Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[misko27]

I'll leave the implications to the people here, but Obama's task force on Surveillance issues was Furloughed, essentially, as all staff were sent home.

[wierd]

Perhaps we can coin a new word, for a less-severe kind of terrorism. Horrorism?

The issue with this of course is that both terror and horror are base, primal emotional responses to many things. I suppose it's odder if you pick any other such base emotion, like could you imagine a world where terrorism was replaced by euphorism? People jumping at shadows that excited or made people happy? They're downright unavoidable emotions.
There are more issues with "terrorism" too. It legitimizes partisans of the corrupt and the despot; and whether it be murderers, protesters or politicians - it makes no distinction. It incites fear, it is terrorism, hold no restraint and give no mercy.

Two words exist to generalize politics: Corrupt practice.
No new words need be coined.

Personally, I would use "Extortion"

[Xantalos]

Perhaps we can coin a new word, for a less-severe kind of terrorism. Horrorism?

The issue with this of course is that both terror and horror are base, primal emotional responses to many things. I suppose it's odder if you pick any other such base emotion, like could you imagine a world where terrorism was replaced by euphorism? People jumping at shadows that excited or made people happy? They're downright unavoidable emotions.
There are more issues with "terrorism" too. It legitimizes partisans of the corrupt and the despot; and whether it be murderers, protesters or politicians - it makes no distinction. It incites fear, it is terrorism, hold no restraint and give no mercy.

Two words exist to generalize politics: Corrupt practice.
No new words need be coined.

Personally, I would use "Extortion"

That works.

[Helgoland]

How far do the president's authorities go under the Patriot act? If shit really hits the fan bigtime, he could temporarily suspend democracy, exile the tea partiers, solve this crisis, repeal the patriot act, and then step down...

[SalmonGod]

repeal the patriot act, and then step down...

How much attention have you paid to this guy's behavior so far?...

[da_nang]

XKCD: Randall's not amused.

Obligatory GOOMHR.

[Helgoland]

repeal the patriot act, and then step down...

How much attention have you paid to this guy's behavior so far?...

He'd have to take these steps if he had previously used the Patriot Act to practically dismantle American democracy. These steps are the thin line between a wise statesman driven to extreme measures and a would-be dictator who is swept away a month or two later.

[mainiac]

exile the tea partiers, solve this crisis,

So the way to solve the problem of the crazy conspiracy theorists is to change the world to make their wild delusions correct?

[Helgoland]

exile the tea partiers, solve this crisis,

So the way to solve the problem of the crazy conspiracy theorists is to change the world to make their wild delusions correct?

No, the way to solve the problem of the crazy conspiracy theorists involves deportation and forced labor.
Unless they're harmless, but that has clearly ceased to be the case.

[SalmonGod]

repeal the patriot act, and then step down...

How much attention have you paid to this guy's behavior so far?...

He'd have to take these steps if he had previously used the Patriot Act to practically dismantle American democracy. These steps are the thin line between a wise statesman driven to extreme measures and a would-be dictator who is swept away a month or two later.

My point was that he's been doing that prior to this crisis.  He's not only continued all of the surveillance/police state initiatives Bush set in motion, but expanded on them.  If he took this as an excuse to implement even more drastic measures, I would not expect him to then give up that power afterwards.  Every precedent in Obama's presidency and current American politics in general indicates this would not happen.  I like my chances better with the economic crisis than with any heightening of the political persecution that already takes place here.

[wierd]

*nitpick

It isn't patriot that gives the president "OMG, WTF, give our elections back!" kind of powers. That's the War Powers Act (1941-42), and war powers resolution(1973).

The patriot act simply gave the fed all kinds of insane powers to spy on you, arrest you in secret, try you in secret, convict you in secret, and incarcerate you in secret-- along with powers to detain US citizens without cause, and all manner of other really really not good things.

This is the problem with ceding power to central government, with the expectation that it will be "temporary".  IT NEVER IS.

War powers act(s) were created in the 40s, to deal with the financial and executive burdens of the second world war. As originally proposed, they were supposed to expire 6months after the end of the war. Well, here we are 60 years later; they still on the books. One of the US's biggest embarassments about social equality and rights of citizens happened, as a direct consequence of these laws. (The concentration of japanese americans in camps, and subsequent insanity over media and literature in regard to "subversive" material.)

The patriot act is the new war powers act. I fully expect it to stay around FOREVER. It is FAAAR too convenient for government enforcers for them to EVER consider letting it expire or be annulled. 

Allowing the president full "Super dictator man" powers is stright up folly.

[Sindain]

Even in the event that he did give up the power peacefully, he would still set a powerful precedent that presidents can do whatever they want if necessary.

[wierd]

Without question.

We have compartmentalized and limited powers in government FOR A REASON. 
People really need to respect why that is.

[mainiac]

This is the problem with ceding power to central government, with the expectation that it will be "temporary".  IT NEVER IS.

Yeah, it's sure sucks that we haven't had habeas corpus in this country since 1861.  But I am glad that the government continues to enforce the elections oversight power granted it in the 1964 civil rights act.  Of course, that's nothing compared to the fact that the Alien and Sedition Acts, passed in the Adams administration, NEVER WENT AWAY.  We are stuck with all relics of prior eras, from the first national bank and the second national bank (why are there two, anyway?) to the Full Employment Act in the 1940s establishing that there would be no Federal Reserve independence from congressional oversight.  Now excuse me, I need to flee for my life because I have broken laws regarding miscegenation and sodomy and the feds are onto me because we all know they have had the power to monitor all forms of media since 1917.

Limited government power is important but don't say ridiculously untrue things.

[GlyphGryph]

Remember that for something like 500 years, every single Roman dictator gave up their power willingly at the end of their term. That's twice the life of the US, with a society that saw giving absolute power to one person as a thing that happened, and the system always returned power to the Senate up until the whole thing fell apart (mostly for unrelated reasons).

It is definitely possible for power to be given up, and for a government to relinquish it.

The problem is that when it doesn't happen, you get some pretty serious issues, and right now our government doesn't seem to exist in a state where such relinquishing of the powers described here is likely to occur anytime soon unless something significant changes.