General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Because President Obama is NOT evil; that is why many of us trust and defend him... [View all]panzerfaust
(2,818 posts)The point seems lost that this not about if Obama or Bush has abrogated more civil liberties than the other. The point is that both have undertaken deliberate actions undermining the constitutional nature of our government. Both embrace what Bush described as the "Unitary Executive" - in short, that the will of the president is the law of the land.
Nixon embraced this idea - "If the president does it it is legal" - but our country was still enough of a constitutional democracy that he could see where he was going after the Watergate conspiracy (which was orders of magnitude less harmful than the Bush-Obama surveillance society) and so he resigned.
I prefer Lincoln's vision - a government of the people, by the people - to the Orwellian vision of the current, and of the previous, occupant of the White House.
Fine, you do not think Obama evil - but you are happy to allow him (and his predecessor) to destroy the checks and balances of our democracy and to turn the Bill of Rights into a quaint historical document all in the name of Protecting Freedom?
If Bush-3 becomes the next president, are you going to be happy with him having these same powers which Bush-2 and Obama have taken for the presidency? Governments never, willingly, give up the powers which they have usurped from the people - and Obama has proven to be one of the most implacable enemies of constitutional government since King George III.
![]()
The problem is not with any given president, but with the role of the president in a constitutional democracy. The United States of America is A government of laws, and not of men," as future president Adams phrased it - and which we are forgetting to our peril.