Comments on: Bush Agrees To Obama Bailout Request
Obama Seeks Final $350 Bailout Funds Available For His First Days In Office
Add a Comment See all 318 Comments
- am fully support of the dumpocraps and their abortion policies...I think they should line up today at the first abortion clinic available...
Soon they won''''''''''''''''t have replaced themselves, THANK GOD!
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:15 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Rowdy, let me help you a little. I am against Abortion myself for the following reason:
Any girl who DECIDED to open her legs should accept the consequences and responsibilities that come with her DECISION.
Likewise, a Man who DECIDED to get between the legs should accept the consequences and responsibilities that comes with his DECISION.
BS the ''I can do what I want with my body'' excuse.
So much for teaching Accountability and Responsibility. - Reply to this comment
I got my glasses on dear...
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:21 PM : Jan 12, 2009
We are awaiting your REPUTABLE AND VERIFIABLE Source, mine is still the same from the congressional Research Service
Boumediene v. Bush:
Guantanamo Detainees%u2019 Right to Habeas Corpus
Summary
In the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States,
decided June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 opinion that aliens
designated as enemy combatants and detained at the U.S. Naval Station in
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. The
Court also found that '' 7 of the Military Commissions Act (MCA), which limited
judicial review of executive determinations of the petitioners%u2019 enemy combatant
status, DID NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE habeas substitute and therefore acted as an
unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas.- Reply to this comment
- Which two cases, Nanc12, I see you conveniently left that part off? Nine will get you ten they were bounced for jursidiction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by TexHillGirl
Which 2 cases? I gave you the link for the decision in BOUMEDIENE ET AL. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
the case I cited earlier that you said was the words of the mainstream media. It''s the Supreme Court decision, if you want to read all 25 pages of it. I presented you with the second paragraph of the summary, duh. - Reply to this comment
- am fully support of the dumpocraps and their abortion policies...I think they should line up today at the first abortion clinic available...
Soon they won''''''''t have replaced themselves, THANK GOD!
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:15 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Rowdy, let me help you a little. I am against Abortion myself for a totally different reason than what you read in the media.
Any girl who DECIDED to open her legs should accept to pay the consequences and responsibilities that come with that DECISION.
Likewise, a Man who DECIDED to get between the legs should accept to pay the consequences and responsibilities that comes with that DECISION.
BS the ''I can do what I want with my body'' excuse.
So much for teaching Accountability and Responsibility. - Reply to this comment
- Speaking if not replacing themselves another Republican Senator announced his retirement a the end of his current term. He will not be seeking re-election 2010. That now makes three open seats up for grabs out of the 19 the Republicans would have been defending with an incumbent in two years.
- Reply to this comment
- That''''''''s a HUGE part of the problem, lovegetpeace...people BELIEVE the KRAP that comes out of the corrupt media...and allow themselves to be lead around by it like sheep.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:13 PM : Jan 12, 2009
One more time got your glasses yet? This is not the mainstream media this is the Congressional Research Service -----
Posted by misha128
And my source was the Supreme Court''s own website. She''ll still say it was somehow manipulated by the ''corrupt mainstream media,'' tho. :) - Reply to this comment
- That''''s a HUGE part of the problem, lovegetpeace...people BELIEVE the KRAP that comes out of the corrupt media...and allow themselves to be lead around by it like sheep.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:13 PM : Jan 12, 2009
What is your Source for Information? - Reply to this comment
- That''''s a HUGE part of the problem, lovegetpeace...people BELIEVE the KRAP that comes out of the corrupt media...and allow themselves to be lead around by it like sheep.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:13 PM : Jan 12, 2009
One more time got your glasses yet? This is not the mainstream media this is the Congressional Research Service ----- - Reply to this comment
- Just because the corrupt main stream media chooses to tell you words that the SCOTUS DID NOT SAY...if you want to believe that KRAP fine. It''''s false information.
Posted by TexHillGirl
Dear Rowdy, I got the information from the Supreme Court website: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/06-1195.pdf
2. Petitioners have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. They are not barred from seeking the writ or invoking the Suspension Clause%u2019s protections because they have been designated as enemy
combatants or because of their presence at Guantanamo. Pp. 8%u201341.
Is that un-corrupt mainstream media enough for ya? - Reply to this comment
- ''''''''''''''''On June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene v. Bush recognized habeas corpus rights for the Guantanamo prisoners.''''''''''''''''
I guess you need to call your personal friend the supreme court justice and explain it to him.
----------------------------------
--------------------------------------
--
------
Posted by nanc12 at 05:01 PM : Jan 12, 2009
No ma''''''''am you are using the corrupt words of the main stream media...
Read the words of the SCOTUS, not the main stream media...
THE SCOTUS SAID, HABAES CORPUS APPLIES TO US CITIZENS, YOU MUST PROVIDE A SUBSTITUTE VENUE TO BRING ''''''''THIS CASE'''''''' TO US COURTS! THAT''''''''S ALL THEY SAID!
Just because the corrupt main stream media chooses to tell you words that the SCOTUS DID NOT SAY...if you want to believe that KRAP fine. It''''''''s false information.
And I already called my friend who is a Texas supreme court justice and asked him...that''''s why I know what the SCOTUS said.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:08 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Still awaiting a verifiable source -- with your experience this should be a piece of cake -- unless your experience is just another lie, too. - Reply to this comment
- I, Barack Hussein Obame,
Posted by Bushtarded at 05:09 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Oh NO! more failures re-cycled naming....you must be getting a high with this. Try some High Quality Opiums from Afghanistan or Cocaine froM Columbia? - Reply to this comment
- Misha,
Give it up with Rowdy, you are outclassed and don''t like the truth. I thought you where going to get that job with Obama? Hillary knock you out? - Reply to this comment
- Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:05 PM : Jan 12, 2009
This is from the Congressional Research Service not the Media -- wrong again --
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34536.pdf
Boumediene v. Bush:
Guantanamo Detainees%u2019 Right to Habeas Corpus
Summary
In the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States,
decided June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court held in a 5-4 opinion that aliens
designated as enemy combatants and detained at the U.S. Naval Station in
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. The
Court also found that '' 7 of the Military Commissions Act (MCA), which limited
judicial review of executive determinations of the petitioners%u2019 enemy combatant
status, DID NOT PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE habeas substitute and therefore acted as an
unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas. - Reply to this comment
- Just because the corrupt main stream media chooses to tell you words that the SCOTUS DID NOT SAY...if you want to believe that KRAP fine. It''''''''s false information.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:05 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Way to go Rowdy! I need all the clues you can provide free about why we are in such a mess as a nation. - Reply to this comment
- Folks,
I have read that Obama may select at least 2 U.S. Supreme Court Justices during his 1st term in office.
The Anti-Abortion right fans can RIP for the next 40 years. - Reply to this comment
- jgg,
Obama will have to start before long to make a decision.Lets just hope it better than the ones made in Illinois or Chicago.
Irmcvet-I''m still practicing just to get use to it when the choosen one sets up his SS. Sieig Heil Y''all. - Reply to this comment
- ''''''''On June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene v. Bush recognized habeas corpus rights for the Guantanamo prisoners.''''''''
I guess you need to call your personal friend the supreme court justice and explain it to him.
----------------------------------
----------------------------------------
------
Posted by nanc12 at 05:01 PM : Jan 12, 2009
No ma''''am you are using the corrupt words of the main stream media...
Read the words of the SCOTUS, not the main stream media...
THE SCOTUS SAID, HABAES CORPUS APPLIES TO US CITIZENS, YOU MUST PROVIDE A SUBSTITUTE VENUE TO BRING ''''THIS CASE'''' TO US COURTS! THAT''''S ALL THEY SAID!
Just because the corrupt main stream media chooses to tell you words that the SCOTUS DID NOT SAY...if you want to believe that KRAP fine. It''''s false information.
Posted by TexHillGirl at 05:05 PM : Jan 12, 2009
No source as usual just another ROWDY LIE from the perpetual fabrication machine herself. - Reply to this comment
- I still don''''t know what you consider "greedy", if we are already giving 40% of our income to the government in the form of taxes, and additional % in the form of taxes described as "fees", isn''''t that enough ? how much more do you feel we need to give, we already give everything to this country/government, but for you....that''''s not enough, is 60% ? 80% ? how much is too much in your book ?
Posted by Joe-NY at 04:58 PM : Jan 12, 2009
I have no idea where you folks get this 40% tax rate. Each year, the IRS reports what Effective Rate Americans paid for that year. For 2006, it was 17.7% after all the Credits, Deduction, Rebates, loopholes, etc. I know I pay much less than 40% on my Federal and State Income Taxes combined after all the credits, Deductions, Rebates, loopholes each year.
Also, compared with all the European nations including eastern Europe, and Asia, Americans pays the Least Effective Total/Gross Tax Rate on Income per Capita. - Reply to this comment
- Well since habaes corpus cannot be APPLIED TO ANYBODY IN US COURTS BUT AMERICANS..the SCOTUS said you must provide a substitute VENUE!
Now how simpler could they have said it?
If that doesn''''t make sense to you two pea brain idiots, I guess nothing else will!
Posted by TexHillGirl
''On June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene v. Bush recognized habeas corpus rights for the Guantanamo prisoners.''
I guess you need to call your personal friend the supreme court justice and explain it to him. - Reply to this comment
Well since habaes corpus cannot be APPLIED TO ANYBODY IN US COURTS BUT AMERICANS..the SCOTUS said you must provide a substitute VENUE!
Now how simpler could they have said it?
If that doesn''''t make sense to you two pea brain idiots, I guess nothing else will!
Posted by TexHillGirl at 04:56 PM : Jan 12, 2009
Rowdy -- you have a choice -- with that 12 years of court experience you claim a real reference from a reputable source ends the discussion -- the ball is in your turf in an area you claim expertise -- Wanna bet you wimp out with the not a link lackey diversion ---- Reply to this comment
