America is veering towards dictatorship, Supreme court justices and top government officials warn

Guess I'm not the only one.

From the article:

When you hear some pundit or historian compare the loss of democratic republican rule currently taking place in the United States with how it happened in ancient Rome, you may be tempted to shrug it off as hyperbole or over dramatization.

When you hear a U.S. Supreme Court Justice and other top government officials use the comparison, it should alarm you tremendously because they are, in essence, firing a warning shot.

In a recent Q & A with students of the University of New Hampshire, former Justice David Souter made the comparison above, along with several other observations that he says all add up to a potential loss of democratic government - and freedom - for Americans at some point in the future.

When a former Supreme Court Justice is worried about our loss of democracy...

Souter made his comments during a lengthy response to a student's question: "My question tonight is really around where we started this conversation, which was really around the schools... And, I've heard a lot this evening about democratic principles, civic engagement, and I guess I'm wondering...if you could share with us your thoughts about what the appropriate role and, probably, responsibility as well of our schools to produce civically engaged students?"

Here are some excerpts of that response:

I don't believe there is any problem of American politics and American life, which is more significant today, than the pervasive civic ignorance of the Constitution of the United States and the structure of government. (This response earned Souter a round of applause)

We know, with pretty reliable evidence, that two-thirds of the people of the United States do not know that we have three separate branches of government. I remember...a survey back four or five years ago in which a substantial percentage of Americans believed that the Supreme Court ... was a committee of the Congress. It didn't used to be this bad.

Starting about 1970, the teaching of "Civics" went into decline from which it has never significantly recovered... The reason I said it is the most significant problem that we've got is that I think some of the aspects of current American government that people on both sides find frustrating are in part a function...of the inability of people to understand how government can and should function. It is a product of civic ignorance.

And what worries Souter the most about America's future?

I don't worry about our losing a republican government in the United States because I'm afraid of a foreign invasion. I don't worry about it because of a coup by the military, as has happened in some other places. What I worry about is that when problems are not addressed people will not know who is responsible, and when the problems get bad enough - as they might do for example with another serious terrorist attack, as they might do with another financial meltdown - some one person will come forward and say: "Give me total power and I will solve this problem."

That is how the Roman republic fell. Augustus became emperor not because he arrested the Roman senate. He became emperor because he promised that he would solve problems that were not being solved.

Sound familiar?

Later in the article, Justice O'Connor takes on the right wing, and other charges are leveled. Interesting read.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039431_Am...#ixzz2NOBWofuY

Key word is Former...

Top Government officials?

Again, you're not letting fact or truth get in your way.

Here's something for you to whack off to!

HA HA HA!

Which type of Librarian are you, Unaliar?

Do you believe in the Invisible Army?

LMAO!

From the same article.
Souter's not the only former Supreme Court Justice to warn of a coming dictatorship. In a 2006 speech at Georgetown University, former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the right wing of U.S. politics was endangering the country's future, following a warning by then-GOP House leader Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas, who said some justices could be impeached:

We must be ever-vigilant against those who would strong-arm the judiciary. ... It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings.

In other words sog, she is referring to people and specifically the country's political right-wing who try to usurp the SCOTUS role in defining the Constitution.
You or anyone on this site who claims something is unconstitutional when SCOTUS says the opposite are part of the slide towards dictatorship.

Also from that article.

It should be noted that, as Natural News has reported, the NSA is currently completing a massive $2 billion facility in Utah that will give the agency the capacity to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store incredible amounts of data gathered from the world over, grabbing communications as they beam down from satellites and race through underground and undersea cables domestically and overseas. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035386_NSA_data_center_spying. html)

That program, codenamed Stellar Wind, was described as patently unconstitutional by a former NSA official, William Binney, who left the agency in 2001, shortly after the NSA launched its warrantless wiretapping program.

"They violated the Constitution setting it up," he told Wired.com in an interview. "But they didn't care. They were going to do it anyway, and they were going to crucify anyone who stood in the way. When they started violating the Constitution, I couldn't stay."


So basically, this article says that SCOTUS says what is constitutional and what is not. And if you ignore their rulings you are one of the ignorant masses causing a slide towards a dictatorship.

Guess I'm not the only one. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

From the article:
When you hear some pundit or historian compare the loss of democratic republican rule currently taking place in the United States with how it happened in ancient Rome, you may be tempted to shrug it off as hyperbole or over dramatization.
When you hear a U.S. Supreme Court Justice and other top government officials use the comparison, it should alarm you tremendously because they are, in essence, firing a warning shot.
In a recent Q & A with students of the University of New Hampshire, former Justice David Souter made the comparison above, along with several other observations that he says all add up to a potential loss of democratic government - and freedom - for Americans at some point in the future.
When a former Supreme Court Justice is worried about our loss of democracy...
Souter made his comments during a lengthy response to a student's question: "My question tonight is really around where we started this conversation, which was really around the schools... And, I've heard a lot this evening about democratic principles, civic engagement, and I guess I'm wondering...if you could share with us your thoughts about what the appropriate role and, probably, responsibility as well of our schools to produce civically engaged students?"
Here are some excerpts of that response:
I don't believe there is any problem of American politics and American life, which is more significant today, than the pervasive civic ignorance of the Constitution of the United States and the structure of government. (This response earned Souter a round of applause)
We know, with pretty reliable evidence, that two-thirds of the people of the United States do not know that we have three separate branches of government. I remember...a survey back four or five years ago in which a substantial percentage of Americans believed that the Supreme Court ... was a committee of the Congress. It didn't used to be this bad.
Starting about 1970, the teaching of "Civics" went into decline from which it has never significantly recovered... The reason I said it is the most significant problem that we've got is that I think some of the aspects of current American government that people on both sides find frustrating are in part a function...of the inability of people to understand how government can and should function. It is a product of civic ignorance.
And what worries Souter the most about America's future?
I don't worry about our losing a republican government in the United States because I'm afraid of a foreign invasion. I don't worry about it because of a coup by the military, as has happened in some other places. What I worry about is that when problems are not addressed people will not know who is responsible, and when the problems get bad enough - as they might do for example with another serious terrorist attack, as they might do with another financial meltdown - some one person will come forward and say: "Give me total power and I will solve this problem."
That is how the Roman republic fell. Augustus became emperor not because he arrested the Roman senate. He became emperor because he promised that he would solve problems that were not being solved.
Wrong.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=ancienthistory&cd n=education&tm=471&gps=95_5_81 0_529&f=00&su=p284.13.342.ip_& tt=2&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.roman-emperors.org/auggie.htm
Introduction
Augustus is arguably the single most important figure in Roman history. In the course of his long and spectacular career, he put an end to the advancing decay of the Republic and established a new basis for Roman government that was to stand for three centuries. This system, termed the "Principate," was far from flawless, but it provided the Roman Empire with a series of rulers who presided over the longest period of unity, peace, and prosperity that Western Europe, the Middle East and the North African seaboard have known in their entire recorded history. Even if the rulers themselves on occasion left much to be desired, the scale of Augustus's achievement in establishing the system cannot be overstated. Aside from the immense importance of Augustus's reign from the broad historical perspective, he himself is an intriguing figure: at once tolerant and implacable, ruthless and forgiving, brazen and tactful. Clearly a man of many facets, he underwent three major political reinventions in his lifetime and negotiated the stormy and dangerous seas of the last phase of the Roman Revolution with skill and foresight. With Augustus established in power and with the Principate firmly rooted, the internal machinations of the imperial household provide a fascinating glimpse into the one issue that painted this otherwise gifted organizer and politician into a corner from which he could find no easy exit: the problem of the succession

Sound familiar?
Later in the article, Justice O'Connor takes on the right wing, and other charges are leveled. Interesting read.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039431_America_dictatorship_Su preme_Court.html#ixzz2NOBWofuY Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I didn't read anything by O'Connor about the right wing. Those words came from the writer and not O'Connor. Her quote was about people who would strong arm the judiciary. Remember like when Obama tried to shame the SCOTUS about their decision on election monies. That kind of strong arming.

I didn't read anything by O'Connor about the right wing. Those words came from the writer and not O'Connor. Her quote was about people who would strong arm the judiciary. Remember like when Obama tried to shame the SCOTUS about their decision on election monies. That kind of strong arming. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You only read what sog fed you. We all know you don't research.

Read the article below.

That kind of strong-arming? Now you equate disagreement (ie dissent) with threats of impeachment?

Allowing corporations to add as much money as they want to, to any candidate, is bullshit and it's mine or any other American's right to say so.

That's a little different than the Speaker of the House threatening the justices with impeachment for rendering a different decision than he wanted.

We put that asshole in jail down here.

How ironic that the law helped Obama more than Romney.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0313-03.htm

Former Top Judge Says US Risks Edging Near to Dictatorship
� Sandra Day O'Connor warns of rightwing attacks
� Lawyers 'must speak up' to protect judiciary



by Julian Borger

Sandra Day O'Connor, a Republican-appointed judge who retired last month after 24 years on the supreme court, has said the US is in danger of edging towards dictatorship if the party's rightwingers continue to attack the judiciary.
In a strongly worded speech at Georgetown University, reported by National Public Radio and the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Ms O'Connor took aim at Republican leaders whose repeated denunciations of the courts for alleged liberal bias could, she said, be contributing to a climate of violence against judges.

We must be ever-vigilant against those who would strong-arm the judiciary.


Sandra Day O'Connor
Ms O'Connor, nominated by Ronald Reagan as the first woman supreme court justice, declared: "We must be ever-vigilant against those who would strong-arm the judiciary."
She pointed to autocracies in the developing world and former Communist countries as lessons on where interference with the judiciary might lead. "It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings."
In her address to an audience of corporate lawyers on Thursday, Ms O'Connor singled out a warning to the judiciary issued last year by Tom DeLay, the former Republican leader in the House of Representatives, over a court ruling in a controversial "right to die" case.

America is veering towards dictatorship, Supreme court justices and top government officials warn Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Move over Jerry Fletcher, StupidOldLyingFart is coming to join you.

Just like his mentor, Jerry Fletcher, SOLF is a certifiable Looney Tunes!

Guess I'm not the only one. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Neither was Timothy McVeigh.

I'm tempted to shrug it off as hyperbole and overdramatization. Just like everything else you post.

What? Whirly disappears for a few days so you feel obligated to ratchet up the crazy?

Omg it's hilarious. If you just skip over the idiot liberals , these threads are awesome.

Then why don't you do us a favor and skip over them? Thereby sparing us your emptyheaded replies?

Omg it's hilarious. If you just skip over the idiot liberals , these threads are awesome. Originally Posted by LovingKayla

The voice of reason ... You never disappoint, HK!

Would you fuck a liberal if you knew it beforehand? Or would you just skip over him/her?

Hey, MunchOnMen, I guess you are happy about the Citizen's United and Kelo decisions. And Dred Scott, they got that one right, didn't they? And poor old Farmer Filburn got screwed because he deserved it. Separate but equal? Damn straight, according to MunchOnMen.

Fucking idiot.