Did I mention that J.K. Rowling is a genius? And maybe we should be giving her mad props as an American Constitutional scholar? In her books, she tells us Americans how to stop George Bush, Dick Cheney, John Yoo and the rest of the Unitary Executive crowd, right in their tracks: The Ridiculous Charm.
For non-Harry Potter fans, the Ridiculous Charm is how you banish bogarts in the closet (or as we say in America, monsters under the bed).
OK. Reader’s Digest version. A bogart in the closet can take many forms, every kid is afraid of something different. The way to disarm and destroy the bogart (before it "gets" you) is to imagine it as something you find funny while saying the charm-word "Ridiculous." Then the scary monster is transfigured into the funny looking thing, which makes you laugh. Your laughter disintegrates the monster and "poof," it’s gone!
Well, the Unitary Executive is like a bogart in the closet. How much time have we spent on these threads, in Congressional hearings, even sometimes in the MSM hearing about how frightening the Unitary Executive is and how helpless anyone is to stop it. The big scary Unitary Executive has all these super powers like Insta-declassification and the power to change Executive Orders without a paper trail, and to certify illegal wiretapping when the AG refuses to, and a host of other things that have no foundation in the Constitution or in statute, and in some cases are clearly in violation of the Constitution and/or statute—is like the bogart in the closet. It’s all bullpoop, that’s why they are so desperate not to let any of these claims get in front of the courts; they know they have no legal basis for the things they have done in the name of it.
All we have to do to make it stop, is laugh at it. Marcy has been tying herself up in knots trying to figure out how Bush’s claim that he can change Executive Orders without leaving any paper record of having done so would actually work in practice. She calls it turning them into Pixie Dust. The problem is, of course, that it could NEVER work in practice because how can anybody follow a rule, if they don’t know about it because it is not written down. It’s, oh yeah, ridiculous.
Think about it. All we have to do America, is when Bushco makes some crazy assed claim that WE KNOW IS NOT TRUE, that we all shout out
RIDICULOUS!
and poof, his ability to pull off that scam will evaporate. The time to fear the Unitary Executive has passed. The time to rail against it has passed. The time to laugh at it, snigger at it, point fingers and bellylaugh until your sides hurt has come.
Read up, White House Press Corps. Your job just got to be fun again. You’re gonna have to take turns though. (Or you can do it as a chorus?) Every time the president/Dana says something over the top, I want to hear at least one of you say "Isn’t that just ridiculous?" or "How can the Administration actually expect the American people to believe something so ridiculous?" or, well, you get the drift….
As for the rest of us, every chance we get, individually and in groups, sing out RIDICULOUS and make sure to laugh. This ought to be a fun thread, let’s list the funniest claims made by this Administration.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Do we still get zeds?
One of the best posts I have ever read on FDL. Props to LHP!
lhp – i’m trying to think of something to laugh at, i really am. great post, sucky commenter.
Something to laugh at is the Unitary Executive. There is such a theory–all it means is that executive Branch agencies should not be too, too independent and should, by their policy work, reflect the policy priorities of the President.
It does not mean that the President can have secret memos. It does not mean he can Insta-declassify, it does not mean he can turn Executive Orders into Pixie Dust without creating a paper trail.
And it does not mean that the OVP is somehow not an executive branch department within the meaning of the Presidential Records Act.
Poor Bill Leonard, his head must have spun 360 when he heard that whopper!
Don’t be afraid of this usurptation, don’t be angry–LAUGH AT THEM and you take away their power.
Will the next president cede the right of the Congress to be co-equal?
hi LHP.
I’ve mostly been screaming about these folks, but I am more than willing to try laughing if you think that would help.
OT Via Froomkin, an interview yesterday December 12, 2007 in USA Today:
Does anyone seriously think that someone like this can negotiate a Middle East peace or even tie their shoelaces?
I do like the use of ridicule to break the will of the bully.
Great Post
It’s kinda like double secret probation.
no………..
I call it invoking “Mystery Science Theater Power” (from MST3K). Laugh at the mads, make jokes about their bad movies, ridicule them until they lose all power over us, and we’ll all have a good time in the Satellite of Love!
I have been saying for some time now that every politician and reporter should start any remark about Bush with “George Bush the worst President in our history said today that . . .” I have to admit RIDICULOUS is shorter and snappier.
W desecrates the Constitution via the Urinary Executive
I saw that exchange between Condi and Hume earlier–and laughed out loud.
Also iirc, there was a Star Trek episode in which Kirk and the Klingons jointly laughed a “hate” monster off the Enterprise.
I have no idea what Mystery Science Theater is–but it sounds like fun
EXCELLANT!!!
did I say it?…if not, let me do it now;
EXCELLANT
it’s what I’ve been talking about since I first came to the lake, FRAMING THE DISCUSSION THE WAY WE WANT TO FRAME IT, not the way they insist on framing it
when they say something rediculous, LAUGH IN THEIR FACE.
looseheadprop, you NAILED it, now let’s hope the democrats take notice
as far as the press?
they’re corporate owned with corporate agenda, that’s really not gonna happen till we break their monopoly
I have one issue with your post though;
the legal basis WILL be established in trial law and establish thier precedence when they take it before scotus
alito and roberts DO subscribe to the unitary executive and WILL do whatever it takes to have their opinion win the day
And then there’s that great Simpson’s episode in which Nelson Munz finally gets his comeuppance from the tall guy in the little tiny car.
I would have a very difficult time of it, disagreeing with your assessment. ;0)
Also via Froomkin:
This should be evidence to us all that once a war criminal always a war criminal. Henry wants himself some Iran war candy and he won’t let facts or reality stand in his way.
I wish I felt that laughing would help. I have been waiting for this gang of thugs to implode for some time. I have come to the conclusion that they just don’t care if no one believes what they say. As long as they can come up with something, anything that could just POSSIBLY, REMOTELY be possible, then that satisfies whatever they have left of a conscience. Unless someone forcibly confronts them, then they will continually get away with all the criminal acts they have heretofore getting away with.
Laughing might make us feel better, but it isn’t going to change the situation any.
Paraphrase post 9/11…
“We cannot tolerate outlandish conspiracy theories…”
Right at the top of the Laugher Curve.
It’s “boggart” and the spell is “riddikulus.”
Really I don’t know how you ever passed your OWLs.
In ancient Ireland, one of THE WORST fates that could befall you was to piss off the satirest. Being laughed at was considered a fate worse than death.
The thing I like about Rowling’s insight as summed up in the “ridiculous” charm, is it actually works. It is the same power as evidenced inthe story “The Emperor’s New Clothes”
By not quaking in fear of the Unitary Executive, by not being afraid to call a spade a spade, we rob them of their power over us.
If the WH press Corp would JUST GET IN THE HABIT of saying “Isn’t that and absurd claim?” or “Dana, sweetie, how can you say that with a straight face? Isn’t that just rdiculous?”
If the headlines of major newspapers atarting saying things like
“Bush White House make ANOTHER wild assed claim of powers never seen in the Consitution”
Well, …?
It’s my advice about how to watch news on cable. Watch for a few seconds, turn down the sound, make rude remarks about all the stupid things you just heard, repeat until something mor intelligent comes on –like a commercial.
Oh, you gotta check them out, looseheadprop! The show no longer runs, but collections of DVDs are available
It WOULD make him batshit if the correspondents started laughing at him during a presser. They laughed at Scotty a couple of times.
What we need is someone with some video skills to put together the top ten ridiculous things he’s said, with a laugh track.
wiki for Mystery Science Theater 3000
Q: “After 9/11, the President declared a policy of preempting threats to the nation before they fully manifested themselves. Yet we’ve seen some of the intelligence about those threats is often flawed, significantly. Can the preemption policy coexist with imperfect intelligence?”
Answer: No, but if you want to use “911″ as a basis to make pre-emptive stikes just cook intelligence to justify the action then you have essentially done what Hitler did to justify his invasion of Poland, without doing the dirty work of his henchmen.
” Much of what is known about the Gleiwitz incident comes from the sworn affidavit of Alfred Naujocks at the Nuremberg Trials. According to his testimony, the incident was organized by Naujocks under orders from Reinhard Heydrich and Heinrich Müller, the chief of the Gestapo.[1]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident
War criminals tried at the Hague provided intersting facts that never would have been revealed, if not for the rule of law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident
Bush can tolerate ANYTHING except being ignored. He MUST be the center of attention. The thought that he could be a lame duck in the White House to whom no one pays attention is frightful for him..
Great MST3K quotes:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094517/quotes
My fav television show EVAH!
It’s “boggart” and the spell is “riddikulus.”
Really I don’t know how you ever passed your OWLs.
looseheadprop is awesome, spelling and all.
And of course we have Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert leading the way…
one problem……… he can still inflict pain on us!!!
The entire press corpse should arrive with an actual “Laugh Track” with little dials like they use in the focus groups. It would certainly make for great TeeVee…
Perris, there actually is, and has been for years, a fairly mainstream–not totaly controversial theory called the theory of the Unitary Executive
BUT T IS NOT WHAT BUSHCO IS CLAIMING IT IS.
Bushco just swiped the name, and then made stuff up.
The REAL theory of the Unitary Executive, in simplified form, stands for the proposition that Executive Branch Agencies should, within th ebounds of ethics and fufillingtheir statutory maindates, do their level best to reflect the policies and priorites of the President.
So, in a Unitary Executive type government, youwould not have had the cold war between Bill Clinton and Louis Freeh. The FBI Director would not have had an agenda that was incompatable with the President’s stated policy objectives.
Shorter version. Unitary Execitve = teamwork.
Non Unitary Executive = herding cats
And Yes, both Alito and Roberts usbscribe to that teamwork notion. Thus far, the courts have been doing not so bad at holding the WH to the letter of the law. Not perfect–but MUCH better than Congress
thanks…..
I didn’t. (Sob) Don’t tell my mother, she would be so ashamed
I read the link describing unitary executive and I now understand the origin
but language lives and “the unitary executive” today means something differant then it did at that time
let’s hope you are right
are you saying you are pleasantly surprised with alito and roberts or are you saying the scotus has done ok in spite of alito and roberts
Darlin’it would be a Maccacca moment. And the tide would start to turn
Unitary power. Should we look to Congress, the next president, or the judiciary to save the day?
Neither, both. What I’m saying is that the Unitary Executive that Scalia and Roberts have written favorably about, is the Teamwork version–not the crazy assed Cheney version, so don’t assumed they will rubber stamp any of this Pixie Dust crap.
What I am also saying is that lots of judges, on all levels have been turning out opinions that hold the WH to the law. Pretty much every time one of these crazy theories has been tested in court,it has failed.
So, guess what? Just because the Shooter and the Decider and their peroxide spokesmodel say ‘down is up” doesn’t make it so.
We should laugh at them. Their ideas are bufoonish and by discussing them as if they are to be taken seriously AT ALL, we cede too much power into their hands.
Thomas, Alito, Scalia, Roberts. I do not revere the Supreme Court.
>
All of the above. Must most of all we should look to ourselves. There was a beautiful speech PatFitz delivered a bit before Tanksgiving, I wish I knew what I did with the link to the audio. In it he said (I’m working from memory here, so if the quotes aren’t perfect, I hope he will forgive me)”good government is not a dream” “it’s not something that we might have tomorrow” “it’s something we had a right to today and had a right to yesterday, and will continue to have a right to” “but it is up to us to demand our right to honest government”
I gotta figure out where that link is. The speech was lovely, sort of a love letter to the Constitution and ethical government.
Nor should you. What you should do, is expect/demand that the Court hew to it’s highest duty.
I haven’t noticed the front pages smeared with attorney organizations’ lamenting what the Bush administration, along with congressional enabling, have done to usurp Constitution.
I think that Senator Leahy often invokes the riddikulus look and short bark of laughter accompanied by a headshake during hearings… then he goes for the jugular with a damning statement when he never gets the truth or an answer from this mal- admin.
(part of why I love him)
great post LHP.
Love letters to the constitution notwithstanding, our representational democracy is in serious danger if not mortally ill.
More Mario Cuomo, less Pat Fitzgerald — please!
And while Leahy barks and shakes his head, Feinstein and Schumer snooker him!
I can’t disagree. We, as voters, are the arbiters of responsibility.
We should permanently station someone outside Boalt to laugh at Yoo every time he enters or leaves the building. And his students should begin every class by pointing and giggling.
yep
:{
but Feingold smiles and does a happy dance!
I occasionally go over to Doonesbury and ask him to let Joanie Caucus Redfern lead some demonstrations against Yoo.
Look again.
http://www.abanet.org/humanrights/
I have seen that. ;0)
I long for a world where there would be no need for the ACLU.
I gotta go to physical therapy. If anyone leaves a question, I willbe back to this thread later tonight and will post an answer
Teh Redickulus post.
Love it!!
new thread
So, from the haughty loins of Babs Bush a new phrase enters the language – “just more ridiculous bushite”
Like that?
LHP, I LOVE YOU! This is a GREAT post! That’s all I have to say!
LHP, thank you for such a great post! I hope the PT appointment went well.
The laughter has an added benefit — how many times have we read that laughter stimulates the immune system and relieves stress? We’ll laugh them out of office, and we’ll be invincible at the same time. I’m liking this idea!
-S
You must mean like Sheldon Whitehouse did when he spoke on the floor of the Senate about the three provisions in the EO that were so offensive. But his tone and his words were incredulous. He might as well have been saying, “Isn’t this ridiculous!”
Great post.
Is a boggart, the same as a bogie?
In that case we may have a double bogie, on a
par with Cheney and Bush?
I liked the way John Edwards spoke about protecting the Constitution. He said something like, “I can’t believe I have to talk about this, but …”
It is rather incredible, isn’t it? But, here we are trying, as did our forbears, to rid ourselves of the fear to govern ourselves by kicking out anybody who doesn’t feel like sharing power. God knows what got into Nancy Pelosi when she said ‘no impeachment’. I hope she tells everybody some day.
“Does anyone seriously think that someone like this can negotiate a Middle East peace or even tie their shoelaces?”
Condi doesn’t wear shoes with laces, does she?
Bob in HI
Yuk! I got a good laugh out of that one.
We muggles have a tough time getting those spell(ing)s right.
Bob in HI
Exactly! In fact, that when it hit me. Well, that and Emptywheel’s choice of the phrase “Pixie Dust”
Recent example(?): When Ahmedinijad responded to a question about homosexuality by saying something to the effect that “We don’t have that problem in Iran” and he almost got laughed out of the room. That got some coverage for a while. Any other recent examples?
Bob in HI
The trouble is that the Democrats are afraid of testing this assumption.
For example, They are afraid of voting on Contempt of Congress because they are afraid that the 4th Circuit(?) will side with the White House.
But then, the Democrats these days seem to be afraid of just about everything, maybe even their own shadows. Good way to convince the public that you’re strong on defense, right?
Bob in HI
“I haven’t noticed the front pages smeared with attorney organizations’ lamenting what the Bush administration, along with congressional enabling, have done to usurp Constitution.”
The National Lawyers Guild, at their recent meeting in Washington, D.C., enthusiastically passed a resolution to impeach Cheney, and maybe Bush, too. Dunno if it made the news. Then there was the wonderful speech that Mario Cuomo gave to the New York Lawyer’s meeting that LHP reported to us, but it, too, got no press coverage that I have heard of.
Maybe the problem is not with the lawyers, but with the press? Or maybe Lawyers write lousy press releases? or don’t write them at all?
Bob in HI
EPU land but anyway …
Mark Twain had the copyright! (partial quote follows)
Power, Money, Persuasion, Supplication, Persecution–these can lift at a colossal humbug,–push it a little– crowd it a little–weaken it a little, century by century: but only Laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of Laughter nothing can stand.
- “The Chronicle of Young Satan,” Mysterious Stranger Manuscripts
Among the stupidist BushCo bogarts evah:
“The (Iraqi’s) will welcome us with flowers.’
‘The war will pay for itself out of oil revenues (it won’t cost the US a dime).’
‘Smoke ‘em out.’
‘Bring it on.’
Using my Magick CheneyZombieBots Decoder Ring, they can be roughly translated to:
‘Pixie Dust is the only thing between us and jail. We’re desparately scattering Pixie Dust — right in your eyes, if we can!’
Ridiculous is the only civilized word for this kind of lunacy.
Let me quote D.H Lawrence:
Even you, if you knew
How this darkness soaks me through and through, and
infuses
Unholy fear in my essence, you would pause to distinguish
What hurts from what amuses.
Most off the wall ridiculous claim by Bush… …he reads books.
LOL!!!
You snarked me AGAIN! Twice in one day! Thanks for leaving me with that little chuckle that will follow me through the weekend!!!
I guess with this post, then Bush/Cheney should leave me with “that little chuckle” for life! Thanks LHP!
BTW, I tend to enjoy moving from EW postings to Christy postings to LHP postings pertaining to the same subject. When the three of you post on the same subject there is an “insight synergy” that happens in the threads and suddenly the world makes sense again! Looking forward to the return of the 123 punch!
LHD may not have passed his OWLS and consequently never wrote his NEWTS, consigned instead to a polytechnic, he didn’t spell bogart wrong. As with all things supernatural in JKR’s wizarding world, the bogart comes from folklore.