Presidents and Monarchs: Keeping an eye on what they get up to.

The Slog: During the 2008 campaign, Barack 'baby bomber' Obama declared, “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorise a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

This would be hugely reassuring were it not for the fact that he did precisely this in Libya, and was (apparently) only held back from Syrian gung-hoing by the British Parliamentary ‘no’ vote, plus a rapidly unravelling story about Assad’s “use” of chemical weapons.
But then again, Constitutions appear at times to be not so much moveable feasts as Meals on Wheels. Here, for example, is the gist of a Bill going through Parliament at the moment (my italics):
‘A Bill to amend the Sovereign Grant Act 2011; to amend the succession to the title of the Duke of Cornwall; to redistribute the Duchy of Cornwall estate; and to remove the requirement for a Parliament to obtain the Queen’s or Prince’s consent to consideration of Bills passing through Parliament.’
Tagged onto the end of this Bill – as if it might be a vague afterthought – is a set of clauses designed to, effectively, remove any right by the residents of Buck Palace to play even the tiniest ceremonial role in the passage of British laws.
This isn’t that big a deal; it’s just that I can’t recall seeing it discussed anywhere in the lame stream media.

But what I can recall are some new laws equally quietly passed to give our Royal Family an astonishing level of privacy from the eyes of the press. I sense that another kind of deal – not a big deal, but a quid pro quo deal – might have been done here. Prince Charles has been working along these lines for some time now – in particular, ingratiating himself with the security services, and getting clauses slotted into Royalty acts about less press intrusion. One HRH somewhere at the end of the Mall has traded some meaningless signatures (and potential future trouble) for some highly meaningful power to censor the press.
And equally, in the US a number of commentators are asking why Barack Obama marched his soldiers up the hill about Syria….and then down again. Some of them were concluding over the weekend that the Black Dude is keen to demolish the growing view that he just might be the most controlling President since Dick Nixon. His seeming awareness of Presidential power limits over the Syria issue has played fairly well on the whole. Meanwhile, his plans to increase citizen surveillance remain increasingly forgotten and largely intact.
Demonstrate, distract and then trade has always been a good political strategy. It’ll be interesting keeping an eye on what happens with both these threats to personal liberty.

Edited by WD

Source 

Art by WB7