The musings of a juggling mother

Rants & raves about life as a woman today, juggling work, home, kids, family, life the universe & everything.

© Mrs Aginoth. The right of Mrs Aginoth to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents act 1988

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Truth, Justice and the American way

I'm confused (OK, I know it doesn't take much, especially when talking about our USA cousins, but .....)

Can anyone explain to me how a Democracy, a world leader of freedom and personal responsibility (certainly in their own eyes), a country based on the fact that all men are equal in the eyes of the state, where the leaders are the loudest denouncers of dictatorship or tyranny in any form, can anyone explain to me how the president of THIS country has the ability to completely ignore the rule of law and due process and can apparently just turn round to the entire judicial system and stick to fingers up at them?

HOW does the president have the power to commute Libby's sentance? It was arrived at following all the corrrect procedures, using all the correct channels and people and systems, yet after the fact, Bush can change it? What?!

One has to ask, does he have the power to do the opposite? When someone had been found innocent in court, could the president decide that actually they were guilty/deserved a prison sentance anyway? Surely it is the same power?

Surely that is something only dictators do?

Isn't that what we condemn China for doing? And others?

Labels: ,

6 Comments:

  • At Wednesday, July 04, 2007 1:06:00 am, Anonymous ~ Stacy ~ said…

    While I certainly can't explain it, I do believe that this type of tyranny (injustice) exists everywhere. It's just that some countries are more subtle about it.

    Politics make me want to hurl.

     
  • At Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:10:00 pm, Blogger DJ said…

    "When someone had been found innocent in court, could the president decide that actually they were guilty/deserved a prison sentance anyway?"

    Yeah, Bush calls them an "enemy combatant."

     
  • At Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:26:00 pm, Blogger Juggling Mother said…

    ah, as i said on Stephen's blog, the thing about Gitmo (and I am not justifying it in any way!) is that they are being denied due process. There is something infinitely more worrying about having a verdict overturned on the whim of one man.

     
  • At Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:56:00 pm, Blogger craziequeen said…

    I'm struggling to see why this is so bad - unless it's just because of who it is...The Old Boys Club.

    How can a power conferred by a country's constitution be tyrannical? Article II, Section 2 of the American Constitution gives the President (ie Bush) the power of Pardon.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/02/washington/w03clemencyproclamation.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    So - change the Constitution......

    cq

     
  • At Wednesday, July 04, 2007 9:09:00 pm, Blogger Juggling Mother said…

    "How can a power conferred by a country's constitution be tyrannical"

    Um, by being there for the good of the people in power and not for the good of the people of the country. Plenty of countries have constitutions that are tyrannical - or do you really believe that if the Government has said it's OK, it IS OK?

    Wikipedia (the bloggers friend) tells us "A tyrant is a single ruler holding vast, if not absolute power through a state or in an organization. The term carries connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his/her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which s/he governs or controls"

    "Tyrants have existed throughout history and some tyrants of note during the 20th Century were Adolf Hitler of Germany, Joseph Stalin of the former USSR and Mao Zedong of China. They have all controlled states with terror and also the use of the 'Cult of Personality'"
    (my bold)

    Just because a constitution allows tyranny does not make it a good thing. Even if the president has the power to over-rule due legal process, is it right for him to do so? I agree that the constitution should be changed, but the fact that he was willing to use the power is terrifying. he already denies enough people the right to enter the legal system at all. if he is now going to start overturning verdicts for his personal friends, and one assumes for his he would do the same for his personal enemies, what kind of State is the United States of America? Does Bush really want to be ranked with Hitler, Stalin and Mao? because he is certainly using many of the same processes as they did!

     
  • At Saturday, July 07, 2007 8:08:00 pm, Anonymous mwfzoro said…

    The President (according to Article 2, Section 2, Paragraph 1 only has the power of pardon (wipe out a sentence entirely) or of reprieve (the delay of the implemetation of a sentence. Commutation(reduction of sentence) is nowhere mentioned. To be legal Bush has to wipe out Libby's two year probation and probably the $250,000 fine as well! 'Politically Correct Parsing' is not allowed under article 2. Can someone check to see if there have been Supreme Court Rulings where commutation has been allowed?

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home