Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Balkinization

Legal Commentary

: Balkinization

Life in a constitutional dictatorship (continued)

By Jack M. Balkin

Dan Froomkin's invaluable roundup of presidentially-related news stories in the Washington Post includes the following, taken from a posting by Matt Corley written for ThinkProgress.org:

"On his radio show this morning, Bill Bennett told the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol -- who had a personal meeting with President Bush yesterday -- that a 'conclusion' he drew was that the hearing was 'less an argument for getting out of Iraq than going into Iran.' After suggesting that Iran may 'have to pay some price at some point on their own soil,' Kristol said that President Bush authorizing an attack of some kind before he leaves office is not 'out of the question.'

Bennett: "Do you think there's any chance that, and we won't ask you to reveal anything confidential, do you think there's any chance that we might take some action against some aspect of the Ira -- against Iran, let's put it that way, before the resident leaves office?"

Kristol: "We didn't really talk about that, in all honesty, directly. I don't think it's out of the question. I think people are overdoing how much of a lame duck the president is." [emphasis added]

Let me translate the last sentence: "People must come to terms with the fact that we have an elective dictatorship in the United States, at least in some respects, and that President Bush, even if he currently has the support of only 28% of the American public, can do whatever he fucking wants to do, becasue he's the great decider and there is absolutely nothing the American people can do about it as a practical matter. For starters, he can veto any legislation barring the use of currently available federal funds to engage in "action" against Iran, and even if the Democrats had the backbone to attempt impeachment, it is unthinkable that enough Republican senators would desert him to make it truly possible--though, of course, some might vote to convict just in order to get President Cheney!"

A second point: Froomkin also notes the return to presenting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a crazed messianist who is willing in effect to destroy Iran in order to bring back the 12th Imam. Putting aside his religious beliefs, which may or may not be crazier than those actually, even if not publicly, held by President Bush and at least some of the 60% of the Republican Party that continues to support him (as against 7% of Democrats and 17% of Independents), one should recognize, as perhaps the Administration does not, that the egregious President of Iran, unlike the egregious President of the United States, is not a dictator with regard to the deployment of Iranian military force. As I have pointed out in an earlier posting. the President of Iran, both as a constitutional and, it appears, practical matter, is firmly under the control of the Supreme Islamic Council, which has given no sign of irrational messianism. Our President, on the other hand, is, as a practical matter, unaccountable and, Kristol clearly hopes, uncontrollable.

Full post as published by Balkinization on April 12, 2008 (boomark / email).