America Votes 2008

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Jason1

What about Aaron Schock? Maybe hes not very well known yet...he probably will be eventually. Hes a local Republican Big wig 27 year old who thinks hes pretty cool. Just became the youngest person in the House at age 27.

I'm not familiar with him, but I was thinking more along the lines of Bobby Jindal, and I mention him a second time because I think he's a great candidate. Mitt Romney is another I liked during the primaries, but I think he fell apart when he tried to do a McCain and get all bible belt when he was obviously uncomfortable doing so. Hopefully this election showed that pandering to the religious right only loses the suburbs, and its the suburbs that win elections. Just look at Pennsylvania.

Newt Gingrich is another name thats from the past but really has always been a forward thinking, idea man for the Republican party, and he was responsible for much of the success of the 90's in working with Clinton.

As for voting for Obama to change the Republican party, I would agree except for one thing: The Supreme Court. I imagine that at least 3 justices will retire under Obama's presidency, and he'll have to opportunity to place several judges that will be able to legislate from the bench and have to opportunity to reinterpret the consitution. This is not an abortion issue for me, its a property rights issue, and leftist judges have shown to be under the wrong side of that argument.

[KillerGremlin]

I thought Obama's Grant Park speech was pretty weak. But the guy looks exhausted, and I'm sure most of it was improvised. But I didn't vote for the guy because of his speeches. Already Obama is saying he wants to free prisoners from Guantanamo Bay and start giving people there fair trials in American Courts. That's some good stuff. Guantanamo Bay = unconstitutional.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

I thought Obama's Grant Park speech was pretty weak. But the guy looks exhausted, and I'm sure most of it was improvised. But I didn't vote for the guy because of his speeches. Already Obama is saying he wants to free prisoners from Guantanamo Bay and start giving people there fair trials in American Courts. That's some good stuff. Guantanamo Bay = unconstitutional.

Hate to break it to you, but its not. Its not even technically against international law, as the Geneva accords only cover uniformed combatants representing a sovereign nation.

And by the way, it was our left leaning "constitutional friends" in the Supreme Court that ruled that local governments can force homeowners to sell to large corporations because it increases the tax base. It was the conservative judges that voted against it. The Supreme Court is where the constitution is dying, not the legislative branch. This was the main reason why I was against Obama, as he has publicly stated that the Constitution "doesn't go far enough", which ignores the entire point of the document (a list of what the government WILL NOT do). If Obama's presidency fails, which I sincerely hope it doesn't, the legislation can be fixed by a change in power. Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointments by the President and their effect will be felt for two generations, if not more.

EDIT: I removed my prt about the patriot act, as I think it would have taken the discussion away from the topic.

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Hate to break it to you, but its not. Its not even technically against international law, as the Geneva accords only cover uniformed combatants representing a sovereign nation.

And by the way, it was our left leaning "constitutional friends" in the Supreme Court that ruled that local governments can force homeowners to sell to large corporations because it increases the tax base. It was the conservative judges that voted against it. The Supreme Court is where the constitution is dying, not the legislative branch. This was the main reason why I was against Obama, as he has publicly stated that the Constitution "doesn't go far enough", which ignores the entire point of the document (a list of what the government WILL NOT do). If Obama's presidency fails, which I sincerely hope it doesn't, the legislation can be fixed by a change in power. Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointments by the President and their effect will be felt for two generations, if not more.

EDIT: I removed my prt about the patriot act, as I think it would have taken the discussion away from the topic.

Fair enough. I'm not going to pretend to know enough about foreign policy and Supreme Court legislation regarding this subject.

I just know that Guantanamo Bay sounds bogus from what I have read.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

Fair enough. I'm not going to pretend to know enough about foreign policy and Supreme Court legislation regarding this subject.

I just know that Guantanamo Bay sounds bogus from what I have read.

Legally its not bogus, or at least not yet. Morally and ethically? Well, thats another conversation and a very long and difficult one at that. Personally I'm for GITMO, but I also think some aspects of it need to change, as I don't believe that people should be held indefinitely with no evidence, but I also don't believe that Constitutional rights or Habeus Corpus should be conveyed to possible terrorists and non-citizen's either.

There needs to be a middle ground where the detainees are afforded some form of recourse but not to the point that it dierectly parallels our legal system. What makes up that middle ground, I couldn't tell you.