Senate report concludes: no proof of contact between

[Lissa]

Here are a few things that come to mind; Clinton's commitment of 20,000 troops in Bosnia without congressional consent is a continuation of the Imperial presidency.

As I seem to recall, he was asked to intervene by Europe and/or UN. There was no war declaration as well, so Congress had no real say so.

Moves during that administration to bring the US under jurisdiction of the Internation Criminal Court.

Why is this a bad thing™? If someone of power in the US Government/Military service does something worthy of a war crime, they should be dealt with. Let's look at the facts, when it has come to war crimes commited, it has always been an international organization that has held the trials, so why shouldn't the US be just as subject to those trials as anyone else?

The implementation of somewhat covert national ID system, through requiring SS# be electronically encoded on DL's by States.

This has been in the works a lot longer than Clinton. The government has always wanted to act in a big brother role since the early 30s across all political parties.

The Brady Bill, and numerous 2nd amendment erosions (e.g. military styled guns).

Why in god's name does a civilian need access to the AR-15? Don't tell me it's so they can hunt with it cause that's a bunch of crap. (I grew up in an area where just about everyone hunted and no one used anything outside a standard hunting rifle.) There is no good reason for civilians to have access to military grade hardware, none.

Legislation introduced and signed to limit encryption, and allows the Feds to control our access to encryption technology which prevents citizens from insuring their own privacy.

Have you used PGP and other encryption methods available? They're pretty hardy items as is. In order to break the encryption that most people use, you have to have several hundred PCs working in concert to break the encryption in a decent amount of time for encrypting things like files and the like (decrypting wireless signals on the other hand is fairly easy).

EO 13083, which attempts to rewrite the Tenth Amendment in favor of the Federal Executive rather than for States.

The states have been losing power every since the 17th Amendment was put in (may be wrong on the number, but it was were Senators were changed to general election instead of appointment by the state government).

Also, many EO's by Clinton (as emergency powers) were done as power play in order to circumvent congress.

And this is different from any of the prior Presidents? All branches have tried to get a leg up on all the others and this has been something that has been happening since the early 30s atleast.

The Clinton sponsored cyberspace harrassment law suppressing free speech on the internet whether it be bigoted political advocacy, sexually themed jokes, potentially offensive art, or religious proselytizing?

Congress has been trying to regulate the internet since it started being used by the general populous. Government overall has been trying to control what they really can't. (One of the best analogies I every heard was from a tech saavy Congressman that pointed out that the internet is like a gigantic highway with innumerable lanes where everyone and their brother can drive on it with their ferrari or their lawn tractor. That there were onramps and offramps everywhere and there was no speed limit. Yet Congress still didn't get it after he made a beautiful and easy to understand explaination.)