![]() |
|
||
|
Marie Cocco: King George, DethronedPosted on Jul 2, 2006By Marie Cocco WASHINGTON—He shall no longer be allowed to compile a “history of repeated injuries and usurpations.’‘ He shall not be free anymore to “render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.’’ Nor can he continue in his refusal to “Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.’‘ This is the gift the Supreme Court has given the nation as it celebrates Independence Day. The court has given us back the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and that document’s recounting of “usurpations’’ by King George III of England—a historic bill of particulars with stunning relevance today. It has affirmed that the president, merely because he is commander in chief, does not possess the powers of a king. Even George W. Bush must live by the enduring rules of democracy—rules he espouses with easy rhetoric but undermines in reality. The court has given us back the Constitution. However much President Bush has tried to assume the powers of a monarch in the “war on terror,’’ however much a cowardly Congress has stepped aside to allow this autocratic impulse to flourish, the Supreme Court has drawn the line. We are, in the court’s view, still a nation of laws and not men. The court has now ruled against Bush on some of the broadest and most serious challenges to democracy that this president has managed to devise. Advertisement Now, in its rebuke of the White House scheme for trying Guantanamo prisoners in tribunals that lack the barest protections of either the U.S. military legal system or international law, the court has at last stated the obvious: That even the commander in chief cannot willfully seize such power for himself, not even in wartime. This is a doctrine that has been affirmed time and again, yet has been so thoroughly disrespected by Bush and his megaphones in the right-wing echo chamber that a common perception has arisen that the president might well be right. But throughout its history, the Supreme Court has rebuffed such presidential power grabs, whether carried out by a Harry Truman or a Richard Nixon. Far from being representatives of those newfangled “activist judges’’ that some conservatives even now howl about, the justices did what justices do: They followed their own precedents, the Constitution and various laws as they are written, not as the president wills them to be. Still, the decision on the Guantanamo tribunals is not cause to set off celebratory fireworks with abandon. Most of the approximately 450 detainees never have been charged or brought before a now-discredited tribunal. Their ultimate fate remains unclear. And ominously, had Chief Justice John Roberts participated in the case, it would probably have been decided by the slim margin of 5 to 4. Roberts had sided with the president when this matter was before a federal appeals court, so he stepped aside during the Supreme Court’s action on it. He appears to be as sympathetic to the sweeping presidential powers Bush claims, as were the dissenters on the right, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. The vote of just one justice separates those who would uphold the Constitution’s careful balance of powers and a court that might, in the future, endorse such a dangerously grandiose view of the presidency. Now Congress is to be called upon to write new rules for military tribunals that could pass legal muster, though the Supreme Court made it plain that this is unnecessary, since it endorsed existing rules for courts-martial as proper. The legislative process is fraught with potential danger. No doubt Bush will use it to push for a grant of wide presidential power. No doubt he will turn what should be a serious debate into just another opportunity for partisan attack. Given the closely divided court and the clear chance for congressional mischief, there is one more history lesson to be taken from this Supreme Court: Elections matter. Previous item: Truthdigger of the Week: John Paul Stevens Next item: Jabari Asim: America's Blacks Are a Giving People CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
We just got faster!
Our site is growing, and we’ve upgraded our servers to bring you a better, faster Truthdig experience.
We’re thrilled with our improvement — but it’s added a lot to our costs. Please help us to keep things snappy and make sure you have instant access to thousands of in-depth Truthdig articles, interviews, videos and cartoons.
Please chip in today with a gift to keep us moving forward. Then check out the site for yourself!
By Paul Crowther, July 6, 2006 at 9:38 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well said Tom Nekia!
Report thisBy Sylvia Barksdale, July 6, 2006 at 10:57 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well, King George may be dead but the bastard is still there with his ego like a nuke for a year and 5 months. There is North Korea and Iran on the tble for him and his never ending deathbed, Iraq.
Report thisI’m not so sure the suprme court has acted on the people’s behalf. They’ve given us just enough to placate us for the moment. What have they given the prisoners who’re held with no legal advice? What have they done about his Homeland Security techniques of looting and plundering and infringing on our privacy without warrents?
What is this: government of, for and by the people all about?
By alex, July 5, 2006 at 9:31 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Too little too late. They should have shown some backbone in Florida 2000 when we REALLY needed it. All we wanted then was a damn recount.
http://www.operation2012.com
Report thisBy Paul, July 5, 2006 at 6:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
@ Andrew Pass’s comment - Guantanamo is a prison. The individuals (innocent Americans) in the World Trade Center and at the Pentagon and in the 4 aircraft used on 9/11 were not prisoners. It’s about complying with basic rights accorded to prisoners, wherever they may be and whatever their alleged crime may be. Continuing to assert that the terrorists will do anything to kill innocent individuals, therefore we must do anything to stop them from doing so is entirely unjustified. I suppose some people would still like to believe that the American government and it’s allies are still doing the “right thing”. There’s a point where you have to do some self-analysis and wonder what you’re doing and what you’ve become, and whether your actions reflect well or badly on your code of ethics.
Report thisBy Tom Nekia, July 5, 2006 at 6:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
As much as I hate to say this—we are Bush. Yes, that’s right, we are Bush. Here’s why:
Report this1) We’re spoiled.
2) We’re ignorant.
3) We’re intellectually lazy.
4) We’re oblivious to the world around us.
5) We live in a myth/bubble that never existed.
6) We worship Mammon.
7) We’re Sunday Christians.
8) We’re patriarchal and tradition-bound.
9) We’re exclusivist and hypocritical.
10)We’re just plain dumb—otherwise how could Bush be president?
Look in the mirror, America. Then smash it.
By Andrew Pass, July 5, 2006 at 1:12 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
On the one hand, I’m not sure that the prisoners at G Bay deserve basic protections. Were the Americans at the World Trade Center afforded basic protections? Were the people on the planes afforded basic protections? At the same time, if todays prisoners at G Bay are not afforded basic protections, who won’t be given them tomorrow? What about the next day and the next? The Supreme Court made the right move in two cases: ruling in favor of George Bush’s Presidency and ruling against him at G Bay.
Andrew Pass
Report thishttp://www.Pass-Ed.com/blogger.html
By ron hansing, July 5, 2006 at 12:04 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
i was deeply saddened by the supreme court ruling… should have been unaminous. reality is we are just one justice short of a suppressive majority that will dominant this country for the next 30 years. scary.
Report thisBy Alan Sindler, July 5, 2006 at 11:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Very good article. Just one problem I can see: Bush is now set to get his lackeys in Congress to pass laws allowing him to do the very things the Supreme Court said he couldn’t. The arrogance of the Cheney White House knows no bounds, so unfortunately, we can probably expect their grap for more power to
Report thiscontinue until the end of this utterly horrendous,
and corrupt presidency.
By Margaret Currey, July 5, 2006 at 10:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear Marie
The flag is a symbol, and no one should be burning the flag, but how many times does a person burn the flag, I think that the singing of the Star Spangled Baner brings forth in the heart just as much feeling as the flag, and in fact does more than the waving of the flag, which represents this country taking land away from the native peoples, I am not an native american, but I believe these people were not given their due in the past and at present. I only hope congress will wake up and realize if you have a job you ought to be doing what you are paid for, especially since they just gave themselves a pay raise, while the federal minimum wage is still $5.15 an hour.
M Currey, Portland, Oregon
Report thisBy July Canute, July 5, 2006 at 9:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
This Supreme Court should be impeached because it is illegal and illegitmate because it enthroned Bush in the first place.
Why does George Bush hate the Arabs and Muslims so much that he wants to lock them away at Gitmo and torture them? It doesn’t make sense. Given his family’s close relationship with the Saudis???
Bill Kristol at PNAC planned to include Saudi Arabia in the “rearrangement” of the middle east btw but the Bushes said no-no.
We once had wonderful Arabists at our State Department. There are books written about them and by them. Now we don’t have two people there who can even speak an Arabic language. How did that happen? Who took over the State Department? Christians?
The Arabs want to sell their oil and we need to buy it. There is no reason for them to be our enemies. As the Bush and Saudi families demonstrate, lucatrive business partnerships make for close friendships, not enmity. so what is the problem here? The Christians?
RHAM EMANUEL is the democrat who will CHOOSE the next presidential nominee. You are correct, elections do matter. The problem is that they are fixed from the get go. Will Rahm choose an evil christian who will continue the holocaust in the middle east? Is Hillary cozying up to Christians?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Report thisBy Dee Meyer, July 5, 2006 at 8:20 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Last week more people voted for American Idol than in any national election to date. Elections might matter if they are entertaining enough. Kill the King!
Report thisDee Meyer
By Merilyn Brunner, July 5, 2006 at 8:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I agree with response 12934 by Fadal Abdullah. I was thinking the same things about the 2000 betrayal by the Supreme Court, and I agree that the wisdom of lifetime appointments should be carefully reviewed. Two hundred years ago it might have made sense, but even the Founding Fathers left open the means to change with the times—and these are different times.
Report thisThank you.
By G. Anderson, July 4, 2006 at 11:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
In the aftermath of decision there was concern that a potential exists to try American service men for war crimes trials.
Congress began immediately drafting legislation to protect our troops from prosecution…
However it is unlikely that any legislation like this would ever protect our men and women in Uniform from trial for War Crimes…
But no matter how many times the law is touted to protect our troops from charges, the real un mentioned reason for this legislation is to protect President Bush….
Unfortunately, nothing congress will attempt can protect President Bush from the consequences of his actions, for violating internation law, the military code of conduct, and the Geneva convention….
International law clearly states that every individual has a moral duty to disobey unlawful orders, and to respect human life no matter their position or political post…
Report thisBy Fadel Abdallah, July 4, 2006 at 2:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear Marie:
Though I enjoyed reading your very thoughtful piece about the Supreme Court words, it is “not cause to set off celebratory fireworks” as you yourself say somewhere in your article. Also, when talking about the Guantánamo prisoners, you say that “this is a doctrine that has been affirmed time and again, yet has been thoroughly disrespected by Bush.”
Judging by issues you affirmed and raised in your article, I feel sorry to say that the title of your piece and its premise do not give me comfort; you’re overrating the Supreme Courts words, when in fact what the nation needs is action. Let me explain why I am not sharing you jubilation.
Firstly, this is the same “Supremely corrupt Court that declared America a dictatorship of sorts with a puppet head in December 2000,” as Sam Snedegar, # 12864, correctly reminds us. If we are dealing with a true democracy, then fanatic and evil Bush should have not been put on the throne in the first place, so that after six years of reckless policies and thousands dead and crippled for life, we have to celebrate the empty words of the Supreme Court about his dethroning!
Secondly, the Supreme Court, being appointed by the president in power, and yet worse for life, is an institution that is the antithesis of both justice and democracy. No matter how fair-minded they are, the justices will eventually side with and serve the interests of the people in power, simply because they view themselves as part of that power structure. For a Supreme Court to be just and democratic, its members should be elected nationally by a popular vote for a fixed term; not nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress. Moreover, the police should be directly under its command, with the power to investigate and remove the President if necessary.
Fadel Abdallh, Chicago
Report thisBy Billy Q, July 4, 2006 at 11:54 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Congress, one would suppose is, or at least ought to be embarrassed by the Supreme Court’s ruling on Hamdan.
Now, perhaps, Senators and Representatives will perform their Constitutional duty (and thereby cease their continual dereliction of it) by acting as checker and balancer of the executive.
Maybe, just maybe, they’ll become so busy doing what their supposed to do that there won’t be time to waste The People’s time and money bringing ‘definition of marriage’ and ‘flag burning’ amendments to the floor in order to create election-year wedge issues. One can only hope.
Have a hopeful, happy and safe Independence Day, everyone! Pray for the safe return of our troops.
Report thisBy Reg, July 4, 2006 at 10:40 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Today is the day to TAKE BACK the flag from those who have usurped it. Surely, no flag is sacred. A flag is a symbol. But we value what it stands for, not the fabric it’s made of. Think.
Tragically, the political right has claimed Old Glory as its own, and the rest of us have shied away from waving or displaying or wearing a replica of this important symbol of freedom and democratic principles. What a shame that is.
As you celebrate the emergence of the United States of America, take a moment to mourn the loss of the principles and virtues that made us the great nation we were. Then, TAKE BACK THE FLAG.
Here’s a free pdf download to keep or share. The tragedy is that it had to be written at all. The beauty is that it reminds us of who we really are, and that we can once again be proud of who we are - if we wake up as a nation.
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/a_real_american.html
Report thisBy Jaded Prole, July 4, 2006 at 8:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Supreme Court ruling was a gratifying suprise but we have to remember that we are dealing with an administration that respects no laws and a Congress infested with fascist ideology and rotten with opportunism. I wouldn’t be suprised if they passed some kind of legislation in support of the Bush/Cheney gulagism.
As for elections, unless we reclaim the franchise with verifiable vote tracking they are a moot point. there are efforts to do just that and they need our support
Report thisBy Hilding Lindquist, July 4, 2006 at 7:54 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yes, Congress will have to weigh in on what Bush and Company—led by the MBA President—have been doing in George’s name.
They’ve been avoiding it, spending their time on spending our money to ensure their re-election with tactically (strategically?) placed earmarks. Somehow the Neocon Republicans thought “core values” meant public-purse projects in the home district.
So now the Neocon Republicans are going to actually have to vote on their interpretaion of the meaning our REAL core values, CLEARLY stated in our Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights ... and, oh yes, since so many of them keep calling us a CHRISTian nation, maybe the will get around to reflecting on the Christ’s Sermon on the Mount ... Jesus’s CLEAR statement of HIS core values.
There is so much divine right of kings (George as God’s Chosen leader with unimpeded executive authority) and OLD Testament (Jehovah smiting the heathen, Joshusa killing every living thing in Jericho) rhetoric spewing out of these Neocons that it is hard to believe that they either American or Christian.
Could it be that they are wolves wearing lambskin? (Good Christians will REALLY appreciate that metaphor.)
Report thisBy Terry Anderson, July 4, 2006 at 1:56 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Congress does have a “role to play” in the debate over Executive powers, now that the SC has ruled.
Report thisThey will do what he pays them for, they will “roll over” and make perfectly legal eveything he has been doing illegally.
When will we realise that it doesn’t matter who we vote for when they don’t serve us at all?
By Dino Riccitti, July 3, 2006 at 5:39 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well Bobbymo, if it is a simpleton act to want the constitution of the United States to be upheld so be it. I must be a simpleton, but at least I have compassion. By the way at least in some respects the North viet. Army held most of the Geneva accords in place. Red cross visits, packages from home etc. These detainees get squat including leagal representation
Report thisBy William, July 3, 2006 at 5:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bob Pearce #12849
Report thisBob,
As a born and bred U.S. citizen I would like to tell you that I have had the same thoughts and feelings you reflect in your comment. I have the untmost respect for Canada and consider your country to be the brightest beacon of democracy at this point in time. Your penchant for tolerance and fairness conform more with our country’s founding father’s ideology than the people holding power in the U.S. Knowing you guys are next door is a comfort for those of us down here that have experienced a constant whittleing away of our liberties since this dictator and the wingnut congress have taken over.
I have even considered moving to Canada but being from the South I have ruled it out in that I don’t think I could handle freezing my ass off.
Will
By Margaret Currey, July 3, 2006 at 5:05 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear Marie
I agree with a person with the comment elections count, the election system should be overhauled, this country has changed a lot since our founding fathers, one example is that government seems to be concreated in the east, or mid west, the far west seems not to matter to Bush and company, Calif might be important because of the governor, but Oregon being a liberal state is not
listened to by our government. I believe that the electoral college is not the way to go, it makes presidents who do not get the popular vote, in 2000 and 2002 the election was stolen by partisan people who control the elections, Cathleen Harris in particular, she also had the blessings of Jeb Bush.
Also the Democrats and Republicians are too cozy, this country needs a third party. Oregon wants a choice on the ballet, if you want to be an independent that should be a right and also a right to vote in the primarys.
If democracy wants to stay alive in the united states people should pay attention, because they surely will pay attention when it is gone. Rich people always want power over the poorer and in most cases honest people. This thing will never stop and people should always keep this in mind. Have a nice Fourth of July.
Margaret C. from Portland Oregon
Report thisBy jasé, July 3, 2006 at 1:06 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Elections count.
Report thisIf only, or perhaps ‘specially,
in providing appointments to SCOTUS.
We’re riding a very thin line here, folx.
By frank lambert, July 3, 2006 at 12:41 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Dear Marie
Your article is precise and illustrates the dangers of this criminal administration. I agree with you that had Roberts voted, the decision would have gone in the wrong direction. Too many Americans are unconcerned about politics, which,as you know, leads to tyranny.
When you say in your last paragraph,“elections matter”, I agree,especially when the votes are accurately counted and voters are not disenfranchised,as Greg Palast,and others have documented since the Florida 2000 election and the infamous 2004 Ohio debacle.
I myself blame the Democratic Party ( I left the party in disgust ) as co-conspirators with the Bush/Republican crime regime. The opposition from the Democrates,especially in the Senate, is tepid at best. I have yet to see any “real” anger over the unchallanged methodical destruction of the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights by the republicans and the soothsaying Christian charlatanistic fanatics who preach their version of subserviance to American fascism and mental slavery.
Last month,in the California primary election,only 28-30% of eligible voters bothered to vote. Need I say any more about our “wonderful” uninformed ( except for nascar,american idol,false reality shows,sports,etc.,etc. ) public? Ms. Cocco, we are a nation of non-readers,in spite of all that’s available. A wise Sage from England once said,“ignorance is not bliss,it is unforgivable!”
I’ve been reading your columns for years, and learn from you. Have a wonderful 4th of July,and many many more.
Peace and Harmony,
Report thisFranklin O. Lambert
By SamSnedegar, July 3, 2006 at 8:39 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well! Up from the dead she arose, did Cocco. I was wondering how they shut her up, and I assumed it was the same way they did Scheer and Conason, by threatening to withhold their book money if they didn’t knuckle under to the Bush thugs.
In case you didn’t know it Marie, the Supremely Corrupt Court declared America a dictatorship of sorts with a puppet head in December of 2000, and that was without the bought and paid for ministrations of Roberts and Alito. Nothing has changed that, and the current court didn’t do anything to relieve the suffering of the innocent who are unfairly and illegally incarcerated in the concentration camps at Gitmo and elsewhere.
If you really want to make a difference Marie, then inform America that Saddam had nothing to do with nine eleven, and that oil was the reason for our invasion and occupation of Iraq. Oh, and you might mention that the puppet in the White House is a moron and incapable of leading or deciding.
Report thisBy Bobbymo, July 3, 2006 at 6:49 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Ah Ms. CooCoo
Only the simpleton mind of a liberal think that this is bad for W and the republicans. Now Congress will put into place laws that curb the Geneva Convention nonsense.
Try (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm )educating yourself before siding with your liberal juges on the SC. They won’t be happy until the US is only answerable to the UN and Europe.
The harder you moonbats push, the more irrelevant you become.
And yes my friend elections do matter… you should worry about that more than anyone. Pretty soon Ginsburg will be gone… that’s if she’s not dead already - or is she just resting her eyes.
Report thisBy Kaushik, July 3, 2006 at 3:52 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yes, ‘free and fair’ elections matter but are americans paying attention? Your electoral system depends on states being ‘just’ in organising the elections within their borders but when each one of them wants a particular result as it happened in Florida in 2000 and Ohio and probably Florida too in 2004 you can’t have anything like a free or fair election. So you must first fix a uniform fair standard for all the processes in an elction for all the states which may mean you follow one method for the country. Until this happens you will continue to have questionable elections that are more like that of a country in Africa than one in the developed world.
Report thisBy Reinold Hofmann, July 3, 2006 at 2:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Ultimately, the power is with us the people and I can only hope that the religious right has learned their lesson now.
Report thisJust because someone calls himself a Christian, beware of the wolf in sheep clothing.
This man, George W. Bush is a dangerous fundamentalist who sees himself as Gods Chosen to redeem the world.
Just remember his words ” If you are not with us, you are against us”
That is not what Christ has thought us.
This this is the same dangerous view radical Moslems have, intolerant of anyone whose beliefs are different than their own.
Just read the Jewish history in Europe and you will find parallels, time and a again the Jews had to abandon their possessions and their homes and often lost their lives because their beliefs were different from the majority.
We the people must vote with our brains not our religious beliefs.
Do we really want a President to listen to our phone conversations and record our financial transactions or be imprisoned with out the right to counsel ?
How many more of our rights are we willing to give up for National Security.
By b pearce, July 3, 2006 at 1:31 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
As a Canadian and thus watching events from outside the U.S., I must say that I have begun to fear the country of my mother’s birth and for which I once had such enormous respect. I never thought that Guantanimo Bay could happen nor did I think that the actions in Iraq could take place with such flimsy evidence; perhaps much of it contrived. From here it looks like a blatent attempt to assure the United States as much oil as it can obtain and I shudder at the potential harm to Canada and its enormous wealth of oil if an American president was ever to say. “Canada has weapons of mass destruction and must be stopped”.
Report thisbob pearce
By Ruth Larkin, July 3, 2006 at 1:25 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Thank the powers that be that our Supreme Court came through for America at last. This childish, uneducated, spoiled brat who gets very angry when his wishes are thwarted, has at last been chastised. Let’s pray he gets more than detention in the corner with Dunce hat on head and that Papa-Puppeteer Cheney doesn’t prevail against the Principal!
Report this