“A Nation That Does Not Know Its History…”
DailyKos has Ken Salazar reading George Washington’s farewell address on the Senate floor, in a rebuke to those who apparently think that separation of powers is secondary to what Ben Franklin referred to as ‘temporary security’.
Not much else to say, there. On a related note, though–our administration apparently thinks that the Constitution ought to mean today exactly what it did at its creation. How come they think the Geneva Conventions can change their meaning over time, or through outdatedness? Are these two different theories of the rule of law, or do they actually have a coherent theory?
Originalism pace Alito seems, instead of being a coherent interpretive doctrine (as Alito himself lays out in A Matter of Interpretation), seems to be an unscrupulous way of promoting the status quo when invoked by Republicans in the administration and in Congress. There are exceptions, of course. But it does seem that selective “originalist” interpretation of Constitution–only when it serves political goals–is the real tactic. Why else would the administration ignore Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 (congress has the power to declare war), or claim the theory of the unitary executive when the original intent of the founders (see especially Federalist 10) was to prevent a powerful executive with control over the military?
That being said, the only person in the administration (or, formerly in the administration) actually making arguments for this stuff is John Yoo, the drafter of the infamous torture memos… Gonzales et al. are just parroting his arguments.
Comment by James Tierney — February 24, 2006 @ 1:51 pm