Jeeze, some of you guys have a lot of faith in Cliton's competance!

I personaly believe he is niether a particularly evil or saintly man, just an abysmally mediocre one.

I also believe he will be remembered as the greatest buffoon in history.

I'd love to hear your conspiricy theories to the contrary tho, :).

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 07, 1999

Answers

How's this sound? If technology takes a major hit from y2k, then how will we hold elections? This guy has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness and ability to persuade and deceive even his detractors. All he has to do is sell the idea of a temporary suspension of elections to a congress that can't even determine that this "buffoon" violated the law. Doesn't sound like much of a stretch to me...

-- yeah, right (brewkit@qnet.com), March 07, 1999.

Hmmm... that should be Clinton, not "Cliton". Freudian slip?

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 07, 1999.

All Zipperman has to do is, declare a state of emergency, and Shazzam, the Constitution is suspended. "Hey Hillary, we can stay here for a few more years." Got a BLUE Dress?

-- Scotty (BLehman202@aol.com), March 07, 1999.

yeah, right,

I know all the Clinton-haters love to spin tales about suspension of elections and the Constitution and all that. Exaggeration can be entertaining. But there's no factual basis to support those tales as realistic possibilities. Congress has no power to suspend elections, either.

- - - - -

Scotty,

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Prez can _not_ suspend the Constitution. We've had many declarations of national emergency; some are in effect right now; but none of them has suspended the Constitution and none ever will for the simple reason that any Presidential order derives its authority from the Constitution, so cannot amend or suspend it.

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), March 07, 1999.

Oh I think they'll be able to come up with somebody worse than Clinton.

Seriously though, not to put to fine an edge on it, but can anybody point out any really big difference between suspending the constitution and fully invoking Executive Order 12919 of 6-6-94? I'm particularily thinking of Part VI section 602. Point being this; They can crow about, "The constitution is fully enforced and E0 12919 is constitutional."

As for, "any Presidential order derives its authority from the Constitution, so cannot amend or suspend it.", I think it was Mao Se Tung that said, "Truth comes from the end of a gun."

This might be a good time to mention the fact that if memory serves me there are only about 2-3,000 BATF agents, don't know how many FBIers there are but at least some of them might be honest. The Praetorian Guard, er S.S., uh Secret Service that is (is that what it stands for? ;) ) won't be fielded, and Clinton's opinions of the worth of the military might be mutual.

-- Ken Seger (kenseger@earthlink.net), March 07, 1999.

"any Presidential order derives its authority from the Constitution, so cannot amend or suspend it. "

Recent history tells us otherwise. Think again:

On December 7, 1941, the Empire of the Rising Sun launched a sudden devastating attack on Pearl Harbor. At the time of the bombing, about 127,000 persons of Japanese origin resided in the mainland United States, of which 113,000 lived in the four states of California, Washington, Oregon, and Arizona. Of the total number, 37 percent were foreign-born, known as Issei (first generation), while the rest were native-born, or Nisei (second generation). As soon as the war broke out, Issei were declared enemy aliens and became subjects for exclusion and detention. Even though Nisei were by birthright citizens of the United States, they followed the same fate. [emphasis mine-- tc]

February 19. The mournful Day of Remembrance for the Internment officially recognized by Japanese Americans. On that date in 1942, ten weeks after the Pearl Harbor tragedy, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. The order authorized the Secretary of War and his appointed officers to exclude all persons, citizens and aliens alike, from specially designated areas in order to provide security against sabotage and espionage. The army took charge of implementing Roosevelt's Order by removing all Japanese Americans from the West Coast of the United States and placing them into concentration camps in desolate areas of the country.

Although the American government claimed that the confinement was necessary to prevent subversive actions in time of Ward War II, it would eventually be revealed that not the military necessity but primarily racial prejudice provoked such unprecedentedly drastic measures, indiscriminately applied to the whole national group.

(http://www.odu.edu/~hanley/history1/Klimova.htm)

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), March 07, 1999.

<< Oh I think they'll be able to come up with somebody worse than Clinton. >>

Exactly.

If Clinton remains in power I believe for the most part, we will still be doing well. Incompetent, liar, adulterer he is. Psychotic world dictator he is not.

Look at the guy's soul! There is *nothing* there that is remarkable, strong, or particularly noteworthy. I believe he's the fall guy for the greatest disaster in human history.

Then there's Hillary... hmmmm...

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 07, 1999.

Ken,

>"Truth comes from the end of a gun."

Then don't blame it on Executive Orders, states of emergency, or suspension of the Constitution.

If you want to warn about dangers of a military takeover, coup d'etat, or other end-of-a-gun scenarios, why drag legalities into it? It just mixes up two incompatible areas.

If you want to argue constitutional legality, don't drag Mao into it.

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), March 07, 1999.

Tom,

>it would eventually be revealed that not the military necessity but primarily racial prejudice provoked such unprecedentedly drastic measures, indiscriminately applied to the whole national group.

So eventually it was acknowledged that the internment of U.S. citizens was unconstitutional. It was a tragedy that the illegitimacy of Roosevelt's EO was not acknowledged sooner. If that EO were issued in today's political and legal climate, it would swiftly be challenged and struck down by the judiciary.

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), March 07, 1999.

In 1969 then President Richard Nixon signed Executive Order 11490 which basically allows the president to suspend the Constitution and replace it with martial law and a legel dictatorship during a national emergency!!!

-- Terry L Cletcher (terbridg@netnitco.net), March 07, 1999.

eo 12919 is the real "kicker", not who will be in charge of it. once eo12919 is put into play, there is no more constitution. you can count on families being sent to detention centers, w/ people forced to labor for no pay, and the govt in control of everything (food, energy, water, transportation, etc.). the whole lovely thing is available at the white house site though, of course, no mention has ever, or will ever, be made to the public.

-- sarah meadows (qubr@aol.com), March 08, 1999.

Go to http://www.devvy.com and read up on this mediocore person. He scares me to death!

-- linda (smitmom@hotmail.com), March 08, 1999.