Is a Presidential Coup Under Way?

[babylonsister]

This is so good, I have to x-post it from Eds. Maybe we should be sending it to our Congresscritters.


Is a Presidential Coup Under Way?

By Jim Hightower, Hightower Lowdown. Posted October 23, 2007.

The Constitution is being trampled and nothing less than American democracy itself is endangered -- a presidential coup is taking place. Where is Congress?

Where is Congress? It's way past time for members to stand up. Historic matters are at stake. The Constitution is being trampled, the very form of our government is being perverted, and nothing less than American democracy itself is endangered -- a presidential coup is taking place. I think of Barbara Jordan, the late congresswoman from Houston. On July 25, 1974, this powerful thinker and member of the House Judiciary Committee took her turn to speak during the Nixon impeachment inquiry.

"My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total," she declared in her thundering voice. "And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution."Where are the likes of Barbara Jordan in today's Congress? While the BushCheney regime continues to establish a supreme, arrogant, autocratic presidency in flagrant violation of the Constitution, members of Congress largely sit there as idle spectators -- or worse, as abettors of Bush's usurpation of their own congressional authority.

Why it matters

Separation of powers. Rule of law. Checks and balances. These may seem to us moderns to be little more than a set of dry, legal precepts that we had to memorize in high-school history class but need not concern us now. After all, the founders (bless their wigged heads!) established these principles for us back in 17-something-or-other, so we don't really have to worry about them in 2007. Think again. These are not merely arcane phrases of constitutional law, but the very keystones of our democracy, essential to sustaining our ideal of being a self-governing people, free of tyrants who would govern us on their own whim. The founders knew about tyranny. The monarch of the time, King George III, routinely denied colonists basic liberties, spied on them and entered their homes at will, seized their property, jailed anyone he wanted without charges, rounded up and killed dissidents, and generally ruled with an iron fist. He was both the law and above the law, operating on the twin doctrines of "the divine rule of kings" and "the king can do no wrong."

(Alert: Ready or not, the following is a high-school refresher course on American government. There will be a test.) At the front of the founders' minds was the necessity of breaking up the authority of their new government in order to avoid re-creating the autocracy they had just defeated. The genius of their structure was that legislating, administering, and judging were to be done by three separate but coequal branches, each with powers to check the other two, and none able to aggregate all three functions into its own hands (a result that James Madison called the very definition of tyranny). Just as important, to deter government by whim, all members of the three branches were to be subject to the laws of the land (starting with the Constitution and Bill of Rights), with no one above the law. As Thomas Paine said, "The law is king."

These were not legal niceties but core restraints designed to protect citizens from power grabs by ambitious autocrats. Such restrictions also make our country stronger by vetting policies through three entities rather than one. This balanced authority helps avoid many serious policy mistakes (or at least offers a chance to correct them later), and it is intended to prevent the one mistake that's fatal to democracy -- allowing one branch to seize the power to rule unilaterally.

more...

http://alternet.org/rights/65450/?page=entire

[H2O Man]

1. Nominated.

These are important issues fot Americans to consider. That includes reviewing the documents from the Watergate era. In the discussions between the pro-impeachment and anti-impeachment folks on DU, it is painfully obvious that some people are not familiar with what impeachment is, and why the Founding Fathers included it in the Constitution.

[flashl]

7. Before the Iraq "war"

Ted Koppel had a town hall meeting on Nightline. Jessie Jackson Jr. directed a question to Senator McCain inquiring about the constitutionality of Congress giving the President the power to go to war. I do not remember the exact words, but McCain said some to the effect that ONE DAY Congress will have to realign itself with the Constitution.

After McCain's statement, I expected a firestorm in the media or from the country. Nothing happen.

So, it seems that the only ones unaware of Congress' misaligment with the Constitution is the public. Maybe, this explains its inability to start impeachment proceedings.

[H2O Man]

8. What many of the

anti-impeachment and timid, sometime-but-not-now impeachment folks want to avoid discussing is that there are many of the old republican right that are very concerned about the threat to the Constitution that this administration poses. Though the corporate media refused to give them any coverage, plenty of the old-fashioned republican right spoke out against Bush and Cheney in 2004. Many advocated not supporting Bush, with some going so far as to endorse Kerry.

[flashl]

9. Yes, hence, the surprise of the century, the second term. n/t

[Hydra]

13. Election fraud can do wonders n/t

[defendandprotect]

57. And Democrats have done noting about hacking of elections as we face 2008 -- !!!!

We have to look back and understand that these computers were put in place beginning in the late 1960's . . . and presumably it took a while for them to get major control, but not ever -- IMO --
total control.

So -- we also have to look at the other filthy things they've been doing -- currently trying to heist California's electoral votes -- and the gerrymandering that's been going on for decades --
"caging votes" and knocking Democrats off the registration rolls -- and who knows what else????

If you look at -- coincidentally -- Nixon's second run for president in '68 against Humphrey, I'd question that as another steal -- I think there were only about 100,000 or more votes involved in the difference between them.

The nation also suffered the deaths of MLK on 4/4/68 and Robert F. Kennedy -- the Democratic candidate on 6/5/68.

PLUS . . . . history now records that Nixon interferred with LBJ's bombing halt for peace in order to convince the other side to wait until he was president for a better deal!!

And -- we also saw Nixon using the IRS, wiretapping, and politicalization of the Justice Department -- not to mention "black box" deals -- in order to protect his corrupt empire and defeat the many "enemies" he thought he had.

Nixon's third run -- against McGovern -- raises no questions of a vote steal -- but one hell of a
lot of questions about the shooting of Gov. George Wallace -- 5/5/72.

And then Watergate its revelations -- including the Huston Plan which is simply another Operation Northwoods.

Nixon, of course, appointed his own successor -- Gerald Ford who was involved in at least two important lies in investigations of the JFK coup -- one having to do with trying to move the right shoulder wound UP and disguising it as a "back wound" . . . and also confusing the testimony re the weapon -- Weisberg and Craig identified the weapon as a Mauser 7.65 BECAUSE THE MARKINGS WERE ON THE RIFLE. For ignored and distorted this information.
Thus Ford as unelected VP and unelected President succeeding Nixon.

Carter . . . seems to have caught them off their feet to some degree --
However, like the Clinton attacks to come, evidently the GOP wasn't waiting for relections to attack.... They made the Iran hostage situation as hot as hot as possible for Carter -- evidently the NIGHTLINE report which led with that story every evening was part of the attack --

And, at least one, if not two or more, Carter RESCUE operations of the hostages failed --
Amazingly so!!! Evidently the helicopters weren't supplied with some sand avoiding shields that they were supposed to have and there were numerous crashes!!!

The ABC campaign -- "Anybody but Carter" 000

Then . . . October Surprise . . . with VP to be Poppy Bush taking the visit to Paris.
Ted Koppel came very close to confirming this --- many others have.

Reagan election and the release of the hostages . . . !!! Anyone believe that today???
Patti Reagan didn't believe it when it happened before her eyes!!!

Iran Contra with the side issue of private armies, ignoring Congressional legislation, and Ollie North working on SUSPENDING THE CONSTITUTION!!!!

Poppy Bush and New Hampshire -- hacking fix by Sununu ?
Gulf War I -- remember the parades!!!!
Overcoming our Vietnam Syndrome
S&L theft and embezzlements -- hacking our Treasury

And then evidently Perot got in the way and we got Clinton . ...

Clinton was pounded by the GOP from the moment he was elected ---
even before he got to the WH -- it never, never stopped.
Until finally they impeached his penis in desperation - !!!!
Clinton, however, remained popular ----

Sometimes the "steals" don't work --- it's not a perfect process evidently--
As we saw in 2000 when they had to resort to a FASCIST RALLY to STOP the vote counting --
and to a Supreme Court Decision by the Gang of 5 ---

and onward we go to 2008 -- still with no end to the computers --

[Hydra]

14. That's one of the weird things about this situation

Things are so far out of whack that those people and I can talk about the violation of rule of law and various issues of this admin, despite the fact that I'm about as far left as you can get.

I often cringe when I agree with what Pat Buchanan is saying, but that's happened more often recently.

[Usrename]

19. Yeah, me too. The Pat Buchanan thing.

I've been thinking about having myself checked. :crazy:

[civildisoBDence]

54. Buchanan published a column denying global warming today

The world is back to normal.

I rarely agree with Buchanan on domestic issues, but damned if he hasn't been right on Iraq and foreign policy from the very beginning!

Newsprism

[H2O Man]

74. Buchanan

is almost always wrong on domestic policy, frequently to an extreme degree. But his grasp of world affairs is often pretty insightful.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

71. Well, John Dean was not a favorite of mine way back when, I now admire him.

:wtf: MKJ

[H2O Man]

73. Oh, John Dean

was a terrible person. He was bad before he became a part of the Nixon White House. But he changed his life, and that is why I respect him. I admire that change, from a snake to a human being with dignity.

[mmonk]

2. Thanks for this post.

Those of us that constantly warn others need as much help as possible.

[Beerboy]

3. Is this Coup 2.0 or 2.5?

I've lost track in all the fascism.

[Cha]

15. I'm thinking Jim Hightower

is talking about coup 3 by now.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

17. I was thinking Coup I (2000) happened. Will Coup II be the removal of a D President in 2009? nt

[Myrina]

77. They won't have to "remove" a D - prez ...

... they can simply unleash the Swift Boaters and the Linda Tripp's and the other smarmy under handed specialists to undermine whatever progress (or Progressive legislation) a Dem Prez might try to implement.

As long as there are 2 GOP'ers in any branch of government, anywhere, something afoul is likely to be planned.

[jimshoes]

4. Great post

and outstanding article. Nominated because it belongs on the greatest page and needs to be read by everyone.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. This is what I keep returning to.

I took two semesters of constitutional law with the same professor. He periodically would comment what geniuses the Founding Fathers were with respect to their design of the separation of powers in the Constitution, that it was so profound that it could withstand any challenge, that short of a constitutional amendment to disband the constitution itself, the system would endure.

What he didn't anticipate (did any of us?) was one or two of the branches passively allowing the third branch to augment its powers and to incrementally transform a constitutional democracy into a fascist state. It was always assumed that the legislative branch (no matter which party dominated) would want to protect its role in the government and the court system would protect the Constitution as its first duty.

Who knew?

[Hydra]

16. It was an under-the-radar coup

The Fact that Bush got in was the overt part of the coup. The more dangerous and subtle part was filling all 3 branches with cronies and allies, to the point that separation of power became irrelevant- they were all answering to the same people, and there were more of them every day.

Cancer at it's best.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

21. Who knew. Most everyone put the evolution of a form of fascism outside the range,...

,...of possibilities in this nation. Most folks still do because denial maintains a false sense of 'goodness' and strength.

And, here we sit with an executive that has succeeded to de-construct our Constitution and turn this nation inside-out while simultaneously concentrating wealth and power in the hands of those who not only loathe but completely reject democratic notions.

I just shake my head.

[bobthedrummer]

35. Sinclair Lewis wrote about the form this fascist unelected criminal regime

of Bush/Cheney has taken.

Yet Sinclair Lewis wrote about this in 1936, as fiction, in "It Can't Happen Here".

Yet "it" has.

Fascism, the other f word. It's getting close to the planned totalitarian phase when WWIII is mentioned and Congress is politically controlled by our own fascist version of empire fronted by George Walker Bush and Richard B. Cheney.

IMPEACH CHENEY FIRST-IMPEACH CHENEY NOW!

[rockybelt]

45. Sinclair Lewis

Sinclair Lewis also said, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped the flag and carrying a cross."
These things are happening RIGHT NOW. Bushco has already taken about nine of the ten steps necessary to kill a democracy and install a dictatorship.
Congress MUST get off their collective asses and impeach cheney and his understudy or there must be a rebellion.:rant:

[ConfidentialStatus]

41. Not to knock your professor

But did he tell you about the preamble or the 4th Branch of Government? In case some don't know... it's "We the People".

I'm assuming you've read the Declaration of Independence.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. (Note: the original hand-written text ended on the phrase "the pursuit of property" rather than "the pursuit of Happiness" but the phrase was changed in subsequent copies in part because it was broader. The latter phrase is used today).

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. 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.

[Swamp Rat]

6. Been a long time since I heard Jim Hightower on RadioPower.org

:kick:

[leftchick]

10. scary shit

because it is painfully obvious congress has become abettors.

[Totally Committed]

18. Jeez Louise! Between this article and yours on the Irreversable Global Warming,

I'm feeling sick to my stomach.

TC

[leftchick]

23. I know what you mean

I am hugging my babies real tight these days. :(

[lonestarnot]

11. "And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the dest

rustruction, of the Constitution." So what does he do?

[antigop]

12. the coup isn't "under way" -- it's already happened n/t

[katty]

31. Right! It's happened-Done! We are now at the end of 2007!

[Blue_In_AK]

20. This is excellent

I get the Hightower report delivered. I meant to post this earlier. Thanks, Sister.

[OneBlueSky]

22. Hightower . . . Secretary of Agriculture in the Gore Administration? . . . n/t

.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

24. "Separation of powers. Rule of law. Checks and balances." Those were the good 'ole days. nt

[Kurovski]

25. I'm beginning to think that Congress may need the help of the military.

I've softened my view of Congress' somewhat in the past week or so. They're almost like hostages.

[Didereaux]

26. That's the scary part, we may be close to needing just that... n/t

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

27. Interesting perspective: congress held hostage.

Of course, needing the help of military is a frightening proposition depending upon what you mean by that.

:scared:

[Kurovski]

33. Military members take an oath to defend the Constitution

against all enemies both foreign and domestic. What does that mean? I honestly don't know.

[14thColony]

65. It should be very simple

It means that our allegiance should be to the founding principles of our republic and to those institutions established by the Constitution; should there be conflict between the Constitution and the actions of individual members of the government, we ultimately obey the Constitution, even if that means an elected official must now be seen as a domestic enemy of the Constitution. At least that's what I thought it meant when I took the oath, and what it has always meant to me. That I obey the President so long as he abides by the rules. If he doesn't, then my obligation is to the Constitution, not to him. But the reality is the officer corps (the only group that swears allegiance to the Constitution alone) has always been more conservative and traditional than the populace at large, and of course we are conditioned to obey and accept authority. I fear the current administration will have to go far, far beyond where it is now before there is a widespread revolt of the officer corps.

[Kurovski]

80. Thank you, and welcome to DU, 14thColony.

:hi:

[Mme. Defarge]

76. They could first try

enforcing subpoenas.

[Mme. Defarge]

28. Great Article -- Thanks!

"Which brings us to the new Congress run by Democrats. Where are they? Yes, I know they have only slim majorities and that the GOP uses veto threats, filibusters, and demagogic lies to fight them -- but, come on, suck it up! At least stop voting for "the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." For example, the party now in charge did indeed cave in to Bush's summer demand that it legalize his warrantless spying on Americans (a Lowdowner sent an email to me saying he hopes Bush gets caught smoking pot, because then the Democrats will immediately legalize it).

"The founders would be stunned that Congress has failed to assert itself. They saw checks and balances not as an option but as an obligation, a fundamental responsibility that goes to the very heart of each lawmaker's oath faithfully to support and defend the Constitution."

[Lone_Star_Dem]

29. I love Jim Hightower

I subscribe to his RSS feed and still somehow hadn't seen this one yet.

Thanks for posting this. You're right it is very good!

[yellowdogintexas]

83. Hightower is the Man! nt

[pacalo]

30. These are the tools that made it possible for them to unravel the Constitution...

-- Buying up the media for the purpose of obfuscating the truth;

-- Dividing the country through propagandizing sensitive, untouchable themes for criticism -- God, country, & U.S. troops -- to curtail any meaningful debate between the two sides;

-- Buying up the companies who make the voting machines.

Those are just three off the top of my head.

[bvar22]

47. You might add:

*buying the Democratic Party leadership through the DLC Trojan Horse.

[TahitiNut]

59. Fascism spreads and takes control by asking for "cooperation" ... "bipartisanship."

Lies, of course ... but that's exactly how fascists have taken power in the instances with which I'm familiar. Even upon taking the reins, it's the same ol' Lucy with the football ploy - over, and over, and over, and over.

[Golden Raisin]

48. Buying a private army of Blackwater stormtroopers.

[Capn Sunshine]

75. while leaving our community's National guard troops overseas.

:grr:

[AtomicKitten]

32. Spectacular post.

K&R.

[spanone]

34. kick.....it may be too late

[Alcibiades]

36. Where are all the Constitutional experts on this?

i.e. prominent lawyers and political scientists? As a political scientist, I've often wondered about this.

The extra-constitutional nature of the current regime is crystal. For example, take the claim that section 2 of article II of the Constitution, which creates the Presidency as the office of the commander in chief, gives the president absolute authority to do whatever he wants. Yet the intent of Madison and the other guys was clearly to give the President the authority to conduct war, not to break the laws passed by Congress. This intent is clearly evidenced by the Third Amendment, and the Tenth. If the founders didn't intend for the government to have the power to quarter troops in your dwelling, why on earth should we assume that they should have the power to read our mail and listen to our phone calls, let along to crush the testicles of the children of suspects being interrogated? The domestic eavesdropping programs are obviously unconstitutional under the 4th Amendment. Much of what has been done at Gitmo and elsewhere is also clearly unconstitutional. The founders knew about the horror of the British prison ships used in the Revolution, and specifically included the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment in the Eighth Amendment. Given that their own prisoners had been badly treated by the British during the Revolution, there's absolutely no reason to think that these protections would not extend to POW's.

Is it ignorance? Why is Dick Cheney able to claim he's not part of the executive branch, when the fact is that this office is described in Article II of the Constitution which is dedicated to the executive branch? The simplest, most obvious things get distorted by this administration, whose allies have even gone so far as to misportray Thomas Jefferson as a Cotton Mather.

I don't know who to blame. We should, at the very least, call for Congress to strip the Supreme Court of any ability to determine the outcomes of presidential elections. That would be a start. I'd like to see a petition denouncing this administration, signed by every Constitutional scholar in the country. When all three branches collude in the cause of tyranny, somebody's got to call bullshit.

[Benhurst]

37. Bill Moyers had on a liberal Constitutional scholar and a conservative Constitutional scholar

a while back, and they were both alarmed.

My guess is the answer to your question rests with the Corporate Media which is behind the conspiracy. If a patriot speaks out in America, with only the fascist press to cover it, does anyone hear?

[WileEcoyote]

39. My estimate is that Congress and the media

are being intimidated. Through threat of force and job loss.

[Alcibiades]

40. We need more of that

Good for Bill Moyers. I was taught by some of those Constitutional types, and the administration does something every day that is in violation of what I was taught. The thing is that many of these people are basically conservative--I don't mean politically so much as attitudinally. It seems to attract that sort of person. Many practically worship the wisdom of the founders, perhaps so much so that their faith in the system, in our checks and balances (a faith which our founders themselves did not share, at least without reservation), leads them to underestimate the extent to which it may be perverted.

They need to be more proactive. The same sort of seriousness and scholarly neutrality that is part of the character of most of the people in this area of study would give more credence to the claim that the Bush crime family is acting in violation of the Constitution, if only they would say publicly what 99% of them must feel privately.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

56. I know. Most of the protectors were/are conservative. Why are they so quiet?

I just do not get that.

:shrug:

Perhaps, they've never considered a time when they would have to do more than just talk about the greatness of our Constitution and actually consider taking action to protect it. If only they would because that protection would lead to OUR protection.

I don't understand the silence.

[DemReadingDU]

62. Were they Bruce Fein and John Nichols?

7/13/07 video here too
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/071407B.shtml

[Benhurst]

66. Yes -- and thanks for the link, DemReadingDU.

[natrat]

38. and that fucking scumbag clinton says she might return some of the stolen powers

[jeff30997]

43. Oh really?

She MIGHT return SOME of the stolen powers? How generous of her.

[bvar22]

53. The DLC helped build the "Unitary Executive"....

(See: Gang of 14)

I don't see the the DLC President dismantling the "Unitary Executive".

[deutsey]

42. Where is Congress? Censuring Pete Stark, apparently

:evilfrown:

[JDPriestly]

44. Love this:

Which brings us to the new Congress run by Democrats. Where are they? Yes, I know they have only slim majorities and that the GOP uses veto threats, filibusters, and demagogic lies to fight them -- but, come on, suck it up! At least stop voting for "the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." For example, the party now in charge did indeed cave in to Bush's summer demand that it legalize his warrantless spying on Americans (a Lowdowner sent an email to me saying he hopes Bush gets caught smoking pot, because then the Democrats will immediately legalize it).

[gateley]

46. A friend of mine was in Tibet after the last election. People were asking her

"how are your people doing after the coup?"

[Just-plain-Kathy]

82. Ever since I found out that Bush's grandfather, along with other corporatist wanted to....

...over throw the government back in the thirties, I realized a coup was staged years ago. Corporate America now rules us. ...I predict a corporate dem will be our next president (to make it appear that we still have free elections), then our corporate owned media will "report" that people would want Jeb Bush to run in '12. ....We'll have no say from here on in, and our media will tell us that whatever we get "we wanted".

[robertpaulsen]

49. Where are the likes of Barbara Jordan in today's Congress?

His name is Dennis Kucinich.

His name is Dennis Kucinich.

His name is Dennis Kucinich.


Anyone else?

[Golden Raisin]

50. I expect nothing from Pelosi

but why aren't the major democratic candidates for President screaming 24/7 about this? Clinton, Obama, Biden --- the whole lot of them? Are they all too terrified to open their mouths and call a spade a spade? This regime has repeatedly raped our Constitution and no one is stopping them.

[malaise]

51. Great article

K & R.

[Hubert Flottz]

52. K&R!

Bush never was a president...he's the PNAC's Fuhrer!

[BushOut06]

55. I would love to see the military remove Bush & Cheney from office

These two should be removed from office immediately, and thrown in prison for their multiple crimes against humanity!

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

61. I believe that would simply create an undesirable precedent. eom

[Benhurst]

68. Not if they are poised to start another illegal and immoral war -- and

certainly less of one than that of the Supreme Court in 2000. Oh, but I forgot, that, according to the ruling, wasn't to be considered a precedent. What bullshit! Maybe the military could make a similar statement.

[earth mom]

79. BINGO! We have a winner! Against ALL enemies foreign & domestic.... nt

[spanone]

58. 2000 supreme court decision....that was the coup

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

85. Yes indeed.

MKJ

[wildbilln864]

60. k&r! eom.

[Whoa_Nelly]

63. Sent article to my senators and my representative

With link.

Before posting the article, I asked them: When will YOU stand up?

[valerief]

64. Another coup? A coup de coup? nt

[A wise Man]

67. excuse me dumb ass.....

....it has been a coup since 2000

[Vidar]

69. Adding my unnecessary recommendation.

[whistle]

70. The coup began in December 2000 what we are seeing now is the battle

...for an Imperial oligarchy and a fascist military dictatorship

[bridgit]

72. ya'think?

[farmbo]

78. Jim Hightower... Karl Rove's first sleazevictim:

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0418-26.htm

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rhett o rick]

84. Huh?? Im betting shaved. Just sayin'. nm

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

86. How are those caps working out for you?

MKJ

[dweller]

87. don't miss the link within the link

And here's a creative idea from Garret Keizer. I have no idea who he is, but he wrote a punchy piece in the October issue of Harper's Magazine (read it here) that I like and that Lowdowners might want to embrace. He's calling for a general strike. Not by unions, but by us-you and me. As a symbolically appropriate day, he suggests the first Tuesday of November, the traditional date for our elections -- this year, Nov. 6. He dubs it "The Feast of the Hanging Chads."

Read it and vote it up here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x316688

:kick: and R!
dp

[GoddessOfGuinness]

88. Every US Rep should read this...

I'm sending it to mine right away.

K&R

[MissDeeds]

89. Nothing will change

Just look at what has taken place in the past seven years. The evisceration of the Constitution should not be news to anyone. The problem is that too few really care and are willing to stand up. Our representatives fold like cheap tin foil for fear of being "unpatriotic" or risking their political futures. All who have remained silent are complicit in the dismantling of Constitution and the rule of law. It is a disgrace.