comments_imageCOMMENTS: 11

Why the President believes he is the law

A quick lesson in how to frame this rogue president.
November 8, 2005  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 
In discussing the most recent round of torture revelations sanctioned by the Bush administration, many are picking up on a phrase that Bush uttered yesterday in his Panama press conference:
PRESIDENT BUSH: Our country is at war, and our government has the obligation to protect the American people. The executive branch has the obligation to protect the American people; the legislative branch has the obligation to protect the American people. And we are aggressively doing that. We are finding terrorists and bringing them to justice. We are gathering information about where the terrorists may be hiding. We are trying to disrupt their plots and plans. Anything we do to that effort, to that end, in this effort, any activity we conduct, is within the law. We do not torture. (my emphasis)

Over at the Frameshop, Jeffrey Feldman discusses the implications of the President implying that he is the law as part of a series of posts about the torture scandals (the other two, both worth reading, are here and here.) He states that this view, that the President and his actions are not bound by the Constitution, is wrong and outside of the mainstream. This retort, however, doesn't go far enough.

The frame of being above the law fits well within the right-wing structure of authority (Lakoff's "strict father," for you framing junkies). Tough love, excessive force to prove a point, might makes right, means justify the ends -- these are all part of the ideology. Cowboys and vigilantes (think: Arizona border patrollers) are icons of this accepted frame, and Bush-as-cowboy is certainly nothing new. The problem for progressives is to not reinforce this frame.

We must be structuring our arguments not to say that cowboys and vigilantes are bad people, but to frame them as militant extremists who drool over every chance to use violence as an answer, who are so clouded by a narrow worldview that violence is the only answer for them. To frame them, perhaps controversially, as the Timothy McVeighs of the government.

They are dangerous, violent extremists who are endangering the lives of all Americans with their policies of instutionalized torture and violence, not "bad cowboys" saving the American frontier from the "savages." Don't let them have that frame.
submit to reddit
Deanna Zandt is a contributing editor at AlterNet, and manages Start Making Sense.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
 

Comments are closed-

shapes of things to come
Posted by: scroogey on Nov 8, 2005 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When Sen. Dick Durbin started putting things together and realized that torture and was becoming a regular "treatment" for some prisoners and made a speech on the Senate floor, the Republican establishment went wild, nuts, crazy. They denounced him as a traitor, etc., etc., we have heard all the names before (like when people questioned the wisdom of invading Iraq). But as more and more reports leak out of mainstream and foreign sources it seems that Durbin was right. Are the Republicans and hard Right media people going to apologize for all the things they said about Durbin? For that matter, are some of the mainstream television announcers on MSNBC and CNN going to apologize? The world is a more dangerous place for Americans (and Westerners, in general) in the last 4 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: shapes of things to come Posted by: scroogey

Comments are closed-

Expansion of Presidential powers
Posted by: lb on Nov 8, 2005 11:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just finished a very interesting article by David Cole in the NY Review of Books (November 17th issue). The president has advisors, like attorney John Yoo, who basically tell him he can do anything he wants, per the original intent of the constitution!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

He is being lied to
Posted by: popsicle67 on Nov 9, 2005 12:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But everyone is so illiterate about the Constitution that he doesn't know it. Used to be that a president didn't need to have somebody to tell him what his duties,responsibilities,
and powers as denoted in the Constitution were because he was taught in school. Now with the proliferation of liberal indoctrination in schools nobody knows that the Constitution means what it says and if you don't like it you have to engage
in a difficult, time consuming, process to change it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: He is being lied to Posted by: andyc
» Liberal indoctrination Posted by: churchofone
» Education is suffering. Posted by: turil

Comments are closed-

Not that stale "vigilantes" lie again!
Posted by: MPJ on Nov 9, 2005 6:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zandt writes: "vigilantes (think: Arizona border patrollers) . . . . We must be structuring our arguments . . . to frame them as militant extremists who drool over every chance to use violence as an answer. . . ."

It looks like Zandt is talking about the Arizona Minutemen. But they intensively train NOT to use violence. The one Minuteman who touched an illegal at all was quickly expelled. The idea that Minutemen "drool over every chance to use violence" is ridiculous.

The opposition to Minutemen just keeps on saying "vigilante" -- just as Bush did -- and ignoring all the facts that prove their slur to be false. Zandt's technique of repeating a false slur doesn't work for her any better than it works for Bush.

It is disgusting to see either side wallow in the trough of lies and name-calling that the Bushies marched into. Our side, including Zandt, should do better, argue better, be better than Bush and his masters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

So what should we promote?
Posted by: turil on Nov 9, 2005 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with claiming that Bush and Co. are too simpleminded and only think of violent ways to approach problems (which I agree is the main problem with Bush), is that then we need to be very clear and precise on what the better solutions are.

We need well-framed soundbite type words that counter the violence as policy. "Peace" is right out, since people, for some crazy reason, think peace is dangerous. "Compassionate" and "intelligent" are out as well, since they too are seen as either wussy or elitist. What to we have left? "Creative" is ok, but not terribly compelling as a term. "Responsible" is good and strong, but might be too openended. "Better" might be the best we've got!

Am I missing something good?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great Tolstoy Novel: War and Better Posted by: AdamSelene11726
» The Butter Battle Book? Posted by: turil
Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

shapes of things to come
Posted by: scroogey on Nov 8, 2005 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When Sen. Dick Durbin started putting things together and realized that torture and was becoming a regular "treatment" for some prisoners and made a speech on the Senate floor, the Republican establishment went wild, nuts, crazy. They denounced him as a traitor, etc., etc., we have heard all the names before (like when people questioned the wisdom of invading Iraq). But as more and more reports leak out of mainstream and foreign sources it seems that Durbin was right. Are the Republicans and hard Right media people going to apologize for all the things they said about Durbin? For that matter, are some of the mainstream television announcers on MSNBC and CNN going to apologize? The world is a more dangerous place for Americans (and Westerners, in general) in the last 4 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: shapes of things to come Posted by: scroogey

Comments are closed-

Expansion of Presidential powers
Posted by: lb on Nov 8, 2005 11:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just finished a very interesting article by David Cole in the NY Review of Books (November 17th issue). The president has advisors, like attorney John Yoo, who basically tell him he can do anything he wants, per the original intent of the constitution!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

He is being lied to
Posted by: popsicle67 on Nov 9, 2005 12:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But everyone is so illiterate about the Constitution that he doesn't know it. Used to be that a president didn't need to have somebody to tell him what his duties,responsibilities,
and powers as denoted in the Constitution were because he was taught in school. Now with the proliferation of liberal indoctrination in schools nobody knows that the Constitution means what it says and if you don't like it you have to engage
in a difficult, time consuming, process to change it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: He is being lied to Posted by: andyc
» Liberal indoctrination Posted by: churchofone
» Education is suffering. Posted by: turil

Comments are closed-

Not that stale "vigilantes" lie again!
Posted by: MPJ on Nov 9, 2005 6:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zandt writes: "vigilantes (think: Arizona border patrollers) . . . . We must be structuring our arguments . . . to frame them as militant extremists who drool over every chance to use violence as an answer. . . ."

It looks like Zandt is talking about the Arizona Minutemen. But they intensively train NOT to use violence. The one Minuteman who touched an illegal at all was quickly expelled. The idea that Minutemen "drool over every chance to use violence" is ridiculous.

The opposition to Minutemen just keeps on saying "vigilante" -- just as Bush did -- and ignoring all the facts that prove their slur to be false. Zandt's technique of repeating a false slur doesn't work for her any better than it works for Bush.

It is disgusting to see either side wallow in the trough of lies and name-calling that the Bushies marched into. Our side, including Zandt, should do better, argue better, be better than Bush and his masters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

So what should we promote?
Posted by: turil on Nov 9, 2005 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with claiming that Bush and Co. are too simpleminded and only think of violent ways to approach problems (which I agree is the main problem with Bush), is that then we need to be very clear and precise on what the better solutions are.

We need well-framed soundbite type words that counter the violence as policy. "Peace" is right out, since people, for some crazy reason, think peace is dangerous. "Compassionate" and "intelligent" are out as well, since they too are seen as either wussy or elitist. What to we have left? "Creative" is ok, but not terribly compelling as a term. "Responsible" is good and strong, but might be too openended. "Better" might be the best we've got!

Am I missing something good?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great Tolstoy Novel: War and Better Posted by: AdamSelene11726
» The Butter Battle Book? Posted by: turil
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS