- by Alan Adaschik

Beyond life itself, the most valuable thing an individual possess is their freedom. However, there are limits to freedom and an obvious one is physical reality. For example, we are free to jump off a building if we wish, but gravity and the hard pavement below insure that there will be dire consequences associated with exercising this kind of freedom. Another limit on freedom is other people as illustrated by the expression; one man’s freedom ends where another’s begins. This axiom is moralized by the golden rule which advises that we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us. The phrase “don’t thread on me” is a belligerent way of making this same point.

Unfortunately, far too many people do not subscribe to the golden rule. To be sure, some people are so selfish they make a vocation of threading on other people and continually work to expand their freedom at the expense of others. This is human nature and in the extreme we find people so demented they think murdering their fellow men for profit, gain, or pleasure is an acceptable way to exercise their freedom. Obviously, most of us have much to fear from those who seek advantage through unreasonable means and this fear is the fundamental seed of government.

Governments exist primarily because of the need to ensure that no person or group of people takes unfair advantage of others. Thus human nature makes governments a necessary vehicle for establishing fairness, equality and justice among men. However, the problem we face is that the tools necessary for doing these things gives those in government great power over us and there is grave danger in this because people, as a matter of practice, tend to expand their own freedom at the expense of others. This being the case, the question arises; what is there to stop the group of people who govern us from exceeding and taking advantage of the power and authority we entrusted to them?

Distilled down to fundamentals, governments are nothing more than a group of people combined with a set of rules which divide into two categories; rules which govern those who govern and rules which govern the governed. The former group is the most important by far because this group exists to protect our rights and freedom by restraining those who govern. However, and this is a very big however, these rules will be effective only if these people are honorable and have the integrity to willingly follow the rules we established for them.

Approximately 130 years ago, America threw off the bonds of tyranny and our leaders came together to write a constitution which would establish a new government; the government of the United States of America. To ensure that those who govern would obey the rules, the Founders established three branches of government with distinct and separate powers designed to ensure that each branch of government would serve as a check and a balance on the others. These three branches of government are a Congress which enacts the laws we live by, a Supreme Court the purpose of which is to ensure that the laws passed by Congress do not violate the provisions of our Constitution, and a President responsible for seeing that the laws passed by Congress are carried out and obeyed. Except for the many details, our government really is as simple as this. The Founders realized that government was a dangerous and necessary evil because of the inherent greed and selfishness of human beings, but through the establishment of three separate branches of government, they hoped that no one branch would become dominant such that it could render our Constitution dysfunctional.

Americans today pride themselves on being free. However, the Founding fathers would disagree with our perceptions because they understood the difference between personal and political freedom. Personal freedom means a person is not constrained and can make the day to day decisions of life without interference. Political freedom means people determine the nature of their government and this is where Americans living today fail the litmus test of freedom. We no longer have any say in how we are governed and this is true despite the fact we vote for those who lead us. Our present situation is such that our government is free and we are not. It is our government which decides how it will govern and our leaders only pay lip service to our Constitution so people will think we live in a free and democratic nation.

Unfortunately for those of us who know the truth, most of us believe our government is in keeping with the will of our Founding Fathers and evolved according the governing principles enshrined within our Constitution. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our government no longer follows the rules and to see this all we have to do is look to the Presidency of George Bush and how our do nothing Congress is reacting to our wayward President. The Presidency of George Bush is a stellar example of everything wrong with our government and the best examples of this are Presidential signing statements, non-treaties, and our war in Iraq.

Signing Statements

A signing statement is a written statement issued by a President subsequent to signing a law passed by Congress declaring which sections of the law he thinks are unconstitutional. The unfortunate result of this action is that it sends a clear signal to the President’s subordinates that he will take no action to ensure that the offending sections of law are enforced. As a result, those designated sections of law end up being ignored. Why would any employee do something that his superior disagrees with? Furthermore, President Bush has gone so far as to deliberately violate sections of law identified by him within a signing statement. Signing statements have been issued occasionally by past President’s, but President Bush has made them a routine part of his presidency and issued over 750 since taking office. These actions put the office of President above the law give it the powers of a dictator.

Supporters of President Bush point out that a President can veto any bill that comes before him. So what’s the problem? All the President is doing is nullifying part of the bill he disagrees with instead of vetoing the entire bill. Surely, if he can veto an entire bill he certainly should be able to veto a part of one especially when this falls within his prerogatives as the Nation’s Chief Executive. There are many problems evident here and they are not just minor ones. First and foremost, the Constitution does not give the President the power to veto a part of a bill and this means that doing so is not a prerogative of his office. He has assumed this authority and our Constitution specifically forbids any branch of government from assuming a power or authority not specifically provided to it. Therefore, signing statements are unconstitutional.

Secondly, the President according to our Constitution is tasked with ensuring that the laws passed by Congress are faithfully executed and this means in their entirety. He is not granted authority to pick and choose which parts of a law he will enforces and which he will not. By so doing the President is not properly fulfilling his duties and responsibilities and is also giving license to his subordinates to ignore or break the law. This is especially true when the President specifically orders them to act contrary to the law. It is truly beyond comprehension that our Nation is led by a Chief Executive who thinks he is properly doing his job by aiding, abetting, and participating in criminal actions.

These constitutional concerns are real, substantive, and cry out to be addressed, but who should address them. Citizens are powerless in this regard because our courts have ruled that citizens have no standing in a court of law when a government official fails to do his job properly especially when the lapse affects all citizens equally. This being the case, with the Nation’s judicial system out of the picture, the only group of people who could possibly address this issue is Congress; but on what grounds should they act?

There are two avenues of approach. First, Congress should find the President in contempt because of the pressing grounds for doing so. Our Constitution makes Congress solely responsible for making or changing laws. President Bush has assumed the power to do so. Therefore, he has usurped a power provided solely to Congress by our Constitution. This is a serious breach of the separation of powers and is a grave affront to Congress. For Congress not to act in response is a dereliction of their duties under the Constitution and is indicative of a grave and serious failure of governmental. President Bush is riding roughshod over our Constitution and for Congress to sit back and do nothing is unconscionable.

If the President does not mend his ways after being found in contempt of Congress, the next step Congress should take is impeach the President. According to our Constitution, the President can be impeached for violating any one of our laws. As to the issue in question, not only is he violating the highest and most sacred laws of our Nation, but by ignoring a contempt citation, he is defying Congress which drives a stake through the heart of our Constitution. No Congress worth its salt should tolerate such behavior from a President.

Non-Treaties

While there is historical precedent, albeit wrongful historical precedent for Bush’s use of signing statements, no such justification exists for his establishment of what he calls non-treaties. According to our Constitution our President has the power to negotiate treaties, but all such treaties must be approved by the Senate and apparently, this presents a problem for the President because it limits his freedom of action. For example, in a recently passed defense bill, Congress established that no taxpayer funds will be used to establish permanent military installations in Iraq or to exercise United States control over its oil resources.

President Bush disagrees with the above two legal requirements and has issued signing statements which claim they are unconstitutional on the grounds that they interfere with his Presidential authority as the Nation’s Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief. In keeping with his wrongful position, President Bush is now in the process of negotiating a long term agreement with Iraq which includes basing US troops there after hostilities cease. Adding insult to injury, the President has declared his intention to not designate this agreement as a treaty and is doing this so he will not have to submit the agreement to Congress for approval. Obviously, Congress will not approve anything which violates a law they passed.

A treaty is a formal understanding or agreement that obligates this Nation to take actions concurrent with the commitment of some other nation to take related actions. As long as these obligations are established between two or more nations, a treaty exists and clearly, no human being should have the power to declare something does not exist when it does. This is especially true for the President of the United States who is accountable to Congress for all treaties he negotiates.

President Bush’s claim that he has the authority to decide if the agreements he negotiates are treaties or non-treaties is splitting hairs on words and is being done to get around Congress and the provisions of our Constitution. Here again, the President is usurping a power not provided to him by the Constitution, breaking a legitimate law passed by Congress, and insulting Congress by not allowing it to perform a function mandated by our Constitution. Obviously, in a situation like this, it is incumbent for Congress to act, but incredibly, again they sit back and do nothing which is prima fascia proof that our government has failed and is dysfunctional.

Our Constitution establishes that the Supreme Court will retain original jurisdiction in all cases affecting treaties with foreign nations. This means that the Supreme Court has the authority to pass judgment upon the Presidents actions in regard to the constitutionality of all treaties he negotiates including the one he is presently is negotiating with Iraq. Americans never hear about the doctrine of original jurisdiction because, throughout the history the Supreme Court has never invoked this power and don’t hold your breath that it will do so now even though the situation cries out for them to do so. President Bush has declared his intention to break United States law, violate the provisions of our Constitution, deny Congress a power provided to it by our Constitution, and declare a treaty to not be a treaty and after all this, much to their discredit and dishonor, our Supreme Court will sit back and do nothing. Hear again, our government has failed and is dysfunctional.

The Iraq war

According to our Constitution Congress is solely responsible for declaring war. Of late, in lieu of declaring war, Congress has wrongfully given this power to the President by passing resolutions authorizing our President to use military force in specific situations when he deems it appropriate or necessary. So it was for our war in Iraq. The problem is that the information and justifications provided to Congress upon which they based their decision were false. Incredibly, this information was not false by accident, but instead by the designs and duplicity of our President. President Bush wanted to invade Iraq irrespective of any sound justification for doing so and to achieve this end he cooked the books on the available intelligence so he would have his way in Congress. Therefore, the President of the United States duped Congress into authorizing his war.

War is the most horrendous course of action a nation can take and should only be embarked upon after all other options have been exhausted. Furthermore, waging war for any reason other than self-defense is a war crime. President Bush convinced Congress to authorize invading Iraq by convincing them that Iraq was an imminent and impending threat to this it nation when it wasn’t. Iraq was not planning any offensive action against us and even if it was, had no capability of carrying out such an offensive. Furthermore, Iraq was not harboring terrorists or supporting their efforts in any manner. Therefore, we are fighting a war in Iraq not because it was necessary, but because George Bush wanted to and for this he is guilty of a serious war crime. For Congress not to step in, end the war, and impeach our President for his crime is unconscionable.

Again Congress has failed this Nation and its people by sitting back and doing nothing in the face of criminal actions on the part of our President. What does the President have to do to get impeached, rob a bank or molest a child? Our President has taken the nation to war on a lie. Thousand of innocent people are dead because the President lied and Congress sits back and does nothing in the hope that President Bush will win his war. Obviously, if he does, many people who have no clue as to what is really going on will praise him for being a hero. Wonderful! Might makes right and everyone loves a winner. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that whether we win in Iraq or not, to not impeach George Bush and remove him from office for his crimes is a travesty of justice and a tragedy for this Nation and the rest of the entire world because a precedent will have been set that Presidents can use war as a tool of diplomacy. Here again, Congress and thereby our entire government has failed us in a matter of extreme urgency and importance.

Analysis & Conclusion

Obviously, something is very wrong!

There are three possible reasons for George Bush’s behavior.

1. He honestly believes that he is doing what is best for this Nation.

2. He is a megalomaniac and wants to be Emperor of the world.

3. There is something far more sinister behind his behavior.

George Bush is not a stupid person and neither are the members of his staff. To think all these people are constitutionally challenged is as absurd as the justifications used by the President to justify his actions. Clearly, the President knows that he is supposed to preserve our constitution by obeying it, that he his supposed to obey and enforce the laws passed by Congress, that he is supposed to exercise his authority and duties provided by our constitution without infringing upon the authority and duties provided to the other branches of government, and that going to war for any reason other than self-defense is wrong. All of the foregoing being obviously true, to conclude that George Bush and is staff are doing what they believe is best for the Nation is ridiculous.

Moving on to item #2, George Bush has a huge ego problem, but he is not a megalomaniac. Furthermore, there is no point in becoming Emperor of the World if he has to give up the job after his term of office is over. Therefore, it does not make sense to think that President Bush wants to be Emperor of the world and this being the case we are left with concluding that some unknown sinister reason is behind Bush’s behavior, but what is it? Perhaps looking to Congress will shed some light on our dilemma.

Congress is made up of a multitude of highly intelligent and educated people most of whom are attorneys. This being the case, Congressmen cannot use stupidity or some other mental aberration as an excuse for not doing their jobs properly. This is especially true when they have sworn an oath to preserve and uphold our Constitution. Why then have they allowed our President to flaunt the Constitution and insult them by wrongfully assuming powers that rightfully belong to Congress? Indeed, why is Congress allowing a war to proceed which has no sound reason for being fought and is curse upon this Nation and the rest of the world? Clearly there is something sinister going on, but what is it?

Duh! Let’s see, what is going on in the world that could possibly explain why our President and all of Congress are acting like ignorant dolts?

Which way did they go? Which way did they go?

Fact! There are people in the world that have wrongfully amassed huge fortunes that exceed the wealth of most nations.

Fact! These filthy rich people have formed organizations that meet in secret and never reveal their agenda to the public.

Fact! Many key people within our government, corporations, and other institutions of society are members of one or more of these criminal organizations.

Fact! To be a member of any of these organizations, especially in a position of leadership, you must swear an oath of loyalty that supersedes and nullifies the oath sworn to preserve and uphold our Constitution.

Fact! Our nation is no longer sovereign, our borders are being dissolved, our currency is being destroyed, and as I write, a new nation called the North American Union is being formed through unconstitutional non-treaties negotiated by George Bush.

Fact! A New World Order exists as acknowledged and endorsed by the former President Bush and several other former Presidents.

Fact! David Rockefeller, a New World Order leader declared in an address to the Trilateral Commission in 1991 that the New World Order’s dictatorship over the nations of the world is preferable to democracy.

Which way did they go? Which way did they go?

Fact! Our government is peopled, for the most part, by lying traitors who have sold us out for a few pieces of silver and who have sworn allegiance to a world dictatorship.

Gee, I wonder why our President and Congress do the things they do? Perhaps I’ll learn something by watching Opra Winfrey or Dr. Phil. Better yet, perhaps the 6:30 news will provide me with some answers.

Post Script

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have said they would issue signing statements if elected. What this means is that they have publicly declared that they intend to violate their oath of office and our constitution once elected. To his credit, John McCain has said he would not issue signing statements. However, take little consolation in this because John McCain is committed to fighting our Iraq war for another 100 years if this is what it takes to win. Some choice we have in the coming Presidential election. We can elect a Democrat who publicly proclaims that he or she will violate their oath of office and trash our Constitution or a Republican who thinks waging perpetual warfare in a nation we invaded because of lies and duplicity is a just and proper course of action.