Finally, Action! Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Defend Constitution!

It's not every day that there is something concrete you can do to save democracy in one powerful stroke and make sure your kids don't come of age in an American in which we are no longer protected by the rule of law. I have been writing about the terrifying and precipitous assault on our liberties and our very system of checks and balances; I have crossed the country with this message -- today I am in Boston -- and I have heard across the nation that (as usual) the people are ahead of the leaders and the pundits. Americans of all backgrounds are alarmed and outraged and ready to take action against these vicious assaults on the rule of law. But what I hear again and again is: "What can we do?"

Here is what you can do, and it is big, big news. If we do this together in our millions we are safer; and if we fail to act we miss an historic opening and risk far worse to come.

There are two new organizations that are driving a grassroots push to restore the rule of law: the American Freedom Agenda was started by leaders who are conservative: Bruce Fein, who was a Reagan administration official in the Department of Justice, and others. The American Freedom Campaign was started by progressives. Both groups advance comparable 10 point legislative agendas that would stabilize democracy long enough for us to forestall the worst and regroup for more long-term reparation of the Constitution and the rule of law. Both would, if passed, protect Americans from the scary stories of abuse and recrimination I am hearing every single day -- journalists intimidated, prisoners tortured, innocent citizens spied on by the State in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Both would make it illegal for any administration to commit the kinds of crimes against America and its constitution that we have seen under this one: the innocent lawyer Brandon Mayfield's home broken into, the innocent software engineer Maher Arar kept prisoner by U.S. agents in an interrogation cell in a U.S. airport and prevented from calling his lawyer, and journalists reporting on abuses by the government threatened by the state with prosecution that could keep them in jail for a decade. Urgently it would close the horrific legal possibility for the president to call you or me an "enemy combatant" tomorrow -- JUST BECAUSE HE SAYS SO -- and lock us up in solitary confinement for years.

Passing the legislative agenda of either group would make it clear that American citizens -- in spite of a heretofore craven and compliant Congress -- refuse to stand by silently while a group of criminals systematically violates the core structure of the democracy our Founders put in place for us.

The big news is that this idea can now become a law and a law creates a reality.

On Monday, Rep. Ron Paul, the outsider Republican presidential candidate who has long upheld these values and who was an early voice warning of the grave danger to all of us of these abuses, introduced the AFA's legislative package into Congress. (The mainstream press has an irrational habit of disparaging outsider candidates -- as if corrupt money and machine endorsements equal seriousness of purpose -- even though the Founders hoped that the system they established would lead citizens, ideally those unembedded in the establishment, to offer their service to the nation.) It is the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 [PDF], and you should read it in its entirety: just as accounts of the recent abuses send chills down your spine, this beautifully argued document feels historic and has the ring of great power to correct great injustice.

What does it do? According to an alert put out by the American Freedom campaign, it would accomplish the following:

"The American Freedom Agenda Act would bar the use of evidence obtained through torture; require that federal intelligence gathering is conducted in accordance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); create a mechanism for challenging presidential signing statements; repeal the Military Commissions Act, which, among other things, denies habeas corpus to certain detainees; prohibit kidnapping, detentions, and torture abroad; protect journalists who publish information received from the executive branch; and ensure that secret evidence is not used to designate individuals or organizations with a presence in the U.S. as foreign terrorists."

Ron Paul was the first of all the presidential candidates, red or blue, to step up in this way -- and all credit is due to him for getting there first. May the others of both parties race to follow his lead. These days, as we have seen from how reluctant some candidates have been -- even on the Democratic sign -- even to sign a mere pledge to uphold the Constitution, it takes some courage to stand fast against the assaults of this administration -- and their manipulations of the terms "patriotism" and "terror threat" -- and insist with legislation on the Founders' vision and on restoring democracy.

A groundswell of millions of Americans of all parties rising up to insist on passage of the AFA legislation means that we are awake -- we get it -- and that we assert that an alert citizenry, not a whipped-dog Congress or a violently abusive executive, decides what happens in this nation still. I am not a voter on his side of the ballot -- but I will move heaven and earth to support the passage of this lifesaving agenda. (Interestingly when I run into Paul's supporters -- who are deeply alert to the abuses of democracy -- and I demur by saying I am a Democrat, it is they who rightly assure me that these issues transcend party).

There is no way to overstate how crucial this piece of legislation is. We are at a turning point, and without the restoration of the rule of law the "blueprint" for what I have called a "fascist shift" -- the closing down of democracy -- calls for scarier recriminations against citizens, greater tightening of social controls -- the ever-growing, disturbingly political TSA watch list is, alarmingly, due to go from the airlines' administration to that of the TSA itself -- and more corruptions of the electoral process. Blackwater is a truly terrifying wild card. Without the rule of law we will be powerless as each of these assaults on liberty continue to escalate. With it we can fight back.

This is the answer both to those who say "What we can do?" and to those who claim (actually, sometimes whine) "there is nothing we can do." And if we don't act on this now we will get the democracy we deserve -- which is no democracy at all.

Put aside your partisan ideal world -- sometimes issues simply transcend partisanship -- and if ever there is an issue that is above and separate from party politics, it is the restoration of the democratic system we inherited. There are good people and passionate patriots across the political spectrum.

We at the AFC are putting out a call to pass this set of laws. Pick up the phone -- every day. Email your representative -- every day. Let them hear from millions of Americans a day. Let them hear from twenty. Please play hardball -- the times demand it and nice girls and boys have managed to get this Congress to do literally nothing at all to protect liberty.

Congressmen and women say off the record that they can't support liberty, much as they'd like to, because they are scared of "looking soft on terror" and they want to run out the clock -- a naive and self-serving posture in a time of crisis. Make them more scared of you if they don't. Tell them you will bombard their donors with the message that they have sold out liberty. Tell them you will denounce them as traitors to the Constitution in your local and regional letters to the editor and op-eds. Tell them they are unpatriotic to stand by while liberty is disemboweled. Tell them you will stop at nothing to ensure their future defeat unless they support this and make it the law of the land.

Let's do it. There is no excuse now. The restoration of democracy is up to you -- as the Founders intended it should be.

Comments

[Countess]

Ron Paul is a true democrat with the guts to stand up to these basturds and I say Bravo!

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

He is no Democrat.....
He couldnt even dream the kind of money the dems spend.

[rmreddicks]

Beyond my desire to NOT see Rep. Paul as President, I certainly see nothing but positives in the legislation he has submitted and would (and will) encourage my representatives to support it. Clinton will probably vote against (he added gratuitously).

[dadw5boys]

RON PAUL SCARES THE HELL OUT OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANKING CARTEL!

Ron Paul would CLOSE THE FEDERAL RESERVE

[mrcontinental]

The Fed is about done for anyway. Does anyone listen to the mexican central bank?

We are less than 12 months from being as totally irrelevant as the dollar has become. A new banker to the world will arise and it will not be us.

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

And have them investigated, charged and tried for treason amongst other things....
You really dont know Dr. Paul when you mess with his constitution!!!
He can be quite "stern"!!!!
:)

Go Ron Paul

[bobleddy]

A large number of the most famous and involved members of the Founding Fathers were anything but Christian, frankly they had a great deal of disdain for it. What's truly alarming is that the standard bearers of the Constitution we elect and appoint to positions of authority know the facts of history and still continue to pander to zealots, or they truly don't know their history and actually believe we were formed as a Christian government.
By ignoring and betraying the true nature and magnitude of what the Founders conceived and realized, we rob them of their true genius and vision. Even sadder we have robbed ourselves of the true democracy they envisioned. These great men studied the history of nations and the repression of the peoples of the world and realized the one common denominator was the involvement of the church and religion with government. It has been referenced in each of their writings on countless occasions, often with disgust.
America is my country and I truly love it. I am angry because we are not defending what it stands for, we are cowering from the very thing they despised and risked there lives to defeat, intolerance, ignorance and repression. Here are some quotes to illustrate my point, say Amen, when somebody sounds like a christian .

God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world.-- John Adams,
The Treaty of TripoliSigned by John Adams
"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] ... it is declared ... that no pretext arising from religious opinion shall ever product an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.... "The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation." -- Treaty of Tripoli (1797), carried unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams

[rmreddicks]

They didn't care too much for African-Americans or Native Americans. Nor did the foundering farters seem to care much for Women or people without substantial means. Whatever luck they fell into with the "Bill of Rights" has more to do with folks who wouldn't put up with their crap.

[kestudi]

In contrast to the purported 'Word of God', the constitution is not infallible. As such, it can be amended. I'd venture to say that the amendments we've enacted in our nation's history have improved the fathers' document. Ignoring it, however, is not the same as recognizing its shortcomings.

Religious people decry 'relativism' in today's society. How about 'constitutional relativism'? The attitude that the constitution can be selectively ignored because "things are different now"? Things are not as different as the 3-day-attention-span types would like you to think. Power still corrupts.

[jasonball]

I notice that a lot of the responses to this post have to do with presidential candidates.

Ultimately our constitution is cynical. It is extemely skeptical of power and reserves special attention for the executive function of government. Looking towards presidential candidates to restore the rule of law is misguided. No single progressive victory has ever been accomplished without ordinary citizens going to great lengths to coerce and pressure politicians. All presidential candidates would promise to restore rule of law and follow through on this promise if it were established that their political career depended on it. Naomi mentions that presidential candidates are reluctant to sign pledges to uphold the constitution - this is not an ideological standpoint so much as it is calculated cost-benefit analysis of how their popularity might be effected. Until people push this issue to the forefront there will not be action on it. Bloggers get it, political junkies get it, do the people you come across in your daily travels get it? Talk to them in a sincere way. It is because our democracy has been rotting from the bottom up that we are seeing our legal system topple over.

[deleweye]

Passing a law that says the current pack of vermin have to stop ignoring the law and the Constitution? They'd have to include a clause immunizing it from repeal-by-signing-statement.

Tactically it might be easier to mobilize people behind something relatively cohesive and simple, but I don't hold out much hope.

[newshound1]

I do not support Ron Paul. I will however actively work to support this critical piece of legislation. This may be the last chance for the real American value, The Rule of Law, not the rule of individuals.

[DottingEyes]

Vote for Ron Paul!

[letsmakesense]

Yesterday Ron Paul took in over $150,000 in donations for the day from a couple 1000 supporters. At that rate he brings in 13 million for the quarter. Since the donation amount mean is so low virtually all of his supporters(over 100,000 to date and 50,000 more expected this quarter) can continue to give. With a motivated base so large (every 20 dollars is 3 million) and still growing money will not be a problem. Small price for freedom

[milo9]

I also do not support Ron Paul for president but I salute him for this act of patriotism and will make common cause with him to restore the Constitution. Without the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, all is lost. So I will be be following Naomi Wolf's advice and pressuring my "representatives" with an intensity they shan't soon forget.

[PC]

Damn straight. These issues transcend political ideologies. I have been a Paul supporter even before he declared. I believe in small government, and while we can debate each other on the merits of domestic spending, my support for Paul shouldn't really threaten progressives. Us Ron Paul Libertarians want to put much of the power back in the hands of the states, the only way you can have a truly libertarian government is if you control every federal position, every state position, and every local position and that by itself is impossible. We understand states like California will enact different spending programs than say Montana and we don't mind that. Diversity of programs and political ideologies would be good for America, these all or nothing solutions made by corrupt federal beuracrats don't help anyone. While I think government intervention hinders progress, I don't think that states that I don't live in enacting progressive policies is a threat to me. Let red states be red states, let blue states be blue states, and break the chains of this Federal Democracy(tyranny of the majority) and return to the limited republic we are supposed to have.

I remember when warrantless wiretapping first came out standing shoulder to shoulder with the progressive commenters on this site, taking out the neocons. I used to spend much more time on this site, but I had to fight the Neocons on their sites and we are changing minds. Truth and reality are pretty easy sells. We all want what is best for the people, minus the party establishments, we just sometimes differ on the means.

To use a dead horse of a cliche, civil liberties is not about left and right, it's about right and wrong.

[Entropic1]

Two words..., Chris Dodd. Enough said.

[DottingEyes]

Vote for Ron Paul!

[libertarian4321]

We need to defend our freedoms regardless of political party.

Whether you are Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Independent, support Ron Paul on this legislation!

[Misanthrope2]

I support the legislation. I do not support Ron Paul. You Republican Paulistas should stop mixing up the two.

[Pdubya]

blue dog dem atheist here, thank you very much

[DeadCivilian]

I'm a lifelong, still registered Democrat, and I'm voting for Ron Paul - and here's why: He addresses the issues that the current crop of Dems will not.

Give me ONE Democratic candidate (besides Kucinich, the '00's version of Governor Moonbeam), who is saying that the administration lied us into war. Give me ONE Democratic candidate who focuses on the fascist and unconstitutional provisions in the Patriot Act. Give me ONE Democratic candidate who questions the reality of the Al-Qaeda myth.

Everyone swallowed Rummy's big lie. And no, I don't believe in the boogey man, either.

Go here if you think you haven't been being brainwashed:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=efeh8vzpHE4

[DemandTruth]

John Edwards. He admits he was wrong, he has called the phony "war on terrorism" a bumper sticker slogan. And of course he was attacked for it. I believe in John Edwards. Ron Paul cannot be elected president, even though I will support him in this legislation. He doesn't believe in taxes at all. Which means he doesn't buy into the "common good". I don't want my bridges to crumble, I don't want my beautiful beaches to go to the highest bidder. I don't want the fire department to let my house burn down because I'm late with my "subscription fee". I don't want to live in a "winner take all, dog-eat-dog" society. Sorry, but that's not MY America either.

On another topic: something we should also be addressing is the widespread abuse of power we're seeing by police and other "officials" these days. There should be swift recourse and stark penalties for ANY police officer who harasses an innocent citizen. That includes unwarranted tasering. Also, there should be swift recourse for rape victims who are denied help by hospitals because they "seem intoxicated".

"Power" and the "Law" are out of control, and they are harassing innocent citizens left and right these days, for no apparent reason. It's happened to me. I could throw a stone in this town & easily hit another person it's happened to as well.

[DeadCivilian]

You could not be more accurate with your power and law observations. We are precariously close to a police state, if we're not there already. All they have to do is say they have "reason to believe" or that you are "acting in a suspicious manner" and you are legally under arrest. All these bs lies to "protect" us. It is simply about controlling the population and supressing dissent, period. Every police department in the country is getting a SWAT team and terrorist training even though Al Qaeda does not exist:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=efeh8vzpHE4

[Misanthrope2]

You can't vote for Ron Paul if you are a Democrat. He is running in the Republican primaries.

[Atheo]

Hurry and register Republican! Your Paul vote may count! He's leading in many polls and has no real competition over there. Time is short as they are moving the primaries forward and many states are not allowing crossover voting for the first time.

[Jsmith888]

Thank you Naomi for all your work. I saw you on the Colbert Report and googled you. I have been a progressive Dem for 20 years, and am attorney for 21. I am also a Philosophy major so I'm really screwed up. But,I like to look at the "reals" not some manufactured consensus reality. I won't blindly vote for someone with a "D" after their name. I decided that while I liked the idea of benevolent big federal government, I have come to the realization that I prefer a constitutional republic based on "rule of law." I also have realize how easily a progressive benevolent big federal government can turn on a dime to a totalitarian big brother federal government in one election cycle and see that we need to bring our government to constitutional proscribed function, ergo, my support for Ron Paul. I disagree with some of his position, but I am willing to let our local state governments constitutionally decide those issues. Also if my local state government goes bad, I can always vote with my feet and escape to California. How in the world to do you escape a totalitarian big brother federal USA? Leave the country? Let's hope people can see things from this point of view before resorting to the "D" or "R" word to determine the next president. I prefer freedom, myself. I hope the rest of the country does too.

[Misanthrope2]

We have similar backgrounds. But I do not think we would be freer or that we would have more liberty under a Ron Paul administration. I think he would allow corporations to cut the forests and mine and drill the mountains. I think he would keep women pregnant and under the control of men. I think he would allow state governments to limit our liberty in many ways.

And as a lawyer, you should know that his interpretation of the Constitution is 1880s.

I think Ron Paul would just accelerate corporate fascism.

[JohnPaulJones]

Right, because none of the leading Dems are beholden to the Big Money.

Again, another person who confuses the free market with corporatism. Ron Paul has spoken out against corporatism.

[rmreddicks]

Thanks. People need to get over this Ron Paul stuff. And this libertarian foolishness. Right wing anarchism is corporativism. You're already there. Our government is a referee amongst the rich. Nothing more.

[Dhaynes89]

Ron Paul would take away the power of the politicians to curry favor towards corporations by promising special legislation, regulation that discourages competition, or subsidies.

I am personally not sold on his position on the environment, but his commitment to civil liberties and his reverence for the constitution is very attractive to me. I do not see any other Democratic candidate running on such a platform.

[LeroyHamill]

"I think Ron Paul would just accelerate corporate fascism."

If that were true, he'd have tens of millions in campaign money flooding in from Wall Street. And he'd be the favorite candidate of Fox News. Instead, he has only grassroots money and YouTube.

There's a big difference between free markets and corporatism. Find me a Democratic candidate who speaks out against the military-industrial complex, the PATRIOT act, etc. like Ron Paul does. Those who profit from the system Naomi Wolf writes about see Ron Paul as a threat to their gigantic (taxpayer-funded) profits.

[Pdubya]

wow, its nice to hear some women still think men have that much power. (sarcasm)

with tort and lobby reform, as he intends, corporate fascism couldn't exist.

AS IT IS ALREADY DOING NOW.

[TruthSlayer]

The Rule of Law coming from a Lawyer is an Oxymoron. In my opinion, Lawyers have done more to ruin this country then any other despicable and unethical group I know of.

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

Like every occupation there are good and bad....I disagree with your statement....Without lawyers there would be no justice.
The ACLU and others around the world have been fighting for your rights since the inception of our Country.

[godlessclif]

We have all wanted to Google Naomi Wolf one time or another

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/12/4502/
American Tears by Naomi Wolf

[TheQuestion]

Isn't this a great country where we can discuss this right out in the open - almost without fear that we will be carted away and punished for our opinions.

[rmreddicks]

Why would they bother?

[Pdubya]

largely because the internet is free of tax and regulation. ANOTHER issue Ron Paul supports.

Doesn't anyone realize that the freedom we so like to share on the internet is one of the LAST forms of freedom that the government hasn't entangled themselves within?

REVOLT against the machine.

[laocoon]

the problem I have with right wing libertarianism is that real issues usually involve conditions where rights and freedoms overlap. One persons freedom interferes with another persons freedom or interests. Yet the discussions tend to talk as if freedoms and rights are absolute. the libertarian right seems to place business rights and freedoms above personal rights and freedoms or fails to distinguish. Business freedoms involve and affect the public. Personal freedoms often have minimal affect on the public. When freedoms collide I think the right libertarians tend to favor business freedoms over personal freedoms or rights. Business rights are enforced by government and the right libertarians tend to overlook this government involvement because they call it private property and define it as the opposite of government. They also tend to believe there should be no limit to the amount of government interference in the recognition and enforcement of private property rights. Property rights = government. There is no way to have any property rights without government whether de facto or de jure.

[milo9]

The operative word is "almost". Here in 2007 Southern California you hardly ever see a political bumper sticker one way or another. I think everybody is afraid.

[RProcksme]

Whenever I hear 'he cant win' or 'he's a liberitarian' it makes me cringe.

Like those posts before mine, I choose to fight. There is no way Ill look at my daughter 10 years from now and not be proud I took it to the streets. Its time to get our country focused on AMERICA.. before we lose it.

Having family dating to the mayflower, no kidding, I was taught what patriotism is. My father was career Army. Uncles went to 'Nam. Grandfathers faught in WWII and Korea.

At the point this country is in, anyone not supporting Ron Paul is beyond colorful explanation by me. Am I a Republican? No. Im an American. He wants to help this country more than any other politician since... the founders? He is wise. He wants economic liberty so the power remains with the people.

The root of the message is this. When you allow a central bank, corruption is soon to follow. Tie the outrageous profits of war with a corrupt money system that reaps those profits and I promise you that you will see more war.

Thats about as common sense as I can make it.

Get it?

[rmreddicks]

How does "economic liberty" devolve to the people? Them what's got, keeps. If push comes to shove they will kill you to keep it.

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

No they wont...I have it riddled throughout my family....In the top .5%...They would take what they could and go overseas...
Just like the neos plan to after their done with America...
Dubai will be the next banking center.
They had to blow up all the records for transfer first. Or should I say "non" transfer.

[Pdubya]

Hell, China's got a better education system in its rural lands and its private and charity.

We had that. And cheap medicine and house calls. Without insurance and the FEd. It was between dr and patient.

hmmm, add two middlemen and expect the cost to go down....hmmmm....add in a central bank and dont expect inflation....hmmmm....


hmmmmmm, where did my money go?

[antboy]

Well said! On this issue, there is no room for partisan pettiness, and while it is not going to pass the first time, forcing the debate in this direction gives us a chance to reverse the trend on civil liberties. Kudos to Dr. Paul and to Ms. Wolf for helping publicize this legislation.

[Galvestonians for Dr. Ron Paul]

I truly believe after the primaries are over, Dennis Kucinich will gravitate towards Dr. Paul if he gets on the ticket. Dr. Paul has brought Mr. Kucinich up, several times over the years and they refer to themselves as
"good friends in the constitution."
I truly hope this is their plan...Ron will not get much of the republican vote...(neos, christian right)
He needs to go after liberal Democrats and Independents...
If Ron approved of more money to government, he would "BE" Dennis Kucinich!! That is their only basic separation...
Man, could we use these two now.

Wait till they see what he will do to New Hampshire!