A Cancerous Tumor in the Body Politic -- Time for Surgery

SAVE AS FAVORITE

VIEW FAVORITES

By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers (about the author) Page 2 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com Permalink

CANCER CELLS GROW WILD WITH POWER

If we've learned anything about cancer, it is that it must be confronted and dealt with. You can't deny its existence, or wish it away, or play nice with it and hope it will ease up on you. Cancers are cells gone wild with their power. When such a malignancy shows up in a human body, you cut it out, and then drive a symbolic stake through its heart through chemo and radiation.

When a malignant tumor shows up in the polity, you follow the same protocol. When the costs of denial become too great, when so much damage and death and destruction is done in your name, then the cancer finally has to be faced and dealt with. Society must mobilize itself for radical surgery, and then through symbolic chemo/radiation -- reforms, re-asserting the primacy of the rule of law and Constitutional protections, re-establishing the checks-and-balances established by our Founding Fathers -- try to ensure that one-party rule, authoritarian leadership, police-state measures, "pre-emptive" wars, torture as state policy, incipient native fascism, etc., do not have an easy chance to re-assert themselves again.

But in order to reach this Restoration-of-Constitutional-Rule era, there first must be a general consensus on the nature of the disease, indeed on the fact that there is a malignancy on the loose, and thus a willingness to combat it. In the past two Presidential elections, it would appear that more than half the population voted for someone other than the cancer-party candidate, but the "official" election results (counted by corporations in lockstep with those in power) said otherwise.

IMPEACHMENT IN THE CARDS?

According to the latest polls, the American population has lost any faith that the Bush Administration knows what it's doing in Iraq, and increasingly they believe that the war -- which, as the top-secret, leaked Downing Street Memos verify, was based on gross lies and deceptions -- wasn't worth it.

The public is a bit more willing to grant Bush a break in terms of fighting terrorism, though it believes his imperial adventures abroad are making it more, not less, likely that terrorists will attack the U.S. again. But with the corporate-owned mass media more or less serving as a propaganda arm for the Administration, and with Rove and his cohorts constantly playing the fright card, the American public, but by a smaller percentage all the time, tends to acquiesce to Bush&Co.'s anti-terror line.

If Bush's war in Iraq continues its disastrous slide into catastrophe, or if a huge number of Bush indictments come down from the Plamegate grand jury (especially if Rove, Cheney and Bush are either indicted outright or listed as unindicted co-conspirators), critical mass may be achieved to demand impeachment hearings in the Congress, especially if the Republicans were to lose their majority in the House.

As a way of aiding that critical mass grow, it seems appropriate to close this piece with the insights of the fellow that opened it: John W. Dean. If there's anyone who appreciates what can happen to our democratic republic when an arrogant president thinks he's above the law, it is Dean. He wrote a book that examines the Bush presidency in that light, "Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush" (Little, Brown).

Dean was known as a relatively circumspect, mild-mannered traditional Republican, but what he has seen firsthand and learned from others about the Bush-Cheney White House revolts his stomach. Check out these excerpts:

DEAN: "WORSE THAN WATERGATE"

"Their secrecy is extreme -- not merely unjustified and excessive but obsessive... It has given us a presidency that operates on hidden agendas. To protect their secrets, Bush and Cheney dissemble as a matter of policy... Cheney openly declares that he wants to turn the clock back to the pre-Watergate years -- a time of an unaccountable and extra-constitutional imperial presidency. To say that their secret presidency is undemocratic is an understatement."

"Cheney formed what is, in effect, a shadow NSC [National Security Council]...It is a secret government -- beyond the reach of Congress, and everyone else as well...Cheney knew that terrorism was the perfect excuse, an ideal raison d'etre for his 'let's rule the world' philosophy. Politically, it would be much easier to be seen as shooting back instead of shooting first, given the caliber of weapon Cheney sought to wield. But he and his team did far worse than simply waiting for an attack that would kill a sufficient number of Americans...It is reasonable to believe that they planned to exploit terrorism before 9/11 handed them the issue ready-made for exploitation -- a fact they obviously want to keep buried."

"Not since Lyndon Johnson hoodwinked Congress into issuing the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorizes sending American troops to Vietnam, has a president so deceived Congress about a matter of such grave national importance. ...Bush and Cheney took this nation to war on their hunches, their unreliable beliefs, and their unsubstantiated intelligence -- and used deception with Congress both before and after launching the war. ...The evidence is overwhelming, certainly sufficient for a prima facie case, that George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have engaged in deceit and deception over going to war in Iraq. This is an impeachable offense."

"Their secrecy helps corporations and industries that are major contributors. But with a deadly difference. Bush and Cheney have, from the outset of their presidency, shown utter disregard for the human consequences of their actions, both at home and abroad. ... What Bush and Cheney are doing to the environment to curry favor with their contributors is far worse than anything Nixon's 'responsiveness program' ever did. The Bush-Cheney presidency is engaged in crimes against nature, not to mention failing to faithfully execute the laws of the land."

ENDANGERING OUR DEMOCRACY

1 | 2 | 3

www.crisispapers.org

Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in California and Washington, worked for two decades as a writer-editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (more...)

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.