Sanders proposes amendment to the Constitution to counter Citizen’s United

According to a story in The Hill, Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has proposed an amendment to the Constitution to exclude corporations from First Amendment rights to spend money on political campaigns.

The proposed amendment’s a reaction to the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, wherein the conservative majority Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the government cannot put limits on election advertisements funded by corporations, unions or other groups. Democrats have charged that the decision essentially treats corporations as people who can enjoy First Amendment rights.

“Make no mistake, the Citizens United ruling has radically changed the nature of our democracy, further tilting the balance of power toward the rich and the powerful at a time when already the wealthiest people in this country have never had it so good,” Sanders said.”In my view, history will record that the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision is one of the worst decisions ever made by a Supreme Court in the history of our country.”

S.J.Res. 33, would state corporations don’t have the same constitutional rights as persons, that corporations are subject to regulation, that corporations may not make campaign contributions and that Congress has the power to regulate campaign finance.

While the Citizens United case affected corporations, unions and other entities, the Sanders amendment focuses only on “for-profit corporations, limited liability companies or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests.”

The Hill reports that Sanders said he’s never proposed an amendment to the Constitution before, but said he sees no other alternative to reversing the Citizens United decision.

“In my view, corporations should not be able to go into their treasuries and spend millions and millions of dollars on a campaign in order to buy elections,” he said. “I do not believe that is what American democracy is supposed to be about.”

This past summer, Republican Tea Party (GOTP) presidential bridesmaid candidate Mittens Romney mewed “corporations are people my friend,” when fielding a question about whether taxes should be raised in order to increase federal revenues, which drew sharp reactions from Democrats.

The Sanders amendment is co-sponsored by Democratic Senator Mark Begich of Alaska, and a similar amendment has been proposed in the House by Democratic Representative Ted Deutch of Florida.

While it’s true these proposals don’t have a snow ball’s chance of moving forward in the House and Senate, as each would need the support of two-thirds of both chambers to pass, Sanders, Begich and Deutch should all be thanked by liberty loving people everywhere; Citizens United is one of the most infamous Supreme Court decisions since Dred Scott and make no mistake it will one day be overturned.

 

History is repeating itself

A young homeless woman, who was reportedly three months pregnant, was sprayed in the face with military grade pepper spray and reportedly kicked in the stomach by one police officer and then hit in the stomach with another policeman’s bike during an “Occupy” event in Seattle; she’s reportedly miscarried her child…

One recurring conservative talking point theme is, “The protesters were told to move out of an intersection and refused. The police then used the pepper spray to control the crowd.”That made me start thinking of other times when the “authorities” have ordered the crowds to disperse and the crowds have refused.

Using logic I’ve heard today:

Tensions were running high in the city of Boston, especially between the King’s soldiers and the citizenry of the city. On 5 Mar 1770, a group of school boys threw snowballs at a British sentry.  When the sentry called for help, soldiers and angry citizens came running.  Citizens began to aggravate the soldiers; and in the confusion of the moment, someone ordered the British soldiers to fire.  When the smoke and haze of the musket fire had cleared, three Bostonians lay dead; and two others were mortally wounded. This incident would come to be known as the Boston Massacre.

During the first week of May 1963, Birmingham police and firemen attacked civil rights demonstrators, many of whom were children, in the streets bordering Kelly Ingram Park. The violence raised a nationwide public outcry, hastening integration in America’s most segregated city.

The protesters were told to move out of an intersection and refused; the police then used water hoses to control the crowd.

The protestors at Kent State University were told to disperse and refused, so the National Guard shot into the crowd to control them…

The one lying down is dead, shot by National Guard soldiers on 4 May 1970; the guardsmen fired 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others…

The students at the University of New Mexico were told to disperse and refused, so the National Guard fixed bayonets and began stabbing people to control the crowd…

On 5 May 70, protesters gathered to protest the Vietnam War and the Kent State massacre; they occupied the Student Union Building, and the ROTC Barracks. Governor Cargo went fishing and allowed the State Police to handle the escalating situation. The National Guard was ordered to sweep the building and arrest those inside; eleven students and journalists were bayoneted.

In the United States of America citizens are allowed to protest, it’s protected by the Bill of Rights – a little something called the First Amendment – and police are supposed to allow them to peacefully do so. If the protestors violate laws then of course the police can arrest them, and that’s what civil disobedience is all about; the protestors take part knowing they will probably be arrested for blocking public access to a building, or a sidewalk, and maybe even an intersection.

If the crowd begins to destroy private or public property then no one will argue the police should stand by, but that hasn’t been the case in the vast majority of reported incidents where police are using military grade pepper spray, rubber bullets and batons to inflict injury and to “break up” the protests; it’s reminiscent of tactics factory owners used against strikers unions in the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s.

84-year-old, retired school teacher, Dorli Rainey is helped away by fellow activists and doused in milk to treat the effects of police pepper spray at an Occupy Seattle protest.

Police at the University of California at Davis dismantled an Occupy encampment Friday, arresting at least 10 protesters, nine of whom were students.

Videos have surfaced on YouTube of police in riot gear pepper spraying a line of protesters who had linked arms and sat down cross-legged on the pavement to protect their camp. In the footage, an officer is seen spraying the demonstrators at point-blank range.

A total of 11 people received medical treatment on the campus and two were transported to the hospital, Sacramento’s KTXL-TV reported.

While I was a young Republican working in Washington DC during the 1980 Iran hostage crisis, there was a rather modest protest of Iranian students not more than half a block from where I was working, the police moved in and many officers reportedly removed their badges and name tags and began breaking up the protest with batons.

I was a young twenty-year-old conservative working on President-elect Ronald Reagan’s Transition Team; I thought it was awesome that the cops had responded that way, especially to Iranian students protesting in my country while hostages were being held in Iran.

My father – a veteran of World War II – very patiently and lovingly told me how wrong I was, and how deplorable the police were for hiding their identity and for using such a high level of force to break up the protest. It was a supreme teaching moment for my father, and a supreme learning moment for me, his son. My Dad spoke of the liberties all people enjoy in America to protest and to have their voices heard, and he said he hoped I would think differently about those rights in the future. It was a lesson that was not lost on me.

In 2007, while serving in the National Guard one drill weekend, the news was on in our staff room, and of course it was FOX PAC; they were covering an anti-Iraq war protest in DC. A Colonel looking at the TV said, “I’d gas the whole lot them.”

I must’ve looked shocked because he asked me, “You disagree Captain”?

I told him that I did, and then I said, “Sir, this tells me that the First Amendment is alive and well.”

As an Army Reservist, I’ve received crowd and riot control training; and one of the absolute cardinal rules is you don’t escalate situations; the many reports of pepper spraying from around the country by police officers who aren’t in life threatening situations (UC Davis incident for example) is very troubling; either these police officers have been very poorly trained, or they’re deliberately trying to incite riots; perhaps in a effort to undermine the “Occupy” movement?

If the police officers in question aren’t poorly trained or incompetent, then one question to be answered is, “Who’s pulling the strings, and at what level within conservative circles, to have the police spin this up”?

 

First Amendment alive and well

Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party have one thing in common – they’re both proof the First Amendment is alive and well – even if one group advocates the overthrow of Wall Street while the latter advocates the overthrow of the freely elected democratic government (by violent means) if necessary.

Now, which do think is the true “domestic” enemy spoken of in the oaths our public officials, and members of the military, swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against?

When protestors from the various “Occupy” movements disrupt the flow of traffic, or allegedly throw things at the Oakland Police, that is not becoming a “domestic” enemy; it may be becoming a public nuisance, but it is not a “domestic” enemy.

When you hold up signs claiming the next time you come back you’ll be armed, or if you show up at rallies with weapons, and spout phrases proclaiming the need for “Second Amendment remedies” then you have truly become the “domestic” enemy, as in “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”.

So, go ahead conservatives, bad mouth the Occupy groups and vilify what they’re doing while supporting the Tea Party; but when they try to “take back” the government, and to usurp your constitutional protected liberties, don’t come crying to me when I’m standing in a line between them and you.

 

 

Judge blocks Wisconsin law curbing labor rights

On Friday, Dane County Circuit Judge MaryAnn Sumi issued a restraining order stopping publication of a law signed last week by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) severely restricting state employee’s right to collective bargaining. The restraining order halts the procedural step essentially blocking the measure, which would go into effect once it is formally published.

The judge issued the order after Dane County’s Democratic District Attorney Ismael Ozanne filed a suit alleging the joint committee of the legislature violated the state’s open meeting law when it abruptly called a session to get the measure passed last week.

While Sumi’s ruling does not speak to the legal merits of the law, it states that Ozanne’s suit must be completed before the publication can move forward.

Phil Neuenfeldt, president of the Wisconsin State AFL-CIO, praised the judge’s action in an interview with the Associated Press, “Judge Sumi confirmed today what we knew all along — that the bill stripping hundreds of thousands of hard-working Wisconsinites of their voice on the job was rammed through illegally in the dark of the night.”

Sometimes the beauty of the system works. Sometimes men like Governor Walker, who think they can run a blind campaign deceiving the voters and then push through an agenda to destroy Unions because they believe they are the bane of everything good and wholesome in America’s free market system are checked, just as the state constitution was designed.

If Walker has proven anything, he’s proven one thing, he’s going to be a one term governor.

 

Wisconsin GOTP Senate Orders Police to Arrest Missing Democratic Party Senators?

Wisconsin’s State Senate Republicans took an unprecedented step towards becoming a police state today when they unanimously passed a resolution calling for police to take 14 Democrats into custody for contempt after they fled to Illinois to avoid voting on a bill that would strip public-sector unions of nearly all their collective bargaining rights.

Wisconsin State Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald

The GOTPs voted 19-0 to give Democrats until 4 p.m. to return to the chamber or be found “in contempt and disorderly behavior.”

The vote comes two weeks after the Democrats left, effectively delaying the vote on Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal to kill collective bargaining for Wisconsin’s state employees – vile people like teachers, police officers and fire fighters.

GOTP Senate Obersturmführer Scott Fitzgerald said the action is legally different from an arrest, but “definitely a shift from asking them politely.”

A private ambulance chaser, James Troupis, hired by Fitzgerald, argued that the move is legal, because the state Constitution allows each house to “compel the attendance of absent members,” thus, this “resolution” supposedly gives the State Senate’s Sergeant at Arms, Edward A. Blazel, the authority to take “any and all steps, with or without force and assistance from police”, to bring the senators back.

Good luck with that Mr. Blazel. Oh, you might want to confer with the State Attorney General’s office before you proceed, and not necessarily rely on some local hack hired privately by the GOTP leadership. After all, it’s the Attorney General who will be defending you – and the GOTP Senate members – from multimillion dollar law suits when this blows up in your face, which it will.

Of course it means little to the regime in Wisconsin that its state Constitution prohibits the arrest of lawmakers while in session unless they’re accused of committing felonies, treason or breach of peace. And it doesn’t say anything about the Senate Sergeant at Arms being invested with the authority to arrest the missing Senators, or anyone else, for alleged “contempt and disorderly behavior”. It’s indeed an interesting line the Senate GOTP leadership has decided to cross.

Walker has made a very transparent move designed to fulfill his desire to break the backs of the state employee’s unions and to gain favor with his sugar daddies, the Koch Brothers (isn’t that a German name?). The GOTP leadership in the Senate has become his dupes and lackeys and are enacting rules and passing resolutions for which it lacks authority.

The 14 Democratic members of the Wisconsin Senate did the only thing they could do when confronted with Walker’s scheme to destroy the ability of the working class in Wisconsin to take part in collective bargaining; they left the state to prevent the state’s senate from having a quorum, thus derailing the plan. These Senators have not forgotten that the Democratic Party stands for the middle class, and the working men and women of Wisconsin. They’ve not forgotten that FDR stood for the rights of the workers, and supported the ideals of collective bargaining. They’re not the criminals in this, they’re the heroes. The criminals are hiding behind edicts and resolutions, using the Wisconsin State Police as their own private palace guard or polizei. Everyone can plainly see what – or whom – the 14 Senators stand for. If you want to know what – or for whom – Walker stands for, just follow the money. There’s more going on in Wisconsin than meets the eye, and there’s much more at stake than collective bargaining.

 

“Do whatever you have to do” to stop the remaking of this country?

C’mon, when has Glenn Beck ever said anything that could be misunderstood as suggesting violence should be used against the Government?

“It falls to the people. It always has fall on the people. But I asked, I said, ‘Between the radio audience and the TV audience, I got about 10 million guard dogs.’ We need people who have understood the Constitution and understand this theory of remaking America, the fundamental transformation, to stand guard and watch them every step of the way — guard and bark and growl and do whatever you have to do, because these people are hijacking our country.” [Fox News, Glenn Beck, 7/28/09, via Nexis]

‎”Do whatever you have to do…” whatever you have to do? The definition of “whatever”: “pron. 1. Everything or anything that …”

“Do everything you have to do…”

“Do anything you have to do…”

Beck is a charlatan and a liar. Telling his listeners to do “whatever you have to do” is telling them to use “any means necessary” to achieve an overthrow of the constitutionally elected government. He is not a patriot, he is a coward – because he wants others to act for him – and he is a traitor to everything he claims to hold dear, including the Constitution and the freedoms outlined therein.

 

This is not Patriotic …

The so-called “patriot” or “citizen” in this picture is not just making some “political statement”, he is making a direct threat of armed insurrection against the freely elected constitutional government of these United States. That, by the way, is not patriotic, it’s treason.

 

FOX PAC Suddenly Silent on Reported GOTP Plans to Use “Cowardly” “Demon Pass” Rule?

With all the extensive FOX PAC coverage of the new Republican Tea Party (GOTP) House majority, isn’t it interesting that it has so far ignored the fact that Herr Boehner and company are reportedly embracing the use of the self-executing rule — commonly referred to as “deem and pass” — to mandate federal budget limits. By comparison, FOX PAC “talking heads” repeatedly attacked Democrats for even considering using the rule during the health care debate, dubbing it “demon pass” and questioning its constitutionality.

Talking Points Memo (TPM) reported that the self-executing rule, also known as “deem and pass,” was “scheduled to make its return to the Capitol Hill on January 5.” According to TPM’s Brian Beutler, “Because Democrats didn’t pass a budget, and because spending authority expires in early March, there’s a strong chance that the government will run out of money before the House and Senate agree to new spending levels. When that happens, under the new House rules, spending will continue — but at levels no higher than those chosen by the House Budget Committee chairman, Paul Ryan.

“As soon as those rules are adopted on Wednesday, Ryan’s spending levels will be considered — or “deemed” — adopted by the full House as if they’d passed a budget with a floor vote. The legislative language in the rules package holds that Ryan’s spending limits, “shall be considered as contained in a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2011 and the submission thereof into the Congressional Record shall be considered as the completion of congressional action on a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2011.” [Talking Points Memo, 1/4/11]

But if we travel back to the days of the great health care debate, when Democratic leaders were merely considering using it, Talking Points Memo also reported, “House Democrats were toying with using a similar process to pass health care reform. They were considering the Senate health care package, which they hated, and a package of amendments to that bill, which they liked. To square those views, they wanted to set up a procedural vote, which, if agreed to, would “deem” both bills passed at once. “Deem” and “pass.”

“This quickly became known as “Demon Pass,” or the “Slaughter Solution,” named after House Rules Chair Louise Slaughter. Republicans rebelled, and conservatives went off the deep end. Radio talk show host Mark Levin called it ‘100 times worse than Watergate.’

“Democrats eventually bowed to that pressure and decide not to use the process — known technically as “deeming,” or a “self-executing.” [Talking Points Memo, 1/4/11]”

Discussing the self-executing rule on the 16 Mar 10 edition of his show, Professor Glenn Beck asked, “How is this even constitutional?” He later wrote in his newsletter that Democrats are “slaughtering the Constitution” and that “the Constitution is being thwarted” if the health care reform legislation passes using the self-executing rule. [FOX PACs’ Glenn Beck, 3/16/11]

During the 11 Mar 10 edition of his FOX PAC show, Sean Hannity said, “The desperation among Democrats to pass this health care bill has reached new heights. Now they lacked the votes in the House to jam this bill through. So their latest solution, don’t vote at all. Now that’s what House rules chairwoman Louise Slaughter is proposing. Now she wants to create a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed and once and for all by passing a minor bill that makes corrections to the Senate bill.” [FOX PACs’ Hannity, 3/11/10 (accessed via Nexis)]

On the 17 Mar 10 edition of FOX PACs’ On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren asked Fox News contributor Dana Perino, “[T]his is a way so that the — in a sense, that the House can go back to the districts and say, Look, I didn’t vote for it because it’s just been deemed passed, right?” and later claimed, “[I]f I were a Democratic member of Congress … the last thing I would want to do is say I sort of cowardly did this deemer — this ‘deem scheme’ thing.” [FOX PACs’ On the Record, 3/17/10, via Nexis]

During an interview with former Republican Sen. Trent Lott, Neil Cavuto compared Democrats who vote for the self-executing rule as “a nefarious car salesman who says, well, yes, you bought this and you paid for this, when, in fact, you didn`t buy this and you didn’t think you paid for this, right?” [FOX PACs’ Your World, 3/15/10, via Nexis]

On 18 Mar 10, FOX PAC leprechaun Hannity criticized then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her support of “deem and pass,” calling it “unconstitutional” and suggesting that House Democrats are “bribing people.” From Hannity:

That same day’s edition of his FOX PAC show, the Beckster called for “the political game surrounding the health care bill” to be “addressed”, “The health care bill is merely a battle. And it is a huge battle. I think it may be Normandy, but it’s part of a bigger war,” Beck said.

“And the war is the fundamental transformation, or restoration of our country. That is the game that they’re playing. And while everybody is going to focus on the political game surrounding the health care bill, the Slaughter Rule, the secrecy, the arm-twisting, the bribes, the lies — these things should be addressed.” [Glenn Beck, 3/18/10, via Nexis]

On the 17 Mar 10 edition of his show, Hannity questioned the “constitutionality” of the “Slaughter rule”, “[I]f this Slaughter rule is used, they have prepared — I’ve put it up on my Web site. They have prepared a court challenge as to the constitutionality of it. There’s also been talk about the constitutionality of mandates.” [Hannity, 3/17/10, via Nexis]

On the 19 Mar 10 edition of his show, Professor Beck said, “The [health care reform] process that the president doesn’t seem to care about has been so abused the average person in America has absolutely no idea what is even happening. What has happened to our country? Is there no honor anymore?
“Yes, let’s just — let’s forget about that whole Constitution thing where it has to pass both the House and the Senate, you know, no. Let’s just instead deem that it has been passed in the House.” [Glenn Beck, 3/19/10, via Nexis]

So far, primetime FOX PAC shows have failed to cover the GOP use of the self-executing rule. A Nexis search of January programs showed no mention of the self-executing rule on any Fox News shows. Media Matters searched FOX PAC transcripts from the networks’ primetime shows from January 1 to January 7 using the search term (deem! w/5 pass! OR self-execut! OR slaughter OR without w/5 vot!). Media Matters search turned up nothing.

So, just to recap, the talking heads at FOX PAC repeatedly attacked the Democrats for simply thinking of using this. But, suddenly (cue the sound of crickets chirping) they are very silent. The GOP House is a den of hypocrites, as is FOX PAC. FOX should just change its motto to “We decide what to report, and you just listen and regurgitate it.”

(Our thanks, as always, to Media Matters for all of its awesome research)

 

Patriotic Idolatry

As a good friend said of the GOP staging of the reading of the Constitution, “They draw near the Constitution with their lips, and with their mouths they do honor it, but their hearts are far from it.”

During the 2008 Presidential election President Obama was attacked by the right-wing talking heads because he wasn’t wearing a US Flag on his lapel. He wasn’t being very patriotic. For a few very short months all the FOX PAC personalities proudly wore the US flag on their lapels, but soon nothing could be seen there any longer. Now we read the Constitution to prove how much we love America. And if you don’t think it was wonderful then you’re not very patriotic.

The conservative right in this country is moving dangerously close to patriotic idolatry.

 

Not Patriotic?

This picture was taken on the 6th of January. Notice anything? Neither Cantor nor Boehner are wearing US Flag lapel pins. Doesn’t that signify a lack of patriotism? Not any more. But in 2008, then candidate Obama, was raked over the goals for not wearing a US Flag lapel pin.

This is the type of hypocrisy on parade that leads me to disbelieve anything these charlatans say about loving America. Or to ever take seriously their stunts, such as reading the Constitution on the floor of the House. Well almost reading the Constitution, except of course the parts referring to slavery, or the fact of skipping two whole Articles, and of course not including the 18th Amendment. Was that Speaker Boehner’s decision? Too many bad family memories?