Defining moments

  
Column by David Reynolds
Submit guest columns: [email protected]

Let’s cut right to the chase. Last month tens of millions of Americans witnessed a president break his oath of office. Ten hours later millions of others saw and heard a vice-president do the same on NBC’s Today show. The only difference being that the vice president, as is his custom, took more words to say the same thing.

And yet, pundits – from the crazy right to the looney left – missed these two defining moments of this administration. (Historians please note.) Maybe the press herd was too busy searching for the lead sheep. No one was willing to step up and take a swing for democracy.

When the good guys don’t speak up, all of us are in danger. We are in danger because democracy gradually becomes an endangered specie. Forget about our policy differences over reforming health care, protecting the environment, keeping America safe and leveling the burden of taxation. These differences should be cherished in a democracy! They spring from two different political philosophies.

So let’s forget that which divides us. Let us focus on the one concept that surely unites all Americas. It is the rule of law. When a president zings a frontal attack down from his high dais to nine unarmed men and women dressed in black robes who were invited to sit quietly just a few feet away, we have a problem. The problem is more than another case of bad manners in river city. It is the breaking of an oath made 372 days earlier. As every school child should know, that oath reads: “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.”

Note the word “faithfully.” Please explain how blasting a law relates to the faithful execution of that same law. You may agree with the pres and his veep that the court’s 5-4 ruling allowing corporations and unions to tap into their treasuries without limitation to fund candidates in federal elections will “open the floodgates for special interests” and therefore should not be allowed. And that Congress should “pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.” That’s OK. But as a columnist I happen to be in favor of free speech.

But that’s not the point here. The point is that President Obama and Vice President Biden violated the spirit of the Constitution. Sure, previous presidents have disagreed with the court’s findings. FDR even tried to “pack the court.” And historians can count on other significant objections. But never so blazingly as to seated justices surrounded by a standing lynch mob of cheering congressmen. That is taking intimidation to a new level.

What’s their excuse? There is none. Our president is a graduate of Harvard Law. He was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago for ten years! He clearly knows better. That is why constitutional law professor Randy E. Barnett at the Georgetown Law Center is convinced that the president’s Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, never saw a State of the Union draft and would never have signed off. In this administration those who work more than a building away from the Oval Office are mere window dressing. (Cabinet members please note.)

As for Mr. Biden. Joey, you, too, know better. Kids from Scranton have made plenty of mistakes in their lifetimes. But I try to restrict my lawlessness to speeding and overtime parking.

When President Eisenhower was charged with executing a court ruling that he personally did not approve what did he do? He sent in federal troops — to enforce racial integration at Central High School in Little Rock, Ark. But Ike was an army general. He was used to carrying out orders.

Let’s get closer to home. Remember when the Supreme Court said that the Virginia Military Institute must accept women within its ranks? Before the decision Superintendent Bunting did everything within his power and influence to prevent admitting women. He said it would unravel the fabric of VMI. After the court’s decision Gen. Bunting did everything he could to admit women in the most successful and effective manner. Neither the superintendent nor the governor called upon the General Assembly to enact a law that would circumvent the court’s ruling. Si, too, is of the old school. An order is an order. A law is a law.

Is it too much to ask for a United States president or a vice president to have the same standards as a superintendent of the Virginia Military Institute?

Remember Congressman Wilson of South Carolina who called out “You lie!” to the president in the same House chamber? Mr. Wilson apologized to Mr. Obama. That was the proper thing to do. Now, the situation is reversed – a presidential apology in order. And this one need not be on foreign soil. It can be in a classroom. The good professor could then explain the separation of powers found in the Constitution.