Declaration of Independence

Comments Off #

The Declaration of Independence describes the why of our government. It lays out the case for severing ties with the tyrannical English monarchy, and in the process lays the groundwork for a country based on the ideals of liberty, justice, and freedom.

Constitution

Comments Off #

The Constitution of the United States describes our system of goverment, of checks and balances and the rule of law. It lays out the how of our goverment.

The Founding Documents

Comments Off #

The founding documents of the United States of America declare a truly remarkable set of ideals: that all of us are created equal, that we have the right to speak freely and to pursue liberty, that we as citizens have a vital role to play in shaping and maintaining our government.

In order that we in the modern age can live up to the ideals of our Founding Fathers, we must endeavor to understand the basis for our system of government, and to involve ourselves in the process of its evolution. This lens aims to be your starting point for the understanding of American Democracy, in hopes that understanding will lead to a fuller expression of that democracy.

Bill of Rights

Comments Off #

The Bill of Rights is technically part of the Constitution, but it’s character is different enough to be thought of as a separate document. If the Constitution describes how the government works in technical ways, the Bill of Rights describes how the government should relate to the governed; it describes the character of the United States government.

Read more:

Are we at war?

2 #

My Bottom Line: Congress has not officially declared war, and the President therefore has no right to claim the extraordinary powers of an executive at wartime.

From FreeFoto.com - Ian Britton

The idea that we are a nation at war has become common wisdom among pundits and politicians on both sides of the aisle. But as the President and his supporters have taken to claiming the extraordinary and almost limitless powers of an executive at wartime, I’ve been wondering: when did Congress actually declare war? Is there a limit to this war? Is there an end date? And who are we at war with?

Now, I’m no lawyer or Constitutional scholar. You might be best advised to consult with your local Congress-critter for a more definitive answer. But here are the facts as best I can tell:

(a) On September 18, 2001, a week after the 9/11 attacks, Congress authorized the use of military force “against those nations, organizations, or persons [the President] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

(b) On October 16, 2002, Congress issued another authorization of military force, this time for the purpose of ”(1) defend[ing] the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforc[ing] all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.” The language of the resolution urges the President to first seek a diplomatic solution.

(c) The 1973 War Powers Resolution makes a distinction between a “Declaration of War” and “specific statutory authorization,” and from what I can tell, Congress issued the latter. No formal Declaration of War exists in the U.S. today. (If you discover otherwise, please use the comments section to point me to the relevant document.)

So we’re in a military action, not a war. Not that it makes much difference to the people who are getting shot at—certainly to them this is a war. But domestically, this fine point makes a huge difference. President Bush might be able to claim certain privileges in a period of extraordinary threat to the U.S. (i.e., wartime) that he’s not allowed otherwise, like suspending habeas corpus or spying on Americans without a warrant.

Let me just say that I think I understand that in the real world, there’s not much practical difference between a “Declaration of War” and a “statutory authorization.” I’m making the point here that I believe there should be a difference. I’m saying that we should set a higher standard for engaging in war, and we should meet a high bar of justification when we cede any authority from one branch of government to another. In public, members of the Administration are repeating the phrase “We’re at war” endlessly as prelude to the justification of actions that make my stomach turn. I believe that, as a matter of policy, we should draw some clear and careful lines around the act of war; this country should not be allowed to edge its way sideways into war.

Here’s the thing, too: I’ve never felt that my day-to-day life has been altered one bit by this conflict. I have a couple of casual acquaintances who are active military, but I don’t really know or come in contact with anyone who knows anyone involved in the military. I haven’t been asked to sacrifice, to participate in scrap metal drives or victory gardens. I’ve been asked to go shopping, to go on with my life, to keep the economic wheels turning.

But now the stakes have been raised. Now the sacrifice that I’m being asked to make is the suspension of civil liberties. I’m supposed to cede my claim to the protections enumerated in the [Bill of Rights] and the Constitution. I’m supposed to accept that the Fourth Amendment doesn’t apply anymore, and that the separation of powers is no longer operative. I’m supposed to abide by the erosion of the rights of free assembly and free speech.

So I’m trying to understand this. When did my Congress declare war? And with whom? And when will it end? If you want me to give up my liberty, then follow the rules: lets debate the declaration of war, let’s discuss what we need to do to resolve the crisis, and let’s decide how we will declare victory.

Until that happens, I maintain that we are not at war, and my Constitution and my Bill of Rights are still in effect, and no one—not the President or anyone—has the right to declare them null and void.

Further reading:


Revised 5/1/06

What I read about Iraq

Comments Off #

Read Eliot Weinberger’s What I heard about Iraq in 2005. It’s long, it’s depressing as hell, and I hope that you read all of it. (via Eric Alterman)

Tags:

Bizarre event

Comments Off #

Mid-morning on Sunday, a flaming van drove down Alki Avenue, trailing sparks and dropping glowing pieces of metal all over the road. The driver apparently made it down the road and around the bend before coming to a stop. Police cars came from everywhere. I haven’t heard a thing about it on the news.

Tags:

The One-Percent Rule

Comments Off #

Flippingoff
Everyone speaks – at the minimum – one percent of truth.
No matter what anyone tells you, at least one percent of it is true. No matter if it’s coming from your worst enemy, or the biggest idiot you know, if you listen closely and carefully, you will be able to uncover a grain of truth in any statement.

Knowing that this rule is true forces you to pay attention to what a person is telling you, to listen deeply and attentively to even the most hostile or manipulative of interlocutors. Because whatever they say will hold truth for you, an opportunity to learn and grow, and you must never miss a moment to hear it.

In practicing this rule, I have come to understand that truth is not binary. Rarely are statements either totally false or totally true. There is always nuance. Truth is like the volume dial on your stereo; it can be all the way down at one percent (barely audible, but still there) or full blast or anywhere in between.

Acknowledging the small grain of truth in what others are saying is a vital step in gaining inner wisdom, and to keep from killing everyone you come in contact with.

Tags: |

RSS

Comments Off #

RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication. Probably. It might stand for Rich Site Summary. But whatever. You don’t really need to know what it means. All you need to know is that RSS makes your life easier.

Howzat? Well, RSS lets you subscribe to an online information source, like a [[blog create]], or a [[podcast create]], or a news headlines site, or… or anything that gets updated regularly. This lets you use a piece of software called an [[aggregator create]] (or [[feed reader create]]) to view these news sources all at once, without visiting dozens of different websites.

Feed readers make your information consumption faster and more efficient.

For more, check out my del.icio.us RSS bookmarks, and these links in particular:

Tags: |

50,000 Monkeys Blogging… Plus One

Comments Off #

Part of the 50000 Monkeys bannerIt is only appropriate that my first post should be in support of my friend Lloyd’s new experiment. 50,000 Monkeys Blogging is a smart, funny, radical idea: turn the blog keys over to anyone who wants them. Open the house and let the riff-raff in. Bring on the spammers, Nigerian scammers, Propecia pushers, and anyone else who wants to get their blog on and let them have their say.

That means you, too, dear reader. You send an email to 50000monkeys@thecoolkids.us, wait a few minutes, and the contents of your email will show up as a post on the blog. Send anything you like: quips, quotes, confessions, rants, raves, obsessions… anything. It’s all anonymous, totally legal, and strangely satisfying.

Those ever-industrious spammers have already found the email address (how do they do it?). What I find interesting is that, rather than being annoyed by the spam, the act of reading random (albeit intentional) human-generated posts in between random spam email makes for a completely dada artistic experience (yes, in a good way). Drawing connections between the posts is a pleasing way to engage in creating order out of chaos. It’s silly and mad and meaningful. And what else would you expect from the man who has photographed every cup of coffee he’s drunk for the past year?

Lloyd lit the fire under my bottom to get this blog project going. Lloyd inspires me. That’s his job. In 2006, we accomplish that which is hard. For me, this blog is the first step.

Postscript: Apparently, a fellow who refers to himself as “The Famous Brett Watson” has done a statistical analysis of the probability that a million monkeys banging away at a million typewriters could eventually produce the script of Hamlet, and he’s posted it online. Ain’t the internet wonderful?