Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-01-2009, 02:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 101
Good job Eric Holder!

Dismissing charges on former Sen. Ted Stevens.


You are a whiner about race relations, but you sure do know govt. misconduct in the DOJ when you see it, and how to at least convincingly pretend, to be non-partisan about your job.

Yay.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-01-2009, 02:55 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Bravo to that, for sure.

I hope Holder is being equally non-partisan with his determination that the proposed DC voting rights bill is constitutional. Apparently his intervention in that matter is unusual for an AG, or at least that's the impression I got from this article:
Quote:
A Split At Justice On D.C. Vote Bill
Holder Overrode Ruling That Measure Is Unconstitutional

By Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 1, 2009; Page A01

Justice Department lawyers concluded in an unpublished opinion earlier this year that the historic D.C. voting rights bill pending in Congress is unconstitutional, according to sources briefed on the issue. But Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who supports the measure, ordered up a second opinion from other lawyers in his department and determined that the legislation would pass muster...
Rest of the article is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/31/AR2009033104426.html?nav%3Dhcmodule&sub=AR (I think you need to register and log in to see the article)

Holder has some history with this issue, so his view probably thought through. I just hope he is not getting proactive on the issue for political reasons.

It's a disgrace that DC residents don't have full voting representation in the House and Senate. If this bill proves to be unconstitutional, then lets get going with an amendment.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-01-2009, 03:06 PM
JollyRoger's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 48
How odd, a fat cat crooked Republican pork barreller extraordinaire has "errors" so bad in his prosecution prosecuted by the Republican justice department, he gets to walk when the Dems come it. How odd.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2009, 06:43 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyRoger View Post
How odd, a fat cat crooked Republican pork barreller extraordinaire has "errors" so bad in his prosecution prosecuted by the Republican justice department, he gets to walk when the Dems come it. How odd.

How odd you seem so pissed off in every post you make here, whether it seems to be something you agree with or something you are against. How odd.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2009, 08:52 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: los angeles
Posts: 451
it seems like mr. holder possesses integrity.

that's a good thing, right?

(learned hand lives! )
__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2009, 09:39 PM
cmac2012's Avatar
Renaissance Dude
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 21,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyRoger View Post
How odd, a fat cat crooked Republican pork barreller extraordinaire has "errors" so bad in his prosecution prosecuted by the Republican justice department, he gets to walk when the Dems come it. How odd.
Hmmm . . . might be something there. Perhaps enough genuine malfeasance to be a problem so do something crooked with a side piece of the puzzle and give him the golden-judicial parachute of his dreams.

However, that said, congrats to Holder for showing how it's done.
__________________
cmac

1986 300SDL, 351K
1984 300D, 133K
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-01-2009, 10:00 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 7,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin View Post
Bravo to that, for sure.

I hope Holder is being equally non-partisan with his determination that the proposed DC voting rights bill is constitutional. Apparently his intervention in that matter is unusual for an AG, or at least that's the impression I got from this article:Rest of the article is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/31/AR2009033104426.html?nav%3Dhcmodule&sub=AR (I think you need to register and log in to see the article)

Holder has some history with this issue, so his view probably thought through. I just hope he is not getting proactive on the issue for political reasons.

It's a disgrace that DC residents don't have full voting representation in the House and Senate. If this bill proves to be unconstitutional, then lets get going with an amendment.
IIRC no insular areas have full representation- never have.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-01-2009, 10:53 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTUpower View Post
IIRC no insular areas have full representation- never have.
Your point being?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-01-2009, 11:50 PM
Emmerich's Avatar
M-100's in Dallas
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 678
Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin View Post
Your point being?
The Constitution spells out in detail how D.C. is handled. You would need an amendment to change that, although the Congress thinks it can do it through legislation.

The solution is to shrink the District to the area encompassing the Federal buildings and making the rest part of maryland, where they will have Senate seats and House seats. The district was originally carved out of Maryland.

This only comes up when Dems are in power because the District is a Dem stronghold and increasing Dem headcount in congress is the goal, not because they think those people are not represented.
__________________
MB-less
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-2009, 11:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: beautiful Bucks Co, PA
Posts: 961
I wonder if the other shoe will drop and Holder investigates the alleged misconduct by the prosecutors.
As to DC, aren't the residents taxed by the Federal g'ment the same as residents of the several states? Taxation without representation comes to mind.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-02-2009, 12:33 AM
mwood's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Doe View Post
How odd you seem so pissed off in every post you make here, whether it seems to be something you agree with or something you are against. How odd.
Maybe he's just not a very happy person.
__________________
1993 300E 2.8 185k miles
2006 Mustang Convertible 4.0 Eaton Supercharged
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-02-2009, 01:35 AM
mgburg's Avatar
"Illegal" 3rd Dist. Rep.
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Onalaska, WI.
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chas H View Post
I wonder if the other shoe will drop and Holder investigates the alleged misconduct by the prosecutors.
As to DC, aren't the residents taxed by the Federal g'ment the same as residents of the several states? Taxation without representation comes to mind.
If you can't read and understand the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights, why should you get special dispensation on where you live? Move out of D.C. if you want to be PROPERLY REPRESENTED. No one is FORCING ANYONE to live in an area that has been designated a NO VOTE ZONE by the Constitution.

When you buy a house, you know (or your attorney does) that there are certain covenants that pertain to residents within the D.C. proper...if you don't like 'em, move. Simple as that.

Congress can't change that provision of the Constitution WITHOUT proposing an amendment and the states have to vote on it.

Simple to understand.
__________________
.

.
M. G. Burg
'10 - Dakota SXT - Daily Ride / ≈ 172.5K
.'76 - 450SLC - 107.024.12 / < .89.20 K
..'77 - 280E - 123.033.12 / > 128.20 K
...'67 - El Camino - 283ci / > 207.00 K
....'75 - Yamaha - 650XS / < 21.00 K
.....'87 - G20 Sportvan / > 206.00 K
......'85 - 4WINNS 160 I.O. / 140hp
.......'74 - Honda CT70 / Real 125

.
“I didn’t really say everything I said.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ Yogi Berra ~
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-02-2009, 08:43 AM
Inna-propriate-da-vida
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgburg View Post
If you can't read and understand the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights, why should you get special dispensation on where you live? Move out of D.C. if you want to be PROPERLY REPRESENTED. No one is FORCING ANYONE to live in an area that has been designated a NO VOTE ZONE by the Constitution.

When you buy a house, you know (or your attorney does) that there are certain covenants that pertain to residents within the D.C. proper...if you don't like 'em, move. Simple as that.

Congress can't change that provision of the Constitution WITHOUT proposing an amendment and the states have to vote on it.

Simple to understand.
Sounds like you don't agree with 'one man one vote' that has become a central concept of our government. When the constitution was written, the actual site for the seat of government was not yet decided. Further, when it was moved, the population was not nearly the size it is now. Most people agree that the founding fathers did not envision a major city arising in the district. Remember, although the Constitution is a well thought out document, it was created by flesh and blood people, who are fallible. The Constitution is a living document, and needs to be interpreted by the people using it. I think it is high time to allow the residents of D.C. to vote in national elections. After all, Congress is their 'state legislature', yet they can't even vote in the election of those officials. I don't think they should be treated as a separate state, with their own reps in the house and senate, but rather should be counted as part of Maryland or Virginia.
Start writing the amendment.
__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-02-2009, 08:49 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emmerich View Post
The Constitution spells out in detail how D.C. is handled. You would need an amendment to change that, although the Congress thinks it can do it through legislation.
That sounds right to me. Others, including Ken Starr (!), believe otherwise. Either way, we need to make the change.
Quote:
The solution is to shrink the District to the area encompassing the Federal buildings and making the rest part of maryland, where they will have Senate seats and House seats. The district was originally carved out of Maryland.
I don't see why that is better than giving Americans living in DC the same rights as other Americans.
Quote:
This only comes up when Dems are in power because the District is a Dem stronghold and increasing Dem headcount in congress is the goal, not because they think those people are not represented.
You are dead wrong. I'm sure that vote counts motivate many Democrats, but that is not the only reason people advocate for the Americans living in DC to have full voting representation in Congress.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-02-2009, 09:41 AM
JollyRoger's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonkovich View Post
it seems like mr. holder possesses integrity.

that's a good thing, right?

(learned hand lives! )
I doubt integrity had much to do with it, the sham prosecution of former Top Porker Stevens didn't take place under his watch, it was done by Steven's Republican pals, who looks to me like they gamed the system to make sure one of their own didn't go to prison where he belonged, and Holder had no choice but to let him walk. This was a pretty much open and shut case, Stevens owned a home. The home was built by someone who benefited from Steven's actions in the Senate. End of case. Seems pretty odd that so much "prosecutorial misconduct" took place on such a simple case, this wasn't Enron, this was the guy's house, with paycheck stubs for workers and receipts for materials, all paid for by someone other than the mighty senator. Some hero you Republicans have, just like Libby, a proven perjurer, or Alberto Gonzalez who got political prosecutors appointed (gee, I wonder which one of them prosecuted Stevens?), or the war criminal murderers at the top, Bush and Cheney.


Last edited by JollyRoger; 04-02-2009 at 09:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page