Another bizarre freak in Florida. Warner was the Republican representative from Stuart.

http://www.sunone.com/articles/2002-04-12h.shtml

>>
Saturday, April 13, 2002

Warner says Constitution can be a luxury
By LOURDES BRIZ
Special to The Sun
When national security is threatened, there are times when the United States cannot afford the luxury of adhering to the Constitution, said Florida Solicitor General Tom Warner Thursday afternoon.
....
<<

http://legal.firn.edu/solicitorgeneral/bio.html

>>
Warner attended the University of Florida on a football scholarship....
<<

Did he wear a helmet?

[ January 03, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

Ump, I give you credit. I've seen too many right wing nuts holding signs "America" love it or leave it." But when a liberal Democrat is elected to the White House, or any other national post, suddenly they can't stand any system that would allow such a person to be elected.
But Ump is an equal opportunity right wing nut (or is it a centrist nut?) Anyone who doesn't like the way our country is being run is free to find another to their liking.
Congratulations Ump, a man of principle.

To clarify, if I can do so without offending the delicate sensibilities of Constitution fetishists, this evil rep did not actually say "When national security is threatened, there are times when the United States cannot afford the luxury of adhering to the Constitution." That, best as I can tell from the article, are the reporter's paraphrase of the reps comments. (You'll notice there are no quotation marks around the words.) The quote is, as Twin58 might put it, invented.

The reps quotes are: ""What are we going to do if we find and capture him (Osama bin Laden)?" Is this really a horrible question? What rights does Osama bin Laden have under the Constitution?

"People . . . are really aggravated at this situation. They don't think the Constitution should apply to him," referring to John Walker, the Taliban guy. Is this incorrect? Is rep distorting the truth when he claims that some people find John Walker's actions to be treasonous, or that some might find the case to be Constiutionally complex?

"If we get word," he said, "that some guy is walking around Gainesville with a nuclear bomb in a suitcase, we are not going to worry about illegal searches and seizures and profiling." This is hypothetical, but I don't think the comment is particularly outrageous. If there is some credible threat I would hope it would be checked out, even if some people are inconvenienced.

Disclaimer: at first, I had no idea whether he was a D or an R, as the "suspend the Constitution" notion has far too many followers on both sides of the aisle. It took some searching for me to find his affiliation. Next week, if a D says the same stupid thing and I find out about it, I'll be sure to report that too.

The beauty of our Constitution is that in time of national security we can still adher to it -- yet suspend rights -- it's built-in -- look at the habeas corpus. "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it" (Article 1, Section 9)

[quote]Originally posted by twin58:
Disclaimer: at first, I had no idea whether he was a D or an R, as the "suspend the Constitution" notion has far too many followers on both sides of the aisle. It took some searching for me to find his affiliation. Next week, if a D says the same stupid thing and I find out about it, I'll be sure to report that too.

---

Twin, I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to, but just in case, I should clarify that the abbreviation "rep" in my post means "representative," as this guy is/was some sort of representative from somewhere. Didn't mean to imply "republican." Just FYI.

Understood. He's not, however, a representative. At least, anymore. He used to be a representative from Stuart. Now he's Florida's Solicitor General. (The federal equivalent is Ted Olsen.)

I'm sure, given a little bit of time and Google, I can find a website with a transcript, or even a .wav file of the whole talk. His actual words, whatever they may be, were spoken at a talk sponsored by the Federalist Society chapter at the U. of FL law school. A UF website might have a transcript.

The _Gainesville Sun_ has a BBS at which this topic is discussed.

http://www.gainesvillesun.com/forums/Forum...TML/002224.html

[ April 16, 2002: Message edited by: twin58 ]

[quote]Originally posted by Ump25:


Nice to see there are still nutballs out there. If he doesn't like our Constitution that much, perhaps he should move to a country that has a better one.

---

Oh, Ump, time out! "Love it or leave it," huh? That says at least two things: first, life here is so perfect that it can't be improved, which is certainly not true. Second, and scarier, there's no room for dissent in this country. Maybe it's even a mandate for forced exile, which is not part of our legal tradition or that of England, from which ours stemmed. Fortunately, our Constitution says otherwise and allows for the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances. "Love it or leave it" went out with RMNixon. And yes, he was a GOPer.

[ January 03, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

[ January 03, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

While I've never been a fan of the "America, love it or leave it" mentality, I do sympathize with its underlying sentiments, i.e., an anger and disgust toward those who reap all the truly amazing benefits and privileges of living in our great nation yet show not a drop of gratitude or appreciation. Dissent is one thing; selfish ingratitude and an angry sense of entitlement quite another. I'm not going to delve much deeper into the topic, mostly because I'm just not in any kind of mood for the inevitable onslaught of The Harpies. But something tells me the "it's all about ME" ingrates have no idea how well the shoe fits.

[quote]Originally posted by BoSoxRudy:
While I've never been a fan of the "America, love it or leave it" mentality, I do sympathize with its underlying sentiments, i.e., an anger and disgust toward those who reap all the truly amazing benefits and privileges of living in our great nation yet show not a drop of gratitude or appreciation. Dissent is one thing; selfish ingratitude and an angry sense of entitlement quite another. I'm not going to delve much deeper into the topic, mostly because I'm just not in any kind of mood for the inevitable onslaught of The Harpies. But something tells me the "it's all about ME" ingrates have no idea how well the shoe fits.

---

You know, Rudy, I'm not going to launch a tirade against you, but look, I work hard every day, I pay taxes, I vote. I am sick and tired of having to deal with racism, with homophobia, with sexism, with thoughtless environmental destruction, and with all the other narrow-minded, hateful ideologies that my tax dollars and those of my ancestors have supported. My ancestors built up and paid taxes to states and to this country, which refused to let them attend or partake of its public institutions, such as elementary schools and universities, have access to equal facilities, serve in non-segregated combat units, etc.--in a nutshell, enjoy full equality or quality of life. I am an educated American who still encounters racism on a regular basis, and it SICKENS me. I want to live in a country where our nation's democratic principles, embodied in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, are realized, rather than shunted aside so that a few people can grow very rich and not have to live like the rest of the working and impoverished suckers out there. I want to live in a country where quality of life is sustainable, not 100F every day, with no unpolluted or non-asphalted wetlands and no beaches and no forests left, but with acres of concrete and tract homes and SUVs. I want to live in a country that is not the target of international hatred because we cannot break our oil obsession and support of the world's worst dictators. I am want to live in a country where there are no people who are so abjectly poor or ill or old that they have to live on the streets, or go without food to pay for a prescription drug to save their lives. I support politicians and policies that foster these ideals. When they do not, I dissent. Maybe this may be read as ingratitude, but isn't speaking out for what you believe in the most basic requirement of citizenship?

Hmmm. Good post. Thanks for that, Fantomas.