A NON-RHETORICAL QUESTION

Finkelman, Paul <paul.finkelman@albanylaw.edu> Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu
Sun Mar 4 20:51:19 PST 2012


Lou's comments are clearly about politics; but my issues is Wilson's clear warning to Germany that we would enter the war if Germany resumed submarine attacks -- I am pretty sure that was 1915; Germany did in 1917 and Wilson asked for a declaration of War.  Surely he could not go to war without Congress but he could promise Germany (threaten Germany) with asking for a declaration of War.

As for FDR, are you suggesting that after Pearl Harbor we should not have entered the War?



*************************************************
Paul Finkelman, Ph.D.
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208

518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)

paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu<mailto:paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu>
www.paulfinkelman.com<http://www.paulfinkelman.com>
*************************************************

________________________________
From: Lou Fisher [lfisher11 at verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 10:49 PM
To: Finkelman, Paul <paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu>; lfisher11 at verizon.net; SLevinson at law.utexas.edu; conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Re: A NON-RHETORICAL QUESTION

I think there is.  In 1916, in the midst of a presidential year, Wilson vowed that he would never take the country into war.  After his reelection, he was ready by spring to go to war.  It is interesting how many presidential candidates in the middle of a presidential year pledge to keep the country out of war (Wilson in 1916, FDR in 1940, and LBJ in 1964).


On 03/04/12, Finkelman, Paul <Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu> wrote:

Not trying to fight with my friend Lou, whose opinions I deeply respect" but is there a difference between you take below on Obama and Wilson's 1915 warning to Germany that eventually led to war?

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless


-----Original message-----
From: Lou Fisher <lfisher11 at verizon.net<mailto:lfisher11 at verizon.net>>
To: "Finkelman, Paul <paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu<mailto:paul.finkelman at albanylaw.edu>>" <Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu<mailto:Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu>>, "lfisher11 at verizon.net<mailto:lfisher11 at verizon.net>" <lfisher11 at verizon.net<mailto:lfisher11 at verizon.net>>, "SLevinson at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.edu>" <SLevinson at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.edu>>, "conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<mailto:conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>" <conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<mailto:conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>>
Sent: Mon, Mar 5, 2012 00:37:02 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: Re: A NON-RHETORICAL QUESTION

Paul:  I don't think he has a "First Amendment right."  I also don't think he has a First Amendment right to encourage people who are out of work to rob grocery stores.  The President is the nation's top law enforcement officer, elected to see that the laws are faithfully executed.  He can't speak off-the-cuff in magazine interviews about illegal and unconstitutional options.  I find his statements extremely irresponsible and ignorant.  I might be a minority of one.  Lou


On 03/04/12, Finkelman, Paul <Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu<mailto:Paul.Finkelman at albanylaw.edu>> wrote:

Lou:  does he have a first amendment right?   Did wilson have a right to warn germany on submarine warfare?

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless


-----Original message-----
From: Lou Fisher <lfisher11 at verizon.net<mailto:lfisher11 at verizon.net>>
To: "SLevinson at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.edu>" <SLevinson at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.edu>>, "conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<mailto:conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>" <conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<mailto:conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>>
Sent: Sun, Mar 4, 2012 21:03:43 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: A NON-RHETORICAL QUESTION

I think he has no statutory or constitutional authority to make such threats.  I interpret his remarks as election-year postering to show he is a "strong" President.  Very unfortunate message.


On 03/04/12, Sanford Levinson<SLevinson at law.utexas.edu<mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.edu>> wrote:

Where does Barack Obama get the authority to threaten “military action” against Iran?  I.e., is there a congressional statute (it surely isn’t the AUMF, unless that’s an open-ended delegation of the power to a constitutional dictator to wage war whenever and wherever he/she wishes) that delegates such authority to the President—I must have missed the great debate that surely would have accompanied such a statute--or is it based on a full-throated reading of the Commander-in-Chief Clause that makes the President a constitutional dictator even without any statutory authority?  IF George W. Bush were doing this, would many (though surely not all) of us be going ballistic about the potential abuse of presidential power and raising all sorts of questions about the pandering to a particular voting bloc in a predictably close election?

sandy

________________________________

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu<mailto:Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20120305/8bb64013/attachment.html>


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list