President Bush said Saturday he vetoed legislation that would ban
 the CIA from using harsh interrogation methods such as
waterboarding to break suspected terrorists because
 it would end practices that have prevented attacks.

 "The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable
 tools in the war on terror," Bush said in his weekly radio address taped
 for broadcast Saturday. "So today I vetoed it," Bush said.

 The bill he rejected provides guidelines for intelligence activities for the year
and has the interrogation requirement as one provision.
It cleared the House in December and the Senate last month.

"This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have
 a proven track record of keeping America safe," the president said.

Supporters of the legislation say it would preserve the United States'
ability to collect critical intelligence while also providing a much-needed
 boost to country's moral standing abroad.

Did you know?
 There was a motion at the original Constitutional Convention
 to include a Bill of Rights in the original document,
 but the idea was rejected without debate by the delegates.

The original text of the US Constitution
provided no enumerated rights for the people.

 The drafters of the Constitution were not against a bill of rights;
however, as they were drafting a document that would allow
only certain enumerated rights to the central government,
 they simply didn’t see the need for guaranteed rights
to be set out in the document. 

However, following the drafting of the Constitution and it being sent
to the states for ratification, it became clear that the states held a
different opinion on the inclusion of language providing these basic rights.

  Why?  Simply put, the states didn’t trust the government to protect
 the rights of the people unless the rights were specifically enumerated.
 After all, the concept was not new.


In 1215, nearly 600 years before the drafting of the Bill of Rights,
King John of signed the Magna Carta, a document designed to
protect the English people from the Crown’s abuse of power.


In drafting the Bill of Rights the framers looked to further
define the role of the central government, essentially by saying
 that the central government would never engage in certain conduct,
that is to say, there would be certain actions that the
 federal government would simply never do.

 In the broadest sense of the word, the Constitution
created three branches of the federal government,
 the legislative, the executive, and judicial and gave each
certain power; however,
there were no rights expressly given to the people.

 As part of the original Constitution,
as it was envisioned to be a fluid document,
that is, one that could, from time to time be amended,
 in fact, the drafters of the Constitution expressly included
 a provision in the Constitution allowing for amendments.

 It was in this fashion that the Bill of Rights was born
and wherein its primary significance rests,
the protection of certain basic rights.

 Without the Bill of Rights, certain concepts such as
religious freedom, protection from troop quartering,
the right to keep and bear arms, the right to a free press,
 the right of accused to a trial by jury or to confront his accuser,
just to name a few, could have potentially been denied, or if not denied,
 repressed placing the burden on the person seeking to exercise the right
 prior to doing what the Bill of Rights allows.


 Through history, under other governments, this had happened
and the framers wanted to make sure that all possible safe guards
were in place to protect the people of our nation.

 While the Constitution enumerated power to the government,
the framers wanted to make sure that at some point later the
 federal government did not infringe on the most basic of rights.

 It has also been out of the ingenious design of the Constitution
and the Bill of Rights are as significant and as important to our
country as they were more than 200 years ago

That being said...


Article II
Section 1
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office,
he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute
 the Office of President of the United States,
and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend
the Constitution of the United States."

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers
of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for,
and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Amendment VIII
bail, fines, punishment
Excessive bail shall not be required,
nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


SO......can we impeach now ????
Any person in office who supports this man
 should have charges brought upon them.
The excuse of  I was just following orders
just don't cut it in my book


EXTRA CREDIT


The Second Amendment is written in two clauses,
a prefatory and an operative clause.
The first clause, "a well regulated militia" is prefatory.
The second clause, "the right of the people" is operative.

 In determining whether the Second Amendment’s guarantee is an individual one,
the most important word is the one the drafters chose to describe the holders
of the right “the people.” That term is found in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth,
and Tenth Amendments.

 It has never been doubted that these provisions were designed
to protect the interests of individuals against government intrusion,
interference, or usurpation.


Since the 2nd Amendment (or any other part of the Constitution)
does not clearly and specifically deny personal gun ownership, it
 can simply be argued that there is no legal basis for banning
personal gun ownership.


The National Guard is NOT a professional Army.
 A professional at anything makes the major portion of his living
from that activity. Members of the National Guard are "part-time"
 soldiers, their professions are the jobs that they get pulled away from.

Having said that, the 2nd amendment states that
THE PEOPLE have right to bear arms.
 The Bill of Rights addresses three groups
 the country, the states and THE PEOPLE.
That means that ANY CITIZEN can own a gun.

Of course, any group would be hard pressed trying to defend themselves
 (with a bunch of hunting rifles) from the government
(with tanks, artillery and A-10s, night and infrared optics).

 Good luck, you just don't have a chance