Declaration: The Crimes & Oppressions of King George (w)
Buzz makes a very good point:
Latino immigrants - from Mexico, Central America, South America - know how to flex their political muscle, and DO SO under adversity, namely the HATE and scorn and potential retribution by Americans (right-wingers) who may be in a position to harm an employees job prospects should that employee be an illegal immigrant (etc).
Meanwhile, Democratic and other minority constituencies seem dazed, confused, and apathetic as King George and the Royal Courtiers - the vapid overpaid parasites of "the major media" inflict one atrocity after another on America, giving tax cuts to billionaires in time of war, while shafting Army, Marine, and Reserve troops with extended tours, extended enlistments, perfunctory health care, inadequate body armor, insufficient support, and above all, appalling committment to wound rehab and PTSD rehabilitation to society.
Actually, Democrats, minorities, and outspoken activists HAVE PROTESTED the Bush regime's illegal war of choice: it is just that the DEMOCRAT "LEADERSHIP" and "Mainstream Media" PREFER TO IGNORE those protesters, whether the tens of thousands on the Washington Mall before the US invasion of Iraq, or the hundreds of thousands protesting in New York city streets either this past week, or during the Republican 2004 convention.
Which is the problem: the "establishment" Democrats HAVE ENABLED THIS MEDIA MONOPOLY, where the CORPORATE MEDIA ** DICTATES ** what is and isn't "news." For example, this example, a New York Times fawning, sychophantic piece by Elisabeth Baumiller [ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/01/washington/01letter.html ] DOESN'T EVEN MENTION the keynote speaker at the White House Correspondents dinner, Mr. Stephen Colbert, who savaged the DC media elites for covering-up, whitewashing, and stonewalling stories about torture, lies-to-war, outing of an undercover CIA operation by the White House as political retribution, collusion between the Bush White House and energy and gasoline price manipulators, and a dozen other scandals which Colbert lampooned so mercilessly, and to the discomfort of the assembled Washington Press whores, at the correspondent's dinner.
[ video download http://movies.crooksandliars.com/WH-Dinner-Colber.mov and
text http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-durang/ignoring-colbert-part-tw_b_20130.html ] Heck, even the right-wing "libertariran" CATO INSTITUTE has come out documenting the "CEASELESS PURSUIT OF POWER and DISDAIN" for the Constitution:
<< “The pattern that emerges is one of a ceaseless push for power, unchecked by either the courts or Congress, one in short of disdain for constitutional limits,” the report by legal scholars Gene Healy and Timothy Lynch concludes. >>
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/6ec15f3c-d93d-11da-8b06-0000779e2340.html
CATO's sentiments are certainly reflected in this op-ed "A Democratic Dictatorship" by Jacob Honberger. If one factors in the Bush-Republican sponsored DIEBOLDIZATION of the US voting process, with NONE of the softaware safeguards in voting machine inspections that state inspectors perform on gambling slot machines routinely, even the concept "Democratic" is open to discussion
A Democratic Dictatorship
by Jacob G. Hornberger, April 26, 2006
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604i.asp
Given all the discussion and debate about whether President Bush will order his military forces to attack Iran, now would be a good time to review the state of liberty in America.
No one can deny that we now live in a country in which the ruler has the omnipotent power to send the entire nation into war on his own initiative. To use the president’s words, when it comes to declaring and waging war against another country, he’s the “decider.”
It wasn’t always that way. The Constitution brought into existence a government in which the powers to declare war and wage war were vested in two separate branches of the government. While the president had the power to wage war, he was prohibited from exercising it without a declaration of war from Congress.
The idea behind the Constitution itself was that a free society necessarily entails restrictions on the power of the government, especially its ruler.
Yet we now live in a nation in which the president has the omnipotent power to ignore all constitutional restraints on his power. That might not be the way the president and his legal advisors put it, but that is the practical effect of what they are saying to justify his powers. >> (cont'd)
___________________________
The Media: Ignoring Colbert
Peter Daou:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/30.html#a8111
"The AP's first stab at it and pieces from Reuters and the Chicago Tribune tell us everything we need to know: Colbert's performance is sidestepped and marginalized while Bush is treated as light-hearted, humble, and funny. Expect nothing less from the cowardly American media. The story could just as well have been Bush and Laura's discomfort and the crowd's semi-hostile reaction to Colbert's razor-sharp barbs. In fact, I would guess that from the perspective of newsworthiness and public interest, Bush-the-playful-president is far less compelling than a comedy sketch gone awry, a pissed-off prez, and a shell-shocked audience.
THIS IS THE POWER OF THE MEDIA TO CHOOSE THE NEWS....TO DECIDE WHEN AND HOW TO SHIELD BUSH ** from NEGATIVE PUBLICITY.. Sins of omission can be just as bad as sins of commission...read on
____________________________________
From King George of 1776 to King George of 2006, It's Time Declare Our Independence from Monarchal Rule
Buzzflash.com editorial
May 2, 2006
http://www.buzzflash.com/index.php?story=Story3
The Declaration of Independence states unequivocally:
"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."
When you read the document (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html) that was the birth certificate of this great nation, you can't help but be struck by how the Busheviks would regard it as a radical, perhaps even terrorist call to arms.
The crimes and oppressions detailed in the Declaration of Independence vary in particularity from the King George of 1776 to the King George of 2006, but the essence of the grievances remain the same.
We could list the bill of particulars stating the case for removing King George W. Bush from office, but it would be too long for your morning's breakfast reading.
But it would include:
-- For his open defiance of the laws of the land and his stated intention to create his own laws as he sees fit.
-- For his secrecy in keeping the business of the people of the United States from their perusal.
-- For his malfeasance in protecting the security of the citizens of the United States of America.
-- For his violations of the balance of powers as set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America.
-- For willfully and intentionally misleading the people of this nation into a financially ruinous war that has led to the loss of ten of thousands of lives -- American and foreign.
-- For his use of public dollars to enrich campaign supporters and businesses related to members of his administration.
-- For, without a warrant and illegally, spying on citizens of the United States engaged in legal activity guaranteed as freedoms under the Constitution.
-- For his ongoing attempts to use official government guaranteed rights and benefits, such as pensions, to keep former government employees from revealing the truth about his administration's deception and betrayal of the American public.
-- For his incompetence in allowing the powers of our military to wither under inept and arrogant leadership.
-- For his placing international financial agreements above the security interests of the nation.
-- For his role in manipulating the outcome of elections, in felony violation of the right to vote.
As you can see, were it 1776, we would need to go through several quills and ink wells to list the grievances against our current King George.
So why is there no outrage to remove the usurper from office?
Yesterday, we witnessed thousands upon thousands of immigrants marching peacefully, with American flags in their hands, in Chicago for the right to American freedom and opportunity. Over a million marched nationally to partake of what's left of the American Dream.
Why aren't there 20 million marching nationally to reclaim our Constitution and our democracy from the faux populist tyrant --with poll ratings at less than a third of the country approving of his tyranny and failure?
Immigrants value our freedom and opportunity, but we as citizens appear to take them so lightly. As if an I-Pod or a McDonald's "Happy Meal" are enough to prove that all is well with the Republic.
We should be closing down the nation in the name of democracy -- and in opposition to tyranny.
The Declaration of Independence reminds us:
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."''
This is about the future security, welfare, and freedom of America. It is about our Constitutional form of government. It is about what differentiated us from the monarchies of Europe, the fascism of Franco, the Communism of the Soviet Union. Are we willing to relegate democracy to the dustbin of history, while an adolescent ruler with a sense of royal entitlement trashes our great governmental heritage?
Proud immigrants showed us the way.
Will we have the courage to follow?
A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL
Latino immigrants - from Mexico, Central America, South America - know how to flex their political muscle, and DO SO under adversity, namely the HATE and scorn and potential retribution by Americans (right-wingers) who may be in a position to harm an employees job prospects should that employee be an illegal immigrant (etc).
Meanwhile, Democratic and other minority constituencies seem dazed, confused, and apathetic as King George and the Royal Courtiers - the vapid overpaid parasites of "the major media" inflict one atrocity after another on America, giving tax cuts to billionaires in time of war, while shafting Army, Marine, and Reserve troops with extended tours, extended enlistments, perfunctory health care, inadequate body armor, insufficient support, and above all, appalling committment to wound rehab and PTSD rehabilitation to society.
Actually, Democrats, minorities, and outspoken activists HAVE PROTESTED the Bush regime's illegal war of choice: it is just that the DEMOCRAT "LEADERSHIP" and "Mainstream Media" PREFER TO IGNORE those protesters, whether the tens of thousands on the Washington Mall before the US invasion of Iraq, or the hundreds of thousands protesting in New York city streets either this past week, or during the Republican 2004 convention.
Which is the problem: the "establishment" Democrats HAVE ENABLED THIS MEDIA MONOPOLY, where the CORPORATE MEDIA ** DICTATES ** what is and isn't "news." For example, this example, a New York Times fawning, sychophantic piece by Elisabeth Baumiller [ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/01/washington/01letter.html ] DOESN'T EVEN MENTION the keynote speaker at the White House Correspondents dinner, Mr. Stephen Colbert, who savaged the DC media elites for covering-up, whitewashing, and stonewalling stories about torture, lies-to-war, outing of an undercover CIA operation by the White House as political retribution, collusion between the Bush White House and energy and gasoline price manipulators, and a dozen other scandals which Colbert lampooned so mercilessly, and to the discomfort of the assembled Washington Press whores, at the correspondent's dinner.
[ video download http://movies.crooksandliars.com/WH-Dinner-Colber.mov and
text http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-durang/ignoring-colbert-part-tw_b_20130.html ] Heck, even the right-wing "libertariran" CATO INSTITUTE has come out documenting the "CEASELESS PURSUIT OF POWER and DISDAIN" for the Constitution:
<< “The pattern that emerges is one of a ceaseless push for power, unchecked by either the courts or Congress, one in short of disdain for constitutional limits,” the report by legal scholars Gene Healy and Timothy Lynch concludes. >>
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/6ec15f3c-d93d-11da-8b06-0000779e2340.html
CATO's sentiments are certainly reflected in this op-ed "A Democratic Dictatorship" by Jacob Honberger. If one factors in the Bush-Republican sponsored DIEBOLDIZATION of the US voting process, with NONE of the softaware safeguards in voting machine inspections that state inspectors perform on gambling slot machines routinely, even the concept "Democratic" is open to discussion
A Democratic Dictatorship
by Jacob G. Hornberger, April 26, 2006
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0604i.asp
Given all the discussion and debate about whether President Bush will order his military forces to attack Iran, now would be a good time to review the state of liberty in America.
No one can deny that we now live in a country in which the ruler has the omnipotent power to send the entire nation into war on his own initiative. To use the president’s words, when it comes to declaring and waging war against another country, he’s the “decider.”
It wasn’t always that way. The Constitution brought into existence a government in which the powers to declare war and wage war were vested in two separate branches of the government. While the president had the power to wage war, he was prohibited from exercising it without a declaration of war from Congress.
The idea behind the Constitution itself was that a free society necessarily entails restrictions on the power of the government, especially its ruler.
Yet we now live in a nation in which the president has the omnipotent power to ignore all constitutional restraints on his power. That might not be the way the president and his legal advisors put it, but that is the practical effect of what they are saying to justify his powers. >> (cont'd)
___________________________
The Media: Ignoring Colbert
Peter Daou:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/30.html#a8111
"The AP's first stab at it and pieces from Reuters and the Chicago Tribune tell us everything we need to know: Colbert's performance is sidestepped and marginalized while Bush is treated as light-hearted, humble, and funny. Expect nothing less from the cowardly American media. The story could just as well have been Bush and Laura's discomfort and the crowd's semi-hostile reaction to Colbert's razor-sharp barbs. In fact, I would guess that from the perspective of newsworthiness and public interest, Bush-the-playful-president is far less compelling than a comedy sketch gone awry, a pissed-off prez, and a shell-shocked audience.
THIS IS THE POWER OF THE MEDIA TO CHOOSE THE NEWS....TO DECIDE WHEN AND HOW TO SHIELD BUSH ** from NEGATIVE PUBLICITY.. Sins of omission can be just as bad as sins of commission...read on
____________________________________
From King George of 1776 to King George of 2006, It's Time Declare Our Independence from Monarchal Rule
Buzzflash.com editorial
May 2, 2006
http://www.buzzflash.com/index.php?story=Story3
The Declaration of Independence states unequivocally:
"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."
When you read the document (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html) that was the birth certificate of this great nation, you can't help but be struck by how the Busheviks would regard it as a radical, perhaps even terrorist call to arms.
The crimes and oppressions detailed in the Declaration of Independence vary in particularity from the King George of 1776 to the King George of 2006, but the essence of the grievances remain the same.
We could list the bill of particulars stating the case for removing King George W. Bush from office, but it would be too long for your morning's breakfast reading.
But it would include:
-- For his open defiance of the laws of the land and his stated intention to create his own laws as he sees fit.
-- For his secrecy in keeping the business of the people of the United States from their perusal.
-- For his malfeasance in protecting the security of the citizens of the United States of America.
-- For his violations of the balance of powers as set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America.
-- For willfully and intentionally misleading the people of this nation into a financially ruinous war that has led to the loss of ten of thousands of lives -- American and foreign.
-- For his use of public dollars to enrich campaign supporters and businesses related to members of his administration.
-- For, without a warrant and illegally, spying on citizens of the United States engaged in legal activity guaranteed as freedoms under the Constitution.
-- For his ongoing attempts to use official government guaranteed rights and benefits, such as pensions, to keep former government employees from revealing the truth about his administration's deception and betrayal of the American public.
-- For his incompetence in allowing the powers of our military to wither under inept and arrogant leadership.
-- For his placing international financial agreements above the security interests of the nation.
-- For his role in manipulating the outcome of elections, in felony violation of the right to vote.
As you can see, were it 1776, we would need to go through several quills and ink wells to list the grievances against our current King George.
So why is there no outrage to remove the usurper from office?
Yesterday, we witnessed thousands upon thousands of immigrants marching peacefully, with American flags in their hands, in Chicago for the right to American freedom and opportunity. Over a million marched nationally to partake of what's left of the American Dream.
Why aren't there 20 million marching nationally to reclaim our Constitution and our democracy from the faux populist tyrant --with poll ratings at less than a third of the country approving of his tyranny and failure?
Immigrants value our freedom and opportunity, but we as citizens appear to take them so lightly. As if an I-Pod or a McDonald's "Happy Meal" are enough to prove that all is well with the Republic.
We should be closing down the nation in the name of democracy -- and in opposition to tyranny.
The Declaration of Independence reminds us:
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."''
This is about the future security, welfare, and freedom of America. It is about our Constitutional form of government. It is about what differentiated us from the monarchies of Europe, the fascism of Franco, the Communism of the Soviet Union. Are we willing to relegate democracy to the dustbin of history, while an adolescent ruler with a sense of royal entitlement trashes our great governmental heritage?
Proud immigrants showed us the way.
Will we have the courage to follow?
A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL
posted by verifi at 8:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home