Contents of this Post
— perhaps because of that “Imperial Presidency lust” — their numbers are dwindling. And in spite of the fact that I know and know of very good Republicans — there is this other fact:
Questionable Personalities
The GOP has been putting forth questionable personalities as candidates for public office for many years. And they have often voted them into positions of power — or, as with the Supreme Court, pushed hard to get them confirmed into positions of power. Then, predictably when “questionable personalities” are handed lots of power, it doesn’t always go real well.
Here’s an example. This article appeared here 18 years ago, about an article in the New York Times dealing with George W Bush’s longing for an “Imperial Presidency,” and about his party and it’s leaders being eager to support that agenda.
See Also:
– Op-Ed & Editorial in Rural Nebraska Rip Bush Escalation Plan, Call for Support for the Troops [2007]
My article from 2006. Quotes are from the New York Times:
The Imperial President –
the Hunger to Have One Unrestrained Sinner Calling All the Shots
Sometimes even the journalistic mainstream gets it.
It is only now, nearly five years after Sept. 11, that the full picture of the Bush administration’s response to the terror attacks is becoming clear. Much of it, we can see now, had far less to do with fighting Osama bin Laden than with expanding presidential power.
Over and over again, the same pattern emerges: Given a choice between following the rules or carving out some unprecedented executive power, the White House always shrugged off the legal constraints.
That’s from an editorial in the New York Times Sunday July 16, 2024. (Times link, via Truthout). (Emphases and outlines added.)
The Times refers to the Bush Administration’s
… perverse determination:
- never to consult,
- never to ask and
- always to fight against any constraint on the executive branch.
One result has been a frayed democratic fabric in a country founded on a constitutional system of checks and balances. Another has been a less effective war on terror.
The editorial cites clear examples
from handling of Guantanamo and “Eavesdropping on Americans”, then deals with the very high costs of this “Real Agenda.” It is worth reading for good short summaries of the current status of affairs in both matters. For example, there’s this under “eavesdropping on Americans.”
The president had no need to go it alone – everyone wanted to go with him. Both parties in Congress were eager to show they were tough on terrorism. But the obsession with presidential prerogatives created fights where no fights needed to occur and made huge messes out of programs that could have functioned more efficiently within the rules.
-NYT on W’s response to 9/11
This “real agenda” of George Bush to obtain absolute power is not Christian. Christian theology and morality teach that no one man or group is to be trusted with absolute and unquestioned authority.
This “real agenda” of George Bush is not American. American political theory and Constitutional history teach that no one man or group is to be trusted with absolute and unrestrained authority.
The article further states that
Jane Mayer provided a close look at this effort to undermine the constitutional separation of powers in a chilling article in the July 3 issue of The New Yorker. She showed how it grew out of Vice President Dick Cheney’s long and deeply held conviction that the real lesson of Watergate and the later Iran-contra debacle was that the president needed more power and that Congress and the courts should get out of the way.
That is profoundly unAmerican and unChristian.
And look what it produces. This list wraps up the editorial – behaviors with which we are all already very familiar.
The results have been devastating.
- Americans’ civil liberties have been trampled.
- The nation’s image as a champion of human rights has been gravely harmed.
- Prisoners have been abused, tortured and even killed at the prisons we know about, while other prisons operate in secret.
- American agents “disappear” people, some entirely innocent, and send them off to torture chambers in distant lands.
- Hundreds of innocent men have been jailed at Guantanamo Bay without charges or rudimentary rights.
- And Congress has shirked its duty to correct this out of fear of being painted as pro-terrorist at election time.
These are the things we fought WWII (against the Nazis and the Japanese) and the Cold War (against the Communists) to prevent.
This is immoral and illegal;
it is not Christian, and it is not American.
What then IS it?
That’s my 18-year-old post about the 18-year-old article from the New York Times.
Do those concerns sound familiar?
In a letter to John Adams in 1814, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth.”
Have we given up on the “experiment”?
Is the Republican Party in particular done with The Experiment?
I hope the voting in November answers, “No. It’s a wonderful experiment, and We’re Going to Keep Working On It!” I hope your vote helps to say that.
See Also:
– Is Trumpism Dangerous? 14 Good Sources Say “You Better Believe It!”
– Right-Wing Violence: Pope Francis’ Early Experience
Questions for us:
1. Some people instantly claim, “Yes, but the other side does it too!” How do you respond to that?
2. Does it matter that many Americans seem to want an “Imperial Presidency?”
Please add any comments below. (Your personal info is not required.)