A Political War against the American People and its institutions

Chronique de Rodrigue Tremblay

Second sorrow: "A loss of democracy and Constitutional
rights as the presidency eclipses Congress and is
itself transformed from a co-equal 'executive branch'
of government into a military junta.

Chalmers Johnson (Sorrows of Empire)
"Now those who seek absolute power, even though they
seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply
demanding the right to enforce their own version of
heaven on earth, and let me remind you they are the
very ones who always create the most hellish tyranny."

Barry Goldwater, former Republican senator from

"Kings had always been involving and impoverishing
their people in wars, pretending generally, if not
always, that the good of the people was the object.
This, our (U.S.) Convention understood to be the most
oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they
resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man
should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon

Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), 16th U.S. president
“There are no hereditary kings in America.”

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor
The Iraq war is turning into a war against the
American people and its institutions. According to the
latest poll, an overwhelming majority of Americans (63
%) want U.S. troops to be out of Iraq by the end of
next year. This is the clear message
the American electorate is sending to President George
W. Bush. On February 16 (2007), 56 percent of the
members of the U.S. House of Representative
essentially said the same thing when they adopted
Resolution 63, by a vote of 246 against 182, in which
they stated that "... Congress disapproves of the
decision of President George W. Bush announced on
January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000
additional United States combat troops to Iraq." And,
to make it complete, 56 percent of U.S. Senators
signified their opposition to the war on February 17
(2007). These clear democratic signals of the people's
wishes came after the November 7 (2006) election, in
which pro-war Republican candidates took a thumping.
They also came after a blue ribbon study group, the
Baker-Hamilton Commission, unanimously concluded that
the solution in Iraq is political and not military,
and unanimously recommended that the U.S. terminate
its open-ended presence in Iraq and begin its
disengagement and “redeployment” from that country.
You would think that politicians who respect democracy
and the people's right to govern themselves would pay
attention and listen to what the sovereign electorate
is saying. — But to no avail. The Bush-Cheney regime,
initially placed into power by one Supreme judge in 2000, after
presidential candidate Al Gore won the
popular vote, went the other way and ordered a
military build-up in the Persian Gulf, and, against
the advice of the generals on the ground, ordered [a
military 'surge' in Iraq.->http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/salon_1_06_07.htm]
It is a strange spectacle in a democracy when the
influence of a few people trumps the will of the
majority. The Bush-Cheney regime seems to be inclined
to follow the narrow advice of powerful lobbies rather
than listen to what the electorate and elected
officials are saying. In Washington D.C., under George
W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the [American Enterprise
Institute (AEI)->http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/01/06/aei/print.html
has more clout than the U.S. Congress. On January 14
(2007), U.S. President George W. Bush
expressed his personal conception of democracy when he
said: "... they [the Congress] could try to stop me
from doing it. But I’ve made my decision. And we’re
going forward." —And two weeks later, on January 25
(2007), oil-man Dick Cheney
reinforced this cynical point of view by saying, after
a Senate Committee adopted a resolution in opposition
to Bush's plan for a military escalation in Iraq: "It
won't stop us"..."We are moving forward." ... "We need
to get the job done." And Cheney added defiantly it's
"hogwash to say Bush's credibility is at stake in
It does not matter that the Bush-Cheney team has made
colossal errors of judgment,
they feel they have absolute powers in their hands and
they intend to use them for whatever project they have
in mind, and damn the American public, damn the
elected Congress, and damn world opinion. Indeed, this
regime has resurrected President Richard Nixon's old
and infamous philosophy of 'executive supremacy' and
has even gone further in adopting the [anti-democratic
theory of an "imperial presidency."->http://www.Democrats.com/Cheneys-Dead-Enders].
According to this dangerous theory, there are no
limits to presidential wartime powers, even when no
such war has been declared by Congress. In such
circumstances of his own choosing, a president could
then stop recognizing the authority of the elected
Congress and refuse to accept the courts as final
arbiters of constitutional rights, each time he
considers this role to be at odds with his vision of
national security.
Of course, such an outright grasp for power smacks
dictatorship and represents a direct attack on the
U.S. Constitution, with its Checks and Balances and
the Rule of Law at its center, provisions which have
been precisely designed to avoid the pitfalls of
dictatorship. Maybe people should have paid more
attention when George W. Bush joked aloud that "If
this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot
easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." (December
18, 2000), or when he proclaimed that "I'm the
decider, and I decide what's best.“ (April 14, 2006)
As President and Father of the U.S. Constitution James
Madison (1751-1836) put it: "There are more instances
of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual
and silent encroachments of those in power than by
violent and sudden usurpations." In fact, most
constitutional experts believe that Bush's claim for
an imperial presidency is prima facie unconstitutional
and is not supported by anything in [the U.S.
Constitution.->http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604b.asp]. In
particular, it has been pointed out that the
Bush-Cheney administration cannot invoke [the October 2
2002 Iraq resolution->http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html]
as a blank check to claim absolute powers, because
this resolution explicitly invoked [the War Powers
Resolution (1976 War Powers Act),->http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?no=340251&rel_no=1]
Section 2(b), which requires the President of the
United States to gain congressional approval before
any troop deployment abroad.
Therefore, it remains to be seen if the Bush-Cheney
regime can go on challenging the American people,
Congress and the courts for two more years, not even
considering international law and world public

Rodrigue Tremblay is
professor emeritus of economics at the University of
Montreal and can be reached at
rodrigue.tremblay@yahoo.com. He is the author of the
book ['The New American
Visit his [blog site
Author's Website
Check Dr. Tremblay's coming book ['The Code for Global
Ethics' ->http://www.moralitywithoutreligion.com]

Laissez un commentaire

Aucun commentaire trouvé