12 Dec 15
Originally posted by whodeyThe NDAA of FY 2012 was passed by the Republican House of Representatives on May 26, 2012 with only 6 of 233 Republicans voting against it while Democrats split almost evenly 95 For, 90 Against. So your partisan shill claims are a typical lie. That is the legislation that authorized the detentions that you are pretending to oppose. https://belligerentact.org/
This is what troubles me, the Dims under Obama and the GOP were complicit in passing the NDAA which grants the government the right to round up its citizens without due process. Let us not forget that the GOP was complicit with rounding up Japanese Americans, just like with the NDAA that Obama and the Dims signed into law.
The NDAA is far worse than FDR ...[text shortened]... is just round them up and take them away forever, so I'm not sure how this is even possible now.
In fact, the provisions are unconstitutional but so are many of types of laws you and other right wing extremists have supported as part of your Holy War against Islam. And the provision is objectionable whether it applied to US citizens or not.
12 Dec 15
Originally posted by whodeyFYI:
Again, what does this mean to you?
"I am not proposing that," Trump said. "This is a whole different thing."
It is pretty self explanatory, even though he could have explained himself a whole lot better. Trump is saying that comparing locking up US citizens to denying foreigners admission to the country is apples and oranges by "I"M NOT PROPOSING THAT ...[text shortened]... no Constitutional rights in the US because citizenship is not a world wide foreign entitlement.
In a recent interview with Time Magazine, Trump didn't disavow Roosevelt's use of internment camps when asked whether he would have supported it.
"I would have had to be there at the time to tell you, to give you a proper answer," he said. "I certainly hate the concept of it. But I would have had to be there at the time to give you a proper answer."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-defends-muslim-plan-by-comparing-himself-to-fdr/
Trump was mealy mouthed, but he certainly did not come out in opposition to the internment even though the US government under Reagan formally apologized to the internees and gave financial compensation.
13 Dec 15
3 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderFrom an article I read.
FYI:
In a recent interview with Time Magazine, Trump didn't disavow Roosevelt's use of internment camps when asked whether he would have supported it.
"I would have had to be there at the time to tell you, to give you a proper answer," he said. "I certainly hate the concept of it. But I would have had to be there at the time to give you a proper an ...[text shortened]... US government under Reagan formally apologized to the internees and gave financial compensation.
The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) was passed by Congress late Thursday night (84-15-1). It received $609 billion dollars in funding. Carl Levin, D-Mich. stated, “the bill before us is not a Democratic bill and it is not a Republican bill. It is a bipartisan, bicameral defense bill.” Those who didn’t vote for it were the outliers with very strong and differing positions from the likes of Senator Bernie Sanders, a socialist, to Senator Ted Cruz, representing the far-right-wing of the Republican party.
Notice how they peg Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz as the radical extreme?
How I hate the media! One of the few who voted against violating the Constitution and they are the radical extremists?
How does one fight the power of the fascist media?
More importantly, why is Bernie and Ted not pounding this issue into the ground?
As for Trump, I'm disappointed in him, but not surprised.
I predict that if Trump becomes elected, he will be one of the most unilateral Presidents in US history, possibly even surpassing Obama. But that is because Obama, and those before him, have laid the ground work.
What are we becoming?
13 Dec 15
Originally posted by whodeySanders v. Cruz would be an excellent general election giving the US a stark choice of differing philosophies.
From an article I read.
The NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) was passed by Congress late Thursday night (84-15-1). It received $609 billion dollars in funding. Carl Levin, D-Mich. stated, “the bill before us is not a Democratic bill and it is not a Republican bill. It is a bipartisan, bicameral defense bill.” Those who didn’t vote for it were the ...[text shortened]... that is because Obama, and those before him, have laid the ground work.
What are we becoming?
Which do you think is more likely to repudiate a policy of indefinite detention without trial for "terror" suspects?
13 Dec 15
Originally posted by no1marauderMore likely to repudiate?
Sanders v. Cruz would be an excellent general election giving the US a stark choice of differing philosophies.
Which do you think is more likely to repudiate a policy of indefinite detention without trial for "terror" suspects?
They both just did.
What kind of a question is that?
13 Dec 15
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderI agree, it would be an excellent general election. In fact, Cruz just pulled ahead of Trump in Iowa.
Sanders v. Cruz would be an excellent general election giving the US a stark choice of differing philosophies.
Which do you think is more likely to repudiate a policy of indefinite detention without trial for "terror" suspects?
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-12/cruz-soars-to-front-of-the-pack-in-iowa-poll-trump-support-stays-flat-ii3p88rp
However, as we all know, Hilary will smash Sanders to bits.
Then again, Cruz may be taken down as well by the courts because of his place of birth.
Leave it to them to all of a sudden give a damn about the Constitution and prevent him from running while embracing the Obaminations of the NDAA.