GOP Defeats Magna Carta In Senate

[Fenian_Bastard]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2007/09/senate_refuses_to_expand_detai.php

Republicans -- On The Wrong Side Of Civil Liberties Since Runnymeade

 

[zeke12]

From now on, anyone presenting a writ of habeas corpus will be tasered.

 

[D-3 Fan]

Will this daily compilation of rants continue until January 20, 2008?

Last I checked, the gentleman in question is a lame duck.

 

[JR]

Well, if nothing else, this'll get my vote for "Thread Title of the Year".

The Onion would be proud of you, FB.

 

[The Big Ragu]

I thought the Democrats (including Bernie Sanders and Joe Leiberman who caucus with the Democrats) control the Senate?

Hasn't the Supreme Court agreed to consider the status (prisoner of war or not) of the detainees and determine whether habeus corpus applies to them?

Aside from the political and the judicial (which are all politically, not constitutionally, motivated anyhow), I don't see why we give the detainees every legal recourse possible. We look bad doing things in secret. We can set an example for much of the world about how a civilized place operates if we allow them representation and allow them fair trials in which evidence gets presented and they can question accusers. Rhetoric doesn't set examples. Walking the walk does. I don't know why everyone is so afraid of this. The outcome that a terrorist gets sprung by a not guilty verdict is not as bad as the current outcome of us operating a secret prison outside the country in which people are held for years without any legal recourse. It just makes us look bad.

 

[Mystery_Meat]

Did Magna Carta cover the spread? They gave 15 right before game time.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

I thought the Democrats (including Bernie Sanders and Joe Leiberman who caucus with the Democrats) control the Senate?

Hasn't the Supreme Court agreed to consider the status (prisoner of war or not) of the detainees and determine whether habeus corpus applies to them?

Aside from the political and the judicial (which are all politically, not constitutionally, motivated anyhow), I don't see why we give the detainees every legal recourse possible. We look bad doing things in secret. We can set an example for much of the world about how a civilized place operates if we allow them representation and allow them fair trials in which evidence gets presented and they can question accusers. Rhetoric doesn't set examples. Walking the walk does. I don't know why everyone is so afraid of this. The outcome that a terrorist gets sprung by a not guilty verdict is not as bad as the current outcome of us operating a secret prison outside the country in which people are held for years without any legal recourse. It just makes us look bad.

Need 60 to break the filibuster of Magna Carta, Ragu. Without the execrable gentleman from Connecticut, there's no chance.
Relying on SCOTUS -- particularly THIS one -- is a risky business, and chicken**** besides. Otherwise, I agree with your entire post.

 

[jgmacg]

To piggyback on what BR wrote: Every time the U.S. chips away at our own core freedoms this way, even in a time of "war," it sets a terrible example in the rest of the world. I'm a member of an organization that spends a lot of time and energy trying to get writers and editors out of prison around the world. They've been detained or jailed in almost all cases for simply expressing ideas in opposition to their repressive home governments. In many cases they're put away for years without formal charges ever being brought.

For every Orhan Pamuk or Anna Politkovskya - famous writers, famously imperiled by their work - there are scores and scores of others around the world who never catch the world's attention.

And whenever America sends the message abroad that the abrogation of basic legal rights is acceptable, it makes it inifinitely harder to mount a moral or practical argument in favor of their release.

 

[andyouare?]

To piggyback on what BR wrote: Every time the U.S. chips away at our own core freedoms this way, even in a time of "war," it sets a terrible example in the rest of the world. I'm a member of an organization that spends a lot of time and energy trying to get writers and editors out of prison around the world. They've been detained or jailed in almost all cases for simply expressing ideas in opposition to their repressive home governments. In many cases they're put away for years without formal charges ever being brought.

For every Orhan Pamuk or Anna Politkovskya - famous writers, famously imperiled by their work - there are scores and scores of others around the world who never catch the world's attention.

And whenever America sends the message abroad that the abrogation of basic legal rights is acceptable, it makes it inifinitely harder to mount a moral or practical argument in favor of their release.

Just to completely change the subject,

Have you checked out this website: http://sovietposter.blogspot.com/


I like this picture: http://bp1.blogger.com/_NzHG4HjtdwI/Ru-s5qNy96I/AAAAAAAAANo/sT4Tc0BmEUA/s1600-h/Train.jpg

 

[jgmacg]

To piggyback on what BR wrote: Every time the U.S. chips away at our own core freedoms this way, even in a time of "war," it sets a terrible example in the rest of the world. I'm a member of an organization that spends a lot of time and energy trying to get writers and editors out of prison around the world. They've been detained or jailed in almost all cases for simply expressing ideas in opposition to their repressive home governments. In many cases they're put away for years without formal charges ever being brought.

For every Orhan Pamuk or Anna Politkovskya - famous writers, famously imperiled by their work - there are scores and scores of others around the world who never catch the world's attention.

And whenever America sends the message abroad that the abrogation of basic legal rights is acceptable, it makes it inifinitely harder to mount a moral or practical argument in favor of their release.

Just to completely change the subject,

Have you checked out this website: http://sovietposter.blogspot.com/


I like this picture: http://bp1.blogger.com/_NzHG4HjtdwI/Ru-s5qNy96I/AAAAAAAAANo/sT4Tc0BmEUA/s1600-h/Train.jpg

Thanks, andy.

Here's one of my personal favorites. Nyet! (Just say no to vodka.) Found it on a T-shirt on St. Mark's Place the other day.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Six R's support Magna Carta -- Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, John Sununu and Gordon Smith. Good on them.
Of course, Specter signed the original, so he's no surprise.

 

[JR]

Magna Carta?

Outdated thinking.

The Senate is just trying to repurpose it.

 

[jgmacg]

Today is the last day to go see the thing itself. Maybe the Gang of 100 should amble down the street and take a look. Get another peek at the Bill of Rights, likewise.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/

 

[Football_Bat]

The Magna Carta is sooooooo 1215, Fen.