We only have to change two words from Jackson's closing address at Nuremburg to make it clear that we're moving toward a presidential dictatorship -- exactly what the Constitution was established to avoid:

"One of the chief reasons the defendants say there was no conspiracy is the argument that conspiracy was impossible with a dictator. The argument runs that they all had to obey Bush's orders, which had the force of law in the American State, and hence obedience could not be made the basis of an original charge."

This shows a troubling lack of inquisitiveness or honesty on Obama's part and a willingness to go along with the establishment's approved line regardless of the facts.

Does Obama actually believe this nonsense? If so, he is ignorant and naive, and if not (to put it bluntly) he is a liar. Either is troubling in the extreme, particularly given an issue with the potential for very real consequences in terms of war and peace, and life and death.

This highlights the critical importance of developing a "grand alliance" between the anti-establishment, anti-militarism, pro-civil liberties Left and Right. That's exactly what Ron Paul tried to do when he invited the various third-party candidates to come together and issue a list of the points they all agreed upon.

Yes, there are a lot of differences and disagreements, but there's too much at stake to let infighting divide and weaken the real opposition to "business as usual" politics. Look at how the left- and right-wings of the establishment close ranks when their comfy monopoly on power and the ability to define the bounds of "legitimate" debate is threatened.

The progressives who want to preserve the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are more conservative than the establishment Right in Washington, and the traditional conservatives who want to end the empire and rein in the military-industrial complex are more progressive than the beltway establishment liberals. It's time for them to come together in an atmosphere of mutual respect (despite acknowledged disagreements) and save their country.

Philip Giraldi reports today that Bill Roggio of the neocon Foundation in Defense of Democracy falsely claims in a new article that “Bin Laden Son Coordinated Ops with Iran:”

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2009/01/22/where-have-we-heard-this-before/

In this case, it seems more a matter of deliberate disinformation than abject ignorance, which is even worse, especially given that it's obviously intended to goad America into another war under false pretenses.

The irony, of course, is that by making a two-state solution impossible, Israel is hurtling down a path likely to lead to its destruction as a Jewish state due to demographics.

American diplomatic and financial pressure on Israel to halt the construction of West Bank settlements and ultimately dismantle them -- and to come to an agreement based roughly on the Arab League’s two-state proposal -- is the only hope that country has for long-term survival.

Instead, the U.S. has been behaving like the enabling spouse of an alcoholic, making endless excuses and paying the bills while indulging in a shared denial of reality. The self-styled friends of Israel in the Lobby and in Congress are may love the Jewish state, but they're helping the object of their affection to destroy herself.

Notice that those advocating immunity for high-ranking lawbreakers are generally the same people who favor torture, kangaroo courts that accept coerced confessions for accused terrorists, aggressive wars, and military actions intended to make civilians suffer and thus induce them to oppose their political leaders ("Palestinian civilians aren't innocent; they voted for Hamas") -- actions which, when done by others, are called terrorism.

So they favor one system for the privileged, one for ordinary Americans and resident aliens, and one for those who have no rights at all to due process. Interestingly, the rule of law is deemed only to apply to the middle group.

There seems to be a reluctance in the mainstream media to apply the terms "racist" and "fascist" to Israel's extreme right even when their use isn't hyperbolic.

Imagine a Republican administration that included David Duke as, say, Secretary of Commerce -- and the reaction in TNR and the Times.

What frightens me most is the accelerating shift across the political spectrum toward an elevation of person and ideology over constitutional principles and the rule of law.

Dictatorships can and have come from Right, Left, and Center, and they may as easily emerge in quasi-legal forms within an eroded and gutted constitutional and legal framework as from revolutions or coups. In either case, it is the public belief that legality and legitimacy are conferred through the personal beneficence and ideological vision of Great Leaders -- rather than through laws and principles that apply to all, regardless of station or political orientation -- that leaves a nation vulnerable to the destruction of liberty and democracy.

I voted for Obama, and am much happier now that he is president and that Bush is gone. Nevertheless, I find much of the Obama worship I see rather troubling. This is not a monarchy and we are not the president’s subjects; he is (or is supposed to be) the employee of a free people who serves at our pleasure, in a role circumscribed by constitutional and legal limitations.

Will Democrats and others on the Left be willing to stand up to Obama (even as they support him in other ways) when he acts against the Constitution, as they did against FDR when he tried to pack the Supreme Court? If not, I fear for my country.

Congratulations on the award, Glenn -- I can't think of anyone who deserves it more. I know I'm risking producing a "fanboy love letter" here myself, but I'm consistently stunned by the quality, depth, volume, and fearlessness of your work.