Posted on 01/17/2006 3:01:13 PM PST by ForGod'sSake
The confirmation of Samuel Alito will contribute towards a total reorganization of this form of government. The Rehnquist era started the shift of the power to the states and away from the federal government - away from the Congress, away from the federal agencies, away from the regulatory system created to protect employees, consumers, investors - the people of America
The Roberts-Scalia-Alito-Thomas-Kennedy Court will not only continue the work of the Rehnquist Court and make the rightward turn more dramatic - it will also preside over the expansion of presidential powers in ways never before imagined. But even more importantly, it will insulate the President from accountability - the Chief Executive, under the new regime, will be responsible to no one. Most radically, his interpretation of a law passed by Congress he signs will become more significant than Congress's own intent. It is the legally binding one.
Our Founding Fathers created a republican form of government - a state in which the supreme power rests in the people through their elected representative - a self-government based on a structure of checks and balances.
The story goes that, as Benjamin Franklin (whose 300th birthday we celebrate today), left the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he was approached by a Mrs. Powell, who asked him, "What have you given us, Dr. Franklin?"
"A republic," he replied, "if you can keep it.
Well, we can't seem to keep it. At least not for the long foreseeable future - for decades. The three branches of government are totally out of joint. The Congress's role is to pass laws, it is their intent (not the President's) that is to be used in interpreting the laws. Under the Constitution, the President has absolutely no power to say what the intent of a law is.
But because he issues a statement at the time he signs the law Bush claims his interpretation of the law has effect. Alito claims, as do conservative academics, that the "signing statement" would "increase the power of the executive to shape the law."
The Supreme Court was supposed to be a check and balance on the Executive. Chief Justice John Roberts's Court will no longer be that. It will give Bush a blank check; not only in foreign matters but in domestic issues as well. 9/11 was a tragic godsend for those who wanted to restructure the government. Often in war times, presidents are given greater powers - and then years later, in peacetime, those powers are diluted. It's a cycle we have repeatedly seen during our history. But, now with a permanent war, the presidency will get a free, unfettered hand from the Court.
The Congress will not be able to stop the President for the Courts will rule they do not have that power. The Courts, in taking away the ability of Congress, takes away power from its 535 elected representatives in the Senate and House. It eviscerates the right and the ability to self govern.
We no longer have three equal branches of government.
Ken Starr, in his book "First Among Equals," argued, as the title makes clear, that the Supreme Court, since it can define the structure of the government, of the democracy, has more power than the other branches. It is deserved, he says, because they, unlike the elected officials, are better able to interpret the Constitution, better educated, and, from a higher level of our culture. Starr claims, they give us the Platonic form of government we wanted where our betters lead the way.
Nonsense. History shows us the effects of that are disastrous. The self-anointed Best and Brightest are not what we want, not what this democracy wants.
The Conservatives have spent the last three decades refocusing the path of legal opinions. All that Edwin Meese, Robert Bork and John Roberts wanted when they formed the Federalists has come to pass.
Martin Luther King's life reminds us how long a struggle for a democracy rights can take.
King's death signified the end of a liberal era. We must now struggle to try to move forward to end this conservative cycle.
His death reminds us we once lived in an era of giants. Where are the giants now?
We start now to fulfill his vision.
The gaints of today are Rice, Bush, Cheney and every man and woman over in Iraq fighting for our country, you and the liberals are just to blind to see that for yourselves... and also the govenment is not out of whack only congress is
Guaranteed if the dems win the presidency and pubs keep congress, the court will become "an obstacle to the presidency, stealing too much of its power."
The Rehnquist era started the shift of the power to the states and away from the federal government - away from the Congress, away from the federal agencies, away from the regulatory system created to protect employees, consumers, investors - the people of America.Odd how for the author, the federal government is identical with the people of America, and opposes the power of the states.
What a load of stinking excrement.... at "worst" current changes might adjust some of the balances between branches to what it was under FDR, Truman, and JFK..... all icons of the Democratic Party, last time I checked.
Yet, given the drastic usurpations of power by judicial legislators in the courts, and given the deference to precedent and the power of the MSM and the 'Rats to obstruct, it's very unlikely that any changes in the coming years will remotely resemble what the author is blathering on about.
I think Orwell had a word for this: Doublethink
Anyone who postulates that the founding father's would have wanted (or even could have imagined) the regulatory behemoth the federal government has become (right down to regulating how much water our toilets can use) is either dishonest, ignorant, or insane (or some combination of the three).
"A republic," he replied, "if you can keep it."
I think old Ben would understand that our "Republic" began its erosion during the Civil War, accelerated its slide under FDR, and really kicked in the nitrous under LBJ. Men like Alito, I pray, will slow the descent.
The fact that this ambulance chaser views increased states' rights and decreased federal bureaucracy as a blow to the Framer's vision of our Republic is staggeringly backwards.
Yep. Some additional Ben Franklin related threads on his birthday:
The Amazing Insight of Ben Franklin
'Better Than Well Said' [Ben Franklin understood the need for secrecy]
FGS
And a bunch of those ought to be representing their states (legislatures), not the people. System's already compromised...
Choke on it losers!
'W' has accomplished impossible.
I truly believed that their would be blooshed and riots if 'W' tried to get in a second Conservative Nominee.
Instead, all we have is tears and depression from the left.
Unbelieveable!
I have lost complete respect for lefty losers as opponents.
The left created the court they are crying about now. Yes, the Court is pretty much all-powerful in our system now but that comes out of the Left law schools and the unrelenting blizzard of lawsuits to make laws that the more popular based Congress rejects. It's their baby and the right is simply trying to have some influence in this superlegislature that the left built.
Devolving power from the feds to the states sounds great. But what's this business about the president's "signing statement?" If it is being presented fairly, it doesn't sound like a good, conservative principle.
1. Okay, got it, the states will reign supreme over the feds.
. . . . it will also preside over the expansion of presidential powers in ways never before imagined. But even more importantly, it will insulate the President from accountability - the Chief Executive, under the new regime, will be responsible to no one.
2. Okay, got it, the President will reign supreme over all at the head of the federal government. Oops, but what about point one?
Typical trial lawyer -- he contradicts himself from one paragraph to the next.
Interesting to note that democratically elected officials like the President, Governors and State Legislators are the enemy here and that unelected civil servants are the protectors of us all.
But another liberal journalist bemoaning the shift of power to the right, where it belongs.
Even while I diagree with much of what is said it is a concern that this is, at present, a seemingly endless war. While Iraq will probably be off the radar by years end, the war on terror will go on.
Why does this concern me?
Obvious answer, a Democratic President, A Democratic House and Senate.
Won't happen you say...politics is a strange beast.
Then again I've been wrong before and I hope I'm wrong this time,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.