I am reminded of a cartoon I saw years ago in a humor magazine. It depicted a a lynch mob running down the main street of some dusty western town. A man running at the front of the mob is asking of the fellow carrying the rope, "This lowdown skunk we're afixin' to hang, what did he do?"

History may be written by the winner but the accepted "Code of the West" was the invention of the dime novel writer. Those people of our western myths were merely people. They were products of their time and environment. Some were good, some were bad. If circumstances forced an individual into a fight for his life, he did what he could to kill his opponent.

When faced with an armed adversary the prudent course was to draw and fire first. I doubt many survivors of gunfights pondered their moral obligation to a "Code of the West" prior to taking action to eliminate the threat to their continued existence.

For the most part, the heroes of our modern western tales had all the human frailties we currently possess but with far less access to the elements of education and basic hygiene that we take for granted. They would have had dirt under the fingernails, halitosis and, as a result of long periods without bathing, probably a level of body odor we would consider to be offensive. Hollywood and the passage of time have had a sanitizing effect on the Hickcock's, the Earps, Calamity Jane, Billy the Kid and all the others in that vast array of dime novel heroes and heroines.

George W. Bush is not writing the end to any "code" that actually existed. He is simply ignoring the expectation that, as leader of the free world, he should adopt the posture of being the "good guy."

If we were to search through tales from the west to find an archetype for George W. Bush it wouldn't be the Earps, or Wild Bill Hickock. Nor would it be Ike Clanton or Jesse James. The model for this president would more closely resemble the Paul Newman character "Hud."

In the film by the same name, Hud asks his father, "Tell me what it is about me that's stuck in your craw, not that I give a damn." The father replies, "That's just what it is Hud, you don't give a damn."

George W. Bush is not the first president to exceed constitutional authority in order accomplish his goals. The difference is that in all other cases, the administration in office at the time took pains to pass legislation that gave the appearance of holding to the constitution. President Bush and the current administration simply doesn't give a damn.

Should that pesky old fourth amendment get in the way, invoke the name of "terror" and soldier on. If the budget does not permit funding a foreign war, move outside the process with emergency supplemental appropriations. Not enough troops for your war, hire mercenaries and have the war's infrastructure needs catered. Property rights law hinders you in building a border fence across private property, declare the law invalid. Can't torture prisoners on US soil, fly them to a countries where they can be tortured. Border patrol agents, by doing their job, anger the officials from a foreign country, throw them in jail.

The list of egregious events go on ad infinitum and affects not only those in Washington, D.C. but has a trickle down effect throughout our society. If the top level of our government can ignore any constraints placed on it by law or the constitution, the reasoning goes, then why should any level of government or law enforcement be so constrained?

George W. Bush may not have ended a so-called "Code of the Wild West" but his actions are leading to, and his legacy may well be, a break down in the rule of law for the entire nation.

Learn more about this author, Rick Fontes.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

---

Add your voice

Know something about How President Bush is ending the Wild West in his administration's foreign policy?
We want to hear your view. Write now!