English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Even though the Supreme Court ruled that Bush's NSA warrantless wire-tapping program violated the 4th Amendment and the FISA, he is still going at it. When something he does is not allowed, guess what he does. He tries to pass laws to make it legal! That's what he is trying to do, just like when he violated the Geneva Convention. I don't think this man respects what the Supreme Court says. That's my opinion.

2006-11-18 04:18:24 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

7 answers

In all honesty, I don't think the man has ever thought about it. The sad truth is that we really are facing a threat from Islamic Terror, which is how he justifies his violations of the law. It's an enormous threat that would have eventually come up whether Bush was president or not. Although he's circumvented the constitution, lied to the American people, and invaded Iraq, a country that was absolutely no threat to the United States, and most certainly should have been left alone, he has brought to the forefront issues that we would have been facing in a few short years. They say every cloud has a silver lining, and perhaps what's transpired is better in that sense. We have to deal decisively with terrorism before it possesses easily attainable nuclear weapons. Even now though, Iraq is little or no threat in that regard, and therein lies Mr. Bush's greatest sin. When we needed a real President and real leadership, the man went along with a program to drain our treasury and line the pockets of his cronies with an unnecessary and probably illegal war. I don't believe he's smart enough to do this himself, but people like Dick Cheney are. They're manipulators of the darkest kind. Unfortunately that the good news. The bad is that we should expect to be in a state of war in the middle east for a very long time to come. There is virtually no way out of it now. The diplomatic door has been closed and so much fuel thrown on the fire that it will never go out. As I said, we would have faced this eventually, but we would have done it with the world, with real allies behind us. (Strangely, Iraq very well might have been one. Saddam was well aware of the threat that fundamentalist terrorism represented to his state.) Probably, and even more importantly though, we would have had the undisputed moral high ground, and maybe the money and will to win. I think both of those things are running out fast. They've been squandered by ignorance of the situation, and the greed of this administration. You asked if the President respects the laws of this land. Look at the record, look at what his law breaking and lying is going to cost us as a nation. It will be far more than cash, and felt long after his inglorious exit. That's my opinion and it saddens me. I hope I'm wrong about all this, but I try and read everything, and that how it looks.

2006-11-18 06:01:47 · answer #1 · answered by Kim 4 · 1 0

Actually, it wasn't the Supreme Court that ruled on the NSA program. It was a federal court in Michigan. That matter is now on appeal.

But yes, he has continued to ignore holdings of the US Supreme Court in other situations, which the court has commented on numerous times. See the holdings in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2005) among others.

As far as the NSA program, his stance is that it doesn't matter if his actions violate the law, because he believes the Office of the President has the inherent authority to ignore federal law at will. That's the exact argument his attorneys made in the NSA case.

2006-11-18 04:38:30 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3 0

I have found that Bush and his followers only respect court rulings when those rulings support their own agenda. When the courts rule against them, they are called activist judges. Isn't that convenient? Bush has repeatedly raped the 4th Amendment, and ignored due process, choosing instead to act as though he is a dictator and not an elected official. His last two years in office are going to be an exercise in anxiety for most Americans, with at least 70% of us praying this cowboy won't completely ruin our reputation around the world beyond repair.

2006-11-18 05:15:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

In all fairness, I can name at least eight presidents who did not respect supreme court decisions: John Adams, Andrew Jackson, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S Grant, Warren G Harding, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, George W Bush

2006-11-18 04:22:33 · answer #4 · answered by smartass 3 · 1 1

I do not know (and doubt anyone else would know) if he respects Supreme court. But I believe he has enough sense to abide by their decisions, though he may have severe shortage of intellect.

2006-11-18 04:34:01 · answer #5 · answered by ramshi 4 · 1 1

Yes.
Bush cares more about saving American lives than he does about "terrorist rights".
How selfish of a president.

At least the terrorists have the Democrats to stand up for them.
"Democrats Care".

2006-11-18 04:46:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

I dont think the president has any repect for anyone other than himself..

2006-11-18 05:12:00 · answer #7 · answered by brock 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers