Monday, May 12, 2008

McCain and the 'Unitary Executive'

By Robert Parry
May 13, 2008

If John McCain wins the presidency – and gets to appoint one or more U.S. Supreme Court justices – America’s 220-year experiment as a democratic Republic living under the principle that “no man is above the law” may come to an end.

To put the matter differently, if a President McCain replaces one of the moderate justices with another Samuel Alito – as McCain has vowed to do – then Justice Department lawyer John Yoo’s extreme vision of an all-powerful Executive could well become the new law of the land.

Read on.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Unitary executive has always sounded to me like another way to say dictatorship.

BBF said...

"While many supporters of Hillary Clinton – especially middle-age white women – have told pollsters that they won’t vote for Barack Obama if he wins the Democratic nomination, that position might ensure that a core feminist principle, “reproductive rights,” will be struck down by the Supreme Court.

In other words, to show their anger over the defeat of a female presidential candidate, Clinton supporters might end up contributing to a historic defeat for feminist rights, including the possible outlawing of abortions in many states."

Maybe those who are continually trashing Hillary should have thought about this before. Maybe it's time to do a reality check, and understand that it is very unlikely that the majority of Whites in this country will vote for a Black man as president of the USA. Even a White female, that the media, including Parry and Company love to hate, stands a better chance against McCain than Obama.

I will not vote for Obama if he is the Democratic nominee. The idea totally disgusts me. Considering he has people like Brzezinski as his advisors, am not sure he'd be much better than McCain. I read Paul Street and Larry Pinkney and Max Blunt and Ed Strong, so I do not love Obama. I think of him as just another sleazy politician.

Anonymous said...

What is your support for this assertion: "Those four justices already have embraced the Bush administration’s radical notion that at a time of war – even one as vaguely defined as the 'war on terror' – the President possesses 'plenary' or unlimited powers through his commander-in-chief authority." Given their rulings in several of the habeas cases, it seems like a gross exaggeration.

factchecker said...

Parry claims: In other words, to show their anger over the defeat of a female presidential candidate, Clinton supporters might end up contributing to a historic defeat for feminist rights, including the possible outlawing of abortions in many states.

You just don't get it, do you?! If you think it's about "anger" over the "defeat of a female presidential candidate" it shows you are desperately out-of-touch with reality.

Many women of a certain age were ready and willing to give Barack Obama consideration as a serious presidential contender, but when they saw what he was about, they decided he wasn't prepared and lacks judgment to handle the job properly.

Has it ever occurred to you, Mr. Parry, that some women just happen to believe, based on the facts, that Hillary Clinton would be a more competent president?

A MALE HILLARY SUPPORTER said...

Here we go again....the Hillary-hating, Obama surrogate Robert Parry is so afraid that his chosen candidate will not prevail in November, that he has (once again) decided in advance that "it's Clinton's fault" if he loses.

Because the anti-Clinton brigade has helped cause her demise, and Obama's rise, they are now looking for scapegoats if their hateful bashing of Hillary (and women who support her) results in a lose to the Republicans.

Too bad you didn't take a more reasonable approach and didn't go hell-bent-for-leather to piss people off. If McCain wins you have no one to blame but yourself -- and Obama as the weaker candidate.

Anonymous said...

Or, do Americans want to go down the path marked by the likes of Yoo, Alito and Bush – ceding virtually all power to one individual who can operate beyond all laws and outside the rules of human behavior – and do so with the blessing of the U.S. Supreme Court?

If gas, fuel and food prices might drop by nailing down oil fields in Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, or wherever, then the answer is Yes.

Would McCain try to get the oil? Sure. He might not succeed, but we know he'd stomp on in there. An outright war for oil. Git 'er done. At least we'd know why we fight.

Obama would start Cartering: sweaters, thermostats, 55 mph. No fun, no SUVs, no nothing.

I don't support either candidate. I'm just talking about how it look.