Extreme Democracy

Umm . . . just found this site and I am only at the start of all the material contained herein - but my first question is why do we need representatives?  

Direct democracy: as long as we are defining new processes for governance, why not seek to remove or reduce the super nodes that are representatives. in large respect, the consolidation of power that they represent acts as a magnet for forces that would co-opt those power centers.

Sphere: Related Content

Ask Your Congressional Representative to Support the Articles of Impeachment

Please review these Articles of Impeachment and lend them your support.

Regardless of political party affiliation, US Representatives have an obligation to uphold our US Constitution. Indeed - while we have chosen to organize our political preferences into parties - our Constitution says nothing about political parties, either pro or con.

You are surely more aware than I of the Article VI instruction to US Representatives, Senators et al and I would never presume to instruct you on this oath. No, I come to you today - through this missive - to beseech you to review these Articles of Impeachment, guided by not your political party affiliation (which can be changed at a whim), but by your status as a Representative, duty-bound by your own oath to uphold our Constitution.

There can be no greater crime against our Republic than for one of our elected representatives - whatever the reason or rationale - to violate the one document that unites us all as fellow members of this Republic. To know that this crime has happened before - by members of either party and any party - is to know a collective shame that we feel as one united body of citizens. This country - our country - is indeed a unique one across all of the nations of this world. We are not united by a common place of origin or a common native tongue or even a common ethnicity; no, what unites us is our Constitution. For anyone to rend hollow its dictates is to tear our national bonds asunder.

Sphere: Related Content

Barack Obama Should Continue

To ignore the advice of pundits and panderers - after all none of those individuals even thought he would make it this far. The talking heads on television all expected Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic nominee and they remained ensconced in that belief well after it was apparent to all non-delusional individuals that the race was over.

Today, those same misguided "experts" are now all wringing their hands over a "shift towards the center" they proclaim Obama is making - when in reality these are not changes in position from Obama, but just that these self-styled experts are now listening to Obama for the first time.

Sphere: Related Content

How Delusional . . .

 . . . was the roundtable on This Week?

There was the old grey beard, Ted Koppel, insisting that no matter who is elected the situation in the Middle East is so tenuous and that the impact of oil on our economy is so pervasive that it demands a US troop presence in Iraq of 80K to 100K US troops.

What?????

Price of oil before US invaded Iraq: $38

Price of oil today, entering the sixth year: $145

Just how has an increased troop presence led to lower oil prices?

Iraq cannot be stabilized with the presence of US troops.  It was the introduction of US troops that destabilized Iraq.  Why is this so hard to see?

Could the US be "stabilized" with the introduction of Canadian troops?

Foreign soldiers are an inherent irritant to any society; we have known this since the Declaration of Independence.

Sphere: Related Content

Celebrate good times, come on

To paraphrase Public Enemy, "Jefferson was a hero to most, but he never meant s**t to me."  

I am not really partial to any of the slave-holding presidents (I can't stand looking at those crisp, new portraits of Jackson as they shush out of ATMs and land in my greedy palms), but I have yet to divine the word that should be used to describe a man who cried out for his own liberty at the same time as he kept his boot firmly planted on my fathers' neck.  

I will not describe what he was doing to my mother - although this lovely English language has crafted a technical term for the matter - one that removes it from the context and strips away the pain, somewhat.  

It is interesting for me this year to see the attention that has been given to Juneteenth - a celebration whose sesquicentennial celebration is just around the corner - and I can only conclude that the presence of Barack Obama on the national stage has elevated it to this platform. How ironic is it that an African-American with more ties to the slave-owning side of our national shame than the slave-being side of the line, brings Juneteenth to the fore merely by his presence. As historians both, I am sure that you and Eric are well aware that 4 July of any year - but especially those before those of that tumultuous decade of the 1960s - was a most dangerous day to be of African descent in this land. For whatever reason, white people of so many generations across so many communities of this country, found doing harm to people (or non-persons, as the case may have been) of dark-toned skin an appropriate celebration of their independence.  

Strange, I know. I cannot explain their actions.  

So while it may be heresy to decry Jefferson, I do fault him for his both his inactions and his actions, while at the same time I pour out a libation to Lincoln; not a perfect man - by any standard - but no doubt a man who did not shirk away from the obligations that were placed before him by history.

Give me Liberty, or give me Death.

Sphere: Related Content