Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,639 Year: 4,896/9,624 Month: 244/427 Week: 54/103 Day: 12/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Senator Al Franken?
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 69 of 300 (703641)
07-26-2013 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Minnemooseus
03-24-2013 5:43 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
quote:
Michele Bachmann considers running against Al Franken; Matchup would pit famous comedian against nationally respected politician who used to be on SNL.
"nationally RESPECTED politician"? With humorless irony like that, it's no wonder clueless americans keep voting in clowns.
Al Franken supports the NSA surveillance program against americans: he voted AGAINST the Amash NSA Amendment (ends the indiscriminate collection of phone and email records) on Wednesday. Besides Democrats Minority Leader Pelosi and Minority Whip Hoyer, and of course Bush Jr. II (Obama), Franken has gone on record AGAINST the fourth amendment:
quote:
Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
quote:
Perhaps the most fundamental problem with the NSA's constitutional theory is that it has no limit. If the constitution is blind to the collection of our data and limits only the NSA's later uses of it, then the NSA truly can 'collect it all' now and ask questions later. Our emails, phone calls and internet activities would all be very simple for the NSA to collect under the NSA's theory. But it could go much further. It could put video cameras on every street corner, it could install microphones in every home and it could even remotely copy the contents of every computer hard drive.
Obama's Willing Executioners of the Fourth Amendment | HuffPost Latest News
quote:
We now know that NSA used Sec. 215 to collect metadata on every phone call that every American has made, reportedly over the last seven years. That metadata includes numbers dialed, numbers of incoming calls, times of the calls, and routing information. Many Members who voted for the Patriot Act, including the past chairman of the law’s authorizing committee, have stated that NSA’s blanket surveillance program is far beyond what was intended in the law.
http://amash.house.gov/speech/amash-nsa-amendment-fact-sheet
So laugh and deride all you want about Bachmann, because the last laugh is on us 99%ers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-24-2013 5:43 PM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 07-27-2013 12:12 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 92 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-30-2013 10:22 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 112 by xongsmith, posted 08-02-2013 12:52 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 72 of 300 (703760)
07-29-2013 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by ringo
07-27-2013 12:12 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
RingO writes:
Franken was a clown before he was elected.
Well, IMO, he is now a treasonous clown . . .
RingO writes:
By the way, there's a reason why we elect representatives and allow them to express different opinions.
No, we don't bother to elect representatives knowing they might flip their stance AGAINST their oath:
quote:
At the start of each new Congress, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate are sworn into office. This oath-taking dates to 1789, the first Congress; however, the current oath was fashioned in the 1860s, by Civil War-era members of Congress.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
The first Congress developed this requirement into a simple, 14-word oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."
Oaths of Office For Federal Officials

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by ringo, posted 07-27-2013 12:12 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 11:52 AM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 75 of 300 (703776)
07-29-2013 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by ringo
07-29-2013 11:52 AM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
RingO writes:
"Supporting the Constitution" doesn't preclude criticizing it.
One cannot support the constitution (as Franken's stated in his oath) and attack it at the same time.
RingO writes:
And you definitely should be aware that anybody you elect may change his/her stance on any issue.
Yep, Republican Representative Richard L. Hanna of New York went against his constituent's wishes when he voted FOR Same-Sex Marriage in New York. Boy, his base was mad at him.
So, yes, when the change is evolutionary progressive as Hanna's change was, that is good.
And when the stance changes to support de-evolutionary, pro-police state, fascism, constitution rejectionism, anti-liberty, attacking of right's . . . then it is bad. [Unless you are Adolf Hitler, which it then is good. Cue Crashfrog's relativist counter-arguments trumping people's inalienable rights and liberties]
RingO writes:
That's why you also have the power to un-elect them.
Like the destruction of some environmental habitats, once something is utterly destroyed, it is nearly impossible to bring it back. Once you drive over a cliff (oh no, please Tempe, no more cliff analogies), stepping on the brakes doesn't have much an effect . . .
The NSA is contracting hundreds of companies to employ tens of thousands of employees like Snowden. Just like funding the industrial military complex, once its presence is enmeshed in the budget, it will be nearly impossible to reduce. There will be too much money/power to reduce it.
I am fond of paraphrasing the following saying in my many crusades on the forum, "I am trying to prevent the epidemic, while Franken is driving the infected monkey to the airport." . . .
It's imperative to fight the attacks on our liberties now, not the next election cycle. My freedom-hating NY Senator Dem Charles E. Schumer, along with Franken, Pelosi, and Obama support a police state and attack my rights and liberties. The clueless voters keep voting them in.
What can I do?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 11:52 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:19 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 76 of 300 (703777)
07-29-2013 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by ringo
07-29-2013 11:52 AM


"treasonous clown"
"treasonous clown" . . .
This is really off-topic but, . . .
The term 'treasonous clown' reminds me of the court jester in fuedal times who was allowed to speak true but treasonous words as long as they were couched in metaphor or told thru songs or jokes. I think John Stewart might be today's modern court jester, as he is one of the only corporate media's allowable ways to gain true insight into modern politics.
But I would use a different definition of 'treasonous clown' when Franken is being referenced.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 11:52 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:22 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 79 of 300 (703783)
07-29-2013 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by ringo
07-29-2013 1:19 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
RingO writes:
Can't you maintain your home and repair it at the same time? Since when is maintenance different from maintenance?
You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.
RingO writes:
So changes that you agree with are good and changes that you disgree with are treason?
As I wrote before, this is Crashfrog's 'relative' counterargument. If you are Adolf Hitler you would be in favor of the things I find repugnant. I get it. If most people prefer to live in nazi Germany, then I guess I need to get used to wearing brownshirts. However, i also believe, for a number of reasons, people fully support things that are against their best interests. That leaves me flatfooted.
Drone writes:
What can I do?
RingO writes:
You tell me.
My limited response is early education in the areas of critical thinking (remember our debate a long time ago?), conflict and anger management, early science classes, global society comparison, religion/fantasy comparison, etc. But it probably wouldn't help for several generations so maybe we are all doomed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:19 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:02 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 83 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 2:07 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 80 of 300 (703784)
07-29-2013 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by ringo
07-29-2013 1:22 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
RingO writes:
Personally, I don't find John Stewart the least bit funny.
Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 1:22 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:05 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 84 of 300 (703796)
07-29-2013 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by ringo
07-29-2013 2:02 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
You cannot destroy your home while simultaneously maintaining it.
RingO writes:
Sure you can. You can gut the spare bedroom to put in an ensuite bathroom.
Ringo, your flippant arguments are revealing. I didn't write "bedroom." I wrote 'home." As in 'entire house.' You are attempting to marginalize what Franken is doing, like repainting a closet in your home example. Franken is attacking the constitution, not merely re-window dressing it. Attacking is not the same as supporting the constituion as he took an oath to do. BTW, did I write that Franken took an oath to support the constitution?
RingO writes:
My views are probably closer to yours than to Hitler's and possibly than Franken's too.
"Probably"?
RingO writes:
I'm not defending either Hitler's views or Franken's. I'm just pointing out how ludicrously over-the-top your criticism is.
The only way you could possibly show I am over-the-top in supporting basic rights and liberties is by defending Hitler.
RingO writes:
It's a democracy.
"Democracy"??? Do you even know what the constitution and its amendments and my argument is all about? . . .
quote:
It is a fundamental principle of American democracy that laws should not be public only when it is convenient for government officials to make them public. They should be public all the time, open to review by adversarial courts, and subject to change by an accountable legislature guided by an informed public. If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy.
Alternet.org - 404 Not Found
RingO writes:
He's allowed to have views different from yours.
No. he made an oath to support the constitution. He is not allowed to change that part. Do you know what an oath is?
RingO writes:
People are allowed to be wrong, for that matter.
Are you saying you are okay with Hitler being merely wrong?
RingO writes:
Being flatfooted doesn't do you or anybody else any good.
No kidding. I concur.
Edited by dronester, : Added Wyden's quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:02 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 07-30-2013 12:02 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 85 of 300 (703797)
07-29-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by ringo
07-29-2013 2:05 PM


Re: "treasonous clown"
Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?
RingO writes:
I find all American politics incredibly boring. It's no wonder nobody votes.
Do you find him more truthful/insightful than Faux News?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by ringo, posted 07-29-2013 2:05 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by ringo, posted 07-30-2013 12:07 PM dronestar has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 86 of 300 (703798)
07-29-2013 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Rahvin
07-29-2013 2:07 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
Rahvin writes:
It is entirely possible to support the Constitution as a symbol of the rule of law and many of the principles it attempts to legislate, while simultaneously attacking provisions that are seen as unjust.
The OP is about Franken. I have brought up his recent vote to attack the 4th amendment. Franken voted AGAINST the Amash NSA Amendment (ends the indiscriminate collection of phone and email records) last Wednesday.
Are you arguing this recent specific vote is against a provision of the constitution which is unfair?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 2:07 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 4:18 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 87 of 300 (703800)
07-29-2013 3:22 PM


Sen. Ron Wyden On NSA Spying: It's As Bad As Snowden Says
Dem Senator Ron Wyden's article (below) is a must read for anybody who supports liberties and rights. The american people have been and are continuing to be deceived by the government. When the Bush Jr administration did this, liberals were all angry. Now where is everyone when Obama does it? Just the sounds of crickets?
quote:
The combination of increasingly advanced technology with a breakdown in the checks and balances that limit government action could lead us to a surveillance state that cannot be reversed.
quote:
Ron, how can the law be secret? When you guys pass laws that’s a public deal. I’m going to look them up online. In response, I tell Oregonians that there are effectively two Patriot Acts the first is the one that they can read on their laptop in Medford or Portland, analyze and understand. Then there’s the real Patriot Actthe secret interpretation of the law that the government is actually relying upon. The secret rulings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have interpreted the Patriot Act, as well as section 702 of the FISA statute, in some surprising ways, and these rulings are kept entirely secret from the public. These rulings can be astoundingly broad.
quote:
It is a fundamental principle of American democracy that laws should not be public only when it is convenient for government officials to make them public. They should be public all the time, open to review by adversarial courts, and subject to change by an accountable legislature guided by an informed public. If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy.
quote:
Outside the names of the FISA court judges, virtually everything else is secret about the court. Their rulings are secret, which makes challenging them in an appeals court almost impossible. Their proceedings are secret too, but I can tell you that they are almost always onesided.
quote:
. . . not only were the existence of and the legal justification for these programs kept completely secret from the American people, senior officials from across the government were making statements to the public about domestic surveillance that were clearly misleading and at times simply false.
Alternet.org - 404 Not Found

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 89 of 300 (703811)
07-29-2013 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Rahvin
07-29-2013 4:18 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
Rahvin writes:
I'm simply pointing out that your absolutist argument that it is impossible to simultaneously support and attack the Constitution is invalid.
But it seems only when using a quantifier, "when the constitution has some provision which is unfair," can you demonstrate my argument is possibly invalid.
Since Franken's vote against the constitution does NOT have a provision which is unfair, I have demonstrated in this specific case, that he cannot support and attack the constitution at the same time.
PS, congrats to having an ethical congresswoman. Most americans should be envious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Rahvin, posted 07-29-2013 4:18 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 93 of 300 (703946)
07-31-2013 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Minnemooseus
07-30-2013 10:22 PM


Re: Al Franken on the NSA surveillance thing (OSLT)
Drone writes:
Al Franken supports the NSA surveillance program against americans
Minnemooseus writes:
As best as I know, that is true (ABE - Make that an agreement if you strike that "against americans" from the sentence).
Drone writes:
he voted AGAINST the Amash NSA Amendment (ends the indiscriminate collection of phone and email records) on Wednesday.
Minnemooseus writes:
I'm pretty sure that was a House of Representatives thing. Franken is in the Senate.
Yes, thanks for correcting me, I was conflating Franken's open support with spying on Americans in direct violation of the fourth amendment with the recent Amash NSA Amendment.
Yes, I have read Franken's weak reasoning why he supports spying on americans in direct violation of the fourth amendment. And I am tired of 'big daddy's' fear tactics which always amounts to this:
quote:
. . . the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Hermann Gring
So I simply ask, instead of needing to violate the fourth amendment, and many others, in the never-ending fight against 'terrorists', why doesn't america simply stop doing things that cause 'terrorists' to want to harm us?: Support of fanatical and violent actions of Israel over Palestine, support of fundamentalist dictators like fanatical human rights-violating Saudi Arabia, world hegemony of building military bases in every corner of the world, invasions of countries for their energy resources, crippling economic sanctions that murder children, etc, ?
Stopping these things would cost no money or violation of rights and liberties. America would go on to win the hearts and minds throughout the world. But, nooo, instead, Franken and his fellow nazis want to merely tweak a secret criminal system so that america can continue its imperial ways.
Screw that!
I did like Franken in the past, but the saying about absolute power corrupts is true, even for former clowns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-30-2013 10:22 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by jar, posted 07-31-2013 9:50 AM dronestar has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


(1)
Message 95 of 300 (703950)
07-31-2013 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by ringo
07-30-2013 12:02 PM


Re: Michele Bachmann considering challenging Al Franken for his senate seat
RingO writes:
Are you being deliberately disingenuous? You know very well that you can renovate your home by "destroying" one room at a time.
There is irony of you needing to put "destroying" in quotes while questioning if I am being deliberately disingenuous.
Though you and Rahvin dislike my absolutist argument, you and him seem to be straining to come up with a satisfying counter-argument that broadly fits.
I wrote: One cannot support the constitution (as Franken stated in his oath) and attack it at the same time.
Franken is neither attacking the constitution to make it better as Rahvin's example suggested, nor is he attacking the constitution, even in portions, to renovate it, or to repair it, or to criticize it, as you have suggested. (Unless you use an extreme example of relativism, i.e., Hitler wants to 'improve' the constitution by creating a secret police state)
Yes, the amendments/constitituion is amendable. And that is done by a legal process. But that is NOT what Franken is doing. Franken solemnly swore that he will support the Constitution of the United States. Yet, Franken continues to support illegal and secret police-state behavior by the government. If america is a land of laws and democracy, Franken is attacking it.
RingO writes:
You're implying criminal intent, yet he faces no criminal charges. It seems that your position is the unconventional one.
Indubitably, violating the fourth amendment. I trust you're not going to extend your debate to Argumentum ad populum.
Drone writes:
"Democracy"?
RingO writes:
You haven't been very clear about that.
Perhaps you missed my last-second edit to my post, it might prove helpful. Take heed, this is going off-topic, so create a new thread if you want to raise more questions about democracy. . .
quote:
It is a fundamental principle of American democracy that laws should not be public only when it is convenient for government officials to make them public. They should be public all the time, open to review by adversarial courts, and subject to change by an accountable legislature guided by an informed public. If Americans are not able to learn how their government is interpreting and executing the law then we have effectively eliminated the most important bulwark of our democracy.
Alternet.org - 404 Not Found
Do you know what an oath is?
RingO writes:
Yes, it's an empty formality.
If you've ever made an oath in your life, was it willfully empty?
RingO writes:
It might be an interesting aside to discuss whether or not Hitler could have been tried for his crimes. (There's a novel called The Trial of Adolf Hitler by Phillipe van Rjndt that discusses some of the difficulties.)
Groan. I am on Federal Grand Jury duty for 18 MONTHS! (GROOOAN!!!) It's an endless procession of cases presented with legal double-talk by slick lawyers that strain definitions of words and actions. So, strained words, definitions, and special pleadings especially irritate me these days. If there may be technical difficulties in trying a monster like Hitler, I would mostly be sad to hear about them.
RingO writes:
But more appropriate to this topic is whether or not Al Franken can be tried for his "crimes".
US director of national intelligence James Clapper had lied to congress. That is a felony offense. At the least, the Obama administration should have fired his ass. It seems people like Bush Jr. and Cheney and James Clapper CAN almost always be tried for crimes, but they never are.
Let me read somewhere that Franken wants Clapper tried for lying to congress.
Edited by dronester, : added: Franken wants Clapper tried for lying to congress.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 07-30-2013 12:02 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 07-31-2013 12:44 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 97 of 300 (703959)
07-31-2013 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by ringo
07-31-2013 12:44 PM


RingO writes:
You have no way of knowing what Franken's motivations are.
Huh?
Actually we do.
Read Franken's words here:
Opinion: We need transparency on domestic surveillance | CNN
Talk about disingenuous, he knew the National Security Agency secretly gathered personal data on Americans since 2007 , including their internet use and cell phone service. It is only now, AFTER Snowden revealed the secret spying program on americans in violation of the fourth amendment that Franken NOW wants to simply make it slightly more transparent. Ugh!
RingO writes:
Of course Hitler was trying to create a better world.
Yes, and Franken wants a similar type of 'better world.' What part of that is not scaring you?
RingO writes:
Of course, Franken is not actually establishing a police state even if he does support the idea of one.
Huh?
the National Security Agency HAS BEEN secretly gathering personal data on Americans since 2007, a violation of the fourth amendment, including their internet use and cell phone service.
RingO writes:
All oaths are inherently empty whether wilfully or not.
Now who is being an absolutist?
RingO writes:
Not technical difficulties, practical difficulties - like what laws did [Hitler] actually break?
Sheesh, they even found tax-evasion to convict Al Capone, I should think there must be something, SOMETHING to convict Hitler. Go ahead, create a new thread/topic, it might be interesting.
RingO writes:
If he was violating any laws, the officials who actually administer the law would do something about it.
Yeaaah, like Clapper being tried for lying to congress.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 07-31-2013 12:44 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by ringo, posted 07-31-2013 1:42 PM dronestar has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1425
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 98 of 300 (703960)
07-31-2013 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by ringo
07-31-2013 12:44 PM


RingO writes:
Even if [Hitler's] vision of a better world was different from yours, it was very popular in Germany.
It seems to be slightly less popular in today's Germany.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 07-31-2013 12:44 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by ringo, posted 07-31-2013 1:46 PM dronestar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024