The Buck Stops Where?

Harry Truman had a motto. “The buck stops here.” It was simple, poignant and effective. Its greatest strength however, was that it was a statement of responsibility. The President of the United States was laying it on the line and proclaiming that his authority had limits and that when reached, he was ultimately accountable. His choice to drop both atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused ramifications beyond imagination. His decisions to enter the Korean War and remove Douglas MacArthur as commander of the United Nations forces when he pushed for the war to enter China as well as his advocation of the use of atomic weapons alienated some Americans and stirred up a bit of a furor. Regardless of what he did good or bad, Truman believed that his post as the executive of our country deserved both credit and fault. His idea of definitive responsibility can be summed up in one word: dignity.

Some might claim dignity was what President Clinton tore out of, stomped on and ridiculed in his eight years in office. Others might know it as the what Oliver North, President Reagan and a great deal of his cabinet pissed on and left to die during the Iran Contra affair or the plethora of equally illegal activities they indulged in. Whatever you believe it to be, its basic premise is that of decorum. It is good manners. It is modesty, etiquette and politesse. Most importantly however, it is restraint; Restraint from partaking in activities that may seem dishonest or deceitful; Restraint from self-aggrandizement; Restraint from excess.

Of late there has been a lack of dignity in our country’s politics. Naturally both sides exhibit aspects of lacking it, but one party has shown its true, bold colors. During the 2000 election cycle, you could hear it at almost every stump for then-Governor Bush. George W. Bush was going to return dignity to the White House. Without pointing fingers (usually at any rate), he and his campaigners laid the claim out that in the eight previous years, dignity was lacking in our executive’s mansion. For all the bad President Clinton may have done, his good far exceeded it. His social conscious extended not only throughout our country, but across the rest of the world as well. Where there was ethnic cleansing, he tried to stop it. Where there was poverty, he attempted to stop or limit it. While his social life may have been immoral to some, it could not be said that his social policies were in any way.

Six years later, the questions remain. What dignity was George W. Bush talking about? Was it dignity or just a prudish sense of morality that he wanted to restore? Where is the dignity that he brought back? What exactly has he done to merit the esteem bestowed upon him as a savior of it?

Since his presidency began in 2001, he has worked at going on vacation more than any other President in our country’s history and still has three years left to set an unreachable record which I have no doubt he will. He has overstepped his bounds as the President by usurping the rights delegated to the people by the Constitution with his personal authorization of illegal warrant-less wiretaps of American citizens. He flaunts his illegal activities in public and says that he will continue to partake in them. Where is his restraint? Where is his restraint from being patently dishonest and deceitful with the American public? Where is his restraint from aggrandizing himself as some sort of rescuer of values? Where is his restraint from excess?

What has he done that has been so much more dignified than his predecessor? If getting a hummer from an intern and lying about it to his wife strips any ounce of dignity from the Presidency, I can only imagine what spying on our own citizens, lying our country into a war which has killed 2,243 of our own countrymen let alone over 100,000 innocent Iraqis and then ravaging our economy to the tune of trillions of dollars in debt and entrusting a country we occupy to a convicted fraud does to it.

If anyone believed that President Clinton brought shame to the office of the President, I encourage you to look at what has been done to it since then. A crook is in office. He is a thief. He broke federal securities laws four times (that we know of) while working for Harken. He has thrashed the 4^th amendment to the United States Constitution. He lied to the American public when he went out of his way to explain that wiretaps always require a warrant while at the same time doing the opposite. He lied about the extent of the Iraqi weapons program in order to scare a country into a war in which over 100,000 Iraqi and 2,200 Americans have died. At what point do we make the statement that the blood of all those who died is on his hands? When can we say to those 2,243 families that their sons and daughters are dead because of the President’s arrogance and lies?

Most importantly, how can we explain the death of their beloved child, the child that they worked so hard to raise, took to birthday parties, to baseball practice, to the park, to school, to visit aunts and uncles, to take to the doctor when they have a high fever at 3 AM, to buy them that new toy that they wanted so badly, to take on family road trips across the country to let them see just what it is all about, to comfort and rock to sleep after waking up from a nightmare, in terms that would make it seem remotely justified?

Of all the questions to ask President Bush, one stands out as the vastest in breadth: When will you take responsibility for your actions? In his farewell address, President Truman set the standard by which all Presidents have since been measured when he said “The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.”

Taking responsibility for your decisions is something they teach in kindergarten. Why our President does not understand that may be more indicative of his level of intelligence than anything else.

Ethical Bankruptcy

Turn back the clock a little more than 5 years ago. It’s late January of 2001. President Bush is being sworn in after the Supreme Court stepped in to void a presidential election and install a president of their choosing. The eighteen year old kid in me who just had his vote stolen from him sits in front of his television and watches in disbelief as the smug face of an ineffectual C student-come-president smirks right before taking the Oath of Office required of him. It’s a short oath, but not for lack of consequence. Its brevity speaks volumes to the inherent idea that overly verbose answers and statements tend to mislead. Simply put it is this:

"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Since President Washington, every President has taken that oath. Each one save for Tyler, Pierce and Hoover who affirmed it, swore to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution is the very core of our country’s values. It is a timeline that shows our faults as well as our gains over the course of our history. From racism to sexism to limiting the possibility of creating a dictator in the office of the President, the Constitution and its amendments lays out what we stand for as a people.

With that in mind, I never once thought I’d get to see the day that a sitting President would see the possibility of being thrown in jail like a common criminal. President Bush has made that scenario possible and I must say that I am all for it. During the impeachment and subsequent acquittal (the latter a fact that all too often is omitted from conversation) of President Clinton, I was of an impressionable age but even then realized that what was going on was an ultra-partisan attack meant to create a social divide in my country. The Democrats were in the ultimate seat of power and the Republicans went on an all out smear campaign to paint the Democrats as an immoral party; one that could not rule with the values of American citizens in its sight. After Al Gore won the 2000 election by what turned out to be at the time the slimmest margin of victory ever in a Presidential race, Bush was given the Presidency by what ended up being the slimmest margin of victory in a 5-4 decision.

He had come to power claiming that he would bring dignity to the White House as if it were lacking because his predecessor had gotten a blow job from an intern and that had just never happened before. Ever. Never ever. Among his countless campaign promises that ultimately were thrown on the fire the second he entered into the White House, that of restoring dignity resonated strongest with me. This from a man who executed 152 people in his reign as governor of Texas. This from a man who referred to a member of the press who didn’t write well of him as “a major league asshole” with a smile on his face while waving to a cheering crowd. This from a man who when asked what Karla Faye Tucker would say to then-Governor Bush replied “'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'”

Taking the Oath of Office is a big step. Without it one cannot ascend to that post. Taking it however, is just the first step. Upholding it is the second and even more important. Just as they say keeping a secret is the biggest part of it, without respecting that oath, those who take it deserve nothing less than scorn, shame and dishonor. If a President does only one thing in office, I would hope it would be to preserve, protect and defend our Constitution.

Let me be very clear when I say this: President Bush has trampled on the Bill of Rights by shredding any meaning the 4^th amendment held for over 200 years.

By personally authorizing the warrantless wiretapping program that intercepts calls of domestic nature from American citizens, President Bush has signed his name to the commission of a crime against our country. If his need was so great, why didn’t he just propose a Constitutional amendment repealing the 4^th amendment? Why did he not go to the court created by the foreign intelligence surveillance act? After all, they had issued over 19,000 warrants while only denying 4. I’m sure they would have agreed to let him spy with a warrant had they presented their case. There are two possibilities in which I can see them not getting the warrants and while both are equally believable given the current administration’s penchant for bald faced lying. One is that who and what they were spying for was not actually a threat to the United States and might have been just another version of Nixon’s enemies list. The second and also not so unbelievable option is that they would have screwed up the presentation to the point where the court would stare, slacked jawed in shock at their ineptitude.

What’s even more frightening about the entire situation is that Bush has admitted publicly over thirty times that he broke the law. Never in my relatively short lifetime have I heard of someone proclaiming so many times as the President has in the last month that he broke the law.

In an earlier post I’d asked what would happen if President Clinton were still in power and various scenarios played out. Invariably the response would have been that the Republican held Congress would have fricasseed him on a spit on the Senate floor. Are Republicans in this country so bankrupt of ethics that they cannot admit that our President has committed a gravely serious crime? Will this country have to wait until late this year to give control of Congress back to the Democrats before impeachment hearings are brought to the House? More importantly, will President Bush resign his post due to his failure to comply with his simple 39 word oath that he took twice and his complete and utter disregard for the Constitution of the United States of America?

Whatever the answers are and whatever actions come, I know this will resonates with any American willing to step back from the situation that take a moment to grasp the President’s own thirty plus admissions of guilt. Regardless, I am a mix of dismay and elation with the thought that my President might be thrown in jail for his unethical, immoral and most importantly, illegal actions.

A Show of Hands

If you read this blog, please post a comment. I'd like to find out if there are more than three of you.