Posted on 12/16/2011 10:09:44 AM PST by Congressman Tom McClintock
Delivered House floor remarks this week about section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act: I rise in opposition to Section 1021 of the underlying Conference Report (H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act).
This section specifically affirms that the President has the authority to deny due process to any American it charges with “substantially supporting al Qaeda, the Taliban or any ‘associated forces’” – whatever that means.
Would “substantial support” of an “associated force,” mean linking a web-site to a web-site that links to a web-site affiliated with al-Qaeda? We don’t know. The question is, “do we really want to find out?”
We’re told not to worry – that the bill explicitly states that nothing in it shall alter existing law.
But wait. There is no existing law that gives the President the power to ignore the Bill of Rights and detain Americans without due process. There is only an assertion by the last two presidents that this power is inherent in an open-ended and ill-defined war on terrorism. But it is a power not granted by any act of Congress. At least, not until now.
What this bill says is, “What Presidents have only asserted, Congress now affirms in statute.”
We’re told that this merely pushes the question to the Supreme Court to decide if indefinite detainment is compatible with any remaining vestige of the Bill of Rights.
That’s a good point, IF the Court were the sole guardian of the Constitution. But it is not. If it were, there would be no reason to require every member of Congress to swear to preserve, protect, and defend that Constitution.
We are also its guardians.
And today, we who have sworn fealty to that Constitution sit to consider a bill that affirms a power contained in no law and that has the full potential to crack the very foundation of American liberty.
# # #
Is this really Tom McClintock ?
ty for fighting this disgusting unconstitutional garbage
Michael Medved says “there is nothing to fear with this”. “In the ten years since detention for support of terrorists, or acts of terrorists, there have only been 4 cases.” I respectfully submit the question. Why do we need a special policy or law, to take care of only 4 people over 10 years? Can’t our existing laws take care of them through the existing court system? Lawyers = Liars, and nearly all of our Representatives in the political system, are both.
I quit listening to Michael Medved decades ago. His lack of intellectual acumen was obvious to me—all he can do is glorify degenerates and promotes sewage in our society. He actively works for Satan 75% of the time. Occasionally he throws a conservative bone but his basic philosophical thinking comes from Marx and he is planted as a “conservative” to erode those moral qualities of Christian Ethics which is responsible for our Greatness. He is part of the “slippery slope” and we are getting to the bottom of the slide and he is happy.
I quit listening as a habit years ago also. Once in a while I turn him on, as there is little besides Dennis Miller, or sports on the radio. I am addicted to talk radio, but his brand makes me puke. Savage has been off of my radio for going on 3 years, Levin is now also gone in this area. Dennis Prager in the AM, Savage if I am at the computer.
Love Dennis Prager. He is a great guy. Savage is—well—Savage, and his analytical skills are exactly like the men in the Modern Age—the Age of Reason. None of the irrational Postmodern thinking of Medved.
Medved is a Progressive Liberal at heart, a perfect man to support GW, Newt or Romney. He spouts about smaller, leaner government, but what he wants is his side at the controls of the behemoth we call our Federal government. Plus he uses the strategy of the left, he ridicules with his words, and with his sighs. I frankly cannot stand him, and doubt I would like him if he was a neighbor. He is holier than thou, and according to him, HIGHLY INTELLIGENT, without a lick of love for the Original Intent. It sounds like you have the same take on him. Isn’t it telling, that local stations always carry him and Rush, but voices that bring original thought to the airwaves, are taken away, or non-existent? Me thinks he is lobbying constantly, for the Tony Snow position in the next R administration at all times.
We would be highly intelligent, too, if we had call screeners to select topics we had studied, along with powerful search programs and several commercials to brush up on a topic.
While it is true that Medved is a Progressive at heart, he is also an Ivy Leaguer and fundamentally worships the golden calf of elitism. All his life he has been told that he is “special”.
I know a chemist who works for one of the world's leading chemistry companies. Neither he or his fellow Ph.D. level scientists will even interview a Ph.D. chemists from one of the Ivy Leagues. They have learned from experience that Ivy Leaguers consider themselves far too “anointed” to get any real work done.
I have exactly the same take. He is what the Ancients and Jesus would call a man of hubris. (and that Vice led to the destruction of many men’s souls and nations.) Medved better repent and dump all his moral relativism—it leads to ugly, ugly societies. He is an enabler.
Three years ago I stopped listening to talk radio as well. I was **disgusted** at how these so-called “conservative” yappers ignored the fundamental issue of Obama’s eligibility. What blazing weenies!
Personally....I will never trust them again. Some things are deal killers.
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.