Pat Political

Thinking about Alito and Scalia

We are hearing so often that Judge Alito is very like Supreme Court Justice Scalia, who believes very strongly that we should keep strictly to interpreting the Constitution only as its framers created it.

I find myself agreeing with him at least partially.

There were two points on which the framers agreed totally. The first was that they were working to create a form of government which could not oppress ether the states which were joining it or any individual citizen. The second was that they , having experienced the war for their freedom, wanted to be sure that this new government could change without the necessity of another violent war. This is why they decided that elections for Representatives should be every two years, figuring that if you could vote someone out of office every two years, you would not have time to build the sort of hatreds that would lead to real violence.

But Justice Scalia apparently believes that the Constitution is graven in stone.

However if one looks at the amendments to the Constitution, it is obvious that this is not true, that the framers of the Constitution saw it as a good beginning but also something which could and should be altered and added to as passing time required...

The first ten amendments were ratified December 15th, 1791, four years after the adoption of the Constitution. Amendments One through Nine listed and prohibited each one of the ways these men saw that the government could oppress an individual citizen. Amendment Ten protects both the individual and the state by reserving any rights not otherwise given to the government to the people and to the state.

Amendment Eleven, which was a modification of Judicial power, was ratified only four years later.

If one looks at the remaining fifteen of the twenty-six which have been passed., eleven deal with alterations or additions to election law. One, the Sixteenth, establishes the income tax. And two involve both making the consumption of liquor illegal and its repeal. The Fourteenth is in many ways the most interesting amendment because it deals with three subjects. The first section has to do with the protection of an individual citizen against possible oppression by a state. The second and third sections deal with elections, and the fourth section with public debt. Only the Thirteenth deals specifically with the status of an individual. The most recent amendment was ratified in 1971.

Do I believe that we need some amendments today? Absolutely.

First, only three states are lacking for ratification of the Equal Rights of Women Amendment. And this is needed as much for women as the Thirteenth was for slaves. The framers of our Constitution were men of their time, that is they saw women not as individuals but only in their relationship to some man. Women will never be free of legislative sniping until they have this amendment in place.

The second I would like to see would involve the limitation of present corporate business philosophy which states that it has no responsibility except to make a profit. It is high time that this “what’s good for business is good for the country” philosophy was made to acknowledge that it exists because of the community which supports it and becomes ready to participate in supporting the community from which it makes its profits.

The third would be in response to the ugliness which the Bush administration has created in its application of. the terms “terrorist“, “evil”. All too many of our young soldiers have been corrupted into believing that anyone labeled in this way is sub-human and therefore can be treated in the terrible ways we have seen and heard of in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. And it’s these young soldiers who are being punished, but not the administration which made their actions possible! Do we believe in our Declaration of Independence’s statement that all men are created equal, or not. If we say we do, then we cannot declare any one, no matter how reprehensible we find their actions, sub-human, “evil”, “terrorist”, not worthy of being treated like any other human being.

The fourth concerns a need which we can easily perceive today but was not one to which the famers of the Constitution gave any thought-- the protection of our natural enviornment.  There is at present no real basis in Constitutional law for any environmental law, whether it be to limit harmful power plant smoke stack emissions or to encourage ecological diversiity through the protection of endangered species.

My next post will be the positions I feel any candidate for governor of Vermont should be embracing. We live in a larger world and must be part of its concerns as well as those we feel are purely local.

This administration in trouble?

(The "Second Republic" group held a big meeting Friiday Oct. 28th, at the State House in Mntpellier and gifted me with two 'comments' about this event on my post of Octoer 21st about corporate inroads on public health.  One of my blogger friends told me that he had deleted this from his blog as being inappropriate as a comment and therefore spam.

I choose to regard these two 'comments' as guest blogs.  I had hoped to get to their meeting in the afternoon, but found myself lingering until it was too late to leave, listening on my radio to the Libby indictment announcement and following commentary.  I plan to post here what I wanted to tell this meeting in person either later today or tomorrow.)

Is this administration in trouble?  Possiibly somewhat, in view of Bush's present low poll ratings.

But their primary agenda which is to privatize so many governmental functions that finally all control of our lives is taken away from us is proceeding quite as planned.

Is it really reasonable to assume that Libby, who worked for the most authoritarian of the administration bosses could have done what  he is accused of doing on his own initiative?

No, Libby is the 'fall-guy'.  He is more likely to plea bargain than to go to trial because an actual trial so close to elections would not really be desirable for the administration.  Very possibly he may end with an electronic bracelet on his ankle for, say, six months house detention.  And when this is finished, his reward for service will be a lucrative job in some corporation which Cheney influences.

And today we see the nominee for the Supreme Court whom this administration has had waiting in the wings all along, Judge Samuel Alito.

Yes, Harriet Miers has been the decoy, the fall-girl.   

With the goal of controlling the Supreme Court so nearly theirs, because of their overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress, there would be no way they would risk the possible confirmation of someone so uncertain as Ms Miers might be.  They could count on enough opposition from Repblicans in general that they would be 'forced' to nominate Alito.  And the likelihood of his being confirmed is very strong.

Even if this administration experiences a major defeat in the 2006 Congressional elections, they have already achieved a good part of their agenda and can undoubtedly do more in the year they still have.

Consider how completely the control over a large part of what used to be our civilian army has been lost to Congress by Rumsfeld's handing over to Halliburton contracts for feeding our soldiers and for their laundry, for instance.  Think of the many hints we have had about private companies involved in the interrogation of prisoners.

Consider how com;letely Medicaire has been turned over to the many private companies which now 'administer' its benefits.  And look how thoroughly any real chance at prescription benefits for seniors has been corrupted by giving over the administration of these to private health insurance companies.

This administration is in no trouble.

Update

"While more than 2,000 American soldiers have did in Iraq since the U.S. invasion in March, 2003, another 16,000 have been wounded, nearly half so severely they didn't return to duty."  (The Sunday Rutland Herald/Times Argus, October 30th, 2005)

The soldier whose story was detailed is Walt Gaya, who has lost the sight of one eye.  It is possible for him that he still will be able to follow his dream of becoming a photographer despite this handicap. 

What is most shocking about his story is that his natiuralization ceremony was scheduled eight days after he was injured.  One would think that his naturalization would proceed automatically.  After all this man has already served this country well.  But now the Immigration and Naturalization Service has refused to renew his Green Card, which gave him permanent residency, or to tell him how he should proceed toward naturalization!

Is this another example of this administration's unwillingness to support the soldiers it is sending into harm's way?

And we as the citizenry can assume that at present there are some 8,000 soldiers and their families who will be needing our help and support in one way or another, perhaps for the rest of their lives.  And more to come as long as the Iraq war continues...

And more than 2,000 have died

So many ceremonies to mark the 2,000th death of a soldier in Iraq. Such an ugly waste of young life in a war which should never have been started.

But the dead will be mourned and shall be honored. It is the living of this war who concern me. More than 15,000 injuries was the figure I heard. I pray that I heard it wrong, that the number is less. For all of these wounded men and women are going to need and do deserve our support, and many will need it for the rest of their lives.

And yet even as we are being urged to continue the fight, we see that the Bush administration is already cutting back on money to give proper support both to these wounded as well as to their families.

The IWW and Mother Jones

What a shock to learn that the international Industrial Workers of the World, which was begun by our own Mary Harris Jones who was so well loved by the miners for whom she worked so hard that they called her "Mother", was labeled a terrorist organization back in the McCarthy era!

We have had some sad periods in our history and this was one of the worst.  We were so ready to label evryone 'evil' and 'terrorist'-- Hitler, Communism-- but the really sad part is that we are still tarnished by this today.

Our willingness to accept Bush's labelling of people as 'terrorist' has led to our accepting also that these people are sub-human and therefore not needing human treatment as detainees...

David Griffin's lecture

And I did not hear anything I did not already know. But he gave a very carefully detailed, if somewhat dry lecture, on all of the questionable official details concerning each of the hi-jacked planes. And in particular he damned the 9/11 Commission for ignoring anything which did not fit the official versions.

I am old enough to have learned in the 1950’s of Roosevelt’s setting us up for Pearl Harbor and to have watched how the Warren Commission assured us that there was no conspiracy involved in the assassinations of the two Kennedy’s and Martin Luther King when at least half of the country was gut-sure there was. And so I have no trouble believing this revelation about our good Bush Republican government.

I find this set-up especially heinous because we have been conned into sending so many of our idealistic young people to die in an inadequately prepared for war which is being fought only for the business advantage of the Bush Republican elite. At least in Roosevelt’s case, there was a very real need for us to come to Europe’s and the Orient’s assistance.

The two most compelling reasons for me to believe are:

First: That President Bush was sent into the most uninvolved position they could find for him that day-- reading to very young children in a public school. I saw from TV clips that he appeared totally stunned and unable to respond when he began to learn of the extent of the disaster. I am not one to hold too strong a brief for him, but I am ready to believe that he had no previous knowledge of exactly what was planned. Just as I am equally sure that Roosevelt did not anticipate the sinking of the battle ship and the thousands of deaths which resulted when Pearl Harbor was attacked.

Second: That no fighters were dispatched to intercept the hi-jacked planes although there was a very sure and well established plan for dealing for just such an occurrence. The blame for these failures was placed solely on the local controllers and their immediate superiors by official accounts although no one was subsequently disciplined for dereliction of duty.

I am glad to know that David Griffin plans to continue his efforts to make more Americans aware of this terrible conspiracy and hope to hear that as many more people are moved to become activist in changing the present direction of our country as I heard from yesterday.

David Griffin speaking

On Wednesday, October 12th, at 12 noon, I shall be listening to David Griffin, who has written “The New Pearl Harbor”, speaking at Trinity Methodist Church in Montpelier on the truth behind 9/11 and the American Empire. (He is also speaking in Brattleboro and Manchester on the 11th, and in Burlington on the 12th in the evening.)

What do I expect to learn? Very little that I don’t already know or believe to be probably true. After all I am from the WWII generation which learned sometime during the fifties that Roosevelt had set us up for Pearl Harbor. Why should I not be ready to believe that the Bush Republicans set us up for 9/11.

Will David Griffin galvanize us hearing him in Vermont into action. This an outcome greatly to be hoped for.

We need to come together to find candidates for our legislature to replace the representatives and senators who are too oriented to the corporate business ‘community’.

We need a candidate for governor who is strong on our values to defeat Douglas.

We have the power. Will we use it.

Rumsfeld Resume

New Job opening:

Director

Pentagon To Head Domestic Disaster Relief-- Agency change proposed by President Bush

Applicant: Donald Rumsfeld

Resume:

Has made maintaining our army far more expensive for those of us who do pay taxes by privatizing so many functions previously always a part of our civilian army. Contracts for these new expensive services given, no-bid, to companies like Halliburton and Bechtel.

Flatly refused to accept and incorporate the recommendations of experienced army generals that far more troops than he wanted to send would be needed if we were to secure Iraq.

When extensive looting occurred, the result of his inadequate troop deployment, shrugged his shoulders and said “Stuff happens....“

Did not incorporate local citizens in the rebuilding of Iraq infrastructure as we did so successfully in Germany after WWII, but granted all reconstruction contracts, again, no bid, primarily to Halliburton.

Has consistently refused to accept any allegations that the huge number of unemployed Iraqi youth is fuel for the insurgency, but insists that the insurgency is primarily fueled by imported Al Qaeda fighters. Has launched several unsuccessful attacks against various so-called foreign fighter strongholds. Only clear results are civilian deaths and property devastation.

Continues to fight his never-ending wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with army reservists, states’ National Guards, and financial incentives for volunteers. Although he talks “promoting democracy in the Middle East” as the reason for our being there, has never proposed our own democratic way for fighting any danger to our country-- the civilian draft. (Is this because President Bush-- and Senator Kerry also-- has daughters of the ideal military age?)

After carefully reading this resume, I can only conclude that Donald Rumsfeld is the ideal candidate for this job....

Addendum to yesterday's post

My last ten working years were as a research technician in the pharmacology department of a small medical college. Many graduate students came to us seeking their doctoral degrees from all over the world-- China, South America, eastern Asia. When I would ask these new students what was impressing them most about the United States, I would expect that the big buildings of our cities might be the answer.

Bur from everyone of them I heard-- There are no soldiers on the streets of your towns and cities..

Think about that, good people....

The Founders are shuddering!

It seems that the Bush administration will use anything available in its effort to dismantle what our forefathers gave us as a government offering the maximum of freedom to every individual.

Now it is proposing that the president as commander-in-chief be able to send the army into disaster areas to help save lives.. And the administration is using the fact that the Louisiana National Guard was unable to respond adequately as its excuse. Having the army a part of civilian life is the last thing our forefathers wanted. The Second Amendment was to ensure both that citizens would know how to use arms and that the army would be for purposes of national defense only.

BUT- if the Louisiana National Guard were up to its pre-Iraq strength and not off fighting the administration‘s war-- if all of its emergency generators were in Louisiana where they should have been and not sent to Iraq, the Louisiana Guard could easily have restored the communication system destroyed by the hurricane and would have been able to deal with all of the storm’s immediate horror and stress without outside assistance..