Can the President lead us into war without a declaration of war?

[poncho]

Originally posted by fromtheright:
poncho,

If you are trying to make decisions based on the collectivist idea of the greater good for the greater number, how are you going to understand a document written by individualists for individualists?

OK, poncho, I gotta hear this: how is the argument Yoo is making regarding the interpretation of the Constitution as to war-making a collectivist argument, as opposed to an individualist one?

BTW, then, isn't "general welfare" somewhat of a collectivist notion, then?

I asked you a question which you did not answer. Instead of answering you countered with a question. Imho, that is a dodge.

Who's educating the vigilant voters individualists or collectivists?

In the case of John Yoo, first of all he is a visiting scholar of the American Enterprise Institute. AEI is nothing more than a public relations outlet for neocon propagandists. His alliegence I suspect is not to the individual American or the general welfare of the American people but to the money powers known as the New World Order.

Now how about answering my question?

Who's educating the vigilant voters individualists or collectivists?

 

[JGrubbs]

I for one am doing all I can to educate the voters within my reach!

 

[fromtheright]

poncho,

I asked my question as a point of clarification. It doesn't do much good to throw around accusations of being "collectivist" if you aren't willing to define or clarify the term. The question is not individualist vs. collectivist, the question in the OP had to do with what was Constitutional and I put the arguments forth. In the end, you opted to question his allegiance and patriotism for simply making a Constitutional argument that you disagree with.

To answer your question as to "Who's educating the vigilant voters? Individualists or collectivists?", it is obvious that both are as both are involved in seeking to advance their views to the voters.

So, again, how is Yoo's argument a collectivist one, as opposed to individualist. And, again, since you seem to believe that this distinction is the only one relevant to the Constitution, is the general welfare a "collectivist" notion, speaking of the greatest good for the greatest number?

Just curious, is Robert Bork a "neocon propagandist"? Fred Thompson? Nicholas Eberstadt? Michael Ledeen?

 

[poncho]

"Just curious, is Robert Bork a "neocon propagandist"? Fred Thompson? Nicholas Eberstadt? Michael Ledeen?"

I can see now FTR that we will never agree on the constitution or geopolitics. I mean if you have to ask if Michael Ledeen, Mr. "I love Machiavelli" himself is a neocon propagandist it just goes to show that any arguement I could ever mount from here on out would be of no affect.

Is Michael Ledeen a neocon propagandist?

Wow!

I gotta go, this is too much.

 

[fromtheright]

poncho,

I can see now FTR that we will never agree on the constitution or geopolitics.

Works for me. When one takes the position you seem to, that there are those who agree with you on the Constitution and there are collectivists; and re geopolitics, that there are those who believe in a mysterious world government conspiracy, which changes shapes, and that the rest of us are gullible fools

, I'm comfortable with the disagreement.

 

[Essene]

Originally posted by OldRegular:

Truman did in Korea.

Kennedy/Johnson did in Viet Nam.

Reagan did in Granada.

Bush 41 did in Iraq.

Bush 43 did in Afghanistan and Iraq. [/QB]

I think the Truman Administration was responding to a United Nations obligation to help nations that are victims of aggression. Still, I would have felt better had there been a formal declaration by the Congress.

Viet Nam, Grenada, Iraq I and II were all mistakes of judgement IMO.

Congress abdicated its responsibilities by passing the "War Powers Act", which allows the President to send troops abroad for SIX months. Any further use of out troops is supposed to be re-authorized by Congress every six months. I think Shrub is about 24 months overdue. Our wimpy Congress is afraid to care.....for fear of being soft on communism (or whoever is the enemy de jour).

 

[fromtheright]

poncho,

In the case of John Yoo, first of all he is a visiting scholar of the American Enterprise Institute.

You know, there's no argument like, "Oooooh, oooh, he's associated with those bad guys!"