-=- What If Clinton was Still In Office -=-
Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.
If Clintonwas Still in offce, what would you think he would of done about "all off this" (9/11, Osama, Iraq) Or would there even of Been a 9/11 or Iraq?
And thanks to irgnore we can post politics right?
I don't think 9/11 would have happened if Clinton was still president, on account of us still being relatively well liked by the world back then. But if there had been a 9/11, the Patriot Act would not have been passed, and we would be in Afghanistan rather than Iraq.
I saw Ferneheit 9/11 but i still don't udnertsand what the patriot act is...
wtf.... if Clinton were still in office he would have been impeached and really under the microscope unfourtunetly.... and all that had happened would have still occured because no matter what ...... they still hated us... do you guys remember that the first World trade center bombing happened during his presidency? and the embassy bombings? and the UN inspector kickings? and the USS Cole bombing?
the patriot act mearly bridges the gap between CIA, FBI, and local police. also, it allows police to get search warrants faster. thats about it.
I think this should be in the GDF
I beg to differ... The Patriot Act allows police to search people's homes WITHOUT a warrant. (I think... I'll clarify that in a second) I am fairly sure they can also arrest people without a warrant. The first time I really opened my eyes to how dangerous this thing is was just recently, when I found out about a guy named Sherman Austin who was arrested for having a link to very vague, general information about explosives on his site. This is information that can be found almost anywhere on the internet, on quite a few other American sites. Even on some white supremacy sites, which actually DO practice violent crimes from time to time. Problem with his site was, it was an "anarchist" site. I've visited it a few times though, and it really wasn't anything harmful. Nobody was saying "let's go throw molotov cocktails at the white house!" or anything along those lines. There was a page about guerilla warfare, and that too, was just general, historical information that could be found anywhere. It even had a disclaimer of sorts at the bottom saying that this was not intended for people to actually create a guerilla band or anything. But a couple years ago, the cops busted into Sherman's house with M-16's, stole his computer, and left. No big deal at first, the site stayed on the net, and I think he was issued a fine or something. Then, just recently, he was arrested at a nonviolent protest in New York. He was sentenced to a good deal of jailtime (don't remember exactly how long, but it was a few years at least) for doing basically what Americans are, or were, encouraged to do. Exercise our freedom of speech. Yet he was labelled a terrorist. Just a month or so ago, the site was shut down entirely. So basically, the Patriot Act gives the government the right to be watching every move you make, interpret it however they want, call you a terrorist, arrest you without a warrant, and throw you in jail without telling you how long you'll be there, or allowing you to see or call anybody. Scary stuff.
the patriot act reducies civil liberties
...as for if Clinton were still in office, the world would be much better off if he was able to have remained in office 12 years. And this war in iraq would not of happened, instead we're be more heavly concentrated in Afghanistan where we should be. And the world wouldn't hate us as muc has they do now.
hmmmmm lets think......well we be pretty much screwed. Kinda like we are now. no matter what pres we get, were still pretty much screwed over.
no. That would be suspending Habeas Corpsus, which has been done twice in our history. what you are describing is suspending search and seizure mixed with suspending habeas corpsus, and during the early 1900's there were communist sympithizers that incited a riot and threw bombs into a crowd with exactly the kind of information described by that site... much that seems simple and harmless when concentrated in one place for easy access can be dangerous. I am sure that if what you described happened without a warrent the media would have spread it from sea to shinning sea... perhaps he is not telling you everything.
What logic some people base their political views on, I will never know. When Clinton was president, the deficit gradually decreased until there was actually a surplus. Education was much, much better off than it is today. The situation in Israel was practically resolved, thanks to Clinton's negotiating skills. Half the world was not blowing the other half up. So what in god's name makes you think we would be screwed if Clinton was still president? We had it damn good back then. Obviously there were a lot of bad things going on too, but not nearly as much so as we see today.
God did you read my original response? all the stuff that happened after his presidency was nurtured by his presidency... you thnk Clinton was a God or something
he couldn't even get the Isrealis and Palastinians to stop fighting.... let alone Milosovich.... and he let Saddam fire missles at our planes with a cruise missle slap to say bad boy
RTO, your so bloody smart when it comes to this stuff
it probably be crying in a corner
Dude... Clinton had nothing to do with the surplus
that is Congress's domain and illegal for the presiddent to touch
Education was better because the economy was good. Our economy goes threw a cycle of recessions... thats how near free-market works... its the ground work of the previous administration that makes the course for the nexts economy, that is how it has always worked.
i liked Clinton but he is given too much credit most of the time...
And perhaps your government is not telling you everything. There is nothing wrong with arresting people who throw bombs into a crowd, warrant or no. But this guy hadn't done anything harmful. To start with, the information about explosives was not on his site. He had not written it, therefore should never have been held accountable for it in the first place. And as I said before, there are hundreds of sites on the web that have exactly the same thing. None of which this kind of thing has happened to. Protesting an organization or anything else peacefully is not, or was not at one point, illegal in this country. Nor, obviously, is having general information about explosives on a website. If that were illegal, there would be hundreds of other people in jail right now for the same thing. Believe it or not, the media doesn't tell you everything, nor is everything the media tells you true.
Dude... he was about two inches away from getting the Israelis and Palestinians to stop fighting. And about the economy, I don't know what you're talking about. The president is not totally powerless when it comes to the economy. This is why we see Kerry and Bush arguing about tax cuts during the debates. Believe it or not, taxes have a direct effect on the amount of money the government has!
And more money for the government means more money to spend on public programs, which means more money for schools!
Holy shit, I think we're really onto something here!
do you not know that the handshake that the two parties took part in was completely forced!!!!!!!!
afterwards they looked at eachother disgustingly and walked away
can't pass a taxe cut without Congress
did you know that the President can't even directly suggest a single bill without a congressional member authering it?
Raisethefist.com was his site... He just got out of prison and entered a half way house. I'd been to his site too. Yeah... the patriot act is a bunch of gestapo style bullshit. A free country needs to have free presses if they are going to be really free.
I know for a fact the government doesn't tell me everything because if i knew everything they did that means the enemy would to
and if you didn't notice the enemy is really good at what they do
Believe me.... if such a infraction of rights was actually undertaken every social liberty group on earth would never shut up about it therefore causing media coverage.
Why the hell would anyone need guerilla tactics and bomb making in the bloody first place
.... no one stands a chance against federal infantry to strat off
yes. freedom is very important. and there are no buts. our enemy however is very similar to facist and therefore is able to use our freedoms against us. moving in and out easily... in order to preserve our freedom, considering if we were attacked again the government would never hear the end of it....
, we have to corner tose who would use our freedom against us by doing something out of character.
How would you suggest the government to go about capturing the enemy? do you have a better way?
Ahh, but that's where you're wrong. Congress passes the bills, and the president signs them into law. And the pres can suggest bills, and override Congress's vetoes, or refuse to sign into law a bill he doesn't like.
Did you know that the President CAN directly suggest bills? but thats only after he submits a first draft written in crayon. Because thats how he does his best work. In crayon.
All bills must originate in the Senate and be approved by the house. The president has a veto power that must either deny or fully support a bill.... he cannot edit or create any form of bill. Congress in turn can over turn a veto with 2/3rds vote. in the end Congress has absolute power which can only be overiden by the supreme court which can declare a bill unconstitutional and must then be enforced by the president... but in turn can be kicked out of office by congress... but infact in the end the people have the true power because the final step is a majority vote by the population of every state.
He CAN suggest them, though. What do you think he's doing in suggesting an amendment outlawing gay marriage?
And it's not a majority vote of every state, 75% of states must pass it...and that's only for constitutional amendments, not ordinary laws.
he can suggest to a congressional member to author it
yes 3/4 for constitutional amendment but 2/3 for extreme circamstances for ordinary laws
Like i said, crayon comes first.
Exactly, meaning he can suggest a bill.
For an ordinary bill to become law, first it is drafted by a congressman. Then it goes into commitee in the House. Then the House votes on it, and if it passes with a majority vote, it goes to the Senate. It goes into commitee again, and then the Senate votes and once again it must pass with a majority vote. THEN, it goes to the president's desk to be signed into law or thrown out. That's how an ordinary law is drafted.
For a constitutional amendment, it has to be passed by a 2/3 vote by BOTH the House and Senate, and then be ratified by 38 (or 75%) of the states before it can be signed into law.
I had these drilled into my brain last year during government class
suggesting and authoring are two different things
he must have a willing member of his party and the bill must survive the porkbarreling process
but mainly in AP US 11th grade
yawn srry everyone but i gotta turn in yawn so don't think i am just ignoring you posts
not that you would think that
I never said suggesting and authoring were the same thing, you implied it. And I think something like 90% of bills die in commitee.
My government class last year was full of idiots...I think I was the only intelligent person in the class...so my teacher was very repetetive to make sure everyone understood. Needless to say I remembered EVERYTHING in that class.
yawn i think it was more like 98%
we were AP and we got lower scores the the general ed classes hysterical
Meh, couldn't remember the exact number, just that it was really high...
I WISH I had taken AP, the rest of my class was so painfully stupid...they were like monkeys...
Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.
Copyright 1999-2019 KillerMovies.