Do you still believe the D's would do different?

[Hollis]

Senate Rejects Expanding Detainee Rights

By ANNE FLAHERTY – 45 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate narrowly rejected legislation on Wednesday that would have given military detainees the right to protest their detention in federal court.
The 56-43 vote fell four shy of the 60 votes needed to cut off debate on the bill, co-sponsored by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa. It was a blow for human rights groups that say a current ban on habeas corpus petitions could lead to the indefinite detention of individuals wrongfully suspected of terrorism...........


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iRzZPHZhjsHquqe_oN5Ndva_lauA

[timetraveller]

You would Need Hard / Reliable intel If the person thats been Arrested is going to Commit a crime ..

If your were to Arrest anyone on there looks Alone Travellers coming through the Airport the Jails and detention centers would be Packed ..to the rafters ..

And you also have the danger of detaining those on a mere rumour ..

You need a system in place that any persons connected with Any outfit there image can be retrived at a touch of a button ..

[gaijinsamurai]

Depends on which particular D is in power. R too, for that matter.
I think that increasingly, people are starting to weigh less on party affiliation, and more on the character, percieved judgement, and likability of the individual candidate.
As for me, even though I'm a D, I would have voted for McCain over Gore back in 2000 (but wouldn't vote for the "new" McCain), and would vote for Ron Paul or any other decent R over Hillary in a heartbeat.

[Mastermind]

I think if they had a serious candidate for President, they would be a lot more sensible and much tighter with their silly rhetoric. A lot of the things they have been putting out have just been childish retribution some based way back on the old Florida debacle...they just can not get over it.

Democrats had once been a stout, highly patriotic and deeply religious party...strong for the little people. But, with their outragous stupidity lately, I don't think they can be trusted to hold the reigns of national leadership.

Just my opinion, mind you.

[Mr. JOSHUA]

I was actually suprised to hear Biden saying some truthful things back in the first debates, but lately, he's back to towing the same bullsh*t party lines, so no, not right now anyway.

[Hollis]

Who controls the Senate? Where was this mandate from the last election?


Senate Blocks Bid to Extend Troop Leave

By DAVID ROGERS
September 19, 2007 6:21 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- The Senate, reflecting continued Republican loyalty to President Bush's Iraq strategy, blocked a bipartisan proposal promising U.S. troops more time at home between tours overseas.


Proponents fell four votes short of the 60 needed to limit debate, and the 56-44 roll call effectively kills what was widely seen as the Democratic leadership's best shot of making some dent in the president's policy.........

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119023907420232929.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[clean]

Dems control the senate, but both sides still find it hard to flip away from the war the voted for, or mandated. The opening line says "reflecting continued republican loyalty," but i think it's just reflecting the senates desire to not admit they're wrong.

EDIT - not sure I'm talking about what the wsj article is saying.

[Ordie]

President Bush has always viewed the judicial process and rule of law as an obsticles in the war on terror.

Actions such as secret prisons, waterboarding, reditions, and the denial of due process, forefts any possibility for suspects to a fair trial because information was obtained through coercion. Thus many of the cases may end up being dropped because evidence is not vaild.

Overall, the detainee policy has radically underminded the United States standing in the world as a nation with the rule of law and justice.

"A democracy must sometimes fight terror with one hand behind its back. Even so, democracy will always have the upper hand."
-Ahron Barak, former president Israel Supreme Court.

[Hollis]

Ordie, Ok good post, wrong Thread? This is about the senate, who controls the senate?


BTW I disagree with assessment, Unless you are privy to Bush's inner most circle, I don't think anyone can say he has , "viewed the judicial process and rule of law as an obsticles in the war on terror." So far, as far as I know, He has acted within the law, and yes it is the interpetation is where the conflict comes in. So far, Where are all the legal challenges. He does not control the Judicial part of our government.

[Ordie]

Ordie, Ok good post, wrong Thread? This is about the senate, who controls the senate?


BTW I disagree with assessment, Unless you are privy to Bush's inner most circle, I don't think anyone can say he has , "viewed the judicial process and rule of law as an obsticles in the war on terror." So far, as far as I know, He has acted within the law, and yes it is the interpetation is where the conflict comes in. So far, Where are all the legal challenges. He does not control the Judicial part of our government.

My bad, got confused.

As for who controls the Senate?

It's the centrist from each party.

As for my post, here's my inside scoop:

"Our strength as a nation state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international fora, judicial process and terrorism." National Defense Strategy - March, 2005
Source: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nds/nds.pdf

[Hollis]

My bad, got confused.




OH NO, I am really good friends with Confusion.

Take care.

IMHO, we live next to two abyss', one is totalitarianism the other is anarchy. It is a balancing act between the two.

[Hollis]

WOW Bush has the Senate. 70 to 28...

The U.S. Senate has rejected, by a 28 to 70 vote, a Democratic-sponsored measure to withdraw troops from Iraq and cut funding for the war. VOA's Deborah Tate reports from Capitol Hill.


http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-09-20-voa70.cfm

[Mastermind]

[quote=Ordie;2772823]President Bush has always viewed the judicial process and rule of law as an obsticles in the war on terror.

Overall, the detainee policy has radically underminded the United States standing in the world as a nation with the rule of law and justice."

I have to disagree somewhat. Bush has done nothing of the sort...every single action has been reviewed, and passed legal muster...if it had not, I can assure you the Dems would have slaughtered him and everyone near. Their great frustration at not having a single item to impeach him on is proof of my thinking on this. As for his "view" on such things, I have challenged folks many times to show me one single speech, one single line of writing from President Bush or his assiciates where by they lament the rule of law or the Judicial process as hinderances of the WOT. Such statements that he does, I find a bit irritating for their propagandistic nature.

As for the "Detainee policy" undermining the US standing in the world, I find no truth in that, either. It has been the extroadinary lftoid media slant and the Democrat hatred of Bush over his beating them twice in lawful elections that has caused the uproar over the detainees....the circumstance of the Gitmo detainees has been reviewed almost annually by the highest judicial entities and has met every single legal challenge. Those people in Gitmo are deadly, and probably should have been executed and would have been in any other less enlightened era in human history. It is only natural for political enemies to use such tragedy for political purposes. The fault is not with them or the Gitmo circumstance...the fault is with a brain dead constituency at home and around the world that fails to critically think out what is really going on...instead, they listen to the BS propagandists and go no further in thought or research. It's quite litterally, disgusting.