<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Elastic Clause of the Constitution</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 17:52:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: A Z</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5380940</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Z]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5380940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many Germans were put in internment camps. They were from all over the Americas.  No proof was given.  Germans who had citizenship of Latin American countries were so interred.

WW2  was not so white gloved as you say.

There were some Italians treated the same way.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many Germans were put in internment camps. They were from all over the Americas.  No proof was given.  Germans who had citizenship of Latin American countries were so interred.</p>
<p>WW2  was not so white gloved as you say.</p>
<p>There were some Italians treated the same way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Z</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5380939</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Z]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5380939</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Citizenship is a choice. It is  a state of mind. People vote with their feet, when they can. Awlaki certainly did.

Awlaki&#039;s citizenship is as valid as that of a Soviet sleeper agent. 

Your problem is that you are so legalistic and pedantic that you are a danger to everyone including yourself and you are unaware of it.

You are such a danger that I do not feel like yelling &quot;Fore&quot; or &quot;incoming&quot;.  I&#039;ll just keep my mouth shut.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Citizenship is a choice. It is  a state of mind. People vote with their feet, when they can. Awlaki certainly did.</p>
<p>Awlaki&#8217;s citizenship is as valid as that of a Soviet sleeper agent. </p>
<p>Your problem is that you are so legalistic and pedantic that you are a danger to everyone including yourself and you are unaware of it.</p>
<p>You are such a danger that I do not feel like yelling &#8220;Fore&#8221; or &#8220;incoming&#8221;.  I&#8217;ll just keep my mouth shut.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Z</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5380936</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[A Z]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5380936</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If one is prohibited from assassinating Awlaki, you are also prohibited from assassinating Goebbels.

&quot;He used modern propaganda techniques to prepare the German people ideologically for aggressive warfare.&quot;

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels

Goebbels was not engaged in hostilities. He never so much as picked up a rock.

&quot;He repeatedly called for jihad against the United States&quot;
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

This is for you.  You feature prominently in the essay.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-i-write/

Two points:
If he was a propagandist and nothing more, he is a legitimate target.

If he is a regional commander, he was a legitimate target. But you would be more than happy it seems to totally let this guy go free unless we gave up our sources and methods and made the CIA moribund.

&quot;U.S. officials said that in 2009, al-Awlaki was promoted to the rank of &quot;regional commander&quot; within al-Qaeda&quot; - wiki]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If one is prohibited from assassinating Awlaki, you are also prohibited from assassinating Goebbels.</p>
<p>&#8220;He used modern propaganda techniques to prepare the German people ideologically for aggressive warfare.&#8221;</p>
<p>- <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels</a></p>
<p>Goebbels was not engaged in hostilities. He never so much as picked up a rock.</p>
<p>&#8220;He repeatedly called for jihad against the United States&#8221;<br />
- <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki</a></p>
<p>This is for you.  You feature prominently in the essay.<br />
<a href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-i-write/" rel="nofollow">http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-i-write/</a></p>
<p>Two points:<br />
If he was a propagandist and nothing more, he is a legitimate target.</p>
<p>If he is a regional commander, he was a legitimate target. But you would be more than happy it seems to totally let this guy go free unless we gave up our sources and methods and made the CIA moribund.</p>
<p>&#8220;U.S. officials said that in 2009, al-Awlaki was promoted to the rank of &#8220;regional commander&#8221; within al-Qaeda&#8221; &#8211; wiki</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berceuse</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5378497</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berceuse]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2014 23:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5378497</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No, I wasn&#039;t ignoring anything.  I&#039;d assumed the citizenship of the Quirin defendants was established and didn&#039;t need to be reiterated.  


In any event, this speaks to my original point.  To use the Quirin decision authorizing the president to convene a military tribunal to try citizens in court as justification for some broader assassination authority is textbook elastic interpretation.  


The UCMJ, LOAC and Hague and Geneva specifically prohibit assassination of anyone not engaged in hostilities.  There is even a clause specifically prohibiting aerial attacks of any kind against illegal combatants.  Recall that Awlaki was never shown to have participated in  attack and was sitting in a private home eating breakfast when killed by an aerial drone.


Last point: SCOTUS has repeatedly rejected the Quirin argument, in Padilla, Hamdan and Lindh.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, I wasn&#8217;t ignoring anything.  I&#8217;d assumed the citizenship of the Quirin defendants was established and didn&#8217;t need to be reiterated.  </p>
<p>In any event, this speaks to my original point.  To use the Quirin decision authorizing the president to convene a military tribunal to try citizens in court as justification for some broader assassination authority is textbook elastic interpretation.  </p>
<p>The UCMJ, LOAC and Hague and Geneva specifically prohibit assassination of anyone not engaged in hostilities.  There is even a clause specifically prohibiting aerial attacks of any kind against illegal combatants.  Recall that Awlaki was never shown to have participated in  attack and was sitting in a private home eating breakfast when killed by an aerial drone.</p>
<p>Last point: SCOTUS has repeatedly rejected the Quirin argument, in Padilla, Hamdan and Lindh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CowboyUp</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5378373</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CowboyUp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5378373</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quirin does apply, because it establishes enemy unlawful combatants - who are US citizens (the part you conveniently left out) - fall under military law.  Like I said, under the LOAC, the US is under no obligation to capture enemy combatants alive or warn them before attacking and killing them.  If you can find an LOAC provision that says they do, I&#039;d love to see it.  Otherwise, unless they surrender or are captured, their due process is US ordnance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quirin does apply, because it establishes enemy unlawful combatants &#8211; who are US citizens (the part you conveniently left out) &#8211; fall under military law.  Like I said, under the LOAC, the US is under no obligation to capture enemy combatants alive or warn them before attacking and killing them.  If you can find an LOAC provision that says they do, I&#8217;d love to see it.  Otherwise, unless they surrender or are captured, their due process is US ordnance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berceuse</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5378286</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berceuse]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2014 18:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5378286</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quirin doesn&#039;t apply.  The court merely established that illegal enemy combatants are subject to military tribunals.  That&#039;s it.  There is nothing in the Quirin decision referencing attacks in any context, much less assassinations of U.S. citizens.  The decision exclusively deals with military tribunals -- which satisfy the due process requirement.  Anwar al-Awlaki was afforded no such tribunal.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quirin doesn&#8217;t apply.  The court merely established that illegal enemy combatants are subject to military tribunals.  That&#8217;s it.  There is nothing in the Quirin decision referencing attacks in any context, much less assassinations of U.S. citizens.  The decision exclusively deals with military tribunals &#8212; which satisfy the due process requirement.  Anwar al-Awlaki was afforded no such tribunal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CowboyUp</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5378222</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CowboyUp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2014 16:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5378222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S., established that any unlawful combatant against the US, including US citizens, falls under military law.   Terrorists are unlawful combatants according to the Laws Of Armed Conflict.  According to the LOAC, they are lawful targets and can be attacked without warning.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S., established that any unlawful combatant against the US, including US citizens, falls under military law.   Terrorists are unlawful combatants according to the Laws Of Armed Conflict.  According to the LOAC, they are lawful targets and can be attacked without warning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian Adams</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377970</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christian Adams]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2014 00:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377970</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A real Article I power does not a phony Article II power make.  The Executive enjoys no &quot;Elastic Clause.&quot; It does not exist any more than the &quot;Edict Clause or the Unicorn Clause.&quot; It is a fairy tale.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A real Article I power does not a phony Article II power make.  The Executive enjoys no &#8220;Elastic Clause.&#8221; It does not exist any more than the &#8220;Edict Clause or the Unicorn Clause.&#8221; It is a fairy tale.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beth Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377714</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beth Aaron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377714</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, Bush  used it to launch a diabolic war crime upon the people, young, old, women, children, the environment, of Iraq for a lie the media perpetuated.  Coffins abounded, children were maimed, families torn apart, the landscape obliterated, for a lie, as all wars seem to be. 
When a nation sleeps with its so called enemy for the so called &quot;resources&quot; it needs be they energy, mined materials, to fuel the ideology of economic growth, the golden calf replacing the one true Gd, it is expected that resistance will ensue.


Who can even tell, with an unbiased eye, who the bad or good guys are. With words tossed about like anti-government forces, rebels, gorilla&#039;s, insurgents, anti-insurgents, terrorists, all for the purpose of propping up whatever regime is kindly to the &quot;interests,&quot; of foreign nations , and common divisions in the US that serve no common good, left wing, right wing, liberal, conservative,  everything based on dividing, who knows anymore what is best for the common good of ALL that live and breath on this troubled earth due to what the human species is doing to every life support system on which it all depends.


Clinging to the use of military force as the only way to solve man-made problems, is so shallow and fear based. We teach children ( perhaps not anymore )not to hit or fight to solve problems yet, as adults, we so easily resort to mass destruction against our own species, something animals who we see as lower, never do.


My view of humanity and our unnatural behaviors, our wars, genocides, mental and physical diseases , clinging to the prowess of military power as somehow being the measure of greatness, makes me  wonder just how we define religion today. The message of Christ was NOT, go forth, ravage the earth, wage war on whatever nations resist westernizing, McDonaldizing, Dunkin Donutizing, KCFizing, and extract all the layers of Creation for your economic interests, to the point your planet&#039;s infrastructure collapses from pollution, over use, and the inability to rebound from human exploitation.  The mission of humanity is what? Dominate, use up for self-serving purposes, poison the planet and spend billions searching for resources on others once you&#039;ve soiled your own nest here?
ALL Presidents take the law into their own hands. STOP blaming this one and blame yourselves for aspiring to a &quot;dream&quot; that has always been an illusion, a lie. In truth, we are guests here and so far, we are leaving our home a trash heap, a slaughterhouse, a once pristine place where all life  thrives, was pure, a gift turned into a cess pool. ALL of us are guilty of selfish want and making choices that cause harm. We are all guilty of turning a pristine planet where nature and life support systems were functioning, clean, able to support life, into a choked, clogged, toxic stew, saturated with the creations of modernity that have put fetal development in harms way, and given rise to environmental disaster. As a nation touting to be, &quot;Under Gd,&quot; our behaviors do not make Creation, a word synonymous with environment, healthy and thriving.
STOP blaming others and LOOK in the mirror. We are all to blame for aspiring to a fake , manipulated system that causes harm not peace, disease, not health, suffering, not empathy, violence, not safety. When our water is undrinkable, our air, unbreathable, and food systems put people in hospitals,  there is much to transform from inside, out. We need look at no one but ourselves. Easy to turn blame on others but solutions are inside.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, Bush  used it to launch a diabolic war crime upon the people, young, old, women, children, the environment, of Iraq for a lie the media perpetuated.  Coffins abounded, children were maimed, families torn apart, the landscape obliterated, for a lie, as all wars seem to be.<br />
When a nation sleeps with its so called enemy for the so called &#8220;resources&#8221; it needs be they energy, mined materials, to fuel the ideology of economic growth, the golden calf replacing the one true Gd, it is expected that resistance will ensue.</p>
<p>Who can even tell, with an unbiased eye, who the bad or good guys are. With words tossed about like anti-government forces, rebels, gorilla&#8217;s, insurgents, anti-insurgents, terrorists, all for the purpose of propping up whatever regime is kindly to the &#8220;interests,&#8221; of foreign nations , and common divisions in the US that serve no common good, left wing, right wing, liberal, conservative,  everything based on dividing, who knows anymore what is best for the common good of ALL that live and breath on this troubled earth due to what the human species is doing to every life support system on which it all depends.</p>
<p>Clinging to the use of military force as the only way to solve man-made problems, is so shallow and fear based. We teach children ( perhaps not anymore )not to hit or fight to solve problems yet, as adults, we so easily resort to mass destruction against our own species, something animals who we see as lower, never do.</p>
<p>My view of humanity and our unnatural behaviors, our wars, genocides, mental and physical diseases , clinging to the prowess of military power as somehow being the measure of greatness, makes me  wonder just how we define religion today. The message of Christ was NOT, go forth, ravage the earth, wage war on whatever nations resist westernizing, McDonaldizing, Dunkin Donutizing, KCFizing, and extract all the layers of Creation for your economic interests, to the point your planet&#8217;s infrastructure collapses from pollution, over use, and the inability to rebound from human exploitation.  The mission of humanity is what? Dominate, use up for self-serving purposes, poison the planet and spend billions searching for resources on others once you&#8217;ve soiled your own nest here?<br />
ALL Presidents take the law into their own hands. STOP blaming this one and blame yourselves for aspiring to a &#8220;dream&#8221; that has always been an illusion, a lie. In truth, we are guests here and so far, we are leaving our home a trash heap, a slaughterhouse, a once pristine place where all life  thrives, was pure, a gift turned into a cess pool. ALL of us are guilty of selfish want and making choices that cause harm. We are all guilty of turning a pristine planet where nature and life support systems were functioning, clean, able to support life, into a choked, clogged, toxic stew, saturated with the creations of modernity that have put fetal development in harms way, and given rise to environmental disaster. As a nation touting to be, &#8220;Under Gd,&#8221; our behaviors do not make Creation, a word synonymous with environment, healthy and thriving.<br />
STOP blaming others and LOOK in the mirror. We are all to blame for aspiring to a fake , manipulated system that causes harm not peace, disease, not health, suffering, not empathy, violence, not safety. When our water is undrinkable, our air, unbreathable, and food systems put people in hospitals,  there is much to transform from inside, out. We need look at no one but ourselves. Easy to turn blame on others but solutions are inside.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berceuse</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377646</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berceuse]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2014 05:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377646</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You raise an interesting point.  There were hundreds, maybe thousands, of Amercans who went to fight for the German Wehrmacht.  The government never tried to assassinate a single one -- ever.  In fact, after the war most of these traitors returned  to the United States.  


The Constitutionally protected presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court does not prevent a cop or a soldier from killing a citizen in an immediate life or death situation, such as a firefight or battle.  But neither a cop nor a soldier may assassinate a suspected enemy, even if the suspected crime is something a  heinous as treason.  It&#039;s why, for instance, our troops brought John Walker Lindh home to stand trial, rather than just put a bullet in his head.  Anyone who would have done so would have spent the remainder of his life in prison.


I&#039;m not a Ron Paul supporter, but I uphold the rule of law.  Obama does not, and he should be impeached for it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You raise an interesting point.  There were hundreds, maybe thousands, of Amercans who went to fight for the German Wehrmacht.  The government never tried to assassinate a single one &#8212; ever.  In fact, after the war most of these traitors returned  to the United States.  </p>
<p>The Constitutionally protected presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court does not prevent a cop or a soldier from killing a citizen in an immediate life or death situation, such as a firefight or battle.  But neither a cop nor a soldier may assassinate a suspected enemy, even if the suspected crime is something a  heinous as treason.  It&#8217;s why, for instance, our troops brought John Walker Lindh home to stand trial, rather than just put a bullet in his head.  Anyone who would have done so would have spent the remainder of his life in prison.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not a Ron Paul supporter, but I uphold the rule of law.  Obama does not, and he should be impeached for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berceuse</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377526</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berceuse]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2014 23:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377526</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your post is incorrect.  The Supreme Court ruled in 1896 (Wiborg v. U.S.) that it is NOT a crime to enlist in a foreign army, nor does one lose citizenship for it.  In fact two subsequent court rulings confirmed that the government may not retract one&#039;s citizenship for any reason.  A citizen may renounce his citizenship, but can reclaim it any time.  IF a citizen formally renounces his citizenship at the same time he gains foreign citizenship AND joins a hostile army, THEN the U.S. government can nullify his citizenship and he would be fair game for assassination.

None of those circumstances applied to the Awlaki situation.  He never renounced his citizenship, never became a citizen of any other nation state, never joined a foreign army, and the U.S. government never revoked his citizen status before hunting him down and assassinating him while he sat in a private house eating breakfast.

In fact his assassination was an impeachable offense.  It&#039;s disappointing that so many conservatives have joined forces with Obama&#039;s mindless sycophants in defending this crime.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your post is incorrect.  The Supreme Court ruled in 1896 (Wiborg v. U.S.) that it is NOT a crime to enlist in a foreign army, nor does one lose citizenship for it.  In fact two subsequent court rulings confirmed that the government may not retract one&#8217;s citizenship for any reason.  A citizen may renounce his citizenship, but can reclaim it any time.  IF a citizen formally renounces his citizenship at the same time he gains foreign citizenship AND joins a hostile army, THEN the U.S. government can nullify his citizenship and he would be fair game for assassination.</p>
<p>None of those circumstances applied to the Awlaki situation.  He never renounced his citizenship, never became a citizen of any other nation state, never joined a foreign army, and the U.S. government never revoked his citizen status before hunting him down and assassinating him while he sat in a private house eating breakfast.</p>
<p>In fact his assassination was an impeachable offense.  It&#8217;s disappointing that so many conservatives have joined forces with Obama&#8217;s mindless sycophants in defending this crime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bittman</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377513</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bittman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2014 23:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377513</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Progressives Professors must be teaching their students about the &quot;elastic clause&quot; because I&#039;ve encountered several young people who have sworn the President had the executive privilege of changing laws as needed.  I&#039;ve found the best thing to do is to ask them to get out a copy of the Constitution and tell me where to find this clause.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Progressives Professors must be teaching their students about the &#8220;elastic clause&#8221; because I&#8217;ve encountered several young people who have sworn the President had the executive privilege of changing laws as needed.  I&#8217;ve found the best thing to do is to ask them to get out a copy of the Constitution and tell me where to find this clause.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lanna</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5377366</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lanna]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2014 17:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5377366</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama makes himself the law and disregards the law and the Constitution. He isn&#039;t fooling anyone about his insane Power Grab.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama makes himself the law and disregards the law and the Constitution. He isn&#8217;t fooling anyone about his insane Power Grab.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G. Tod Slone</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376870</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[G. Tod Slone]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, interesting article.  Too bad you did not obtain the student ADULT&#039;s name and a direct quote.  I would have loved to cartoon her.  Just the other day (I&#039;m now reading the Gulag a second time, though this time auf Deutsch), I thought how little Solzhenitsyn is now mentioned in the literati circles. So, I&#039;m glad you evoked him.   For me, he is one of the very best (with Orwell) of the last century). Read The Oak and the Calf for a great take on the literary scene under USSR socialism and how much it resembles the scene in America today!   One thing I do not like about conservatives is their constant pounding of the religion drum!   I am for small government and the First Amendment, but am an atheist.  Can an atheist not be conservative?  Frontpage ought to have a little section, where conservativism and capitalism are criticized by conservatives.  Otherwise, it remains blind to the faults of conservatism and less convincing.  Blindness is never a good thing.  BTW, check out my blog for the cartoon I did on that Wellesley College sleepwalker statue... featuring Hillary as the statue.   

G. Tod Slone, PhD (universite de Nantes, FR), 

Founding Editor (1998)

The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of
Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence

www.theamericandissident.org

wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com

todslone@hotmail.com

217 Commerce
Rd.

Barnstable, MA 02630]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, interesting article.  Too bad you did not obtain the student ADULT&#8217;s name and a direct quote.  I would have loved to cartoon her.  Just the other day (I&#8217;m now reading the Gulag a second time, though this time auf Deutsch), I thought how little Solzhenitsyn is now mentioned in the literati circles. So, I&#8217;m glad you evoked him.   For me, he is one of the very best (with Orwell) of the last century). Read The Oak and the Calf for a great take on the literary scene under USSR socialism and how much it resembles the scene in America today!   One thing I do not like about conservatives is their constant pounding of the religion drum!   I am for small government and the First Amendment, but am an atheist.  Can an atheist not be conservative?  Frontpage ought to have a little section, where conservativism and capitalism are criticized by conservatives.  Otherwise, it remains blind to the faults of conservatism and less convincing.  Blindness is never a good thing.  BTW, check out my blog for the cartoon I did on that Wellesley College sleepwalker statue&#8230; featuring Hillary as the statue.   </p>
<p>G. Tod Slone, PhD (universite de Nantes, FR), </p>
<p>Founding Editor (1998)</p>
<p>The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of<br />
Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theamericandissident.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.theamericandissident.org</a></p>
<p>wwwtheamericandissidentorg.blogspot.com</p>
<p><a href="mailto:todslone@hotmail.com">todslone@hotmail.com</a></p>
<p>217 Commerce<br />
Rd.</p>
<p>Barnstable, MA 02630</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CowboyUp</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376861</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CowboyUp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376861</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[His hilariously inaccurate citation of the 5th in his &#039;conversation&#039; with me below, was especially poetic.   Apparently, he doesn&#039;t want to be bothered with the facts.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>His hilariously inaccurate citation of the 5th in his &#8216;conversation&#8217; with me below, was especially poetic.   Apparently, he doesn&#8217;t want to be bothered with the facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 11bravo</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376849</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[11bravo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your splitting hairs Mr. Ron Paul absolutist libertarian. The constitution means what I say it means, and there is NO OTHER interpretation allowed.
What about the US sniper in WWII who shoots a German American in Berlin who went back to fight with Hitler?
I am reaching - but so are YOU!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your splitting hairs Mr. Ron Paul absolutist libertarian. The constitution means what I say it means, and there is NO OTHER interpretation allowed.<br />
What about the US sniper in WWII who shoots a German American in Berlin who went back to fight with Hitler?<br />
I am reaching &#8211; but so are YOU!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tagalog</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376818</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tagalog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When you make war on the United States and you&#039;re a United States citizen, it is well within established law, not only the law of war but civil law as well, to deem you to have repudiated your citizenship and become a traitor.  

It is the law in the United States that if you join a foreign army, even one that is an ally of the United States in war, you lose your U.S. citizenship.  Ask all the U.S. citizens who got tired of waiting for the U.S. to enter World War II and who joined the RAF or the Canadian Army.  They all lost their U.S.citizenship.  They later got it back, but they lost it first.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you make war on the United States and you&#8217;re a United States citizen, it is well within established law, not only the law of war but civil law as well, to deem you to have repudiated your citizenship and become a traitor.  </p>
<p>It is the law in the United States that if you join a foreign army, even one that is an ally of the United States in war, you lose your U.S. citizenship.  Ask all the U.S. citizens who got tired of waiting for the U.S. to enter World War II and who joined the RAF or the Canadian Army.  They all lost their U.S.citizenship.  They later got it back, but they lost it first.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tagalog</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376809</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tagalog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376809</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;d be pretty much right if it weren&#039;t for that pesky detail that the &quot;necessary and proper&quot; clause you cite is in Article I, relating exclusively to CONGRESS, not the executive branch.  So it&#039;s CONGRESS, not the President, that has the powers necessary (and proper) to carry out its delegated powers.

The powers of the executive branch are expressed in Article II.

Please try to be intellectually honest in the future and avoid that sneaky language about &quot;Congress and the President.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;d be pretty much right if it weren&#8217;t for that pesky detail that the &#8220;necessary and proper&#8221; clause you cite is in Article I, relating exclusively to CONGRESS, not the executive branch.  So it&#8217;s CONGRESS, not the President, that has the powers necessary (and proper) to carry out its delegated powers.</p>
<p>The powers of the executive branch are expressed in Article II.</p>
<p>Please try to be intellectually honest in the future and avoid that sneaky language about &#8220;Congress and the President.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tagalog</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376805</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tagalog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How fitting that that dumb student would be an officer of the campus branch of some Democrat group.

And they call US &quot;the stupid party.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How fitting that that dumb student would be an officer of the campus branch of some Democrat group.</p>
<p>And they call US &#8220;the stupid party.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cxt</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/j-christian-adams/in-defense-of-the-elastic-clause-of-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-5376792</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cxt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=219809#comment-5376792</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Daniel
So, even in your own posting, you show good and proper reasons why the subject is complex and with multiple interpretations.
So why use the term &quot;dishonest&quot; as even in what you posted there is clear difference of opinion and interpretation????
Didn&#039;t you say &quot;CONGRESS and the President could act&quot; So if you and your POV is to be believed the Congress could reach beyond its enumerated powers as well and take unilateral action beyond the scope of its authority.
I wonder how you and other Leftists would view that???
Also please recall that despite your protestations President Obama himself---invoking his training as a Constitutional professional---decried the actions of Bush in his application of the concept..........until of course he had the job. ;)
So if you really want to argue about it---why not take it up with the President as he clearly USED to take serious issue with YOUR POV. ;)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel<br />
So, even in your own posting, you show good and proper reasons why the subject is complex and with multiple interpretations.<br />
So why use the term &#8220;dishonest&#8221; as even in what you posted there is clear difference of opinion and interpretation????<br />
Didn&#8217;t you say &#8220;CONGRESS and the President could act&#8221; So if you and your POV is to be believed the Congress could reach beyond its enumerated powers as well and take unilateral action beyond the scope of its authority.<br />
I wonder how you and other Leftists would view that???<br />
Also please recall that despite your protestations President Obama himself&#8212;invoking his training as a Constitutional professional&#8212;decried the actions of Bush in his application of the concept&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.until of course he had the job. <img src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" class="wp-smiley" /><br />
So if you really want to argue about it&#8212;why not take it up with the President as he clearly USED to take serious issue with YOUR POV. <img src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif" alt=";)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 777/826 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-29 13:10:38 by W3 Total Cache -->