Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2014, 09:16 AM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,942,406 times
Reputation: 2385

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
When the executive branch ignores the Constitution what is the remedy?
Anyone that has been harmed has action against any President's 'unconstitutional" actions.

A case in point is when the President Obama made and filled positions to the National Relations Labor Board without 'consent of Congress". When the NRLB ruled against a company in California, that company and other advocates filed suit in federal court claiming the the NRLB's decisions were null and void because the person in charge of LB were "unconstitutionally" placed without the consent of congress.


A federal appeals court recently ruled the Presendent acted "unconstitutionally" in the maner in which he sat the board members.

This case will be heard by the SC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2014, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,862,130 times
Reputation: 10371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
I notice you did not actually answer the question--just criticized and responded with an insult worthy of a sixth grader. This is a common response from right wing extremists who have no substantial defense or response--they just take on a patronizing attitude and throw out a couple of ad hominem attacks. Unfortunately this lends no credibility whatsoever to whatever point you were attempting to make.
Because the poster doesn't do it as well as you do? Is that why you criticized the poster? You can do it but they can't. Keep posting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Old Town Alexandria
14,492 posts, read 26,592,930 times
Reputation: 8971
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Paul fought Bush over these same things. He was against Bush when he claimed the right to deny prisoners due process. Obama was against it then also.

Feinstein joined him at that.

https://www.fas.org/irp/congress/201...tein-lee2.html

He voted against the Patriot Act

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7qvpS5zbqA

Ron Paul voted "No" for the war in Iraq.

Congressman Paul voted against granting President Bush the authority to use force in Iraq, He opposed the surge and voted against it.

Ron Paul - The War in Iraq

God you're clueless.
Thanks for this info.

I was aware of ACLU suits against NSA.
Feinstein, a fraud, was supportive of NSA spying 24/7 on all Americans.

Dems need to remember this at election time. The betrayal and lies.


Obama at SOTU talked about "changing" the NSA's agenda, or contracting it out, and reducing the staff. They are now e3ven monitoring kids with "Angry Birds" apps. LOL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 12:24 PM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,677,147 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post
Anyone that has been harmed has action against any President's 'unconstitutional" actions.

A case in point is when the President Obama made and filled positions to the National Relations Labor Board without 'consent of Congress". When the NRLB ruled against a company in California, that company and other advocates filed suit in federal court claiming the the NRLB's decisions were null and void because the person in charge of LB were "unconstitutionally" placed without the consent of congress.


A federal appeals court recently ruled the Presendent acted "unconstitutionally" in the maner in which he sat the board members.

This case will be heard by the SC.
Or the US Congress commences impeachment proceedings, which i think they should be doing.

No matter which political party a president is a member of, we all need to hold them accountable, because all of this snowballs and one day we will have a tyrant who was elected, either by hook or by crook, and that person will use all the previous abuses to legitimize rolling right over the people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 12:44 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,368,360 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurbie View Post
The Milbank piece you linked is interesting.

It looks like Rand Paul hitched a ride on a bi-partisan lawsuit composed by conservative activist Bruce Fein, a very respected attorney. Paul then took over, dropping Fein, kicking of the Dem plaintiffs, and attaching failed Virginia pol Ken Cuchinelli to the suit, in place of Fein. Is Paul grooming Cuchinelli for running mate??? As a Dem, I sure hope so!

What the hell is wrong with Paul? First he plagiarizes other peoples speeches. Now he steals their legal work.

Fein is spitting nails over this, and who can blame him? What a no-class publicity stunt THIS is.

Fearless prediction: if it's Paul/Cuchinelli in 2016, Clinton/Castro will win by an historic margin.
Yeah this sort of thing is pretty bad. Feins pretty annoyed. And using some terms that indicate that Rand Paul may have made a serious mistake.

Like this from his spokesman:
“I am aghast and shocked by Ken Cuccinelli’s behavior and his absolute knowledge that this entire complaint was the work product, intellectual property and legal genius of Bruce Fein,†Mattie Fein, his ex-wife and spokeswoman
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 01:05 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,550 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
Funny. He had no problem telling us in a nutshell in the State of the Union address that it was his way or the highway.
actually what he said is where Congress would not act, and he could, he could. But i guess you see that as my way or the highway instead of recognition of a gridlocked legislature which was the least productive in the last 100 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
He didn't have to push for its reauthorization and sign it.
What does that have to do with anything ? The Patriot act reauthorization(vote not signing) happened in May of 2011. Republicans controlled the House, they have had no problem voting against the President before, what changed ?

Could it be that your Republican party actually wants the Patriot act to exist ?

here is the vote break down for reauthorization

House

Yes: 54 Democrats, 196 Republicans
No 122 Democrats, 31 Republicans

Senate

Yes: 31 Democrats, 41 Republicans
No: 18 Democrats, 4 Republicans

So lets not play this game anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 01:11 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,550 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452 View Post
Obama/Holder expanded the NSA to conduct domestic surveillance.
From Wiki....
Your link says nothing about an expansion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452 View Post
Don't be so certain!
obviously I dont know what Rand Paul would have did, but since the law was reauthorized in 2005 as well, i can say republicans as a whole were not outraged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 01:16 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,550 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Bush was sued over his policy of indefinite detention. Rightly so at that. There is no other option when those who swear to uphold the Constitution refuse to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoniDanko View Post
How can you Liberals honestly be for Government domestic spying programs where the government spies on it's own citizens without any suspicion, probable cause, and/or warrants? Does it even matter which presidents fault it is or why this law suit is taking place? Why is the focus on who's fault it is instead of supporting the fact that someone for what ever reason is doing something about this? The Patriot Act was wrong and so is NSA spying, and I do not care who supported it or if someone is only fighting to fix it for personal gain or not. I only care that it's being fixed.
No, the answer is that there are 2 separate argument going on here.

1. right vs Wrong
2. Constitutional vs unconstitutional

It is indeed wrong to spy on your own citizens and each and every Democrat will agree with you on that. However legality under the Constitution is where everyday Republicans and Democrats split.

it seems that Some people like the above can not distinguish between the 2. Just because you disagree with something does not make it unconstitutional.

So a person like myself can be both against the program and at the same time realize it is legal.


People on this site have gotten to the point where they think everything is black and white, the above post prove it as do the other threads like the " We have job growth, why do people still need unemployment" type forums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 01:19 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,191,640 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
What does that have to do with anything ?
everything and you know that. If he didn't support it, he vetoes it. Not only did he sign it he pushed for it and has expanded it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2014, 01:24 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,191,640 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
No, the answer is that there are 2 separate argument going on here.

1. right vs Wrong
2. Constitutional vs unconstitutional

It is indeed wrong to spy on your own citizens and each and every Democrat will agree with you on that.
No they won't.

Quote:
However legality under the Constitution is where everyday Republicans and Democrats split.

it seems that Some people like the above can not distinguish between the 2. Just because you disagree with something does not make it unconstitutional.

So a person like myself can be both against the program and at the same time realize it is legal.


People on this site have gotten to the point where they think everything is black and white, the above post prove it as do the other threads like the " We have job growth, why do people still need unemployment" type forums.

Spying on American citizens without probable cause is unconstitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:04 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top