The Leftist Second Amendment Remedy
If you think that the corporatist are now so firmly entrenched in power that they can not be dislodged at the ballot box; and if you think American as it stands now is unsustainable, and if you don’t want to move or cede the country to The 700 Clubers, then you might want to check out the Rude Pundit.
It used to be understood on the left, back in the 1960s and 1970s, that you talked about revolution, even if it involved violence as a last resort, in order to achieve leftist goals. But now such talk is seen as madness from liberals. Our goals are only to be accomplished through the niceties of the electoral process and the hope that some yahoo from Kentucky won’t just block shit in order to be an asshole.
There. I have now done my part for the glorious revolution.
It depends on what you mean by “leftist.” The violence for economic justice happened in the early 20th century union wars, and succeeded in winning a decades-long victory. The violence or threats in the 1960s was mostly about getting out of Vietnam and “bringing the war home.” The war for economic justice was doing relatively well at the time non-violently with the Great Society agenda. It was widely believed at the time that we could have both guns and butter. Oddly, getting out of Vietnam is an isolationist position that would have been “conservative” before WWII.
I would add that the THREAT of violence embodied by Malcolm X and the Black Panthers, made moderates like MLK, SCLC and SNVCC viable, during the campaign for civil rights.
Not that I am at all interested in armed leftist revolution, threatened or otherwise.
I am well within my rights to knuckle up loudmouths several times a year.
Whenever the “right” doesn’t win what they consider is rightfully theirs [no pun intended] at the ballot box, you always see the flourishing of anti-government groups throughout the country and the rise of ideologues and hate-mongers.
They accuse the government in power of taking their guns and ignoring the sacred Constitution.
Like jason330, I’m not interested nor an advocate for an armed revolution.
But, I have crossed the Rubicon and purchased weapons and ammunition after swearing off them.And this saddens me.
The purest of thought will always succumb to a high-velocity projectile.
And I don’t want to be confronted by a mob of slack-jawed misanthropes with the Constitution in one hand and my limp-dick in the other.
A major step would be a Constitutional Ammendment to deny corporations citizen rights. Watch this space after New Years for what you can DO.
Does that really require a Constitution amendment rather than simple changes to the law? I don’t see why, as there’s nothing in the Constitution about corporations in the first place.
“Does that really require a Constitution amendment rather than simple changes to the law? I don’t see why, as there’s nothing in the Constitution about corporations in the first place.”
The personhood of corporations has been routinely recognized as constitutional, principally by the Supreme Court, since (as I recall) the 1800s. I don’t believe that mere statutory changes cannot trump longstanding case law precedents. So, Auntie Dem might be correct. A constitutional amendment might be in order.
Geezer,
Given the current SCOTUS changing the law simply gives them another one to strike down. It’s gonna take an ammendment.
I was just asking off the top of my head. Google has enlightened me in the past hour, and though I could not find a specific answer to my question, Auntie and Dana might well be right.
As a practical matter, though, I would like to see changes in the law that SCOTUS would strike down, because it seems to me a winner of a populist position to force the right to defend the interests of corporations vs. people. We are living through the absurdity of right-wingers claiming to be populists. It would be nice to set reality back on its feet.
before you fire on Ft Sumpter… you might want to take a head count.
no need to risk meeting a “bitter clinger” in person, just drive by your local shooting range and count the bumpersticker.
or go to democratunderground and freerepublic and ask, how many of you shoot/hunt?
being outnumbered a thousand to one is not a good start for a revolution/civil war.
Yes. I think we all agree that once mobilized, the left would annihilate the fat ass, rascal scooter driving blow hards on the right in an afternoon. Of course they would. We all know that. The questions is, should they? I still say no.
Auntie Dem — I’m all for that, provided we also deny non-citizens all citizen rights.
You know, things like a right to trial by jury and other forms of due process for terrorists, the right to free exercise of religion for Muslims, the right to drop an anchor baby for illegal aliens…
Ordinary Joe – our resident legal/constitutional dunce has just opened up his stupid mouth again
Re-read the Constitution again Dunce – especially the 14th amendment, second clause
Its this whole RADICAL idea based on EquaL Rights – we had a whole war and decades of civil unrest to attain just that
its a fundemental ideal that ALL on US soil are subject to its laws and/as well as its protctions – so Mr. “bitter clinger” stop trying to undo 140 years of progress ( as a matter of fact, just give it up entirely)
and as far as civilian criminal trials by jury for terrorists – for the recored ALL those tried by civilian juries are incarcerated and doing time – the 3 tried by the military courts are walking free…….
“the right to free exercise of religion for Muslims – ummm that’s pretty clearly covered by the 1st amendment already
” the right to drop an anchor baby for illegal aliens also covered by the 14th amendment, 1st clause – not gonna change any time soon..
As we say at home – “there’s now for ya”
deal with it – or emigrate……
“Slavery was the legal fiction that a person was property. Corporate person-hood is the legal fiction that property is a person.”-Joan Edwards + Molly Morgan WILPF
Dirty Girl — you clearly have no understanding of the concept of sarcasm, which I was using to mock Auntie Dem’s suggestion.
Well, Joe, you failed at using sarcasm then, because your comment was not ironic, funny, or otherwise discernible as sarcasm. Rather, it is the same old hat bullshit we hear from wingnuts day in and day out.
@OJ – I clearly have an understanding of scarcasm – you clearly do not have an understanding of its proper use.
The above sentance IS sarcasm, clearly and well used – this sentance is irony…try to keep up
@jason – thanks BTW do you realize that Delusional David over on DP is using your name, Fist and most of last…and then he writes about “the purification” of the center
and folks in Georgeton complained bitterly at the security surrounding Return Day – maybe they have the Violent right-wing nuts to blame for making statements like “blood will run in the streets if the conservatives do not win in November” Bill Colley, WGMD
and Sharon Angle’s 2ndamendment rights
so someone suggested that Joe Biden not be invited any more to Return Day…..
see story here:
http://www.capegazette.com/storiescurrent/201011-16-30/26001-return-day.html
Just blocking corporate spending won’t cut it. We need a Constitutional Amendment mandating public campaign financing.
That’s the ticket, anonone — force us all to give money to candidates we oppose via higher taxes. I’m sure you would just love funding President Palin’s reelection campaign.
I just browsed the comments for this thread but I think it’s absolutely hilarious that someone who names them self “dirty girl” would criticize people for not getting her sarcasm while simultaneously being unable to spell (or recognize the fucking automatic spell check graphic that pops up) the word “sentence”.
Ah the stupid. Absolutely priceless.
OJ, you’re already paying the public salaries of people you oppose. I’d rather level the playing field for all candidates than, using your examples, having President Palin fulfilling on the corporate bribes called “campaign contributions” that purchased the office of the Presidency for her.
@Whybother – and I find it absolutely hysterical that someone named “Whybother”- would bother……..(that would irony,Ordinary Joe)
try fixing “refudiate” next time
or go play with our ‘North Korean” Allies
after that we can discuss stupid
BTW – seeing as you obviously only think Americans can spell English – try the English (as in England) for alternate spellings of “English” words – Dunce
and folks in Georgeton complained bitterly at the security surrounding Return Day – maybe they have the Violent right-wing nuts to blame for making statements like “blood will run in the streets if the conservatives do not win in November” Bill Colley, WGMD
Didn’t COD bring her own bodyguard to Return Day? Now that is ironic.
COD’s bodyguard rode in the carriage, too, I was told. Apparently keeping her safe for her star turn on Dancing With the Stars. Her compatriot Tom Delay was on this show just before his trial for having his hands in the campaign finance cookie jar. Like we hope COD will be when her own campaign finance issues are dealt with. Slammer Time for then both, I’m thinking.
some “Mama Grizzly” in Club Fed will be her new bodyguard……..
I was on the stage at Returns Day and actually had a civil conversation with COD. The guy she was with did not give off the aura of a bodyguard but more of a friend. For a person as clearly calculating as she is she comes off as a very naive young woman in personal situations. I spoke to her about mutual friends and she was animated and happy and even invited me to her return Day party. While knowing full well that I have consistently opposed her since 2006. DWTS may be just where she belongs:).
Well the righties are always talking about state rights. Whats wrong with any State enacting its own campaign finance laws?
JP, is there anything unusual about inviting people of the other party to a return day party especially when they are obviously trying to be friendly? Reaching out to people who opposed you but are open to speaking with you is the only way, you are going to turn the result from a deficit to surplus.
States can already do that. Though the federal Constitution gives Congress a say in the federal elections.
So Jason, are you this afraid of losing in 2012?
It used to be understood on the left, back in the 1960s and 1970s, that you talked about revolution, even if it involved violence as a last resort, in order to achieve leftist goals.
I really want to read Rall’s book.
But it seems to me — just from reading the interview with the Rude Pundit — that Rall is talking more about revolution rather than violence (which seems to be the spin being taken). If you think about the changes achieved by the multiple efforts of the civil rights era, you can’t help but come away with the impression of group of people working with varying effectiveness to get to about the same place. The key word here, of course, being *working*. And the work being done was about embarrassing governments, challenging those in charge, and inflicting genuine political pain on the status quo. Something that won’t be done by whinging from your keyboard.
Some of the folks involved in the civil rights movement put themselves at considerable physical risk to accomplish their goals. In my own family, people handed over babies, Powers of Attorney and wills to relatives on weekends to take part in that revolution. I don’t think I even know many people who would feel strongly enough about ANY political goal to make much of a sacrifice at all. Because you can’t have revolution — of either kind — without sacrifice.
It strikes me, though, that a Constitutional Amendment that affirms that only humans can be citizens of the United States, is probably the revolution of our lifetimes.
Whats wrong with any State enacting its own campaign finance laws?
Nothing; go for it. But remember the new corporate campaigning doesn’t fall under campaign finance law.
The cause of the Returns Day cluterfuck was summed up in the last few sentences of the article:
“… Topping said he made the call at 5:45 a.m. when it appeared Biden was not attending, but he received no official word from the Secret Service.
At that point, Topping said, security was relaxed and officers were sent home.
Kurt Reuther, Delaware Homeland Security adviser, said Biden is known to be very spontaneous. “We had to keep things in place for that reason,” he said.
Reuther said his agency is not required to be involved with Return Day, and can only provide services if requested by the town, which was done by Georgetown officials. “But unfortunately in our society, we have threats of vulnerability. We have to be prepared,” he said.”
Delaware Safety and Homeland Security (DSHS) involvement was the only new addition to the equation. Knowing most of the players mentioned in the article, I can surmise the services “requested by the town” was either by Chief Topping himself, and/or by the new Mayor on advice from Topping. DSHS, who implemented the National Incident Management System (NIMS), had developed an 84-page “Return Day Incident Action Plan”. As always, they were anxious to practice and hone their skills for a real Armageddon. If they can’t handle a parade, it doesn’t instill confidence that they will come through if the shit ever hits the fan.
When is Obama going to show some backbone??????????????
When John Boehner and Mitch McConnell give him permission.