Sadly, "When we vote on minority rights of many, if not all, stripes in this country, we tend to vote no," Rachel said Thursday. But, she adds, "It's part of the concept of rights: they're not supposed to be up for a vote."
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
We are getting set up for real Constitutional issues, perhaps crisis in the near future.
With the government forcing citizens to purchase insurance that we may want not to purchase. We the issues of gay divorce and the effect on the incomes of divorce lawyers nationwide yet to be settled because the folks can't even get married yet.
Now, this morning, the CIA executed two American citizens (an act that I applaud) without benefit of due process or even consulting with their attorneys.
Additionally, the government taking cash from working Americans to give to the leeches.
This modern government is moving too far away from the Constitution.
Next thing you know, they are going to outlaw getting a woman drunk to expedite getting her twitterpated.
Maybe we do need the fruitcake Ron Paul. At least he would consider the US Constitution and our rights before signing any law.
Posted by: Chucks | September 30, 2011 at 02:21 PM
You should join the protests across the country as the constitution never said anything about corporations being the same as people.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | September 30, 2011 at 05:37 PM
Agreed, LRF. If there are two things I hate in women, it's short haircuts and opinions. And if there are two things I hate in women's opinions, it's facts and reason.
I say swap out this video with one of those hot blonde boat-show-model looking babes from FNC. Now those are women. If they do happen to have thoughts, they keep them to themselves. I don't need a lady to tell me about stuff. If I want to know something, I just punch it into the google (which coincidentally is what those foxes at fox do).
Posted by: Tony | September 30, 2011 at 08:45 PM
Chucks
Looks like Rachel Maddow -and Ron Paul- are raising this important issue of a US Citizen being denied the fundamental right to trial. She's right, of course. Wonder how many of our Progressive Friends take any issue with this.
"Rachel Maddow raised a series of questions about the legality of the killing of the U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki on her Friday show.
Al-Awlaki was killed by a U.S. airstrike on Friday morning. While many lawmakers and pundits celebrated the death, others were troubled by the precedent that might be set by killing an American citizen without any trial or evidence presented against him.
Maddow ran through the long list of operations that al-Awlaki was allegedly involved in. She noted that there were "a lot of 'allegedlys'" in the list, and that "none of those allegations was ever made in court." The only due process involved in al-Awlaki's killing, she says, was that President Obama ordered him to be killed.
"Can the United States government choose an American citizen to be executed without ever charging them with anything, without ever proving anything against them, without ever giving them a chance to defend themselves?" she wondered. "Whether or not you think it is deserved, under what authority did President Obama or could any president sign him up to be killed on sight?"
Later, Maddow asked her guest, Wired writer Spencer Ackerman, about the precedent that could be set by the killing.
"If the US government can justify this action overseas, what about here in the US?" she asked. Ackerman said he didn't see what the difference was between ordering an American to be killed overseas and ordering him to be killed on U.S. soil."
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 01, 2011 at 02:47 PM
So if an American citizen moved to Germany or Japan during WWII and helped those countries kill thousands of Americans, would we be having this conversation? We all know that if this had happened in, oh say, 2003 or 2004, Republicans would have touted this as proof that that Administration was showing great military strength and had made the world safer.
Posted by: Jovita | October 01, 2011 at 06:12 PM
We all know that if this had happened in, oh say, 2003 or 2004, Republicans would have touted this as proof that that Administration was showing great military strength and had made the world safer.
Posted by: Jovita | October 01, 2011 at 06:12 PM
Yes Jovita, and we know how the Left would be all up in arms. Kind of funny how some play the role dependent upon who is in office, eh?
Rachel is asking the right questions. As is Republican Ron Paul.
The question is, what about you?
Can you go above Party and ask the harder question?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 01, 2011 at 06:21 PM
For all of you on the Left that are okay with President Obama assassinating American Citizens without due process, just understand that one day you see a President Bachman or President Perry or President Gingrich like person carrying out the Obama Policy.
You're all onboard with that, right?
Joviata, Black Rhino, Sparky, Original Andrew, J Sombrero, Fremont, et al...
Rachel Maddow is asking the right question.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 01, 2011 at 06:34 PM
PSB, i'm not sure if he is a citizen or not. For one he most likely and privately re-nounced his citizenship when he joined Al-Queda. Mighteven be a requirement to join that terror group. And 2, i never seen his birth certificate so most likely he never was a citizen.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 01, 2011 at 07:16 PM
The right question was asked on the condition that he was an American citizen. Maybe Donald Trump needs to badger authorities into exposing his birth certificate, so there can be some definitive action here.
PS - Don't forget the possibility of a President Cain or Pres. Huntsman.
Posted by: KS | October 01, 2011 at 08:09 PM
PBJ, everyone acknowledges both he and a second person who was with him were American citizens.
I'm just curious as to all the outrage expressed over water-boarding, a non lethal form of torture, yet all the Progressives on this blog seem to be okay with the Assassination policy.
Maybe a change of heart?
KS, good point. Wonder how 'on board' the Progressives would be if it was President Cain.
Of course, they are too busy worrying about 'issues' such as corporation as 'citizens.'
Curious. LMAO
Rachel and Ron Paul are asking the right questions.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 01, 2011 at 08:59 PM
I have no idea what the answer is for that situation. I do wonder how a little boy sitting in an elementary school in New Mexico turned into someone who wanted to kill everyone in the country of his birth. What forces changed him into that person?
The topic of the thread, though, is people's rights and how we treat others who are different than us.
Someone sent me this today in my email and it restored, somewhat, my faith in the power of relationships and reaching out to those who are different than us.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 09:29 AM
Y'know Sparky, i hope Coiler reads that. But even if he does i dont see him changing his opinion of Chucks or anyone else who is not a Progressive.
As for "peoples rights". They are only as good as what the majority in power thinks they should be. As a teacher you should be aware of this concept (as should Rachel) as throughout history "rights" have been given and taken from individuals and groups many times. Without a vote.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 02, 2011 at 10:03 AM
I'm not "okay with the assassination policy" nor with the diminution of peoples' rights. It's truly depressing to watch the entitlements one fought for eroded by enduring bigotry. Thanks for the note of hope, Sparks!
Posted by: fremont | October 02, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Another gaffe from the mighty one.
“If Asking Billionaires to pay the same tax rate as a JEW… Uh… As a Janitor”
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 02, 2011 at 12:38 PM
Reports of Hispanic Students Vanishing From Alabama Schools After Immigration Ruling
With the Tacoma teachers strike having ended already i cant help but wonder if Alabama's cracking down on illegal immigration would have been an acceptable method for the teachers union to bring down the class sizes.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 02, 2011 at 12:54 PM
That "reach" has to go in both directions PBJ. Read it again.
Meanwhile, some Marines are headed to Wall Street today to help protect the rights of the protesters and their pieces of chalk against the cops and their cans of mace.
Semper Fi: Marines Coming To Protect Protesters On Wall Street
October 1, 2011
By Michael Hayne
The thousands of indefatigable protestors, who have been risking their eyes and recording equipment against Wall Street’s personal jack-booted thugs in the NYPD at the Occupation of Wall Street, recently garnered even more support– the US Marines. That’s the type of support that might make an NYPD cop think twice before he decides to go all Tiananmen Square on a group of teenage girls armed with chalk and cardboard signs.
The Occupy Wall Street movement may have thought it broke new ground when the NYC Transit Union joined their movement, but that ground just tipped the Richter Scale with news that United States Army and Marine troops are reportedly on their way to various protest locations to support the movement and to protect the protesters.
Here’s the message Ward Reilly relayed from another Marine, on his facebook page:
“I’m heading up there tonight in my dress blues. So far, 15 of my fellow marine buddies are meeting me there, also in Uniform. I want to send the following message to Wall St and Congress:I didn’t fight for Wall St. I fought for America. Now it’s Congress’ turn.
My true hope, though, is that we Veterans can act as first line of defense between the police and the protester. If they want to get to some protesters so they can mace them, they will have to get through the Fucking Marine Corps first. Let’s see a cop mace a bunch of decorated war vets.I apologize now for typos and errors.
Typing this on iPhone whilst heading to NYC. We can organize once we’re there. That’s what we do best.If you see someone in uniform, gather together.
A formation will be held tonight at 10PM.
We all took an oath to uphold, protect and defend the constitution of this country. That’s what we will be doing.
Hope to see you there!!”
So, PS, he even used your word "whilst" !
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 04:25 PM
The topic of the thread, though, is people's rights and how we treat others who are different than us.
Someone sent me this today in my email and it restored, somewhat, my faith in the power of relationships and reaching out to those who are different than us.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 09:29 AM
Actually, the topic of the thread is the elimination of rights of which the right to trial is fairly basic. It's in the Constitution, Sparky.You really out to give it a read sometime.
For someone who was against USAPATRIOT Act --until Pres Obama took over and now you're for it- it's amusing the moral somersaults some of the folks take on this blog. A version of the 'I never listen to Dori but...'
In regards to the 'Marine' trying to whoop up a fight in the streets, I doubt that that will happen like he wants. It's reads more like an activist looking for a fight or his '60's fix' in order to get on the TV.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 02, 2011 at 07:22 PM
Does it make it more interesting for you to add words to what I write?
Even if I wanted to listen to Dori, which i don't, he is on when I am at school. What I know about Dori's show is what I see on here. KIRO does not come in on my radio here at home..I am too far away from Seattle. One time I heard him in a friend's car when we were in Seattle. Why is that important?
Why do you assume I haven't read the Constitution just because I interpret it differently than you do?
Did I say I like the Patriot Act now that Obama is President? No. Did the article about the Marine say he was going to "whoop up a fight"? No. Did he say he hoped they would get on TV? No.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 08:00 PM
It would be interesting to know Sparky if you support such actions by those Marines. I just read an article that these Wall Street protesters when asked if they plan to vote for Obama in 2012, they said yes. Now that tells me that these people are idiots and dont realize that it was Wall Street that gave Obama the Presidency with thier donations. With that said, what are they trying to accomplish.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 02, 2011 at 08:25 PM
Go back and read what they said they were trying to accomplish.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 08:45 PM
I read what the Marines are trying to accomplish. But what are the Protestors trying to accomplish.And that was nowhere in your article you posted.
Now do you support those Marines or not.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 02, 2011 at 08:57 PM
PBJ
Good luck with Sparky.
Fairly clear from that article that Michael Hayne wants to have a confrontation with the NYPD. They'll probably oblige him.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 02, 2011 at 09:34 PM
Exercising their constitutional right to free speech, letting people know their opinions. Pretty simple.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 09:59 PM
If that is all there was to it, no problem. Opposing opinions need to also be allowed though. The state run media establishment is habitually abusing the First Amendment by purposely leaving out relevant facts that incriminate their Democratic politicians or by suppressing dissenting views.
In this case, if you dig deep enough, there will be relevant information omitted that does not conform to their agenda template- make liberals look good by not reporting all of the facts.
Posted by: KS | October 02, 2011 at 10:23 PM
Exercising their constitutional right to free speech, letting people know their opinions. Pretty simple.
Posted by: sparky | October 02, 2011 at 09:59 PM
LMAO, yes Sparky, and the part about blocking traffic and interfering with the rights of others you have no problem with I guess.
"(Reuters) - Police reopened the Brooklyn Bridge Saturday evening after more than 700 anti-Wall Street protesters were arrested for blocking traffic lanes and attempting an unauthorized march across the span.
The arrests took place when a large group of marchers, participating in a second week of protests by the Occupy Wall Street movement, broke off from others on the bridge's pedestrian walkway and headed across the Brooklyn-bound lanes.
"Over 700 summonses and desk appearance tickets have been issued in connection with a demonstration on the Brooklyn Bridge late this afternoon after multiple warnings by police were given to protesters to stay on the pedestrian walkway, and that if they took roadway they would be arrested," a police spokesman said."
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | October 03, 2011 at 05:47 AM
So Sparky, why is it so hard to answer a simple question. I dont get it. You posted this so you must have a strong opinion of what they are doing but yet you stay clear of any admission to where you stand.
Personally, No. I wouldnt support these Marines. All they are doing is trying to make a situation thats on the breaking point more unstable. We rooted them people out of from our group. We would rather have the "raging grannies" then some bully Marines who think they are the answer because they think we in trouble. If they felt so concerned of our cause, they would have been there from the first day.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 03, 2011 at 09:04 AM
"Exercising their constitutional right to free speech, letting people know their opinions. Pretty simple."
I used the word "Protester". All you did was look the word up up in a dictionary and use its definition. No clue?
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 03, 2011 at 09:15 AM
Police arrested more than 700 people under very suspicious circumstances. The arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge appear to have been a staged event by the police. If you doubt this, just read this eyewitness account.
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | October 03, 2011 at 09:23 AM
PBJ it's ok if you don't get it. Really. The numbers are increasing, and people are showing up all over the country in major cities. You will just have to watch the news to figure it out. Or not.
Posted by: sparky | October 03, 2011 at 04:41 PM
very cool
Posted by: sparky | October 03, 2011 at 04:47 PM
What are these protesters proving there ? That they can gather like the Tea Party and on top of that, get
arrested ?
If these people want to resonate more and get more empathy, they should go to DC and protest the unnecessary regulations and burden on small business that this White House has caused ?
Sparky, Are you so ideological that you are unable to admit that this administration is to blame for our sagging economy ? Based on the legislation they have passed or tried to pass, that is a no-brainer. Say it ain't so.
Posted by: KS | October 03, 2011 at 06:29 PM
All you Fascists are bound to lose. Happy Birthday Woody
Posted by: Johnny Sombrerro | October 03, 2011 at 07:06 PM
I suggest you go down to the Federal Building in Seattle and ask the Occupy Seattle folks to explain it to you.
Posted by: sparky | October 03, 2011 at 07:13 PM
A good bet that if I asked some of them what they proposed as a solution - their responses would be hate-filled and incoherent.
You decided not to answer my question - that speaks for itself...
Posted by: KS | October 03, 2011 at 08:11 PM
So Bloomberg is going to sponsor a debate for the Republicans that will focus solely on the economy.
So how are they going to fill two hours with, "Cut taxes on the job creators, make the poorest pay taxes, and cut regulations" ?
Posted by: sparky | October 03, 2011 at 08:36 PM
You dont know what their reaction would be, unless you plan on criticizing them instead of sincerely wanting to know their opinions.
And I have learned over the years on here there is no answering any of your questions to your satisfaction. So that is why I suggest you go ask the people involved instead of asking me to speak for them.
Posted by: sparky | October 03, 2011 at 09:16 PM
I figure by not answering, you are not denying that you aren't an ideologue.
Not talking about the question of why the protesters are there - one can draw their own conclusions by reading about it (several accounts - not just one). I was referring to the cause of our sagging economy.
Posted by: KS | October 03, 2011 at 09:40 PM
Several alternate media sources say these protests have been orchestrated by the Unions and expressed by Van Jones that October will be a "game changer" - these are hard core progressives designed to further divide the masses. The White House will remain silent, but have been talking behind the scenes with the Public Sector Unions and Jones & the demonstrations parrot "class warfare" message from Prez BO and the angry mobs are useful idiots - (as they normally are in these type of demonstrations) what do they get for their efforts.
Roseanne Barr threw in her two cents worth with her plea for beheading of the wealthy if they don't pay their fair share - oy-vay.. That likely resonated with the protesters.
Posted by: KS | October 04, 2011 at 07:34 AM
It's called civil disobedience, and it's what the hard-core progressives did to enable integration in the South, and the 8 hour workday. Whatever happened to those hard-core conservatives who used to call themselves the tea party? While they took a nap, the big-money Republican elements took over their movement. It's must a partisan sock puppet now.
Posted by: Phil Dirt | October 04, 2011 at 08:54 AM
No Sparky. Its you who doesnt get it. I did it. Its a shame you have to live your life through others actions. Oh, congradulations.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 04, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Sparks answered your question admirably, Junk! Pay attention and stop the ponderous ad hominems...please!
Posted by: fremont | October 04, 2011 at 11:35 AM
KS, if you did happen to go to the Federal Building in Seattle to ask them protestors as Sparkys said to, you might not have found any. See, they were actually a bout 5-6 blocks away at the Westlake Center. Was i on the mark or what about Sparky and these protests.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 04, 2011 at 11:46 AM
She did Fremont. If you think she did then show me.
Posted by: Progblogjunky | October 04, 2011 at 11:59 AM
Another gaffe from our VP Joe Biden
"whoever he is"
Posted by: Progblogjunky | October 04, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Sorry Fremont. Yes i need to pay more attention. She did answer my question. I was refering to her not answering a previous question about her support or non-support of the Marines she posted about.
Posted by: ProgBlogJunky | October 04, 2011 at 12:20 PM
This was my email message PBJ:
Tue, 09/27/2011 - 20:46
Spread flyers, awareness, and discuss the future of the Occupy Seattle movement! Do we want to start an overnight occupation? Do we want to continue to gather outside of the Federal Building? Let's talk about it!
When: Saturday, October 1 · 10:00am - 7:00pm
Where: Westlake Center Plaza
Two protests! Cool!
Posted by: sparky | October 04, 2011 at 04:49 PM
Alrighty then, We'll expect a live or post-mortem report on this event on this blog from you for additional commentary fodder.
Posted by: KS | October 04, 2011 at 04:57 PM
oops - It would be post mortem, as this event has come and gone and by PBJ's account, it wasn't happening today.
Stay tuned, folks...this is the beginning of the revolution according to Sharpton, the MSNBC hack and the 9-11 Truther henchman former Green Jobs Czar/fraud Van Jones. We'll be waiting for periodic updates.
Posted by: KS | October 04, 2011 at 05:04 PM
KS, I think you can do just fine with the ad hominems without my assistance.
PBJ, I told you what I thought. Continue to address your ad hominems with yourself and your buds at your pleasure. Or not.
Posted by: sparky | October 04, 2011 at 05:24 PM
KS, Puget Sound, Progressive Blog Junky : what do you think of the information reported tonight that Justice Thomas did not list gifts given to him by individuals who then received votes from him on their issues of import, and his wife has earned over a million dollars working against the Health Care legislation which has come up before the Court, and with Citizen's United, which was passed by the Court, and none of her income was reported?
Posted by: From the Tower | October 04, 2011 at 06:02 PM