America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Something to think about . . . Not flaming anyone, but . . . Something to Think About . . .

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

Vctor, I'm sorry to hear that you believed that at one time, you were almost sounding reasonable.

Rick can't back anything up Draathar. It's all because he says so or because "everybody that's not stupid knows". It all he has since there is no back up for 90% of what he says.

Rug, I would argue that I'm a very reasonable person. I simply have looked at the actions our president has taken and the types of words he uses. I do see a great deal of similarity between him and the leaders of facist gov'ts in history.

Now, I am willing to give him a bit of the benefit of the doubt. In any situation where you have armed conflict, these sorts of statements become more prevalent. However, he created much of the armed conflict (which makes me concerned). I also believe that americans are for the most part easily frightened. a second terrorist attack would put us back into post 9/11 attitude of standing behind the president. This would give him the power to act in a manner even more outside of the constitution.

I just don't trust the man.

Victor, what actions and words?

"I just don't trust the man" is how I felt about Wellstone. It's hardly a basis to say he prone to pulling a fascist coupe.

Donut,
trust is an interesting question. I trust most other politicians (on either side) to respect the constitution and try to gain power within those rules.
I don't trust them to tell the truth, not sleep w/prostitutes, not take/give bribes etc... but most of them don't give off the "empire building" vibe.

Rug,
I would disagree. I'm personally very sensitive to overly dramatic "patriotic statements". I personally find the demagoguery involved disturbing. And while I've only been old enough to pay attention to a few different presidential terms (the bushes, clinton a little reagan) I don't recall any time in my life when this sort of thing has been so prevalent. In both Clinton's and Bush Sr's terms we were fighting conflicts abroad, and I don't recall nearly as much "bringing freedom" "blah blah democracy abroad" and "defend our nation" crap. I have given him a bit of a benefit of the doubt, simply because the situation is different. But it seems too much to me.

As far as actions, I misspoke earlier, I referred to them as memos. What I was trying to refer to was the "presidential signing statements". Current statistics are 750 signing statements for Bush, 140 for Clinton, 232 for Bush Sr. Don't you think it is unusual for a president who has control of the congress to write this many signing statements?

These statements allow him to "selectively interpret" the law as written by congress. It is congresses job to write the law, and in my opinion this is a dangerous step to take. Coincidentially (and I did get this from a liberal site) it turns out Alito seems to have been one of the first people to really have identified the presidential signing statement as a manner to expand presidential power. Now, I don't think that is too significant, but others do.

Bush has done a lot towards concentrating power in the presidential position. This power isn't going to go away even after bush leaves the seat. So, like it or not, we may find ourselves in a real bad position later in history.

Hey Rug,
I do agree that no other president has faced the same sort of situation as W. I'll even agree that the situation Bush faced in 2001 with the first major terrorist attack on US soil was extraordinarily challenging. I really don't think he was the right person (for us) to have in charge at that time. When something like this happens, the public reacts with fear, this fear gives the leader enormous power. When you are afraid of something (truly afraid) you are willing to give up more than you should simply to have the feeling of security. Bush (in my mind) has taken advantage of this by using the fear from 9/11 to consolidate the power in the executive branch.

I'll agree that he's taking a lot of heat from the press, but don't you think this may be for a good reason? Hell, he's the only president I've really disliked too!

I don't think the courts have tried grabbing power (don't know how they could) but I'm open to any info.

The legilative branch may be requesting more oversight, but remember, the legislative branch is closer to the people. Their demand for oversight could be because the people are demanding it. Also, you must remember if Bush is trying to get away with something, their only action would be to try to keep an eye on his actions.

Regarding Clinton... I never said he was a saint. But his sins pale in comparison, simply because they are on a different scale. Manipulating what positions you can and attacking ones enemies is par for the course from politicians. They are dirty and corrupt, that's how they got where they are. The difference is that Bush and his group are actually changing the scope of the position and setting precedents which a smarter, more popular politician may exploit in the future. I read somewhere (a law website, but I am assuming left leaning) an idea which struck a chord with me, "the expansion of power never rolls backward". This basically suggests that Bush is changing the role of the president irreversibly.

The expansion of the role of the president ties directly into his use of signing statements, you should look into them. They also are the reason he has never vetoed a bill. In essence, he signs whatever congress sends him (even if he disagrees) and then writes a signing statement later (after the press have left) detailing what areas of the bill he will ignore. I'm sure it isn't nearly as bad as its made out to be (of course, even I'll agree that "mild news" doesn't sell) but it is still worrisome.

Have a good night.

^ hahaha good use of the search function!

Ladies and gentlemen, if you look out the left side of the boat you will see the cousin of the hippopotamus amphibius, greek for "river horse," known as hypocritamus posterior, greek for "horse's ass."