November 14, 2008 archive

I will put this as simply as I can.

America is, and is only, The Constitution….and the laws, rights and privileges spelled out therein.

There IS nothing else.

We do not have anything else from which to proceed, there is no other basis for reference, there is no alternative history or text. We have no monarchy and no traditions of monarchy, we have no aristocracy, we in fact do not even have a philosophy. We have a Constitution. We have Laws. We are a Nation of Laws and nothing else. Without the Constitution…what is America?

Without the Constitution, in point of fact, America becomes a monarchy, an aristocracy with the president as our King, and Congress as our aristocracy. Yes they can still be replaced, but while in office for two, four, six or eight years…well we have seen how long the last eight years have been and how much damage has been wreaked in that time. These 536 people set and decide and enforce the Law. On what basis? Personal whim?  What brings them the most lasting power (see gerrymandering and the incumbent re-election rate.) What will garner them the most political contributions? Favors for the temporarily influential? The politics of the moment?

On what basis do they proceed in governing, without the strict guidance of the Constitution?  When a difficult question of governing arises, to what do they refer? There either is or is not a Constitution, there either is or there is not the Rule of Law. We are either governed by laws, or we are governed by the  exigencies of the moment and the will of ….men (and women).

We have are just emerging from a momentous civics lesson. The most unpopular President ever, the worst President ever, seized power by court order and proceeded to do everything in that power….literally regardless of law…to increase that power. George Bush declared war, not America, not the Constitution. George Bush declared that torture was legal. George Bush declared that he would spy on Americans. In direct contravention of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. George Bush and Dick Cheney decided that the President had the power to rule America. Not govern America in a co-equal system of checks and balances. As the Constitution insists. Without basing every decision made upon the Rule of Law, we become a nation ruled by the whim of the President and the Congress, or at best by political expediency. If the President can cow the Congress and corrupt the only other agency to which he is accountable, the Department of Justice, HE…a fallible man…becomes the Ruler, Not the Rule of Law. Not the Constitution.

And here we are.

America has the incredible benefit of being founded on the highest principles and the best presentation of those principles in the history of mankind. It is ALL in the Constitution….and it works. The principle of the Rule of Law is the only way  that freedom, justice and equality is possible. At the moment we are in grave danger of throwing that away….because Obama has so much else to do to ‘fix things.’

But what basis, what reference point is there for any ‘fix’ if the most basic principle, the founding principle of America, The Rule of Law is ignored, if it is not restored?

Back in January, as the Democratic Primary heated up in an epic battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, there was a lot of what I would categorize as “silly talk” pitting women’s issues against those of African Americans. I can’t claim to have been untouched by that strain in our leftward attempts at coalition though. There were charges from both sides that were deeply painful and only occasionally a real discussion about how these systems of hierarchy and oppression are very much alive in our culture.

I remember that during those days, I found solace and guidance in the words of the one group who felt this tension deep in their souls…African American women. I traveled around the nets to find and listen to their voices and wrote an essay that attempted to capture some of it. At the time, these women were busy reacting to an op-ed by Gloria Steinem. But its these words that I remember most.

After reading Steinem’s Op-Ed I felt invisible…as if black and woman can’t exist in the same body. I felt undocumented…as if the history of blacks and the history of women have nothing to do with the history of black women.

Look, I’m not going to go head to head with Steinem and argue what is most pressing for womyn in America – race or gender. What I do know is that as a US womyn of color living in this country is that the two are so inexplicably interlaced that I resist ANY individual that pits once against the other.

Further, by casting the debate as between Black men and White women, Steinem renders the woman of colour invisible, reaffirms the binary Black-White paradigm of race, and demands we take a side in the epic battle between race and gender.

(General Petraues seen here raising his fist in a black power salute of unity with Obama and Gates)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…

http://www.associatedcontent.c…

In a dramatic reversal to previous presidents, sources say President Elect Obama has asked, Bush favorites Robert Gates (CIA liberal) and David Petraues (Military Industrial Complex liberal) to stay on. Petraues started out as a purchaser of weapons in Iraq and went on to become supreme overseer of the military in the region. He was responsible for implementing the fabulously succesful, “surge” which has brought peace, stability and democracy to Iraq.  

Guantanamo Bay: Camp X-Ray

There has been quite a bit of conflicting information in the news lately and speculation about what Obama intends to do about Guantanamo Bay and whether Bush has set things up in such a way that it may be very difficult if not nearly impossible to close the place, and it appears to be shaping up as one of the most defining issues of the opening days of his presidency, and whether or not he will live up to campaign promises or just made them out of expediency during his campaign.

Center for Constitutional Rights President Michael Ratner talks about the issue with Real News CEO Paul Jay:

As the world waits for examples of the ways the Obama administration is going to distance itself from the exiting Bush administration, his transition team confirmed on Monday that they will follow through on Obama’s promise to close Bush’s controversial prison camp located at the US Navy base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Senior Editor Paul Jay spoke to constitutional law expert Michael Ratner who expressed his approval for the news but couched that support in an explanation of the variety of other tough decisions that accompany the decision to close the base.

Most of the issues hinge around the fates of those currently imprisoned at Guantanamo, both those who will face prosecution and those who will not. Michael expresses his desire that those who the US does not plan to charge, a group that represents the vast majority of the inmates, should be released immediately. Those remaining, Michael believes, should be tried in civilian courts and not by military commission.

This is a move that human rights groups and Michael himself have been advocating for a variety of reasons, one of which has been that civilian courts–unlike military commissions–do not admit evidence obtained under the use of torture.

November 13, 2008 – 11 min 46 sec

When and how will Obama close Guantanamo?

Michael Ratner: Focus is on fate of hundreds detained at Guantanamo who will never be put on trial