US Sen. Schumer writes letter to Apple CEO over iPhone 4 antenna

14567810»

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 197
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    What does any of what Schumer said have to do with the Constitution?



    Be careful what you ask.



    Like any good politician, I'm sure he'll find something that can be twisted around enough to give the justification and power for meddling with Apple.
  • Reply 182 of 197
    bushman4bushman4 Posts: 805member
    Schumer must be looking for votes or a free Iphone. LOL
  • Reply 183 of 197
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by benice View Post


    What's wrong with the Senator doing his job? Politicians are there to represent us on a very wide range of fronts that are of concern to the community. Though it's pretty unprecedented for a politician to give a crap about a single phone, I think it shows that Schumer has his finger on the pulse of what's annoying constituents. He ought be commended for gently encouraging Apple to make its phone deliver everything that users expected.



    His job is to uphold the Constitution, not to send open letters to companies (most likely for political benefit). If politicians gave a damn about what their constituents wanted, they'd all stop running for office.
  • Reply 184 of 197
    finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Wrong, wrong, wrong. Politicians insert themselves into all affairs whether they are needed or not, and it is clearly not needed here. In case anyone is fuzzy about what the sworn duty of a Senator is...



    The Constitution requires that senators take an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution.



    Congress has prescribed the following oath for new senators:

    ?\tI, (A? B?), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.





    What does any of what Schumer said have to do with the Constitution?



    While the oath is that the Senators will support and defend or uphold the Constitution, the affirmation has nothing to do with the powers that the Senate has. The powers of the Legislative Branch are enumerated in Article I of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, the 2nd Clause "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" allows Congress to regulate Commerce.



    For a fuller dissertation on the Commerce Clause see



    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitutio...nstitution.pdf



    and the 2008 supplement



    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/011.pdf



  • Reply 185 of 197
    finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Incorrect. Their job is to support and defend the Constitution. All else is proof of corruption of the office.



    Missed this--see comments re: Constitutional Lesson
  • Reply 186 of 197
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,319member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    While the oath is that the Senators will support and defend or uphold the Constitution, the affirmation has nothing to do with the powers that the Senate has. The powers of the Legislative Branch are enumerated in Article I of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, the 2nd Clause "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" allows Congress to regulate Commerce.



    For a fuller dissertation on the Commerce Clause see



    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitutio...nstitution.pdf



    and the 2008 supplement



    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/011.pdf







    Of course, you are correct. I was making a point about government straying from their original purpose and inserting their noses into every aspect of our lives.



    And when's the last time you saw them obey this:



    No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.



  • Reply 187 of 197
    benicebenice Posts: 382member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Of course, you are correct. I was making a point about government straying from their original purpose and inserting their noses into every aspect of our lives.



    And when's the last time you saw them obey this:



    No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.







    Government couldn't even document how broad it considers its purpose these days. I'd imagine if the Constitution was rewritten in 2010 it would be considerably longer, far more extensive and ensure that Congress had something of an "access all areas" obligation to manage people's lives.
  • Reply 188 of 197
    ktronixktronix Posts: 12member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post


    Likely, you're one of those who criticizes Congress for not doing their jobs. Well, one of their jobs is to represent the people and work in their interest, so that's what Mr. Schumer is doing here. And then you criticize him for doing it. How about you STFU?



    An open letter is the wrong way to go about it. As a matter of proper decorum, this should could have been handled with a call to Apple by the Senator's office so that a few facts could be injected into the story. He writes a letter addressed to one individual, but does it publicly. It's pure grandstanding where none is likely needed.
  • Reply 189 of 197
    STFU STFU STFU STFU



    Go make your own goddamned phone and then show us all how it's done, you sleazeball loser.



    You and your idiot friends in Washington have us $1 trillion more in debt this year than last year, and $1.2 trillion more last year than the year before, and you want Apple to do its work "free-of-charge"



    You are such a slimeball moron.
  • Reply 190 of 197
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    While the oath is that the Senators will support and defend or uphold the Constitution, the affirmation has nothing to do with the powers that the Senate has. The powers of the Legislative Branch are enumerated in Article I of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, the 2nd Clause "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" allows Congress to regulate Commerce.




    "regulate Commerce" does not mean what you think it does.



    If it meant "the power to enforce any law against anyone who buys or sells anything" then we do not live in a limited-government Republic, which another part of the Constitution "guarantees" us. If it means that, there is no need to have a Constitution in the first place. Logic tells you that.



    In 1789, regulate Commerce means to make sure that the rules of commerce are made equal and that no tariffs, trade barriers, etc., get unfairly raised by States against other States.
  • Reply 191 of 197
    Hey Chuck my Sears Leaf Blower wont start, my Bic pen doesn't always write and my sons Hasbro Transformer popps it pieces off when he tries to transform it.
  • Reply 192 of 197
    Yes. LOL.
  • Reply 193 of 197
    john galtjohn galt Posts: 959member
    Obama should just issue an Executive Order resolving to kick Apple's ass. Problem solved.
  • Reply 194 of 197
    john galtjohn galt Posts: 959member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by universeman View Post


    In 1789, regulate Commerce means to make sure that the rules of commerce are made equal and that no tariffs, trade barriers, etc., get unfairly raised by States against other States.



    Yes. It was the original North American Free Trade Zone.



    Since its inception Commerce Clause had been abused mercilessly, I believe Wickard v. Filburn was the first case that upheld a violation not on an activity's effect upon interstate commerce, but an act that "could have - perhaps - maybe" affected interstate commerce - but didn't. It elicits comparisons to a "thought crime".



    Wasn't until 1995 that US v. Lopez finally pushed the limits beyond the Supreme Court's comfort. I believe a concurring opinion stated words to the effect "if the Federal government can apply Commerce Clause to this case, there are no limits on its regulatory authority."



    Interesting read - look it up.
  • Reply 195 of 197
    -hh-hh Posts: 31member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stompy View Post


    Got a laugh from me, thanks.



    ...



    (BTW, I assume you'll post to this thread? If not, I suppose I can search for your recent posts.)





    Well, I did choose to suffer the indignity of Yet Another Schumer Sunday Schpiel. Guess he was disappointed with how Jobs shut him down, so he turned his attention to ... BP's oil spill.



    In the meantime, his political fundraising brought in another $2M this spring, raising his War Chest to $23.8 million on hand. Heaven forbid that anyone dare even suggest that Schumer simply protect his NY Constituents by paying for iPhone bumpers out of his own pocket. :-)





    -hh
  • Reply 196 of 197
    sennensennen Posts: 1,465member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by john galt View Post


    Obama should just issue an Executive Order resolving to kick Apple's ass. Problem solved.



    haters are worried their own favorite toys can't eclipse apple's, hence calling for outside intervention?
  • Reply 197 of 197
    stompystompy Posts: 336member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by -hh View Post


    Well, I did choose to suffer the indignity of Yet Another Schumer Sunday Schpiel. Guess he was disappointed with how Jobs shut him down, so he turned his attention to ... BP's oil spill.



    In the meantime, his political fundraising brought in another $2M this spring, raising his War Chest to $23.8 million on hand. Heaven forbid that anyone dare even suggest that Schumer simply protect his NY Constituents by paying for iPhone bumpers out of his own pocket. :-)





    -hh



    I appreciate your sacrifice and thanks for posting back -hh, even if it was a bust. Hmm, if anything like your last comment happened, now that would be news!
Sign In or Register to comment.