Skip to main content

View Diary: Kansas City protest vigil - New Year's Eve (17 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's good to see that you have your civility. (0+ / 0-)

    After all, insulting people is the hallmark of getting them to look at your case and judge it on its merits.

    In either case, I do have a good understanding of the Constitution, and while I don't yet have the vast case knowledge that some have, that might be because this is my first year back, and my classes have all been general education courses.  The paper by Dr. Staab is perhaps the best critique from your side that I have read.  However, I take contention with some of his points, such as relying on Justice Hugo Black's dissent in Johnson v. Eisentrager for much of his support on why that is a bad case to reference.  With all due respect to Justice Black, dissents have no legal tender, but rather are a viewpoint against the majority.  They are good quotables, but they are not decisions of the Court which can be referenced as precedent.  Furthermore, if I am reading his paper correctly, he doesn't seem to state a case which would give clear-cut precedent to giving foreign enemy combatants access to our legal system, except for Eisentrager.

    Perhaps President Bush was wrong in his interpretation of the law with regards to military commissions, and if so, then he was wrong, and has been corrected by Hamdan.

    If laws were broken, then they need to be corrected, swiftly and correctly.  I have often contended that Congress has not done its job as it has needed to with regards to oversight.  If you are trying to make me out as an apologist for the Republican Congress of the last few years, the only reason I wanted them in there was because I believe that the qualities I don't like about the current batch of Congressmen will only be enlarged by a Democrat Congress.  That is nothing to say of your party, personally, but I have disagreement with policies that many espouse.

    What troubles me about you is the fact that you seem to make it personal -- if you don't agree with me, you are a bad person, you don't think about anything, how could anyone reasonable come to a different conclusion than me, etc.

    And, as far as the JAG officer, I would love to meet him - not because my critical thinking skills need work, as you might contend (they do, but so do everyone's-none are perfect), but because I think there would be much common ground between the two of us due to our military backgrounds, and because I would benefit from the knowledge of someone whose career I hope to follow in the footsteps of.

    •  A civil tongue? (0+ / 0-)

      My personal experiences over the last six years give me no inclination to offer a civil tongue. I'm not interested in holding hands and singing songs of brotherhood.

      ...the best critique from your side that I have read...

      It's the side of the Constitution and the angels. So much for dubya being a "uniter, not a divider", eh?

      The telling point in James Staab's paper does not come from the dissent in Eisentrager, but in that, for the present case, Congress has not declared war. The seperation of powers argument is another. Note the date of his paper. The supremes said the same thing three years later in Hamdan.

      ...the current batch of Congressmen will only be enlarged by a Democrat Congress...

      Typical republican shill - the proper usage is Democratic. You watch too much of the Faux News Channel - not too helpful in developing those essential critical thinking skills.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site