178 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 48 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds   

The insolence of office

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   No comments

Michael Lubin
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Michael Lubin
Become a Fan

It's oath-inducing enough when officeholders break their oaths of office. But there can be no greater insolence than an officeholder who denies knowledge of what his oath was.

The President...shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.

--U.S. Constitution

I do solemnly swear that I will...to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

--Richard Nixon, 1968 and 1972

Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.

--Richard Nixon, 1977

Nixon's long, painful decent from the Oval Office was marked by the constant assertions of The President's Men that their loyalty to him overrode all other considerations, including legality, and that they considered this the height of honor. Interestingly, their oath of office is to uphold the Constitution and doesn't even mention the president, while laws were already on the books that required of them outright disobedience to illegal orders. "Loyalty to the president" isn't mentioned anywhere, although the fact that the laws allow the president to fire members of his government at will certainly explains where it comes from.

In our own time, the Nixon Doctrine of presidential lawlessness is being used far more vigorously than Tricky Dick ever would have dared. From signing statements to illegal search and seizure to cruel and unusual punishment to forced self-incrimination, Bush's "anti-terrorism" campaign has ripped out so many parts of the Constitution he swore to preserve, they should probably just issue an abridged edition to save paper.

In the latest in a long train of usurpations, Bush has ordered staffers Harriet Miers, Joshua Bolten, and Sara Taylor to refuse to answer questions and provide documents demanded by Congress. Such orders from more traditional presidents would only be exposed after a lengthy investigation, but Bush has come right out and done it in the open. According to the dark hints of James Comey, whatever they're hiding is so extreme that that guardian angel of civil liberties, John Ashcroft himself, was ready to resign in 2004 if they didn't stop it, along with Comey and other top Justice Department officials.

The greatest prophet of the sixteenth century might actually not have been Nostradamus but Shakespeare:

For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office...

What Hamlet is trying to account for with his great speech, in his princely, flowery language, is why everybody doesn't just off themselves, given how cruddy everything is. The political trends of the past few years lend renewed significance to this question--especially when it comes to the oath of office.

Consider Keith Ellison, the freshman Democratic congressman from Minnesota who was trashed late last year after he announced he'd be taking his oath on the Koran. His Republican colleague Virgil Goode, who serves a district in an area of Virginia that has been a bastion of slavery, Jim Crow, and white paranoia since the nation began, warned against more Muslims coming into the country and electing more Muslims to Congress. Goode also commented, "I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way." In an op-ed, with admirably unintentional irony, he called on Americans to "save Judeo-Christian values" to avoid "leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion."

Bush refused to criticize Goode's overt anti-Muslim bigotry--"no judgments have been made," Bush spokesman Dana Perino explained. But Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) took it upon himself to play the good cop for the GOP, distancing himself from Goode's remarks:

"Why would you swear allegiance to a document outside your faith? ...I embrace religious diversity. I welcome this new member of Congress. I'm glad he's swearing allegiance to a document that is consistent with his faith."

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Michael Lubin 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

Michael Lubin served on the first democratically elected governing board in the history of KPFA, the nation's oldest listener-sponsored radio station. There, he was a founding member of the pro-democracy listeners' (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.
Follow Me on Twitter     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.

STAY IN THE KNOW
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
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

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

Do Polls Mean Anything in an Age of Fraud?

Ron Paul's History of Virulent Racism (part 1)

The Real America is Thinly Scattered

The Smart Progressive's Guide to Election Night

Our new national holiday: Pardon Cheney Day?

We're All Americans Now--Even Midwesterners

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend