'08 Candidates Must Sign the American Freedom Pledge

Is it still America if the president ignores or deliberately eviscerates the Constitution?

And if the president himself is doing this, who will protect the Constitution?

This is the oath of office: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

On what history will confirm was a very dark day for the nation, George W. Bush took that oath. Within a year, he had launched a methodical effort to undermine the very document he swore he would protect.

He has suspended habeas corpus, tapped the phones and opened the e-mails of Americans without warrants, defied congressional subpoenas, and declared through "signing statements" that the administration can pick and choose which parts of the bills passed by Congress to execute. No president in history has come close to these actions.

We have to get it that this is not a set of departures from business as usual in a working democracy. This is becoming a different game with a different set of rules.

Is it theoretical if America disembowels its own Constitution? Or do those sets of checks and balances protect you and your family -- on the most personal, visceral level? With every violation of the Constitution that the president engineers -- in the face of a craven, compliant Congress -- you and your family face greater risks. The president says he can imprison ANY AMERICAN CITIZEN HE WANTS TO IMPRISON on his say-so alone. Today it is a bona fide `terrorist' -- but let's notice that now environmental activists who targeted property, not people, are being called "terrorists."

History shows that the definition of "terrorist" -- enemies of the state, traitors, and "saboteurs," which has just made its predictable appearance in the arsenal of the White House's more extremist allies -- metastasizes when there is a power grab intended to close down a society or crack down on a democracy movement; eventually such language and the laws that go with it target critics, dissidents, opposition leaders. Now he can seize the assets of those who object to his prosecution of the war in Iraq and has new powers to declare a state of emergency.

History demonstrates unequivocally that these are the things that would-be despots always do when they want to shift the system away from democracy and toward a repressive regime. When a commentator says "tyrant" or "despot" in a democracy, he or she is being rhetorical; we have to get it that these kinds of strategies are literally classical steps in the closing down of democracies and that we have to start to understand such language technically and not rhetorically.

Yes, even here. Yes, even now. As we watch. As we try to figure out what to do.

At this critical time in our nation's history, when the very foundation of our democracy is under attack, we must be certain that the next president will be constrained by the checks and balances of a living Constitution. It is hard to overstate the danger to us if he or she is not. And citizens have to confront what they must do when an acting president assaults the very rule of law he has sworn to defend.

Toward this end, the American Freedom Campaign, a new grassroots and grasstops democracy movement, has asked each of the presidential candidates to sign the American Freedom Pledge. It reads:

"We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people's phones and emails without a court order, and above all we do not give any President unchecked power.

"I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from assault by any President."

Any candidate unwilling to sign this pledge during the campaign clearly does not deserve -- or cannot be trusted -- to be our next president. A sitting president who will not adhere to this commitment should be confronted.

A couple of days ago, while blogging on Daily Kos, Elizabeth Edwards, in response to a question about whether her husband would end the abuses of executive power undertake by the Bush administration, provided the following response:

"None of the nonsense of avoiding constitutional and legal requirements for executive branch activities by issuing executive orders.

None of these signing statements intended to undermine legislative intent.

None of the refusal to enforce laws that have been passed.

Under John, the constitution returns."

Thank you, Mrs. Edwards, for those heartening words -- but words are easy in a presidential campaign, and leadership is harder. Congress is sitting it out or rolling over when this fight is brought to its doorstep -- leaders are confiding off the record that without a grassroots movement to press them into action, they can't resist these encroachments because they are afraid of being tarred as "soft on terror."

Every period of repression that led to a closed society has used the threat of an external enemy to strip citizens of liberties, and history will judge such leaders harshly. Meanwhile, let me invite Mrs. Edwards to urge her husband to make good on her faith in him -- let me invite him to do it right here on the front page of the Huffington Post.

Mr. Edwards, will you prove your leadership and your fitness to guide this nation by being the first of the candidates to sign the American Freedom Pledge? If so, will you then publicly challenge the other candidates to do so?

If you are the first presidential candidate to take the pledge here on this page, the 10,000 Americans who signed the pledge in its first 10 days -- and all other Americans who honor the Constitution - will applaud you. You will deserve our gratitude.

If not, why not?

I look forward to your response. Within a week. Here. Or your wife's -- on your behalf.

As for the rest of the Huffington Post's readers -- we need your help in leading this charge. "They" -- the political classes, the pundits, Congress -- are not going to redeem the rule of law without you. You have to save your own country now.

The American Freedom Campaign has set up an action page so that you can send a quick e-mail to the presidential candidates, urging them to sign the pledge.

The White House needs to hear that it can't get away with violating our system. That those who commit crimes against the Constitutional must be held accountable by the American people.

Congress needs to hear our contempt for their inaction and our demand that they act boldly in a time of crisis.

We need to hear each other and remember that the first American revolution was begun by a handful of people who saw tyranny, called it by its proper name and took action.

Comments

[Give Peace A Chance]

To get elected one has to pander and lie to just about every ideologue group. So why should we be surprised when a liar ends up getting elected?

In 2004, Americans re-elected the guy, so the ones truly worthy of blame are the voters. Kucinich is probably the only current candidate willing to do what Americans want and he isn't a front runner. Stupid Americans will elect another loser.

[darker]

Having to sign a freedom pledge is THE OPPOSITE OF AMERICAN FREEDOM.

Why not just declare yourself a Nazi fascist and scream, "Heil Hitler!!", while goosing each other in perfect lock-step?

It's time for AMERICAN REVOLUTION #2 to get rid of these conformist hypocrites.

[Qbear]

pinkie-swear you won't be another Cheney...yeah that's gonna keep the free world free.

[ImpeachmentNOW]

For Conniving Calculating Clinton, who will say ANYTHING to get elected, her endorsement of this pledge will be meaningless. After all, SHE VOTED FOR THE "PATRIOT ACT"!

.

[Kozan]

People - please take the time to read Naomi Wolf's new book, "The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot", available within the next week. Our country is in a crisis, and it's time that We the People came together and let the Bush administration and Congress know that political "business as usual" is no longer good enough, and is in fact running our nation into the ground.

If we really want to effect change in this country we need to realize that the American People can, and must come together as the only real and viable third political party. An American People's Party to take back the country from the current corporate-military state that dictates the actions of our current administration, senators and representatives.

It's pretty simple - either the American people begin taking responsibility for our government, or we continue down the blind path of corporate consumer fascism. It's time to wake up and realize the power that resides in We the People.

[Doofus]

May I suggest a simpler alternative for future
Presidents, for current candidates, so as
to improve the government of the People:

Please sign the following pledge -

Whenever my presidenti­al-popular­ity-poll numbers
drop below 33% and remain so for more than 3 months,
I will resign, out of respect to our great democracy & the
People's wishes. The same will apply to my vice president
& if necessary he will resign before I do.

Respectfully, __________­__________

[rehajm]

Naomi, what a cute but unbelievably ignorant and counterproductive idea. Have someone you trust explain the meaning 'campaign promise' to you. Perhaps you should also have candidates cross their heart and hope to die?

[EdwardEdwards]

I'm with you Naomi. Just submitted your story to John's blog, awaiting member approval.

[Quantumystic]

Edwards cannot be the "First" to sign on to this... because RON PAUL has LED on this issue of Constitution First ALL ALONG.

The author of this article states... "Any candidate unwilling to sign this pledge during the campaign clearly does not deserve -- or cannot be trusted -- to be our next president."

This being True, then there is NO other choice for the next Presidnt. It MUST be Ron Paul.

Mere words indeed are easy for a candidate seeking power to utter. Which is why words cannot be trusted. WHO has the Record of standing unflinchingly w/ the Constitution? WHO is the Person of Actions that prove the Truth of their words?

RON PAUL.

The only person even remotely close is Kucinich.

[oogabooga]

Our Constitution deliberately empowers individuals to run their own lives, without government interference. Unfortunately, the extreme left and radical right in our country want to overregulate personal behavior, choices and decisions. The left wants to ban stuff such as "hate speech" or "offensive speech". Under that scenario, if I remarked in front of a bipolar person that "it is a beautiful day today," that person could have me arrested for hurting their feelings because they were having a bad day. Or if I say that Bush is an asshole, the touchy rightwing nutjob could report me for being a traitor. If we surrender our individual freedom to the government, under any pretext, we cease to exist as a free nation. I believe Obama or Paul are the only candidates who truly respect and treasure personal freedom.

[goofy grin girl]

Do we know if any candidate has signed this pledge yet?

[BuckBurris]

Hell, Bush would sign that thing in a minute, making a few nice remarks about it as he did.. Then he's laugh his scrawny ass off.
It ain't what you say but what you do.
But Shorty George ain't no friend of mine.
And Shorty George ain't no friend of thine either,
less'n you're one of his base supporters.
And he still has a base base, believe me! They love him in Israel. Certain crony corporations like him a lot. And I met five rednecks the other day who thought him a fine fellow. (Well, there are only three of them around now. Two were accidentally shot while ... but the stories grow a bit confused here.)

[kujo76]

Why would any president who didn't think twice about ignoring the oath of office think twice about ignoring this pledge? Any such pledge will be signed by one of two types of candidates: sincere ones or lying ones.

Another approach for concerned voters would be to research the candidates' platforms, past speeches, and proposed legislation. After doing so, those that feel this is one of the most important issues facing the country can vote for the candidate that has a public record that states a clear opposition to presidential overreach. There are candidates out there that have such a record. Heck, some of them even voted against the needless, unconstitutional, and undeclared Iraq War.

[Mishagothe]

Or people could just stop voting for liars and idiots. People such as GW get elected because they convince some segment of the population (usually the entitled class) that it is in their best interest for that person to be elected. If character mattered, how could GW, the draft-dodging rat weasel of all time, have gotten all those Mom and Apple pie Americans to vote for him? Then they were disappointed when he didn't push their conservative agenda...LOL, you elect a weasel, don't be shocked when he goes down the hole. Pledges are pointless...find a DECENT person and elect him or her. I don't have to agree with a persons every view point, but I would like to believe I know what they stand for.

[Sundialsvc4]

We already have such a pledge: it is called the Oath Of Office, and if the laws of this land are not enforced by those who are entrusted to do so, it (like any pledge) is worthless.

The Impeachment Clause of the Constitution places the Congress into a role that it refuses to uphold: the role of grand-jury and inquisitor, with "any civil officer" of the government being under its jurisdiction.

A Grand Jury is supposed to timely determine if there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, and if so, to timely return an indictment. Obviously, if they didn't do that, they would themselves be "aiding and abetting" the criminals.

The criminal threat that we now face is most terrible because it is so broad: possibly a majority of the Congress has been corrupted, ditto key members of the Judiciary and (of course) the Executive. The three branches are therefore cross-ruffing the game to protect one another, and the long-term consequences to the Republic .. well, why should they care? The corporations they represent are, after all, "multi-national."

It will take an enormous effort to turn this tide, most-especially because the "old media" machine is still alive and well, still pumping out pervasive lies.

When the ordinary people of this country accept no excuses from anyone, AND impose no excuses upon themselves ... when there is no one else left blame-ING (whether or not there is "someone left to blame") .. THEN the people of this country might once-again prove themselves worthy of the sacrifices made by their ancestors.