Oh Damn, Ron Paul....

[Nbadan]

Even if you think that Paul is a few apples short of a full basket...you gotta love this...


H.R. 3835: To restore the Constitution's checks and balances and protections against government abuses as... (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-3835)

:clap

[Wild Cobra]

For someone who claims to be going by the constitution, he seems to understand it less than I do. Some of the things in the bill can only be enforced by doing it as a constitutional amendment. Nice piece of feel-good legislation, but impractical.

I really like Ron Paul except for his being opposite of me on national defense in several ways. This piece of legislation, sorry, makes me like him quite a bit less. I respect his determination to do what he thinks is right, but this bill is flat out wrong, and it will fail. Even the democrats won't let it get far and if they do waste time on it, it is most certainly going to be vetoed.

link for future tracking:

HR 3835 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.03835:)

[mookie2001]

by national defense you mean hes not pro-war

[Lebowski Brickowski]

I find nothing un-constitutional in the bill, nor anything that would require a constitutional amendment. I, however, have a better than average understanding of the constitution.

[Wild Cobra]

I find nothing un-constitutional in the bill, nor anything that would require a constitutional amendment. I, however, have a better than average understanding of the constitution.
I will give you one example which is a total joke:


The President's constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence is subordinated to this provision.

Give me a break. It's even too obvious.

[Galileo]

Go Ron Paul!

Get the latest scoop: www.dailypaul.com

Join the revolution: www.thisnovember5th.com

Ron Paul's TV ads start today in NH, and he will be on the Tonight show Tuesday with Jay Leno, Tom Cruise, and the Sex Pistols.

[Yonivore]

I find nothing un-constitutional in the bill, nor anything that would require a constitutional amendment. I, however, have a better than average understanding of the constitution.
Congress can't pass a law that affects the constitutional powers of another branch of the government.

For instance, where it says, "President's constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence is subordinated to this provision;" would be unconstitutional.

In one breath, the legislation affirms the President's constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence while, in a second, unconstitutional breath, the legislation (a product of Congress) pretends to subordinate the power of another branch of government, the Executive.

There are several other constitutional problems with the legislation but, you being a scholar and all, I'm sure you overlooked them as a learning opportunity for the rest of us.

[Holt's Cat]

It's only unconstitutional if you believe the President should be able to act unconstitutionally.

Anyways, there's nothing wrong with Paul. He says what he believes and he acts accordingly as a member of the House of Representatives. That's quite preferable to the alternative.

[Wild Cobra]

There are several other constitutional problems with the legislation but, you being a scholar and all, I'm sure you overlooked them as a learning opportunity for the rest of us.
I see it as a clear case of people learning from one of several of the "Universities of Indoctrination," lying to generations of students what the laws of the land are, so that when things like this FISA debate come out, people are clearly indoctrinated against the constitution, because they don't know better.

[BradLohaus]

Does anybody know where the constitution talks about the president's intelligence gathering power? I couldn't find it in Article 2 and I don't feel like searching over the whole thing.

[Holt's Cat]

Does anybody know where the constitution talks about the president's intelligence gathering power? I couldn't find it in Article 2 and I don't feel like searching over the whole thing.


I thought the Constitution limited the Executive Branch with enumerated powers instead of giving it carte blanche.

[Wild Cobra]

Does anybody know where the constitution talks about the president's intelligence gathering power? I couldn't find it in Article 2 and I don't feel like searching over the whole thing.
I'm not going to do a search for it. I don't think it specifically exists. However, for the president to 'faithfully' fulfill his duties, he needs to use resources at his disposal.

Does it need to be more complex that that?

[Yonivore]

Does anybody know where the constitution talks about the president's intelligence gathering power? I couldn't find it in Article 2 and I don't feel like searching over the whole thing.
It's right beside the Constitutional Right of privacy and abortion.

Can you cite a court ruling -- that's been upheld -- that says the president cannot surveil terrorists in the manner the executive branch claims to be doing surveillance?

All the accusation of who's been surveilled are just that. No one has yet produced a party that has been harmed by any unconstitutional surveillance. The administration denies having done so. So, you're left with hysterical, "The president is trashing the constitution," nonsense.

All the administration has allowed is that FISA, because some communication between suspects, outside the United States, travels through equipment located within the United States, has made it difficult to operate in the realm of surveillance due to the warrant requirements.

And, if a communication originates or is destined for a device outside the United States that is being surveilled, there is no requirement from FISA that a warrant be issued. After all how can the law predict to whom or from whom a Pakistani terrorist suspect will be communicating?

[Lebowski Brickowski]

I read that section to mean that The Executive's intelligence gathering powers are delineated in 50 U.S.C. 1801 and that "No Federal agency shall gather foreign intelligence in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act." If the Executive claims to have a Constitutional basis for it's methods of gathering intelligence, the claim must be vetted under 50 U.S.C. 1801.

That section really is just an affirmation of existing US Code, not any new limit on executive powers.




at least, that's how I read it.


EDIT: Yonivore It's funny how you try to make fun of people on the internet. Not funny: haha; funny: queer

[BradLohaus]

It's right beside the Constitutional Right of privacy and abortion.

In other words: it's not there, but the Supreme Court said that it is, so it is.


So, you're left with hysterical, "The president is trashing the constitution," nonsense.

I think the Patriot Act is what is trashing the constitution.


Congress can't pass a law that affects the constitutional powers of another branch of the government.

Didn't the Patriot Act expand the powers of the Executive Branch?

[Yonivore]

EDIT: Yonivore It's funny how you try to make fun of people on the internet. Not funny: haha; funny: queer
Doesn't that kinda make you guilty of the same? Are you feeling funny? Not funny: haha; funny: queer?

[Oscar DeLa]

noone understands the constitution less than you do
I don't know what it is but you think thats badd??

[Lebowski Brickowski]

Doesn't that kinda make you guilty of the same? Are you feeling funny? Not funny: haha; funny: queer?

You have a keen sense of hypocrisy

[Galileo]

Don't forget to tune into the Tonight Show tonight.

Special guest is RON PAUL. NBC expects a new record ratings high.

[Yonivore]

You have a keen sense of hypocrisy
I certainly do but, I don't think your statement made you a hypocrite as much as it made you not very self-aware. After all, you didn't seem to condemn the practice you found "queer," and of which I believed you to be similarly engaged in; you just made an observation and stated how it made you feel. I assume you were unaware that by adding that little edit at the bottom of your post, it could be characterized as making fun of me...on the internet.

[Yonivore]

Don't forget to tune into the Tonight Show tonight.

Special guest is RON PAUL. NBC expects a new record ratings high.
Are you kidding me?!?! The Cheetah Girl got kicked off Dancing with the Stars tonight. She'll be on Kimmel. Leno's gonna lose.

EDIT: Ooops, Fortunately for Leno, Kimmel is on later. Conan will be the loser.

[RandomGuy]

Even if you think that Paul is a few apples short of a full basket...you gotta love this...


H.R. 3835: To restore the Constitution's checks and balances and protections against government abuses as... (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-3835)

:clap

Oddly relevant, since he is running for election again.