The fantastic new PLA blog has two particularly powerful thought experiments. The first relates to President Bush's ability to label any American citizen an "enemy combatant" and have them dragged off:
Should President Richard Nixon, in 1971, have had the unilateral power to arrest and hold Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein for the duration of the Vietnam War with no competing authority empowered to review that decision?
During the bombing of Kosovo, should President Bill Clinton have had the power to declare Ken Starr an enemy combatant and have him dragged off to a brig never to be heard from until the end of a nebulous �War Against Ethnic Cleansing?�
the other is asking what a potential future president might do with the power of 170,000 political patronage employees in the Department of Homeland Security:
Regardless of your political identification, the other party will eventually come into power. When that occurs, is it really wise to have added 170,000 political patronage positions to the power of the President? The issue is not simply whether or not this President would use those patronage jobs to reward political supporters and punish political opponents. The issue is not solely whether this President would allow political ideology to trump knowledge, ability, competency and efficiency in the staffing of the Homeland Security Department. The issue is also whether or not the worst, least efficient, most political, most corrupt President that we elect in the future would do so.
Read the blog entry in full for more.