Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 25 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

A three in three chance for another Bush

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   3 comments
Message Ed Martin

If I had to pinpoint the one thing that has lowered the United States to the status of a third rate dictatorship, it would be the fact that George Bush unconstitutionally and therefore illegally assumed the position of commander in chief. From that position, he assumed the authority to, also unconstitutionally, declare war, with the resultant destruction of Iraq, a million innocent people, over 4000 US soldiers, the US military, the US economy and the rule of law.

All three candidates for the presidency, Clinton, McCain and Obama, are chomping at the bit to become president, so that they can also be commander in chief. They have already done, before they're even elected, exactly what George Bush did, using 9/11 as his excuse to anoint himself to that position. They're thinking that when they become president, they'll automatically become commander in chief, assuming Bush's falsely assumed role.

We now have a three in three chance (100%) of having another George Bush as president.

Look at this.

At a news conference in Chicago on March 12, 2008, "Admirals and generals from the United States Army, Navy and Air Force that together have served under the last nine Commanders-in-Chief today announced their endorsement of Obama for president."

Compounding the falsehood, Obama said, "As a candidate for the presidency, I know that I am running to be Commander-in-Chief."

Obama, Bushlike in his fevered rush to become commander in chief, is ignoring the fact that there have been only six commanders in chief in the history of the United States. They are Madison, Polk, McKinley, Wilson, Roosevelt and Truman, who was the last commander in chief in l945. There has not been a commander in chief since then.

Clinton has already, on her own, without a congressional declaration, declared war on Iran and is contemplating Iran's obliteration. She's already, unelected yet, practicing how to act like a commander in chief, even though she'll never be one, even if she attains the presidency. After Bush has reduced the US military to a pathetic shadow, a mere shell, a burnt out husk of its former self by appointing ideologue Republican sycophants to run it, the congress wouldn't dare declare war on anything.

There's no point in discussing McCain's delusions of becoming commander in chief. After all, he's a conservative, and even worse, a Republican. Enough said.

The constitution provides that the president shall be commander in chief of the military WHEN CALLED INTO SERVICE. Note that the president is commander in chief of only the military, while Bush, Clinton, McCain and Obama are trying to pass themselves off as commander in chief of the whole United States. The only provision in the constitution for calling the military into service is congress' exclusive power to declare war. That was last done in December of 1941.

Whoever becomes president, it a certainty that they will not be commander in chief of anything.

If we had a qualified candidate elected to the presidency, that president on taking office, when asked by the Defense Department how to continue conducting Bush's Iraq war would say:

"Look, I'm not the commander in chief. I have no authority to give orders to the military about what to do with Bush's Iraq war. Its his war, go ask him what he wants to do about it. I'm not involved in it.

"But, I will tell you this. Inasmuch as Bush declared war illegally, it is a war, even though it is an illegal war, and as such is a war crime. I'm instructing the Attorney General to prosecute everyone in the Bush administration, including Bush, everyone in the Pentagon, everyone associated with the Defense Department, every member of Congress who unconstitutionally tried to pass on their war declaring powers to George Bush and continue to provide the money for Bush's war crimes, everyone who advocated for Bush's illegal war, for war crimes and aiding and abetting a war crime.

"So, if you still support Bush's war crimes in any way, you're going to be hearing from the Justice Department."

That's what a qualified president would do. Its what I would do.

Rate It | View Ratings

Ed Martin Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Ed Martin is an ordinary person who is recovering from being badly over-educated. Born in the middle of the Great Depression, he is not affiliated with nor a member of any political, social or religious organization. He is especially interested in (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Conyers' year of tolerating contempt

The twelve powers of a President.

Removal of the President from Office

You need to read this! Rob Kall's declaration of war

Textbook descriptions of George Bush reveal psychopathy, and much worse.

The worst is yet to come; foreclosure fraud is the banksters' least problem

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend