Author Topic: Have we become what we fought against?  (Read 2487 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2020, 08:56:32 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12267
  • Tommy Points: 1285
Trump is a lightning rod, but our issues started LONG before he was president.

The federal government has WAY more power than the Founders intended, and this is due in large part to a long series of Supreme Court decisions granting more and more powers to the federal branch than the Constitution delineates.


I would submit that the problem isn't whether the federal government has too much power but rather that the power that the federal government is not exercised in a representative manner consistent with the will of the people.

You complain about the Supreme Court?  The makeup of the SC is determined by the President and the Senate - neither body of which is democratically determined.

My problem with the SC is not its makeup, but the fact that it wields far more power than it was supposed to.

Agreed.  The SC did a great job for roughly the first century, and then more and more waded into creating rights guaranteed by the Constitution.  I happen to agree with many of those “rights”, and disagree with others, but none are mandated by the Constitution.

Yep the Court has been busy creating and expanding constitutional rights, and dont forget it also took time out of that busy schedule to select a president in 2000.

This is all arguable, of course.  And clearly the most elite legal scholars of the land (i.e., the members of the SCOTUS) disagree, else they would not have made those decisions.  But maybe Joe Random Blogger knows how to interpret the Constitution better then they did.

Conversely, if one does accept the assertion that the SCOTUS has granted rights not intended by the Constitution, that may be an argument for how the Constitution was simply incomplete.   If you agree with _any_ of the 'rights granted by the SCOTUS' that were not explicitly delineated, then you implicitly agree with that argument.  And that is a reasonable take.  The notion that it is a perfect document authored by perfect men needs to be discarded.

I do not cede the interpretation of the Constitution to anyone. I do agree that their opinion counts because they have the votes, but I do not, but I do not cede constitutional analysis to them. I definitley do not agree with the majority decision in  Bush v Gore. Nor do I agree with the decision that the 2nd amendment decision in Heller.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2020, 08:58:00 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12267
  • Tommy Points: 1285
Trump is a lightning rod, but our issues started LONG before he was president.

The federal government has WAY more power than the Founders intended, and this is due in large part to a long series of Supreme Court decisions granting more and more powers to the federal branch than the Constitution delineates.


I would submit that the problem isn't whether the federal government has too much power but rather that the power that the federal government is not exercised in a representative manner consistent with the will of the people.

You complain about the Supreme Court?  The makeup of the SC is determined by the President and the Senate - neither body of which is democratically determined.

My problem with the SC is not its makeup, but the fact that it wields far more power than it was supposed to.

Agreed.  The SC did a great job for roughly the first century, and then more and more waded into creating rights guaranteed by the Constitution.  I happen to agree with many of those “rights”, and disagree with others, but none are mandated by the Constitution.

Yep the Court has been busy creating and expanding constitutional rights, and dont forget it also took time out of that busy schedule to select a president in 2000.

Bush v Gore was a very strange decision, but ultimately various groups completed the recounts, and Bush still won.

That must have done wonders for Gore. Imagine how devastating it would be if he had proof that he was cheated out of the biggest political office in the world.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2020, 10:05:21 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379
Quote
The order seeks to impose economic and U.S. travel sanctions on any foreign person “directly engaged in any effort by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute” personnel of the U.S. or our allies without prior consent of their respective governments.

In announcing the sanctions, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo accused the ICC of being “highly politicized” and a “kangaroo court.” He said that the ICC would have done well to “do the right thing and kill the investigation.” Given that Pompeo was a director of the CIA when that agency is reported to have been complicit in the commission of war crimes committed by Afghan operatives, his views may perhaps come as no surprise.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2020, 10:14:50 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379
Quote
Federal troops in camouflage, without identification, heavily armed, uncommunicative, roving in unmarked cars, seizing and incarcerating peaceful protesters without charging them. Acting without invitation. No reporting of this deployment to any state authority. No official justification of the Constitutional or other basis for dispatching these troops.
Quote

https://www.theskanner.com/opinion/commentary/30256-trumps-military-occupation-of-portland

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2020, 10:42:11 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41901
  • Tommy Points: -27133
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Stay on topic, please, Liam.  You’ve already begun a discussion of those issues in another thread.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat. CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #35 on: July 20, 2020, 01:00:56 AM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379
Stay on topic, please, Liam.  You’ve already begun a discussion of those issues in another thread.

I thought I was commenting on the excesses of the executive branch. Off-topic?

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #36 on: July 20, 2020, 08:40:19 AM »

Offline gift

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2502
  • Tommy Points: 211
The "SYSTEM" is not perfect.

But it DOES work...."voting" - that is.

Must ensure VOTING RIGHTS are there for ALL PEOPLE - especially in THESE TIMES.

After all - 63 Million people looked past Pres. Trump's faults - and they are MANY - and made the system work for THEM.

Us on the OTHER SIDE - either sat home and DIDN'T vote...voted for someone else (Jill Stein) or crossed the line and voted for him.

The SYSTEM WORKS....it DOES.

VOTE.

Vote on the LOCAL levels.......vote on the STATE levels.....vote on the NATIONAL levels.

Make SURE the people you vote for has your BEST interests at heart....you / me - won't get a Christmas list to chose from, but MOST people want the SAME THINGS.....we DO...Republican, Democrat OR Independent.

The BOTTOM LINE is that some became complacent in 2016.....I think that is why we're where we're at, now.

The System Works. MAKE it work.

Voting works or doesn't work within a system.   Voting doesn't work if the system for measuring votes is broken.

The Senate is not a democratic mechanism for representing voters.  It represents geography.

The Electoral college is heavily skewed by the same problem:  Two electors from every state are representing geography, not voters.

This leads to the fundamental problem:  Voters, based purely on where they live in the US, do not have equal representation in either the Senate or the election of the President.  The latter is especially egregious since the latter is supposed to be the executor of the office on behalf of ALL the nation.

In addition, we have the further disenfranchisement of millions - yes millions - of 100% pure US Citizens who are robbed by our 'system' of the same federal representation that other US Citizens get because they live in places like the District of Columbia or the various U.S. Territories (i.e., Puerto Rico).

The system is broken.  Voting is broken.   Yes, we still need to advocate that people vote within this system because it is all that we have and it is the necessary first step toward fixing anything.   But make no mistake:  Our democracy is flawed at a deep and fundamental level.

You are right. Why should Rhode Island , where I live, that has a million people in it have the same amount of senators as Texas and New York? It's non-representational goverment.

You might also ask why Rhode Island exists at all.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #37 on: July 20, 2020, 10:28:18 AM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379
The "SYSTEM" is not perfect.

But it DOES work...."voting" - that is.

Must ensure VOTING RIGHTS are there for ALL PEOPLE - especially in THESE TIMES.

After all - 63 Million people looked past Pres. Trump's faults - and they are MANY - and made the system work for THEM.

Us on the OTHER SIDE - either sat home and DIDN'T vote...voted for someone else (Jill Stein) or crossed the line and voted for him.

The SYSTEM WORKS....it DOES.

VOTE.

Vote on the LOCAL levels.......vote on the STATE levels.....vote on the NATIONAL levels.

Make SURE the people you vote for has your BEST interests at heart....you / me - won't get a Christmas list to chose from, but MOST people want the SAME THINGS.....we DO...Republican, Democrat OR Independent.

The BOTTOM LINE is that some became complacent in 2016.....I think that is why we're where we're at, now.

The System Works. MAKE it work.

Voting works or doesn't work within a system.   Voting doesn't work if the system for measuring votes is broken.

The Senate is not a democratic mechanism for representing voters.  It represents geography.

The Electoral college is heavily skewed by the same problem:  Two electors from every state are representing geography, not voters.

This leads to the fundamental problem:  Voters, based purely on where they live in the US, do not have equal representation in either the Senate or the election of the President.  The latter is especially egregious since the latter is supposed to be the executor of the office on behalf of ALL the nation.

In addition, we have the further disenfranchisement of millions - yes millions - of 100% pure US Citizens who are robbed by our 'system' of the same federal representation that other US Citizens get because they live in places like the District of Columbia or the various U.S. Territories (i.e., Puerto Rico).

The system is broken.  Voting is broken.   Yes, we still need to advocate that people vote within this system because it is all that we have and it is the necessary first step toward fixing anything.   But make no mistake:  Our democracy is flawed at a deep and fundamental level.

You are right. Why should Rhode Island , where I live, that has a million people in it have the same amount of senators as Texas and New York? It's non-representational goverment.

You might also ask why Rhode Island exists at all.

Quite true.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #38 on: July 20, 2020, 10:59:04 AM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5057
  • Tommy Points: 829
Trump is a lightning rod, but our issues started LONG before he was president.

The federal government has WAY more power than the Founders intended, and this is due in large part to a long series of Supreme Court decisions granting more and more powers to the federal branch than the Constitution delineates.


I would submit that the problem isn't whether the federal government has too much power but rather that the power that the federal government is not exercised in a representative manner consistent with the will of the people.

You complain about the Supreme Court?  The makeup of the SC is determined by the President and the Senate - neither body of which is democratically determined.

My problem with the SC is not its makeup, but the fact that it wields far more power than it was supposed to.

Agreed.  The SC did a great job for roughly the first century, and then more and more waded into creating rights guaranteed by the Constitution.  I happen to agree with many of those “rights”, and disagree with others, but none are mandated by the Constitution.

Yep the Court has been busy creating and expanding constitutional rights, and dont forget it also took time out of that busy schedule to select a president in 2000.

This is all arguable, of course.  And clearly the most elite legal scholars of the land (i.e., the members of the SCOTUS) disagree, else they would not have made those decisions.  But maybe Joe Random Blogger knows how to interpret the Constitution better then they did.

Conversely, if one does accept the assertion that the SCOTUS has granted rights not intended by the Constitution, that may be an argument for how the Constitution was simply incomplete.   If you agree with _any_ of the 'rights granted by the SCOTUS' that were not explicitly delineated, then you implicitly agree with that argument.  And that is a reasonable take.  The notion that it is a perfect document authored by perfect men needs to be discarded.

I do not cede the interpretation of the Constitution to anyone. I do agree that their opinion counts because they have the votes, but I do not, but I do not cede constitutional analysis to them. I definitley do not agree with the majority decision in  Bush v Gore. Nor do I agree with the decision that the 2nd amendment decision in Heller.

Then you take the side that the Constitution is ... not perfect.   Written by imperfect humans (as is the make up of the SCOTUS).  That's reasonable.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #39 on: July 20, 2020, 03:17:57 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379



This seems a long way from were the founding fathers were going. The political balance needs to be restored.

 
Quote
John Yoo told Axios he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders that flout federal law.

In a Fox News Sunday interview, Trump declared he would try to use that interpretation to try to force through decrees on healthcare, immigration and “various other plans” over the coming month.

Constitutional scholars and human rights activists have also pointed to the deployment of paramilitary federal forces against protesters in Portland as a sign that Trump is ready to use this broad interpretation of presidential powers as a means to suppress basic constitutional rights.

“This is how it begins,” Laurence Tribe, a Harvard constitutional law professor, wrote on Twitter. “The dictatorial hunger for power is insatiable. If ever there was a time for peaceful civil disobedience, that time is upon us.”

Yoo became notorious for a legal memo he drafted in August 2002, when he was deputy assistant attorney general in the justice department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

It stated: “Necessity or self-defense may justify interrogation methods that might violate’ the criminal prohibition against torture.”

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #40 on: July 20, 2020, 03:26:15 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12198
  • Tommy Points: 1479



This seems a long way from were the founding fathers were going. The political balance needs to be restored.

 
Quote
John Yoo told Axios he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders that flout federal law.

In a Fox News Sunday interview, Trump declared he would try to use that interpretation to try to force through decrees on healthcare, immigration and “various other plans” over the coming month.

Constitutional scholars and human rights activists have also pointed to the deployment of paramilitary federal forces against protesters in Portland as a sign that Trump is ready to use this broad interpretation of presidential powers as a means to suppress basic constitutional rights.

“This is how it begins,” Laurence Tribe, a Harvard constitutional law professor, wrote on Twitter. “The dictatorial hunger for power is insatiable. If ever there was a time for peaceful civil disobedience, that time is upon us.”

Yoo became notorious for a legal memo he drafted in August 2002, when he was deputy assistant attorney general in the justice department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

It stated: “Necessity or self-defense may justify interrogation methods that might violate’ the criminal prohibition against torture.”

Congress needs to do it's job.  And the public needs to actually hold them accountable when they don't.  Sadly, I'm not sure how we get there with a public that has become so polarized nothing either side does is indefensible to the respective party bases.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #41 on: July 20, 2020, 03:42:59 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379



This seems a long way from were the founding fathers were going. The political balance needs to be restored.

 
Quote
John Yoo told Axios he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders that flout federal law.

In a Fox News Sunday interview, Trump declared he would try to use that interpretation to try to force through decrees on healthcare, immigration and “various other plans” over the coming month.

Constitutional scholars and human rights activists have also pointed to the deployment of paramilitary federal forces against protesters in Portland as a sign that Trump is ready to use this broad interpretation of presidential powers as a means to suppress basic constitutional rights.

“This is how it begins,” Laurence Tribe, a Harvard constitutional law professor, wrote on Twitter. “The dictatorial hunger for power is insatiable. If ever there was a time for peaceful civil disobedience, that time is upon us.”

Yoo became notorious for a legal memo he drafted in August 2002, when he was deputy assistant attorney general in the justice department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

It stated: “Necessity or self-defense may justify interrogation methods that might violate’ the criminal prohibition against torture.”

Congress needs to do it's job.  And the public needs to actually hold them accountable when they don't.  Sadly, I'm not sure how we get there with a public that has become so polarized nothing either side does is indefensible to the respective party bases.

Congress has totally abdicated any responsibility for running the country and has the lowest approval rating ever, like 15 % or something, but incumbents keep winning and these ancient senators who have been in office for 40 years just keep on doing nothing.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #42 on: July 20, 2020, 05:39:42 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5057
  • Tommy Points: 829
And now Trump is threatening to do the same thing in NYC as he has done in Portland:

https://nypost.com/2020/07/20/trump-says-cuomo-must-end-nyc-crime-wave-or-he-will-step-in/

Quote
Reacting to The Post’s front page Monday, President Trump said Gov. Andrew Cuomo must squash a spike in violent crime in New York City — or he will send in federal authorities to restore order.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #43 on: July 20, 2020, 05:56:42 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12267
  • Tommy Points: 1285
It is odd that the Congress has ceded its powers to the executive and now the power of the purse which is congressional check on the executive is now been used by the executive in threats to not fund schools if they refuse to follow the wishes of the executive.

is there not a law that the executive must release monies apporpriated by Congress without attaching addional conditions? Didnt the country just go through this with congessional apporpriated aid for Ukraine?

Re: Have we become what we fought against?
« Reply #44 on: July 20, 2020, 06:03:10 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18896
  • Tommy Points: 1379
It is odd that the Congress has ceded its powers to the executive and now the power of the purse which is congressional check on the executive is now been used by the executive in threats to not fund schools if they refuse to follow the wishes of the executive.

is there not a law that the executive must release monies apporpriated by Congress without attaching addional conditions? Didnt the country just go through this with congessional apporpriated aid for Ukraine?

Yeah, the congress said that there's nothing wrong with Trump holding up money for a quid pro quo so now he can do whatever he wants. Trump has a free pass on doing whatever he wants and now he's putting federal troops on Americain streets in unmarked vans.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2020, 06:13:56 PM by liam »