Conservatives for the Constitution
Just imagine if one of the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination endorsed this radical agenda:
AC/a,!AC/ End the use of military commissions to prosecute crimes.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the use of secret evidence or evidence obtained by torture.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the detention of American citizens as enemy combatants without proof.
AC/a,!AC/ Restore habeas corpus for alleged alien combatants.
AC/a,!AC/ End National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping.
AC/a,!AC/ Empower Congress to challenge presidential signing statements.
Just imagine if one of the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination endorsed this radical agenda:
AC/a,!AC/ End the use of military commissions to prosecute crimes.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the use of secret evidence or evidence obtained by torture.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the detention of American citizens as enemy combatants without proof.
AC/a,!AC/ Restore habeas corpus for alleged alien combatants.
AC/a,!AC/ End National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping.
AC/a,!AC/ Empower Congress to challenge presidential signing statements.
AC/a,!AC/ Bar executive use of the state secret privilege to deny justice.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the President from collaborating with foreign governments to kidnap, detain of torture persons abroad.
AC/a,!AC/ Amend the Espionage Act to permit journalists to report on classified national security matters without threat of persecution.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit of the labeling of groups or individuals in the U.S. as global terrorists based on secret evidence.
Of course, it is difficult to conceive of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or even the somewhat more Constitutionally-courageous John Edwards going to such extremes.
They are, above all, cautious candidates. They don't want to be accused of getting too serious about maintaining the basic underpinnings of the Republic.
Only the nuttiest of radicals who ask that candidates for president would ask that candidates for nation's top job to start talking about the notion that the lawless presidency of George W. Bush has created a Constitutional crisis.
So what left-wing cabal is promoting the above assault on the executives excesses of the Bush administration?
The group that's advancing this so-called "American Freedom Agenda" is chaired by Bruce Fein, a former Nixon administration aide who served as deputy attorney general under President Reagan and who helped to formulate some of the serious -- pre-blue dress -- arguments for impeaching Bill Clinton. Fein is joined by former Georgia Republican Congressman Bob Barr, veteran conservative fund-raiser Richard Viguerie and David Keene, the former aide to Bob Dole who for many years has served as chairman of the American Conservative Union.
What gives? How come conservatives are taking the lead in the fight to restore basic Constitutional protections?
"The most conservative principles of the Constitution have been repeatedly violated in the last several years," says Fein. "[The] Founding Fathers engrafted a system of checks and review of one branch by another -- a system of due process safeguards against injustice that is likely to occur because of prejudice and fear. And those checks and balances have eroded enormously over the last several years, particularly since 9/11."
Viguerie is even blunter, suggesting that "a constitutional crisis... has developed to alarming proportion under President George W. Bush."
Rejecting the suggestion that conservatives must remain silent because Bush is supposedly one of their own, Viguerie says, "Conservatives must not fail to oppose the massive expansion of presidential powers out of fear they will be aid and comfort to the Left. Concern about one branch of government acquiring excessive power should not be the providence of liberals, moderates, or conservatives. It must be the concern of all Americans who value liberty..."
Barr echoes that view, arguing that, "[We]" cannot sit by and wait thirty years for court decisions. We cannot wait until another four-year election cycle is concluded to have the Bill of Rights restored and defended."
The American Freedom Agenda campaign is the vehicle that these conservatives have established, with a self-described twofold mission: "the enactment of a cluster of statutes that would restore the Constitution's checks and balances as enshrined by the Founding Fathers; and, making the subject a staple of political campaigns and of foremost concern to Members of Congress and to voters and educators. Especially since 9/11, the executive branch has chronically usurped legislative or judicial power, and has repeatedly claimed that the President is the law. The constitutional grievances against the White House are chilling, reminiscent of the kingly abuses that provoked the Declaration of Independence."
The agenda was launched two weeks ago. So far, one candidate has expressed support it: Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the libertarian Republican who explains that: "[They] say that the executive branch is always hungry. That's why it's up to the people, up to the congress to reign in the power of the executive branch."
Paul's right to sign on. The question now is whether any Democratic presidential contenders will join him in doing so.
The restoration of the Constitution's system of checks and balances ought not be a project of the left or right. It ought to be something that every presidential candidate can endorse. And, for Democrats, the American Freedom Agenda initiative creates a perfect opportunity to do the right thing with "political cover." After all, if Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards were to express support for the restoring the system of checks and balances and undoing the damage done to the Constitution during the Bush years, they tell the Democratic strategists who constantly counsel ideological caution: "Don't worry, I'm not taking any risks. I'm just making like the conservatives."
John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism.
(c) 2006 The Nation
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Just imagine if one of the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination endorsed this radical agenda:
AC/a,!AC/ End the use of military commissions to prosecute crimes.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the use of secret evidence or evidence obtained by torture.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the detention of American citizens as enemy combatants without proof.
AC/a,!AC/ Restore habeas corpus for alleged alien combatants.
AC/a,!AC/ End National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping.
AC/a,!AC/ Empower Congress to challenge presidential signing statements.
AC/a,!AC/ Bar executive use of the state secret privilege to deny justice.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the President from collaborating with foreign governments to kidnap, detain of torture persons abroad.
AC/a,!AC/ Amend the Espionage Act to permit journalists to report on classified national security matters without threat of persecution.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit of the labeling of groups or individuals in the U.S. as global terrorists based on secret evidence.
Of course, it is difficult to conceive of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or even the somewhat more Constitutionally-courageous John Edwards going to such extremes.
They are, above all, cautious candidates. They don't want to be accused of getting too serious about maintaining the basic underpinnings of the Republic.
Only the nuttiest of radicals who ask that candidates for president would ask that candidates for nation's top job to start talking about the notion that the lawless presidency of George W. Bush has created a Constitutional crisis.
So what left-wing cabal is promoting the above assault on the executives excesses of the Bush administration?
The group that's advancing this so-called "American Freedom Agenda" is chaired by Bruce Fein, a former Nixon administration aide who served as deputy attorney general under President Reagan and who helped to formulate some of the serious -- pre-blue dress -- arguments for impeaching Bill Clinton. Fein is joined by former Georgia Republican Congressman Bob Barr, veteran conservative fund-raiser Richard Viguerie and David Keene, the former aide to Bob Dole who for many years has served as chairman of the American Conservative Union.
What gives? How come conservatives are taking the lead in the fight to restore basic Constitutional protections?
"The most conservative principles of the Constitution have been repeatedly violated in the last several years," says Fein. "[The] Founding Fathers engrafted a system of checks and review of one branch by another -- a system of due process safeguards against injustice that is likely to occur because of prejudice and fear. And those checks and balances have eroded enormously over the last several years, particularly since 9/11."
Viguerie is even blunter, suggesting that "a constitutional crisis... has developed to alarming proportion under President George W. Bush."
Rejecting the suggestion that conservatives must remain silent because Bush is supposedly one of their own, Viguerie says, "Conservatives must not fail to oppose the massive expansion of presidential powers out of fear they will be aid and comfort to the Left. Concern about one branch of government acquiring excessive power should not be the providence of liberals, moderates, or conservatives. It must be the concern of all Americans who value liberty..."
Barr echoes that view, arguing that, "[We]" cannot sit by and wait thirty years for court decisions. We cannot wait until another four-year election cycle is concluded to have the Bill of Rights restored and defended."
The American Freedom Agenda campaign is the vehicle that these conservatives have established, with a self-described twofold mission: "the enactment of a cluster of statutes that would restore the Constitution's checks and balances as enshrined by the Founding Fathers; and, making the subject a staple of political campaigns and of foremost concern to Members of Congress and to voters and educators. Especially since 9/11, the executive branch has chronically usurped legislative or judicial power, and has repeatedly claimed that the President is the law. The constitutional grievances against the White House are chilling, reminiscent of the kingly abuses that provoked the Declaration of Independence."
The agenda was launched two weeks ago. So far, one candidate has expressed support it: Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the libertarian Republican who explains that: "[They] say that the executive branch is always hungry. That's why it's up to the people, up to the congress to reign in the power of the executive branch."
Paul's right to sign on. The question now is whether any Democratic presidential contenders will join him in doing so.
The restoration of the Constitution's system of checks and balances ought not be a project of the left or right. It ought to be something that every presidential candidate can endorse. And, for Democrats, the American Freedom Agenda initiative creates a perfect opportunity to do the right thing with "political cover." After all, if Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards were to express support for the restoring the system of checks and balances and undoing the damage done to the Constitution during the Bush years, they tell the Democratic strategists who constantly counsel ideological caution: "Don't worry, I'm not taking any risks. I'm just making like the conservatives."
John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism.
(c) 2006 The Nation
Just imagine if one of the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination endorsed this radical agenda:
AC/a,!AC/ End the use of military commissions to prosecute crimes.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the use of secret evidence or evidence obtained by torture.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the detention of American citizens as enemy combatants without proof.
AC/a,!AC/ Restore habeas corpus for alleged alien combatants.
AC/a,!AC/ End National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping.
AC/a,!AC/ Empower Congress to challenge presidential signing statements.
AC/a,!AC/ Bar executive use of the state secret privilege to deny justice.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit the President from collaborating with foreign governments to kidnap, detain of torture persons abroad.
AC/a,!AC/ Amend the Espionage Act to permit journalists to report on classified national security matters without threat of persecution.
AC/a,!AC/ Prohibit of the labeling of groups or individuals in the U.S. as global terrorists based on secret evidence.
Of course, it is difficult to conceive of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or even the somewhat more Constitutionally-courageous John Edwards going to such extremes.
They are, above all, cautious candidates. They don't want to be accused of getting too serious about maintaining the basic underpinnings of the Republic.
Only the nuttiest of radicals who ask that candidates for president would ask that candidates for nation's top job to start talking about the notion that the lawless presidency of George W. Bush has created a Constitutional crisis.
So what left-wing cabal is promoting the above assault on the executives excesses of the Bush administration?
The group that's advancing this so-called "American Freedom Agenda" is chaired by Bruce Fein, a former Nixon administration aide who served as deputy attorney general under President Reagan and who helped to formulate some of the serious -- pre-blue dress -- arguments for impeaching Bill Clinton. Fein is joined by former Georgia Republican Congressman Bob Barr, veteran conservative fund-raiser Richard Viguerie and David Keene, the former aide to Bob Dole who for many years has served as chairman of the American Conservative Union.
What gives? How come conservatives are taking the lead in the fight to restore basic Constitutional protections?
"The most conservative principles of the Constitution have been repeatedly violated in the last several years," says Fein. "[The] Founding Fathers engrafted a system of checks and review of one branch by another -- a system of due process safeguards against injustice that is likely to occur because of prejudice and fear. And those checks and balances have eroded enormously over the last several years, particularly since 9/11."
Viguerie is even blunter, suggesting that "a constitutional crisis... has developed to alarming proportion under President George W. Bush."
Rejecting the suggestion that conservatives must remain silent because Bush is supposedly one of their own, Viguerie says, "Conservatives must not fail to oppose the massive expansion of presidential powers out of fear they will be aid and comfort to the Left. Concern about one branch of government acquiring excessive power should not be the providence of liberals, moderates, or conservatives. It must be the concern of all Americans who value liberty..."
Barr echoes that view, arguing that, "[We]" cannot sit by and wait thirty years for court decisions. We cannot wait until another four-year election cycle is concluded to have the Bill of Rights restored and defended."
The American Freedom Agenda campaign is the vehicle that these conservatives have established, with a self-described twofold mission: "the enactment of a cluster of statutes that would restore the Constitution's checks and balances as enshrined by the Founding Fathers; and, making the subject a staple of political campaigns and of foremost concern to Members of Congress and to voters and educators. Especially since 9/11, the executive branch has chronically usurped legislative or judicial power, and has repeatedly claimed that the President is the law. The constitutional grievances against the White House are chilling, reminiscent of the kingly abuses that provoked the Declaration of Independence."
The agenda was launched two weeks ago. So far, one candidate has expressed support it: Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the libertarian Republican who explains that: "[They] say that the executive branch is always hungry. That's why it's up to the people, up to the congress to reign in the power of the executive branch."
Paul's right to sign on. The question now is whether any Democratic presidential contenders will join him in doing so.
The restoration of the Constitution's system of checks and balances ought not be a project of the left or right. It ought to be something that every presidential candidate can endorse. And, for Democrats, the American Freedom Agenda initiative creates a perfect opportunity to do the right thing with "political cover." After all, if Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards were to express support for the restoring the system of checks and balances and undoing the damage done to the Constitution during the Bush years, they tell the Democratic strategists who constantly counsel ideological caution: "Don't worry, I'm not taking any risks. I'm just making like the conservatives."
John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism.
(c) 2006 The Nation