Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Possible Suspicious Incidents
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 687557" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>I found the following article with comments from Judge Andrew Napolitano on military tribunals very interesting. Judge Napolitano's thoughts on military tribunals IMO are informative in light of his adherance to law and originalist constitutional construction. I'll concede the fact that pure originalist construction is in fact inconvenient with the current approach of dealing with the threat we call terrorism. Not only with tribunals but the apparatus of the surveil state which IMO both political parties follow. That said, it's also very easy to treat the constitution like a cafeteria line and just pick and choose at the moment what's convenient and pretend the other dishes don't even exist at all. Again, both political sides do this whether it's twisting the general welfare clause or providing for the common defense. IMO from an originalist POV, I don't think the founding fathers whether of the Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian schools envisioned the extremes we've taken this 2 constructs from the original constitution.</p><p></p><p>From a POV, if you don't trust your own system to uphold proper justice (yes proper justice goes both ways ultimately finding truth and dispensing justice accoding to said truth) then why should someone outside your system be willing to adopt all or even some of your system as their own means of organized society? If winning the hearts and minds of foreign interests is the goal, what better place to start than at home and then point to the good working example for them to look at. People like to hold and look at a product, even see it demonstrated before they buy and is societal governance any different?</p><p></p><p>To close, on a comedic if not a bit of truth POV, when I take an outside view and look at America with both Bush and Obama along with the actions of the resulting Congress in power, I can understand why so many foreign peoples want no part of how we do things.</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy-very.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy-very:" title="Happy Very :happy-very:" data-shortname=":happy-very:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 687557, member: 2189"] I found the following article with comments from Judge Andrew Napolitano on military tribunals very interesting. Judge Napolitano's thoughts on military tribunals IMO are informative in light of his adherance to law and originalist constitutional construction. I'll concede the fact that pure originalist construction is in fact inconvenient with the current approach of dealing with the threat we call terrorism. Not only with tribunals but the apparatus of the surveil state which IMO both political parties follow. That said, it's also very easy to treat the constitution like a cafeteria line and just pick and choose at the moment what's convenient and pretend the other dishes don't even exist at all. Again, both political sides do this whether it's twisting the general welfare clause or providing for the common defense. IMO from an originalist POV, I don't think the founding fathers whether of the Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian schools envisioned the extremes we've taken this 2 constructs from the original constitution. From a POV, if you don't trust your own system to uphold proper justice (yes proper justice goes both ways ultimately finding truth and dispensing justice accoding to said truth) then why should someone outside your system be willing to adopt all or even some of your system as their own means of organized society? If winning the hearts and minds of foreign interests is the goal, what better place to start than at home and then point to the good working example for them to look at. People like to hold and look at a product, even see it demonstrated before they buy and is societal governance any different? To close, on a comedic if not a bit of truth POV, when I take an outside view and look at America with both Bush and Obama along with the actions of the resulting Congress in power, I can understand why so many foreign peoples want no part of how we do things. :happy-very: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Possible Suspicious Incidents
Top