Search

The distinctly uncompassionate partner to compassionate conservative George W. Bush in 2001 will be House majority whip Tom DeLay, the Texas firebrand who is arguably the most powerful man in Congress. A gleeful hard-right partisan, nicknamed "the Hammer" for his willingness to use brute political power and for his often heavy-handed manner, DeLay is the man Democrats love to hate. Amid the bipartisan song of love currently wafting through the nation's capital, DeLay has consistently emitted off-key notes of combative rancor. DeLay is fiercely ideological and closely tied to the Republican right, including Christian conservatives, flat-taxers, the National Rifle Association, free-enterprise libertarians and rural property-rights activists out West.

The article presents the author's thoughts regarding the problems facing the U.S. as of the beginning of 2010. The problems with the decade of 2000-2009 are discussed, mentioning the author's thoughts that the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush contributed to the nation's problems. The problems that have persisted despite the change in administration are also discussed, giving the opinion that there should be a redistribution of power in the U.S.

The author argues that the United States is using its status as the world's only superpower to try to control events through an unwinnable war on terror. The apocalyptic imagination has spawned a new kind of violence at the beginning of the twenty-first century. We can, in fact, speak of a worldwide epidemic of violence aimed at massive destruction in the service of various visions of purification and renewal. In particular, we are experiencing what could be called an apocalyptic face-off between Islamist forces, overtly visionary in their willingness to kill and die for their religion, and American forces claiming to be restrained and reasonable but no less visionary in their projection of a cleansing warmaking and military power. The war on Iraq--a country with longstanding aspirations toward weapons of mass destruction but with no evident stockpiles of them and no apparent connection to the assaults of September 11--was a manifestation of that American visionary projection. More than mere domination, the American superpower now seeks to control history. That entitlement stems partly from historic claims to special democratic virtue, but has much to do with an embrace of technological power translated into military terms. That is, a superpower--the world's only superpower--is entitled to dominate and control precisely because it is a superpower. The murderous events of 9/11 hardened that sense of entitlement as nothing else could have.

The article discusses a picture of United States Marine James Blake Miller after a battle in Falluja, Iraq. Iconic images inspire love and hate, and so it is with the photograph of James Blake Miller, the 20-year-old Marine from Appalachia who has been christened "the face of Falluja" by prowar pundits and "The Marlboro Man" by pretty much everyone else. For a country that just elected a want-to-be Marlboro Man as its President, Miller is an icon, and as if to prove it he has ignited his very own controversy. Yes, that is right: Letter-writers from across the nation are united in their outrage--not that the steely-eyed smoking soldier makes mass killing look cool but that the laudable act of mass killing makes the grave crime of smoking look cool. Impunity--the perception of being outside the law--has long been the hallmark of the President George W. Bush regime. At home, impunity has been made official policy with Bush's nomination of Alberto Gonzales--the man who personally advised the President in his infamous "torture memo" that the Geneva Conventions are "obsolete"--as Attorney General. In the name of "electability," Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's campaign gave Bush five months on the campaign trail without ever facing serious questions about violations of international law.

Focuses on the re-election of United States President George W. Bush. Report that Bush has more power than he did in his first term because of Republican Party wins in the U.S. Congress; Plans of Bush to partially privatize Social Security; Possibility that Bush will pursue tax reform and tort reform; Report that Bush may have the opportunity to replace up to four justices in the Supreme Court, making it hostile to environmental laws and gay rights; Lack of a Democratic political leadership.

The article looks at two U.S. Supreme Court decisions during the President George W. Bush Administration. The Supreme Court of the United States has had two historic encounters with President George W. Bush. The first was its decision to stop the recount of the presidential vote in Florida in December 2000 and, in effect, to put Bush in the White House. The second was the series of decisions rendered in June 2004 in the cases regarding the detainees in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and the two American citizens being held as "enemy combatants." Some 673 law professors from 173 law schools signed a statement asserting that "by stopping the vote count in Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court used its power to act as political partisans, not as judges of a court of law." If the policies of the Bush Administration have exhibited any one constant theme, it has been contempt, in domestic as well as foreign affairs, for law. In the period of the Iraq war, other checks and balances provided in the constitutional system had failed: Congress surrendered its war power to the President, and the press, taken as a whole, had become a cheering section for the war. In 2004, the Court delivered a firm rebuke to the Administration's imperial conception of the law. It required detainees to have some chance to show their innocence in a judicial forum. But more important than the substance of the decisions and the opinions was the fact of a clear, strong, effective rebuff on the otherwise unconstrained growth of presidential power.

This article comments on a claim by the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush that the success of the U.S. war in Iraq proves its opponents were wrong. Numerous critics of the war, intimidated by these allegations and the demonstration of overwhelming American military power, are falling silent.

Discusses the influence of the U.S. on world politics as of March 21, 2005. Comments on the definition of a "superpower" in international relations; View that the power of the U.S. is failing due to damaging foreign policies; Impact of President George W. Bush's diplomatic travel in Europe on U.S. power; Potential for declining U.S. power to inspire opposition from an alliance of foreign powers.