G-Wohl
07-24-2008, 04:29 PM
I sent one of my state's senators, Joseph Lieberman, an email regarding this movement's views on HR3221, the bill passed by the house recently allowing the bailout of Freddie and Fannie, along with some absurd new violations of our right to privacy. The email is seen here:
Dear Senator Lieberman:
As you probably have heard by now, the House passed HR 3221 - the Housing Bailout Bill - today with an overwhelming majority. In less than 48 hours, the bill will be on the Senate's doorstep. This bill is no joke, it's not funny, and if this bill passes, it cannot be undone.
HR 3221 permits a number of radical and economically-destructive events to occur under an increasingly-imperialistic federal government. Because of this bill, Henry Paulson could be given an $800 billion dollar blank check in the form of an increased Federal Debt Ceiling, which he can then spend on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in any way he chooses, including buying the worst loans they have and sticking a one-hundred percent loss - $800 billion worth - onto the People's tax bill. A huge percentage of the debt issued by Freddie and Fannie - about $1.5 trillion worth - is held by foreign central banks. Paulson is proposing to bail out the Chinese and Japanese governments with the People's tax money! Paulson says he will "protect the taxpayer." However, this bill allows him to mess with the taxpayer with absolutely no recourse or oversight.
That's not even the worst part about this bill. It contains a well-hidden passage (which I'm sure most House members who voted for this bill didn't read) that would significantly violate the individual liberties guaranteed to us in the Constitution. I dearly hope, after all, that you will not support a bill that calls for the finger printing of all people taking out a mortgage, and the reporting of all credit card purchases over the internet to the IRS. The fact that in one vote this urgent and radical bill passed on the House floor literally sends chills down my spine.
I am writing you today in the hope that you will not vote for this bill. If the Senate does not vote down this reckless and destructive nonsense, we, the People, our children and grandchildren, will be stuck with the consequences. I hope that you will make the right choice to not only vote down this bill, but to also express dissatisfaction towards it.
Thank you for your time,
Andrew Grathwohl
The following email was sent back to me, supposedly from the Senator himself, about the subject.
Dear Mr. Grathwohl:
Thank you for contacting me to express your views regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush concerning the rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees to file habeas corpus petitions in federal court. I appreciate your views on this serious matter, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 2005, during the 108th Congress, I voted for the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA; P.L. 109-148). The DTA expressly stated that Guantanamo detainees did not have the right to file petitions for habeas corpus challenging the legality of their detention. However, the DTA did allow Guantanamo detainees to appeal the determinations made by the Combatant Status Review Tribunals with regard to their detainee status to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Such access to the federal court system for those caught fighting American soldiers overseas is much more than what was ever afforded our enemies captured during World War II. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court held that the DTA applied only to pending petitions for habeas corpus, not future petitions. Congress responded by passing the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA; P.L. 109-366). The MCA clarified that the bar on habeas corpus petitions filed by Guantanamo detainees applied to all pending and future detainees.
Like the DTA, I supported the MCA, in part, because I oppose granting Guantanamo detainees the same rights as American citizens. Detainees held in Guantanamo are enemy combatants who were caught in the war on terrorism and have demonstrated a willingness to exploit international law and our laws to advance their cause. These Islamist terrorists are committed to attacking America and killing Americans; and it is also critical to remember that, of the detainees that have been released from Guantanamo, at least 30 have returned to the battlefield to fight American servicemen and servicewomen.
On June 12, 2008, in the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, the Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 opinion, that aliens designated as enemy combatants and detained at Guantanamo have a constitutional right to file habeas corpus petitions challenging their detention. While I respect the role of the Supreme Court role in our system of separation of powers, I strongly disagree with its decision. Enemies of the United States who have been captured on the battlefield and designated unlawful enemy combatants are entitled to the protections afforded by the Geneva Convention, not the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision changes that and does so in a way that will only increase the burdens and responsibilities placed on our brave men and women in the military. I regret the outcome of the majority's opinion, and I hope that our country is not rendered less safe as a result. To the extent there are opportunities to work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to change the outcomes of the Court's decision, I intend to do so.
Thank you again for sharing your views and concerns with me. I hope you will continue to visit my web site at http://lieberman.senate.gov for updated news about my work on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress.
Huh? Seriously? You are so lazy and unconcerned for your constituents that you not only automate the emails you send to people, but also can't even get the damn topic right? What, have none of your interns written you an HR3221 email template yet?:mad:
Dear Senator Lieberman:
As you probably have heard by now, the House passed HR 3221 - the Housing Bailout Bill - today with an overwhelming majority. In less than 48 hours, the bill will be on the Senate's doorstep. This bill is no joke, it's not funny, and if this bill passes, it cannot be undone.
HR 3221 permits a number of radical and economically-destructive events to occur under an increasingly-imperialistic federal government. Because of this bill, Henry Paulson could be given an $800 billion dollar blank check in the form of an increased Federal Debt Ceiling, which he can then spend on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in any way he chooses, including buying the worst loans they have and sticking a one-hundred percent loss - $800 billion worth - onto the People's tax bill. A huge percentage of the debt issued by Freddie and Fannie - about $1.5 trillion worth - is held by foreign central banks. Paulson is proposing to bail out the Chinese and Japanese governments with the People's tax money! Paulson says he will "protect the taxpayer." However, this bill allows him to mess with the taxpayer with absolutely no recourse or oversight.
That's not even the worst part about this bill. It contains a well-hidden passage (which I'm sure most House members who voted for this bill didn't read) that would significantly violate the individual liberties guaranteed to us in the Constitution. I dearly hope, after all, that you will not support a bill that calls for the finger printing of all people taking out a mortgage, and the reporting of all credit card purchases over the internet to the IRS. The fact that in one vote this urgent and radical bill passed on the House floor literally sends chills down my spine.
I am writing you today in the hope that you will not vote for this bill. If the Senate does not vote down this reckless and destructive nonsense, we, the People, our children and grandchildren, will be stuck with the consequences. I hope that you will make the right choice to not only vote down this bill, but to also express dissatisfaction towards it.
Thank you for your time,
Andrew Grathwohl
The following email was sent back to me, supposedly from the Senator himself, about the subject.
Dear Mr. Grathwohl:
Thank you for contacting me to express your views regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush concerning the rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees to file habeas corpus petitions in federal court. I appreciate your views on this serious matter, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 2005, during the 108th Congress, I voted for the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA; P.L. 109-148). The DTA expressly stated that Guantanamo detainees did not have the right to file petitions for habeas corpus challenging the legality of their detention. However, the DTA did allow Guantanamo detainees to appeal the determinations made by the Combatant Status Review Tribunals with regard to their detainee status to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Such access to the federal court system for those caught fighting American soldiers overseas is much more than what was ever afforded our enemies captured during World War II. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court held that the DTA applied only to pending petitions for habeas corpus, not future petitions. Congress responded by passing the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA; P.L. 109-366). The MCA clarified that the bar on habeas corpus petitions filed by Guantanamo detainees applied to all pending and future detainees.
Like the DTA, I supported the MCA, in part, because I oppose granting Guantanamo detainees the same rights as American citizens. Detainees held in Guantanamo are enemy combatants who were caught in the war on terrorism and have demonstrated a willingness to exploit international law and our laws to advance their cause. These Islamist terrorists are committed to attacking America and killing Americans; and it is also critical to remember that, of the detainees that have been released from Guantanamo, at least 30 have returned to the battlefield to fight American servicemen and servicewomen.
On June 12, 2008, in the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al Odah v. United States, the Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 opinion, that aliens designated as enemy combatants and detained at Guantanamo have a constitutional right to file habeas corpus petitions challenging their detention. While I respect the role of the Supreme Court role in our system of separation of powers, I strongly disagree with its decision. Enemies of the United States who have been captured on the battlefield and designated unlawful enemy combatants are entitled to the protections afforded by the Geneva Convention, not the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision changes that and does so in a way that will only increase the burdens and responsibilities placed on our brave men and women in the military. I regret the outcome of the majority's opinion, and I hope that our country is not rendered less safe as a result. To the extent there are opportunities to work with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to change the outcomes of the Court's decision, I intend to do so.
Thank you again for sharing your views and concerns with me. I hope you will continue to visit my web site at http://lieberman.senate.gov for updated news about my work on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress.
Huh? Seriously? You are so lazy and unconcerned for your constituents that you not only automate the emails you send to people, but also can't even get the damn topic right? What, have none of your interns written you an HR3221 email template yet?:mad: