- Last week's annual Conservative Political
Action Conference signaled the transformation of American conservatism
into brownshirtism. A former Justice Department official named Viet Dinh
got a standing ovation when he told the CPAC audience that the rule of
law mustn't get in the way of President Bush protecting Americans from
Osama bin Laden.
-
- Former Republican congressman Bob Barr,
who led the House impeachment of President Bill Clinton, reminded the CPAC
audience that our first loyalty is to the U.S. Constitution, not to a leader.
The question, Barr said, is not one of disloyalty to Bush, but whether
America "will remain a nation subject to, and governed by, the rule
of law or the whim of men."
-
- The CPAC audience answered that they
preferred to be governed by Bush. According to Dana Milbank, a member of
the CPAC audience named Richard Sorcinelli loudly booed Barr, declaring:
"I can't believe I'm in a conservative hall listening to him say Bush
is off course trying to defend the United States." A woman in the
audience told Barr that the Constitution placed Bush above the law and
above non-elected federal judges.
-
- These statements gallop beyond the merely
partisan. They express the sentiments of brownshirtism. Our leader über
alles.
-
- Only a few years ago this same group
saw Barr as a conservative hero for obtaining Clinton's impeachment in
the House. Obviously, CPAC's praise for Barr did not derive from Barr's
stand on conservative principle that a president must be held accountable
if he violates the law. In Clinton's case, Barr's principles did not conflict
with the blind emotions of the politically partisan conservatives demanding
Clinton's impeachment.
-
- In opposing Bush's illegal behavior,
Barr is simply being consistent. But this time, Barr's principles are at
odds with the emotions of the politically partisan CPAC audience. Rushing
to the defense of Bush, the CPAC audience endorsed Viet Dinh's Fuhrer Principle
over the rule of law.
-
- Why do the media and the public allow
partisan political hacks, like Viet Dinh, to define Bush's illegal actions
as a national security issue? The purpose of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act is to protect national security. FISA creates a secret court to which
the president can apply for a warrant even after he has initiated spying.
Complying with the law in no way handicaps spying for national security
purposes. The only spying handicapped by the warrant requirement is spying
for illegitimate purposes, such as spying on political opponents.
-
- There are only two reasons for Bush to
refuse to obey the law. One is that he is guilty of illegitimate spying
for which no warrant would be issued by the FISA court. The other is that
he is using "national security" to create unconstitutional powers
for the executive.
-
- Civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate
writing in the Boston Phoenix says that Bush's grab for "sweeping,
unchecked power in direct violation of a statute would open a Pandora's
box of imperial possibilities." In short, it makes the president a
dictator.
-
- For years, the Republican Federalist
Society has been agitating for concentrating more power in the executive.
The members will say that they do not favor a dictator, just a check on
the "imperial Congress" and "imperial judiciary." But
they have not spelled out how the president can be higher than law and
still be accountable, or, if he is only to be higher than some laws, but
not other laws, and only in some circumstances, but not all circumstances,
who draws the line through the law and defines the circumstances.
-
- On Feb. 13, the American Bar Association
passed a resolution belatedly asking President Bush to stop violating the
law. "We cannot allow the U.S. Constitution and our rights to become
a victim of terrorism," said bar association president Michael Grecco.
-
- The siren call of "national security"
is all the cover Bush needs to have the FISA law repealed, thus legally
gaining the power to spy however he chooses, the protection of political
opponents be damned. However, Bush and his Federalist Society Justice Department
are not interested in having the law repealed. Their purpose has nothing
to do with national security. The point on which the regime is insisting
is that there are circumstances (undefined) in which the president does
not have to obey laws. What those circumstances and laws are is for the
regime to decide.
-
- The Bush regime is asserting the Fuhrer
Principle, and Americans are buying it, even as Bush declares that America
is at war in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
-
- _____
-
- Dr. Roberts is John M. Olin Fellow at
the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent
Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal and
a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author
of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.
|
