History, History, History, History

[LegalEagle 22]

My wife picked up a DVD from Wal-Mart that contains the WWII "war films" put out by our defense department.

In the first part, "Prelude to War," it showed how the Axis leaders used politics and patriotism to remove power from the legislative and judicial branches of government and secure it in the executive branch. It showed how the executive branch then purged those who resisted them thereby further gaining absolute control of the government.

I don't have time to go into great detail here, but that was our defense department talking about how dangerous it is to allow the executive department to usurp the powers of the other branches of government and shows how such a feat may be accomplished by the use of a call to partiotism.

My gut told me we are heading in the wrong direction in this country. Bring on the November elections - then the true patriots will have an opportunity to save our country.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

You used the term "true patriots". Are you referring to the same people that have been cheering for America's defeat? You know, the ones that are currently making the power grabs within the donkey party.

Politicans is politicans, but I would never go as far as to call these liberal hijackers of the democrat party patriots. They have done more to undercut the military on the battlefield than any other force I can come up with.

[80Tiger 899]

Exactly what powers have the legislative and judicial branches lost recently. I don't think the recent ruling by the judge in Detroit over the phone issues will stand. So I am not sure where people think there has been a shift in power between the branches. In fact the judicial branch became more active beginning in the 1960's

and I believe it is acting in a manner that the framers did not intend. In comparison to early presidents , I think the executive branch (not the man but the office)is now weaker comapared to Lincoln, FDR, TR, Truman and JFK.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Can I be truthful here for just asecond? If the Clinton White House had declared the wiretap rules the Bush White House now claims, I would have ZERO doubt that they would be abusing the power. I think Filegate proved that. I feel assured that the Clinton White House would abuse any power ever given them in this situation. I mean ANY power would have been abused. Look at them in Travelgate. Look at them with the total molestation of Election Laws in 1996. No way could I ever support a Dem president with these powers. So, even If I think bush is doing okay with the powers, I could NEVER trust a Dem in power with them. They are too much to ever allow a Dem President to have.

Anyone else remember all the religious organization in the country getting audited by the Clinton IRS? Some people just cannot be trusted with any real power.

[LegalEagle 22]

Sadly, you who replied, a.k.a. elephant plants, have the right to vote. Even more sadly, you likely do vote. I'm over the hill, and the change is gradual. Enjoy your future under the control of big government.

I even heard Bill O on the radio today exposing the Republicans (and Democrate) and calling for a strong 3rd party to guide this nation.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Sadly, you who replied, a.k.a. elephant plants, have the right to vote. Even more sadly, you likely do vote. I'm over the hill, and the change is gradual. Enjoy your future under the control of big government.

I even heard Bill O on the radio today exposing the Republicans (and Democrate) and calling for a strong 3rd party to guide this nation.

I have been calling for a Third Party for quite some time now. If Republicans want to spend money like Dems. Then they look like Dems to me.

Give me the Third Party

[rexbo 104]

You are missing the wrong story of history. There is nothing, absolutely nothing happening in the US today that even comes close to what the Axis powers were doing in the 1930's; but what is happening is that the world is ignoring a rising global threat (and this time nuclear), led by the passive European nations and a so-called world peace organization (United Nations).

It is just as easy for you to sit back and say "Oh, look, they are overblowing the threat to take away our rights", as it is for someone to say, "Oh look, you have to be patriotic or our country will be defeated". Step back and look closely at the facts from 1930's history and today's situation, then make your history comparison. If you cannot see that the fascist threat is coming from the Islamic world, and not Washington DC, then you need to go back to high school.

[LegalEagle 22]

You are missing the wrong story of history. There is nothing, absolutely nothing happening in the US today that even comes close to what the Axis powers were doing in the 1930's; but what is happening is that the world is ignoring a rising global threat (and this time nuclear), led by the passive European nations and a so-called world peace organization (United Nations).

It is just as easy for you to sit back and say "Oh, look, they are overblowing the threat to take away our rights", as it is for someone to say, "Oh look, you have to be patriotic or our country will be defeated". Step back and look closely at the facts from 1930's history and today's situation, then make your history comparison. If you cannot see that the fascist threat is coming from the Islamic world, and not Washington DC, then you need to go back to high school.

Thanks for sending me to school. Are you a BushMan? Who has been in control of the legislative and executive (and judicial for that matter) for the past 6.5 years? Why do they sit around and let N. Korea and Iran develop nukes on their watch? The little pipsqeak b*****d in Iran is making fools out of Bush, the USA and the UN. What is your great leader and great party doing about it? Bush won't even mention the "Axis of Evil" anymore. He doesn't say "Bring it On" or "Mission Accomplished." What's wrong with him? He ran for office saying we are not in the business of nation building, now with his great blunder, we are - to the tune of $420 Billion U. S. taxpayer dollars. Would the US be better off today with Saddam in power in Iraq? Absolutely. He'd be at war with Iran and destroying their nuclear development program. I think 66 Iraqis were killed yesterday. What was the per day average with Saddam? Are the Iraqis better off?

The real problem is that the current leadership sees the Constitution upon which this country is founded to be an impediment to their "rule." It was written so that we would not have one "ruler" and also so that equal powers in three separate government branches would provide "checks and balances" over one another to ensure that one branch does not become the ruling branch. During this administration, FISA (which is a great compromise to the executive branch to start with) has been circumvented. The President is making announcements when he signs legislation as to how the executive branch will interpret it and work to the interpretation, not the plain wording of the law. Already the Republican packed Supreme Court has ruled that the government may listen in on cordless telephone calls and when you put your trash out on the curb, the government has every right to pick it up and rummage through it for any purpose it desires. Helicopters and sattelites are overhead and the government may spy on your backyard activities without recourse to you. I can go on and on about search and seizure rights you have lost. And yes, they could search me and my house and my property and find nothing illegal, but I don't want them to nor do I want the government to have the right to do such.

We only know of the abuses of power that newspaper reporters or others uncover. Do you have any imagination as to what other programs they are involved in that we know nothing about?

I keep a photo on my desk that I took outside the Supreme Court Building in DC. In stone is etched, "Eternal Vigilance is The Price of Liberty." That is meant more for us to be vigilant over our government than to be vigilant of outside forces. If we aren't vocal about enforcing limitations on government, we will be under the near absolute control of the government.

Believe it or not, I used to be a "Conservative Dumb Ass" who blindly followed hate, exclusion, abuse of power and the other vices of power that the Republican Party hold on dearly to today. But, I did go to high school, then to college, then to post-graduate studies and later to law school. Until I studied constitutional law, I have to admit, I was dangerous to freedom and liberty - the two most precious guarantees to American citizens. Now, I have seen the light. I no longer live in darkness, but I do fear for my children and their children - living under an abusive and omnipotent government. Therefore I will speak out until my death. I owe that to my Country and my Fellow Citizens. The fact that it falls upon deaf ears like pearls before swine does not deter me. I will be named by those in power who seek absolute control as a "Libbie," an "Anti-American" and such other fowl name as they can muster. However, those who seek to limit my speech, those who seek to limit my freedom, those who seek to limit my liberty are the True Enemies of the USA. By seeking obtaining additional power which it did not have, the government has by definition placed further limitations over my speech, freedom and liberty. The biggest threat to our way of life is not from outside forces, but instead from within.

Once another piece of power is obtained, it is easier to obtain another and another, until all power is in the corrupt government, largely made up of corrupt politicians and appointed officials. These people gained office by taking money from the rich and powerful and by duping the average citizen into voting for them. Do you really think they are there representing you as opposed to their rich and powerfull friends and benefactors? Keep eternal vigilance and stand in the way of additional governmental power and pay the price of liberty so that your kids and grandkids will at least have the opportunity to straighten this government out and return it to a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

[rexbo 104]

The real problem is that the current leadership sees the Constitution upon which this country is founded to be an impediment to their "rule."

This is where I stopped reading, if you really believe this, you should be in your Congressman's office everyday calling for impeachment, and start thinking about exercising your 2nd Amendment Rights...

[AUloggerhead 2,229]

My wife picked up a DVD from Wal-Mart that contains the WWII "war films" put out by our defense department.

In the first part, "Prelude to War," it showed how the Axis leaders used politics and patriotism to remove power from the legislative and judicial branches of government and secure it in the executive branch. It showed how the executive branch then purged those who resisted them thereby further gaining absolute control of the government.

I don't have time to go into great detail here, but that was our defense department talking about how dangerous it is to allow the executive department to usurp the powers of the other branches of government and shows how such a feat may be accomplished by the use of a call to partiotism.

My gut told me we are heading in the wrong direction in this country. Bring on the November elections - then the true patriots will have an opportunity to save our country.

Oh, please. Another weak, tortured comparison of Nazi Germany/Fascist Italy/Militarist Japan to today’s US administration. Not only is it a lame argument, it’s totally misguided. Consider this: whenever you use Hitler/Nazis/Axis Powers comparisons to current US government/administration policies, you cheapen your argument through such hyperbole -- you grossly exaggerate whatever transgressions today’s government is supposedly doing and at the same time, you thoughtlessly diminish the very real evil that was the Nazis/Fascists/Militarists through such comparisons. Please stop it. You’ve got a trained legal mind. Use it to frame your argument without the baggage of such inflammatory rhetoric. I acknowledge there are some problems with the Patriot Act with respect to individual rights. I also acknowledge the Constitution was penned in the 18th century whose framers couldn’t possibly fathom the concept of suicide Islamic terrorists nor modern technology as we know today. Do we do nothing and allow terrorists to freely communicate abroad or move about the country insulated from government monitoring by our own Bill of Rights? Is it a good idea to extend 1st Amendment protections to a “religious” group that advocates random mass murder against our citizens? Something has to give. I’d be more than happy to read your legal recommendations on these issues in this forum (i.e. light a candle rather than curse the darkness & stuff.)

[Tigermike 3,025]

I can go on and on about search and seizure rights you have lost.

Please DO. And don't forget to provide documentation links and specific instances, I am interested.

[LegalEagle 22]

I can go on and on about search and seizure rights you have lost.

Please DO. And don't forget to provide documentation links and specific instances, I am interested.

Just buy a book on search and seizure. It'll all be there. I don't have the time to do a bunch of research for those who truly don't want to hear it. I mentioned two above - garbage and wireless telephones. Hence, I do not own a wireless telephone.

Go get it. It's time you got off of pablum anyway.

[Tigermike 3,025]

I can go on and on about search and seizure rights you have lost.

Please DO. And don't forget to provide documentation links and specific instances, I am interested.

Just buy a book on search and seizure. It'll all be there. I don't have the time to do a bunch of research for those who truly don't want to hear it. I mentioned two above - garbage and wireless telephones. Hence, I do not own a wireless telephone.

Go get it. It's time you got off of pablum anyway.

Bull$hit buy a book. You made the rant and I asked for clarification, now you say buy a book. That's sweet. In other words you can't provide a certifiable instance where someone has actually lost any rights can you? If I didn't want to hear it I would not have asked! If you cannot back up what you are ranting about, then it is just typical ranting from the left.

As far as the garbage. When garbage is placed out on the street for pick up it no longer is private. Hasn't the Supreme Court said something along those lines in the past? And I don't think it was a Republican appointed court either was it? They do it on Law and Order every other week.

[DKW 86 7,419]

"When debating, the first one to 'Nazi,' is the LOSER."

[rexbo 104]

I can go on and on about search and seizure rights you have lost.

Please DO. And don't forget to provide documentation links and specific instances, I am interested.

Just buy a book on search and seizure. It'll all be there. I don't have the time to do a bunch of research for those who truly don't want to hear it. I mentioned two above - garbage and wireless telephones. Hence, I do not own a wireless telephone.

And did you know that if you wrapped your head in tinfoil that it will keep the NSA from reading your mind with the new secret satelites they are launching?

[quietfan 233]

Can I be truthful here for just asecond? If the Clinton White House had declared the wiretap rules the Bush White House now claims, I would have ZERO doubt that they would be abusing the power. I think Filegate proved that. I feel assured that the Clinton White House would abuse any power ever given them in this situation. I mean ANY power would have been abused. Look at them in Travelgate. Look at them with the total molestation of Election Laws in 1996. No way could I ever support a Dem president with these powers. So, even If I think bush is doing okay with the powers, I could NEVER trust a Dem in power with them. They are too much to ever allow a Dem President to have.

Anyone else remember all the religious organization in the country getting audited by the Clinton IRS? Some people just cannot be trusted with any real power.

That's the point I think: It's a lot easier to let the Executive acquire power than to remove that power later. Any power that you would be afraid to put in Clinton's hands should not be given to Bush either, because eventually there will be another election and another person in the White House who could abuse that power in ways even more extreme ways. And that's true for both parties... Democrats should be careful of what powers they wish for their man/woman in the White House, because one day someone they don't like or trust will be wielding the same powers.

Historically, the old saying "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" has been pretty accurate.