Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

No Exception Given For The President

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:06 AM
Original message
No Exception Given For The President

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does it say this one's at the President's discression?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Maybe when they gave Bush the ...
... phonetically spelled out, 'colouring book' version of the Constitution so he could learn it, they mis-translated some of the amendments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Good one!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Hey?
shouldn't that be "misundertranslated"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. The pResident amended the Constitution without a vote of any
kind. And the fucking sheep are fighting over fucking Christmas. BEAM ME THE FUCK UP!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cantstandbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Excellent point! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GrpCaptMandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
3. It doesn't, of course
The 4th Amendment was written with elegant simplicity. It was written, in fact, to be absolutely plain to future readers. Nonetheless, that hasn't stopped far less elegantly-minded people from manipulating it to suit their ends. If the 4th Amendment had as many vociferous supporters as the 1st and 2nd, we wouldn't be in this mess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
6. We should send this sentence to the media whores who sat
there yesterday and defended the indefensible, even praised it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
7. Wonder how the "strict constructionalist" folks are going to try to
spin this one. The crowd that says the Constitution is not a living document, that our forefathers intended it to be read just as the words were with no interpretations for modern progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Yeah ...
.... wonder if the WH still wants a 'strict constructionist' on the Supreme Court!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. We should get Harry Reid to ask ScAlito the question pointblank. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. No wonder he wanted Harriet, he knew the NYT had this and couldn't
stay buried forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissWaverly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
9. this goes back to his core beliefs
all rights and privlleges belong to the wealthy elite, those beneath get nothing and deserve
nothing, all those who oppose him by disagreeing with him in any way are to be shown no
mercy. No mercy, no compromise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. Absolutely.
Most of these types can cover up their beliefs. Bush's personality disorder "Narcissism" allows him to act on his core beliefs. When confronted he is not able to hide his beliefs of infallibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissWaverly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. He was Mr. Charm on Jim Lehrer's news hour
now's he's back to his old self
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
13. I'm a little confused....
Edited on Sat Dec-17-05 11:38 AM by zanne
Wasn't Watergate about domestic spying and phone-tapping? Since 2000, we've really raised the bar for impeacheable offenses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
14. 9-11 changed everything...now that is just a goddamned piece of paper
Or so we are told......:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Yeah, 9-11 you libruls!
End of discussion. That means Bush, the executive, can write his own laws and then declare that what he did was legal. He's the executive, legislative and judicial branch all rolled into one.

I'm a bit surprised, though, that Congress and the Supreme Court apparently have gone along with this scheme. You'd think they would be interested in preserving their co-equal status under the Constitution, but 9-11 is just such a scary thing, they're still hiding under the bed too scared to come out. Let George fix it.

So if Congress and the courts aren't interested in reining in an out-of-control madman, who ya gonna call?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. 9/11 did change everything. It was the day America knew
it had the biggest fuck up in the world occupying the Oval Office.

Don't Congress and the courts derive their power from the consent of the governed? Or, do I have that wrong? :silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. Home of the Brave....
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-17-05 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
18. I'll bet Al Gonzales told him that during wartime, anything the Prez does
is by default legal.

And now he owns the Supreme Court, so i suppose he's right--no matter what the constitution says."Its just a goddamn piece of paper" remember?

And remember Bush v Gore. Law has nothing to do with Shrub. "I don't testify."

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC