Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-02-07 12:13 PM
Original message
The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"
The right's explicit and candid rejection of "the rule of law"
(updated below)

The Wall St. Journal online has today published a lengthy and truly astonishing article by Harvard Government Professor Harvey Mansfield, which expressly argues that the power of the President is greater than "the rule of law."

The article bears this headline: The Case for the Strong Executive -- Under some circumstances, the Rule of Law must yield to the need for Energy. And it is the most explicit argument I have seen yet for vesting in the President the power to override and ignore the rule of law in order to recieve the glories of what Mansfield calls "one-man rule."

That such an argument comes from Mansfield is unsurprising. He has long been a folk hero to the what used to be the most extremist right-wing fringe but is now the core of the Republican Party. He devoted earlier parts of his career to warning of the dangers of homosexuality, particularly its effeminizing effect on our culture.

He has a career-long obsession with the glories of tyrannical power as embodied by Machiavelli's Prince, which is his model for how America ought to be governed. And last year, he wrote a book called Manliness in which "he urges men, and especially women, to understand and accept manliness" -- which means that "women are the weaker sex," "women's bodies are made to attract and to please men" and "now that women are equal, they should be able to accept being told that they aren't, quite." Publisher's Weekly called it a "juvenile screed."

more:http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/05/02/mansfield/index.html?source=rss
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-02-07 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. We've Put Him on the List
SONG--KO-KO with CHORUS OF MEN.

As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list--I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed--who never would be missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs--
All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs--
All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat--
All persons who in shaking hands, shake hands with you like
that--
And all third persons who on spoiling tete-a-tetes insist--
They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed!

CHORUS. He's got 'em on the list--he's got 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of
'em be missed.
There's the banjo serenader, and the others of his race,
And the piano-organist--I've got him on the list!
And the people who eat peppermint and puff it in your face,
They never would be missed--they never would be missed!
Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone,
All centuries but this, and every country but his own;
And the lady from the provinces, who dresses like a guy,
And who "doesn't think she waltzes, but would rather like to
try";
And that singular anomaly, the lady novelist--
I don't think she'd be missed--I'm sure she'd not be missed!

CHORUS. He's got her on the list--he's got her on the list;
And I don't think she'll be missed--I'm sure
she'll not be missed!

And that Nisi Prius nuisance, who just now is rather rife,
The Judicial humorist--I've got him on the list!
All funny fellows, comic men, and clowns of private life--
They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed.
And apologetic statesmen of a compromising kind,
Such as--What d'ye call him--Thing'em-bob, and
likewise--Never-mind,
And 'St--'st--'st--and What's-his-name, and also You-know-who--
The task of filling up the blanks I'd rather leave to you.
But it really doesn't matter whom you put upon the list,
For they'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be
missed!

CHORUS. You may put 'em on the list--you may put 'em on the
list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of
'em be missed!

http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/mikado/libretto.txt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. if yur gonna keep posting that, you gotta record yurself singing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DawnIsis Donating Member (202 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-02-07 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. Harvard should be ashamed
Are you kidding me "women's bodies are made to attract and to please men"? Gee I thought my body was made so I'd have a place to keep my organs and be able to move around and pick things up. I never realized I was made to be "something to look at" I wonder why I have a brain at all? It would be so much easier if I didn't have these pesky thoughts bouncing around my feminine brain making me equal in intelligence and capable of independent thought and creativity. I guess it's so I can entertain my man instead of accomplish anything.

"now that women are equal, they should be able to accept being told that they aren't, quite." This quote is so contradictory I need not point it out.

What is the point of co-equal branches if only the president is above the law. THEY WOULDN"T BE EQUAL would they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-04-07 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
3. if he had writtent this a bit sooner, Bush might have appointed him to Supreme Court
It's hard to believe open fascism is advocated in Wall Street Journal.

There may be times when a president needs to push the limits of his power, but Bush has gone far beyond push, and worse, he is the president least competent to be a lone ranger, a living counter-example to Mansfield argument.

Essentially, a letter to the editor on this would read: This could all be true in some sense, but remember, he's talking about BUSH.

I don't think Mansfield even believes this, but because it is in the Wall Street Journal, the real message is "this is the only way we can steal as much as we want."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC