Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Catfish who wrote (13389)	8/22/1999 11:46:00 AM
From: chalu2	Respond to of 13994

>>Why do you ALWAYS defend the liberal viewpoint in your posts?<< The EO under discussion could have been written by Richard Nixon concerning the surveillance activities of the MK Ultra project. My guess is that the ACLU would go ballistic over the governmental activities described. The liberal position is that government should not be watching Internet activities, as this violates unreasonable search and seizure proscriptions, free speech, etc. I think these ideas to watch what is going on on the internet are percolating up from law enforcement authorities, not the radical left. The most conservative judges agree that law enforcement officials should have every tool at their disposal to fight crime. The Internet is just a new medium pursuant to which some commit crimes. Why would you tie the hands of law enforcement? Is weakening law enforcement and making the Internet the only place police can't enforce the laws part of the conservative plank? I haven't heard that, and neither has Mr. Bauer. As for always taking the liberal viewpoint, I think you haven't been reading my posts on the abortion issue on the George W. Bush thread. I could point to many more posts on many other topics, but this should suffice for now. They're all within the last 24 hours.

To: Catfish who wrote (13389)	8/22/1999 6:16:00 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

By the way, Darrell, since you are so concerned about Presidential usurpations of power, what is your opinion about the biggest Presidential usurpation of them all--the power to make and declare War. That is clearly reserved in the Constitution only for Congress. The last President to ask Congress to declare War? Your pal Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941. Since then: --Three years of bloody war (called a "police action") in Korea. No Declaration of War sought by President Harry S Truman. --Eight or more terrible years of non-war (500,000 troops fighting at the "high" point) in Vietnam. No Declaration of War sought by President Lyndon Johnson or by President Richard Nixon, the two War Presidents. --War against Iraq deploys enormous men and armaments, and almost triggers a wider mideast War. No Declaration of War sought by President George Bush. --War against Serbia. No Declaration of War sought by President William Jefferson Clinton. So we have at least 4 undeclared police actions that really were wars, presided over by 3 Democrat and 2 Republican Presidents. But the Constitution says only Congress shall have the power to make and declare War. Does this bother you? Were Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Bush and Clinton wrong in conducting wars without Congressional approval? Isn't sending hundreds of thousands of men out possibly to die without a constitutionally-required Congressional declaration more scary to you than a bunch of FBI guys reading the Internet?