Obama continues his assault on civil rights

rickonker

rickonker

CAGiversary!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090424/ap_on_go_su_co/us_obama_defendants__rights

The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to overrule a 23 year-old decision that stopped police from initiating questions unless a defendant's lawyer is present, the latest stance that has disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups.

While President Barack Obama has reversed many policies of his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, the defendants' rights case is another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather than expand rights.

Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.
Click to expand...


:whistle2:#

[quote name='Koggit']believe in != believe -- although he isn't always honest, i believe in obama. nothing stupid about that answer. unlike many obama supporters, i have not yet allowed the right-wing rhetoric to taint my opinion of him.[/QUOTE]


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNIVZXeG714
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Woah woah woah.... don't change the subject man. Lets get back to the real topic. Obama isn't the second coming of Jesus anymore?
 
Yeah, police don't follow this at all right now anyway.

I got arrested once because I was in a car with a kid who had pot on him. The cop told me if I didn't cooperate and tell him where the kid got the pot from that I wouldn't be able to get my license until I was 21(I was 17 at the time). I didn't tell the cop anything despite being verbally abused and harassed for an hour with no lawyer present.

Judge threw the case out right away and said PD acted inexcusably.
They need to start punishing police who don't follow the law instead of removing the law. It's going backwards.

Obama will not be getting re-elected in '12 I don't think. And what's scary is that someone even worse will probably get elected because Obama is tarnishing peoples hope for change.
 
[quote name='HowStern']Obama will not be getting re-elected in '12 I don't think. And what's scary is that someone even worse will probably get elected because Obama is tarnishing peoples hope for change.[/quote]

I think we'll (hopefully) see a shift for the better in '10. We need a shift in the House/Senate; the President is fine and dandy but it's the representation that truly matters and as of right now it's an absolute bust.
 
it's really just the butthurt conservatives that are "disappointed" with obama, but they shouldn't have expected to like him.. we'll have him for 8 years, don't worry.
 
[quote name='Koggit']it's really just the butthurt conservatives that are "disappointed" with obama, but they shouldn't have expected to like him.. we'll have him for 8 years, don't worry.[/QUOTE]
So the EFF and the ACLU are full of "butthurt conservatives". Uh huh...
 
From somewhere else:

The purpose of nine unelected jurists is not to substitute for the legislative process with the exception of only the most egregious violations of rights. This, though unfair and distasteful, does not rise to the level of unconstitutional. The judiciary should not be deciding this, and the Justice Dept is right to argue that.
Click to expand...

What's the problem here again?
 
[quote name='speedracer']From somewhere else:



What's the problem here again?[/QUOTE]
Your own quote apparently calls it "unfair and distasteful".
 
[quote name='rickonker']Your own quote apparently calls it "unfair and distasteful".[/QUOTE]
Right. But that's not the point. The executive branch shouldn't be supporting the offloading of legislation to the judiciary. That's just supporting good governance.
 
[quote name='HowStern']Yeah, police don't follow this at all right now anyway.

I got arrested once because I was in a car with a kid who had pot on him. The cop told me if I didn't cooperate and tell him where the kid got the pot from that I wouldn't be able to get my license until I was 21(I was 17 at the time). I didn't tell the cop anything despite being verbally abused and harassed for an hour with no lawyer present.

Judge threw the case out right away and said PD acted inexcusably.
They need to start punishing police who don't follow the law instead of removing the law. It's going backwards.

Obama will not be getting re-elected in '12 I don't think. And what's scary is that someone even worse will probably get elected because Obama is tarnishing peoples hope for change.[/quote]

Almost the same thing happened to me but with alcohol.
Anyway, the United States people as a whole are like one giant retarded baby. Obams was, is, and will be no different than any other dirty whore of a politician. I think it's funny how people feel their hopes being "tarnished" just because of this. This proves people are weak minded.

I'm not bashing you dude. I agree completely with what you said. I'm just saying the majority of US citizens = retarded. :lol: I enjoy watching the news when people speak negatively about Obams. It makes me laugh.
 
[quote name='HowStern']
They need to start punishing police who don't follow the law instead of removing the law. It's going backwards.[/QUOTE]

I like you. QFMFT!
 
While I still think people are jumping on Obama's case way too early in his presidency, I will say that if this actually gets passed, and the next "Rodney King" video is discovered (whether related or unrelated), the backlash would be unimaginable.
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']While I still think people are jumping on Obama's case way too early in his presidency, I will say that if this actually gets passed, and the next "Rodney King" video is discovered (whether related or unrelated), the backlash would be unimaginable.[/QUOTE]

1. The government needs backlash.

2. The backlash won't be that great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top