The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision but, that's not good enough for Obama

page: 3
64
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by roguetechie
Afterall your party is supposed to be the morally superior party or at least that's what you guys tell us day in and day out on every thread under the sun.



Wanted to address this
Who said Dems are morally superior? Do they claim to hold the evangelicals? Do they claim to be the party of God?
Morals..pfft..
Principles and logic is what (supposed) to run the left..leave the morals and nationalism for the right..they can burn the witches.

There is no veiled support for warrantless anything coming from the left...there is however a notice of how one side can use something, but then when the other tries, officials come in and say its a no-no.
This ruling should have been given 10 years ago...why suddenly now? Time to simply highlight the hypocracy would be my only view on what is happening here...and who knows...maybe by this being shot down, it will have an actual look at a whole plethora of unconstitutional bull---- that has become the norm in society.




posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

If I found someone intending to steal my property...it's a good thing I have Texas law to back me up. Not to mention that if you pull your weapon, and you aim for anything other than center mass, you could actually be imprisoned for reckless endangerment.

/TOA


that's because trauma plates in kevlar vests are "center of mass". I don't suppose I'd shoot, because my aim is abominable, and would likely be "off center" - but it would be frequent to make up for the lack of accuracy!



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlonzoTyper

Every person's phone is essentially a gps tracking device now, and can be listened to without a warrant. No one seems bothered by that idea.....

Obama bailed out GM which has their OnStar program. This not only allows anyone to pinpoint your location, but also can listen in to conversations, and even shut your car down at the push of a button....


Solutions:

1) "forget" your cell phone at home, or take the battery out.

2) Buy "other than" GM, and/or disable any "OnStar like" devices.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


And exactly as I stated in my post you have came in with attempted deflections including blaming the right IE why wasn't this brought to court ten years ago. Also stating that this court case should have been fought ten years ago not now. You've also conveniently blamed the supreme court citing it's lack of authority in your eyes since they declared corporations people

You've also side stepped the morality angle by saying the democratic party isn't about morality per se more about logic and something else.

You've also stated that noone is tacitly supporting gps which is an outright lie as the Obama administration released a press release specifically stating that the court left a loophole they intend to exploit which is what the thread is about.

You;ve also stated that it's not fair that the bush administration did it so it's not fair when the dems aren't allowed to do it.

There's a few other doozies straight out of the playbook I layed down in my post but i won't get into those I think these four are plenty

1. I'd like to point out that it can take up to a decade for a court case to make it's way through the lower courts and up to the supreme court so that argument is essentially BS .... Chances are the case relates to something that happened 10 years ago this is how the justice system works. The ruling isn't "targeted" at the Obama administration at all although thank you for so graciously illustrating your party's persecution complex

2. If the democratic party isn't about being moral.... well I'll just let that one speak for itself in all it's jaded grandeur.

3. This thread wouldn't exist without a press release from teh white house basically crowing about it's finding of a loophole that lets them continue an immoral and unjust practice. (for the record this practice was just as immoral and unjust when it was a republican administration doing it and I've consistently been against gps taps without warrants NO MATTER WHO IS IN POWER) You on the other hand are just mad because the "right" party wasn't doing it. I suspect that if it had been democrats in power when this legislation passed you would have found some way to defend it.

4. It's not fair that the other guy got to do it but we don't.... Wrong is wrong and two wrongs don't make a right. Many of us have been against this situation from Day one No matter WHO was in control of the white house at the time.

As you can see you've done EXACTLY what my post was warning of. No matter how many times you point your finger at the right and scream he did it first it still doesn't make you doing the same thing right.
edit on 5-6-2012 by roguetechie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


1) I pointed out it was established by the right...why would the left then not be allowed to take advantage of it?

2) If your seeing veiled deflection and justification being spoken..it may not be because that is what happening..but you are actually seeing justification, just cannot accept it

3) Morals allow bombs to be dropped due to opposing religions, witches to be burned, gays to be beaten, etc...morals are ultimately subjective and quite often evil in action.
Better to be the party of principles derived from logic than the party of morals derived from nationalism. You can find fault in that line of thinking...probably why your not a liberal.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by roguetechie
 


1) I pointed out it was established by the right...why would the left then not be allowed to take advantage of it?

2) If your seeing veiled deflection and justification being spoken..it may not be because that is what happening..but you are actually seeing justification, just cannot accept it

3) Morals allow bombs to be dropped due to opposing religions, witches to be burned, gays to be beaten, etc...morals are ultimately subjective and quite often evil in action.
Better to be the party of principles derived from logic than the party of morals derived from nationalism. You can find fault in that line of thinking...probably why your not a liberal.


I am not a liberal either and I can see a wrong when it is being done and I am not going to defend a president that sits and craps on the constitution and runs roughshod through the law. This is an absolute disgrace and it absolutely is all about party lines and the My team has to win attitude. Its not about teams. It is about this country and what is best for it right now. The wire tap and GPS deal first came about I believe right after 9/11 and the country was very much in a state of panic and had the lets do everything we can attitude to where now we are a little more secure. Or at least we all think so. And the GPS thing needed to be done away with. The fact that this administration is doing as many strange things as they are should worry people but if they are absolute party line liberals, as stated above will defend ANYTHING this administration does. If they came out and said they wanted you to give up your fist born and that the president was going to start sleeping with all your teenage daughters the party line people would defend it as "Principals derived from Logic". Morals are not at all necessary. It amazes me how hard and fast people are to their democratic party.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
The admin oversteps its authority
scotus says no
appeals court checks
voila
This is called the system..its how it works..checks and balances.

what more needs to be done? the system seems like it is working fine...



No the system is not working fine. The appeals courts look at decisions handed down by lower level courts based on case law. When there is no case law, as in this instance, the case makes its way up to the Supreme Court where the matter is decided, once and for all. Roma Locuta Est, Causa Finita Est or as close as you can get to that in the US.


The Supreme Court is the final court of appeals and after that there is no further review of the matter by other courts. It is the duty of the lower courts to enforce the law as decided by the Supreme Court.

The Court made it quite clear that attaching a tracking device to a vehicle and using that device to track the vehicle constitutes a search and requires a warrant. Arguing that this doesn't apply because of semantics is just silly.

The Obama administration is trying to get a do-over by appealing this to a lower court by saying the Feds don't have to adhere to the Supreme Court's decision. Any normal judge would laugh Obama out of court after such a clear decision by the Supremes. That's why he went to the 9th Circuit Court. The idiots there don't seem to have any idea of what they're doing judging by how many of their decisions end up overturned on appeal.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Haha.. the 9th Circuit Court is the only Court that truly know what the meaning of "is" is.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
omg. Read people, read. Then read again, and again and again

"In a case being heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Obama administration argued that since the Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t specifically mandate the obtaining of a search warrant in all situations, then the justices intended to leave a loophole open — a loophole large enough to mount a tracking device"

Obama wants a MANDATE for a search warrant for ALL SITUATIONS. There was a loophole that the justices left, and Obama found it. Now he wants it fixed. All of you are so hell bent on condeming him, so sick of this crap. He is trying to protect a piece of the constitution, not just accept a POS decision that basically said, well, you need a search warrant, ACCEPT WHEN... no Obama wants it to say ALWAYS, not SOMETIMES. WTH is wrong with making sure it is 100%, not 65%? Everyone of you knows that if there is a loophole, every government agency will utilize it.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


I wonder if this is a dry run for when the Court hands down its decision on Obamacare?

He may be testing the waters for an open act of defiance against the court in case they decide against his health care legislation. The Supreme Court is one of the last checks left in the system, if Obama can find a way to ignore their decisions and the public doesn't react too strongly, he could render them irrelevant, just like the Constitution.

He did promise to fundamentally change Amerika after all...


Presidents have been negating the scotus for a long time, through executive orders, etc. We've been operating under emergency powers for decades. Scotus is simply a tool used to make actions more politically justified. If they don't rule the way tptb want, then the president overrides (where it makes sense to use the E.O.s to do so without totally losing all credibility with the masses. Bush did it to a ridiculous degree. Obama has to some degree, and you can bet will match or exceed Bush's abuses in his 2nd term (which he most assuredly will have)



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


You cannot listen to conversations in the vehicle with onstar.
Ok I checked their privacy specs and it does say that they can record conversations with you and them, you and emergency personel, you and the police. So it seems that you must initiate the conversation in order for onstar to record. They are not recording casual conversations of you and your friends while riding in your car which is basically what you are claiming. All 911 calls are recorded too. This info may be needed after an accident or incident with the vehicle.
edit on 5-6-2012 by karen61057 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   


No matter, the cars are being made with these items as standard operating equipment. All the gubbermint needs to do is tune in.
reply to post by karen61057
 


Something for the drones to tune into hmmm?
Sorry, not sure what else to say.
Glad I don't live in America, but the UK has its fair share of woes to contend with as well.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


I am a dem. I lean as far left as I can and still remain standing. As far as I always knew the moral majority was part of the republican right wing adgenda. We're the ones supporting abortions, gay marriage, and the legalization of pot, remember ????
edit on 5-6-2012 by karen61057 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by nenothtu
 


You cannot listen to conversations in the vehicle with onstar.
Ok I checked their privacy specs and it does say that they can record conversations with you and them, you and emergency personel, you and the police. So it seems that you must initiate the conversation in order for onstar to record. They are not recording casual conversations of you and your friends while riding in your car which is basically what you are claiming. All 911 calls are recorded too. This info may be needed after an accident or incident with the vehicle.
edit on 5-6-2012 by karen61057 because: (no reason given)


It wasn't my claim - I merely responded with solutions to problems presented in another claim. I don't care what OnStar does - I don't have it, nor will I ever. It's an entirely useless contraption to me, much like the car it lives in.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


they would do this already I don't know what the hell is changed.. The US govt is well known for committing dodgy acts and crimes within its own country against its own citizens. If the govt/men in black/tptb/whatever you wanna call them wanted a gps tracker on a car they would just do it. Since when have they felt guilty enough to try and make it legal before they violate citizens privacy? They do it all the time with phone taps and other stuff.

I'm glad I live in australia because we are so far behind with everything, we don't have a lot of this invasion of privacy technology haha.

Give it a few years though and we will be up there with the US, UK etc
edit on 5-6-2012 by knightwhosaysnih because: changed "or" to "of"



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
The upcoming decision from the Supreme Court on Obama's health reform debacle will not be accepted by him or his administration either. Some of his law will be righfully and thankfully overturned. Just another couple of weeks before the sheet hits the Obama Admin's fan!

-cwm



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Obama sees himself as a dictator, so he is acting accordingly. Ergo, Eric Holder feels emboldened to do whatever his boss tells him to do - constitutionality be damned. This should not surprise anyone.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Have yall thought maybe they do not care where you go. Their are enough Fusions centers to track those movements.

Remember that when anyone ask a why do they... the answer is MONEY

I cover this in my rant

Kent Walls Rant IV: Did not quite make ATS or had no staying power

The state is wanting to collect more cash for road maintenance.

They want to track your mileage so they can tax it, since gas taxes flowing into their coffers will be lower



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
reply to post by stanats
 

Would you settle for Stalin? Mao? Any other dictator that completely ignores the will of the people and the country's highest court?


So I'm guessing you are not going to vote for him, of course given that you have the opportunity to vote for him or someone else totally trashes your argument about him being a dictator.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheTardis
reply to post by stanats
 


I am pretty sure when talking about self defense laws regarding shooting someone the Zimmerman name might come up as relevant at the present time. Sorry if you didnt like it but I think it very relevant to the conversation at that point. And if you didn't catch the sarcasm in it you should re read it.

But either way this is just another slap in the face for the American People, The constitution and our Judicial System.


The true test of "the American People, The constitution and our Judicial System" is if you support the right to appeal even if you disagree with the party that is appealing
edit on 6-6-2012 by stanats because: grammar
edit on 6-6-2012 by stanats because: grammar





new topics
top topics
 
64
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join