Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Posted on 03/03/2002 6:26:29 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:39:16 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
In Beijing, Bush called China our ''partner.'' Cuba officially is our ''enemy.'' Why?
Because a small number of powerful exiles in South Florida cow our politicians into keeping the crazy Cuban policy. That was designed to castrate Fidel Castro and has failed for more than 40 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
Yeah, but Jefferson did pass the Nonimportation Act, in 1806, forbidding the importation of specified British goods. And then after determining that the Embargo Act of 1807 didn't work Thomas Jefferson gave his assent, although reluctantly, to the Nonintercourse Act of 1809 that opened trade to everyone except with Britain and France. He knew what regulate meant, why did he sign those?
I gotta figure Jefferson was just pulling another Louisiana Purchase deal where he knew it wasn't constitutional but felt it had to be done given how England was forcibly enrolling our sailors as recruits for military duty. But I wish he had tried to fight for passage of an Amendment to do those things, it would have set the right precedents for future governments.
You don't need to keep posting the wording. I am familiar with it. I am not arguing about the wording. I am arguing application.
But I have reason to think that you are confused, I used to think along the exact same lines that you think. Obviously, I have changed my mind since.
I am not "old" yet, or at least as old as you suggest, but I think that I am older than you, and based on that, I can tell you that you are going to experience a major restructoring of your political views in the near future.
Fidel does use the embargo as an excuse for his dismal failure, it is worthy of note that he HAS failed miserably, so maybe the embargo HAS worked. It is also worthy of mention that Fidel calls the trade that used to exist between US Corporations and Cuba "exploitation".
Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
Also, keep in mind that while the old Soviet Union was underwriting Castro's "revolution", Fidel was busy cause mischief all over the hemisphere, and beyond.
Lifting the embargo would replace a great deal of Fidel's lost revenue, and make it possible for him to start funding Central and South American Marxist guerillas once agai
Fidel has had his hands full since the Russians pulled out just trying to finance his Caribbean worker's paradise.
Good job on the guy bringing up all that Batista crap.
If a situation comes up that the Constitution doesn't seem to address properly, the correct course of action to take is NOT to just interpret the Constitution in a way that will cover the situation that concerns us. Let's look at it both ways ...
If it were currently constitutional for the Feds to engage in the sale of military equipment/arms to other countries, and we, as a nation, decided that we wanted that to be UNconstitutional, then we should pass a constitutional amendment denying that power to the federal government. If it were currently unconstitutional to sell foreign nations our military equipment/arms, and we, as a nation, decided that we wanted that to be constitutional, then we should pass an amendment granting that power.
The way we have it now is, we allow some military equipment to be sold to some nations and not others. Who we sell to, and what we sell, seems to be up to whatever administration is in charge of the Commerce Department at the time (we saw how that worked didn't we?) As far as I know, States are prohibited from selling any military equipment to foreign nations. I don't know about companies and individuals. But regardless, I'm of the opinion that the Constitution doesn't grant the power to prohibit those sales because I don't believe that "regulate" can be construed as including the power to prohibit. If I believed that "regulate" could mean prohibit then under the current Constitution the Feds would have the power to prohibit Idaho from selling potatoes to Virginia for whatever reason they wanted. I think "regulate commerce among the several States" means to "make regular or uniform the rules for commerce among the several States".
That being said ...I think the Feds should have the power to prohibit the sale of any products with military applications (that include technologies less than 30 yrs old, and/or components of weapons of mass destruction) to all governments, companies, or individuals in foreign nations, so I would be in favor of an Amendment to the Constitution that stated as much. Something like ...
AMENDMENT XXVIIINote: A portion of Article I, section 8, of the Constitution was superseded by this 28th amendment.
Section 1.
The Congress shall have Power To prohibit the sale of any products or equipment with military applications with technologies less than 30 yrs old, and/or components, whole or partial, of weapons of mass destruction including, but not limited to, chemical, biological, or nuclear to all governments, companies, or individuals in foreign nations, or within the United States.Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
How's that?
But I have reason to think that you are confused, I used to think along the exact same lines that you think. Obviously, I have changed my mind since.
I am not "old" yet, or at least as old as you suggest, but I think that I am older than you, and based on that, I can tell you that you are going to experience a major restructoring of your political views in the near future.
Fidel does use the embargo as an excuse for his dismal failure, it is worthy of note that he HAS failed miserably, so maybe the embargo HAS worked. It is also worthy of mention that Fidel calls the trade that used to exist between US Corporations and Cuba "exploitation".
Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
Also, keep in mind that while the old Soviet Union was underwriting Castro's "revolution", Fidel was busy cause mischief all over the hemisphere, and beyond.
Lifting the embargo would replace a great deal of Fidel's lost revenue, and make it possible for him to start funding Central and South American Marxist guerillas once agaiN.
Fidel has had his hands full since the Russians pulled out just trying to finance his Caribbean worker's paradise.
Good job on the guy bringing up all that Batista crap. Q
Shouldn't that be promote the general Welfare of the United States. Common mistake.
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
I learned a few things and I expect a few others did too. Great stuff!
Thanks Willie.
Nice to know that I can count on the Brigadiers on this one.
OMG!!!
You're kidding! Intercourse is unconstitutional?
Oh man, I hadn't thought of that angle, but you're right -- the government would have a list of people whose minds were very likely "off the plantation". I would imagine that the winner's Cuban relatives are watched more carefully too.
If you were capable of adding the 2 and 2 in your last statement, you wouldn't need to have it explained.
Embargo keeps Dollars out of Cuba, But not China. China is 7000 miles away and has acquired Nuclear Capabilities.But is sufficiently far enough away to not be a nuclear blackmail threat. Obviously the Embargo works......Capice?
Because he was angry at france and England is my conclusion. And your bringing up the Louisianna purchase is perfectly appropriate in my view. It is another example of where Jefferson decided to circumvent the constitution....I believe he admitted it too didn't he? Proving that even he wasn't averse to that in certain circumstances.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.