Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Darkest of Horses: [Ron] Paul may surprise in New Hampshire (Newsweek)
Newsweek ^ | oct 29th | Howard Fineman

Posted on 10/21/2007 2:20:44 PM PDT by traviskicks

Whatever Hollywood says a presidential candidate is supposed to look like, Ron Paul isn't it. At 72, wearing mall-walking shoes and an inquisitive smile, he looks like a retired obstetrician, which he is. His platform is hardly from central casting, either. He not only wants U.S. troops home from Iraq, he wants them home from the rest of the planet. He wants to abolish an alphabet of federal agencies and the income tax, dismantle the Patriot Act, reconnect the dollar to the price of gold, decriminalize prostitution and call an end to the drug war. Seated in the House Speaker's Lobby, he speaks matter-of-factly, like a doctor describing an easy delivery. "This is my freedom message," says the Texas representative. "People have to be left alone."

Much of the world dismisses Paul as a libertarian crank. But mainstream candidates from Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have good reason to watch him. That reason's called the New Hampshire primary. Always unpredictable—there's not even a date set for it yet—the primary is more mysterious now because a record 44 percent of voters have registered "undeclared." Suspicious of established politics, with an antiwar sentiment stretching back to Vietnam, they decide at the last minute. Since they can vote in either party's race, their migrations choose the outcome in both. In 2000, two thirds asked for GOP ballots, boosting John McCain and dooming Bill Bradley, who was going after the same voters.

This time, Obama, Giuliani and Mc Cain are the big names fishing in the sea of independents. But conditions have changed: it's expected that two thirds of those voters will take part in the Democratic contest, which could be Obama's main, or last, chance. His yearning to change a "broken political system" is a good hook, but only if he can convince voters he has the guts and skill to do it. He has work to do: a recent Marist College poll shows Clinton leading him among independents 38 to 29 percent. A hot Democratic race would be bad for McCain and Giuliani, whose appeal rests in part on their perceived distance from GOP orthodoxy. The arithmetic of the undeclared is one reason Romney is sprinting to the right and why Mike Huckabee is getting a look in the state.

As George W. Bush's Republican coalition falls apart, its rougher edges become more visible and Paul's small-government, isolationist message gets heard. Many New Hampshirites see the state's LIVE FREE OR DIE motto as an article of faith, and they blame mushrooming federal deficits as much on the GOP as on the Democrats. "Independents are so mad about spending they can't see straight," says Jennifer Donahue of Saint Anselm College in Manchester. These voters loathe the war in Iraq, too. "They are as antiwar as anyone here, maybe more so," she says.

For now, Paul is a blip on New Hampshire's radar; in a recent poll, he stood at 5 percent among independents. But that could change. He's banked more than $5 million, recently raised more in the state than most other candidates, has a huge Web presence and just bought $1.1 million in New Hampshire TV ads. His staff is inexperienced, but smart. Andy Smith, a pollster at University of New Hampshire, says Paul could get 10 to 20 percent of the vote in the GOP race. That would be a dramatic story, but maybe not one most Republicans would want to read.


TOPICS: Editorial; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections; US: New Hampshire
KEYWORDS: abcdefg; braindead; diapers; gop; gothirdparty; nh2008; ohno; paulestinians; ronpaul; ronpaulforprez; slownewsday; troubledwaters
This weekend, Paul has got some pretty good media coverage, including:

NBC nightly news.

Joe Scarborough et al.
1 posted on 10/21/2007 2:20:46 PM PDT by traviskicks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

ping


2 posted on 10/21/2007 2:21:08 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

In before the keyword vandals!!!


3 posted on 10/21/2007 2:23:49 PM PDT by Abcdefg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

It will be quite interesting to see what transpires on the 5th of November with that donation campaign.


4 posted on 10/21/2007 2:26:09 PM PDT by Xenophon450 (They say it's lonely at the top, then I am as lonely as can be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ron Paul surprises me every time I hear him speak.


5 posted on 10/21/2007 2:27:59 PM PDT by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
A perfect depiction of the Paulites.



Ron Paul’s Disqualified: The defense of the country is a paramount issue in a presidential election. It is the most important responsibility of the executive branch of government. Yet, Paul's positions on the key defense and security issues of the day are closer to those of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry than Ronald Reagan. That's why, for me, he's disqualified – even if he had the support necessary to win, which he doesn't and never will.

6 posted on 10/21/2007 2:30:39 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: traviskicks

Right it is the greatest hope of the MSM that Ron Paul would show some strength in the GOP primaries. Therefore you can expect him to get better and better press this fall.


8 posted on 10/21/2007 2:35:32 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Fineman can’t tell a “dark horse” from a jackass.


9 posted on 10/21/2007 2:38:49 PM PDT by Nervous Tick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

For now, Paul is a blip on New Hampshire’s radar; in a recent poll, he stood at 5 percent among independents. But that could change. He’s banked more than $5 million, recently raised more in the state than most other candidates, has a huge Web presence and just bought $1.1 million in New Hampshire TV ads. His staff is inexperienced, but smart. Andy Smith, a pollster at University of New Hampshire, says Paul could get 10 to 20 percent of the vote in the GOP race. That would be a dramatic story, but maybe not one most Republicans would want to read.


Not sure that NH carries that much weight even though some are banking on winning there as a part of their stragety [Romney, ie]. McCain waxed President Bush in 2000 in NH only to lose Delaware and finally be put away in SC. As the article points out NH voters tend to flow with the tide and make decisions at the last moment moving from party to party. I don’t think that is typical of the voters in most GOP primaries....


10 posted on 10/21/2007 2:39:36 PM PDT by deport (>>>--Iowa Caucuses .. 75 days and counting--<<< [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ron Paul is a RINO.


11 posted on 10/21/2007 2:40:21 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative (Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

I’m in favor of bringing troops home from lots of places, like the Balkans, for example, where we never had any reason to be, but Iraq has to be stabilized or the entire western world loses.

Will somebody please lend a clue to RP?


12 posted on 10/21/2007 2:41:04 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ron Paul would be better than Rudy.

Barely.


13 posted on 10/21/2007 2:44:54 PM PDT by Grunthor (http://franz.org/quiz.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLS
"Right it is the greatest hope of the MSM that Ron Paul would show some strength in the GOP primaries. Therefore you can expect him to get better and better press this fall."

If that's their game, it'll backfire. If RP were to end up with a significant block of delegates, it would help torpedo their guy, Rootie.

14 posted on 10/21/2007 2:45:58 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

I am voting for Fred, I am a NH voter. libertarians buy grass in Lawerence, Mass, and in their smoke filled dreams imagine a morf of Paul into Ann Rand.


15 posted on 10/21/2007 2:49:47 PM PDT by Little Bill (Welcome to the Newly Socialist State of New Hampshire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Someone running as the anti-Bush will get votes.


16 posted on 10/21/2007 2:52:04 PM PDT by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
Ron Paul Supporters
Darkest of Horses

17 posted on 10/21/2007 2:55:11 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (ETERNAL SHAME on the Treasonous and Immoral Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

All I can say is, let’s hope the primary voters show some sense in this election cycle. Otherwise, we are in deep doodoo.


18 posted on 10/21/2007 3:18:14 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
"...As the article points out NH voters tend to flow with the tide and make decisions at the last moment moving from party to party. I don’t think that is typical of the voters in most GOP primaries...."

It IS screwed up. Let's not mention the NH colleges and universities that allow Massachusetts residents to register as NH voters, further skewing the voting. Forget New Hampshire as any bellwether state.

19 posted on 10/21/2007 3:25:06 PM PDT by Does so
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ratmedia panting after a way to disrupt the GOP primary system. Rupaul is just a coward who wants to make believe we are not fighting an enemy who wants to kill us all. He is getting funds from the left the way Dan got money from us. The second a real candidate gets the nomination he will be a memory.


20 posted on 10/21/2007 3:27:32 PM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatives live in the truth. Liberals live in lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
If winning Internet polls meant anything, we'd be running against President Dean.

Yeeeeaaaagggghhhhhaaa!

21 posted on 10/21/2007 3:31:02 PM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
reconnect the dollar to the price of gold

Yeah. The dollar has been disconnected from the price of gold my whole life, and I've been in miserable poverty the whole time. Won't someone from the UN send me something to eat?

22 posted on 10/21/2007 3:31:33 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative

“Ron Paul is a RINO.”

You had a large spelling error in your posting. It should say:

“Ron Paul is a PSYCHO.”


23 posted on 10/21/2007 3:38:27 PM PDT by TimeLord (A whale fetus is a whale; a human fetus is a blob.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

“Cui bono?”


24 posted on 10/21/2007 3:55:20 PM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (Call me a pro-life zealot with a 1-track mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
Guys, he says a lot of good things. I don’t agree with it all, but the Federal government is too large and it has its snoot in everything. In addition, it rarely does anything correctly. Look at the mess at issuing passports, or controlling the southern border as examples. Are the really 35 million illegal immigrants in the US. Who knows. How many drugs are crossing the border at this minute. Who knows? Not Uncle. Some changes are needed.
25 posted on 10/21/2007 4:40:31 PM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (Swift as the wind; Calmly majestic as a forest; Steady as the mountains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenophon450

Agreed, it is going to hurt, but i took the pledge myself...


26 posted on 10/21/2007 4:47:35 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine
Guys, he says a lot of good things.

Actually, I can't think of one thing I disagree with him on except the Iraq war (and no one else has pointed out anything else he is wrong on either). I would still vote for him over anyone in the Republican field other than Thompson, Hunter, or Tancredo.

27 posted on 10/21/2007 5:07:28 PM PDT by Texas Federalist (Fred!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: narby
******Yeah. The dollar has been disconnected from the price of gold my whole life, and I’ve been in miserable poverty the whole time. Won’t someone from the UN send me something to eat?*****

You just don’t realize how much we have lost in this country. When I started my first “real” job (research chemist with a masters degree in 1966) my entry level salary was the equivalent of $85,000 in today’s money. A couple years later, I switched to being a teacher and got the equivalent of $50-60,000 in today’s money to start.

In the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, man could support his family with one job.

28 posted on 10/21/2007 5:13:04 PM PDT by jmeagan (Our last chance to change the direction of the country -- Ron Paul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
Ron Paul Derangement Syndrome (RPDS):
Painful breakdown in values suffered by some conservatives, especially Neocons. Said conservatives encounter a Republican candidate who is strongly pro-life, opposes big government, high taxes, and ineffective, interventionist foreign policies. Rather than applauding this candidate, however, RPDS victims actually smear, libel and attack said candidate and his supporters.
29 posted on 10/21/2007 5:34:40 PM PDT by Goodness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmeagan
In the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, man could support his family with one job.

If you live at the level that people did in those years you can support a family on one job. The average house was smaller, the average car had less features, there were no PCs. Most only had one TV, without cable, and long distance was a luxury. I could go on.

There have been books written about people who have lived within the means of your average American of 1960, and one salary can support it.

My children are just out of college, and they're living much better than I did at their age. Anyone that would take the currency that supports the world and artificially tie it to gold merely because they think it's a "better idea" is nuts.

30 posted on 10/21/2007 7:15:36 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative
Ron Paul is a RINO.

ROTFLOL!

Well, I suppose it's true...with the Republican party so far to the left these days, a conservative and supporter of the Constitution is properly known as a RINO!

31 posted on 10/21/2007 8:07:46 PM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Goodness

Doesn’t Rep. Paul’s demeanor scare you though. Even if I agreed with him on Iraq I would be turned off by his tirades on the subject. If he would calm down and make a rational argument instead of ranting and screeming like he was on Air America he would have a lot better chance of influencing people like me.


32 posted on 10/21/2007 9:04:02 PM PDT by dschapin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Ron Paul is a kook.


33 posted on 10/21/2007 10:53:49 PM PDT by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
Notice that it is all the most rabid far Leftist mouthpieces, like Howie Fineman, in the US Junk Media that are cheering on Paul? Think maybe they have an ulterior motive for hyping Paul?

Maybe the Paulbots should be asking themselves why all their worst political foes are suddenly cheering on Paul.

34 posted on 10/22/2007 6:07:08 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Yo Democrats, You don't tell us how to wage war, we will not tell you how to be the village idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine
And how is a whole sale dismantling of the Federal Govt, as advocated by Ron Paul, going to do a single thing to stop the illegals?
35 posted on 10/22/2007 6:09:59 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Yo Democrats, You don't tell us how to wage war, we will not tell you how to be the village idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jmeagan

In the 50-60-70s Govt consumed less then 25% of your income. Now it consumes 50% or more. It has nothing to do with pegging the dollar to the price of gold. It has to do with your local-state-federal taxes.


36 posted on 10/22/2007 6:11:20 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Yo Democrats, You don't tell us how to wage war, we will not tell you how to be the village idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Goodness
“conservatives encounter a Republican candidate who is strongly pro-life, opposes big government, high taxes, and ineffective, interventionist foreign policie”

Then take a look at the latest highly anti Constitutional bill of Paul’s. Please explain to us how Paul’s being this rabidly pro terrorists is in any way even remotely Conservative?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1913087/posts

American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 3835 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3835

To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 15, 2007

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and Select Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Unchecked power by any branch leads to oppressive transgressions on individual freedoms and ill-considered government policies.

(2) The Founding Fathers enshrined checks and balances in the Constitution to protect against government abuses to derail ill-conceived domestic or foreign endeavors.

(3) Checks and balances make the Nation safer by preventing abuses that would be exploited by Al Qaeda to boost terrorist recruitment, would deter foreign governments from cooperating in defeating international terrorism, and would make the American people reluctant to support aggressive counter-terrorism measures.

(4) Checks and balances have withered since 9/11 and an alarming concentration of power has been accumulated in the presidency based on hyper-inflated fears of international terrorism and a desire permanently to alter the equilibrium of power between the three branches of government.

(5) The unprecedented constitutional powers claimed by the President since 9/11 subtracted national security and have been asserted for non-national security purposes.

(6) Experience demonstrates that global terrorism can be thwarted, deterred, and punished through muscular application of law enforcement measures and prosecutions in Federal civilian courts in lieu of military commissions or military law.

(7) Congressional oversight of the executive branch is necessary to prevent secret government, which undermines self-government and invites lawlessness and maladministration.

(8) The post-9/11 challenges to checks and balances are unique in the Nation’s history because the war on global terrorism has no discernable end.

(b) Purpose- The American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 is intended to restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

SEC. 3. MILITARY COMMISSIONS; ENEMY COMBATANTS; HABEAS CORPUS.

(a) The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is hereby repealed.

(b) The President is authorized to establish military commissions for the trial of war crimes only in places of active hostilities against the United States where an immediate trial is necessary to preserve fresh evidence or to prevent local anarchy.

(c) The President is prohibited from detaining any individual indefinitely as an unlawful enemy combatant absent proof by substantial evidence that the individual has directly engaged in active hostilities against the United States, provided that no United States citizen shall be detained as an unlawful enemy combatant.

(d) Any individual detained as an enemy combatant by the United States shall be entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2241 of title 28, United States Code.

SEC. 4. TORTURE OR COERCED CONFESSIONS.

No civilian or military tribunal of the United States shall admit as evidence statements extracted from the defendant by torture or coercion.

SEC. 5. INTELLIGENCE GATHERING.

No Federal agency shall gather foreign intelligence in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). The President’s constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence is subordinated to this provision.

SEC. 6. PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS.

The House of Representatives and Senate collectively shall enjoy standing to file a declaratory judgment action in an appropriate Federal district court to challenge the constitutionality of a presidential signing statement that declares the President’s intent to disregard provisions of a bill he has signed into law because he believes they are unconstitutional.

SEC. 7. KIDNAPPING, DETENTIONS, AND TORTURE ABROAD.

No officer or agent of the United States shall kidnap, imprison, or torture any person abroad based solely on the President’s belief that the subject of the kidnapping, imprisonment, or torture is a criminal or enemy combatant; provided that kidnapping shall be permitted if undertaken with the intent of bringing the kidnapped person for prosecution or interrogation to gather intelligence before a tribunal that meets international standards of fairness and due process. A knowing violation of this section shall be punished as a felony punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to 2 years.

SEC. 8. JOURNALIST EXCEPTION TO ESPIONAGE ACT.

Nothing in the Espionage Act of 1917 shall prohibit a journalist from publishing information received from the executive branch or Congress unless the publication would cause direct, immediate, and irreparable harm to the national security of the United States.

SEC. 9. USE OF SECRET EVIDENCE TO MAKE FOREIGN TERRORIST DESIGNATIONS.

Notwithstanding any other law, secret evidence shall not be used by the President or any other member of the executive branch to designate an individual or organization with a United States presence as a foreign terrorist or foreign terrorist organization for purposes of the criminal law or otherwise imposing criminal or civil sanctions.

37 posted on 10/22/2007 6:21:46 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Yo Democrats, You don't tell us how to wage war, we will not tell you how to be the village idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks

Doubtful Dr. Paul will get a lot of traction. His recent abandonment of principles lost him a lot of support. If he would have stuck to the non-initiation of force principle, he’d still be ok. But his willful ignorance of the attacks on US, the moral rightness of fighting BACK, and his pandering to the “blame America first” crowd has lost him a lot of conservative-libertarian support.


38 posted on 10/22/2007 6:28:06 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
Perhaps you can take a break from your Junior High School IQ level sneering at everyone and everything and try one time actually defending some of the pro terrorists insanity from your god, Der Paul?

Try explaining how this bill is Conservative?

For a supposed "Cosnitutionalist" Paul demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the principals governing "Separation of Powers".

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1913087/posts

American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 3835 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 3835

To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 15, 2007

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and Select Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007’.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Unchecked power by any branch leads to oppressive transgressions on individual freedoms and ill-considered government policies.

(2) The Founding Fathers enshrined checks and balances in the Constitution to protect against government abuses to derail ill-conceived domestic or foreign endeavors.

(3) Checks and balances make the Nation safer by preventing abuses that would be exploited by Al Qaeda to boost terrorist recruitment, would deter foreign governments from cooperating in defeating international terrorism, and would make the American people reluctant to support aggressive counter-terrorism measures.

(4) Checks and balances have withered since 9/11 and an alarming concentration of power has been accumulated in the presidency based on hyper-inflated fears of international terrorism and a desire permanently to alter the equilibrium of power between the three branches of government.

(5) The unprecedented constitutional powers claimed by the President since 9/11 subtracted national security and have been asserted for non-national security purposes.

(6) Experience demonstrates that global terrorism can be thwarted, deterred, and punished through muscular application of law enforcement measures and prosecutions in Federal civilian courts in lieu of military commissions or military law.

(7) Congressional oversight of the executive branch is necessary to prevent secret government, which undermines self-government and invites lawlessness and maladministration.

(8) The post-9/11 challenges to checks and balances are unique in the Nation’s history because the war on global terrorism has no discernable end.

(b) Purpose- The American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 is intended to restore the Constitution’s checks and balances and protections against government abuses as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

SEC. 3. MILITARY COMMISSIONS; ENEMY COMBATANTS; HABEAS CORPUS.

(a) The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is hereby repealed.

(b) The President is authorized to establish military commissions for the trial of war crimes only in places of active hostilities against the United States where an immediate trial is necessary to preserve fresh evidence or to prevent local anarchy.

(c) The President is prohibited from detaining any individual indefinitely as an unlawful enemy combatant absent proof by substantial evidence that the individual has directly engaged in active hostilities against the United States, provided that no United States citizen shall be detained as an unlawful enemy combatant.

(d) Any individual detained as an enemy combatant by the United States shall be entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2241 of title 28, United States Code.

SEC. 4. TORTURE OR COERCED CONFESSIONS.

No civilian or military tribunal of the United States shall admit as evidence statements extracted from the defendant by torture or coercion.

SEC. 5. INTELLIGENCE GATHERING.

No Federal agency shall gather foreign intelligence in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). The President’s constitutional power to gather foreign intelligence is subordinated to this provision.

SEC. 6. PRESIDENTIAL SIGNING STATEMENTS.

The House of Representatives and Senate collectively shall enjoy standing to file a declaratory judgment action in an appropriate Federal district court to challenge the constitutionality of a presidential signing statement that declares the President’s intent to disregard provisions of a bill he has signed into law because he believes they are unconstitutional.

SEC. 7. KIDNAPPING, DETENTIONS, AND TORTURE ABROAD.

No officer or agent of the United States shall kidnap, imprison, or torture any person abroad based solely on the President’s belief that the subject of the kidnapping, imprisonment, or torture is a criminal or enemy combatant; provided that kidnapping shall be permitted if undertaken with the intent of bringing the kidnapped person for prosecution or interrogation to gather intelligence before a tribunal that meets international standards of fairness and due process. A knowing violation of this section shall be punished as a felony punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to 2 years.

SEC. 8. JOURNALIST EXCEPTION TO ESPIONAGE ACT.

Nothing in the Espionage Act of 1917 shall prohibit a journalist from publishing information received from the executive branch or Congress unless the publication would cause direct, immediate, and irreparable harm to the national security of the United States.

SEC. 9. USE OF SECRET EVIDENCE TO MAKE FOREIGN TERRORIST DESIGNATIONS.

Notwithstanding any other law, secret evidence shall not be used by the President or any other member of the executive branch to designate an individual or organization with a United States presence as a foreign terrorist or foreign terrorist organization for purposes of the criminal law or otherwise imposing criminal or civil sanctions.

39 posted on 10/22/2007 6:35:13 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Yo Democrats, You don't tell us how to wage war, we will not tell you how to be the village idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Without welfare and free medical care, most illegals won't come here. The ones that would still come here are the hard working individuals we want to have come here.

We have too much government costing us needless expenditures. To make things worse, the "mission creep" of our FedGov since the New Deal has led to most of the "contempt for the limits of the Constitution" that is the hallmark of Congress the last twenty years.

40 posted on 10/22/2007 6:43:21 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
whole sale dismantling of the Federal Govt

Sounds gooooood! Sign me up.
41 posted on 10/22/2007 7:06:00 AM PDT by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Well, at least you’ve mastered C&P, through repetition, it seems. Care to explain how keeping the government’s nose out of your and my butts isn’t “conservative?”


42 posted on 10/22/2007 7:07:12 AM PDT by Goodness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

Ratmedia panting after a way to disrupt the GOP primary system.

&&&
Exactly. Well said.


43 posted on 10/22/2007 9:08:02 AM PDT by Bigg Red (Duncan Hunter in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson