[Veracious Poet]

"Clearly, the answer is NO. No man is a law unto himself - that's why we have the U.S. Consitution. It is superior in force to ANY man."

Hmmm...well, it seemed Lincoln was "a law unto himself" in that he not only suspended many aspects of the Constitution, he governed by decree completely in contradiction to the powers delagated to the office of the president.

Do you need examples or are you aware of the history of Lincoln's rule?

[Non-Sequitur]

Do you need examples or are you aware of the history of Lincoln's rule?

Some examples would be nice.

[exmarine]

I don't need examples. I am aware. Suspending Habeus Corpus was UNLAWFUL. We are a nation of laws, not men. There is no defense for that - none. The Constitution is not a suggestion - IT'S THE LAW OF THE LAND. The Bill of Rights CANNOT BE LEGALLY SUSPENDED. There is no way to legally defend that. If it is okay for Lincoln to suspend Constiutitonal protections, then it sets a precedent for anyone to do it. All they have to do is come up with some lame justification.

Did you see what Tommie Franks predicted? He basically said that in the event of a catastrophic terrorist attack, he believed that the Constiution would be suspended and a military dictatorship enforced. TYRANNY OVER CHAOS! Be afraid.