I was watching a bit of
National Treasure last night and I was struck by the sheer reverence Nick Cage, John Voight, and Diane Kruger show towards the
Declaration of Independence. Granted they've stolen it to find hidden Masonic treasures, but in all aspects of their treatment of our founding document they take utmost care to preserve it from harm. And I'm not just talking about making sure it isn't torn or burned, but actual religious reverence of the ideas written on the page. To damage the physical well-being of the Declaration would have been a body blow to the pillars of our republic. Cage's reverence for the preamble takes a sacred tone in his recognition that no truer conclusions may ever been written in the history of philosophy and politics than "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Today I
read that the Bush administration's illegal surveillance on American citizens is even broader than originally thought. Our government is reaching into telecommunications switches that serve as hubs for thousands of unrelated calls and communications between Americans and trying to pull out a handful that are actually connected to terrorists. As a result, a broad net is cast over the American populace and who knows how many Americans, suspected of nothing, guilty of nothing, are having their privacy invaded as a result. George Bush's America
kidnaps. George Bush's America tortures. [Ed.: I just realized that I want to, and often have, projected a dichotomy between Bush's America and my own. I want to disavow any complicity I may have in the actions Bush takes in my name. But I cannot and will henceforth not try to do so.] We invade countries who haven't attacked us and we base our actions on the slimmest hints of suspicion while ignoring troves of evidence contrary to our stated goals. Where is the certitude that strives to do not what may or may not be necessary, but what is right?
How would George Bush handle the Declaration of Independence? Would he show such regard for it that he literally risks his own life for its physical protection? Would he be able to reach into its 18th Century language and cull from it phrase to hold up as beyond the possibility of modern thought? Would his eyes glow with admiration at the power of what he holds in his hands?
I wager that the answer to all of those questions lies in the negative. Bush's abject refusal to recognize the power of rule of law, not just in the Declaration's sister document the Constitution, but in duly passed laws of Congress, suggests a lack of respect for the conditions led that our Founding Fathers to revolution. He acts in the name of protecting our country from physical harm, but for whatever safety we may be assured by increasing the police and military presence in our lives here at home, we lose our some of what we long to preserve. The ideas set forth in the Declaration of Independence are lofty ones that demand constant pursuit to ensure that we maintain what the Founding Fathers carved out for the American people. While the protections of civil liberties -- all preserved to ensure that no American every be subject to the powers of monarchy again -- set clear demarcations for the greatness of our government, the simple division of government into three branches with checks and balances does just as much for the virtue of American democracy.
Bush's violations of America's trust go beyond partisan politics. Actions were taken in our name and for our benefit, yet they cut against the fabric of our democracy. Bush has demonstrated an abject lack of respect for the rule of law, of both constitutional and congressional statutes. He has declared, in nihilistic fashion, that all is permittable for the executive in a time of war. Yet America has been and always will be subject to external threats. Terrorism does not hope to seize American territory, but affect American policy. To the extent that Bush has violated civil liberties, engaged a bellicose foreign policy, and broke international agreements on war and human rights, Al Qaeda has affected American policy. Bush's repeated volleys against the powers of the legislature and the judiciary to check the executive must be met head on. The presidency is just that and it cannot creep slowly and defiantly towards imperial rule. Something must be done.
As far as Bush's NSA spy operations against American citizens goes, action must be taken. I agree with the Barron's editorial:
Willful disregard of a law is potentially an impeachable offense. It is at least as impeachable as having a sexual escapade under the Oval Office desk and lying about it later. The members of the House Judiciary Committee who staged the impeachment of President Clinton ought to be as outraged at this situation. They ought to investigate it, consider it carefully and report either a bill that would change the wiretap laws to suit the president or a bill of impeachment.
Either Bush must be given legal, congressional authority to spy on Americans -- an idea that I abhor -- or he must be reprimanded by the Congress as our Constitution allows. If his actions were criminal, he should be treated as such and impeached.
The only glee that I would find in this is the return of our government to the structure set forth in the Constitution of a limited executive subject to oversight by the judiciary and legislature. Impeaching Bush for his violations of America's security and sanctity of home would be a massive strike against the hopes and goals of Al Qaeda. If we want to win a war of ideology against a group of people that wish us to do our harm to our values, we must show that we respect the offices and responsibilities in our government more than the particular individuals that fill them. We can show the world that our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence are not pieces of paper forgotten by needs of a war on terror, but immortal beliefs immune to any transgression.
Cross posted at The Baltimore Group
