July 22, 2007
A New "King George"
The Nation: President Bush's Handling Of The War Recalls Warnings From Founding Fathers
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Troop Pullout Not In Sight
President Bush continues to push for more time for his troop strategies in Iraq to work. Officials feel it will be months before a pullout can be considered. Susan Roberts reports.
-
Video
Opposition To Iraq War Grows
The defection of some of President Bush's key supporters in Congress underscores growing opposition to the war in Iraq. Joie Chen reports that Congress plans to push for troop withdrawal.
-
Photo
President Bush, pictured in 2005, has fought Congress's attempts to defund Iraq operations or set timetables for troop redeployments. James Madison, chief architect of the U.S. Constitution and later our fourth president, presciently wrote, "The separation of the power of raising armies from the power of commanding them is intended to prevent the raising of armies for the sake of commanding them." (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
-
Interactive
Battle For Iraq
The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.
-
Interactive
Bush Presidency
The president's agenda, plus facts, figures, major events and key personalities.
George W. Bush is the imperial president that James Madison and other founders of this great republic warned us about. He lied the nation into precisely the "foreign entanglements" that George Washington feared would destroy the experiment in representative government, and he has championed a spurious notion of security over individual liberty, thus eschewing the alarms of Thomas Jefferson as to the deprivation of the inalienable rights of free citizens. But most important, he has used the sledgehammer of war to obliterate the separation of powers that James Madison enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
With the "war on terror," Bush has asserted the right of the president to wage war anywhere and for any length of time, at his whim, because the "terrorists" will always provide a convenient shadowy target. Just the "continual warfare" that Madison warned of in justifying the primary role of Congress in initiating and continuing to finance a war the very issue now at stake in Bush's battle with Congress.
In his Political Observations, written years before he served as fourth president of the United States, Madison went on to underscore the dangers of an imperial presidency bloated by war fever. "In war," Madison wrote in 1795, at a time when the young republic still faced its share of dangerous enemies, "the discretionary power of the Executive is extended ... and all the means of seducing the minds are added to those of subduing the force, of the people."
How remarkably prescient of Madison to anticipate the specter of our current King George imperiously undermining Congress' attempts to end the Iraq war. When the prime author of the U.S. Constitution explained why that document grants Congress not the president the exclusive power to declare and fund wars, Madison wrote, "A delegation of such powers [to the president] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments."
Because "[n]o nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare," Madison urged that the constitutional separation of powers he had codified be respected. "The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war...the power of raising armies," he wrote. "The separation of the power of raising armies from the power of commanding them is intended to prevent the raising of armies for the sake of commanding them."
That last sentence perfectly describes the threat of what President Dwight Eisenhower, 165 years later, would describe as the " military-industrial complex," a permanent war economy feeding off a permanent state of insecurity. The collapse of the Soviet Union deprived the military profiteers and their handsomely-rewarded cheerleaders in the government of a raison d'๊tre for the massive war economy supposedly created in response to it. Fortunately for them, Bush found in the 9/11 attack an excuse to make war even more profitable and longer-lasting. The Iraq War, which the president's 9/11 Commission concluded never had anything to do with the terrorist assault, nonetheless has transferred many hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars into the military economy. And when Congress seeks to exercise its power to control the budget, this president asserts that this will not govern his conduct of the war.
There never was a congressional declaration of war to cover the invasion of Iraq. Instead, President Bush acted under his claimed power as commander in chief, which the Supreme Court has held does allow him to respond to a "state of war" against the United States. That proviso was clearly a reference to surprise attacks or sudden emergencies.
The problem is that the "state of war" in question here was an al Qaeda attack on the U.S. that had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Perhaps to spare Congress the embarrassment of formally declaring war against a nation that had not attacked America, Bush settled for a loosely worded resolution supporting his use of military power if Iraq failed to comply with U.N. mandates. This was justified by the White House as a means of strengthening the United Nations in holding Iraq accountable for its WMD arsenal, but as most of the world looked on in dismay, Bush invaded Iraq after U.N. inspectors on the ground discovered that Iraq had no WMD.
Bush betrayed Congress, which in turn betrayed the American people just as Madison feared when he wrote: "Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it compromises and develops the germ of every other."
By Robert Scheer
Reprinted with permission from The Nation.
| If you like this article, check out www.thenation.com for more investigative reports, timely editorials and incisive columns |




- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 207 CommentsI will add this, however.
We now have a President that was not elected by The People's popular vote the first time. And bullied and played on the fears of The People to get elected for a second.
Not a shock that such a man would embrace perpetual war to maintain power.
Anti Democratic - yes
Anti 'American values' - yes
It will always be easy to rally a certain segment (not small enough) of the population to war - endlessly.
The Bush administration's behavior is completely consistent with contemporary Republican thinking. That's the even bigger problem.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm (copy and paste in the Web box)
Look at the signers of this document. Do any of them sound familiar?
America has been experiencing a cabal. For your convenience, here is a definition:
ca7bal
ca7bal [k%u0259 bal]
n (plural ca7bals)
1. group of plotters: a group of conspirators or plotters, particularly one formed for political purposes
2. secret plot: a secret plot or conspiracy, especially a political one
3. clique: an exclusive group of people
vi (past ca7balled, past participle ca7balled, present participle ca7bal7ling, 3rd person present singular ca7bals)
conspire as group: to form a group and plot together against somebody or something.
There never has been an exit strategy, because this bunch never intends to leave Iraq. The perpetrators of this cabal have taken over control of our government. Our military is being used to fight for their agenda. This is the reason for all of the secrecy in Washington and these strange executive powers we are experiencing. If this bunch gets away with it, a new precedent will be set so that America will never be the same as it has been in the past. Al Qaeda is their excuse to control power.
My personal guess is that before long something disastrous is going to happen that they will feel justified to impose martial law based on NSPD51, a white house presidential directive made public in May, 2007.
at the intersection of First and Main at high noon. These are the
folks who dote on O'Really? on the Fixed Noise Channel and all of his cohorts and would believe them if they said 'The Sky is Falling'.
So, W never lied, Cheney is a prince of a man and all the rest of the gang are wunnerful, clear thinking, absolutely righteous people.
There's very little hope of changing the thinking of this kind of
unquestioning, gullible, moronic entity so you can rail at them 'til the cows come home and it won't make any impression at all.
After all, Right is Right and wazzamadayu that you don't get it?
----
The UN is responsible for imposing and enforcing it's resolutions, not any individual member nation.
We, as a country, should be ashamed that Bush/Cheney/Rice/Wolfowicz/Rumsfeld were able to seduce the minds of up to 72% of the citizens of this country with pure fabrication, self-righteousness, xenophobia, and paranoia. There is hope for us, however, in the fact that that percentage is now down to 30% and dropping.
This bunch which has prostituted the truth for idoelogical gain will soon be gone but the damage inflicted by them will be with us for decades.
And we deserve to suffer those consequences for allowing ourselves to have our baser instincts successfully employed against us.
From my perspective, America is a country with no shortage of paranoids who love to hate and are willing to employ emotion over reason.
Time will tell if we have truly learned the lesson of the dangers of electing and supporting megalomaniacal leaders.
Bush thinks he is king like. They have crown prince Jeb waiting in the wings. As much as George the Elder was clueless and George the Younger is ignorant, Jeb the Crusader would be even worse with his evangelistic ferver. They have corrupted religion for their own worldly desires.
Both parties believe that Congress is more like Britain's House of Lords where entry is an entitlement, longevity assured, and right of ascension reserved for hand picked off spring.
Posted by afmca at 09:39 AM : Jul 22, 2007
How can a concept that is corrupt from its inception, intellectual enslavement of the masses (cults), be corrupted by someone?
Once you convince someone to believe what they are told - regardless of how bizarre and contrived - instead of being skeptical of fairy tales, you can get them to believe anything.
Bush, et. al. didn't corrupt cultism, they simply employed the "believers" gullibility against them.
Posted by BareEmperor at 10:07 AM : Jul 22, 2007
Unfortunately, those who would most benefit from the message will be the last to accept that such is the case.
Good grief. Another whiny liberal pantywaist article. "Bush lied!! Bush lied!!"
Well, if he did, so did Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Algore, and a whole supporting cast of other Dembots who were saying the EXACT SAME THING about Hussien, Iraq, and WMDs BEFORE Bush was ever elected.
As for Margie Schoedinger, you can bet your liberal skinny buttt that all the Dan Rather and Woodward & Bernstein-wannabees would have been all over this if there was ANY truth to it, especially as Bush's poll numbers fell. Most likely this lady's story has more holes in it than a New Orleans levy.
...
Well, if he did, so did Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Algore, and a whole supporting cast of other Dembots who were saying the EXACT SAME THING about Hussien, Iraq, and WMDs BEFORE Bush was ever elected.
As for Margie Schoedinger, you can bet your liberal skinny buttt that all the Dan Rather and Woodward & Bernstein-wannabees would have been all over this if there was ANY truth to it, especially as Bush's poll numbers fell. Most likely this lady's story has more holes in it than a New Orleans levy.
...
Posted by hawksprings at 10:16 AM : Jul 22, 2007
I rest my case, BareEmperor.
*LMAO*
Ironically, the antichrist was placed into office that year (he wasn't voted in, the neocon Supreme Court put him in, remember? Gore really won the election!) and no one knew it!
And the world is coming to an end, the world we know as the United States!
SIG HEIL, BUSH!!
Posted by naber1961 at 10:51 AM : Jul 22, 2007
That colonoscopy must have been very difficult to perform considering Bush's acute case of cranial-rectal insertion, don't you think?
Gimel - 3
Heh - 5
Ayin - 70
Resh - 200
Gimel - 3
Heh - 5
Beth - 2
Ayin - 70
Shin - 300
Cheth - 8
Total = 666
The mark of the beast is the real ID system, your finger print or retina scan - (hand or forhead)
Not a Bible thumper myself but the book of Revelations has an uncanny accuracy of what is going on now.
Posted by formrusmcsgt at 10:54 AM : Jul 22, 2007
It more than likely looked like another polyp to be cut out and probably was.
Very good article! It has covered points I have been discussing with friends and associates for a long time. We need to wake up America! We are being sold down the river and it will be an uphill battle to regain what was lost. Don't depend on your sold out Congress. Start discussing this with friends and neighbors. Let's get organized...
Posted by kaiyo4u at 11:30 AM : Jul 22, 2007
It's not that difficult. Register as an Independent as I and millions of other have.
When the two major parties see that they are in the minority, we will have a paradigm shift in our politics. Until that happens, we'll continue status quo.
Posted by Jack3213 at 12:01 PM : Jul 22, 2007
History will judge us as an agressor nation that attacked another country that was not a threat for hegemonic drivers. Just as Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and the USSR. That's great company to be keeping historically in your opinion? Give me a break!
Bush will never be looked on by history as anything other than the ideological megalomaniac that he has clearly shown himself to be.
Never has Robert Scheer stopped to question his own abuses of power by being a syndicated columnist, or offer anything but irrational rhetoric against any president that holds national security as a top priority, and has to face tough decisions to protect it.
In other words, Robert Scheer is completely worthless as a columnist, an American, and a human being.
Go soak you fat head, Robert Scheer.
You know, bin Laden also claims to have a hotline to God....says a lot about how alike these two really are, don't you think?
In addition to their shared "hotline" beliefs, they both promote terrorism. Bin Laden through active resruitment and Bush through incompetent polices that our own 16 intelligence agencies have determined actually increase terrorism rather than deminish it.
Can anyone else believe how ignorant these Bush folks are? Sorry Jack3213, that was Afghanistan not Iraq. ...To think that Saddam would have let someone like Bin Laden operate in his country.
And then the Bush folks still put just as much blame on Congress. I agree to the point - but the vote was 7 months before the invasion and when his poorly thought out war plans and with Scott Ritter and Hands Blix all over the TV (although being marginalized by the media) were saying there were no WMD, the antiwar folks/troops like me marching before the war - Bush then invaded. It was his final decision.
I just hope when he get out of office the Hague indicts him and he ends up in Hess's old cell at Spandou Prison in Germany. Perhaps the shoe laces will still be haning for the ceiling - all ready for him.
Yes, thank President Bush (and a complicit Congress) for increasing annual federal spending by more than 50% during his tenure.
Thank him for the Medicare vote-buying prescription drug benefit scheme for seniors that will further increase the future debt obligation placed on our children and grandchildren.
Thank him for continuing the interventionist nation-building foreign policies established by previous presidents that is making enemies around the world.
Thank him for the federal government's abolition of individual privacy by allowing warrantless wiretaps, mandated govt access to private financial records, the elimination of habeas corpus, etc.
Thank him for the perpetual war machine that is costing taxpayers of the country billions upon billions of dollars with no end in sight.
Congratulations, voters. You got what you deserved.
I know nothing of Sheer's political leanings, but the points he has presented in this column all ring true. President Bush has performed an endless number of constitutional usurpations during his tenure.
If it were a Dem in office doing the exact same things that Bush has done while in office, those on the right would be howling in protest while making the same points that Sheer makes here.
At the same time, if it were a Dem pres in power doing exactly what Bush has done so far, those on the left would defend 'their' guy to the end, no matter how despicable his actions are.
The American sheeple seem to equate politics with sports - as long as 'their' team wins, it doesn't matter how it is achieved.
The lack of morality when it comes to politics and political action is overwhelming. Why more people don't see this, I have no idea.
Talk about oversimplify. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a communist. But the continued denial of the neocons that Bush lies is pathetic. The CIA told Bush that Iraq did not try to buy yellowcake from Niger, but the a$$f*ck used it in the SOTU address anyways to justify war with Iraq. Just one of many Bush lies, but until Bush signs a confession on national TV that he lied, you neocns will continue to live in your fantasy world of the perfection of GWB.
Posted by One_American at 12:15 PM : Jul 22, 2007
Sheer can't be discredited or indicted for pointing out what's plain to see to all except the self-righteous, xenophobes, and paranoids who patently refuse to see the obvious:
That the "Emperor" has no clothes.......
WHERE ARE THE OPPOSITION??where are the Democrats??
People like Sheer are the very same people that weakens our war effort, motivates our enemies to step up thier terrorist acts BECAUSE IT WORKS an effective weapon to sway our war policies (look at the overnight DNC propaganda pullout session)and to mention divides the nation
Posted by xzavierbrown at 12:54 PM : Jul 22, 2007
Not true. Our own 16 intelligence agencies unanimously agree that these are the causes of increased terrorism (from the 2007 NIE Assessment on Terrirism):
In the declassified excerpts on terrorism, the intelligence community found:
The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qaida in Iraq might lead the terror group's veteran foreign fighters to refocus their efforts outside that country.
While Iran and Syria are the most active state sponsors of terror, many other countries will be unable to prevent their resources from being exploited by terrorists.
The underlying factors fueling the spread of the extremist Muslim movement outweigh its vulnerabilities. These factors are entrenched grievances and a slow pace of reform in home countries, rising anti-U.S. sentiment and the Iraq war.
Groups "of all stripes" will increasingly use the Internet to communicate, train, recruit and obtain support.
This is a man that should have been removed from office soon after 911!
He is insane with hate and has gotten us in a war which will destroy the United States!
The GAO has stated that Bush and the war has bankrupted the United States!
The damage done is irreparable !
And people like you are the reason 3000+ American soldiers have died needlessly. You can't see what is right in front of your face and you keep the incompetents of this administrartion in power by your constant defending, no matter what the cost. Now that you neocons lost this war you should never have started in the first place, you are setting up to blame it on the Dems. But we aren't going to let you. You neocons lost this war all by yourselves. Studying even a little bit of history would have shown you neocons that this war could never have possibly succeeded. The French and US in Vietnam, the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Israelis in Lebanon - all failures because you can no longer force a political solution on indiginous peoples, especially through military action.
Posted by xzavierbrown
Exactly how much this 'war' has really been waged on you? It took 20 of their most radical over a dozen years to knock down two of your buildings; and now the whole of the Muslim world is supposed to feel your wrath? Get a grip - you just want cheap oil/goods.
First Amendment
* Freedom of religion, speech, press, and peaceable assembly as well as the right to petition the government.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
You are not being FORCED to read the article or would you feel better if it was written in German!
Tongue tied? Thought so. You can spin the war in Iraq any way you wish but the fact of the matter is that we now have a President in office that took the fight to the enemy whether you like it or not.
With your twisted logic, you probably think that it was wrong for America to land in Normandy to wipe the Nazis out simply because they "didn't attack America". History has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was the right thing to do just like history is going to prove President Bush did the right thing by liberating 50 million people in two countries that were slaughtering their own people.
Your hatred for George Bush is something you need come to grips with (2000 election)and move on.
Posted by IrishPM2 at 01:46 PM : Jul 22, 2007
How about listing some of these attacks on America by Iraq that made them our "enemy", IrishPM2?
Merriam-Webster defines "enemy" as:
a military adversary
Just how was Hussein our military adversary?
...or offer anything but irrational rhetoric against any president that holds national security as a top priority, and has to face tough decisions to protect it."
Posted by One_American at 12:15 PM : Jul 22, 2007
The degree of irony and delusion here is bar none. For those who soak up propaganda not unlike religious dogma, the truth is a threat to your feeble minds. My only solace is that you're in the minority.
*******
Posted by IOWEIGN at 01:14 PM : Jul 22, 2007
+ report abuse
and what religion was established??are you NOW required by law to abide to a religion??freedom of speech??WELL ASK JOHN KERRY REGARDING THAT..HE HAS A S0LUTION TO SOLVE THE DISAPPORPIRATE BALANCE BETWEEN LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE MEDIA SOURCES. Oh yeah i love this one..Did you know I cant say F AG or ni gger but I can say cracker. ***** and who should i thank for that..I do not agree with those words BUT A CLEAR VIOLATION OF YOUR OWWWWWWN RULES. there is a difference between assembly and a riot..I am sure you are refering to sheehan..well guess what sheehan is doing these days..
do you really want to experience those violations??go to iran.
Posted by greybeardvet at 02:06 PM : Jul 22, 2007
Agreed, however, those who could most benefit from the comparison are the least likely to see it for what it is.
To the rest of us, it's just preaching to the choir, eh?
Also, whenever you hear some Christofascist claim our founding fathers were devout Christians, inform them that they are lying and point out that when Ben Franklin, as a deist but not a fully faithful Christian in his own mind, asked the Constitutional Congress to say a prayer for divine guidance the Congress REFUSED!!
Why, because even though many were Christian, or at least Universalist in their faith they abhorred mixing religion with state. Just look at the history of disasters related to religion or religious persecution mixing with government. Palestine, Israel, Nazi Germany, Iran, Afghanistan, England at the time of the Revolution, Nazi Germany, and etc. etc. etc.
Should be obvious that our founding fathers, liberal humanists most all of them, were right on target.
By the way, I am a practicing Christian that is very comfortable in the fact that when I meet my maker I can proudly say I never supported King GW Bush.
Posted by bflong at 02:19 PM : Jul 22, 2007
You might also ask them while you're at it why it is, if our founding fathers intended for America to be a "Christian nation" as the contend, that there is not a single mention of God in the US Constitution.
Says it all......
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 207 Comments