"No one owes obedience to a usurper government or to anyone who assumes public office in violation of the Constitution and the law. The civil population has the right to rise up in defense of the constitutional order. The acts of those who usurp public office are null and void."

Well said, DOES THIS APPLY TO FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN IN 2008?

"THEN WHAT?"
Or, What to Do with the Enormous Mess Left Behind by the Bush Administration

Bush is neither out of office, impeached nor imprisoned yet, although he deserves to be all three. Unfortunately, in the months left, he can still do tremendous harm to our troops, our treasury, our health, our economy, our Constitution, our other laws and treaties, and our prestige and reputation.

Nevertheless, since we are selecting a replacement for him, now is the time to insure those seeking the job agree to do the things necessary to clean up the political toxic waste Bush and his co-conspirators have left behind piled up in seemingly unending piles of offal. We cannot simply declare we want to put the unpleasantness behind us. If we do not dramatically and publically spotlight and undo the damage, if people are not punished for their attempted putsch to topple us into a perpetual dictatorship controlled by a small group of Neocons, then some successor might someday claim under some pretext that it is okay to repeat what the Bushites did. And, next time it might not be a barely articulate bumbler attempting it. Using the same techniques, but less clumsily so, someone else could have successfully accomplished the coup d'état which is obviously what the Neocons had in mind.

No, we must ferret out and undo everything, absolutely everything, Bush has done since being illegally placed in power by the five Republicans appointed to the Supreme Court. To begin with, repeal every law, every so-called "signing statement" and every executive order signed by the current Administration. Once they are repealed, we can re-examine each to see if any deserve consideration. It should be noted though that the title of many of the laws are deceptions and the exact opposite of what was really intended by the Neocons. Examples include the so-called Patriot Act, the Healthy Forest Initiative, the Bankruptcy Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and the Clear Skies Initiative. It is theoretically possible the Bush Gang enacted something worthwhile in practice, but doubtful. Certainly nothing was ever implemented if it was.

In the same vein, every single person in the Bush Administration ever recommended for office during Bush's tenure must removed, starting with those in charge of funds, regulators, troops and contracts. The exception would be those who were in place already prior to Bush's being crowned king, those who subsequently quit in disgust or disillusionment and those were fired because of whistle blowing or were not sufficiently personally loyal to Bush. Those removed should never again be allowed in positions of power and trust unless and until they can affirmatively prove they are worthy of it or a reconciliation council is set up similar to the concept used in Mandela's South Africa working its way out of apartheid.

Yes, it's "profiling" of a sorts, but it's not an illegal or unconstitutional profiling since this particular reason for discriminating is not among the constitutionally prohibited list. The suspicion would be that Bush's favorites were active and knowing participants in the attempt to overthrow our democracy. An investigation of their finances and conduct should be undertaken to determine whether that was so. Maybe we can recover some of the trillions stolen, diverted, lost or wasted. Lots prosecutors and investigators should be hired and their offices fully staffed and funded. Let's convict and jail some for crimes like torture and conflict of interest.

Detractors might argue that it would eliminate a large group from the pool of potential public officials and might diminish the general caliber of replacement future appointees. In normal circumstances that would be true, as turned out to be the case when the Baathist Party functionaries were banned in Iraq. However, given the amount of harm that the Bush appointees have accomplished, replacements selected at random out of the phone book could hardly be worse.

New laws should be put in place to forbid former officials of all sorts from becoming lobbyists for at least six years after they were in office.

We also need to investigate every contract entered into by the Bush Administration with private companies, especially the no-bid contracts that were awarded to companies that were campaign contributors of Bush or were companies in which Bush officials held stock. Corruption, bribery, profiteering and gouging should be punished and severely so. Failure to perform timely or otherwise should grounds for seeking damages for breach of contract. More importantly perhaps the General Accounting Office should investigate whether we need some of the contracts at all. For instance, why do we need to pay Blackwater guards in Iraq five times what we pay our own troops for the identical tasks? Why should Blackwater employees be given immunity in advance from all laws for whatever they might do? To the extent possible, we should get out of such contracts immediately and move the contractors to the bottom of the list, if at all, for future work.

Lots of regulators should be hired to once again insure the safety of our air, water, food, deposits, toys, etc.

We need some new laws to insure no more voting fraud by paperless hackable electronic voting machines. We need some new laws on campaign financing to stop buying of elections. We need some new laws to insure government transparency and less secrecy, at least less secrecy designed solely to cover up malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance. Maybe we need to go back to the old equal time rules on access to the media in political campaigns

We need to start obeying once again our international treaties we long ago agreed to like the Geneva Conventions and the Kyoto Accord. Maybe we should disbar the attorneys who asserted we did not have to do so.

We definitely need to get out of Iraq. We can save a little face by saying we'll be back if the country acts up again or actually attacks us or invades Israel or others. That's probably what we should have done the moment we seized Saddam anyway. It would not have justified our highly illegal invasion without cause, but it would not have subsequently revealed our vulnerabilities and our utter inability to govern Middle Eastern countries. There will be pain getting out. On the other hand, it will be less than the pain and cost of staying forever. Besides, we got kicked out of Vietnam. They were as fiercely suicidal as the Muslims, but we seem to have no fear they would follow us home once we left their country.

Perhaps we should stand up and apologize to the rest of the world for being such jerks for the past eight years. Maybe we should turn Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld over to international tribunals to see if they are war criminals. That might go a long way toward showing we mean it when we say we are sorry.

Bullshit. You don't have to accept what the Supreme Court says, you go out into the streets and protest and make a mess. Supreme means there is no appeal, not that they can't be questioned. Grow up a little. The court is corrupt and politicized. Don't be a sheep!

dmaddox5 - it wasn't Zounds who called you a troll. It was ColdWarBaby47 who did, in a reply to a previous post by Zounds. Looks to me like Zounds was trying to be respecful to you and ColdWarBaby was mocking him for it. Go back and read the posts.

No! Darlin! elmysterio, America has been a criminal state since it first put its foot on this continent, 1492. That's 500 years of criminal acts of greed, murder, slavery.

How it begins, is the way it unfolds in behavior, "We The People" Freedom, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness" not withstanding.

We're looking at 500 years of criminality firmly based in 6,000 years of slavery, violence, and greed of patriarchy.

As someone said: "Age and Treachery will always win over Youth and Idealism." At least that's been true of Patriarchy/Empire/Facism/Imperialism down thru the ages.

Gore is indeed to blame and so are stupid voters like KEM PATRICK who keep choosing the 'lesser of two evils'.

Also to blame are the 6 million (that's 6 million) registered DEMOCRATS who voted for Bush in 2000, so Nader getting 2 million votes didn't cause Gore to lose, you drooling idiots.

Gore was a coward just like Kerry was in 2004. He didn't fight like a man and deserved to lose. Just for choosing warmonger LIEberman as VP, Gore deserved to lose. Democrats are the most ignorant voters on the face of the earth, terminally retarded.

Hi ~METAL DOG~. It was only two counties in Florida where the "Hanging Chads" fiasco was a problem. It wasn't Gore's fault, nor was it his fault that the Supreme Court took the case, (presented to them by Republican lawyers.) Nor was it Gore's fault how the Supreme Court ruled. Once that happened, he had no other alternative than to accept their decision, ___ neither did anyone else.

Yet still many blame Gore and call him a wimp for dropping out and not fighting it. Some seem to love displaying their incredible io ignorance here. The Flordia court agreed to re-count those two counties, but they would not agrre to re-count the entire state, for it was not necessary.

How ignorant and stupid it is, to blame Gore for any of it. He didn't quit or drop out, the Supreme Court booted him out and there was no other court to appeal to. Some who blog comments here at CD are block-heads and they can't see the trees for the forest.

Dan the Man, the only reason you are upset about Ted Rall's cartoons is because several of the retarded children looked just like you!

Enlightenment is happening too slowly for my taste.

Articles like this are unintentional (I assume) barriers to an essential understanding that History is trying to show us:

The problem begins with the centralization of power and the creation of Nation-States.

An analogy could be drawn with Industrialization. These system-style machines have given much that otherwise the People might never have achieved, but they have also taken much away that otherwise the People might never have lost.

The continued use of the machine of State is problematic to say the least.

But the continued inability of almost everyone to think about life without this machine is just pathetic.

I try to find it funny.

-matti.

Your reference to signing statements, for example, is absurd. The fact that others have used signing statements ignores the number of such uses and the purpose. It also ignores the fact that this government acts outside the law. Your post is useless, except to get people angry because they are frustrated by your blindness. You make assumptions that are not just unfounded but disingeneous. We are sick and tired of this shallow thinking which is so common to average Americans. Clearly you are not aware that the US is a monster with a monstrous history. You speak not like an adult but a dutiful child who cannot think on his own and is totally sold on the myth of American goodness.

dMaddox: the response you get is frustration at the sight of a human being being naive and harmful at the same time. Your mindless acceptance of what you read or are told and your way of thinking are a danger to us all. you have been recognized as a part of the problem. How does one argue with someone who thinks the people in government must know better? Besides, it is clear that you are so far from understanding that taking you on seems like an interminable task. For example, you actually believe the government was fooled by the intelligence while the evidence says this is not so. You are a sucker, and it bothers people because you suckers fall for these tricks and vote the way you are being shaped to vote. Americans really are foolish, and you are proving it.

Oh lets see here you folks go ahead and fall for what ted has to say but REMEBER he was FIRED from a lot of news papers for his hatful cartoons of crippled children and retarted children. You don't think i'm telling the truth look it up and also he is a liberal and all they do is run their mouths. Funny hwo they all seem to go back 8 years ago and still cry foul. Its over and done with lets move on to making this a btter country the first move is to tell teddy and the rest of the goodie to shoes to shut up and leave it will make a better place for us.

The Deomcrats have lacked a spinal column since Carter scammed out the party's Left in '80 nomination. The notion that they would have a spinal column is charming, I appreciate Rall's sense of fantasy!

#
chessgames56 April 2nd, 2008 1:59 pm:

"Looking around and listening to many opinions and ideas here and elsewhere, it is evident that the majority in this country need a much bigger shock, or set of shocks, than have already been received to break the tremendous spell of denial we/they are presently under.

"That essentially means we must suffer a much greater loss in order to wake up. And it's ultimately up to us how we handle the 'truth' after that."
++++++++++

It's already in the works ... that "much greater loss."

Obviously, not too many are following the economic forecasts of a depression that will outdo The Great Depression of the '30's.

In Los Angeles, for example, 59% of homes are in foreclosure. Shortages of oil are predicted as all nations scramble for their fair share and their survival.

Paulsen of the Treasury has just added more FOX-power to the Federal Reserve that will REGULATE ITSELF even more, thank you, and we chickens are about to be cooped up or eaten in the not-too-distant future.

It often seems that too many of us perceive the United States as THE WORLD as if no others are around and have their own plans.

Life for the U.S. citizen is over as we've known it, even though most of the trappings are still here. But what is now looming on the horizon has been in the works for a very long time. And the powers that pull the strings of the U.S. Administrations are just doing their thing, very skillfuly I might add.

We are under Corporate and Banking Systems rules and we're in for it.

Fighting "Terrorism" is a pattern on the scrim curtain that just keeps the profits of the Military-Industrial complex rocketing to the stratosphere and coring out the center of our nation.

Hi-tech bubbles and Mortgage bubbles are so well-engineered.

We are a shell of a country now with our manufacturing base elsewhere and oil shortages in the offing as India and China can afford to pay more for the growth of their burgeoning
economies. But China is now the world's most egregious polluter, with India not too far behind.

The fly in the ointment seems to be the soullessness and heartlessness and blind spot of the mega-money powers.

Even they can't stop the spiraling-out-of- control environmental disasters that are coming right along with the economic collapses and food and water shortages that will be global, especially in the poorest of the poor countries.

It is a great Constitution we have, but it is stripped now as our electoral process has been corrupted by the corrupt who have governed corruptly for quite some time. ... And the corrupt are not just in Washington D.C.

Shocks and Losses of a mega-variety have already happened, and more are coming ... and when they do, and likely soon, each one of us who have enjoyed our free passes to the shopping malls, super-super food markets, the new car show rooms for so many years, and munching munchies as we watch the Super Bowl and Nascar races without a care in the world are going to change in remarkable ways.

This is one world, one planet after-all and whatever remnant of us are left after the cataclysms which are fast approaching, we are going to have to find a way to do it differently, do it collectively so, in fact, all and everything on this planet have a fair chance at living securely and well.

Likely this will be the task of the next generation ... a Federation of Peoples that actually works ... and it would be wonderful if they finally get it right. But that is up for grabs, as we may return to our most primitive selves as we scramble to survive.

As Rebel Farmer often says on these Boards, create community wherever you are and prepare with a plan for food and water and etcetera. And do it now.

Yes, we will go through the charade of this election likely, and if it happens that a Savior turns up in the presidency, I will be so happy to stand corrected.

peace ...

KEM -- many blame Gore for the outcome of 2000 because he made the fatal mistake of asking for a recount in just two counties, rather than insisting that EVERY VOTE be counted. As soon as he did that, he gave the impression that he was interested in something other than a full and fair count.

First, to Zounds: Geneva Convention protections apply only to "protected persons". Anyone captured under arms must meet strict guidelines in order to qualify as a protected person. Those guidelines include being in the armed service of a signatory state, being in the authorized uniform of that signatory state, and having personally complied with the rules of war. As an officer trainee, many years ago, it was drilled into us that if we were captured on the battlefield and were out of uniform, we could be legally shot on the spot as spies.

Also, the Clinton administration was also convinced, based on much of the same intelligence used by the Bush administration, that Iraq posed a real and present danger to American interests. The intelligence, in full, was shown to the House and Senate intelligence committees. Members of those committees, after having seen and understood the intelligence, voted to authorize military action. Who lied to whom?

Finally, if leading members of an opposition Congress had a shred of real evidence that treaties were being violated or that sworn testimony had been falsified, charges would have been brought. The reality is that both Pelosi and Reid have seen the classified data and, while publicly castigating the President, privately understand that certain courses of action were, and remain, necessary.

To Zounds and others, regarding signing statements. These statements have been in common usage since James Monroe was President. It is the prerogitive of the Chief Executive to determine the manner of enforcement of any law passed by Congress. If Congress leaves enough "wiggle room" in legislation that the President doesn't like, who can blame the President for taking advantage of that? If they don't like the President's interpretation of their laws, they can either tighten up the language or take it to court for an official interpretation. That why we have a judiciary. And the word "abuse" is so tired. It is only abuse if you disagree with a particular instance of a signing statement. If abuse were present in sheer numbers, Bill Clinton takes the prize.

I am sometimes amazed by the venomous responses to opposing viewpoints I find in the supposedly liberal and progressive, enlightened, blogosphere. I'm particularly amused by the gradual transformation of the language used by Zounds in his posts in this thread. While he (an assumption on my part) starts out with rational, reasoned disagreement he ends with the assertion that I am "a money worshipping troll". Having been defeated in the realm of ideas and discourse, he resorts to base name calling.

I guess Ted's not the only one expressing childish and immature opinions here.

This whole article is sooooo 2000. Get over it and address the present. There are bigger fish to fry than past elections. Here the Donkeys come up with a candidate who the College Crowd and "The View" watchers think is way cool, and his primary opponent has turned into a pathological liar, and were worried about events of 8 years ago. Talk about appealing to the mentally challenged. The Rep's come up with a candidate older than dirt, and we're worried about the '00 election. The Senate is full of senile old f--ts who should have retired decades ago and we're worried about '00.
Ted, you bore me to tears, this article should earn a college freshman a failing grade and you pass your ass off as a professional journalist/editorialist. Your Pathetic.
Here's the drill. Both Hillary and Barakorama are qualified to run 3rd shift at a fast food resturant, period. Come November, we are going to get our ass handed to us on a plate, and we have it coming. The position we are deciding in November is Chief Executive of the most powerful Nation in the History of the Planet. Loose the Bafoons and give me a leader with demonstrated Executive performance.

peaceful implosion: take the United away from the States and start again...a few smaller tigers to deal with rather than a mighty monster..Gorbachev showed the way...any takers?

Goose2@10:14 PM April 2 re: Article.II.
Rall is correct in which Article but what he came away with is wrong. Article.II.Section.1.....But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by the States...
So by Constitutional law the counting of the votes is left to the state and the statute commits challenges finally to the judgement of Congress. The Supreme Court had no right according to the Constitution of the United States to stop the state from counting its votes, its guarenteed by the preceding.
Then denied the Legislative Branch its Constitutionally guarenteed role in the three tiered system of Government we are SUPPOSED TO HAVE, that being said it no longer matters and these MOTHERF$$KERS are going to do as they please. SO?

SIX CHEERS!

Three for Rall's article and perspicacity. Right on.

Three for Peru and its respect for hard-won democracy.

Impeachment is the way to save America's Soul (if there is any left after this horrendous brutalizing, blood commerce, lying and fear-mongering).

Obama runs from impeachment (as do nearly all of our Congress) as well as he runs from exposing Reality (REv. Wright's Wrighteous Rage). His popularity? Folks clamoring for a way out of this nightmare will accept anything that looks like hope, even if it is not connected to any Plan linked to Reality.

For a true reality check: the Koerner Report anniversary: a quick look exposes 40 years of hype covering inaction and misaction, mystification, disinformation, and speculation.

America's Number One sport??

The Reality Sprint. Goes like this: If you catch a Glimpse of Reality, turn 180 degrees, and run as fast as you can. Works every time, right? Got us here, didn't it?

"If Obama really were for change—and he's not—he'd be calling for the impeachment of Bush; in fact, he'd have led the movement, shoulder to shoulder with the excellent Dennis Kucinich. On this basis alone, Obama's presidency is already dead in the water.'

Yet ,strangely enough ,it seems that millions venerate him - hanging onto His every word ,and every utterance. Richardson, for one ,has gone to the extent of declaring that He is that once-in-a-lifetime leader. ( Hardly a testament though, to the quality of leadership during Richardson's lifetime , it has to be said.)

"George Bush will be lucky to survive ten minutes on the streets of any US city." -pangolin

I would sincerely like to believe this statement. I watched DemocracyNow last night and they had a clip of the chimp throwing the first pitch. It sounded as though the crowd was cheering quite loudly for him. Amy Goodman said that he was greeted with cheers and jeers, but all I could see and hear was jubilation.

What's up with that? Was anyone actually at that game that could shed a little light on what was actually happening in the stands?

Hmmm. I'm thinking that the clusterfuck that the US has become in the last eight years is so bad that we are all sitting on a powderkeg. George Bush will be lucky to survive ten minutes on the streets of any US city without some serious heckling.

He's the most hated man in the world. Likely the most hated man ever due to things like population growth since the death of Hitler. I think that will count for something in the end.

Nature bats last.

Ronald White, Amen!

Zounds 1 April 2nd, 2008 3:22 pm

"dmaddox5's omission of any legal criticism of Bush's many brazen, arguably extra-constitutional maneuvers, seems to reflect very selective fault-finding by dmaddox5, against Ralls and in favor of Bush."

That's because dmaddox5 is a money worshipping troll!

Pere Ubu:

The point is there was no mandate from the masses, and the supreme court thing is no more than a farcical aquatic ceremony. Now he goes around saying he's an emperor and he ought to be put away.

>>Under Article II of the Constitution, Federal courts don't have jurisdiction in election disputes. The state supreme courts–in that case, Florida–have the final word.<<

I just read Article II and it doesn't say anything of the kind that I can find. Can you point to where this is stated or by what prescedent it is inferred?

how many of you who post your cynicism here have done any of them?

I don't watch , listen to or read MSM . If millions of Americans and Canadians did something as simple as that things may change for the better .

Somewhere out on the parallel universe timeline, Gore got Osma Bin Ladin at Tora Bora, the Economy took a dip after 9/11 but with some help from the World we got back to Normal, Liberman took the job as Vice and found out about the warm piss, we moved to a Greener system and slowed down Global Warming, and the Dollar was still King.
Watch out for McCain/Liberman...

the way of bush co. will be the way of mussolini and hitler, although i wish the next president in conjunction with congress would pursue the criminals who've wrought so much damage upon this world.

typically i'm not a conspiracy theorist, but in the back of my mind i see a connection b/w unsupervised warrant-less eavesdropping and congress' hesitancy to pursue impeachment b/c of high crimes and misdemeanors (treason). i would not put death threats beyond the bush co. crowd (or the clinton crowd for that matter). one politicians plane crashing (as described in the book confessions of an economic hit man)can be ordered as quickly as we can order a pizza.

i've never personally experienced a serious death threat or political blackmail but i sense it happens and has the desired impact on the politician- especially in light of the spitzer folly, every politician has a little dirt (if not a mistress) under their fingernails. dirt is unacceptable to hygienic puritanical america, especially dirt distilled through MSM splattered across the world within moments on tv.

i suspect the fascists in this country won't see bars until their unwittingly picked up on the streets of europe or latin america and tried in the international court (ICC) for war crimes (i'd be surprised if bush or cheney travel very much once out of office), at least after they're nabbed they'll receive public trials in europe.

if international institutions fall through, i suspect we will be liberated in 10 or 15 years by troops representing the united states of south america with backing from europe and china.

they'll find a few north americans sipping champaign admiring their stolen art and loot but most of us will be starving as we manufacture more munitions. who knows maybe the brainwashed white supremacists we'll send flocks of 12 and 13 year old children into the streets to fight for the homeland against the brown invaders. they might have to nuke cleveland before we get the point and surrender.

it's a little absurd, but no more or less absurd then imagining these criminals will receive justice in this country....

...peace....

We Didn't Pledge to That

We didn't pledge allegiance to that my friend
We didn't pledge to a talon or a sword
A bird of prey doesn't blight the sky
with terror from on high
or litter carrion to seed fear

We didn't pledge for total dominance
or stealthful coups
or eternal strife
to feed the basest of the faceless
fiat feeding crews who play the world
for their largess
while we tread the treadmills
for our broken pledge
and march in step
to a barren place
like a place where a lunar flag
is fluttering though still

Are we under God or under Greed?
and when will justice get to feed?

Ted Rall---

I don't like rule by executive order, which is what you propose. That's dictatorial, not democratic---exactly what Bush did with his NSPD-51.

You've got to take it to Congress, like FDR. Of course everything there would be watered down at best. So you have to begin to propose reorganization of Congress, taking it out of the hands of inherited committee chairs and simple-majorities-take-all.

Maybe give 55% of the budget to the Dems if they have 55% of the seats, and the rest to the GOP and minor parties (if any), and let them make undiluted social and economic law, while the GOP carries on with its "defense" contracting. Soon the GOP% will shrink.

If this fails, then let New England, the Upper Midwest, the Pacific Northwest, and California turn their backs on Washington and write their own constitutions, and get on with it, with ambassadors to the other regions.

free all the prisoners at Gitmo?? I'm sure many or most are innocent, but there are many of the worlds most dangerous men in there as well. maybe giving them free lawyers and a speedy trial would be more appropriate. otherwise, good article.

you the man.

you the man Ted.

"When a ruler seizes office by extralegal means he rules the same way."

This does say a lot but should read "illegal" instead of "extralegal." Is it only CD folks who think it is a possibility or even probability that there may not be an election this November, or cheney/bush will find a way to stay in power? They have invested too much everyday to just hand the reins over to a Hillary or Barack adminstration. I hope we're wrong. At the least, they'll find a way to get their boy mccain in there. Then again, dems, or a third party should pick a candidate that will ensure an election that won't be close enough that the supreme court of conservatives will have to illegally decide again.

Yes, yes, and yes, to the three remedies. Reinstate the law of the land.

Karita Hummer
Edwards Democrat

Whenever someone says "Move on, get over it!", I am reminded of Bill Hicks bit about the Kennedy Assassination:

"C'mon, Bill, Kennedy was a long time ago. Get over it!"

"OK, well then you stop bringing up Jesus with me! As long as we're talking shelf-life.. 'Jesus died on the cross for your sins...' Yeah, it was a long time ago, let it go!!"

Very good 1-2-3 punches, except that it won't happen. Furthermore, repealing in one fell swoop every law passed by the Bush administration would create chaos and do more harm than good. They would have to be repealed one by one by one by one, which represents what we call in French a monk's lifework. Then there's the little matter of the Supreme Court admitting to the whole world that one of their own rulings was unconstitutional - somehow I don't expect the US of A ruling against itself any more than I expect TIM (That Idiot Mugabe) to gracefully relinquish power in Zimbabwe .

And besides, it would take a President who doesn't agree with Bush. Which is not likely to happen if the Democrats keep waging their own neverending little Iraq war within their own ranks, while McCain is busy quietly campaining, you know?

As things stand now, it sure looks like the Russian joke is about to be americanized.

Hector - you many be right in your isolated point about Ralls. But if dmaddox were objectively concerned about Constitutional propriety per se, instead of just criticizing Bush's critics, surely he would've mentioned Bush's unprecedented abuse of presidential signing statements.

Bush has appended over 900 of these 'signings' to congressional statutes he "..doesn't like..."

Most of Bush's brazenly abusive 'signings' are nothing but unconstitutional 'amendatory veto's' of laws passed by congress; saying in effect to the legislative branch: I, the Prez, will determine what's a good or bad law.

Such 'signings' are unconstitutional, as used by Bush, because he uses them to gut the intent of a statue while by-passing the provided-for mechanism for doing so(namely, an up-front official presidential veto, which the congress can then, in turn, at least officially override.)

Bush deserves impeachment and removal, just for this abuse alone. Apparently dmaddox believes that whatever's Constitutional is whatever Bush can get, or has thus far gotten, away with -- since he focuses on Rall's theoretical errors to the entire exclusion of Bush's far worse errors of commission.

All the [other] people here who think Constitutional law is boring or nitpicking -- just remember: the Constitution is the only legal instrument The People have to thwart tryanny. And if It hasn't done much to stop Bush, so far, you can lay that crisis at the feet of an equally corrputed Congress.

The officers of the armed forces of the People of the United States of America are sworn to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Perhaps, someday, they will....

dmaddog5, If the Supreme Court ignores the law, they ignore the law. Doesn't make it legal, just makes it done. It means that they're ignoring the law for ideological reasons, or political expediency. Korematsu or Dred Scott ring a bell here?

re: this silly claim you make: "Next, the power of an executive order does not extend to nullification of laws duly passed by Congress and signed by other presidents"; you have heard of Bush's bogus "signing statements" haven't you?

If you're going to snark, try to get your fu***ng facts straight first.

Thanks for this article---Never cared for Bill Maher's smug Hollywood-Stud-Intellectual pose, either. Yeah, we're all bored with the Constitution and its defense because you are, Bill....

Many blame Gore for the Supreme Court ruling on the Florida vote recount. What in hell could he do? An attempt to have a congressional ammentment with a congress still full of Republicans would have been absolutely fruitless. How long would that have taken anyway? It wa not Gore's fault, it's our fault, more than half of Americans don't even bother to vote.

Gore would have appeared as a spoil sport, a sore loser. He had no viable choice but to accept that December ruling, which as noted, should never have been taken buy the Supreme court in the first place. One problem is, we elected presidents and conresses who placed those judges on the bench for life.

Werner S "Rall is perhaps a bit naive!!!!… but why snipe at his earnestness?"

Sniping and sarcasm don't help. And in today's world, anything but gratitude in response to decent instincts is self-defeating. But to be candid, any movement for decent change cannot afford to have decent people like Ted Rall spending time writing (and thinking up) strategies that are impossible of implementation without the most fundamental constitutuional changes -- changes that are not going to occur -- and that would, if they did occur, effect enormously more of the Bush/Cheney agenda than Bush and Chaney have been able to effect -- and indeed, I suspect, to dream.

I regret dmaddox5's (and anyone else's) use of such terms "woeful civic ignorance" and "silly childish screeds", but nothing that dmaddox5 said is in any way "authoritarian" (pace siouxrose) -- his points are precisely the opposite of authoritarian. His point is that the executive branch cannot declare invalid laws passed by Congress, or to declare null and void any measures taken by non-federal (i.e., state and local) entities. It's actually Mr. Rall who's proposing a more "authoritarian" executive than Bush Cheney have dared try be, and dmaddox5 who's pointing out that under the current constitution such encroachment of the executive on the legislative branch, and of the federal government on state and local government, is forbidden, precisely as a check against "authoritarian" power. Re-read what he's said.

If you want change, stop voting Democrat.

Since our election laws and systems have changed very little since 2000, I really doubt that we have moved on at all.

The requirement of any election system in a democracy would be to have one that is completely beyond question. There should never even be a serious discussion about whether the results of an election match the opinions of the electorate.

We've done nothing since 2000 to correct the issues that allow there to be doubt about that election. And, with the Help America Vote Act or whatever the Orwellian name of that act that funneled lots of public money to purchase computerized voting machines that were even less transparent and more open to question than the systems used in 2000, it could be said we've moved away from the goal.

The recent push to at least require paper trails is a step back in the right direction, but at the very, very best that would only take us back to where we were in 2000.

One thing we must figure out how to do is how to remove the control and supervision of elections from the hands of the two corporate sponsered parties. Having people related to entities that contest the election also organize and supervise the election is a conflict of interest and very, very stupid on the face of it. The result is that you can never trust the election anywhere because both parties now have a 'win at all costs' mentality.

Both parties also have long histories of manipulating elections. Both parties have a vested interest in keeping other groups off the ballot and out of the system, thus maintaining their monopoly on entry into the political system. And both parties have histories of rigging election results that goes way back before 2000. Think the Daley machine in Chicago rigging the 1960 election for JFK as one example. And if you think it only goes back that far, think Tammeny Hall.

The current system is so bad and so untrustworthy that it does need to be scrapped. But we should not entirely start over. Before the concept of a 'voting machine' ever came along, we had pretty well defined methods of how to solve the twin problems of maintaining a secret ballot but also having an election system that is transparent and verifiable. Returning to that would be the obvious solution. Its not neccessarily easy to solve both of these problems at the same time, so returning to the solution that once worked seems obvious.

In short form, this would be ...

-- Paper ballots.
-- Publically count the ballots in the precinct when the polls close
-- Make sure all centralized results can also be compared back and verified by these public counts.

That may not be quick. But to me, having results for TV to report on the 10 oclock news is not a requirement. The requirement is for such a solid system that there's no question at all about the results.

Yes, Ted, give me justice first. The peace will follow.

If Obama really were for change---and he's not---he'd be calling for the impeachment of Bush; in fact, he'd have led the movement, shoulder to shoulder with the excellent Dennis Kucinich. On this basis alone, Obama's presidency is already dead in the water.

dmattox is wrong on another point, although practicality, politics and logistics make it seem unlikely: the point is this - Constitutional Amendments have legal authority over Supreme Court decisions - in essence - the people truly do have the last word - this is something to think about.

And as for all the naysayers - just lay down and f-----g die. I am raising children in this mess and I will not concede one damned thing to this bunch of ideological thugs. I have said it before and I'll say it again - get off your asses and do something. There are a thousand different ways that each of us can impact the system - how many of you who post your cynicism here have done any of them? And for those of you who have - do more!

ZOUNDS good rebuttal to DMADDOX, our resident "authoritarian" du jour. This Supreme Court is to justice what our "intelligence" anticipating 911 was to same. When any branch of government demonstrates malfeasance and incompetence, and runs against the duty (to uphold the Constitution and the rights therein) it is obliged to honor, then it SHOULD be rescinded! For all the illegalities of the past 7 years, the idea of rescinding sounds EXCELLENT to me. New laws have been developed since the inception of our nation, and it's not impossible to see some type of law evolve that seeks to undo that which was done on the basis of OUTRIGHT fraud.

This Supreme Court and Bush have a quid pro quo relationship. They put him in, he rubber stamps authoritarian clones who in turn support every decision he does. If any step out of line, they are investigated (that obscene attempt to get rid of their own Republican attorney generals!) and tossed overboard. This group act as the antithesis to democracy or fair representation, they are about war profits, big pharma blood $, and oil. ONLY those with big bucks get seen, heard or respected. That is NOT what this nation is intended for... it's governors act like the same kind of currupt CEOS of Enron and his ilk... so many insiders have been convicted of fraud or money laundering of one type of another. The disease has taken over the 3 branches and could well bring the whole tree down. Rescind in this case is equivalent to emergency medical attempts to revive the near corpse of this nation's body.

It's just all come a bit too far and become far too dysfunctional for future Presidential proclamations and judicial redemptions, regardless of the limitations and the (perceived) realities of Ted's dream. Like Mussolini and his cabal of fascists, our fascists will also have to be physically removed, dragged through the town behind vehicles and hung by their jackboots at a gas station (fitting) before they are ever truly relinquished of their power. This now toxic form of government must be completely torn down and then rebuilt, honoring the original model/tenets. Maybe our children's children will have the backbone - it obviously isn't present in our generation.

They say the drunk will never change until he/she comes to the absolute miserable end of their denial. This will happen to the United States, and these things will come to be, or it is, simply the end of America.

Democrats' failures to challenge the stolen elections of 2000 and 2004 have been compounded, and sealed, by their unwillingness to impeach the war criminals running this country. They are complicit in shattering our republic.

Only a truly horrific "perfect storm" of financial and environmental disasters (coming in the next few years) will provoke Americans to finally wake up to our awful situation. And by then, it will be too late. Of course, if the "Masters of War" attack Iran soon, we won't have to wait for that "perfect storm."

Screw Dubya and screw the Supreme Court. The best way to handle Dubya and the mess he has made is to make him and his ilk totally irrelevant, which Hillary will probably do anyway as she believes in doing things differently from him. I know all you naysayers will bring up the Iraq war, but lets not forget, she is a Senator from NY and it was her yard that was grievously violated by the Islamic radicals and their joy-riding plane-bomb exercusion. She has "played ball" long enough with the boys to know how to play the game and how to beat them at their own game. She's a fool no more.
And further more, Hillary should stay in the run for the President if for no other reason than to give the remaining states and their voters a real choice in the primary. AND, if a boy with Hillary's numbers were running, NO one would ask him to bow out; the boys only do that to the girls, but this girl knows better and has a real shot at the brass ring. GO HILLARY, GO!

I'm in agreement with Rall's overall disgust with the Bush administration. But I agree with dmaddox5 that at two of Rall's specific suggestions are dubious.

[1]Executive orders can't nullify congressional statues (dmaddox5 is absolutely correct on this)

[2]Any new president would be ill-advised to try, and probably legally barred from, establishing a cabinet level department to witch hunt the errors and deceits of his/her predecessor.

On the other hand, dmaddox5 apparently doesn't think that Bush has abrogated Geneva Convention proscriptions against torture (most constitutional and int'l law scholars disagree); nor does he seem concerned that there is enough evidence in the public domain to require impeachment (i.e.,congressional investigation) of Bush for manipulating [and lying about] the intelligence findings he used to justify the Iraq invasion.

If some of Ralls' specific correctional suggestions reflect Ralls proceedural ignorance, then that should be acknowledged. But dmaddox5's omission of any legal criticism of Bush's many brazen, arguably extra-constitutional maneuvers, seems to reflect very selective fault-finding by dmaddox5, against Ralls and in favor of Bush.

OK,my brilliant posters, Rall is perhaps a bit naive!!!!... but why snipe at his earnestness? .....elmysterio, dmaddox 5: have you perused Naomi Klein's book:The Shock Doctrine? an eyeopener that defines the last 30plus years!!!!

"Who wouldn't want to read their political opponents' email and listen to their phone calls?"

Ralph Nader wouldn't.

Ron Paul wouldn't.

Cynthia McKinney wouldn't.

I wouldn't.

Mr. Rall once again displays his woeful civic ignorance.

First, if the Supreme Court says something is legal then it's legal. Period. That's why they're the SUPREME Court. Until some other court comes along and overturns a previous decision, which rarely happens, Supreme Court decisions are sacred.

Next, the power of an executive order does not extend to nullification of laws duly passed by Congress and signed by other presidents. I'm not even sure such powers extend after declaration of martial law, which is itself highly limited. So, the nullification of 8 years of law is a fantasy you'd expect from someone with a teenage mentality.

The power of an executive order CERTAINLY doesn't extend to the ability of a president to nullify state and local laws. In spite of an ever encroaching federal government, states do still have some rights.

The president could, of course, propose reparation payments in a budget or request a bill be passed by Congress to offer such. But the President can't actually commit the United States to such payments on his own authority.

US troops in some lands are there by treaty agreement or under the auspices of the United Nations. The president does not have the authority to abrogate treaties without the consent of Congress.

It is silly, childish screeds like this one that will forever keep Mr. Rall confined to the comics pages of marginal inner city publications.

Kucinich would have done much of what Ted suggested. I'm still voting for him, because the idealistic part of me believes in peace.

But the reptile-brain part of me believes in agression, and directed by the "higher" cortical functions, I'd advocate directing that agression toward the MSM: protest voluably at their offices and studios, splatter their newsvans and newspaper racks with bloody handprints (OK, hyperbole - red paint), go to public places that have TV showing (sports-bars, etc.) and when the talking-heads come on, scream out "liars" as loudly as you can.

Looking around and listening to many opinions and ideas here and elsewhere, it is evident that the majority in this country need a much bigger shock, or set of shocks, than have already been received to break the tremendous spell of denial we/they are presently under.

That essentially means we must suffer a much greater loss in oder to wake up. And it's ultimately up to us how we handle the 'truth' after that. Will we kill each other, or work together toward what we know is right, meaning toward a greater good where the many walls of division are torn down? Given human nature, the outlook does not seem too good.

Either way it is likely the 'empire' will crumble into chaos. One can hope that a more compassionate country arises from the ashes of this Phoenix. But only time will tell.

Give 'em Hell, Ted!

and don't forget about Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity, and all the other whores of the forces of reaction

"If we sit on our asses, as we've done since that weird, soul-crushing day in late December of 2000, illegality will be hardwired into the U.S. government."

I would say it's much too late for that... in fact, it's 60 years too late for that. The US became a criminal state when they nuked Japan... The move to being a criminal state continued through the 50's with the CIA getting involved in peddling fascism throughout the world... and finally solidified with the assassination of JFK...

Also, I would say it's quite naive to believe that the new president will roll-back anything Bush and Cheney has done. It's just not going to happen. You have to think that all the people of power in the states are one big incestuous family. There will be no serious investigations. There may be some "show" trials that result in some low-level people being convicted but nobody of significance will be put in the dock... Why? Because they know too much. If Cheney was hung out to dry, he could take down SO many others with him... therefore, he'll never face justice. Same with Bush...

bush/cheney need to be impeached now. Everyday they are not, they gain more power. Why aren't we seeing signs posted all over the country? We need to tell Congress if they don't put impeachment back on the table, they won't get our vote in Nov - period. If cheney has something on them and they are afraid to impeach (or do anything for that matter) then don't you think that he'll use it anyway when he's out of office? They might as well take him down with them. I know, I know, he's not planning on leaving anytime soon.

I used to be a big fan of Maher, he lost me several years ago after showing his true colors. He's a creature of the system.

And sorry, but we aren't going to BE like the former USSR. We already ARE like the USSR...Only difference between the Soviet Union and America is we have STUFF.

Good article, the blowback from 8 years of neoconservatism is coming.

so much baby talk.

every brother and sister has a duty to

humanity to resist oppression.

but fail in this and then, not content to

merely live in servitude, amuse

yourselves and demonstrate your

superiority by tearing down the efforts

of the courageous.

wallow in the muck of defeat, of fascism,

of tyranny.

suck it in, drink it down.

Wouldn't it be nice if the solution to this mess was as simple as what Ted proposes. I wonder what we'd all be proposing if we knew everything that's in the works, or in place already, that we don't know.

I think I'd rather be lying somewhere a little less - WET - whether delivering swords or engaging in Kem Patrick's fantasy (which is a good one).

America needs much more than just a new president. The new president will be more like a relief driver of a runaway train. America needs fundamental change in how today's politicians do their business in D.C. Today, the voice of the 'people' falls on ears that have been bought by corporate America. The needs of corporate America are more important to our political whores in D.C. than the needs of middle class America. Our politicians are a bunch of Benedict Arnold's.
Hoa binh

All good points, Ted.

I wish our country's troubles were confined to just a rogue president.

But we also have a money-corrupted Congress and mainstream news media that is incapable of challenging rogue presidents.

Bush's agendas should've been halted or at least slowed down by Congress and the MSM, over these past 8yrs. The fact that it wasn't means our problems aren't gonna end with getting rid of the present Pretender. Our government and media Systems are now dominated at every level by pretenders. No easy way to fix this much brokenness.....

Keep dreaming!
The Democrats do not plan on reversing any of these things if they get in power because they also want to use them. They could have reversed a lot of it already if they had the desire to.

I like the women lying in ponds idea. leave the swords out of it though, wine, grapes and cheeze would be lots better.

Well, one of the major faults of the Bush administration and its ideological enablers has been the federal executive's asserting authority it does not have and exercising power that it does not lawfully have. Initiative No. 1 would be such an exercise: the executive branch of the federal governnment has no authority to "declar[e]all [or indeed any] laws and actions undertaken by the Bush Administration, the states and local municipalities (because many state and local ordinances are influenced by national politics) between January 2001 and January 2009 null and void." Nor does the federal legislative branch have authority to "declar[e]all [or indeed any]laws and actions undertaken by . . . the states and local municipalities (because many state and local ordinances are influenced by national politics) between January 2001 and January 2009 null and void."

There are no apocalyptic, one-stroke solutions to the errors committed by both parties, and all three branches, of the federal government over more than the past 7 years. Overcoming those errors is by no means assured. Relying on magic bullets to do so is assured to fail.

We're either in it for the long haul, or we're defeated.

Ted Rall should really move on and stop bitching about how the chairs were arranged on the deck of the Titanic.

2000 used to upset me too. Not anymore. Gore/Lieberman would've just been a hypocritical version of Bush/Cheney, with the same Empire-building, genocide-of-innocent-civilians policies for the advancement of corporate profit overseas (Clinton bombed Iraq for 8 years, and remember Kosovo?) and with more anti-labor measures like NAFTA/GATT for Americans here. At least Bush is a criminal and doesn't pretend to be the opposite, like Dems.

Gore's cowardly behavior (and Clinton's) after all the evidence of election fraud was reason enough to abandon Democrats in 2000, but I stayed with them for another 4 years. Then Kerry finally made me get the message:

Republicans and Democrats are part of a decades-old charade to fool voters into believing we actually have a choice. We don't. Look at this Congress, look at Pelosi and Reid.

VOTE THIRD PARTY, VOTE INDEPENDENT.

When a ruler seizes office by extralegal means he rules the same way. Because he does not derive his power from the people–indeed, his rule relies on their passivity–he is not beholden to them.

You know, I'm beginning to get the feeling strange women lying in ponds distributing swords would, indeed, be a better system than what we're stuck with.

You can either attempt a "start over" with a brash Obama or you can muddle around with no leadership (because Hillary is a follower, not a leader) or you can ratify everything Bush has done by allowing the country to elect McCain. Two big details on this:

1) The Bosnia landing story Mrs. Clinton told has rendered her absolutely (and easily) swift-boatable because of its profound disrespect of the GOOD job the military did in protecting her every day she was first lady. There are no longer enough dumb women in America to elect her--they will defect with their men on this one act of too-ignorant-to-be-
Commander-in-Chief grandstanding. Dems are done if she's nominated.

2) John McCain is defeatable (unless Hillary is nominated) on the incongruence with social conservatism and family values which is demonstrated on 25 years of profiting from wholesale beer while serving the same 25 years in Congress.
Church folks WILL move to Obama as they learn about the beer sold by Hensley and Company, Cindy McCain, Chairman.

This is a valid statement, but both parties of Congress have been complicit in the Bush crimes !

I saw Bush, Cheney and Rice doing the perp walk out of the White House. I saw the trial. I saw the verdict. Guilty!
I saw them arrive at Guantanamo to serve their time.
Then I woke up, no longer able to "dream the hell on" as Demonstorm said.
Rall's three steps are simple, moral and necessary. But, again, what likelihood that any of the presidential contenders would do any of those things?

national security presidential directive no. 51

I think the back story to the Democrats primary is that all the votes will be counted. Unlike 2000 and 2004. I remember Dec. 8 2000 it was my birthday and it was a sad day. I was so ready for John Kerry to launch an investigation with the team of lawyers. He did'nt and by then you realized it was an empire of dirt.

When Dick said "So," here recently that was a harken back to the fact they took it illegally and have been stealing ever since.

If the election is cancelled, we're gonna miss ya Ted.

if anyone needs a coconspirator in the overthrow of the bush administration, drop me a line.

-a citizen

The civil population has the right to rise up in defense of the constitutional order.

This is in our 'founding document' also. Look for 'overthrow the tyrant' in the Declaration of Independence.

Obviously I have no quarrel with the spirit of this article.

Legalistically speaking though, would the Supreme Court rule in favor of initiatives 1, 2, and 3 when their challenges reach it?

Would the Supreme Court rule, in essence, that IT handed down an UNCONSTITUTIONAL ruling in December of 2000?

I have a hard time picturing how this would work.

Thank you, Ted Rall, for saying this -- it needed to be said.

Excellent article. Extremely valid points. Everything said is on the money, completely true, and couldn't have been stated better. There's just one problem:

It ain't ever, ever, gonna happen.

Dream the hell on.

Incidentally, I do take exception to Zounds 1's characterization of a Cabinet-level position to "...witch hunt the errors and deceits of his/her predecessor".

First of all, it certainly doesn't have to be a cabinet position-- a special prosecutor or task force would do just fine. As long as it's not one of our handy-dandy "blue ribbon commissions" led by the Usual Suspects, "senior statesmen" with the gravitas to seal the truth inside the whited sepulcher of a commission report.

More importantly, it's absolutely wrong to casually describe such undertakings as a "witch hunt". A witch hunt is the polar opposite of what Rall is seeking, insofar as it suggests draconian authorities accusing and punishing innocent victims. The rogues and reprobates occupying positions of power in the present criminal maladministration left innocence behind long ago.

Even if a legitimate authority were convened to pursue the myriad crimes and evils of the gang in power, one would expect the canard of "witch hunt" to be voiced by the corporate media infotainwhore celebrities. But that's a bogus meme that is best not reinforced.

When governments violate their own laws, it sets a precedent that is likely to be followed by successive administrations, whether they be of the Republican or Democratic stripe. Therefore, just moving on and forgetting about it accomplishes nothing except to entrench this state of affairs more deeply. Ted Rall is absolutely right in his conviction that we should roll back all the policies of the Bush administration. Al Gore has given fiery speeches over this issue. At times, Hillary has emphatically denounced the criminality of the Bushies, as has Obama. Let's hope it's not all a lot of hot air. Maybe Gore could commandeer the Democratic nomination and win in a landslide in November. Wouldn't that be poetic justice?(More like a pipedream)

4. Remove ALL Judicial Appointees of the Bush administration. Including, but not limited to, the 2 Supreme Court appointments.

(While technically this comes under #1, I'm done with language that assumes complete thought. We have to spell it out.)

O roe April 3rd, 2008 4:52 am Couldn't agree more, Roe!...UNTIL........BIG UNTIL...WE get off our fat asses and do something about it. This morning, I watched "Planet Earth...Part 1"...BBC. In one segment, they filmed a million acribou migrating across the Canadian tundra...with their calves keeping up as best as possible. The wolves followed, waiting for their chance. They would send out a lone wolf to scatter the herd, hoping a calf would be left behind. The caribou, in fear and intuition, do not realize their numbers could easily overwhelm the wolves. Humans supposedly have the ability to REASON and thereby act in UNISON to defeat a common enemy. We have no excuse. Shame on us!