Alia Brahimi
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199562961
- eISBN:
- 9780191595059
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562961.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory, International Relations and Politics
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of ...
More
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of the West and Islam. This book explores the moral‐theological arguments for war offered by the George W. Bush administration and al‐Qaeda. It examines the way in which these actors have drawn upon key just war concepts and, in some cases, reconceptualized their scope and content. The book's principal contention is that, in significant ways, the just war arguments of Bush and bin Laden are inconsistent with the moral requirements of their respective just war traditions. In two parts, the book examines these arguments in relation to the body of thought which comprises the Western just war tradition and that of Islamic jihad, and assesses the consistency of Bush and bin Laden's claims. The central argument of the book—that the Bush administration and al‐Qaeda depart from important consensuses about justified warfare—contains within it an alternative way of understanding the war on terror. Rather than a clash between civilizations, it is suggested that the war on terror can be accounted for by a clash within civilizations: in resorting to violence, both sides have acted against their own traditions and contravened the requirements of their own civilizations.Less
In the ‘war on terror’ both sides have taken great pains to justify their actions in moral terms. As force is employed so are sophisticated arguments which directly invoke the just war traditions of the West and Islam. This book explores the moral‐theological arguments for war offered by the George W. Bush administration and al‐Qaeda. It examines the way in which these actors have drawn upon key just war concepts and, in some cases, reconceptualized their scope and content. The book's principal contention is that, in significant ways, the just war arguments of Bush and bin Laden are inconsistent with the moral requirements of their respective just war traditions. In two parts, the book examines these arguments in relation to the body of thought which comprises the Western just war tradition and that of Islamic jihad, and assesses the consistency of Bush and bin Laden's claims. The central argument of the book—that the Bush administration and al‐Qaeda depart from important consensuses about justified warfare—contains within it an alternative way of understanding the war on terror. Rather than a clash between civilizations, it is suggested that the war on terror can be accounted for by a clash within civilizations: in resorting to violence, both sides have acted against their own traditions and contravened the requirements of their own civilizations.
Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195152777
- eISBN:
- 9780199833900
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195152778.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
In the dispute over Florida's vote in the 2000 election, Al Gore and George W. Bush fought a fierce battle to determine the press frames that would govern the debate. Bush was far more successful, ...
More
In the dispute over Florida's vote in the 2000 election, Al Gore and George W. Bush fought a fierce battle to determine the press frames that would govern the debate. Bush was far more successful, pushing frames including “chaos” and “military ballots” to the forefront. Subsequent analyses reveal that had press coverage been different, Gore could have won Florida and the presidency.Less
In the dispute over Florida's vote in the 2000 election, Al Gore and George W. Bush fought a fierce battle to determine the press frames that would govern the debate. Bush was far more successful, pushing frames including “chaos” and “military ballots” to the forefront. Subsequent analyses reveal that had press coverage been different, Gore could have won Florida and the presidency.
Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195152777
- eISBN:
- 9780199833900
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195152778.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
In the 2000 election, journalists settled on twin portraits of Al Gore and George W. Bush that framed the coverage each received. Gore was portrayed as the lying panderer, while Bush was portrayed as ...
More
In the 2000 election, journalists settled on twin portraits of Al Gore and George W. Bush that framed the coverage each received. Gore was portrayed as the lying panderer, while Bush was portrayed as the inexperienced dolt. These portraits then determined how campaign events were interpreted. While neither portrait was complimentary, in the end they worked to Bush's advantage, because no moral value was attached to inexperience, while a moral value was attached to Gore's alleged dishonesty.Less
In the 2000 election, journalists settled on twin portraits of Al Gore and George W. Bush that framed the coverage each received. Gore was portrayed as the lying panderer, while Bush was portrayed as the inexperienced dolt. These portraits then determined how campaign events were interpreted. While neither portrait was complimentary, in the end they worked to Bush's advantage, because no moral value was attached to inexperience, while a moral value was attached to Gore's alleged dishonesty.
Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195152777
- eISBN:
- 9780199833900
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195152778.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
In times of crisis, the press acts in a patriotic role, fostering national unity and defending American institutions. After George W. Bush was inaugurated, the press ignored evidence that Al Gore had ...
More
In times of crisis, the press acts in a patriotic role, fostering national unity and defending American institutions. After George W. Bush was inaugurated, the press ignored evidence that Al Gore had as much of a claim to be the victor in Florida as Bush, shaping stories about postelection analyses of the Florida vote to make only a Bush victory seem legitimate. On September 11, journalists filled in rhetorical gaps in Bush's performance, then changed the criteria by which the president was judged.Less
In times of crisis, the press acts in a patriotic role, fostering national unity and defending American institutions. After George W. Bush was inaugurated, the press ignored evidence that Al Gore had as much of a claim to be the victor in Florida as Bush, shaping stories about postelection analyses of the Florida vote to make only a Bush victory seem legitimate. On September 11, journalists filled in rhetorical gaps in Bush's performance, then changed the criteria by which the president was judged.
David M. Malone
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199278572
- eISBN:
- 9780191604119
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199278571.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter discusses the second phase of UN involvement in Iraq, which seemed to herald the emergence of the Security Council as a New World Order Policeman. The Security Council’s capacity to ...
More
This chapter discusses the second phase of UN involvement in Iraq, which seemed to herald the emergence of the Security Council as a New World Order Policeman. The Security Council’s capacity to legitimize the use of force provided a legal basis for international action to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait in 1991. The chapter recounts the diplomatic and military success of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm — mandated to compel the withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait and conducted by a coalition of states — drawing legitimacy from Security Council decisions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Chapter VII also provided a newly assertive basis for traditional activities, such as ceasefire implementation and border-monitoring tasks, the Council gave to a new mission, UNIKOM, deployed along the border between Iraq and Kuwait. This new police role for UN peace operations was part of a larger ‘New World Order’ heralded by President George H. W. Bush, which seemed to hold the promise of an international rule of law, enforced by a united P-5 operating through the Security Council.Less
This chapter discusses the second phase of UN involvement in Iraq, which seemed to herald the emergence of the Security Council as a New World Order Policeman. The Security Council’s capacity to legitimize the use of force provided a legal basis for international action to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait in 1991. The chapter recounts the diplomatic and military success of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm — mandated to compel the withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait and conducted by a coalition of states — drawing legitimacy from Security Council decisions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Chapter VII also provided a newly assertive basis for traditional activities, such as ceasefire implementation and border-monitoring tasks, the Council gave to a new mission, UNIKOM, deployed along the border between Iraq and Kuwait. This new police role for UN peace operations was part of a larger ‘New World Order’ heralded by President George H. W. Bush, which seemed to hold the promise of an international rule of law, enforced by a united P-5 operating through the Security Council.
Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195152777
- eISBN:
- 9780199833900
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195152778.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
If news is the rough draft of history, the draft written on November 7, 2000 was rougher than most. This chapter analyzes how the preconceptions journalists brought to election night 2000 resulted in ...
More
If news is the rough draft of history, the draft written on November 7, 2000 was rougher than most. This chapter analyzes how the preconceptions journalists brought to election night 2000 resulted in critical errors in judgment, leading to mistaken calls alternately benefiting Al Gore and George W. Bush. While all the networks did not use the same frames to describe the same events, each was misled by the metaphors guiding their coverage.Less
If news is the rough draft of history, the draft written on November 7, 2000 was rougher than most. This chapter analyzes how the preconceptions journalists brought to election night 2000 resulted in critical errors in judgment, leading to mistaken calls alternately benefiting Al Gore and George W. Bush. While all the networks did not use the same frames to describe the same events, each was misled by the metaphors guiding their coverage.
Elizabeth H. Prodromou
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195323405
- eISBN:
- 9780199869237
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323405.003.0012
- Subject:
- Religion, Sikhism
Under the presidency of George W. Bush, this chapter argues, religious identities and ethical commitments had a significant impact on U.S. foreign policy—and an even greater impact on perceptions of ...
More
Under the presidency of George W. Bush, this chapter argues, religious identities and ethical commitments had a significant impact on U.S. foreign policy—and an even greater impact on perceptions of that policy abroad. The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 and the attacks of September 11, 2001, were critical junctures. The end of the cold war and religious mobilization in U.S. politics coincided with heightened awareness of religious persecution across many countries, culminating in the 1998 legislation. And in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the U.S., the struggle against Islamic radicalism became both a foreign policy priority and a rallying cry in U.S. domestic politics. The worldwide perception of a religious impetus in U.S. foreign policy has had a negative impact on America's standing in the world.Less
Under the presidency of George W. Bush, this chapter argues, religious identities and ethical commitments had a significant impact on U.S. foreign policy—and an even greater impact on perceptions of that policy abroad. The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 and the attacks of September 11, 2001, were critical junctures. The end of the cold war and religious mobilization in U.S. politics coincided with heightened awareness of religious persecution across many countries, culminating in the 1998 legislation. And in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the U.S., the struggle against Islamic radicalism became both a foreign policy priority and a rallying cry in U.S. domestic politics. The worldwide perception of a religious impetus in U.S. foreign policy has had a negative impact on America's standing in the world.
Stephen Spector
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195368024
- eISBN:
- 9780199867646
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195368024.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society, Judaism
Most observers attribute evangelical Christians’ bedrock support for Israel to the apocalyptic belief that the Jews must return to Israel as a precondition for Christ’s Second Coming. But the actual ...
More
Most observers attribute evangelical Christians’ bedrock support for Israel to the apocalyptic belief that the Jews must return to Israel as a precondition for Christ’s Second Coming. But the actual reasons, this book argues, are far more complicated. In Evangelicals and Israel, the book delves deeply into the Christian Zionist movement, mining information from original interviews, websites, evangelical publications, survey research, news reports, worship services, and interfaith conferences to provide a surprising look at the sources of evangelicals’ alliance with Israel. He finds a complex set of motivations. In addition to end-times theology, these include gratitude to the Jews for providing the theological foundation for Christianity; remorse for the Church’s past anti-Semitism; the belief that God will bless those who bless Israel and curse him who curses Israel; fear that He will judge the nations at the end of time based on how they treated the Jewish people; appreciation of Israel as a friendly democracy; and reliance on the Jewish state as the West’s only firewall against Islamist terrorism. This book explores many Christian Zionists’ hostility toward Islam, but also their unexpected pragmatism and flexibility concerning Israel’s occupation of the West Bank. The book looks as well at George W. Bush’s beliefs about the Bible and the evangelical influence on his Middle East policies.Less
Most observers attribute evangelical Christians’ bedrock support for Israel to the apocalyptic belief that the Jews must return to Israel as a precondition for Christ’s Second Coming. But the actual reasons, this book argues, are far more complicated. In Evangelicals and Israel, the book delves deeply into the Christian Zionist movement, mining information from original interviews, websites, evangelical publications, survey research, news reports, worship services, and interfaith conferences to provide a surprising look at the sources of evangelicals’ alliance with Israel. He finds a complex set of motivations. In addition to end-times theology, these include gratitude to the Jews for providing the theological foundation for Christianity; remorse for the Church’s past anti-Semitism; the belief that God will bless those who bless Israel and curse him who curses Israel; fear that He will judge the nations at the end of time based on how they treated the Jewish people; appreciation of Israel as a friendly democracy; and reliance on the Jewish state as the West’s only firewall against Islamist terrorism. This book explores many Christian Zionists’ hostility toward Islam, but also their unexpected pragmatism and flexibility concerning Israel’s occupation of the West Bank. The book looks as well at George W. Bush’s beliefs about the Bible and the evangelical influence on his Middle East policies.
George P. Fletcher
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195156287
- eISBN:
- 9780199872169
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195156285.003.0013
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
In this afterword, the author discusses the events surrounding the 2000 U.S. Presidential election, in which George W. Bush became President based on a Supreme Court ruling that gave him the majority ...
More
In this afterword, the author discusses the events surrounding the 2000 U.S. Presidential election, in which George W. Bush became President based on a Supreme Court ruling that gave him the majority in the electoral college, defeating Vice President Al Gore, who had won the popular vote. The widely held ideal of a popular democracy is contrasted with the reality of the Twelfth Amendment system of electoral votes, and the author asserts that such contrasts point to the ongoing conflict between our “two constitutions” and our own sense of nationhood. Issues of voter disenfranchisement raised in the election are also examined.Less
In this afterword, the author discusses the events surrounding the 2000 U.S. Presidential election, in which George W. Bush became President based on a Supreme Court ruling that gave him the majority in the electoral college, defeating Vice President Al Gore, who had won the popular vote. The widely held ideal of a popular democracy is contrasted with the reality of the Twelfth Amendment system of electoral votes, and the author asserts that such contrasts point to the ongoing conflict between our “two constitutions” and our own sense of nationhood. Issues of voter disenfranchisement raised in the election are also examined.
Henry Shue and David Rodin (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199233137
- eISBN:
- 9780191716270
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233137.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
The dramatic declaration by US President George W. Bush that, in light of the attacks on 9/11, the United States would henceforth be engaging in ‘preemption’ against such enemies as terrorists armed ...
More
The dramatic declaration by US President George W. Bush that, in light of the attacks on 9/11, the United States would henceforth be engaging in ‘preemption’ against such enemies as terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction forced a wide-open debate about justifiable uses of military force. Opponents saw the declaration as a direct challenge to the consensus, which has formed since the ratification of the Charter of the United Nations, that armed force may be used only in defence. Supporters responded that in an age of terrorism defence could only mean ‘pre-emption’. This book provides the historical, legal, political, and philosophical perspective necessary to intelligent participation in the on-going debate, which is likely to last long beyond the war in Iraq. Thorough defences and critiques of the Bush doctrine are provided by the most authoritative writers on the subject from both sides of the Atlantic. Is a nation ever justified in attacking before it has been attacked? If so, under precisely what conditions? Does the possibility of terrorists with weapons of mass destruction force us to change our traditional views about what counts as defence? This book provides the most comprehensive assessment to date of the justifiability of pre-emptive or preventive military action. Its debate, accompanied by an analytic Introduction, focuses probing criticism against the most persuasive proponents of pre-emptive attack or preventive war, who then respond to these challenges and modify or extend their justifications.Less
The dramatic declaration by US President George W. Bush that, in light of the attacks on 9/11, the United States would henceforth be engaging in ‘preemption’ against such enemies as terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction forced a wide-open debate about justifiable uses of military force. Opponents saw the declaration as a direct challenge to the consensus, which has formed since the ratification of the Charter of the United Nations, that armed force may be used only in defence. Supporters responded that in an age of terrorism defence could only mean ‘pre-emption’. This book provides the historical, legal, political, and philosophical perspective necessary to intelligent participation in the on-going debate, which is likely to last long beyond the war in Iraq. Thorough defences and critiques of the Bush doctrine are provided by the most authoritative writers on the subject from both sides of the Atlantic. Is a nation ever justified in attacking before it has been attacked? If so, under precisely what conditions? Does the possibility of terrorists with weapons of mass destruction force us to change our traditional views about what counts as defence? This book provides the most comprehensive assessment to date of the justifiability of pre-emptive or preventive military action. Its debate, accompanied by an analytic Introduction, focuses probing criticism against the most persuasive proponents of pre-emptive attack or preventive war, who then respond to these challenges and modify or extend their justifications.
Alan M. Dershowitz
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195158076
- eISBN:
- 9780199869848
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195158075.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
Outlines the constitutional and statutory framework within which presidential elections are conducted in the USA. Provides a brief chronology and an account of the US (Bush vs Gore) presidential ...
More
Outlines the constitutional and statutory framework within which presidential elections are conducted in the USA. Provides a brief chronology and an account of the US (Bush vs Gore) presidential election of 2000. The different sections of the chapter are: How We Elect Our President (the constitutional and statutory framework); The 2000 Election and Its Aftermath; The Ground War in Florida; The Butterfly Ballot; ‘Count All the Votes’ — or at Least the Ones That Favour Gore; Bush Goes to Court; The Overseas Absentee Ballots; The Supreme Court's Initial — Unanimous — Decision; and The Supreme Court's Stay (the decision to stop recounting in Florida before even hearing an argument) — looks at other cases in which equal protection has or has not been applied by the US Supreme Court.Less
Outlines the constitutional and statutory framework within which presidential elections are conducted in the USA. Provides a brief chronology and an account of the US (Bush vs Gore) presidential election of 2000. The different sections of the chapter are: How We Elect Our President (the constitutional and statutory framework); The 2000 Election and Its Aftermath; The Ground War in Florida; The Butterfly Ballot; ‘Count All the Votes’ — or at Least the Ones That Favour Gore; Bush Goes to Court; The Overseas Absentee Ballots; The Supreme Court's Initial — Unanimous — Decision; and The Supreme Court's Stay (the decision to stop recounting in Florida before even hearing an argument) — looks at other cases in which equal protection has or has not been applied by the US Supreme Court.
Daniel K. Williams
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195340846
- eISBN:
- 9780199867141
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195340846.003.0011
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
George W. Bush depended on evangelical voters for his election, and he maintained a close relationship with Christian Right leaders, who supported him on the Iraq War even when other Americans did ...
More
George W. Bush depended on evangelical voters for his election, and he maintained a close relationship with Christian Right leaders, who supported him on the Iraq War even when other Americans did not. Christian Right pressure forced his administration to endorse a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage. But evangelicals were disappointed by their lack of legislative victories in Bush’s second term. They blamed the “liberal” judiciary for their failures but ultimately became disillusioned with Bush when they clashed with the administration over a Supreme Court nomination. By the end of the Bush presidency, some pundits predicted the collapse of the Christian Right, but strong evangelical support for the McCain-Palin ticket in 2008 demonstrated evangelicals’ continued loyalty to the Republican Party. Yet it also appeared that the Christian Right’s political style was changing, as younger evangelicals embraced the conciliatory approach of megachurch pastors such as Rick Warren.Less
George W. Bush depended on evangelical voters for his election, and he maintained a close relationship with Christian Right leaders, who supported him on the Iraq War even when other Americans did not. Christian Right pressure forced his administration to endorse a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage. But evangelicals were disappointed by their lack of legislative victories in Bush’s second term. They blamed the “liberal” judiciary for their failures but ultimately became disillusioned with Bush when they clashed with the administration over a Supreme Court nomination. By the end of the Bush presidency, some pundits predicted the collapse of the Christian Right, but strong evangelical support for the McCain-Palin ticket in 2008 demonstrated evangelicals’ continued loyalty to the Republican Party. Yet it also appeared that the Christian Right’s political style was changing, as younger evangelicals embraced the conciliatory approach of megachurch pastors such as Rick Warren.
Geir Lundestad (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199552030
- eISBN:
- 9780191720291
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552030.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics, European Union
The Iraq War in 2003 led to a deep crisis in American–European relations. France and Germany, not Russia and China, emerged as the major critics of the US intervention. Some spoke about the death of ...
More
The Iraq War in 2003 led to a deep crisis in American–European relations. France and Germany, not Russia and China, emerged as the major critics of the US intervention. Some spoke about the death of NATO, to be replaced by “coalitions of the willing”; more temperate voices referred to transatlantic drift. Deep structural forces were allegedly at work: the end of the cold war, a turn to the right in the United States, the emergence of a more independent Europe. Yet, there had always been crises in NATO. They had come and gone ever since the organization was founded in 1949. In George W. Bush's second term relations between the United States and Europe improved considerably. The United States discovered that it needed allies; the Democrats took control of Congress. Under Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy Germany and France again moved closer to the USA; the defeat of the constitutional treaty slowed the independence of the EU. So, did the initial Bush years represent just another crisis in Atlantic relations, already come and gone like the many crises of the past, or did they represent deep, structural forces at work? In this book leading historians and political scientists on both sides of the Atlantic give different, but always stimulating answers to this question.Less
The Iraq War in 2003 led to a deep crisis in American–European relations. France and Germany, not Russia and China, emerged as the major critics of the US intervention. Some spoke about the death of NATO, to be replaced by “coalitions of the willing”; more temperate voices referred to transatlantic drift. Deep structural forces were allegedly at work: the end of the cold war, a turn to the right in the United States, the emergence of a more independent Europe. Yet, there had always been crises in NATO. They had come and gone ever since the organization was founded in 1949. In George W. Bush's second term relations between the United States and Europe improved considerably. The United States discovered that it needed allies; the Democrats took control of Congress. Under Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy Germany and France again moved closer to the USA; the defeat of the constitutional treaty slowed the independence of the EU. So, did the initial Bush years represent just another crisis in Atlantic relations, already come and gone like the many crises of the past, or did they represent deep, structural forces at work? In this book leading historians and political scientists on both sides of the Atlantic give different, but always stimulating answers to this question.
Alan M. Dershowitz
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195158076
- eISBN:
- 9780199869848
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195158075.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US ...
More
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. Contrasts the prior decisions and writings of the particular majority justices with the opinions that they joined in this case; the dramatic discrepancies found raise troubling questions. Moves from this concrete evidence to a more speculative consideration of what may have motivated these inconsistencies. The different sections of the chapter look first at the decisions of Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and Justice Clarence Thomas. The following speculative sections first ask generally why each justice behaved as they did, and then go on to devote separate sections on the motives of each of the five justices.Less
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. Contrasts the prior decisions and writings of the particular majority justices with the opinions that they joined in this case; the dramatic discrepancies found raise troubling questions. Moves from this concrete evidence to a more speculative consideration of what may have motivated these inconsistencies. The different sections of the chapter look first at the decisions of Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and Justice Clarence Thomas. The following speculative sections first ask generally why each justice behaved as they did, and then go on to devote separate sections on the motives of each of the five justices.
Stephen Spector
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195368024
- eISBN:
- 9780199867646
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195368024.003.0009
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society, Judaism
This chapter considers survey research about white evangelicals’ motives for supporting Israel. It reports on a religious service at a charismatic church that celebrated the emigration of the Jews to ...
More
This chapter considers survey research about white evangelicals’ motives for supporting Israel. It reports on a religious service at a charismatic church that celebrated the emigration of the Jews to Israel as hastening Christ’s return. For enormous numbers of born-again Christians, supporting the Jewish return to the Holy Land allows them to join in the unfolding of divine history. Many disavow any intention of hastening scriptural prophecy, however. The chapter discusses another way to speed the end-times: building the Third Temple in Jerusalem. It notes plots to destroy the Dome of the Rock in order to clear the Temple Mount for the construction of the Temple. And it describes the biblically prescribed need for a red heifer to purify workers who would build the Temple. The chapter concludes by questioning the charge that George W. Bush is a Christian Zionist, perhaps even a premillennial dispensationalist, and that his faith shaped his Middle East policies.Less
This chapter considers survey research about white evangelicals’ motives for supporting Israel. It reports on a religious service at a charismatic church that celebrated the emigration of the Jews to Israel as hastening Christ’s return. For enormous numbers of born-again Christians, supporting the Jewish return to the Holy Land allows them to join in the unfolding of divine history. Many disavow any intention of hastening scriptural prophecy, however. The chapter discusses another way to speed the end-times: building the Third Temple in Jerusalem. It notes plots to destroy the Dome of the Rock in order to clear the Temple Mount for the construction of the Temple. And it describes the biblically prescribed need for a red heifer to purify workers who would build the Temple. The chapter concludes by questioning the charge that George W. Bush is a Christian Zionist, perhaps even a premillennial dispensationalist, and that his faith shaped his Middle East policies.
David Domke and Kevin Coe
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195326413
- eISBN:
- 9780199870431
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195326413.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
Religion has always been a part of American politics, but something profound has changed in recent decades. This book demonstrates that, beginning with the election of Ronald Reagan as president in ...
More
Religion has always been a part of American politics, but something profound has changed in recent decades. This book demonstrates that, beginning with the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980, US politicians have employed religion as a partisan weapon, using it in a no-holds-barred calculus designed to attract voters, identify enemies, and solidify power. The book reveals this political approach by identifying four crucial religious signals used by leading Republicans and Democrats, from Reagan to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush to the front-running candidates for the 2008 presidential election. In their emphasis on God and faith in public addresses, commemorations of tragedies and requests for divine blessing for the nation, the issue agendas pursued, and even the audiences addressed and the nature of Christmas celebrations, today's political leaders use religion for partisan gain in a manner distinct from those who came before. These signals become apparent through analysis of thousands of public communications by American politicians over the past seventy-five years, the tracking of public sentiment on several topics during the same period, and the perspectives of interest groups and political strategists. The result of these developments is an environment in the United States in which religion and politics have become almost inseparably intertwined — an outcome which benefits savvy politicians but endangers the vitality of church, state, and the entire American experiment in democracy. Less
Religion has always been a part of American politics, but something profound has changed in recent decades. This book demonstrates that, beginning with the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980, US politicians have employed religion as a partisan weapon, using it in a no-holds-barred calculus designed to attract voters, identify enemies, and solidify power. The book reveals this political approach by identifying four crucial religious signals used by leading Republicans and Democrats, from Reagan to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush to the front-running candidates for the 2008 presidential election. In their emphasis on God and faith in public addresses, commemorations of tragedies and requests for divine blessing for the nation, the issue agendas pursued, and even the audiences addressed and the nature of Christmas celebrations, today's political leaders use religion for partisan gain in a manner distinct from those who came before. These signals become apparent through analysis of thousands of public communications by American politicians over the past seventy-five years, the tracking of public sentiment on several topics during the same period, and the perspectives of interest groups and political strategists. The result of these developments is an environment in the United States in which religion and politics have become almost inseparably intertwined — an outcome which benefits savvy politicians but endangers the vitality of church, state, and the entire American experiment in democracy.
Alan M. Dershowitz
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195158076
- eISBN:
- 9780199869848
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195158075.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US ...
More
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. Discusses the importance of Bush vs Gore to all Americans, and starts by noting that Bush vs Gore is certainly not the first bad Supreme Court ruling. It looks at some of the other evil, immoral, and even dangerous, decisions made, most of which have been overturned by later courts and condemned by the verdict of history. However, for the most part, the justices who wrote or joined the majority opinions for these terrible decisions were acting consistently with their own judicial philosophies; Bush vs Gore was different because the majority justices violated their own previously declared judicial principles, and in this respect, the decision in the Florida election (recount) case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history. The different sections of the chapter discuss why criticism and accountability are important, some lessons to be learned from Bush vs Gore, the wages of Roe vs Wade (a controversial abortion case that helped to secure the presidency for Ronald Reagan), and changing how justices are selected.Less
Aims to demonstrate that, during the (Bush vs Gore) US presidential election of 2000, by any reasonable standard of evaluation, the majority justices of the US Supreme Court failed to test the US constitutional system in ways that it had never been tested before, and did so not because of incompetence, but because of malice aforethought. Discusses the importance of Bush vs Gore to all Americans, and starts by noting that Bush vs Gore is certainly not the first bad Supreme Court ruling. It looks at some of the other evil, immoral, and even dangerous, decisions made, most of which have been overturned by later courts and condemned by the verdict of history. However, for the most part, the justices who wrote or joined the majority opinions for these terrible decisions were acting consistently with their own judicial philosophies; Bush vs Gore was different because the majority justices violated their own previously declared judicial principles, and in this respect, the decision in the Florida election (recount) case may be ranked as the single most corrupt decision in Supreme Court history. The different sections of the chapter discuss why criticism and accountability are important, some lessons to be learned from Bush vs Gore, the wages of Roe vs Wade (a controversial abortion case that helped to secure the presidency for Ronald Reagan), and changing how justices are selected.
Alia Brahimi
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199562961
- eISBN:
- 9780191595059
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562961.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory, International Relations and Politics
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These ...
More
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These arguments are explored in the context of seven jus ad bellum criteria: just cause, right authority, right intention, goal of peace, proportionality, last resort, and reasonable hope of success. It is argued that the main source of controversy arose from the Bush administration's shift away from the more narrow, modern understanding of the just war by making arguments which rested on the broader moral tradition of the just war and the larger moral agenda of the ‘war on terror’.Less
The Bush administration argued vigorously that the 2003 Iraq war was just. The war's critics similarly invoked the language and concepts of the just war tradition to register their opposition. These arguments are explored in the context of seven jus ad bellum criteria: just cause, right authority, right intention, goal of peace, proportionality, last resort, and reasonable hope of success. It is argued that the main source of controversy arose from the Bush administration's shift away from the more narrow, modern understanding of the just war by making arguments which rested on the broader moral tradition of the just war and the larger moral agenda of the ‘war on terror’.
Geir Lundestad
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199552030
- eISBN:
- 9780191720291
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552030.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics, European Union
The Introduction presents the dramatically changing evaluations of NATO. Through the years many had predicted the demise of the organization, but NATO had weathered crises after crises. In 1999 it ...
More
The Introduction presents the dramatically changing evaluations of NATO. Through the years many had predicted the demise of the organization, but NATO had weathered crises after crises. In 1999 it celebrated its fiftieth anniversary, still going very strong. It had indeed survived the end of the cold war and the disappearance of the Soviet Union. The 1990s had been a period of transition, but the emphasis seemed to be on the continuity side. The coming to power of George W. Bush appeared to change everything. The Iraq War brought to a climax tensions that had developed in Atlantic affairs. Yet, soon the crisis subsided. So, was this just another major crisis that had come and gone? The chapter sums up the conclusions of the many prominent contributors to this book.Less
The Introduction presents the dramatically changing evaluations of NATO. Through the years many had predicted the demise of the organization, but NATO had weathered crises after crises. In 1999 it celebrated its fiftieth anniversary, still going very strong. It had indeed survived the end of the cold war and the disappearance of the Soviet Union. The 1990s had been a period of transition, but the emphasis seemed to be on the continuity side. The coming to power of George W. Bush appeared to change everything. The Iraq War brought to a climax tensions that had developed in Atlantic affairs. Yet, soon the crisis subsided. So, was this just another major crisis that had come and gone? The chapter sums up the conclusions of the many prominent contributors to this book.
Geir Lundestad
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199266685
- eISBN:
- 9780191601057
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199266689.003.0011
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Discusses the transatlantic drift (or split) that has occurred between the US and Western Europe since the election of George W. Bush in December 2000, and the attack on the World Trade Centre in New ...
More
Discusses the transatlantic drift (or split) that has occurred between the US and Western Europe since the election of George W. Bush in December 2000, and the attack on the World Trade Centre in New York on 11 Sept 2001. The further tensions that have arisen since then over the Afghanistan and Iraq wars are discussed, as is the crisis over North Korea and the huge expansion in NATO and in the EU through the entry of Eastern European countries. The author presents speculations on the future of the American–Western European relationship, and forecasts an even further drift apart. This he bases on eight primary reasons, which he discusses in detail. These are: the Cold War is over; unilateralism is growing stronger in the US; the EU is slowly but steadily taking on an ever stronger role; out‐of‐area disputes are becoming increasingly frequent and they have been notoriously difficult to handle for the two sides of the Atlantic; redefinitions of leadership and burdens are always difficult to do; economic disputes are proliferating; even cultural disputes are becoming increasingly numerous; and finally, demographic changes are taking place, particularly on the American side of the Atlantic, that in the long run are likely to challenge the existing relationship.Less
Discusses the transatlantic drift (or split) that has occurred between the US and Western Europe since the election of George W. Bush in December 2000, and the attack on the World Trade Centre in New York on 11 Sept 2001. The further tensions that have arisen since then over the Afghanistan and Iraq wars are discussed, as is the crisis over North Korea and the huge expansion in NATO and in the EU through the entry of Eastern European countries. The author presents speculations on the future of the American–Western European relationship, and forecasts an even further drift apart. This he bases on eight primary reasons, which he discusses in detail. These are: the Cold War is over; unilateralism is growing stronger in the US; the EU is slowly but steadily taking on an ever stronger role; out‐of‐area disputes are becoming increasingly frequent and they have been notoriously difficult to handle for the two sides of the Atlantic; redefinitions of leadership and burdens are always difficult to do; economic disputes are proliferating; even cultural disputes are becoming increasingly numerous; and finally, demographic changes are taking place, particularly on the American side of the Atlantic, that in the long run are likely to challenge the existing relationship.
