Is it hyperbolic or, perhaps worse, a cliche to point out that we are on the verge of losing the rule of law in the United States? It can happen, make no mistake. We have started down a path that would be familiar to anyone who has lived, suffered and died under other enlightened, democratic nations that have allowed themselves to slide into totalitarianism.
Lately, I am struck by George W. Bush's resemblance to Julius Caesar, as portrayed by Ciaran Hinds in HBO's excelelent series "Rome." I do not know if that character was drawn as an allegory to our own feckless leader, but the parallels are disturbing.
Bush is a tin-pot Caesar to be sure, but he is a would-be dictator nonetheless. What are his defenders thinking? Are they so afraid of the dark-skinned Arab hordes that they are willing to pledge their all to this weak, limited man who is good merely at feigning strength and competence?
Andrew Sullivan sums things up nicely.
We're talking about a president who believes that he alone can determine any policy even vaguely related to a war that he has redefined as a permanent condition for the indefinite future. My best guess is that we've only begun to find out what powers he has secretly assigned to himself. I certainly don't trust him not to authorize torture again in the future. The only recourse is the press and the Congress. The Courts are in the process of being stacked with men and women completely deferent to executive power. I'm beginning to believe that Democratic retaking of at least one half of the Congress this year is essential to resisting the potential dangers of our current situation. And I'd say the same if we had a Democratic president with Bush's contempt for the rule of law, and if the Republicans were the party in opposition.
Republicans need only to ask themselves if they would be comfortable with a President Howard Dean or a President John Kerry wielding the same kind power that Bush claims for himself. If the answer is "no," then the debate is over.
UncommonSense