Scott Ritter calls for "repudiation", not impeachment

scott ritter, posting in truthout...

Any effort to impeach Bush and any of his administration found to be engaged in activities classifiable as "high crimes and misdemeanors" would fail to rein in the unitary executive core of any successor. One only has to listen to the rhetoric of the Democratic candidates for president to understand that this trend is as deeply rooted among them as it is with President Bush. Americans today look for leaders without recognizing the absolute necessity of electing team players. The Founding Fathers deliberately designed the executive branch to be strong and independent, but also made sure, through an elaborate system of checks and balances, that it operated merely as one of three separate but equal branches of government.

[...]

The impeachment of President Bush would not in and of itself terminate executive unilateralism. It would only limit its implementation on the most visible periphery, driving its destructive designs back into the shadows of government, away from the public eye, and as such, public accountability. Impeach President Bush, yes, if in fact he can be charged with the commission of acts which meet the constitutional standard for impeachment (and I believe he could, if Congress only had the will to do its job). But to truly heal America, we must repudiate everything President Bush stands for, in terms of not only public and foreign policy, but also in terms of his style of governance, since the former is derived from the latter.

Repudiation is a strong term, defined as "rejecting as having no authority or binding force," to "cast off or disown," or to "reject with disapproval or condemnation." In my opinion, the complete repudiation of the presidency of George W. Bush is the only recourse we have collectively as a people to not only seek redress for the wrongs committed by the Bush administration, but also to purge society of this cancer that threatens to consume and destroy us as a whole, and which would continue to manifest itself in our system of governance even after any impeachment proceedings.

[...]

I fear not the bloody rebellion of an outraged citizenry, but rather the passive submission of a shameful mass which betrays the cause of liberty and freedom through the abandonment of the Constitution, and the obligations of citizenship derived thereof, in favor of the narcotic of consumerism. Such a mass, foreswearing blind obedience to those who profess how to best construct a cocoon that immerses the occupant in transitory comfort, is the most pressing problem facing America today. In a nation whose defining document begins, "We the People," I find that it is we the people who constitute the greatest threat to the future of America. It is not through the force of our actions, but rather the vacuum created by our inaction and apathy, a vacuum all too readily filled by those who would have us exchange our hard-fought freedoms for a gilded cage of market-driven consumerism.

This is the main reason why I am not a proponent of the 'impeach now' mentality so prevalent in political circles that oppose George W. Bush. The expediency of impeachment simply replaces one source of tyranny (President Bush) with another (whomever replaces him). It is not the failures of an individual that have gotten us to where we are today, but rather the failure of the collective.

[...]

Today one only needs to observe the corruption of our rulers and the carelessness of our people to understand the significance of the Constitution when it comes to preserving these United States of America. The nefarious nature of the Bush cancer is that, in its infection of the American system, it seeks to draw legitimacy for its tyrannical actions by citing the very same Constitution it seeks to destroy.

ok, scott, i buy all that... so, what do we DO...?

• Repudiate the notion of a "unitary executive."
• Repudiate presidential signing statements.
• Repudiate executive violation of Article 6 of the Constitution, which binds municipal law in America with binding treaty obligations incurred when the Senate ratifies a treaty or agreement by a two-thirds majority or better.
• Repudiate "faith-based initiatives" pushed by any branch of government.
• Repudiate a weak Congress.
• Repudiate weak senators or representatives, especially those with a track record of abrogating their constitutional mandate.
• Repudiate ignorance, especially that of the American citizen who knows little or nothing about the Constitution which empowers him or her.
• Repudiate consumerism, especially the virulent form it takes in the selfish framework of American-centric capitalism.
• Repudiate pre-emptive wars of aggression.
• Repudiate American Empire.

and then...?

Instead, embrace the empowerment of education. Embrace active citizenship. Embrace the rule of law, as set forth by the Constitution. Do all of this and, in the end, if conditions and circumstance warrant, impeach President Bush and any of those in his administration so deserving.

while i certainly don't disagree with ritter on anything he has to say, i'd like to know what the hell "repudiation" looks like and how it would be binding on anybody... saying "i repudiate" while all the measures that bushco has put in place (signing statements, executive orders, secret detention, warrantless domestic wiretapping, etc., etc.) are still alive and kicking, would only be a gesture of good faith, but would carry no mandate or consequences if not followed...

real "repudiation", imho, MUST be accompanied by an offical, legal, formal striking of the suspect signing statements, passing of legislation forbidding certain types of actions, other legislation repealing the frankenstein laws passed under bushco, and, most importantly, the application of real consequences, consequences with teeth, to the perpetrators of war crimes and constitutional breaches... repudiation in and of itself, while i certainly would like to hear it, particularly since it's something we're NOT hearing much of from anybody at the moment, is great, but unless that repudiation is built into the structure itself, backed up with the force of law and with serious consequences for failure to abide, it is only empty verbiage...

(thanks to luke at wot is it good 4...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet