not really. it says deprived of life without due process of law.

TomatoPie wrote:Thinking ahead to brighter days ...

After the impeachment, who will Pence bring in as VEEP?

Will he toss a conciliatory bone and bring in Mittens or Condi? He certainly wants someone who wouldn't be competition in 2020.

Obama. It shortens up the blame game.

pacino wrote:Chairman of the House Oversight Committe is on the case:

Ultimately, Chaffetz said, chatter about potential conflicts of interest for Trump is mostly bluster from Democrats mired in the minority in both houses of Congress.

“I know the Democrats are flailing about this issue and they want to stir the pot. It's about the only thing they have to do at this point,” he said. “I think the president is required to do his financial disclosure. By all accounts he has done that. The president is exempt from most of all of the conflict of interest laws.”

instead, he's going to continue to investigate Hillary Clinton. Seriously.

he also wants to rule over DC proper because he can

i hate this motherfucker the most i think.

jerseyhoya wrote:

The Savior wrote:The fact that the SC has become so political in structure over past decade or so is sad. Never intended to be that way. Thx dems and repubs.

Over the past decade or so

Wouldn't you say it all started with Bush v Gore?

President Mr Trump at this listening session (where he mostly talks) for Black History Month is infuriating. Wonder if he regaled them about the times him and his pops continually denied housing to African-Americans in NYC and were slapped down by the feds as a result? Then they kept ignoring the feds. Or the Central Park 5, who he insists are still guilty of a crime they did not commit?

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Werthless wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:The death penalty is in the constitution

No it's not.

Its existence is expressly acknowledged in the 5th amendment.

here's the 5th amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Your "acknowledgement" requires some heavy, non-textual interpretation, Ivan. "Deprived of life" needn't mean "put to death".

We're watching you

Acknowledging that I might be missing some context to this discussion, doc, IMO you're the one using an extremely tortured reading of the 5th Amendment. I'm not aware of any serious scholars who opine anything other than "liberty" referring to imprisonment and "life" referring to the death penalty. In fact, I'm pretty sure there's a Federalist Paper that mentions the death penalty, although I'm decades removed from reading those (recent events moved them back on my reading list though). I do know for certain that Jefferson wrote in support of the death penalty.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:doc, IMO you're the one using an extremely tortured reading of the 5th Amendment. I'm not aware of any serious scholars who opine anything other than "liberty" referring to imprisonment and "life" referring to the death penalty.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm merely pointing out that if the words in the document are the only sacred point from which to determine their authors' intent, nowhere in that amendment does the word "death" appear.

But maybe my reading comprehension's failing me. Can you highlight where the word "death" DOES appear in the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States?

jerseyhoya wrote:

The Savior wrote:imagine how much better jerseyhoya's day-to-day life will be when the LBGTQ community loses its rights?

I've supported gay marriage for a decade longer than the most recent Democratic nominee for president. There is a lot more on the Supreme Court's job description than that, however. (and Gorsuch replacing a vote against Obergfell is pretty unlikely to overturn it since 4 is less than 5, even if the 3 remaining dissenters were eager to, which I doubt)

you support people who do not inherently believe in equality and human rights for all.

it's sad we live in a country where this is even debated anymore. people are people.

The Savior wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

The Savior wrote:imagine how much better jerseyhoya's day-to-day life will be when the LBGTQ community loses its rights?

I've supported gay marriage for a decade longer than the most recent Democratic nominee for president. There is a lot more on the Supreme Court's job description than that, however. (and Gorsuch replacing a vote against Obergfell is pretty unlikely to overturn it since 4 is less than 5, even if the 3 remaining dissenters were eager to, which I doubt)

you support people who do not inherently believe in equality and human rights for all.

it's sad we live in a country where this is even debated anymore. people are people.

it's good to see more and more people recognize the GOP for what it is

So Trump's speech at the Black History month is just wow. I just read the transcript. Thats or President folks. Fuck.

drsmooth wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:doc, IMO you're the one using an extremely tortured reading of the 5th Amendment. I'm not aware of any serious scholars who opine anything other than "liberty" referring to imprisonment and "life" referring to the death penalty.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm merely pointing out that if the words in the document are the only sacred point from which to determine their authors' intent, nowhere in that amendment does the word "death" appear.

But maybe my reading comprehension's failing me. Can you highlight where the word "death" DOES appear in the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States?

Doc, come on. You're better than this. What do you think "deprived of life" means if it's not referring to death?

Also, the term "capital," as it is used in the 5th Amendment to describe a particular class of crimes, refers to crimes which may carry the death penalty. That is both the modern meaning and the historical meaning of the term. If you don't believe me, this site appears to incorporate Black's Law Dictionary, which is the gold standard, in its public definitions (I would verify, but my copy of Black's disappeared a while back and I never replaced it).

slugsrbad wrote:So Trump's speech at the Black History month is just wow. I just read the transcript. Thats or President folks. #$!&@.

he didn't even show what his guys have been finding in Hawaii.

"Ol' Frederick. Freddie, where are you? Is he here? Freddie, stand up and take a bow if you're here!"

there's my african americans

they're going to run that bust thing into the ground for the next 40 years. it was an errant report that was fixed almost immediately afterwards and the reporter even directly apologized.

jerseyhoya wrote:

Werthless wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:The death penalty is in the constitution

No it's not.

Its existence is expressly acknowledged in the 5th amendment.

I agree that the Supreme Court has upheld its general Constitutionality. With the rise in DNA evidence exonerating people on death row, we're in a position that the founders did not anticipate; they certainly did not advocate innocent people being executed for the greater good, and made specific statements to the contrary ("It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer" Link). They also did not have reliable alternatives such as lifetime incarceration that we have today, as the first penitentiary was built after the Constitution was signed. I see grounds for a challenge, perhaps using the 14th amendment, in our lifetime.

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.res ... eID=001715

Given my cursory understanding of the scholarship about the death penalty, that it is an ineffective deterrent and more costly to pursue, I'm surprised more conservatives are not amenable to a suspension of it. It's a form of government waste!

was this posted?

Detroit family caught in Iraq travel ban, says mom died waiting to come home

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:doc, IMO you're the one using an extremely tortured reading of the 5th Amendment. I'm not aware of any serious scholars who opine anything other than "liberty" referring to imprisonment and "life" referring to the death penalty.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm merely pointing out that if the words in the document are the only sacred point from which to determine their authors' intent, nowhere in that amendment does the word "death" appear.

But maybe my reading comprehension's failing me. Can you highlight where the word "death" DOES appear in the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States?

Doc, come on. You're better than this. What do you think "deprived of life" means if it's not referring to death?

Also, the term "capital," as it is used in the 5th Amendment to describe a particular class of crimes, refers to crimes which may carry the death penalty. That is both the modern meaning and the historical meaning of the term. If you don't believe me, this site appears to incorporate Black's Law Dictionary, which is the gold standard, in its public definitions (I would verify, but my copy of Black's disappeared a while back and I never replaced it).

They definitely should have been more specific, like burning at the stake

drsmooth wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:doc, IMO you're the one using an extremely tortured reading of the 5th Amendment. I'm not aware of any serious scholars who opine anything other than "liberty" referring to imprisonment and "life" referring to the death penalty.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm merely pointing out that if the words in the document are the only sacred point from which to determine their authors' intent, nowhere in that amendment does the word "death" appear.

But maybe my reading comprehension's failing me. Can you highlight where the word "death" DOES appear in the 5th amendment of the constitution of the United States?

Haha. If someone said a person was recently "deprived of life," I wouldn't think they were in jail.

thephan wrote:I was looking at a map of the Reading Line and thought that nothing is ever going to make Catawissa, Muncy, or Jersey Shore (the one in the middle of the Pennsylvania mountains) relevant again, much less great. How could it? All those towns built on Rails, Iron, and Coal as part of the Reading's flawed strategy seem to be firmly waiting for a comeback to the time of my Great Grandparents? That would be a lot of you Great-Great Grandparents. What will it take for Eagles Mere to realize its been had?

Reading Railroad System Map

As I've posted here in the past, I lived in parts of Central & Northeast PA for most of 2015. You are spot on.

While onshoring manufacturing wlll lead to some job creation, automation will also be a large part of those new/upgraded facilities. So even if ABC Steel Co. brings a plant (back) to Anytown, USA, the jobs the previous generations held at ABC Steel have probably since been automated in some way.

On one hand, I do empathize with the people in these areas. Though they are sometimes painted as racist, xenophobic hillbillies, they are fiercely loyal and incredibly welcoming (granted, I'm a white male) in other aspects. They want the best for their families and friends like we all do.

On the other hand, though, there is an enormous skills gap in the U.S. from a technology perspective. We are importing 3/4 of our graduate students in areas like computer science and electrical engineering, and I'm sure there are plenty of other examples. These "new" manufacturing jobs will be technology-based, and the best hope for a future of prosperity is to pursue that rather than trying to turn the clock back.

Also, for areas I know to be very genuine and no BS, the fact that they so fervently back Trump is mind-boggling. Tells you just how forgotten those areas feel, I think (re: my previous comments here about understanding their anxiety). It kind of reminds me of the Rain King episode of X-Files, if anyone remembers that.

Sorry to ramble, but this is a topic I am extremely interested in and have some feels about, it seems.