THIS MODERN WORLD

John “Crusher” Yoo has written a new book called The Powers of War and Peace. And according to a review in the Nation, it has some big news: everything you know about American history is wrong!

You may remember from 10th grade the argument in 1787 between the federalists and anti-federalists over the ratification of the Constitution. The anti-federalists’ main worry was the Constitution as written would centralize too much power in the national government, particularly the executive branch. In fact, they said, we’d end up with a tyranny again, just after we’d fought a revolution to escape a king. Meanwhile, the federalists argued the Constitution had checks and balances that would prevent this.

Of course, the Constitution was ratified, leading to much rejoicing and eventually several segments of Schoolhouse Rock. But in history class they always tell you the anti-federalists were wrong: we didn’t end up with a tyranny. The Constitution prevents the executive branch from doing anything it wants. For instance, only Congress has the power to declare war.

But John Yoo has some surprising news: the anti-federalists were right! The Constitution does give the president, particularly in matters of war and peace, exactly the same powers of the British king circa 1787! The only difference is, Yoo thinks this is a good thing.

Think I’m exaggerating? Well, check out Yoo’s website, which has an article he wrote that’s incorporated into the book:

…[The anti-federalist] Cato correctly concluded that in the realm of practical politics, the President’s authority under the Constitution did not differ in important measure from that of the King.

Ha ha ha! The joke’s on you, American history!

The best part is, Yoo is associated with the Federalist Society, the notorious conservative legal organization. I guess one of the main tenets of the Federalist Society is that the anti-federalists were right all along.

SPECIAL NIXON BONUS: Here’s what James St. Clair, Nixon’s counsel, said in the famous 1974 case U.S. v. Nixon about executive privilege:

The President wants me to argue that he is as powerful a monarch as Louis XIV, only four years at a time, and is not subject to the processes of any court in the land except the court of impeachment.

This is one of the sickest, most repulsive things I’ve ever seen in my life. A flash-based “game” in which you try to murder as many immigrants as possible, including a pregnant woman and her children. I don’t know who made it and haven’t bothered investigating who’s hosting it (though it can be found here as well), but this is a pretty clear reminder of the truly evil mindset that we’re up against. I will never understand how someone could be so filled with blind rage that they’d sink to dehumanizing their fellow human beings to the point that they could make jokes of their violent fanatasies.

Gotta love how the press is spinning Karl Rove’s second change in job title as if it were a big deal.

White House political mastermind Karl Rove surrendered a key policy role Wednesday and press secretary Scott McClellan resigned in an escalation of a Bush administation shake-up driven by Republican anxieties.

Rove gave up his responsibilities as chief policy coordinator, a position he assumed just over a year ago that strengthened his influence over matters ranging from homeland security and domestic policy to the economy and national security. The promotion had left him stretched too thin in the eyes of some officials, as the White House grappled with mounting problems.

With Wednesday’s change, Rove will be able to focus more on politics, fundraising and big-picture thinking with the approach of the November congressional elections, officials said.

He “surrendered” and “gave up” his policy role? Well, that’s one way to spin it. A more accurate way to spin it would be to say that the Bush White House has never really given a shit about policy and that Rove’s function is and has always been to bully people around and win elections. Of course, with Dubya’s poll numbers in the toilet and the pressure for Republican incumbents to distance themselves from the White House’s string of failures, Rove’s part-time job of threatening potential GOP traitors is quickly becoming full-time.

Does anyone really believe that Ann Coulter spends many Sunday mornings in church?

Editor & Publisher picked up my open letter to the Pulitzer Board. Here’s how they quote me:

The self-syndicated Tomorrow noted that “the only Pulitzer ever awarded to a cartoonist from the alternative press was given to Jules Feiffer in 1986. The only other remotely non-traditional cartoonists to have been recognized within my lifetime are Garry Trudeau in 1975 and Berke Breathed in 1987. And the last time, to my knowledge, that an alternative editorial cartoonist of any kind was even considered was when Ted Rall made the short list a full ten years ago.”

Here’s what I actually wrote:

The only Pulitzer ever awarded to a cartoonist from the alternative press was given to Jules Feiffer in 1986. If Jules’ Pulitzer were a person, it would be old enough to vote. It would be a year away from drinking legally in every state in the union.

The only other remotely non-traditional (i.e. non-daily-editorial-page) cartoonists to have been recognized within my lifetime are Garry Trudeau in 1975 and Berke Breathed in 1987. And the last time, to my knowledge, that an alternative editorial cartoonist of any kind was even considered was when Ted Rall made the short list a full ten years ago.

It’s a small thing, but when you condense someone’s words, isn’t a standard journalistic practice to indicate this in some way, with ellipses or something?

…by the way, now that a truncated version of this essay is getting wider circulation, I want to reiterate the postscript:

To those whose immediate response is “ha! he certainly does not deserve a Pulitzer,” let me just reply in advance: you are probably correct. But I would maintain that the entire field of alternative cartoonists do not deserve to be similarly dismissed out of hand.