The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Dick cheney has always believed in the Unitary Executive, the Imperial Presidency. Nixon believed that he was above the law, "..if the President does it, it's legal..". This was Cheney's maxim too.
But I guess he realised that in order to implement his ideas he had to create some national ememrgency. thus it was that almost as soon as bush was elected, Cheney was stomping around trying to start wars. China, Iraq, anyone would do so long as he could pretend the US was being attacked and he could emergency powers. 9/11 was a gift to that plan.
It wasn't negligence, it was deliberate. The holding of joseph Padilla was done to demonstrate contempt for the law and they got away with it. Guantanamo was done to push the boundaries, they got away with it. FISA, the legal system being pumped full of Regent University alumni. The firing of the competent, the elevation of the ideolgical, the jailing of opponents. all done to test and extend the level of personal control Bush (and therefore Cheney) had over the system.
They now effectively ignore the requests of the Houses, because there is nothing anybody can do to impose a view upon them.
But don't think this is a novelty. Clinton did extraordinary rendition. Torture has been part and parcel of US techniques since WWII, it's just never been promoted as the more moral position before.
But while you have two political parties of pro-corporate militarist fervour, there will be no change.
keep to the Fen Causeway
Funny you mention Clinton - I jumped in to the FDL Book Salon w/Jane Mayer and she eventially replied (in response to another question). She wrote a great book but I thought she somewhat glossed over the previous administration. Maybe I'm being a nitpicker but that's the kind of detail the right will seize on and say "see! it's all political!" We have to be willing to call out anyone who's doing it.
I suppose which strategy to choose depends on whether you're in the "lesser evil" school or in the "Chthulhu/Hastur" school.
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
...while you have two political parties of pro-corporate militarist fervour, there will be no change.
Helen, as is her wont, nails it.
She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
i think he has to pretend to be a vicious militarist to get the gig.
can politics be changed from a centrist (possibly closet liberal) position?
hopefully we're about to find out.
my guess is yes, but only incrementally, as in tidy up the wars you're in, don't start any new ones, and make your militarism more about taking good care of vets, than about more clunky dysfunctional vaporware ubertoys for dominating space etc.
beat them into solar water heaters instead...
'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 1 5 comments
by IdiotSavant - Sep 28 7 comments
by IdiotSavant - Sep 28
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 18 66 comments
by Luis de Sousa - Sep 13 33 comments
by ARGeezer - Sep 7 91 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 8 82 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 15 comments
by IdiotSavant - Sep 28
by IdiotSavant - Sep 287 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 1866 comments
by Luis de Sousa - Sep 1333 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 882 comments
by ARGeezer - Sep 791 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 418 comments