Hmmm, how does that apply to the US and the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? How has the government expanded it's power? Specifics, please, no partisan rhetoric about liberty being denied. And how has the government built up the military? Of course, it hasn't...but how do you think it has?
Homeland Security, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, Real ID Act, No Fly list, wiretaps, etc. Plus spending what is it, a trillion or so on a war, setting up a puppet governmnet, occupying sovereign land, going to war without formal declaration, etc. How did the government not increase in size? More laws, more control, more surveillance. We need less of all these things, not more.
Huh? While I recognize that nations have agreed to how conduct war (see Geneva, for example), they didn't do so in order to check their own ambitions to expand their power or build up their military might. They did so because such agreements recognize long-established morals of fighting wars.
Where do you get the idea that nations have agreed to restrictions on the reasons they choose to go to war? I don't know of any nation that subscribes to the idea that they have subjugated their sovereignty to any NGO, to the UN, or any other body. Do you?
Supposed to take a formal declaration of war by Congress. President is commander in chief when forces are called up. The only mechanism in the Constitution to call up is a declaration of war by Congress. When going against other nations, other government, as we did in Iraq you rightfully need a formal declaration of war. War should not be permitted without it. Not some vote to "authorize" blah blah blah; whatever the treasonous Congress did to give away part of their checks and balances over military use. The Constitution says only Congress can declare war, thus if you want to go to war, Congress must declare it. Congress is also to control the purse strings, unfortunately that too has been corrupted. Now it's "they won't fund the troops, they don't care about our military men and women" blah blah blah. How the hell is Congress supposed to exert any amount of control without being able to exercise that which was granted to it by the People? The President for all intensive purposes fully and always controls the military. He can use it as he sees fit, that sounds like the power of a King; not that of a public servant.
No, we don't.
It seems to me that the reigning argument nowadays is that Congress or the Courts should be supreme in order to check a President they hate. And this depends on the individual's policy preferences. If you're pro-abortion you want the Courts to be a superior branch to be the final arbiter of what is constitutional and to invent and protect new rights that you find preferable. If you're anti-war you demand that Congress be superior and conduct non-stop, over-arching investigations of whatever it wants to within the Executive Branch.
Yes, Congress and the SCOTUS have some say in this. The President isn't to be king. In fact, I would say the President wasn't meant to be the most powerful political position in the US. The President is merely the Executive, the most powerful branch was to be Congress. The Congress must be made to retake the powers it gave away. Those powers aren't theirs to give away, those were demands and restrictions by the People. There must be friction between the 3 branches, there must be checks and balances. As it stands now, the President has well too much power; we weren't meant to be ruled by a king.
I have faith in the concept of separation of powers and checks and balances, but it seems to me that liberals and Democrats hate both concepts currently. And most likely becuase both concepts limit their ability to reign in the branches they need to in order to realize their policy preferences.
I think many people hate checks and balances. I would say neo-cons especially hate that. They hate the courts coming in and telling them that their fascist laws are unconstitutional. While there may be areas in which the democrats hate check and balances, you saying it's only liberals shows your true partisan behavior. Both sides do it, both sides are corrupt, both sides want nothing more than power even if it comes at the expense of the rights and liberties of the People.
What pop culture rubbish this is. No wonder our younger generations do not deserve our respect.
Maybe the younger generation is just getting sick of bowing their heads to government. You take not even the time to consider the words, knee-jerk reactionary sentiment. Oh those youngin's these days...they don't know blah blah blah. Condescending tripe. Maybe those whom have lost the will to oppose government growth don't deserve our respect. Those willing to excuse the treason and tyranny of the State for a little "safety". Franklin was right, the founders were right. Distrust the government, watch it and constrain it. It's not something to let go, it's not something to have blind faith it, it is something that will always have to be opposed. That's reality.