Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 09-12-2006, 06:42 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
Rupert, you claimed the PATRIOT Act was written by Congress, which is wasn't. In addition, the Constitution does not contain an "emergency power" or "suspension" clause other than the clause allowing limited suspension of habeas corpus-- BUT-- that power is granted to CONGRESS, not the President (Article 9, Section 1). And it's been the White House, without Congressional knowledge in many cases, who has been orchestrating the secret prisons, the torture, etc. etc. Not that there haven't been cases decided in favor of eroding civil liberties, but the decisions weren't found in the Constitution.

The Patriot Act is 340 pages. The Senate was given just three days to read the bill before voting on it. Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Sen. Orrin Hatch found a pending appropriations bill due for a vote, and tacked on a slew of amendments servings as a sort of precursor to the Patriot Act — again, giving the Senate no time to actually read and discuss them.

You really think all 98 people who voted for the PATRIOT Act read it in its entirety and had time to consider it? In three days? But do you think they'd admit to it? And what does that say if they didn't vote to renew? Oh, gee, now that I've had a chance to actually read the thing I think I was wrong? Although some did-- the vote went 280-138 in the House and 89-10 in the Senate. (This year, by the way, not last year. It failed last year.)

In fact, Congress NOT reading legislation they have passed has gotten so bad several organizations are pushing for legislation that will require Congressmen and women to sign legal affadavits that they've read what they voted on. I kid you not. Fat chance seeing it passed, of course.

If you think mainstream media is liberal-- I don't even know how to address this one (I'm sure your Fox KoolAid is deeelicious, though!). Yes, many reporters identify as politically liberal. They aren't the ones who decide what stories get reported. It's the editors and the owners, who tend to identify as conservative. It doesn't matter one whit what political way you lean if you don't have the authority to decide what gets on the air.

And Colmes, or any of the other straw dogs Fox offers as "liberal viewpoints?" Oh please. I could stick a dildo on a desk next to Chris Matthews and claim it was a "Republican commentator" but that doesn't mean that it's going to be any good at commentating. If you can't see that they find the most incompetent idiots for O'Reilly to shout at and bully, you're kidding yourself (You call that debate? What he does?). But how can they claim to be "fair and balanced" unless they pretend to be giving both sides? Please. Oldest trick in the book, next to "Look at the monkey!" Call me when Fox puts on Joan Walsh or Sidney Blumenthal or someone good. I won't hold my breath.

Geraldo? Gimme a break. I can't believe you even typed that in any seriousness. It'd be like me assuming your Ann Coulter is the best you right-wingers can offer. Unfair and untrue of me to do so. Geraldo. Right. 'Fess up-- you meant that as a joke, right?

Please feel free to give me any examples of major news outlets showing a clear liberal bias in their reporting. As you have said, best to deal in facts and not opinions.

What, just because Section 411 doesn't apply to citizens, that makes it okay?

Thanks Rupert, as always, for the opposing view! Makes me do my homework, which I appreciate.
You obviously don't watch Fox. They have Senators and Congressmen on from both parties all the time. Equal time is given to both sides.

You must be kidding about the networks. Dan Rather was allowed to do a negative story on President Bush that was based on forged documents. they didn't check their sources at all. If they would have done even a minimal amount of homework, they would have known that the documents were forged. How were they allowed to do this story if the higher-ups were conservative? The higher-ups have never been conservative at the networks. Where did you come up with that? If the higher-ups were conservative, why s it that they never hire conservative journalists?

I'm not sure I understood your comments about Chris Matthews. I assume you know he is a democrat but I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't. He worked for Jimmy Carter for many years.

I agree with you that Alan Colmes is not some left-wing nut. He is a relatively conservative democrat. With regard to Ann Coulter, I have no problem when she represents the right. She can hold her own. She's articulate.

Anyway, you obviously don't watch Fox. They have the Joe Bidens and the Sidney Blumenthals and all the articulate democrats on there all the time.
Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.