On Sep 24, 4:10*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:10:38 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

i know you righties love big govt with unlmited powers, but we lovers
of the constitution prefer a separation of powers...

The constitution says that is THREE branches of government, not Two

you don't know what separation of powers means. no kiddin'. a right
winger only knows the 2nd amendment...


A year ago this was being defined by the left as an abuse of the right
of habeas corpus and due process.

uh...no it wasn't. what WAS being defined as a power grab was bush's
imperial presidency...no limits...no checks...no accountability to
congress

and that's what the article says. i suggest you read it

Suddenly that is OK with you as long
as it is OK with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
Bush would say he got the tacit approval from his congress in the
various war resolutions they passed

and bush said he didn't need it. that's the point.

and you? you just quit reading after the first 3 letter word in the
article


.. The reality for anyone who really
thinks this is a constitutional issue is that neither the congress nor
the president has that power. Due process requires the judiciary.

meaningless


You would have to amend article 1 section 9 of the constitution to
change that.

The flip side of this is others say Gitmo is not in the United States,
these are not US citizens, they are enemy combatants and the
constitution does not apply at all.
This is purely a military exercise and the president is commander in
chief of the military.

irrelevant. goalpost moving.