Enlightenment wrote:The Duchess of Zeon wrote:You're a communard basing your argument on an unsupported proposal which was picked up by an unreputable news agency and hasn't be confirmed.
WTF is a 'communard?'
By what stretch of your imagination is my argument 'based' entirely on Asscroft's latest proposals to invalidate the US Bill of Rights?
Pigin French for Communist. It seemed appropriate at the time.
And, it appeared it was in that case, though obviously your opposition is more complete than that.
I'm really not concerned about the laws currently enacted. They're not a big deal. This would be, but this may be leftist propaganda, something to be destroyed in committee (I
do want Ashcroft gone, but I have faith in the checks and balances of our Constitution to contain him while he exists), or something that will be voted down outright, or even annihilated by the Justice Department its self.
My real concern is the secret appeals court in which the government can have one government lawyer argue
both sides of the case, and the entire record kept sealed.
That is disturbing, because it destroys the judicial process.
That has potential to become a modern Star Chamber, and I'd like to see it abolished and replaced in a constitutional amendment by an elected College of Censors, which has additional powers of certain other things of similiar nature, those powers then being removed from the range of certain agencies or committees. Incidently, that court is not an innovation of the Bush Family but rather Seventies post-Watergate hysteria.