Rush Limbaugh: We Go to War for Civil Liberties?

RushLimbaugh.com ^ | 12/19/05 | Rush Limbaugh

[wagglebee]

I knew Rush would be on fire today and this segment was one of his all time best!

[wagglebee]

Ping!

[JohnLongIsland]

and with Levin batting behind him, they both kept on hitting the ball out of the park today.

[Darkwolf377]

If we get hit again, we know whose responsibility it is. It's the Democrats in the Senate and these four Republicans: Larry Craig, Chuck Hagel, Lisa Murkowski and Sununu.

This is another piece in the Democrats' complete meltdown this week--another piece being their admission that they have no plans for the WOT.

They have given Bush a Not My Fault Guarantee. I hope there will never be another attack, and if there is, Bush can say, honestly, "We have to wonder what changed from September 12 to now to let this happen." And FOX, at least, will show that clip of Harry Reid proclaiming "We defeated the Patriot Act today!" to applause.

[wagglebee]

I don't get to hear Levin where I live, I love to hear him when he's on Rush's or Sean's shows though. It is a real treat when he finds time to come spend some time with us here online.

[KDD]

All members of the Court joined in rejecting the government's argument that the Bill of Rights simply did not apply in wartime. The majority opinion contains a somewhat rhetorical passage for which it is justly famous:

The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false; for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it, which are necessary to preserve its existence; as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority.

Civil Liberty and the Civil War: The Indianapolis Treason Trials

[txhurl]

bttt caught about 1/3 of it great stuff

[tet68]

Burnside's statement is a must read.

[Waco]

Face it folks, this war will be a lot more interesting when 2-3 million New Yorkers are littering the streets NYC. Be great for ratings. Kids and grandkids? The NYT has already given the it's "P*ss on the kid$" blessing. It's really gonna be a lota fun you know. You can bet the NYT feels it is entirely justified in it's attempts to help the enemy destroy this nation. Bet on it.

[Romanov]

Unfortunately if (when?) it does happen the Dems and their leftwing radical buddies will say it was plotted by Bush to justify his actions. They (Dummies) have no shame.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...All of you out there listening, how many of you think we go to war to protect civil liberties? When is the last time you heard a president declare war on the basis that we gotta go protect our civil liberties? I can't think of one, and I have a fertile memory, my friends....

You worthless assclown, our nation was born in a war to protect our civil liberties.

George Washington ring a bell?


...Our civil liberties are worthless if we are dead!...


Ben Franklin spits on you.

And so do I.

Why are your medical records so damned private if you've got nothing to hide?

Oh, and if we're at war, why are the borders wide open?

[Sybeck1]

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact," Abraham Lincoln

[Alkhin]

!) Get a grip on yourself, man.

2) Get a history book. Read up on the Revolution. Face up to the fact that your publik screwel education CHEATED you of a solid understanding.

3) Learn to write properly. FReepers might pay better attention to you.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

..."The Constitution is not a suicide pact," Abraham Lincoln...

As he repealed it.

How did that work out for him, anyway?

I forget my History. Did he live happily, ever after, a loved and respected hero of the nation, worshipped and fawned over in his old age?

[Tuxedo]

We go to war for Civil Liberties? I thought it was to protect our precious bodily fluids? Lord knows we don't want them impurified.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

So George Washington was not the president of a nation born in war over the God given rights of men?

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Well, are you an assclown?

George Washington?

Heard of him?

[mysterio]

If they want to suspend civil liberties, there are two legal ways to do it:

1. A Constitutional Amendment

or

2. Declare martial law.

If it's just for wartime, why do they have a problem with letting the "patriot" act sunset? If it's just for wartime, then why not declare martial law?

I'll tell you why. Because it's NOT just for wartime. This is the wishlist of big government since Clinton. The Clinton justice department wanted these powers, too. And now, the next Clinton justice department will have them, should she be elected. I guess then we'll see how everyone feels about making this anti-Constitutional, big government boondoggle permanent.

Civil liberties make America America.

[Alkhin]

George Washington was president over a nation born in war over legal representation. Those rights had to be first be defined as God-given to spell out exactly who came first in the heirarchy of law. God FIRST, then national leader. As opposed to the Divine Right of the King, who was also presumed to represent the 'civil rights' of men but failed doing so because legal representation was severely limited. So you and I can go round and round all day about whether not civil rights was an issue in the Revolution. I find it fatuous to even comtemplate that terminology, considering that wasn't even in the play at the time of war. I do believe the Articles of Confederation came before the Bill of Rights.

It denigrates the Constitution to say its all about civil rights. The Constitution is THE LAW. Period, and should be enforced as such.

as for "civil rights" during war : there are hostiles, and their are civilians. The safety of the civilians comes before the hostiles. If someone plots and acts to hurt/damage/kill a civilian, they are HOSTILE, and shoudl be treated as such.

[sgtyork]

..live happily, ever after, a loved and respected hero of the nation, worshipped and fawned over in his old age?

I have visited the Lincoln Memorial, I would describe it as a place where he is adulated and yes 'fawned over' FOR ALL AGES. What a strange question!