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.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (3493)	12/24/2002 6:04:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

The interstate highway system is not clearly unconstitutional. It has a lot of interstate commerce relevance (as much as that idea is stretched it doesn't make every aplication a stretch) and when it was conceived it was seen as militarily useful as well. Besides if it was unconstitutional the constitution would not demand that it be ripped up, but I suppose the maintenance would have to go to the states. It can be argued that a federal pension and revenue sharing are and were bad things. However even a court determined to make them unconstitional (if such a thing ever happened) would it seems have to allow for some phase out period. There is nothing that allows the feds intercept and monitor this message when I hit submit. It does it anyway. There is nothing that says the federal government can't monitor public statements. There is no assumption of privacy on public posts just like there would be no assumption of privacy if you went to the street corner and started shouting your opinion. You might have a better argument with e-mail but that argument would only suggest that the government is perhaps violating the constitution, not that it should. It grants habeas corpus. What's going on in Gitmo? Non US citizens that are not on US territory. Tim