Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mc****: Supreme Court Ruling on Gitmo "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Dharmacrat Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:23 PM
Original message
Mc****: Supreme Court Ruling on Gitmo "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country"
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 05:38 PM by Dharmacrat
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080613/pl_nm/usa_politics_mccain_guantanamo_dc_1

PEMBERTON, New Jersey (Reuters) - John McCain on Friday lambasted the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to grant greater rights to prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, aligning himself with George W. Bush at a time when the unpopular president is seen as a political liability to his would-be Republican successor.

McCain, the Arizona senator who has wrapped up his party's White House nomination, has sought to distance himself from Bush, highlighting their differences on climate change policy and the administration's initial handling of the Iraq war.

But both men essentially condemned the top court's ruling on Thursday allowing Guantanamo Bay prisoners, who now number about 270, to go before U.S. federal judges to challenge their years-long detention.

Bush said he disagreed with it, and McCain -- sharpening his original reaction -- said it would make U.S. citizens and military personnel less safe.

"The United States Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country," McCain said to applause from a crowd of supporters in New Jersey.

"Our first obligation is the safety and security of this nation and the men and women who defend it," he continued. "This decision will harm our ability to do that."

The court ruled that the detainees, some of whom have been held for six years, had rights under habeas corpus, a long-standing legal principle by which people can challenge their imprisonment. The 5-4 decision, welcomed by human rights groups, was seen as a setback to Bush's war on terrorism.

McCain said the prisoners did not deserve the legal protection afforded to U.S. citizens.

"These are enemy combatants. These are people who are not citizens. They do not and never have been given the rights that citizens of this country have," he said.

McCain highlighted Democratic rival Barack Obama's support for the decision and, acknowledging the likelihood that the next president may appoint new justices to the court, knocked the Illinois senator for not supporting Chief Justice John Roberts at his confirmation hearings.

"Senator Obama applauds this decision and he supports it. I argue against it and will do what I can to at least narrow down some of the wide-open aspects of this Supreme Court decision," he said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Our first obligation is to preserve and protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,
not tear it asunder, you twit! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dharmacrat Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. he truly is the king of the ass-hats
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. That's ok, I read it as McCain anyway before I clicked on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dharmacrat Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. that proves it, it's a keeper! - Not!
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 05:38 PM by Dharmacrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. I thought he didn't like torture?
Guess you can get to like anything. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. I guess he only hates torture
when it happens to him.

He really ought to know better but since he seems to have the brains of an amoeba I guess that would be expecting too much.

Regards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. when it happens to him.
well put, that seems to be the case...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Yes, it's offensive.
Edited on Fri Jun-13-08 05:34 PM by MaineDem
I suggest you read the rules or change your title before it's removed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dharmacrat Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Done, I change it to **** that way, we can fill in the blanks depending on our mood....
...mine, after I read his comments... is not so good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. I suggest you edit your thread title to remove the offensive spelling
of McCain's name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. yeah. we are better than that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dharmacrat Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. done.... he is suuuuuuch a little weasle, I couldn't help myself
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I've got a few choice words for him, but thanks for editing.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
10. No doubt he'll sponsor more detainee "legislation"
to get around the ruling just like he did last time. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. this is what happens when one party completely abandons the constitution
The GOP is the Fascist Party now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I finally have to agree--the GOPukes are fascists n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Republicanism is a cult of greed, stupidity and death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moriah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
16. And he wants justices who will be "strict constitutionalists"....
Here's a few things from the Constitution.

"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."

The 6th Amendment:

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

It says in ALL criminal prosecutions. Not just prosecutions of citizens.

The "enemy combatants" are not a Rebellion or an Invasion.

McCain is showing that he would be very happy for the Supreme Court to "legislate from the bench" when it suits him.

Not only that, but he's essentially saying that, as a former POW himself, that he doesn't think he should have had the right to contest his captivity when he was in the Hanoi Hilton, that it was right for them to hold him without a trial.

Hypocrite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. ...
"Not only that, but he's essentially saying that, as a former POW himself, that he doesn't think he should have had the right to contest his captivity when he was in the Hanoi Hilton, that it was right for them to hold him without a trial."

AND FOR FOREVER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
17. That statement alone should be enough to doom McCain's
run for the Presidency. It shows ,beyond a shadow of a doubt. that he is in the company of thugs
like Anthony Scalia and is unqualified to serve as President of the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
19. No, McAsswipe......
you are just proving what a fucking moron you are. The first obligation is to the law and the constitution. You fucking jerk. I will be dancing in the streets the nite you are defeated soundly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-13-08 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
21. It is both infuriating and depressing
to realize that anyone, let alone a candidate for the Presidency, could possibly believe that it's OK for anyone -- no matter what crimes they are suspected of committing -- to be imprisoned indefinitely without even the right to know the charges and the evidence against them, let alone a lawyer and a fair trial.

How in the world does affording the Gitmo detainees the basic protections of habeas corpus endanger anybody? It won't set them free; it doesn't guarantee an acquittal; it just means they get to know what they're accused of. Why are the wingnuts so afraid of a process that has existed in our legal tradition for eight hundred years? It just proves how truly medieval, in the literal sense, these idiots are. They had habeas corpus in 1215, fercripessake!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC