Comments on: Bush vs. the Bill of Rights

By: chuckwoolworth

chuckwoolworth — Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:05:29 +0000

too late to work within the system and too soon to oust them all. I cleaned that up. Don’t want to be on file you see

By: jkb

jkb — Fri, 30 Dec 2005 06:17:20 +0000

I am simply amazed at what this asshole can get away with. All he need do is say “9/11″ and like hormone-laden nymphets at an Elvis concert, the people swoon at his “decisiveness”

I cannot imagine congress or the supreme court, if it should come to that, to stand for this. If they turn the other cheek, then they are irrelevant.

[chsrles, I like you.]

By: chsrles

chsrles — Fri, 30 Dec 2005 04:10:58 +0000

BILL OF RIGHTS???? WHAT BILL OF RIGHTS???? ALL THAT SON OF A BITCH IN THE OVAL OFFICE HAS IS A LYING BUNCH OF MISFITS THAT IS IN LINE TO HELP HIM FILL HIS 2 FRONT POCKETS OF MONEY THAT SEEM TO NEVER GET FULL!!!! THIS IS THE CROOKEDIST BUNCH OF MISFITS IN THE WHITW HOUSE AND SENATE AND CONGRESS THAT HAS EVER BEEN! IT IS LOOKING LIKE THERE IS SOME SORT OF SCANDAL ON MOST OF THE REPUBS UP THERE!!! WAKE UP AMERICA! NEED TO PUT THE BASTARDS OUT! GET US BACK ON TRACK AND IN GOOD ATANDING IN THE WORLD AGAIN!!!

By: Alan Charles

Alan Charles — Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:31:01 +0000

For all our moaning and groaning about this administration, I’d wager not many have written their representatives in Washington urging them to ensure we do away with those evoting machines that have proven to be so easily hacked, thus setting us up in 2006 for another loss. Just as in the 2004 election, it doesn’t have to be by much, just enough. And now the clock has run out on anyone being able to do anything about them by the 2006 election. Now friends, who will we point the finger at when we lose again?

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:47:41 +0000

Bush swore to “uphold and protect” the US Constitution, not the people of the US. Not that protecting the citizenry isn’t a noble cause in and of itself, but he violated the nation’s most sacred document in doing so.

The 2006 midterm elections may turn out to be one of the most important in US history, as they literally spell the difference between Bush answering for his crimes against the nation and his finishing out his 2nd term.

By: bob reynolds

bob reynolds — Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:24:02 +0000

The spin is bad guys calling bad guys, but that is not the truth. In the run up to the Iraq war NSA was spying on the UN and on the Security Council delegations. Email, faxes, and telephone calls by antiwar activists to the UN and those delegations were therefore harvested. Technically the UN is international territory, but it still seems to have been US to US monitoring, something prohibited by law.

While Bush admitted to doing spying he defiantly claimed the right to do so and said he would continue to do so. Whether its spying, habeas corpus, or torture there is the assertion that he has dictatorial powers based on his powers as Commander in Chief during wartime. But it is not a war defined under either US or International Law even assuming such powers actually exsist. It is a rhetorical war similar to the war on drugs and the war on crime, both of which are ongoing and endless.