News Another 'right' denied by the Bush admin.

[Tsu]

From the LA Times (a registration site). Here it is without having to register

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/103004U.shtml

 

[pelastration]

From the LA Times (a registration site). Here it is without having to register

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/103004U.shtml

Amazing.
But also amazing that the Bush supporters of PF don't react. Are they happy that their own civial rights are violated? Or don't they understand that this is happening systematic, step by step.

 

[graphic7]

Amazing.
But also amazing that the Bush supporters of PF don't react. Are they happy that their own civial rights are violated? Or don't they understand that this is happening systematic, step by step.

Indeed, but instead of responding and admitting Bush is limiting their rights, they will state that this information is from a biased source and isn't worth their time.

 

[Gokul43201]

Damned if you do; damned if you don't ?? C'mon !

Let's stop bashing folks that haven't even posted yet, and get back to the topic, wot ?

 

[pelastration]

Damned if you do; damned if you don't ?? C'mon !

Let's stop bashing folks that haven't even posted yet, and get back to the topic, wot ?

OK.
What's your point?
You responded but said nothing about the topic.
So ... you feel good with that amazing change in governmental attitude? Do you feel your civil rights are well protected?

 

[Gokul43201]

I've made my stance clear in previous posts on voter disenfranchisement. I'm not going to voice an opinion on this before I see more of the story.

 

[kat]

Idon't tihnk many have been on to post, actually. The few minutes I've been on I've been grabbing a bite before I head out the door and was too lazy to pick upthe keyboard and type...

At any rate, I save my comment until I get or find the link to the actual case. Do you have it yet Tsunami? Or is the L.A.Slimes as far as you got?

 

[Tsu]

OK, kat. Here's a direct link to a different source (major newspaper - San Jose Mercury News) which doesn't require registration. It was easy to find. Feel free to google for more. My first link has it's own direct link to the LA Times at the top of the page called 'Go to Original', but as I said, The Times is a registration site. However, my link does offer the article in its entirety.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/10045248.htm?1c

Which case are you wanting to see, kat? So far, there are seven (see WSJ link below). The Bush admin. lawyers have argued in only three that I can tell. Did you even read the article? Bush lawyers are trying to argue that only the Justice Department has to right to sue states over the rights of voters... Now, I'd prefer to keep that right, myself. I think we've already given up enough rights in the past four years.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/article_print/0,,SB109892363852058034-INjfYNglah3n52mbHuIba2Im4,00.html

 

[fourier jr]

Amazing.
But also amazing that the Bush supporters of PF don't react. Are they happy that their own civial rights are violated? Or don't they understand that this is happening systematic, step by step.

"...And these are the good new days. The Authorities can no longer claim a threat from anti-Vietnam War radicals or a civil rights movement. The Black Panther Party is history, as is the alleged International Communist Conspiracy. The Central American and South African struggles are over. And J. Edgar Hoover, proving, after all, that he actually had something in common with the rest of humanity, has died. But the Authorities continue to need enemies -- to justify their swollen budgets, to provide themselves with a mission, to protect and aggrandize their jobs. Ergo, in place of finding a commie under every bed, they now find a drug possessor, user, shipper, courier, or dealer. Instead of The Evil Empire, they now see lots of Rogue Nations out there, Outlaw Nations, Pariah States -- enemies need catchy names -- with their regiments of terrorists, supporters of terrorists, nuclear smugglers, asylum seekers, and other anti-American types. In place of civil rights agitators, the Authority Juggernaut now zooms in on youth gangs, immigrants, environmentalists, welfare recipients, prisoners, and a host of other folks with little political power.

What keeps most Americans from being shocked by the shredding of the Bill of Rights is that they have yet to feel the consequences, either personally or through someone close to them. It would appear, however, that they only have to wait."

- A Day in the Life of a Free Country, William Blum

 

[kat]

OK, kat. Here's a direct link to a different source (major newspaper - San Jose Mercury News) which doesn't require registration. It was easy to find. Feel free to google for more. My first link has it's own direct link to the LA Times at the top of the page called 'Go to Original', but as I said, The Times is a registration site. However, my link does offer the article in its entirety.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/10045248.htm?1c

Which case are you wanting to see, kat? So far, there are seven (see WSJ link below). The Bush admin. lawyers have argued in only three that I can tell. Did you even read the article? Bush lawyers are trying to argue that only the Justice Department has to right to sue states over the rights of voters... Now, I'd prefer to keep that right, myself. I think we've already given up enough rights in the past four years.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/article_print/0,,SB109892363852058034-INjfYNglah3n52mbHuIba2Im4,00.html

Thanks for the extra links. That's not really what I'm looking for. I'd like to see the actual arguments used. I'll scan the justice dept and maybe findlaw when I have time.
I did read the first link you posted and I'm actually registered at the LA Slime
I'm very disapointed with much of how this election is being manipulated on both sides, no all three sides...as well as both sides of the ocean... no, actually...I'm more then disapointed, I'm absolutely disgusted.

 

[franznietzsche]

The Bush admin. lawyers have argued in only three that I can tell. Did you even read the article? Bush lawyers are trying to argue that only the Justice Department has to right to sue states over the rights of voters...

Actually they are arguing that only the justice department can sue to enforce this particular act, their argument has no bearing on other voting laws. Try getting your facts straight and then maybe conservatives will care what you have to say.

That said i still don't like it.

 

[russ_watters]

Tsu, your characterization of in the title has lead some who didn't bother to read the article to the wrong conclusion about the issue. Bush didn't "deny" anyone any rights. He doesn't have the power to do that.

 

[Tsu]

Thanks for the extra links. That's not really what I'm looking for. I'd like to see the actual arguments used. I'll scan the justice dept and maybe findlaw when I have time.
I did read the first link you posted and I'm actually registered at the LA Slime
I'm very disapointed with much of how this election is being manipulated on both sides, no all three sides...as well as both sides of the ocean... no, actually...I'm more then disapointed, I'm absolutely disgusted.

I'm absolutely disgusted with my President and his administration.

 

[franznietzsche]

I'm absolutely disgusted with my President and his administration.

Please, Kerry is no better.

 

[pelastration]

Please, Kerry is no better.

What make you say that? From Bush we know that he went many times wrong and that has skrewwed his own people with corruption like Halliburton, that he skrewwed environment, civil rights, etc ... from Kerry we don't know that. But for sure it would be hard for Kerry to do it worser.
Qua mentality I believe Kerry is a real fighter - record Vietnam - while at that time Bush's battle was to empty the maximum of bottles and having his psychedelic divine naps.

 

[franznietzsche]

What make you say that? From Bush we know that he went many times wrong and that has skrewwed his own people with corruption like Halliburton, that he skrewwed environment, civil rights, etc ... from Kerry we don't know that. But for sure it would be hard for Kerry to do it worser.
Qua mentality I believe Kerry is a real fighter - record Vietnam - while at that time Bush's battle was to empty the maximum of bottles and having his 0.psychedelic divine naps.

Bush can spell screwed after ruining things.

I don't trust Kerry on anything. With Bush i know exactly wht he'll do wrong. With Kerry i get to wait and see entirely new ways for him to ruin our lives. A draft is far more likely to come from the Democrats (they're the ones introducing draft bills to scare people).

We've seen in California that a strong Democratic rule is just as bad as a strong republican rule (until last october every single statewide office was held by a democrat, they held a majority in both houses of state legislature and proceeded to turn the state to ****). It got so bad that last october we threw the governer out of office. Not by impeachment or trial, but by a mass vote, he was literally thrown out. And that was a guy that AL Gore almost picked for a running mate.

The only way i see a good thing coming from kerry being elected is if the republicans maintain control of congress. The resulting gridlock would be the best thing possible. That was how Clinton managed not to screw anything up, because he was opposed by a republican congress. If Kerry is opposed by a republican congress, he might be the lesser of two evils, but if he's not, then he will be just as bad as bush. What matters isn't the presidential election, its the congressional elections, and which party gets control of congress. That will determine which candidate will do the least damage.