But Has The American Colossus Learned How to Interpret?

If the American Colossus makes an interpretive claim that may not be challanged, then are we sure the American Colossus has the knowledge and wisdom to interpret for the rest of us? How Hobbesian is this administration becoming?

A fine paragraph by Glenn Greenwald:
"There is a profound and fundamental difference between an Executive engaging in shadowy acts of lawlessness and abuses of power on the one hand, and, on the other, having the American people, through their Congress, endorse, embrace and legalize that behavior out in the open, with barely a peep of real protest. Our laws reflect our values and beliefs. And our laws are about to explicitly codify one of the most dangerous and defining powers of tyranny -- one of the very powers this country was founded in order to prevent."
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/09/legalization-of-torture-an_115945829460324274.html

And as the NYT states today in their news analysis: "Rather than reining in the formidable presidential powers Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have asserted since Sept. 11, 2001, the law gives some of those powers a solid statutory foundation. In effect it allows the president to identify enemies, imprison them indefinitely and interrogate them — albeit with a ban on the harshest treatment — beyond the reach of the full court reviews traditionally afforded criminal defendants and ordinary prisoners."

It does appear that John Yoo and others are bringing American back to a Hobbesian definition of the soveriegn: "The law is all the right reason we have, and (though he, as often as it disagreeth with his own reason, edny it) is the infallible rule of moral goodness. The reason whereof is this, that because neither mine nor the Bishop's reason is right reason fit to be a rule of our moral actions, we have therefore set up over ourselves a sovereign governor, and agreed his alwas shall be unto us, whatsoever they be, in the place of right reason, to dictate to us what is really good" (Hobbes debate with Dr. Bramhall, Bishop of Derry as qtd. in The Philosophy of Hoobes by W.G. Pogson Smith.)

In place of an objective right, we have the sovereign's right. And in Chapter XXVI of Part II of Leviathan, Hobbes writes:m "The Legislator known; and the Lawes, either by writing, or by the light of nature, sufficiently published; there wanteth yet another very materiall circumstance to make them obligatory. For it is not the Letter, but the Intendment, or Meaning; that is to say, the authentique Interpretation of the Law ( which is the sense of the Legislator,) in which the nature of the Law consisteth; And therefore the Interpretation of all Lawes dependeth on the Authority Soveraign . . . ."

Yet, for The American Colossus, another document curbs his "Authority Soveraign."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html

Especially Seciton 2 of Article III. It's time now for the Supreme Court to have a talk with the American Colossus about his tripe recipes.