Dodd Defends Constitution — Where are the Others?
Ten days ago, I wrote in this space about the American Freedom Campaign’s launch of a U.S. citizens’ democracy movement that will drive the issue of defending the Constitution to the center of the presidential campaign. It’s pretty sad that we Americans even have to ask whether a candidate would protect the Constitution if elected — sad but necessary: in merely six years, however, the Bush administration has dramatically altered the presidency and its powers.
With our democracy crumbling and our liberties threatened, we cannot sit back and hope that the next president will voluntarily reverse the damage now done to the Constitution and the rule of law: history shows that leaders of any party are corrupted by unchecked power and it is not human nature to yield power once it has been aggregated into one’s hands.
This situation is simply too dangerous.
We want commitments. From every candidate. And we want the candidates to know that they will only receive our votes if they make this commitment.
The good news is that we have a frontrunner — in the call-out to defend the Constitution. Yesterday, Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) stepped up to the patriot’s task and gave the American Freedom Campaign the following statement:
“It’s a sad day when a presidential candidate actually has to talk about restoring the Constitution, but that’s where we are after this administration’s assault on the rule of law — an assault, by the way, that actually makes us less secure and more isolated by weakening our standing around the world. I have said repeatedly that if elected, the *FIRST THING* I would do after being sworn in is to reverse as much of the damage done to the Constitution by President Bush as possible. And I would immediately do as much as I legally can by executive order.”
Chris Dodd is acting like an American. He should be congratulated. But the rest of the candidates should be ashamed — at least for now. We know they are aware of our efforts, since they have all received thousands of emails from supporters of the American Freedom Campaign. In some cases, calls to the candidates to defend the Constitution have been even more direct.
John Edwards, where are you? Two weeks ago, his wife Elizabeth wrote on Daily Kos that “under John, the Constitution returns.” After I asked him to make good on his wife’s words by signing the pledge, one of his own supporters posted a link to my blog on Edwards’ own campaign blog. Earlier in August, another Edwards campaign blogger urged the former Senator to sign the pledge.
As promised, a week later I called the campaign and let them know we were hoping for his endorsement of the rule of law. Ten days now? No response from Mr. Edwards.
Here is the text of the American Freedom Pledge:
“We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people’s phones and emails without a court order, and above all we do not give any President unchecked power.
“I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from assault by any president.”
Some people have suggested that this pledge is not strong enough, or that candidates are as likely to break their word after signing this pledge as they would be after taking the oath of office, which similarly contains a commitment to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.” These critiques are fair. But if the alternative is silence, this is not good enough for America.
Candidates — and Congressmen and women — take some risks by standing up for the Constitution right now. I asked a librarian to distribute copies of the Constitution — provided for free — and she said this would be seen as too controversial. A major TV channel declined to renew a long-running series teaching U.S. kids about democracy because they said they didn’t want to be seen as rocking the boat. Many leaders on the Hill have told us off the record that the fear is widespread that standing up for liberty means they think they risk being painted as “soft on terror.” And I must note that major interests are served financially by an open-ended war and ever-proliferating surveillance technologies.
So, yeah, it says something if a candidate won’t publicly commit to restoring the Constitution.
And a pledge also matters psychologically — to us. We need reminding of what we have while we can still save it. Every time we are reminded of the personal courage of our founders, our appreciation of the Constitution, now dusty, renews itself. And every time we talk about the disrespect the Bush administration has demonstrated for the Constitution our own personal desires to stand up against these abuses intensifies.
So, Senator Edwards — we’re waiting for a call. Or an e-mail. Or even a comment in this blog entry. Is it too controversial to support the Constitution? Or will you sign your name and be counted — as the founders did? As many of your supporters already have?
And the rest of the candidates — will you let Dodd outshine you? Show us you deserve our presidency. Help remind the American people how precious — and fragile — our democracy is. Sign the American Freedom Pledge or make as strong a statement as possible about your commitment to defending our Constitution.
We’re standing by — in the millions.
If you want to send an email to the candidates encouraging them to sign the American Freedom Pledge, click here.
Naomi Wolf’s most recent book is The End of America: Letter to A Young Patriot.
© 2007 Huffington Post
Get a clue. Dennis Kucinich is the one that pulled a pocket copy of the constitution out of his pocket at a debate. Dennis Kucinich is the one that is protecting the constitution by filing articles of impeachment (HR 333) against Cheney. Dennis Kucinich is the one that voted against the Patriot Act right after 9/11. It’s been Dennis all the way. The stories even on Commondreams are just so much propaganda any more.
And where exactly has Sen. Dodd, the great defender of the Constitution been for the last five years? Funny, I don’t remember his brave filibusters trying to stop these abuses from passing in the first place. I don’t remember him standing right there alongside Feingold casting votes against the passage of the Patriot Act.
Typical Dem. Quiet as a mouse and not doing a damn thing when they can take real actions to stop something or change things. But then gets all brave when he’s just talking.
Actions count, not talk.
Another day, another writer/journalist pretending that Dennis Kucinich doesn’t exist.
This is getting very silly!
The quotes attributed to Dodd in this article were made on the Ed Schultz Program yesterday. It was obvious to me he was just making them to differentiate himself from the frontrunners so he’d get more attention. More empty promises from another candidate who’s in the running based on his campaign spending rather than based on his qualifications. Big wow. Campaign spending limits now!
What a ridiculous crock. An article like this one by Naomi Wolf doesn’t even deserve to be published. The first two CD comments above contain more truth & insight than the article itself.
Dodd is a contemptible weakling — a complete zero. His mousy & timid remarks in these years of darkening tyranny have been of a piece with a Kerry or a Biden saying, “The president has not levelled with the American people about the war…” — something that’s easy to say, but which means precisely nothing, especially when followed up by mere platitudes & banalities.
If a Democrat isn’t saying loud & clear that Bush is a war criminal who deserves not just impeachment but to be placed before an international tribunal a lá Nuremberg, he isn’t saying diddly-squat. And as we know, NONE of them are really saying that. Only Kucinich & maybe Gravel are getting anywhere near what could be called significant “truth telling” — and even they are not using terms like “war criminal” or calling for Nuremberg-style trials.
Chris Dodd is BS, and so is this article attempting pump up his defense of the US Constitution. Get real!
We in Connecticut cannot count the number of times Dodd has advocated “taking out” Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, or some other head of state who fell into disfavor with the American public (or Israel) and how enthusiastic he’s always been about bombing powerless people in other countries. He’s a hypocrite.
We need to defend the constitution now, not at some later date! It will not wait, the nation’s fate hangs in the balance, as does Iran’s. Impeach Cheney, Bush, Rice, Pelosi.
NAM - MYOHO-RENGE - KYO
The ultimate teaching of Buddhism that leads to enlightenment through the law of cause and effect. Chant this phrase to overcome problems, fulfill desires, and to become happy.
World peace begins with you.
Cause folks, I’m afraid at this point, this is all we have left.
Another day, another writer/journalist pretending that Dennis Kucinich doesn’t exist…anniesee
Get a clue. Dennis Kucinich is the one that pulled a pocket copy of the constitution out of his pocket at a debate. Dennis Kucinich is the one that is protecting the constitution by filing articles of impeachment (HR 333) against Cheney. Dennis Kucinich is the one that voted against the Patriot Act right after 9/11. It’s been Dennis all the way. The stories even on Commondreams are just so much propaganda any more….sky sonja
I had occasion yesterday to have someone, after seeing my Kucinich bumper sticker, ask: “who is Koochigniichsky?”
(Or some such translation) Point being: If you truly believe in this man, it is up to you/us to find whatever means possible to get his name (Correctly pronounced and spelled) in front of people.
I must add here, for you Kucinich bashers, that there is NO PERFECT CANDIDATE. And, I must add, NOCHANCE OF A THIRD PARTY coming out of the shadows to save the country this time out. If your values match this gentleman, please don’t look for reasons NOT to support him or, I can assure you, we will again be voting for the lesser of evils. I will NOT stoop to that again as I did in the general election of 2004.
Celebrity, I would vote for Kucinich were he to win the Dem nomination. He will not however and has no support in the Democratic party. The Democratic party DOES NOT WANT HIM. the only reason he has been tolerated so far is precisely because he has no support (from the party) and no real exposure by the media.
He may as well BELONG to one of those third parties.
Like I said, if he gets the nomination, great, count me in. But if he doesn’t get it, I’ll be damned if I vote for another traitorous Dem. I am left with no moral choice.
We Are The 801: “I would vote for Kucinich were he to win the Dem nomination”.
Well, the primary is kind of the crucial vote, if you know what I mean. It makes sense to me to register Dim, or Decline To State, so you can vote for Kucinich in the primary. That’s were you have the most power to change the outcome and the debate.
Celebrity, I’m right there with you. None of the other Dims running will get my vote in the general election. But I’m going to fight like hell for Kucinich in the primary, because his campaign provides an opportunity to educate people about issues. Also, by supporting Kucinich, you are fighting the brainwashing attempt by the media to choose your candidate for you.
Dennis Kucinich Dennis Kucinich Dennis Kucinich. Why is no one even talking about him. Are the dims and the media afraid of him?.If so, then what are they afraid of. Could it be………….THE TRUTH! Dennis, dump your dem dead weights and turn green, or any thing other than a part of the dead party.THEY DON’T WANT YOU, THEY DONT NEED YOU, AND THEY DONT DESERVE YOU! Please! Please! Please! Thanks, Tex
I was excited about Kucinich until he fell in line with the party and supported John Kerry, aka “Bush-lite.”
When it comes down to it, a third Party candidate looks like our ONLY chance. The Dems have been in bed with the Bushistas too much for too long and kow-tow to the same corporate interests. (You will note that corporations often contribute heavily to BOTH parties. That isn’t because they want to be fair and impartial. It’s because they own them both!)
The admonition not to look for a “perfect” candidate is just a rephrasing of settling for the lesser evil — and I trust you can see clearly where that’s gotten us.
We need radical action for radical change.
Any boxer can tell you that, when the fix is in, with a hometown ref and hometown judges calling the fight for the hometown boy, the ONLY way you’re going to win is by KO. Right now, the Republic we dreamed of is WAY behind on points and we’re in the closing rounds of the fight.
We need a knock-out.
If we keep doing what we’ve done up until now, we’re finished.
Liberty & Justice,
SJ
www.spartacusjones.com
celebrity said “Point being: If you truly believe in this man, it is up to you/us to find whatever means possible to get his name (Correctly pronounced and spelled) in front of people.”
Of course! Agreed. I’ve blogged about DK on several occasions, quoted from, and linked to his speeches and websites. I pounce on any opportunity I can find to talk about him. Next - a bumper sticker!
Spartacus Jones: “We need radical action for radical change”, “We need a knock out”.
O.K., but maybe fighting for Kucinich and the principles he stands for in the primary, thus educating people on the issues and fighting media brainwashing, IS the radical action to take right now.
Kucinich DOES represent radical change, folks. It’s change most Americans actually agree with, when it’s not getting called ’socialist’. Check out his platform, his history. I know he won’t get the nomination due to media brainwashing, but maybe fighting that brainwashing and highlighting the platform is the most effective action to take leading up to the primaries.
I repeat, I will not vote for the other Dims in the general election.
Hooray for those supporting my points! For those who still can’t see the forest for the trees–well think and do what you must, it is your right; however, this coming primary could go down in history with Kucinich support.
“bigchange” is right: Kucinich DOES represent radical change, folks. It’s change most Americans actually agree with, when it’s not getting called ’socialist’.
“spartacusjones”: The admonition not to look for a “perfect” candidate is just a rephrasing of settling for the lesser evil.
NOT SO. All I was referring to was that Mr. Kucinich must bear the ongoing, misguided complaint of his 2004 decision to support his “team”. In the same situation, I believe most who condemn him would do nothing less for their “team”. And, as I said above, I agree with you, I will not vote for any other Democratic shill.
Okay folks, we all support Kucinich, fine and dandy. Let’s put our money where our mouths are; the campaign is grossly underfunded so every one of us should be sending money every month. And yes, I have donated.
It seems pretty clear, based upon reader’s comments on CD in various threads these past weeks and months, that most people posting here support Dennis Kucinich. He has been the winner of the debates, though that fact is left unreported by the Dems and the MSM. And he is truly the most progressive candidate. (I like Gravel and think the National Initiative is the smartest idea to come along, but I think Kucinich is more balanced.)
So, Common Dreams (yeah you!), why don’t you take an official position and support Kucinich? Oh, I suppose it is against your policy to ’support’ anything. Well, if that’s the case, that’s some weak-ass nonsense.
How about it Common Dreams, why don’t you ‘break from the MSM pack and ‘endorse’ a candidate, the one your readers support, and start promoting him big time? If he won the debates, which he did, why aren’t you placing article after article about him and making a big noise?
And CD readers, how about you, how about calling CD out on this, loudly and repeatedly? Hao bu hao?
Great comments, everyone, there is not viable third party out there, so Kucinich is definately our best bet, the longer we can keep him in the race, the longer the American people get to hear some one speaking the truth instead of a bunch of platitudes.
If Dodd was really interested in protecting the Constitution he would be leading the fight to Impeach Bush, Chaney etc. like Kucinich.
Besides donations to Kucinich we all need to bug our favorite interview shows to have him on.
I plan to ask the Daily Show and The Colbert Report to have him on.
Yeah, I know they are not “real” news but they have a lot of veiwers. So, I hope you all will do likewise.
off topic but still relevant…Naomi, a week ago or so you wrote some sort of fluff about clinton on the huffington post. i wrote a response but it was censored because I asked if you were still being paid by the clinton camp as a consultant. Would’ve been good to disclose somewhere in the piece.
The author is extremely niavette. You want a commitment for my vote? You forget these professional politians know how to committ, but it’s the follow-through that is lacking. We’ve danced this charade many times. These career political hacks know that they can suspend habeous corpus, shred the constitution, invoke military actions, possee comorotus, all under criminal and suspect manipulation.
As far as I’m concerned, Dodd needs to show that he can walk the walk. Talk is too cheap from just another brand “d” slickster, bought and paid by corpo capitalists.
Check with Kucinich, if you want to see how actions speak louder than rhetoric.
Supporting the Constitution now is like supporting the house of Bourbon. There will be no restoration.
The Constitution was inadequate, and it’s framers never believed that the Bill of Rights might actually apply to anyone outside their own social circle; by “the people” it always meant “we people,” people like them.
The 1960s saw the last remaining attempts to extend to the whole true rights, rights which had always in practice meant the privileges of some.
The Constitution is gone. Begin again with the knowledge that without economic equality political equality is a fantasy.
Dichterfreund;
Very good points.
I am not well read with regard to the Constitution, by any stretch of the imagination, so I must ask, is it possible that the framers of the Constitution wrote a document that was unwittingly ‘adequate’? Perhaps they never imagined the time in the future when, due to the relatively simple language in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, what was then considered framed with to regard the privileged, would in its simplicity become universal and thereby be equally applicable to the unforeseeable masses and lawyers of the future (present).
Time for an article 5 convention!
http://www.foavc.org/
Was this letter perhaps a ploy to get more folks thinking about this ? To stand up and cry KUCINICH?
I mean that in a positive way.
I see so many articles on here that talk about various issues that folks want.. there is usually nothing mentioned of Kucinich IN the article or only a glib reference to him…
and yet the majority of the comments invoke his name!
He IS the best candidate out there…
we need to have the courage of our convictions and tell the DNC that is what we want .. verbally and through voting.
I was just in a local book store. Joseph Beth. They were selling Hillary and Obama playing cards.
I asked the woman at the counter…”What about Kucinich” and she nodded her head I suppose in aggreement… but then stated … “I think he is too nice”..
I had blurted out.. before that.. “What.. he is too short? “.. anticiptating that glib “he will never win”…
but it sounded like she liked Kucinich.. and obviously… something about being nice doesn’t jibe with the presidential race..
Yet.. what if every person voted for Kucinich who believed in their heart of hearts in him..??
Wow… we could possibly change the world.
Peace
Ah, yes. Christopher Dodd. The insurance industry’s guy in the Senate. When was the last time he actually stood up for anything?
(Off topic also)
diana said “off topic but still relevant…Naomi, a week ago or so you wrote some sort of fluff about clinton on the huffington post. i wrote a response but it was censored because I asked if you were still being paid by the clinton camp as a consultant.”
Same here! I’ve had 3 comments blanked by HuffPo, 2 relating to Clinton - one was on the article you mention. I’ve complained, but it was ignored.
Anniesee September 1st, 2007 11:33 am
(Off topic also)
diana said “off topic but still relevant…Naomi, a week ago or so you wrote some sort of fluff about clinton on the huffington post. i wrote a response but it was censored because I asked if you were still being paid by the clinton camp as a consultant.”
Same here! I’ve had 3 comments blanked by HuffPo, 2 relating to Clinton - one was on the article you mention. I’ve complained, but it was ignored.
——-
Huffington Post has become a left-wing drudge report, nothing more. A few of huffington’s bloggers are terrific–far fewer than before–but most are ‘friends of arianna.’ Arianna is obsessed about marketing herself, and politics is given equal billing with social fluff (’25% of all men will go bald before 40′)and entertainment news.
The site once had a chance to become a place for serious, unbiased discussion. Now one simply can’t take it seriously.
Well, this article truly sucked, but it sure has been interesting reading the comments, so I’m glad I clicked on it after all (I usually don’t, when I see that Naomi Wolf is listed as author. She is a mediocre thinker and an insipid writer.)
I, too, belong to the many millions of Americans who will not bother to vote Democratic unless Kucinich is the nominee.
Is this the same Chris Dodd who voted in 2002 to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq?