A corporation has no opinions or endorsements.

Only the people behind it do, especially the powerful and rich ones.  They have every right as individual “natural,” God-made “persons” that you and I have … even more since they are rich and powerful, if you know what I mean.  I struggle not to begrudge them that, after all, the Lord said, The rich you will always have with you … sort of.  It has ever been so; nothing new under the sun.

So why do they need to increase that influence of theirs exponentially by means of the money their customers entrust to them in good faith while making, in most cases, apolitical “consumer” purchases?  Why indeed?

And why, with extra privileges and “rights” that We The People have supposedly freely and graciously, Sovereignly bestowed upon them?  Why indeed?  What are they up to, and why should we “trust” them?

Why do they always want more, and more, and more?  Fool us once, shame on you.  Fool us twenty times … shame on us.

ADA doomed?

Will New Corporate America — The Second American Republic, if you will — chuck the Americans With Disabilities Act?

After all, look how expensive we are!  Do we spend enough to be worth it?

Hell, they could take away Disability assistance / benefits, and basically put us out on the street and/or kill us!

Change Prez election procedures?

If you think too long and hard about the question, they might close Comments on you!  (Maybe that’s one of the MSM’s problems!!)  So here’s what I was gonna say (and maybe more):

  • Simple paper ballots, hand-completed in ink (X, check, or circle; no dots to fill in or chads), hand-counted in public at the polling place, no matter how long it takes (no matter what Wall Street or Fox News say), with protections against old-fashioned stuffing. Yes, LOW-TECH. It was good enough for the Founding Fathers….
  • Enough precincts for the population to have no more than a reasonable wait.
  • Non-partisan administration of elections. (And no “privatization” of THIS!)
  • Federal regulation of elections to Federal-related offices: Presidential and Vice-Presidential Electors, Senators, Representatives.
  • Right to Vote: no more “determined by the legislative authority of each state,” like when the 2000 Fla. GOP legislature threatened to throw out the vote and select GOP Electors themselves.
  • Total public financing of campaigns, no private or party or third-party (eg, Swiftboats) donations or money at all … with an amount of free ad time on TV, radio, satellite, and cable.
  • Automatic voter registration with citizenship / adulthood.
  • Regional Primaries.
  • Enforce truth-in-advertising standards, especially if now we’re paying for them!!!
  • Paid holiday, and/or mandatory paid time-off for those who can’t plan to take the whole day off.  No matter what employers say.
  • Simultaneous 24-hour polling nationwide, so as not to disenfranchise the West.
  • No re-election of President: only one term ever per person.
  • Make the presidential runner-up President of the Senate as effectively originally (just, no longer VP, since that has become an important part of the Prez’s Administration), with only a tie-breaking vote, but chairing Senate sessions, etc.
  • Require polling places to be able to accommodate all expected voters indoors in any way possible, in case of bad weather, even if they have to be tents in parks, rental trailers, commandeered big-box stores, supermarkets, malls, etc.
  • Electoral Votes for Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Am. Samoa, Guam, and Northern Marianas Islands — maybe one or two apiece. After all, they’re Americans too, and affected by Presidential decisions! (How about a voting Senator and Rep. apiece, too, and 2 Sens. for DC?)
  • No ballot initiatives at the same time as elections for President or Congress, effectively “federalizing” state and local issues (so much for States’ Rights!!); nevermind that I&R is unconstitutional in the first place, denying States “a republican form of government,” ie, representative democracy!
  • Warmer-weather elections and changes-of-government
  • Apparently it needs to be clarified that Federal Courts have NO role in election of a president or VP
  • Put teeth in the requirement that Prez and VP can’t be from the same state, by adding “in the last 4 years,” to avoid another Dick Cheney sham-move from Texas to Wyoming to be eligible
  • Lame-duck restrictions on abuse of powers, maybe for the final six months of his/her term, maybe unless consented by a supermajority of Congress or the Senate (“advice and consent”), or something

New Bushie ‘Business Plot’: Take Bailout Money and Run

It looks like Democratic leaders in Congress, and the MSM, are prepared to let them, too.  Here’s the details, and here’s a little different perspective.

I believe that “no review” provision is unconstitutional.  It comes from arrogant “conservatives” who propose using Congress’ power to delineate Federal courts’ jurisdiction, to exclude altogether pet projects like anti-flag-burning, public school prayer, anti-abortion, anti-pornography, etc etc etc.  But that’s at best a misunderstanding, at worst a vile perversion, of the provision, otherwise Congress could just explicitly exclude ALL its laws from judicial review, and do whatever it wants, the Constitution be damned.  But this power has never been seriously interpreted this way by Congress or the Courts.  Every act of the legislative or executive branches has to be reviewable judicially, even if just to say “It’s a political matter” or “It’s a Constitutional Amendment” (which would be obvious of course), “they’re allowed.”  If Congress (and the White House) sought to exclude a new bill from review by existing courts, they would be required to establish a new court just for that bill (like FISA), or designate State courts or something.  We can’t have NO review!

And a dictatorship of the Treasury Secretary, who works for the President?  Please!  I don’t see these powers granted in the Constitution.  Congress spends money.

As for the artificiality of the current “crisis,” you just know these guys were sitting around one day saying to each other, “What’ll they do, let us go under, and take the economy with us?!!”  This may be the culmination of W.’s “planned train wreck,” to totally “discredit” government by ballooning the deficit (incl. erasing the Clinton / Democratic surplus!), instigating a reaction to “shrink government small enough to drown it in a bathtub.”  (Of course, it all started with the Revolution of the Colonial Ruling Elites against The Crown and legitimate traditional government….)  They scream about “handouts” to us who are needy, but demand this total governmental giveaway to predatory corporations and the rich?!!!  This is right up there with trying to abolish Habeas Corpus and spy on us without a warrant.  And for the Democrats to just roll over and play dead on this when they have the majority in Congress would be a mortal sin.  RED states may not be buying it, but will they take that outrage to the polls in November and thrash the GOP that brought it on them?

Again, I have to wonder how much of this “bailout” money will find its way into Repug campaign coffers, or perhaps the corporate paychecks of Bush officials if they leave office in January?

Just more Republican “borrow-and-spend” “voodoo economics”!!!

America’s King’s Birthday

I missed it, but June 4 is the birthday of ‘British America’s’ *  last actually-reigning Sovereign, King George III, as currently recounted on the Gregorian Calendar.  (He was born under the Old Calendar.)  He was ill-advised regarding Ireland, like most of his predecessors and successors, and a little delusional regarding America.  But insofar as America suffered at all – and not just one in five, or fewer, the rebels with vested socioeconomic interests (ie, not in the Common Good) – ISTM it was mostly owing to the immoderation of homeland politicians’ legislation, eg, a tax on every damn piece of paper?!!!

The late Marc Chaitlin commemorated his birthday from a U.S. monarchist and constitutional-legitimist perspective shortly before his own passing (text-search “birthday” – without quotation marks – here).

God be good to both of them … and to the victims of George’s politicians.

(*–That is to say, south of Canada!)

Wright = Lewinsky. Move on!

Yes, this Rev. Wright thing has been too long a distraction in the most important election in ages.  Media-driven, racist, religious persecution.  Or should we put all candidates’ preachers under the microscope?  They’re Protestants, so they’ve probably said a thing or two to pee-off half the country or more (PDF)!

There’s a reason why the Constitution outlaws “religious tests” for public office….

Judge-Made Law

…has a long tradition in the English/American legal system.  What do you think Common Law is?!!  Montesquieu’s analysis, dividing the British (uncodified) constitution into three branches – legislative, executive, and judicial – seems to have been historically ignorant.  Parliament only became the lawmaking busybodies they are today in the last couple centuries.  Before that, Parliament moved far fewer statutes, the King made law by himself or in his Council, and judges dispensed justice ideally on the basis of actual justness, reason, Divine law, legal tradition, and (Western) Christian morality, “from time immemorial” – the Common Law or case law.  (The much-lampooned Trial by Ordeal had to be relatively rare when you think about it, eh?)

Of course, Parliament didn’t used to be in mostly continuous existence like it is today, giving them plenty of time for politician mischief!  The King only used to convoke MPs when he needed them to allow a tax for his administration and military.  At that time Parliament used to petition him for some changes in the laws (or “redress of grievances“) before granting him his tax.  And then they were gone until he needed them again.  Of course, then there was little Parliamentary “oversight” over his administration … so we’ve traded royal court mischief for politician mischief.  Which is worse?!!

Mostly, Continental European countries have completely codified their legal systems via legislatures and/or written Constitutions.  [Maybe one reason why the proposed EU Constitution was like a New York phone book … and that the EU is infamously bureaucratic!]  They have no more “judge-made law”!  Is that what you want?!  Catholic, Napoleonic, Imperial, French, German, Roman, Louisiana/Quebec law?!!  They seem to have taken Montesquieu very seriously.

In reality, of course, even most U.S. courts feel hamstrung to merely apply existing law, and only State Supreme Courts or the U.S. Supreme Court, each in their own constitutional competence, feel empowered to interpret law – but even they are (supposed to be) bound by U.S. and State written Constitutions, unlike English courts traditionally, U.S. “conservative” (actually Classical Liberal) and antigovernment whining notwithstanding.

So really, most of America’s judge-made law is many centuries old, and not at all recent – much even back to “time immemorial,” even before AD 1066 – “for the common law of England was not introduced by {William} the conqueror.”