# The Final, Ultimate, Supreme Bush v. Kerry Thread! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2004, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144 "2004-10-14T02:33:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/81 "2004-10-20T15:28:07Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > However, the idea that the states should have power over the federal government certainly is a political principal in it’s own right! It even has it’s own ammendment on the bill of rights. If you are referring to the Tenth Amendment (which might as well not be there, as it has never been the basis for any important case of constitutional law), it does not give the states any power **over** the federal government. It only says the states (or the people, and there’s no basis provided for deciding which) retain any powers not expressly granted the federal government – which is really nothing but a needless reaffirmation of the delegation-of-powers clause in Article 2. The only way the states, as states, have ever had any power over the federal government was in the power of state legislatures to choose their senators, which practice was abolished by the 17th Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/82 "2004-10-20T15:30:54Z")
> [@GomiBoy](#): > > I don’t think so, or at least the way you describe is exactly how the UK sends it’s reps to the EU. They are selected by the government in power, not through any sort of popular vote. > > Of course you can vote out those who do the selection, but the public does not directly vote for EU representatives. 😕 I’ve often read news stories about “EU elections” in the UK. It’s even been mentioned as a significant issue that EP members are elected by proportional representation while Westminster MPs are elected by the winner-take-all single member-district system, a difference giving minority parties a more prominent role in EU politics than in UK politics. Did none of this ever happen? ---
**Author:** ![GomiBoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b2d939/32.png) [@GomiBoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GomiBoy)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/83 "2004-10-20T15:43:29Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > By “global test,” he meant any military action by the U.S. should meet a general global (or at least G-7) **standard** of justification and rationality, not that the U.S. should actually submit the decision for foreign countries’ approval. My point still stands. Satisfying that sort of body of our justifications for performing some military action in the larger world I am against. If we have the overwhelming mandate of our citizens to do something, we must do it, regardless. If this is against the will of the international community, then it is up to the leaders (i.e. the President) to explain that to the populace in a way they will understand and support. For example, say someone did attack us with some form of biological weapon, the order of events _should_ be: 1. Find out who did it 2. Prove they did it 3. Tell the US general public who did it 4. Find out what the people’s representatives are willing to do about it (go to the House and Senate) 5. Take that action, and go to the international community and TELL THEM what we will do in response. 6. If our response was met with international outrage for being over the top (nuking cities when we could simply invade would be an example of this), then the job of the President is to bring that information back to the representatives of the people and propose an alternate plan. I wouldn’t want to see that order of events changed in any way. It is one of the benefits of being a US citizen (and coincidentally why I won’t give mine up, in spite of living abroad) is the the US government MUST tell it’s people what it is doing, at least to the point of telling our directly elected representatives what is being planned and getting their approval. And yes, I know, there are exceptions to this (such as the President’s right to wage war for 90 days without Congress) but the actuality is that this would never happen without Congress’s say so unless the missiles were actually flying and that was the only response (and I kinda doubt it would happen even then). On our other topic, > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I’ve often read news stories about “EU elections” in the UK. It’s even been mentioned as a significant issue that EP members are elected by proportional representation while Westminster MPs are elected by the winner-take-all single member-district system, a difference giving minority parties a more prominent role in EU politics than in UK politics. Did none of this ever happen? There was a general election to join the EU and there will be another to accept the EU constitution (if they ever write the bloody thing!) but the individual representatives to the EU from the UK are selected by the Government and subject to approval during an EU hearing, not elected. This just recently occured, with the former spin-meister for Downing Street (can’t recall his name) being recalled from ‘spending time with his family’ to be one of the EU representatives for the UK based on a direct request from Tony Blair. There is no direct representation of the people at the EU level, which is why some people find it so problematic to be a member state of the EU. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/84 "2004-10-20T16:32:56Z")
> [@GomiBoy](#): > > If we have the overwhelming mandate of our citizens to do something, we must do it, regardless. Whoa! Now **that’s** just plain wrong! This kind of decision belongs to the president and Congress, not the citizenry! Their job is not to act as proxy agents doing the will of the people. Their job is to do what they think is best for the people (and, WRT decisions on military action, also to at least consider what is best for the peoples of other countries), in their own independent judgment, regardless of whether the people like it or not – always on notice, of course, that if the people **really** don’t like it, they risk getting turned out next election. That’s how republican government is supposed to work! > [@GomiBoy](#): > > There is no direct representation of the people at the EU level, which is why some people find it so problematic to be a member state of the EU. From the Wikipedia – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European\_Parliament:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament:) > [@](#): > > Elections to the parliament are held using various forms of proportional representation, as selected by the member states. These forms include regional and national lists and Single Transferable Vote. > > \ > > The most recent elections were held on 10-13 June 2004. Following the enlargement of the Union on 1 May, they were the largest simultaneous transnational elections ever held in the world, with nearly 400 million citizens eligible to vote. If I’m reading that right, the mode of selection is not required by the EU treaties, it’s a “local option” thing – meaning the House of Commons could mandate direct election of the UK’s EP delegation. If it chose. Also, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European\_Parliament\_election%2C\_2004:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election%2C_2004:) > [@](#): > > Elections to the European Parliament were held from June 10, 2004 to June 13, 2004 in the 25 member states of the European Union, using varying election days according to local custom. Votes were counted as the polls closed, but results were not announced until June 13 and 14 so results from one country would not influence voters in another where polls were still open; however, the Netherlands, voting on Thursday 10, announced nearly-complete provisional results as soon as they were counted, on the evening of its election day, a move heavily criticized by the European Commission. > > Approximately 343 657 800 people were eligible to vote, the second-largest democratic electorate in the world after India. It was the biggest transnational direct election in history, and the 10 new member states elected MEPs for the first time. The new Parliament consists of 732 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). Voting was in most cases by proportional voting, using the D’Hondt method for calculating the number of seats to be allocated to each party’s candidate list. In Italy open lists are used. **In the United Kingdom, closed lists are used in England, Wales and Scotland but the Single Transferable Vote is used in Northern Ireland.** Not a word about Westminster playing any role in the process. Is the Wikipedia simply wrong? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/85 "2004-10-20T16:39:03Z")
Regarding the EU stuff: There was a great article in Wired magazine sometime in the last year or so that invloved this. They basically make a case that one of the great strengths of the EU is that it uses the existing power structure in the member countries. It’s precisely that it does not take sovereignty over the member countries and works within their existing legal and political systems that is it’s great strength. I’ve been looking and I can’t find the article, though. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![GomiBoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b2d939/32.png) [@GomiBoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GomiBoy)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/86 "2004-10-20T16:42:10Z")
Look, mom - I’m arguing two points simultaneously! Look how smart I am getting here on the Straight Dope! 😃 > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Whoa! Now **that’s** just plain wrong! This kind of decision belongs to the president and Congress, not the citizenry! Their job is not to act as proxy agents doing the will of the people. Their job is to do what they think is best for the people (and, WRT decisions on military action, also to at least consider what is best for the peoples of other countries), in their own independent judgment, regardless of whether the people like it or not – always on notice, of course, that if the people **really** don’t like it, they risk getting turned out next election. That’s how republican government is supposed to work! Let me apologize for not being more clear; when I said the people before, I meant their representatives. Clearly it’s not up to the individual citizens to support military action, but is is up to their directly elected representatives. And if the people don’t support that decision, it is their right to elect different representatives. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > If I’m reading that right, the mode of selection is not required by the EU treaties, it’s a “local option” thing – meaning the House of Commons could mandate direct election of the UK’s EP delegation. If it chose. Right. And the UK chooses to not do this. The rules created by the EU are voted on by their council What you’re refering to are major referenda, such as the choice to allow new member states into the union, or to adopt a EU constitution, in which case the people do have a voice and a vote. But as to the day-to-day running of the EU, that’s down to the representatives from the member states, represented in numbers that relate to the population of that state. In the UK, those members are selected by the government and sent to Brussels to be confirmed. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Not a word about Westminster playing any role in the process. Is the Wikipedia simply wrong? Not wrong, but talking about different things. BTW - if I ignore this forum for a while, it’s not cause I am ignoring you, just that it’s time for me to do some real work and to drive home here in the UK… ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2004, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/87 "2004-10-20T18:50:17Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > What happened? Where you hit by lightning? Sudden brain trauma? Poisonous spider bite? > > 😃 (kidding, kidding.) Short version: After I grew disaffected from libertarianism (for reasons described above) I went back to being an ordinary love-me-I’m-a-liberal like my parents. But I encountered Martin Gardner’s _WHYS of a Philosophical Scrivener,_ and the chapters, “Why I Am Not an Anarchist,” “Why I Am Not a Smithian,” and “Why I Am Not a Marxist” were real eye-openers. Gardner more or less made a case for non-Marxist democratic socialism (though he wasn’t married to he name – much as Gardner is a “philosophical theist” who believes in a personal God while rejecting each and every religious tradition). I figured, if a guy as famously skeptical and hard-head as Gardner (who is best known for his work in debunking pseudosciences, New Age crap, and claims of the paranormal) takes socialism seriously, there just might be something in it. And before I read Gardner I was not really aware of the existence of a rich tradition of democratic-socialist politics, entirely separate from and opposed to the Communists, in America and (even more so) in most other industrialized countries. So I gradually grew more interested. And then I went to law school in Baltimore – the school is located downtown, where you never have to step over empty crack vials but you often have to step over empty liquor bottles. Living among our society’s forgotten and neglected ones really changed my outlook – seeing all those pitiful, hopeless, broken, defeated-looking people (most of them black) in the streets day after day. I concluded, “Capitalism has a lot of advantages, but for these people it’s just not working. Something Must Be Done.” Also while in law school, I became intimate friends with an unreconstructed old Marxist – a guy who really believed in proletarian revolution but, for the time being, was content to organize for creation of a city-owned auto insurance company, to make cars more affordable to poor people. (I tried to get the Baltimore Greens to back him on that but, as environmentalists, they couldn’t get behind anything that makes it easier for anybody to own a car; things are never simple.) And I read a lot of socialist writers, like Michael Harrington. And George Orwell – Orwell was a big influence on me (and not just politically). Everybody remembers him for writing _Animal Farm_ and _1984_ to lambaste Soviet Communism, and fewer remember that Orwell was a socialist to the end of his life. I started making a habit of reading magazines like _The Nation_ and _In These Times_ and found that very, **very** enlightening. I was also heavily influenced by Michael Lind’s _The Next American Nation._ Lind, a onetime _National Review_ editor, is not a socialist of any kind, but some of analyses (e.g., identifying and describing in detail the “White Overclass”) and his specific policy proposals (like redistributive taxation, vigorous color-blind government programs to lift up the poor, proportional representation, and vigorous campaign-finance reform) reflect the kind of thinking I like to see. For all of that, it was only a couple of years ago that I got around to joining the Socialist Party and the Democratic Socialists of America. Also the Labor Party. (But I’m still a registered Democrat – why not? Socialists can’t vote in the primaries.) In the mid-'90s I was active for a while in the left-progressive New Party, but its organizing efforts sputtered out in most states and it no longer exists as a national organization. (Some state branches of it survive, e.g., the Working Families Party in New York. If I lived in New York, that party would be my political home.) You don’t want the long version. ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/88 "2004-10-21T01:03:40Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And then I went to law school in Baltimore – the school is located downtown, where you never have to step over empty crack vials but you often have to step over empty liquor bottles. Just out of curiosity, where is it? (I’m a college student in Baltimore.) > [@](#): > > (Some state branches of it survive, e.g., the Working Families Party in New York. If I lived in New York, that party would be my political home.) When I was registering to vote in New York, that was one of the 5 parties listed on the form–I had to write in “Libertarian.” ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/89 "2004-10-21T01:49:37Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Just out of curiosity, where is it? (I’m a college student in Baltimore.) I went to the University of Maryland School of Law, part of the University of Maryland at Baltimore – located right downtown, close to the Camden Yards Stadium. (I lived in Ridgely’s Delight while they were building it – the construction noise woke me up more than once.) It’s the campus that includes an old church (now used as the school’s assembly hall) with an attached churchyard where Edgar Allan Poe is buried under a white marble obelisk. (Hence the name of B’more’s football team, the Ravens. IMO, better they should have called it by an equally distinctively Maryland name: The Crabs! “Yes, the Crabs were all over the Cowboys today, Bill!” 😃 (Thanx to George Carlin for that one!)) Say, did they ever finish the Harborwalk project? The one that was supposed to provide a continuous broad brick-paved walkway along the waterfront, all the way from the Inner Harbor to Fell’s Point? And what did they do with the old Memorial Stadium? (I left after I graduated in 1992.) ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/90 "2004-10-21T03:49:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Say, did they ever finish the Harborwalk project? The one that was supposed to provide a continuous broad brick-paved walkway along the waterfront, all the way from the Inner Harbor to Fell’s Point? And what did they do with the old Memorial Stadium? (I left after I graduated in 1992.) The old Memorial Stadium was demolished, although, from what I understand, parts of it were brought over to Camden Yards. I don’t know about the Harborwalk as I’m just a freshman and have only lived here for a couple of months. My dorm is near Charles Village, which I consider the midtown area, although I might be conflating the 34th street of New York with the one here. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/91 "2004-10-21T04:22:35Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > My dorm is near Charles Village, which I consider the midtown area, although I might be conflating the 34th street of New York with the one here. Do you go to Johns Hopkins, or the University of Baltimore? (Only two I recall in the city other than UMAB, which is a grad-schools-only campus.) ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/92 "2004-10-21T04:49:58Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Do you go to Johns Hopkins, or the University of Baltimore? (Only two I recall in the city other than UMAB, which is a grad-schools-only campus.) Hopkins. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/93 "2004-10-21T19:16:12Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Hopkins. Much nicer neighborhood. But then, as I remember it, Baltimore isn’t a city with a “good side” and a “bad side,” but kind of a random socioeconomic patchwork – you could walk along the street and find yourself transitioning from a really nice neighborhood to a really poor and dangerous neighborhood in a couple of blocks. Enjoy yourself, but be careful! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2004, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/94 "2004-10-21T19:18:08Z")
Oh, and check out Fells Point the first chance you get! It’s really funky and lots of fun! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/95 "2004-10-22T03:40:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Much nicer neighborhood. But then, as I remember it, Baltimore isn’t a city with a “good side” and a “bad side,” but kind of a random socioeconomic patchwork – you could walk along the street and find yourself transitioning from a really nice neighborhood to a really poor and dangerous neighborhood in a couple of blocks. Enjoy yourself, but be careful! 🙂 Heh, I’ve been noticing that. It also seems to have its share of…eccentric individuals. (A couple of weeks ago, I was walking home from Normal’s (an indepedent used book store in the area), when I was approached by a man who wanted to know if I’d like to have his dog. When I politely declined, he became rather upset and insisted that I take it.) But the city wouldn’t be the same without them. 😛 > [@](#): > > Oh, and check out Fells Point the first chance you get! It’s really funky and lots of fun! I was initially dissuaded from going to Inner Harbor by my upperclassmen friends, but I just looked Fells Point up online and it looks really cool. Thanks for the tip! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/96 "2004-10-22T16:54:44Z")
FWIW, all leftists and progressives should be aware that _The Nation_ has decided to endorse Kerry (as opposed to, say, Nader). From [http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=editors:](http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=editors:) > [@](#): > > This magazine’s disagreements with Kerry are deep and touch on fundamental matters. We believed that the invasion of Iraq was “the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time” (as he now describes it) before the war was ever launched; he has come to that conclusion only recently, having voted to authorize the war. We believe the United States should withdraw from Iraq; he wants to “win” the war there. We think the military budget should be cut; he plans to increase it, adding 40,000 troops. (For what, exactly? to fight another wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time?) We reject pre-emptive war; he embraces it. We oppose the wall that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is building on Palestinian lands; he supports it. We believe in the elimination of all nuclear weapons; he wants only to stop their spread. He calls for significant expansion of healthcare; we call for a single-payer system that would cover everyone. He opposes gay marriage; we back it. If he wins the election, The Nation will pursue each of these differences vigorously. > > But while we have sharp differences with Kerry, we believe he has the qualities required for the presidency. He is more than “anybody but Bush.” His instincts are decent. He is a man of high intelligence, deep knowledge and great resolve. At times in his life–notably, when he opposed the Vietnam War–he has shown exemplary courage. He respects the law. He believes in cooperation with other countries and has the inclination and ability to bring America out of its current isolation and back into the family of nations. As a senator, he demonstrated concern for social welfare and has backed this up with enlightened policy proposals. He has supported civil rights and labor rights and opposed racism. He has supported the rights of women, including the right to an abortion. He has been an advocate of nuclear arms control and opposed the almost incomprehensibly provocative nuclear policies of the Bush Administration. He would rescind the most unfair of Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy. He would be a friend of the environment and return the United States to the negotiations on global warming. > > \ > > But even these stakes are not the largest on the table in November. The largest and most important is the protection of American democracy. It is always difficult while enjoying the comforts and privileges of taken-for-granted liberties to imagine that they could be lost; but the elements of Bush’s misrule have plainly converged to form this threat. It is the wars of aggression designed to expand imperial sway abroad that produce the fear that fuels his campaign. It is the transfer of money from the poor or average majority to the rich few and corporations that cultivates the allegiance of the corporate chieftains who swell Bush’s campaign coffers while at the same time helping to bring the news media, now owned mostly by large companies, to heel. It is the media that amplify his Administration’s war propaganda while failing to expose the deceptions put forward as justification for war and puffing up the bubble of illusion whose creation is perhaps the Administration’s top priority. And it is government secrecy and Justice Department repression and a right-wing judiciary that chills the dissent that tries to puncture the bubble of illusion. The upshot is a concentration of power in the Republican Party that has no parallel in American history, including the Gilded Age and the Nixon era. > > It is not only all three branches of government that have fallen largely into the same hands; it is the corporations, the military (which tends to vote Republican) and, increasingly, the communications industry, which are either propaganda arms of the party, as in the case of Fox News and other outlets of the Rupert Murdoch media empire, or else simply bow to the pressure of Administration threats and popular anxiety. > > Even before Bush’s selection by Supreme Court fiat in 2000, a dangerous pattern had asserted itself at the top levels of American institutional life. The Republican Party embarked on a process of using legitimately won power to acquire more power illegitimately. In the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton for lying to a grand jury about sex, the Republican majority in Congress abused its power in the legislative branch to try to strike down the leader of the rival executive branch. The attempt failed. In the election of 2000, the party in effect abused the judicial power to seize the presidency for itself, and this time the attempt succeeded. The deed was in fact a culmination of a long, deliberate (if not conspiratorial) campaign of politicization of the judiciary, pushed by right-wing legislators as well as such groups as the Federalist Society. In a series of reapportionment battles, notably the one waged by House majority leader Tom DeLay in Texas, the party used legislative power to entrench itself in that same legislature. Meanwhile, a web of think tanks and other institutions, supposedly independent but actually de facto instruments of the Republican Party, was created. They cooperated in vetting political loyalists for government posts and in flooding the news media with apologists for the party and its policies. Under DeLay’s leadership, the Congressional Republicans, leaving no stone unturned, have sought to take over even the lobbying establishment of Washington by threatening firms that hire former Democrats to work for them. > > The persistent theme of these policies and actions, domestic and international, is to acquire power–to seize it, to increase it and to keep it for good. A systemic crisis–a threat to the Constitution of the United States–has taken shape. At the end of this road is an implied vision of a different system: a world run by the United States and a United States run permanently by the Republican Party, which is to say imperial rule abroad, one-party rule at home. Somewhere along that road lies a point of no return. It is in the nature of warnings in general that you cannot know whether the danger in question will come, or be averted by timely action, or perhaps never present itself at all. But it’s also in the nature of warnings that one must act on them before it is too late, and this is especially true in the case of threats to democracy. That is why the danger to democracy takes primacy over other perils that are in themselves greater, including nuclear war and irreversible damage to the ecosphere through global warming. (It is notable that none of these three perils has been more than glancingly mentioned in the election debates that have just ended.) > > \ > > **Safeguarding Democracy** > > Kerry’s election would not necessarily save, and Bush’s election would not necessarily destroy, democratic government in the United States. Even as President, even “in power,” Kerry might well find himself “in opposition.” In that case, he would need all the help from ordinary people he could get, and there’s good reason to believe it would be forthcoming. The impeachment of Clinton failed, but it demonstrated the strength of the assault on legitimate government that can be waged not by the presidency but upon the presidency–and that was in peacetime. Clinton, after all, began his two terms in office with all three branches of government in Democratic hands but ended with all three in Republican hands. (His presidency was perhaps the most brilliant political retreat in American history, but it was a retreat.) Moreover, Kerry has given his right-wing opponents powerful ammunition. By pledging to win a war in Iraq that is unwinnable, he may have put his foot in a trap that would snap shut once he was in office, leaving him open to the charge of failure. What would the party that impeached Clinton for sex and lies do to a President who presided over the “loss” of Iraq in the midst of the “war on terror”? > > If Bush is elected, the role of popular activism in support of the democratic system would be even more important. Roughly half the country dissents from Bushism. The antiwar movement, and now the campaign itself, have generated widespread and intense opposition. Activism has blossomed. New progressive organizations have been founded and will outlast the election. Events are also unlikely to favor the Administration. Already, its war policy and its fiscal policies are widely recognized as disasters. Opposition is bound to be strong and can save the Republic. And let us recall that when President Nixon threatened the constitutional system thirty years ago, he was driven from office in disgrace by popular fury. For all its importance, the election is only one episode in a longer popular struggle, whether Bush or Kerry is President. Either way, The Nation will devote itself to the fight. > > Yet it remains true that of all the things Americans can now do to support democracy, the election of John Kerry is the most important. A Kerry presidency would seriously disrupt the concentration of power at the heart of the present danger. He might still try to “win” the Iraq war but would be less likely to wage future wars. His appointments to the Supreme Court would stop the Court’s slide into unchecked, one-sided partisanship. His control of the bully pulpit would be a powerful counterforce to the right-wing propaganda that now all but drowns out other voices in the news media. His control of the agencies of the executive branch would halt, or at least retard, their merger with corporate America. More important, the simple structural fact that the Democrats are the other party would create a counterbalance to the right-wing power that predominates elsewhere in the system. The Democrats, including Kerry, have been disappointing champions of their namesake, democracy, yet the culture of their party is still an improvement over that of the Republicans. The Democrats are reluctant imperialists; the Republicans are imperialists by avocation. The Democratic Party generally wants to defend civil liberties and does so when it dares; the Republicans, with honorable exceptions, apparently would sweep them aside. The Democrats prefer social justice, however weakly they fight for it; the Republicans would give every dollar they can find to the rich. The Democrats are inclined to limit corporate power; the Republicans are corporate power. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/97 "2004-10-22T17:01:52Z")
Thanks fo posting that, **BrainGlutton**. It was quite informative. I always try to do in life exactly the opposite of what the _Nation_ recommends. This has served me and my country well. My course, now, is clear, thanks to their endorsement. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2004, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/98 "2004-10-22T17:21:42Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > I always try to do in life exactly the opposite of what the _Nation_ recommends. This has served me and my country well. No, just you. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/99 "2004-10-23T02:49:16Z")
Meanwhile, Pat Buchanan’s _American Conservative_ magazine doesn’t know which way to turn. Their 11/8/04 issue has an article endorsing Bush, another for Kerry, Badnarik, Peroutka (two articles), even Nader, plus an article touting the option of not voting at all. There’s no pleasing some people [http://www.amconmag.com/index.html](http://www.amconmag.com/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2004, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144/100 "2004-10-31T18:59:13Z")
I haven’t really made my contribution yet. You should vote for Kerry because: 1. His approach to foreign policy is not reckless. He might not get us out of Iraq right away – his attitude is, “you break it, you own it,” meaning it would be irresponsible for us to destroy Hussein’s government and then pull out under circumstances that would result in a civil war. OTOH, he probably will not invade Iran, Syria, North Korea or Cuba. Bush, if he got a second term, might, in disregard of the facts that our military strength is already overextended and that any more military action might touch off a general regional conflict that could quickly spin out of contro. Highly placed neocons in the Administration have been laying plans to regime-change Iran for some time – I’ve run a thread on that. 2. Kerry is not a unilateralist. He can mend fences with all the foreign countries Bush has alienated. 3. Kerry is a Washington insider – he’s been in the Senate for 20 years. That makes for an easy transition, and it means he will know how to get things done even if both houses of Congress remain in Republican hands. 4. Kerry will give us, if not universal single-payer health care, at least something nearer than we’ve got now. 5. Kerry will put an end to Bush’s unconstitutional “faith-based initiatives” and public funding of religious-conservative political organizations – which might have died out by now without such funding; see [http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041101&s=kaplan](http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041101&s=kaplan). 6. Kerry will appoint Supreme Court justices who are pro-choice and who will respect civil liberties. 7. Kerry will roll back Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, which have done nothing significant to stimulate the economy and have given us nothing but a whopping budget deficit. (Bush is probably the first president in American history, in fact so far as I know the first national leader in any country’s history, to cut taxes right at the start of a war.) 8. Kerry will enforce the environmental-protection laws, which Bush has not. He might even sign on to the Kyoto Protocol. 9. Kerry will shut down your churches, confiscate your Bibles, herd Republicans into re-education camps, force all white gentile women to have abortions, and make your teenage sons marry pedophiles – oh, wait, we’re keeping a lid on that part until after the election! 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-final-ultimate-supreme-bush-v-kerry-thread/269144.md?page=6)