6 ms·

Lindsey Graham wants ability to lock you up forever without trial

14 points by sjcsjc 14y ago

corwinstephen 14y ago
I know this might be a borderline inappropriate comment for Hackernews, but sometimes I wonder whether having horrible, racially insensitive, biased, outdated ideas is the definition of being Republican.
- adventured 14y ago
  It's not just inappropriate, it's bigoted and extraordinarily ignorant. You just slandered at least 100 million Americans. Care to discuss all the scary laws and accepted practices Obama has ushered into existence the last four years? Let's talk about the indefinite detention, the torture ("enhanced interrogation"), the right to assassinate (murder) American citizens, the drone killings worldwide, the NDAA, the continued war in Afghanistan and killings that go with it, the extreme spying powers and general violations of civil liberties by the Obama admin that seems to have become the every day norm. What happened to the elected Democrats being the protectors of civil liberties? And then let's talk about whether there are actually any differences between the Democrats in power vs the Republicans in power. All I see is an Obama Administration that is continuing where Bush left off.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - corwinstephen 14y ago
    Before I say anything, let me first mention that I'm not trying to defend my right to post comments like this. I shouldn't have said anything. That said, if you're struggling to find differences between Obama's administration and Bush's, you're looking in the wrong places. I assume when you mention "the right to assassinate American citizens," you're referring to the case of the Yemeni boy who was killed by the drone? If that's the case, trust me when I say I don't disagree with you here: it's a horrible thing. BUT, just because it's horrible doesn't mean it wasn't avoidable. The boy knew that his father was on the "kill list" as a known extremist. In choosing to go and visit him in Yemen anyway, he would have accepted the possibility that he would be put in harms way by association. It was an avoidable risk that he knowingly chose to take. I don't find that nearly as offensive as say, Guantanamo bay, which I might add was created by the Bush administration. But international politics is a messy area, and I think it's safe to say that no matter who is president, horrible things are bound to happen as a result of global economic climate, and independent of who's in office. What REALLY offends me, though, are the things that happen here at home. When I hear conservatives say things like "We don't need more trees! We need more jobs!" I'm immediately offended that someone so short-sighted could even consider running for office. When important officials are making claims about women's bodies rejecting fetuses that are the result of rape, and others are refusing to teach the theory of evolution, I'm offended. These ideas are not healthy: they're toxic. They hinder the advancement of society. So frankly, if I had to pick one thing about the Obama Administration that I do "care to discuss," it's gotta be the fact that never have I ever heard him suggest any such toxic ideas. I can't say so much for the other team.
- khawkins 14y ago
  You're correct, this is an inappropriate comment which offers no insight and broadly dismisses a diverse group of people and opinions.
- pav3l 14y ago
  Inappropriate comment to an inappropriate article (Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, [...] unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon[1]). [1]http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jrajav 14y ago
  Leading with self-deprecating self-reference doesn't make it any less harmful and slurred, just more subtle.
  - corwinstephen 14y ago
    Very valid. I just wanted people to know that I'm not unaware of how inappropriate it is. The fact that I chose to post it anyway should stand as a testament to how incredibly offensive this man's ideas are to me.
    - jwhite 14y ago
      If his ideas offend you, you should rebut them, rather than making such an uncouth, sweeping value judgement.
      - corwinstephen 14y ago
        You're right. Apologies...
greyfade 14y ago
I sometimes wonder if perhaps there should be criminal penalties associated with a government official drafting a bill or amendment or action or whathaveyou that clearly violates the Constitution. I mean, Congress seems to want to try to attach a criminal penalty to everything else. Why not put them in prison for trying to violate the Constitution?
- pav3l 14y ago
  Everything is evolving, people should be able to amend the Constitution. What you're proposing would make that illegal.
  - Turing_Machine 14y ago
    There's a clearly defined procedure for amending the Constitution. "Whatever some government official wants to do" isn't the criterion.
  - greyfade 14y ago
    I was speaking of amendments to bills, not amendments to the Constitution.

14 points by sjcsjc 14y ago

I know this might be a borderline inappropriate comment for Hackernews, but sometimes I wonder whether having horrible, racially insensitive, biased, outdated ideas is the definition of being Republican.

adventured 14y ago
It's not just inappropriate, it's bigoted and extraordinarily ignorant. You just slandered at least 100 million Americans. Care to discuss all the scary laws and accepted practices Obama has ushered into existence the last four years? Let's talk about the indefinite detention, the torture ("enhanced interrogation"), the right to assassinate (murder) American citizens, the drone killings worldwide, the NDAA, the continued war in Afghanistan and killings that go with it, the extreme spying powers and general violations of civil liberties by the Obama admin that seems to have become the every day norm. What happened to the elected Democrats being the protectors of civil liberties? And then let's talk about whether there are actually any differences between the Democrats in power vs the Republicans in power. All I see is an Obama Administration that is continuing where Bush left off.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- corwinstephen 14y ago
  Before I say anything, let me first mention that I'm not trying to defend my right to post comments like this. I shouldn't have said anything. That said, if you're struggling to find differences between Obama's administration and Bush's, you're looking in the wrong places. I assume when you mention "the right to assassinate American citizens," you're referring to the case of the Yemeni boy who was killed by the drone? If that's the case, trust me when I say I don't disagree with you here: it's a horrible thing. BUT, just because it's horrible doesn't mean it wasn't avoidable. The boy knew that his father was on the "kill list" as a known extremist. In choosing to go and visit him in Yemen anyway, he would have accepted the possibility that he would be put in harms way by association. It was an avoidable risk that he knowingly chose to take. I don't find that nearly as offensive as say, Guantanamo bay, which I might add was created by the Bush administration. But international politics is a messy area, and I think it's safe to say that no matter who is president, horrible things are bound to happen as a result of global economic climate, and independent of who's in office. What REALLY offends me, though, are the things that happen here at home. When I hear conservatives say things like "We don't need more trees! We need more jobs!" I'm immediately offended that someone so short-sighted could even consider running for office. When important officials are making claims about women's bodies rejecting fetuses that are the result of rape, and others are refusing to teach the theory of evolution, I'm offended. These ideas are not healthy: they're toxic. They hinder the advancement of society. So frankly, if I had to pick one thing about the Obama Administration that I do "care to discuss," it's gotta be the fact that never have I ever heard him suggest any such toxic ideas. I can't say so much for the other team.
khawkins 14y ago
You're correct, this is an inappropriate comment which offers no insight and broadly dismisses a diverse group of people and opinions.
pav3l 14y ago
Inappropriate comment to an inappropriate article (Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, [...] unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon[1]). [1]http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
jrajav 14y ago
Leading with self-deprecating self-reference doesn't make it any less harmful and slurred, just more subtle.
- corwinstephen 14y ago
  Very valid. I just wanted people to know that I'm not unaware of how inappropriate it is. The fact that I chose to post it anyway should stand as a testament to how incredibly offensive this man's ideas are to me.
  - jwhite 14y ago
    If his ideas offend you, you should rebut them, rather than making such an uncouth, sweeping value judgement.
    - corwinstephen 14y ago
      You're right. Apologies...

greyfade 14y ago

I sometimes wonder if perhaps there should be criminal penalties associated with a government official drafting a bill or amendment or action or whathaveyou that clearly violates the Constitution. I mean, Congress seems to want to try to attach a criminal penalty to everything else. Why not put them in prison for trying to violate the Constitution?

pav3l 14y ago
Everything is evolving, people should be able to amend the Constitution. What you're proposing would make that illegal.
- Turing_Machine 14y ago
  There's a clearly defined procedure for amending the Constitution. "Whatever some government official wants to do" isn't the criterion.
- greyfade 14y ago
  I was speaking of amendments to bills, not amendments to the Constitution.