|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > The Real World > World Events > King George | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
darkbow
Rabbit lord
      
Date Joined Oct 2005
Total Posts : 1760
| Posted 5/24/2007 11:30 PM (GMT -5) |   | | | |
|
MichaelEhart
Sage
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 2352
| Posted 5/25/2007 2:15 AM (GMT -5) | | Barb, George and his folks have been working toward a new understanding of the "unitary executive" which is remarkably similar to John Adams idea of the president as king. Gonzales and Yoo have set into motion a great number of ideas that were first hatched in the Nixon whitehouse ( no surprise, many of the same characters have popped up) that essentially promote the idea that the president answeres to no-one. I am unsure at this point if this crew will turn over the reins to someone else on January 20, 2009.
darkbow, at this point is isn't a question of doing better, for now at least the Democrats are believers in checks and balances. And I am not certain if anyone could, even on purpose, do worse than this crew of Mayberry Machiavellis. Pretty much everything Bush's team has touched has turned to crap.
"The Scarlet Colored Beast" The Sword Review, September 2007
"Nothing But Our Tears" The Sword Review. August 2007
"Weaving Spiders Come Not Here" The Sword Review, July 2007
"The View From the Shotglass Floor" Ray Gun Revival, coming soon!
"Six Zombies Doing That Mick Jagger Strut" Damned in Dixie, March 2007
"The Death of Number 23" Dark Krypt, Fall 2006
"Servant of the Manthycore" Sword Review, April 2006
"Voice of the Spoiler" Better Fiction, Spring 2006
"Dancing with the Elder Gods"-- Thirteen Magazine, October 2005
"It's a Living" Byzarium---November 2005
"An Exorcism Straight, Hold the Elvis" The Sword Review, October 2005
Host, 2005 Nebula Awards Live Chat, sff.net
http://mehart.blogspot.com/ | | Back to Top | | |
|
darkbow
Rabbit lord
Date Joined Oct 2005
Total Posts : 1760
| Posted 5/25/2007 9:35 AM (GMT -5) | | | | |
|
Jeff Stehman
Sage
Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 1224
| Posted 5/25/2007 10:56 AM (GMT -5) | | BarbT said...
Okay, I'm a Republican. I've decided that George W. is not.
We pseudolibertarians have been trying to explain that to you for years. 
Didn't Clinton sign a similar EO, or am I mixing up my conspiracy theories? My google-fu is weak today, but I did find this interesting quote:
"The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call reserve forces amounting to two and a half million men to duty, institute martial law, seize and control all means of transportation, regulate all private enterprise, restrict travel and in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of Americans . . .
"Most [of these laws] remain a potential source of virtually unlimited power for a President should he choose to activate them. It is possible that some future President could exercise this vast authority in an attempt to place the United States under authoritarian rule.
"While the danger of a dictatorship through legal means may seem remote to us today, recent history records Hitler seizing control through the use of emergency powers provisions contained in the laws of the Weimar Republic."
--Senators Frank Church (D) and Charles McMathias (R), September 30, 1973.
--Jeff Stehman | | Back to Top | | |
|
MichaelEhart
Sage
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 2352
| Posted 5/25/2007 8:45 PM (GMT -5) | | You are remembering the elevation of FEMA to cabinet status, which many on the right fringe went ballistic over. Clinton gave FEMA much more authority than previously, which frightened some of the folks who just knew that Clinton was going to declare martial law, and bring in a corps of blue helmets to enforce one-world government. Remember the X-files where FEMA was part of the conspiracy? That fear and left over paranoia was part of the de-emphasizing of FEMA during the beginning of Bush's time, which lead eventually to the debacle of Katrina.
Lessons for both parties--- when you rule by ideology, idiocy is the most likely outcome. :)
The Church quote was part of a response to the pardoning of Nixon, wasn't it?
"The Scarlet Colored Beast" The Sword Review, September 2007
"Nothing But Our Tears" The Sword Review. August 2007
"Weaving Spiders Come Not Here" The Sword Review, July 2007
"The View From the Shotglass Floor" Ray Gun Revival, coming soon!
"Six Zombies Doing That Mick Jagger Strut" Damned in Dixie, March 2007
"The Death of Number 23" Dark Krypt, Fall 2006
"Servant of the Manthycore" Sword Review, April 2006
"Voice of the Spoiler" Better Fiction, Spring 2006
"Dancing with the Elder Gods"-- Thirteen Magazine, October 2005
"It's a Living" Byzarium---November 2005
"An Exorcism Straight, Hold the Elvis" The Sword Review, October 2005
Host, 2005 Nebula Awards Live Chat, sff.net
http://mehart.blogspot.com/ | | Back to Top | | |
|
MichaelEhart
Sage
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 2352
| Posted 5/26/2007 12:27 AM (GMT -5) | | You know, you are right on the date, Nixon resigned in August '74. I was remembering wrong, based on the silliest of things-- who I was dating that year :) I left out a girlfriend in my list. My bad, and I hope my wife doesn't learn about my historical timeline system :)
Frank Church was one of my heroes, a staunch populist who did more than almost anyone to curb the powers of the federal government. Reagan talked small geovernment, just like Bush II, but that seemed to be a code word for anti-anti-poverty programs. Weird that the actual reduction in federal workforce (and welfare reform) happened under Clinton.
The older I get the wiser my grandfather seems--- he was happiest with a split government with at least one house of congress held by a different party than the executive.
Our boy George was the one, after all, who famously said this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvUEsm0wNIA
"The Scarlet Colored Beast" The Sword Review, September 2007
"Nothing But Our Tears" The Sword Review. August 2007
"Weaving Spiders Come Not Here" The Sword Review, July 2007
"The View From the Shotglass Floor" Ray Gun Revival, coming soon!
"Six Zombies Doing That Mick Jagger Strut" Damned in Dixie, March 2007
"The Death of Number 23" Dark Krypt, Fall 2006
"Servant of the Manthycore" Sword Review, April 2006
"Voice of the Spoiler" Better Fiction, Spring 2006
"Dancing with the Elder Gods"-- Thirteen Magazine, October 2005
"It's a Living" Byzarium---November 2005
"An Exorcism Straight, Hold the Elvis" The Sword Review, October 2005
Host, 2005 Nebula Awards Live Chat, sff.net
http://mehart.blogspot.com/ | | Back to Top | | |
|
erazmus
Master
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 4554
| Posted 6/4/2007 2:34 AM (GMT -5) | | Hell, I'm agin just about everything the Gubermint wants to do. What bothers me more is the things they _don't_ want to do. There is a cleat case for securing the border-- securing its international borders is something every soveriegn nation has the right and responcibilty to do. There isn't a whole lot of support for doing it on either side of the isle.
I've always relied on the idea of a clear thinking and patriotic Secret serviceman preventing a power grab by a sittig president, so I'd watch for a sudden turn over in the Secret Service as a sign that things are about to go south. The Secret Service protects members of both parties, the teams are selected and staffed with minimal input from the protectees and are just about as non-partisan as you get in government service. They are also the guys standing around the oval office with guns, the only ones.
Now this sort of law is a tricky thing. Hitler manufactiured a crisis in a pretty transparent way when he took power, but the Weinmar system left him able to suround himself with his own supporters for security. Ours doesn't really do that. So any "crisis" would have to be pretty opaque, to people with access to everything going on in the executive offices, to pass over the heads of the guards.
The other thing to look at is why these sort of laws get on the books in the first place. In a real crisis, you need real leadership. Bush has pretty good reason to believe that right now, in the event of a true catasrophy, he would not be able to rely on good-faith cooperation from congress. He got it during 9/11, he didn't during Katrina and this close to the election he isn't going to get it, too many have too much to gain witholding it, in both parties. None the less, should one of these suspicously timed terrorist plots the gov. keeps "foiling" every few days actually come to fruition, I want America to respond, effectively and with deliberation. That means the president formulating a responce and carrying it out. In the end, that is his job.
We are too far into things to just overthrow the existing system and start over. Who watches the nucs while we do that? With the current Goverment having a hand in every aspect of daily life, from food labeling to traffic management, how do you start over? If you lined the bastards up against the wall and shot them, could we even arrainge to get rid of the bodies afterward? What institutions could even provide a sembalence of organization under such circumstance? The state governors and their national guard ? A junta of Cols? I know there aren't three general officers who could stand up and disagree with a politican, let alone convince their own trioops to follow them against the government. And when, in the last fifty years, have we been without serious foreign enemies to take advantage of such an event?
No, we won't be watering the tree of liberty with a revolution here anytime soon. Likewise, the president isn't going to sieze power and lock out the congress soon either. He is going to retire to his texas ranch and collect obscene amounts of money in speaking fees for the rest of his natural life, and the government is going to muddle on as always.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com
"Dutchman Rescue"in Continuum SF #6
www.continuumsciencefiction.com/orders.htm
"An Incident at Black Tongue Tavern" in _Bash Down the Door and Slice Open the Badguy_ from Fantasist Enterprises:
www.fantasistent.com/books/anthologies/BASH.php | | Back to Top | | |
|
Scott M. Sandridge
Former King of Shameless Plugs
Date Joined Dec 2005
Total Posts : 714
| Posted 6/4/2007 1:01 PM (GMT -5) | | I see your point, Mike. But Bush isn't the one I'm worried about. It's what future Presidents might do. And a devious enough mind can find a way around any roadblock to absolute power.
But regarding Copyright laws, not only have they taken infringments out of civil courts and made silly things like "illegal downloading" a criminal act; they now want the power to sieze the possesions of those with "intent to infringe".
http://politechbot.com/docs/doj.intellectual.property.protection.act.2007.051407.pdf
I'm all for protecting intellectual property in the civil courts (where it belongs), via lawsuits, etc. but making it a federal crime worries me. Not only that, but "intent to" brings with it the legalization of punishing "mindcrimes" and that's just way too Orwellian for comfort. Hopefully, Congress will toss that proposal away in the trashcan where it belongs; but considering how entrenched both parties are with the monopolizers (Republicans and Big Business, Democrats and Hollywood), I doubt they'll do so.
And all this while the Postal Service accepts the Time Warner proposal to give discounts to large publications and not small pubs? While Viacom and other companies are trying to talk Congress into eliminating Net Neutrality so they can have control of the pipes (and thus charge others higher rates for usage while leaving the rest in the slow lane)?
I'm a firm believer of "loose lips sink ships", but let's face it. By destroying the greatest opportunities independent artists and small publishers ever had, Freedom of Speech is getting attacked on all fronts in a way that far exceeds necessity even in a time of war, especially when it's only us small guys getting "indirectly" silenced.
In short. Allowing broad emergency powers in a time of crisis or war? Fine. Most of what they're giving the Prez is just stuff the early Presidents had that they're giving back. But doing all that at a time when both Big Business and Hollywood are trying to destroy all opportunities for independent entrepreneurs and independent artists? To the point of allowing the punishment of mindcrimes in the form of "intent"?
Way too coincidental. Even for me.
Which lich fell in the ditch? | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Wednesday, January 07, 2009 1:22 AM (GMT -5)
There are a total of 85,796 posts in 7,115 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 18 new threads and 74 reply posts. View Active Threads
| | Who's Online | This forum has 1334 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, esbrown.
14 Guest(s), 0 Registered Member(s) are currently online. Details
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP2
dotNetBB © 2000-2009
(c) SFReader |
|
|
|