As part of Operation Democracy, I think it’s important to remind people that the United States is still a democracy. It’s a rather flawed, representative democracy where our lawmakers are more beholden to corporate interests than their constituents, but it’s still a democracy and the Constitution is still supposed to rule as the law of the land.
So as part of Operation Democracy, I believe we need to ring the bell long and hard to alert people to the erosion of democracy and to their rights as outlined in the Constitution. Just Friday morning I was reminded of yet another egregious attempt at some sort of theocracy or dictatorship by the Bush administration.
An
article in The New York Times Friday began with this paragraph:
“President Bush struck an aggressive new tone on Thursday in his clash with Congress over Iraq, telling lawmakers they had no business trying to manage the war, portraying the conflict as a showdown with Al Qaeda and warning that moving toward withdrawal now would risk ‘mass killings on a horrific scale.’”
Um, what? I’m no legal scholar, or any other kind of scholar, but even I know that Article I of the U.S. Constitution outlines the role and powers of Congress and it says in Section 8 of Article 1:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; …
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
As I read in this
article:“The suggestion that the president should have unilateral power to make war was decisively rejected at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. As delegate Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts put it, he ‘never expected to hear in a republic a motion to empower the executive alone to make war.’ Instead, the Framers agreed that Congress would have the power to declare war.
“It’s true that the Constitution makes the president the ‘Commander in Chief’ of the US Army and Navy. But as Alexander Hamilton noted in Federalist No. 69, this does no more than make the president the ‘first General" of America’s armed forces. And generals don't get to decide which countries we go to war with.”
So can someone explain why Bush has always tried to circumvent Congress in this war? And what may be more disappointing is why the heck has Congress allowed Bush to take away its war powers? (What a woeful disappointment this Congress has been thus far!)
But after Bush’s fiery speech Thursday, the House did vote pretty much along party lines to require that the United States withdraw most combat troops from Iraq by April 1. That’s a good first step. Now it’s important for the Senate to follow suit. Stand up now and tell your Senators to approve the bill as passed in the House.
But even if that should happen, I’m sure Bush, in his constant push for authoritarian rule, will laugh off the actions of Congress, and the will of more than 70% of the American people, and veto the bill. But that just means that we have to be that much more passionate in reminding our representatives that they have been elected to serve us. They cannot simply ignore the will of the people or the Constitution itself with no repercussions.
And speaking of ignoring the Constitution, how about Dick saying the Vice President wasn’t part of the executive branch? Um, I think
these people make up the executive branch.
And look whose picture is there, it’s smirking Dick.
Seriously, if I want to find out who is part of the executive branch, it doesn’t take a lot of research. You could just
click here.Why, look Dick’s there, too.
I know the Constitution is considered void for this administration, but most of us still consider it to be the law. And look there in Article II, the part specifically about the Executive Branch. Who is that mentioned in the very first paragraph? Why it’s the Vice President!
The list of violations of the Constitution of this administration are long. I hate to even think about our loss of habeas corpus.
Habeaus Corpushabeas corpus n. Law A writ issued to bring a party before a court to prevent unlawful restraint. Source: AHD
"The basic premise behind habeas corpus is that you cannot be held against your will without just cause. To put it another way, you cannot be jailed if there are no charges against you. If you are being held, and you demand it, the courts must issue a writ or habeas corpus, which forces those holding you to answer as to why. If there is no good or compelling reason, the court must set you free. It is important to note that of all the civil liberties we take for granted today as a part of the Bill of Rights, the importance of habeas corpus is illustrated by the fact that it was the sole liberty thought important enough to be included in the original text of the Constitution."
Operation Democracy and ALL Americans have the right and responsibility to remind this administration that this is still a democracy. It is not a dictatorship. And despite the last seven years of evidence otherwise, no one should be held above the law. It is time for us to stand up and not let this administration continue to get away with its high crimes and misdemeanors as it has done for seven years.
And to end this on somewhat of a light-hearted note. You need to check out the act of this
Bush impersonator (some questionable language, if you happen to be at work or something...) What's scary, though, is that I truly believe the guy has nailed down exactly as Bush thinks.
Posts
