Bush Seeking to Create an Elected Dictatorship...

[Tellurian]

In an interesting article, Paul Krugman profiles a strange phenomena happening with our government particularly in the Supreme Court.

The evolution of this phenomena is a doctrine that makes the United States a sort ofElected Dictatorship: a system in which the president, once in office, can do whatever he likes, and isn't obliged to consult or inform either Congress or the public.

Krugman says:

"Not long ago I would have thought it inconceivable that the Supreme Court would endorse that doctrine. But I would also have thought it inconceivable that a president would propound such a vision in the first place."

The title of his article is "A Vision of POWER"...please read..

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/27/opinion/27KRUG.html

might have to log in-

[seabeyond]

1. gosh and what happens when kerry wins

all the presitants they are sitting. the freedom kerry will have. those repugs should be getting very afreaid for that alone

[Tellurian]

4. Could be, if the SC rules in favor of Bush/Cheney

The dynamic duo may decide elections during War time compromise National Security and are suspended until further notice.

[PaDUer]

12. So true...

the goon squad is working overtime on changing the laws to their benefit..Haven't they committed enough "sins"! However, wouldn't he be considered NOT the president then?--IMO, he's NOT the real president. The US is being controlled by them and getting away with it.

[Tellurian]

16. As long as we can endure. No matter how long it takes.

[Beware the Beast Man]

2. This isn't a new concept-

During the days of the Roman Republic, the Senate would appoint a dictator during times of crisis. He had absolute executive power for I think one year, and could be reappointed if the crisis had not passed. The definition of dictator changed when Julius Caesar appointed himself dictator for life. I pray to God this doesn't happen here.

That's History class for today kids...it's recess time!

[Pepperbelly]

11. This isn't Rome and Bonehead isn't Ceaser.

He is a shallow man in far past his depth.

[Tellurian]

3. Today was a very distracting day...coincidence? I don't think so..

Today was the day Bush and Cheney were making their joint appearance before the 911 Commission. Perhaps, a better descriptive would be their STEALTH appearance.. The Commission was forbidden to tape, record or transcribe their words by any mechanical or manual means and they both refused to give testimony under oath unlike Clinton and Gore, who willingly took the oath because they wanted to do all they could to help solve the puzzle of how this unprecedented attack was allowed to happen.

Part of the agreement for Bush Cheney STEALTH appearance includes the final conclusions of the 911 commissions findings would have to be first vetted by the White House before the findings could be released to the public.. By any standard, a Very Big Day..

However, not the most important issue today, not by a long shot. For now, we can put the stealth appearance of Bush and Cheney before the 911 Commission on the back burner. Addressing yet another mind boggling dynamic created by White House attorneys, the necessity of securing a favorable decision from the Supreme Court allowing the President to broaden his powers beyond the scope delegated by the Constitution.

As Krugman, has wisely asked: Why would a president need or ask for such authority by the SC for broadening his powers? What does he plan to do with all this power? Will it affect us somehow?

What do you think are Bush and Cheney's reasons for the Writ of Mandamus before the court giving them sole discretion as to what they are able to do with all this power?

[arcos]

5. aren't they going to appear tomorrow? n/t

[Tellurian]

6. I believe Bush and Cheney have several cases before the SC...

including this one:

"And on April 28, the Court will hear oral arguments on the President’s asserted right to designate "CITIZENS" as “enemy combatants,” hold them at the U.S. Navy base in Charleston, SC, and deny them the ability to challenge the lawfulness of their detention."

All the cases seem to be interconnected. The broadening of Presidential powers, the secrecy of the Energy Papers etc.

We should really keep our eyes open on these issues.

[opihimoimoi]

7. Who was it that said "SOMETHING IS VERY SUSPICIOUS?"

Was it that guy on LAUGH IN?

[Tellurian]

15. No, maybe Columbo? n/t

[librechik]

17. veerrrryy interrresting.....but shtoopid. n/t

[BeFree]

8. Keep an eye on these issues

A vigil at the steps of the SCOTUS should be underway. It may be. I wish there were a way to let those judges know how we feel. I guess we shall just have to trust that the Constitution will be followed.

Next to the decision in 2000, these cases are the most important in modern history. If the court goes against the Constitution the cabal will have way too much power. Let's hope the court realizes that.

[Tellurian]

13. The Judges- hmm.. Will any of them have the conscience to make..

the right decision?

We know for sure, Bush has Rehnquist, Thomas and Scalia in his pocket.

Any thoughts on Ginsburg, Kennedy, Souter, O'Connor, Breyer or Stevens?

[Cleita]

9. Or, in other words, we have an elected king in every way

except for the crown jewels. Time for another continental congress I fear.

[Davis_X_Machina]

10. Republicans...

...in a very weird twist of language, are, basically, divine-right monarchists.

[Tellurian]

14. In their minds...I guess, you're right on about that-

I've been buzzing around today polling Republicans. It seems most of the Moderate Conservative base are ready to bolt. Collectively, they feel Bush is shaming them and raining down a world of hate on their party.

I've never seen them so humble and apologetic. They cringe at the mention of his name and hang their heads in shame. No matter what I said to them, they were speechless. They just shook their heads and agreed.

Sad, very sad, indeed.

[loudsue]

18. That's really good news, Tellurian....

And it's what a lot of people on DU have said previously. That's why I just don't understand where in the hell they're getting the people they "poll" when they come up with Bush 45% - Kerry 45%. Are they making those numbers up? Or are those the only folks they find at home?

:kick:

[Tellurian]

19. Thanks, Sue..

Early on IIRC, a deal was made with pollsters during War time as a matter of national security, the polls *are required* to reflect support for the president. I seem to remember a flap over this involving Poppy. He was the one who made and defended the rational for the statement in a breakfast interview w/Jamie Gangel on nbc.

I imagine there is a formula being used, some sort of a point spread keeping Bush's numbers at an acceptable level.

Theres nothing worse than looking at a sad sack republican when they're losing a popularity contest. Of course they deserve negative ratings, they brought it on themselves. uh, huh!