How can someone who fully supports Bush truly respect the Constitution?

Question

"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." (Article One, section nine of the U.S. Constitution).
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 allows the government to hold all suspicious non-citizens and citizens found in the United States indefinitely. Habeas Corpus, innocent until proven guilty, is shattered with the Un-American MCA passed by our devisive congress and endorsed by our president.
Amendment 4 of the Constitution was violated according to a high court in Detroit, Michigan. Bush's NSA warrantless wire-tapping program is considered an unlawful search and seizure and a terrible violation of privacy. Not to mention the NSA violates FISA standards.
And don't let me even get started on Bush's record with international law...
But I suppose all of this doesn't matter to some people, right?

No, we are not in a time of rebellion or invasion.

Answer 1

so that's the Republican answer?:

It doesn't matter what I say - you have your opinion and I have mine. Minds are not going to be changed on YA.

At least I respect your opinion - but you obviously don't respect mine.

Meanwhile we've been called traders, communists, nazi's, and terrorist sympathizers. After we've been smeared like this for 6 years, I don't think we need to respect the opinion, at least for now, of any of the clueless people that still support the worst President in American history.

As far as international laws he's broken, lets START with illegally invading a sovereign nation? Or how about human rights violations in GITMO.

Answer 2

Can you say "Propaganda"? C'mon! Let's hear it!

Read the constitution again:
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, UNLESS WHEN IN CASES OF REBELLION OR INVASION THE PUBLIC SAFETY MAY REQUIRE IT." (Article One, section nine of the U.S. Constitution).

Public safety requires we NOT give constitutional rights to terrorists! How can you NOT understand that?!

>>>The Military Commissions Act of 2006 allows the government to hold all suspicious non-citizens and citizens found in the United States indefinitely. Habeas Corpus, innocent until proven guilty, is shattered with the Un-American MCA passed by our devisive congress and endorsed by our president.

The MCA is PERFECTLY within Constitutional bounds. Look above!

>>>Amendment 4 of the Constitution was violated according to a high court in Detroit, Michigan.

Federal courts do not have the right to declare laws unconstutional. This is a duty reserved only for the Supreme Court. A liberal, federal judge in Michigan does NOT have this authority.

>>>Bush's NSA warrantless wire-tapping program is considered an unlawful search and seizure and a terrible violation of privacy. Not to mention the NSA violates FISA standards.

WRONGO! FISA, as any educated person will tell you, has NO international authority. The electronic surveillence/data mining program of the Bush administration (it is NOT a wire-tapping program. No wire-tapping takes place) is an international matter, and therefore does not fall under FISA regulations. Those outside the U.S. are not protected under the constitution... I hardly considerable monitoring calls between terrorists and the U.S. "unreasonable search and siezure."

Did you complain about Clinton's Echelon project too? That was far more invasive.

>>>And don't let me even get started on Bush's record with international law...

Please do. What national law has he violated? And since when do we require U.N. approval to protect ourselves?

>>>But I suppose all of this doesn't matter to some people, right?

Nope. To you, it doesn't. Anything to bash the president and undermine the WOT, right?

EDIT: Sorry. I didn't see this until after I posted.

You said in your details:
>>>No, we are not in a time of rebellion or invasion.

Huh... That's funny... So what would you consider what happened on September 11, 2001? And does public safety NOT require being able to intercept communications between terrorists in order to acertain whether they will attack our nation?

Answer 3

President Bush has never went against the Constitution
The writ of Habeas Corpus can be suspended in certain
cases of Rebellion or Invasion such as the terrorist on this nation on 9/11/01, so I think that people better wake
up before we are attacked again, because we are at war
with Radical Islamist Terrorists!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 4

If you had read your own question, you would realize the answer. There are exceptions and caveats in the Constitution (i.e. "...UNLESS when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it...", "...UNREASONABLE search and siezure...")

Article One does not say Habeas Corpus can never be suspended, it gives exceptions. The 4th Amendment does not protect us from all search and siezure, just "unreasonable".

Your OPINION may be that Al-Queada living among us and blowing up our buildings is not an Invasion. Your OPINION may be that listening to the telephone calls of KNOWN terrorists that originate outside the US is unreasonable. But that is just your opinion, unfortunately shared by a few nut-job judges.

Unfortunately, your opinion allows our enemies to kill more innocent Americans. My opinion is that our present circumstances clearly fall withing the exceptions that the Constitution provides. Thankfully, our President shares my opinion and is trying to save lives, fully within the bounds of the Constitution.

If you can get over your blind hatred of anyone with an "R" by their name, you will see that your own quotes of the Constitution provide for the measures our administration is currently implementing to save lives.

Clearly, not only do people like the President and I respect the Constitution, but we can actually read it and understand it.

Answer 5

WE were invaded, We are @ war. They have to do what they have to do to find and catch the terrorist. They aren't checking your calls or mine unless you have some radical islamist calling you. The people @ Gitmo are enemy combatants caught fighting against us. They don't represent any 1 country,they just want to kill us. We shouldn't have to pay for lawyers for them and have them in Our courts. Let the military do their job.
Don't think for a minute that President Bush has been the only one to authorize the so called wire tapping,Clinton did to as many other Presidents in the past have. The only rights and freedoms that we are losing are the ones that the left winged nuts are taking from us.
The terrorist didn't worry about the rights of 3000 or more of innocent men,women and children that they kill on September 01,2001. They didn't care about innocent people jumping out of skyscrapers to their death to keep from being burned alive. No, We are fighting for Our existence,Our Freedom, OUR COUNTRY!

Answer 6

First off.... learn to read.

There are so many flaws in your comments that it is laughable at best. I will only challenge one, simply to save time.

Quote for me the exact text of Pubic Law No. 109-366, 120 Stat. 2600 (Oct. 17, 2006), enacting Chapter 47A of title 10 of the United States Code where it says that (and I'll quote you) "allows the government to hold all suspicious non-citizens and citizens found in the United States indefinitely".

You're full of crap and don't understand what you are arguing so vehemently against.

Answer 7

The answer is in the question.

"..unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Answer 8

Great question.
That's impossible. Your question, says it all.
It does matter to me. I've been questioning Bush's blatant ignorance of the Constitution for years. But Bush supporters are set in their ways, and put the blinders on when it comes to Bush blunders.

Answer 9

Maybe the constitution should be changed. Bush is doing what he thinks is best to keep America safe. Sounds like you would rather have us blown away. I think we WERE invaded in a sort of cowardly way. We were attacked on our soil. Trust me, Bush has no interest in your private conversations unless it will cause death and destruction to America.

Answer 10

are you able to think of Mr. Obama's marvel at having a stand to preserving the form intact, fairly of rewording it to in wonderful condition a particular presidents needs of the 2d? i could argue that it is not the photograph of submission the GOP needs, it is the look of entire dedication to the rfile they worry.