Our incipient dictatorship

I am more and more dismayed as it seems inevitable that Bush's nomination of Alito to the Supreme Court will be confirmed. The reason for my dismay has more to do with his belief in the expansion of executive power than anything else. In that regard I want to share with you today an article picked up by Smirking Chimp called "Bush has crossed the Rubicon" by Paul Craig Roberts:

Dictatorships seldom appear full-fledged but emerge piecemeal. When Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon with one Roman legion he broke the tradition that protected the civilian government from victorious generals and launched the transformation of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire. Fearing that Caesar would become a king, the Senate assassinated him. From the civil wars that followed, Caesar's grandnephew, Octavian, emerged as the first Roman emperor, Caesar Augustus.

Two thousand years later in Germany, Adolf Hitler's rise to dictator from his appointment as chancellor was rapid. Hitler used the Reichstag fire to create an atmosphere of crisis. Both the judicial and legislative branches of government collapsed, and Hitler's decrees became law. The Decree for the Protection of People and State (Feb. 28, 1933) suspended guarantees of personal liberty and permitted arrest and incarceration without trial. The Enabling Act (March 23, 1933) transferred legislative power to Hitler, permitting him to decree laws, laws moreover that "may deviate from the Constitution."

Later Roberts says the following:

The Republican interest in strengthening executive power has its origin in agenda frustration from the constraints placed on Republican administrations by Democratic congresses. The thrust to enlarge the president's powers predates the Bush administration but is being furthered to a dangerous extent during Bush's second term. The confirmation of Bush's nominee, Samuel Alito, a member of the Federalist Society, to the Supreme Court will provide five votes in favor of enlarged presidential powers.

President Bush has used "signing statements" hundreds of times to vitiate the meaning of statutes passed by Congress. In effect, Bush is vetoing the bills he signs into law by asserting unilateral authority as commander in chief to bypass or set aside the laws he signs. For example, Bush has asserted that he has the power to ignore the McCain amendment against torture, to ignore the law that requires a warrant to spy on Americans, to ignore the prohibition against indefinite detention without charges or trial, and to ignore the Geneva Conventions to which the U.S. is signatory.

In effect, Bush is asserting the powers that accrued to Hitler in 1933. His Federalist Society apologists and Department of Justice appointees claim that President Bush has the same power to interpret the Constitution as the Supreme Court. An Alito Court is likely to agree with this false claim.

Another article I read expressing these same concerns ended by urging all readers to write their senators opposing the Alito confirmation. I really have a sense of complete despair in that regard. Our senators here in Oklahoma are Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe - both rabid right-wingers. No letter from me is going to have any effect on them whatsoever. I know because I once wrote to them opposing the torture at Guantanamo Bay. I received a reply stating essentially that the people we have detained there are terrorists and deserve to be tortured. It was an appalling statement that didn't even try to deny that we are horrifically abusing the detainees.