Ones and Zeros: On Global Tests

On Global Tests

October 05, 2004

...[T]o place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take.
--Thomas Jefferson, 1825

Mr. Jefferson explains why it was necessary to write a document explaining to the world why starting a war was the last resort of the American people.

you've got to do in a way that passes the test�that passes the global test�where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
--John F. Kerry, 2004

Mr. Kerry is firmly in line with Thomas Jefferson.

I have a different view.
--George W. Bush, 2004

Mr. Bush's view is not. I agree with Misters Jefferson and Kerry.

.:Posted by Michael on October 5, 2004 9:30 PM:.

A Global Test: Bush vs. Jefferson

See here and here. And for an amusing take on what a Bush vs. Kerry debate on the Declaration of......

.:Posted to The Agitator on Oct 18, 2004 11:35 AM:.

I don't recall any of the Founders giving another country a veto on the Declaration of Independence, or for that matter wait upon the approval of the "international community".

Kerry has given plenty of indication, despite some very recent statements, that he'd be inclined to do at least the latter.

.:Posted by Eric the .5b ( total) on October 18, 2004 1:01 PM:.

>>Kerry has given plenty of indication, despite some very recent statements, that he�d be inclined to do at least the latter.

What indication? You smear is unsupported by the facts.

.:Posted by failureman ( total) on October 18, 2004 5:00 PM:.

key words.. "it was necessary to write a document"

funny... I didn't see Kerry lobby for and vote up a declaration of war. No he just submitted yet another enabling act, making dubya the officially sanctioned, unconstitutional leader of the Unified State America Empire.

.:Posted by darby ( total) on October 19, 2004 5:53 AM:.

I've got to admit that I'm not 100% pleased with the cold war era moves that made declaring war a de facto presidential responsibility and not a de jure congressional one.

If we'd followed the old model and the president had needed a declaration of war to invade a foreign country and overthrow the government of it, then individual representatives would have been responsible to their constituents for how they voted.

The War Powers Act should have a provision that says "if we can yak about this long enough to take a case to the UN, then there's enough time to get a declaration of war through Congress and that's the way this is supposed to work."

.:Posted by Michael ( total) on October 19, 2004 6:49 AM:.