this international herald tribune article Cheney says 9/11 changed the rules quotes vice president cheney:
“I believe in a strong, robust executive authority and I think that the world we live in demands it,”
now i know politicians from all sides are hypocrites most of the time, they don’t care about the truth and they say what they think people want to hear … but to hear from a republican that the current global threat situation demands a rethinking of the way the country is run is quite something.
after all we are talking about the party here that usually says there should be a small government and that there should be a literal, frames interpretation of the constitution. the constitution is pretty clear on a separation of power and the framers intent on the role of the president is much clearer than that on the right to own guns. after all the frames had just gotten rid of a king and they wanted to make sure that there wouldn’t be a new one. so for cheney to say 9/11 changed the rules and has to lead to a more power of the executive means that we throw out the framers intent.
but let’s ask another question here. 9/11 has certainly been a critical moment in US history — although i would say that it wasn’t a paradigm shift because the shift to a multidimensional global threat model has been going since the end of the cold war — but so was the beginning of the cold war. did the cold war result in an increase in executive power? actually not, it lead to a reduction.
what is ultimately the most ridiculous part of this whole current debate is that all of this is not necessary under the current law. the president could have used current ways and means, but just in order to show his power probably didn’t choose to do so.
