Another Teabagger Who Doesn't Understand the Constitution

Merry Hyatt has found allies in her quest to put an initiative on the ballot next year requiring public schools to play Christmas carols.

Hyatt, who moved to Redding four months ago, said she joined the Redding Tea Party Patriots and recruited several members to help her collect the 433,971 signatures needed by March 29.
.....

"Bottom line is Christmas is about Christmas," said Erin Ryan, president of the Redding Tea Party Patriots. "That's why we have it. It's not about winter solstice or Kwanzaa. It's like, 'wow you guys, it's called Christmas for a reason.' "
.....

"I have two words to say about Ms. Hyatt's proposal: blatantly unconstitutional," said Rob Boston, senior policy analyst for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which is based in Washington, D.C., and has a local chapter in Sacramento.

These misguided idiots! Public schools are not religious schools. They are not there to promote one religion over another. They are there to teach our kids. It's time for responsible and sensible parents to stand up and say don't try to force stuff like this and Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design is nothing than an attempt to have religion taught under the guise of pseudo-science.

If these people really want to help kids who come from backgrounds in which violence, drugs, and alcoholism abounds, they need to go into those neighborhoods and be mentors to them.

There were two holidays Erin Ryan did not mention that occur during this time of year: the Islamic New Year and Chanukah. This is why so many businesses use the term Season's Greetings.

People really need to wake up and learn what the Tea Party really stand for. It is not a grass-roots organization that wants to uphold the Constitution. It is one that wants it distorted to meet their religious goals. It is an affront to our founding fathers who fought and struggled to make sure that those in the minority would not have their rights trampled upon.

Republican Purges

Would you consider this to be Stalinist, Maoist, or Nazism?

We're Not Fragile

For the past several months, I've been reluctant to click on some of the blogs I used to read on a daily basis. When Bush was president, many claimed there was a Bush derangement syndrome among centrists and leftists. This pales in comparison to the moronic derangement of some bloggers and a lot of others out there who seem to think that Obama is a Marxist, Socialist, Communist, and Fascist.

It's been quite a few months since I've clicked on Likelihood of Success. I'm glad that he sees the rampant stupidity as well.

A few months ago, I dared to click on Little Green Footballs site. I'm glad to see he isn't suffering from derangement either.

I've watched this video of Jon Stewart several times. I agree with him. This country is bigger than one president. It will be able to overcome and set right all the legislation passed by President Reagan and President Bush that infringes on our 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments. I too believe this country is big enough to handle health care for all.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Some Truths Are Self-Evident

The Onion does it again in it's Area Man Passionate Defender of What He Imagines Constitution to Be.

"Our very way of life is under siege," said Mortensen, whose understanding of the Constitution derives not from a close reading of the document but from talk-show pundits, books by television personalities, and the limitless expanse of his own colorful imagination. "It's time for true Americans to stand up and protect the values that make us who we are."

According to Mortensen—an otherwise mild-mannered husband, father, and small-business owner—the most serious threat to his fanciful version of the 222-year-old Constitution is the attempt by far-left "traitors" to strip it of its religious foundation.

"Right there in the preamble, the authors make their priorities clear: 'one nation under God,'" said Mortensen, attributing to the Constitution a line from the Pledge of Allegiance, which itself did not include any reference to a deity until 1954. "Well, there's a reason they put that right at the top."

"Men like Madison and Jefferson were moved by the ideals of Christianity, and wanted the United States to reflect those values as a Christian nation," continued Mortensen, referring to the "Father of the Constitution," James Madison, considered by many historians to be an atheist, and Thomas Jefferson, an Enlightenment-era thinker who rejected the divinity of Christ and was in France at the time the document was written. "The words on the page speak for themselves."

According to sources who have read the nation's charter, the U.S. Constitution and its 27 amendments do not contain the word "God" or "Christ."

Mortensen said his admiration for the loose assemblage of vague half-notions he calls the Constitution has only grown over time. He believes that each detail he has pulled from thin air—from prohibitions on sodomy and flag-burning, to mandatory crackdowns on immigrants, to the right of citizens not to have their hard-earned income confiscated in the form of taxes—has contributed to making it the best framework for governance "since the Ten Commandments."

As postscript about the Pledge of Allegiance: It was written by a socialist preacher in 1892.

Justice for All?

This family was lucky. They could afford to pay close to a million dollars to prove their innocence.

Why would police produce false reports when they know the entire incident was recorded? "I really don't know," Nick says. "I guess they figured they're cops, so what the hell is going to happen to them? And you know what? They're right. They've gotten away with it."

What happens to those who can't afford a good defense? Shouldn't police officers, prosecutors, and judges who manufacture evidence, cover-up evidence be prosecuted or punished in some way?

Equal Rights Now!!!

Community Organizers

There’s been a great deal in the news about community organizers. Our country has a long history of community organizers. In fact, some of the most radical ones in our history were from the late 1700s. These radicals included John Hancock, John Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and many, many others.

These men were filled with radical ideas. They saw a vision of the colonies becoming united states with a common theme that all men were created equal with unalienable rights and that laws should not be unfair.

One of their biggest beefs was unjust taxes. Under President Bush the following occurred after President Bush cut taxes:

The poverty rate in 2008 rose to 13.2 percent, the highest in 11 years, while median household income fell to $50,303. Ten years earlier, adjusted for inflation, it was $51,295.
Of course this reflects the ravages of a horrid recession. But the decline started before the collapse in the housing and financial sectors — and it was calculated, in the eyes of some.
Harvard economist Lawrence Katz called it “a plutocratic boom.” If anything comes close to defining the era, that would be my nomination. President Bush cut $1.3 trillion in taxes — and the biggest beneficiaries by far were the top 1 percent of earners. At the same time, Wall Street was inflated by the helium of a regulation-free economy that eventually gave us Bernie Madoff and banks begging for bailouts.

One of the biggest arguments for cutting taxes is that it will help spur the economy. We did not see that happen. Instead, we saw a decline in income for the majority of Americans.

Now consider the people who showed up in a state of generalized rage in Washington over the weekend. They have no leaders, save a self-described rodeo clown — Glenn Beck of Fox News — and some well-funded Astroturf outfits from the permanent lobbying class inside the Beltway. They are loosely organized under a Tea Party movement, but these people are closer to British Tories than 18th century patriots with a love of equality.

1984

It had been 25 years since I last read 1984 by George Orwell. The first time I read it, I couldn't really visualize the description of the Two Minute Hate and people becoming riled up to the extent they were in the book. But now that I see the hour long hate-fest by Glenn Beck, the moronic writings of Pat Buchanan, and the hate Rush Limbaugh spews, I can understand a little better.

Rationing

One of the big talking points opponents of health care reform bring up is the fear of rationing. They claim health care rationing exists in Britain's and Canada's health care system. A British doctor speaks out:

Among the inflammatory charges, Sen. Edward Kennedy wouldn't have received state-of-the-art care for his brain tumor in a place like Great Britain because health overseers would have found extending the life of the 77-year-old unworthy of the expense.

"Well, I'm sorry to say that's the most ludicrous thing that I've heard," Ara Darzi, a surgeon and former minister of health, tells Steve Inskeep on Tuesday's Morning Edition. It's an example, Darzi says, of the "lies that have been used to set fear against reform."
...
"Americans fear that countries such as Britain and Canada ration care -- and that such rationing could and should never be tolerated in the United States," the Post editorial says. "Yet 47 million uninsured is quite an extreme form of rationing. So at this moment, the burden of proof falls upon those who oppose change -- for they stand in defense of fear.

All the Rage

Our founders were not godlike men. They had their faults like everybody. Most of the Southerners who signed the Declaration of Independence were heavily in debt. Thomas Jefferson eventually lost his beloved Monticello because of his debt. Benjamin Franklin was the 1770's Bill Clinton.

When the American Revolution was fought, we were in heavy debt. It was to the point that many other countries thought for sure the new country would totter over the brink and exist no more. France was our China back then. We borrowed mostly from them in the 1770's just as we borrow heavily from China today.

Our Founders had a great deal of courage. Throughout our country's history, we've met hardships before. There have been wars, recessions, depressions, natural disasters, and other obstacles to struggle through.

And even as our country struggled through this, we still welcomed our doors to the poor wretched huddled masses yearning to be free. Today, we tend to try to slam the doors.

Are we to be frightened of helping our neighbors? In the video, Ms. Abram states their insurance deductible if $5,000. Her family is lucky to have any coverage at all. But like many Americans, their family is going to be struggling with mounting debt as her son goes through his surgeries. Health care reform is to help her and yet she fears it because of the bugaboo word socialism.

Her and so many others should be directing their rage at the real culprits in this mess: The insurance companies.

Health care reform is needed and badly. Premiums have gone up and along side those premium increases, deductibles have gone up as have co-pays. People are being dropped from insurance as soon as they become sick.

Insurance reform is not just needed in health care. It is also needed in property insurance. I'm hoping Congressman Gene Taylor supports health care reform. By doing so, he can garner interest in the insurance reforms he has been proposing since Hurricane Katrina.

We need debate on this issue not blind rage. Screaming at your Congressman and throwing a temper tantrum doesn't alleviate the problem.

Average Americans?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Visions

There are some great leaders in our country's history. Thomas Jefferson had great vision when he made the Louisiana Purchase. Abraham Lincoln had the vision of keeping the country united as well as abolishing inhumane slavery. Theodore Roosevelt had the great vision of preserving wild and undeveloped areas for future generations and our national park system was created.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had the vision of helping those affected by the Great Depression and many social programs were put in place. These programs helped people from starving to death and helped create jobs. He served a record four terms of office and led our country out of the depression and through World War II.

Dwight Eisenhower saw the need for a road system in which our military could travel the vast distances of our country without being bogged down. Thus, the interstate systems was created.

John F. Kennedy had the vision of us going to the moon. He set our country on a path of technological discovery has not been reviled. Because of his vision, the US developed computers, cell phones, ceramics that are used in our vehicles, satellite phones, and so many other modern conveniences we take for granted today.

Even one of the presidents I despise most, Jimmy Carter was a visionary. He saw the need for us to develop forms of transportation and power needs that were not so dependent on foreign oil.

The Federal government had to borrow money for these visions of America's future to proceed. In fact, the American Revolution was fought on heavily borrowed money from France and other European countries. Some funds were borrowed from individuals.

Some of the Founders were dismayed about all the borrowing but it was a tradition most of the Founders from Southern states were used too. Jefferson and other Southern leaders had vast personal debts.

What these visionaries understood was that these plans for the future cost money. In many cases taxes were raised and our country was heavily in debt. At one point after the American Revolution, it seemed that our country would be swallowed up by the weight of the debt. But one thing these visionaries had in addition to the country's future growth was courage. As did the people they led.

Now, our country seems to be filled with those that are so fearful, they are willing to give up their rights and sadly, not have any visions for the growth of our country. We've seen what Reagan's trickle down economics have led to: More and more people having to use credit cards for basic needs such as food, jobs flying oversees, less deregulation leading to higher bills on electricity, telephones, etc. and most alarmingly, a shrinking middle class.

George W. Bush's economic policy exacerbated the problem. Further deregulation has led to massive bailouts on Wall Street and the current recession.

Our country is at a crossroads now. Millions of jobs lost have to be replaced. Our country needs to face a new way of getting from here to there as the price of fuel goes. And as President Obama has proposed, we can create jobs in an effort to make our country less dependent on foreign oil. We can overhaul our medical system ins which premiums continue to rise while at the same time, we have less coverage.

Is this going to take money and debt? Yes. I believe in our country and I believe that working together toward our future can help everyone. We just have to have the same courage shown during other great times of vision.

Strays

Yesterday was one of those hectic days at work. I decided to go to the D'Iberville Marina with the intention of taking a 30 minute photo break and then coming back and eat the lunch I brought. Instead, I spent nearly 45 minutes trying to entice a beautiful little calico kitten. The kitten ate some chips I had brought with me but still would not let me get closer than 3 feet. I made a cat toy from discarded fish line and pipe cleaners and tried to edge closer but as soon as I moved closer than 3 feet, back it went under the pier.

I was relieved to learn that the kitten was feed every day. I was also told the kitten would maintained the 3 foot barrier even with the kind person who has been feeding it every day for the past month. I had planned to take it some food later. We have a bag of cat food at work that we used for a momma cat and two little kittens. She left with her babies after a few days. I guess all the people going into and out of the offices spooked her.

Like I said, my intention was to take the kitten some food after I got off work. It was a very hectic day and I didn't leave work until after 6 and I decided I would until today to go. Someone else was feeding it.

On my way home, I saw a homeless man walking down the road. He looked like he was about to pass out from the heat. I swung back around and went back to the office and grabbed a coke, two bottles of water, and the lunch I didn't get to eat. I normally don't do this but the man looked so pitiful. I parked my car and walked up to him and asked if he needed any water. He said yes. I took the water to him and then asked if he would like some food. He said it had been a few days since he had anything to eat. He had a medical bracelet on. I gave him the food and the coke and then left.

On the way home, I cried most of the way because I realized I had just feed a human being like I would have a stray cat or dog. It made me somewhat ashamed that there are fellow Americans who have no homes, no food, and cannot find a job.

In Defense of the 6th Amendment

Thank you Justice Scalia!

Legal experts and prosecutors are concerned about the results of last month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that requires lab analysts to be in court to testify about their tests. Lab sheets that identify a substance as a narcotic or breath-test printouts describing a suspect's blood-alcohol level are no longer sufficient evidence, the court ruled. A person must be in court to talk about the test results.

The opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, has prosecutors and judges shaking their heads in disgust and defense lawyers nodding with satisfaction at the notion that the Constitution's Sixth Amendment guarantee that defendants "shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him" is not satisfied by a sheet of paper.

"This is the biggest case for the defense since Miranda," said Fairfax defense lawyer Paul L. McGlone, referring to the Supreme Court ruling that required police to inform defendants of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. He said judges "are no longer going to assume certain facts are true without requiring the prosecution to actually put on their evidence."

Now do something about those laws which violate our 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendment rights.

Quitters Never Win

Socialism in Action!

This weekend, instead of having a tea bag protest, really help your community:

Alternative Protest: Million Can

HOW: Act locally. Here are some examples:
• Take a bag of food to a local pantry
• Organize a food drive where you work or play, your church or motorcycle club, etc.
• Organize some friendly competition amongst a group of blogs
• Challenge your Facebook & Myspace friends and your twitter followers
• There's no one right way to get involved. Look around you, see the need and do something about it.

American Justice?

I used to feel good about our justice system. It seemed it used to be the best in the world as far as having a level playing field for those who have been charged with a crime. But since Reagan's War on Drugs and Bush's War on Terror, more and more laws are being passed that give almost unlimited power to prosecutors. Laws have been passed out of fear. Some of these laws encroach too heavily on our 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendment rights.

Too often, I hear people say that as long as you don't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear from these laws. The thing is that far too many people are being caught up in these laws. The three strikes and you're out laws now give the same level of punishment to those who pass bad checks to those who murder.

A law passed two years ago, the Adam Walsh Act, was meant to protect society from sexual predators. It was meant so that no other parents had to go through what Adam Walsh's parents had to go through. The sad thing is because of all the new rules implemented with the Adam Walsh Act, the system is becoming so overloaded that the police can no longer keep track of the true sexual predators.

We see teenagers being charged for child pornography when they take a picture of themselves and email and send it via cell phone to their boyfriend/girlfriend. These kids, if convicted, will have to register as sex offenders for at least ten years.

We see ten year olds having to register as sex offenders for playing doctor with an eight year old.

We see young adults younger than 21 who inadvertently download child pornography, having to register as sex offenders for 10 years or more. Is it justice when 9 child porn photos are found out of hundreds of thousands of files on a person's computer and that person is charged with a felony and will have to register as a sex offender if convicted?

We see 17 year olds having to register as sex offenders after being charged for statutory rape for having sex with their year old boyfriend/girlfriends. Is this justice? Does it really keep us safe? Does it really keep our children safe?

Right Wing Extremist

Who says the DHS is unfairly targeting right-wing extremists? Von Brunn, Timothy McVeigh, and the and Dr. Tiller's murderer are some of the right-wing extremists the DHS needs to keep an eye on.

No Justice

The Supreme Court has made another infamous ruling. It further erodes the protections against excesses and abuses of our rights. Each one of us, those who have never committed a crime and those who have, need to be worried.

The new ruling affects our 6th Amendment rights:

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

At stake is the right to the accused to be represented by counsel. The case involves a man who was appointed a public defender:

At a preliminary hearing, a judge ordered that a public defender be appointed. The timing is in dispute, but at some point Mr. Montejo was read his Miranda rights again and agreed to accompany detectives to locate the murder weapon, which he had indicated that he had thrown into a lake.

During the trip, he wrote a letter of apology to the victim’s widow, using paper and pen provided by the detectives. Only upon his return did Mr. Montejo meet with his lawyer, who was furious that his client had been questioned in his absence, and was further incensed when the letter was admitted as evidence at trial.

This descision also infringes upon our 5th Amendment rights. There are numerous laws, such as the PATRIOT Act, certain laws passed during the war on drugs, and another passed a couple of years ago which infringe upon our 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendment rights. These are not rights that are there just to protect those who have been accused of crimes. They are there to protect everyone's rights. They were framed into our Constitution because of the excesses of British colonial rule. Are we willing to give up those precious rights which protected us from the excesses of a power-hungry government?

Justice Stevens sums it up best:

Mr. Montejo’s Sixth Amendment right to legal representation, as well as his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, were damaged by the ruling, Justice Stevens said.

“Such a decision can only diminish the public’s confidence in the reliability and fairness of our system of justice,” he said.

I disagree with Justice Scalia:

That 1986 ruling has not only proved “unworkable,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority, but its “marginal benefits are dwarfed by its substantial costs” in that some guilty defendants go free.

I tend to think like John Adams:

"The reason is because it's of more importance to the community, that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished".

Fishing

A week or so ago, I published a post called For the Common Good. It didn't generate any comments here but at Weather Underground received over 200. One of those comments was the adage of give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he can eat every day. There's a lot of truth in that adage. It does ignore the components that need to be in place before one can teach another to fish. The person being taught needs to have a place to cook, in reasonable health, the tools necessary to catch a fish, a place to keep the fish, clean and unpolluted waterways were fish can thrive, and a way to get to the fishing spot.



In 2006 when budget hearings were being held, Congressman David Price made the following plea:

Mr. Speaker, colleagues will remember the biblical story of the prophet Nathan coming to the might King David. Nathan told David a story about a rich man who had many sheep but who took the one little ewe of a poor man to feed a visiting friend. David flew into a rage at the rich man and proclaimed that anyone who would do such a thing deserved to be put to death for abusing his power and showing so little compassion. And Nathan said to David, "You are that man". This story should lead us to look into the mirror: Are we in danger of becoming "that man"? The Republican budget removes support four housing, education, Medicaid, community development, and small business lending. It raises taxes on the poor. And it does all this so the Republicans can afford new tax cuts for the wealthiest among us. If there was ever a moral issue before this Congress, it is that one.

When my son was younger, I taught him to fish. He learned well and was soon catching more and bigger fish than I.


The thing is, I, and many like me, who come from backgrounds were opportunities were limited have benefited from programs that have taught us to fish. Funding for public education, programs such as Section 8, food stamps, public transportation and other similar programs have given many the option of learning to fish. Once basic needs were taken care of, programs such as Pell Grants enabled us to learn to fish. Many, like me, now pay taxes so that others can learn to fish.

To be able to learn to fish in order to support oneself is the basic premise of so-called entitlement programs. They are an investment in our country's future. These programs make it possible for many to pass on newly learned skills and thereby lend a helping hand to others.

It takes more than a pole to teach a person to fish. It takes roads, clean water, shelter, transportation, teachers, clothing, etc.