One-Party System Will Suspend Constitution
INS News Staff
International News Service
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
WASHINGTON, December 20: President Bush, seeking to become President for Life, has given the green light to key recommendations of a secret 30-page planning document entitled "Justifications for One-Party Rule in America."
Two sources verify that terrorist threats or attacks against key cities such as Houston and Bakersfield will be used to trigger formation of a national unity party, the National Despotism Party, which would then be asked by the President to suspend the Constitution and declare "necessary and essential measures" to fight the war on terror on American soil.
Upon such a threat, the President might issue an emergency Declaration of National Unity, might seek an emergency Congressional referendum, or might even risk a nonbinding national plebiscite.
The plan originates in the President’s increasingly hostile relationships with his opponents over renewal of the Patriot Act, wiretapping, the CIA prisoner gulag, the use of torture, indefinite detention of a variety of prisoners, and alleged war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The President’s energies have been unduly diverted into a spirited defense of wiretapping, his supporters say. The Federal Wiretap Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the Patriot Act all make clear that no American has any property rights over telephone conversations, e-mail, mail, pagers, wireless phones, computers, and any other electronic devices for communications, they say. Most Americans do not realize that they have no right to prevent government snooping into communications, bank and library records, and much else, these presidential supporters add.
While the President’s unconstitutional behavior has not yet led to his impeachment, he is chafing against even the feeble democratic opposition he is encountering. Close aides fear that if Bush is impeached, he will take Saddam Hussein’s behavior in court as a model, alternately berating the court, throwing temper tantrums, and walking out. They wish to preclude impeachment.
Despite his oath of office, the President has been quoted as saying "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned piece of paper." Still, the planning document argues that the only way to protect the Constitution is to suspend it for the next 100 years or until the war on terror is won, whichever comes last.
Supporters of the plan argue that it merely extends, rationalizes, and solidifies already existing trends in U.S. government. Competition in government, it is said, is just as wasteful, disorderly, and inconsistent as marketplace competition. What we need is an overall plan to move ahead as one people with one direction. Defeating the enemy requires nothing less, according to the document.
The existing losses of civil liberties, evisceration of the Bill of Rights, and eradication of the Constitution would simply be codified, supporters say. Prior Presidents could not fight their wars by adhering to the Constitution. Why should Bush be singled out for prejudicial treatment, they ask?
The Justice Department has provided the President’s planners with a series of memos penned by John Yoo, Alberto Gonzales, and others that legalize all the proposed measures. The President’s inherent authority as Commander-in-Chief, they write, allows him to declare war. Anyway, this is consistent with modern history inasmuch as Clinton flouted the 1973 War Powers Resolution, they add. Yoo points out that even human-rights activists share his view of presidential power, when they agree with the President’s goals. Since every branch of government has effectively abrogated the Constitution, Yoo sees no reason why Bush cannot now do the same but more effectively and efficiently in a time of national emergency.
The President wants boldly to declare all-out war on America. America is the next logical front in the war on terror, the report suggests, and one that can be won relatively easily and quickly. Key Democrats, some members of his own party, and other anti-war figures are increasingly viewed as threats to order, defeatists, supporters of terrorists, and traitors.
They are really subversives and should be treated as such in order to protect national security, the document reads. It is important to clean up the home front before proceeding any further overseas. The next foreign war should not be impeded, as this one has, by impatient, weak, and cowardly liars, realists, isolationists, sunshine patriots and gloom-and-doomers who continually denigrate the humane efforts of neoconservatives to offer democratic alternatives to autocracy and theocracy. Before saving the world, it is first necessary to save America from its critics. So the report says.
Bush believes that the leader of the only remaining superpower in the world should have power that is commensurate with that status. Why, it is argued, should Kim Il-Sung be the Eternal President and not Bush? Why should Duvalier and Tito have been Presidents for Life and not Bush, when the U.S. is a far greater country than North Korea, Haiti, or Yugoslavia? The plan is ambivalent on whether the new post should be called President for Life or Despot for Life.
Neoconservative supporters believe that a single National Despotism Party with a Despot for Life will immeasurably strengthen the ability of the U.S. to attain global hegemony. They point out that every foreign leader will know that when Bush speaks as Despot for Life, he faces no opposition at home. Being unchecked by domestic political forces, the power of the U.S. will be amplified even further.
The mechanism to attain these changes is a new party, the National Despotism Party, that will supersede the Democratic and Republican parties. Bush’s brain trust argues that most Democrats will jump at the chance to share power, especially if such power increases when the new party suspends the Constitution.
The plan’s provisions for successors to Bush, which provide for selection from key figures from both major existing parties, are expected to rally support for the new party. In the future, a 50-member Despot Council would serve as a breeding ground for successor despots.
However, some division among democrats is anticipated. One wing, it is supposed, wishes to continue the current system. They think that two names and parties allow voters to believe that occasional changes in the party affiliations of officeholders make a significant difference to dominant U.S. policies and programs. Another wing wishes to come out of the closet and admit the aim of naked monopoly rule.
The public’s reaction to the 9/11/01 events is the model for the next series of actions. Several close advisors to Bush regret that more drastic action wasn’t taken at that time. They do not plan to make the same mistake twice. They believe that the public will overwhelmingly support the President in any emergency that he declares, real, imagined, or fabricated by the CIA.
All he has to do, political strategists say, is make a dozen speeches modeled along the lines of his current crop of four speeches that have partially rebuilt support for the Iraq War. The gullibility and fickleness of the American public have proven themselves time and again, they believe, but once the National Despotism Party officially suspends the Constitution, we’ll never have to worry about the voters again.
Michael S. Rozeff [send him mail] is the Louis M. Jacobs Professor of Finance at University at Buffalo.