Wednesday, January 04, 2006

The Authoritarian Madness of King George: I'll Do Whatever I Please


Oblivious to his own inadequacies as a leader, oblivious to the dozens of poor decisions he's made, Preznit Toad-Exploder makes another one, via the Globe as he struts to announce his ability to do whatever he damn well pleases, regardless of the laws of the land.

Why? Cuz he's the PREZNIT, that's why!

Congress can pass that pussy McCain amendment, but if Bubble Boy don't want it to apply, then--it don't!

Pretty nifty for a guy who slept through Poli Sci 101, and can't even spell "authoritarian regime."


BUSH ASSERTS HE CAN BYPASS THE MCCAIN ANTI-TORTURE LAW

and pretty much anything else that he feels like . . .



WASHINGTON -- When President Bush last week signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees, he quietly reserved the right to bypass the law under his powers as commander in chief.

After approving the bill last Friday, Bush issued a ''signing statement" -- an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law -- declaring that he will view the interrogation limits in the context of his broader powers to protect national security. This means Bush believes he can waive the restrictions, the White House and legal specialists said.

''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief," Bush wrote, adding that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

Some legal specialists said yesterday that the president's signing statement, which was posted on the White House website but had gone unnoticed over the New Year's weekend, raises serious questions about whether he intends to follow the law.

A senior administration official, who spoke to a Globe reporter about the statement on condition of anonymity because he is not an official spokesman, said the president intended to reserve the right to use harsher methods in special situations involving national security. . . .

[T]he official said, a situation could arise in which Bush may have to waive the law's restrictions to carry out his responsibilities to protect national security. . .

''Of course the president has the obligation to follow this law, [but] he also has the obligation to defend and protect the country as the commander in chief, and he will have to square those two responsibilities in each case," the official added. ''We are not expecting that those two responsibilities will come into conflict, but it's possible that they will."

David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said that the signing statement means that Bush believes he can still authorize harsh interrogation tactics when he sees fit.


''The signing statement is saying 'I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it's important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me,' " he said. ''They don't want to come out and say it directly because it doesn't sound very nice, but it's unmistakable to anyone who has been following what's going on."

'The whole point of the McCain Amendment was to close every loophole," said Marty Lederman, a Georgetown University law professor who served in the Justice Department from 1997 to 2002. ''The president has re-opened the loophole by asserting the constitutional authority to act in violation of the statute where it would assist in the war on terrorism. . ."

Elisa Massimino, Washington director for Human Rights Watch, called Bush's signing statement an ''in-your-face affront" to both McCain and to Congress.

''The basic civics lesson that there are three co-equal branches of government that provide checks and balances on each other is being fundamentally rejected by this executive branch," she said.

''Congress is trying to flex its muscle to provide those checks [on detainee abuse], and it's being told through the signing statement that it's impotent. It's quite a radical view."



Radical?

Yep. That's our Bubble Boy.

Clearing brush. Undermining the rule of law. Undermining the Constitution.

It's hard work.



.

1 comment:

lily said...

Bubble boy indeed. sad.