RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts

RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 4:25:21 AM)
Wow! You'll go anywhere but the thread topic, won't you? What's next, will you be blaming dolphins for this because they assisted the government in spying on Cuba? Your diversionary rants are cracking me up.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 4:48:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Made2Obey Wow! You'll go anywhere but the thread topic, won't you? What's next, will you be blaming dolphins for this because they assisted the government in spying on Cuba? Your diversionary rants are cracking me up. Everyone knows those were pilot whales silly.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 4:49:30 AM)
OK, that is one of the weirdest attempts at defection I have ever seen.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 4:54:17 AM)
quote: Let's be fair about how much Trump had to do with all of this. The event Carpenter was convicted of based on phone records occurred in 2011. True, it started under Obama, but Trump is pursuing it so it is on both of them. Tell me again how the Reps and Dems are different when it comes to respecting rights?

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:07:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick OK, that is one of the weirdest attempts at defection I have ever seen. I'll grant you the courtesy of assuming you meant 'deflection.' It's hard to defect from what one never signed on to in the first place. I did say that the OP and one of the respondents were full of horse manure for blaming intrusion of privacy strictly on the government, for those paying attention. On topic. And you? "It started under Obama, but . . . Right. So relation of verified history in contradiction to bog standard political drivel is "off topic" or even "defection." Hoo wee mayne.

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:12:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Let's be fair about how much Trump had to do with all of this. The event Carpenter was convicted of based on phone records occurred in 2011. True, it started under Obama, but Trump is pursuing it so it is on both of them. Tell me again how the Reps and Dems are different when it comes to respecting rights? Dizzy I won't dispute that both parties have conducted themselves in questionable ways about equally at times. I only chose to speak up on this thread because it seemed to me that the OP was laying this all on the Trump administration. In fact, the rule change, the crime, the arrest and trial, and the appeal all took place under the Obama administration. Even though the case is currently coming before the SCOTUS now, it would be hard to argue that the SCOTUS as it is currently configured, is part of the Trump administration. It's mostly a legacy court. I just hate to see blame mis-credited. For example, I was never a huge fan of Bill Clinton, but when I hear someone blaming him for NAFTA I always speak up and point out that NAFTA was negotiated by Bush I and only happened to come up for signing after Clinton took office. He did not fully agree with it, but signed it to avoid an entrenched battle with Congress as he was hoping for their help in some sort of healthcare reform. So he did something few politicians are willing to do anymore, it's called compromise.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:28:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Made2Obey Wow! You'll go anywhere but the thread topic, won't you? What's next, will you be blaming dolphins for this because they assisted the government in spying on Cuba? Your diversionary rants are cracking me up. So, since the gist of the OP was specifically to point of a Supreme Court case, I was "off topic" in any discussion of the Supreme Court and any incident history leading up to their involvement or any subsequent historical repercussions thereby, right?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:31:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Made2Obey quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick quote: Let's be fair about how much Trump had to do with all of this. The event Carpenter was convicted of based on phone records occurred in 2011. True, it started under Obama, but Trump is pursuing it so it is on both of them. Tell me again how the Reps and Dems are different when it comes to respecting rights? Dizzy I won't dispute that both parties have conducted themselves in questionable ways about equally at times. I only chose to speak up on this thread because it seemed to me that the OP was laying this all on the Trump administration. In fact, the rule change, the crime, the arrest and trial, and the appeal all took place under the Obama administration. Even though the case is currently coming before the SCOTUS now, it would be hard to argue that the SCOTUS as it is currently configured, is part of the Trump administration. It's mostly a legacy court. I just hate to see blame mis-credited. For example, I was never a huge fan of Bill Clinton, but when I hear someone blaming him for NAFTA I always speak up and point out that NAFTA was negotiated by Bush I and only happened to come up for signing after Clinton took office. He did not fully agree with it, but signed it to avoid an entrenched battle with Congress as he was hoping for their help in some sort of healthcare reform. So he did something few politicians are willing to do anymore, it's called compromise. Beware saying anything about anyone named Clinton that is less than derisive. A certain person will call you a leftist.[8D]

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:40:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: Made2Obey Wow! You'll go anywhere but the thread topic, won't you? What's next, will you be blaming dolphins for this because they assisted the government in spying on Cuba? Your diversionary rants are cracking me up. So, since the gist of the OP was specifically to point of a Supreme Court case, I was "off topic" in any discussion of the Supreme Court and any incident history leading up to their involvement or any subsequent historical repercussions thereby, right? In the manner you were so doing, pretty much. Yep.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:46:17 AM)
I am fully on board with the OP in regards to the essential matter. I am just pointing out that you and he both are ignoramuses if you think this is the first go round on the issue. Trying to pin all of it on either Trump or Obama is just too silly.

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:49:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Beware saying anything about anyone named Clinton that is less than derisive. A certain person will call you a leftist.[8D] Bill Clinton wasn't the best or worst in that office. He did some good things that gave us the best economy in recent history, and then he gave China "Most Favored Nation" trading status, pretty much ensuring the decline of that good economy. So, like most presidents, I have mixed opinions about him, but they are based on performance, not partisanship.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:52:06 AM)
Thanks for that "on topic" demonstration. Us kids just go by example.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:52:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Made2Obey quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Beware saying anything about anyone named Clinton that is less than derisive. A certain person will call you a leftist.[8D] Bill Clinton wasn't the best or worst in that office. He did some good things that gave us the best economy in recent history, and then he gave China "Most Favored Nation" trading status, pretty much ensuring the decline of that good economy. So, like most presidents, I have mixed opinions about him, but they are based on performance, not partisanship. He was a morally bankrupt fuck but he got shit done.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 6:55:58 AM)
The only somewhat conservative conservative presidents we've had in the last 40 years have been Democrats. Sheesh. The rest were inartfully drawn wannabe comic book heroes.

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 7:01:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird I am fully on board with the OP in regards to the essential matter. I am just pointing out that you and he both are ignoramuses if you think this is the first go round on the issue. Trying to pin all of it on either Trump or Obama is just too silly. The Supreme Court considers issues one at a time, regardless of their scope, either broad or narrow, and often as they see fit with regard to historical precedent. The case under review occurred entirely within the time span of the Obama administration. It willed be ruled upon as the court feels it relates to the Constitution, not by what was allowed in other administrations. In Supreme Court rulings interpretation of the Constitution always overrides precedent. If not Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation would have been declared invalid because we had a long precedent of legal slavery. You truly seem to misunderstand the purpose of the Court.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 7:13:34 AM)
Whatever the outcome, any ruling from that court indicates that both majority and minority opinion rely heavily on precedent. The court du jour might or might not warp precedent to their own purpose, but even the opinions arguing against precedent run in circles to honor precedent. I was a HS dropout too, but at least I went on reading a lot even before I went to college. US history and US government were core requirements where I went. Sorry you missed out.

Made2Obey -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 7:19:14 AM)
Slept through those classes did you?

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 7:27:22 AM)
I in fact did just that in HS. That's how bad the teaching was. Or how bad I was. Either way. How I ever got through "Fortran IV with Watfiv" in my only yr. in HS with a B after coming into class directly from a 4:30 AM paper route is beyond me. But soon enough I was at work and not sleeping. Never went to sleep in any of my university classes, though, even before or after working. Eyes were open in all classes. Unlike you, I at least studied what I was talking about.

Edwird -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 8:03:22 AM)
I still did the morning paper route even two years into having a regular job, from some extremely warped sense of duty. Epitome of a complete fuckwit if ever there was.

MrRodgers -> RE: Electronic privacy...in 4 weeks SCOTUS starts (9/7/2017 8:37:58 AM)
Ok, kinkroids here's the issue here for me and why I brought it up. I want a very robust search warrant system where all the FBI had to do was inform the court that with what (likely a lot) was very probable cause to make their case for 'breaking' into his phone. I've seen otherwise average law biding people have something searched and been convicted with it called an 'administrative' search. New name (Orwellian) for warrantless searches. People, politicians and other critics, often bring up something called a 'slippery slope' to this or that. These extra-constitutional proceedings are a big time slippery slope to gradually seeing over time, the evisceration of our bill of rights. This decision will either keep us protected for a few more years or it will having us surely a 'slipping' further down that slope...to fascism. Note:.....the Emancipation Proclamation had no force of law. Even historians and accredited legal officers at the time and dozens since then, knew it meant little or nothing but had to be backed up by what ? The union army. [It] was going to show the rebellious states...who was in charge now and that you will 'never get your slaves back.'

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.078125E-02