A Stunning Rebuke To The U.S. Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” Decision
Posted by Michelle Moquin on January 5th, 2012
Good morning!
Doug sent this to me. It is a powerful rebuke of the SCOTUS decision that corporations can give unlimited contributions to campaigns. A must read.
State Supreme Court Issues Remarkable Ruling Against Corporate Speech
January 1, 2012 – Montana’s Supreme Court has issued a stunning rebuke to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010 that infamously decreed corporations had constitutional rights to directly spend money on ‘independent expenditures’ in campaigns.
The Montana Court vigorously upheld the state’s right to regulate how corporations can raise and spend money after a secretive Colorado corporation, Western Tradition Partnership, and a Montana sportsman’s group and local businessman sued to overturn a 1912 state law banning direct corporate spending on electoral campaigns.
“Organizations like WTP that act as a conduit for anonymously spending by others represent a threat to the political marketplace,” wrote Mike McGrath, Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court, for the majority. “Clearly the impact of unlimited corporate donations creates a dominating impact on the political process and inevitably minimizes the impact of individual citizens.”
The 80-page ruling is remarkable in many respects. Throughout, including in a lengthy dissent by a state Supreme Court justice who felt Montana was dutibound to abide by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the Montana Court attacked the thinking behind the Citizens United decision and the impact of big money in political culture, including the notion that corporations are deserving of the same political speech rights as citizens.
“While, as a member of this Court, I am bound to follow Citizens United, I do not have to agree with the [U.S.] Supreme Court’s decision,” wrote Justice James C. Nelson, in his dissent. “And, to be absolutely clear, I do not agree with it. For starters, the notion that corporations are disadvantaged in the political realm is unbelievable. Indeed, it has astounded most Americans. The truth is that corporations wield enormous power in Congress and in state legislatures. It is hard to tell where government ends and corporate America begins: the transition is seamless and overlapping.”
“It should be noted that the Montana Corrupt Practices Act was adopted in 1912 at a time when the country’s focus was on preventing political corruption, not on protecting corporate influence,” wrote Nelson, later in his dissent.
Western Tradition Partnership
The lead group that sued to overturn the Montana ban on direct corporate spending in campaigns followed a very deliberate course of clashing with virtually every aspect of Montana campaign finance law. The lawyers behind the litigation believe that they should face no limits or accountabililty for any political fund-raising or spending.
The Montana Supreme Court’s majority opinion described why Western Tradition Partnership was as slippery an organization as one finds in modern politics. They noted how the groups lawyers claimed that they should be allowed to spend freely because the group would have to disclose that activity under Montana law, when as the state’s Chief Justice noted in his opinion, the same group, using another name, actually had sued the state to overturn those very disclosure laws.
Moreover, the ruling quoted a fund-raising brochure that said, “If you decide to support this program, no politician, no bureaucrat, and no radical environmentalist will ever know you made this program possible.” The group also is involved in a third suit challenging the state’s campaign spending disclosure law.
“We take note that Western Tradition appears to be engaged in a multi-front attack on both contribution restrictions and the transparency that accompanies campaign disclosure requirements,” the Court said, adding in a footnote that the Montana Commissioner of Political Practices called the group a “sham” because it failed to register with the state, and refused to disclose the sources of its funds or its spending—as required by law.
Rebutting Citizens United
Lawyers attacking the Montana ban on direct corporate spending said the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2010 Citizens United ruling removed any barrier to corporate spending. But the Montana Supreme Court disagreed and took a more nuanced view.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United found there was no compelling reason why a non-profit corporation that produced an anti-Hillary Clinton video should be prevented from showing that video in the weeks before Election Day—as a new federal campaign law had banned. But the Citizens United ruling did not remove all bans on corporate speech, the Montana Court said. “The Supreme Court held that laws that burden political speech are subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the government to prove that the law furthers a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to that interest.”
The Montana Court then launched into detailed explanations of sufficiently compelling state interests to merit sustaining the century-old law. The majority opinion read like a history lesson that recounting how the state, especially in the decades following its founding in 1889, struggled to restrict the power and influence of mining corporations. In 1906, the citizenry amended the state Constitution to allow for ballot initiatives. Six years later it passed the ban on corporate spending, specifically to curb mining companies based in Butte. The Court noted that the state—then and now—was beset with corporate players whose money, power and influence easily overshadow individuals.
“What was true a century ago is as true today: distant corporate interests mean that corporate dominated campaigns will only work ‘in the essential interest of outsiders with local interests a very secondary consideration,’” the opinion said, quoting a historian’s testimony from a lower state court that reviewed the case. “While specific corporate interests come and go in Montana, they are always present.”
The Court said Montana had a political tradition that has emerged in intervening decades and they wanted Montana to remain a state where candidates run low-budget, personal campaigns and do not rely on anonymous, well-financed messaging from outsiders.
The Court pointed out that judicial elections were particularly vulnerable to anonymous spending by large corporations. Montana’s 2008 Chief Justice race had advertising from all candidates costing about $60,000, it noted. “It is clear that an entity like Massey Coal, willing to spend even hundreds of thousands of dollars, much less millions, on a Montana judicial election could effectively drown out all other voices.”
These various factors—a history of citizenry fighting corporate corruption, political traditions of low-budget campaigning, and the vulnerability of judicial elections to corporate spending—were sufficiently compelling, the Court said, to preserve the century-old ban on corporate spending in the face of the Citizens United ruling.
“The question then, is when in the last 99 years did Montana lose the power or interest sufficient to support the statute, if it ever did,” the majority said. “We think not. Issues of corporate influence, sparse population, dependence upon agriculture and extractive resource development, location as a transportation corridor, and low campaign costs make Montana especially vulnerable to continued efforts of corporate control to the detriment of democracy and the republican form of government.”
Concluding, the Court said that the sportsman’s group and businessman who sued to overturn the law were not prohibited from participating in politics by the ban on direct corporate spending. And it said Western Tradition Partnership could follow the same rules as anyone else. “WTP can still speak through its own political committee/PAC as hundreds of organizations in Montana do on an ongoing basis,” the Court said. “The difference then is that under Montana law the PAC has to comply with Montana’s disclosure and reporting laws.”
There is little doubt that the anonymous money behind Western Tradition Partnership will appeal the Montana Supreme Court ruling in federal court—and even seek to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, even it it does that, the ruling issued Friday by Montana’s Supreme Court will endure as a monumental defense of a state’s right to curb political corruption and the excesses of big-money politics.
Corruption and Corporate Personhood
Justice Nelson, who dissented because he believed that the state had to follow the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling, concluded by fervently disagreeing with the assumptions behind the Citizens United ruling, starting with the Roberts Court’s assumption that spending large sums in campaigns was not inherently corrupting.
Nelson said independent expenditures by corporations in political campaigns—where political players are not supposed to coordinate their actions with candidate campaigns—absolutely were noticed and influenced the lawmaking process. “In the real world of politics,” he wrote, “the “quid pro quo” of both direct contributions to candidates and independent expenditures on their behalf is loyalty. And, in practical effect, experience teaches us that money corrupts, and enough of it corrupts absolutely.”
Nelson closed by slamming the legal theory of corporate personhood—that corporations, because they are run and owned by people, should have the same constitutional freedoms as individuals under the Bill of Rights. Corporatist judges, such as the Roberts Court, believe that corporations and people are indistinguishable under the law. In contrast, constitutional conservatives know very well that the framers of the U.S. Constitution distrusted large economic enterprises and drafted a document to protect individual businessmen, farmers and tradespeople from economic exploitation.
“While I recognize that this doctrine is firmly entrenched in law,” Nelson began, “I find the concept entirely offensive. Corporations are artificial creatures of law. As such, they should enjoy only those powers—not constitutional rights, but legislatively-conferred powers—that are concomitant with their legitimate function, that being limited liability investment vehicles for business. Corporations are not persons. Human beings are persons, and it is an affront to the inviolable dignity of our species that courts have created a legal fiction which forces people—human beings—to share fundamental natural rights with soulless creations of government. Worse still, while corporations and human beings share many of the same rights under the law, they clearly are not bound equally to the same codes of good conduct, decency, and morality, and they are not held equally accountable for their sins. Indeed, it is truly ironic that the death penalty and hell are reserved only to natural persons.”
As Nelson said, ending his dissent, “the [U.S.] Supreme Court has spoken. It has interpreted the protections of the First Amendment vis-a-vis corporate political speech. Agree with its decision or not, Montana’s judiciary and elected officers are bound to accept and enforce the [U.S.] Supreme Court’s ruling…”
But the Montana Supreme Court has also spoken—and with a clarity that is rare to behold.
***********
Doug: Excellent article for women to see. Thanks for posting. And thanks for the sending me the above article.
Morris: I so like your definition better.
Darryl: Happy you like it. Your cousin Benny is now member. If you discover his secret partner, let me know. For now it will be “Cousin Benny + Secret Sex Partner“.
Helena: Happy New Year to you! A nice surprise – I’ve missed seeing your name here.
Tsarmi: Hmm…are you sure you can’t share? I’m sure my readers would enjoy the stories too.
Wendy: It’s never too late to make McCain a member – would you like me to? I doubt he’s changed much since then, and I think he still deserves that title. I mean, once a LSOS…almost always a LSOS.
Alycedale: Happy New Year! I’m diggin’ the LSOS Club too – thanks. We’re getting quite the membership going here. Vicki Larson: -Congratulations! You are now a member.
Human Events/Newt: As much as I get a kick out of seeing your name here, if you’re trying to score some votes here, you’re going to be disappointed. By the way, have you hear of my LSOS Club? You’ll be happy to know that you’re a member. Don’t worry – you don’t have to do anything more; just continue to be yourself, and you’ll be a member for life.
Rhonda: Granted. Your husband Frank is now a member.
Readers: Hahah!! I’m giggling over here. This is so much fun. The membership is growing – keep ‘em coming. Oh…by the way…I must address a little bit of blog news. In case some of you posted yesterday but didn’t see your comments, it seems that quite a few of you (9) made a comment on 1/4 but posted your comment on the day before, 1/3. I just noticed the comments myself. Please post on the most recent day to keep it contemporary. Thanks.
That is all I have time for this morning. I’ll catch up with the rest of you tomorrow.
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:
Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129
Thank you for your loyal support!
All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2012
" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"
January 5th, 2012 at 9:43 am
It is adorable Ym to be so into your girl that you lose the Lust for the Love of the moment. I should be so lucky. A girl likes to be appreciated for something other than what’s between her legs.
It would be so erotic to know that you were so in awe of me that your big head over ruled the little one and it satisfied your body with just the presence of me.
I’m 28 and gorgeous. If you like I will send my email address and picture to Michelle, I am not trying to interest you. I would insult you or your lady that way. I just want to make a point.
All beautiful blond women aren’t dumb and we appreciate a true romantic too.
Love your writing. As Zen Lill said it is sooooooooo erotic. And for the most of us who understand the difference, that passage about Love rendering Lust moot was the bomb!!!!!
If only I met a man who felt like that about me.
Brittany
January 5th, 2012 at 9:47 am
Add my sex manic brother. He lies to his wife and expects me to help him. I refused and the bastard called our mother.
The gall. Add Lenny the sleaze.
Doris
January 5th, 2012 at 9:50 am
Zen Lill,(hope you don’t mind me using your name before I check with you) it wasn’t his Lust that made him unable to perform it was his love.
Picture the situation. They are not in bed she has entered his space, fully clothed. It is a statement of awesome proportions. She is more important than the sexual pleasure she gives him.
His love is about her. Poetry writing itself, lady,
Ym, even the swooning gets me wet.
Maria
January 5th, 2012 at 10:01 am
Maria, I totally get it and got it when he wrote it, and have had it happen to me, that’s why I made my statement, it was only half true, it’s incredible to be that loved/admired, I just meant I didn’t want it to hinder our ability to connect sexually due to this new found love/admiration, if it kicks things into a whole new level of love and love making the by all means I am for it! Hope that’s clear…and no, didn’t mind that you used my name without clearing it with me : ) that’s cute and funny, and absolutely no offense to you, Howie, so don’t even go there, am I right, Maria? : D
I can think of many nominees for the LSOS club, all my banter about not labeling aside, bc a big fat liar is a big fat liar just as a rose is a rose is a rose…
I’m going to go check out the comments on 1/3 now : ) bc I’m sure I missed something good, there’s always a nugget in everyone’s comments…although Jake – what’s up with the ‘fuck you’ comment or is taht an ‘inside’ joke/serious statement?
Al, how’s it hanging?!
Larry, you out there?
I’m anxious to hear 2012 predictions from the desk of anonz : ) what say you, desk of?
Luv, Zen LIll
January 5th, 2012 at 10:04 am
Misch, I think those last 9 on 1/3 are spam. I could be wrong though I’ve gotten comments on my site with exact wording and it was spam. -ZL
January 5th, 2012 at 10:08 am
Michelle this ruling outs the crooked STARK. They know that their bullshit is not called.
If this were a decision that the republicans were against they would be up in arms against those “activist” judges. But the balless dems are silent.
Trish
January 5th, 2012 at 10:11 am
I hope the dems in the Senate and the House will come out on the side of Montana and state their disappointment of the corruption of the SCOTUS.
STARK represents the reach of that corruption.
Nancy
Ym your words are what every woman is dying to hear and I mean ALL of them.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:13 am
“The law, which was passed by Montana voters in 1912 to combat Gilded Age corporate control over much of Montana’s government.”
And yet, in modern America, our Supreme Court of the United States cannot see how their ruling allows corporate control over the United States government….because, at Mitt Romney said “Corporations are people.”
And the ruling didn’t just open it up to American corporations…foreign corporations can do the same, run big money campaigns for candidates without revealing the sources of the money. Hmmm…I wonder if China has a favorite candidate, or Iran, or North Korea?
If American corporation can control who get elected in American, so can corporation in other countries. And that, if nothing else, is a reason to repeal the law. Let’s get the power to the people, and out of the hands of the few, the rich, the most powerful. That is what our country should be about.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:13 am
Feel the moment Zen Lill, his words were not about sex. They were about love,adulation. They were about the woman not the body of the woman.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:20 am
If a man loved me like that. If a man loved me like that. Oh if only a man loved me like that.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:22 am
We are under the control of those bought and paid for Lying Sacks of Shits, STARK. They are the minions of the banks.
Morton
January 5th, 2012 at 10:25 am
It is a sad day in America when we have to consider that five justices, STARK, of the Supreme Court of the United States may have to be defied.
When the broad consensus of a people is that their government, as evidenced by a long train of abuses, is breaking the social contract guaranteeing the right of the citizens to life, liberty and estate, then the people have a natural (and positive) right to reject such government and pursue change most conducive to the public welfare.
With the increasing corruption of this Republic by the neofeudal few, perhaps there may be a surgical revolution implemented by state supreme courts.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:25 am
Thank you Montana Supremes for standing up for sanity and against corruption. It’s nice to know not every judiciary in this country is bought off.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:33 am
STARK represent the political opinions of the republican party. They decide anything political or philosophical strictly along party lines.
The LSOS republicans advocate that political philosophy would not enter into decisions by the court. Yet they appoint judges to do just that.
Who really is at fault. The criminal who steals because we as a society has made it legal to steal or the society who elects the party who writes the laws that enable the criminal to steal and appoints a judge who will look the other way?
January 5th, 2012 at 10:37 am
STARK is owned by the Koch brothers
January 5th, 2012 at 10:45 am
Ym, your words sent this Latina into the clouds.
Michelle, I like this quote:
————————–
Citizens united decision ended democracy as we know it in America. Now Democracy belongs to the richest corporate elites with the most resources or in short rule by and for the rich.
Just what their ideological mentor Ayn Rand proscribed:
“She said the United States should be a “democracy of superiors only,” with superiority defined by being rich.
Well, we got it. As the health care crisis has shown, today, the rich have the real power: The vote that matters is expressed with a checkbook and a lobbyist.
We get to vote only for the candidates they have pre-funded and receive the legislation they have pre-approved.
It’s useful—if daunting—to know that there is a substantial slice of the American public who believe this is not a problem to be put right, but morally admirable. ”
http://www.slate.com/id/2233966/
—————————–
There are many ignorant people who admire Any Rand’s prose because they do not understand the ramifications
of her words.
Nor do they understand that she was a poor woman seeking the approval and money of the super rich of her day.
Many wannabe rich men without the intellectual skills to make it the world of finance, fantasize about her words. They have no clue what she is really advocating.
Today they have the results.
Carla
January 5th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Gloria, got it babe, see my above comment, I’m quite clear on the essence of it, thank you though, I appreciate you trying to get me to ‘feel’ but believe me I am a very kinestetic woman, very visual as well…I understand the ym love/admire/lust experience, and love being reminded of it and how it felt, once upon a time.
Alycedale, last paragraph, excellent point and we all know the answer. What do we do with the judges now though, the are public ‘serving’ lifers, that’s the bad news…
- ZL
January 5th, 2012 at 10:51 am
“I just meant I didn’t want it to hinder our ability to connect sexually due to this new found love/admiration,”
================
Personally, I can find any man who will fuck this beauty I am. But to find a man whose “love/admiration” new found or not prevents him from lusting after me because he is filled with the love of me, would be so rare, I would worship him.
Zen Lill, if you have truly had this kind of love, you are one of the very few. I know of only one, she who is loved by Ym.
Zabal
January 5th, 2012 at 10:55 am
Zen Lill, exactly, “What do we do with the judges now though, the are public ‘serving’ lifers, that’s the bad news…”
And yes, you may use my name without checking with me first. That is a first amendment right not yet taken by STARK. Now H’s opinion that is another matter.
Alycedale
January 5th, 2012 at 11:09 am
Howie, we all misspeak on occasion. Alas we are but human. I did it with Obama and was called to task for it(albeit, gently) by Michelle.
I apologized and was welcomed back by my compadres and peers here. You can do the same. Apologize to Zen Lill and retract the demand to be checked with first before your name is used in context.
It is a blog and opinions like assholes it is said we all have one.
I am a UFO enthusiasts so I read your input with high interest and scientific skepticism. I have found no reason to doubt your input so far.
But if I do, I will not hesitate to voice my differences. So your admonition would not serve you well with the likes of me. Why then impose it on our more polite, gentile contributors, like Zen Lill?
She was courteously polite in her retort. Why not now answer with an equally courteous, “I am sorry.”
Your sincerity is highly respected so we will know that you contrition is genuine.
Sir
Robert, Rt
January 5th, 2012 at 11:26 am
HOW ANTIDEPRESSANTS MAY HURT YOUR ARTERIES
A number of weeks ago, I told you about a surprising and dangerous side effect of certain antidepressants — they can mess up your heart’s rhythm (see the December 1, 2011 issue of Daily Health News).
Today, I need to warn you about another little-known way that antidepressants may hurt your cardiovascular system — they may thicken your artery walls.
Few studies to date have examined this phenomenon, yet it poses a serious health risk. Narrowed arteries raise your risk for heart attack and stroke.
Anyone taking an antidepressant should have this information.
At Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, cardiologist Amit J. Shah, MD, and his colleagues decided to study this topic because the potential connection between antidepressant use and heart disease has been poorly understood.
He presented his preliminary findings at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology this past spring in New Orleans. I gave him a call to get more details.
ONE THICKENING, SICKENING PROBLEM
To rule out genetics as a factor, Dr. Shah and his colleagues analyzed people from one of the largest twin databases in the country — 513 pairs of identical and fraternal male twins (average age 55).
At the time of the research, about 16% of the men were taking antidepressants — all different kinds, though 60% of the antidepressants were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), such as fluoxetine (Prozac), duloxetine (Cymbalta) and sertraline (Zoloft).
The researchers didn’t record how long the men had been taking the medications or the exact dosages. They used ultrasound to take one measurement of the thickness of the linings of the mens’ carotid arteries (the main arteries in the neck that supply blood to the brain).
What the study found: As we grow older, our arteries naturally thicken at the rate of about 10 microns (one millionth of a meter) per year, but Dr. Shah discovered that participants who had been taking any type of antidepressant had experienced substantially greater artery thickening.
When the researchers looked at the 59 twin pairs in which one twin was taking an antidepressant and the other wasn’t, the carotid artery lining was, on average, about 40 microns (about 5%) thicker in the twin taking the drug.
The men were not followed to see who developed cardiovascular disease and who didn’t, but previous research has revealed that each 10-micron increase in carotid artery thickness is associated with a 1.8% increase in risk for cardiovascular disease,
so that 40-micron increase in thickness could correlate to about a 7.2% increased risk for cardiovascular disease in the men who were on antidepressants.
Another way to look at it: Their arteries were, in effect, four years older than their brothers’ arteries, noted Dr. Shah.
This finding took into consideration other factors that can affect artery thickness, including alcohol and coffee intake, previous history of heart disease, history of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression.
“A higher level of depressive symptoms was associated with higher artery thickness only in those taking antidepressants,” said Dr. Shah.
“Therefore, antidepressants may act synergistically with depressive symptoms to increase risk for artery thickness.”
WHY THE DISHEARTENING EFFECT?
Dr. Shah theorized why the antidepressants might have been associated with having thicker arteries.
Antidepressants, of course, work by increasing levels of neurotransmitters.
Yet while these chemicals act in your brain to relieve symptoms of depression, Dr. Shah said that they also may cause blood vessels elsewhere in the body to constrict or tighten, which can lead to thicker arteries.
Dr. Shah cautioned that this is an observational study — not a test of cause-and-effect — so we can’t definitively conclude from it that antidepressants cause artery thickening.
Further research is needed to confirm these results.
WEIGH THE PROS AND CONS
So if you’re on an antidepressant, what should you do? “No one taking antidepressants should stop taking them based solely on the results of this study,” said Dr. Shah.
That is undoubtedly true. But keep in mind that, like all drugs, antidepressants have side effects — some that we can see and feel (e.g., agitation, insomnia, sexual dysfunction) and perhaps others that we cannot.
And if you’re considering taking an antidepressant, consider natural treatment first, such as exercise, healthy eating and talk therapy.
Sit down with your doctor and carefully discuss the pros and cons for your particular situation.
Source:
Amit J. Shah, MD, cardiology fellow, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta.
January 5th, 2012 at 11:43 am
Michelle;
Is is possible for you to send Madaline back. We are being shot from roofs by Assad’s snipers.
January 5th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Yeah, Jake, what was that f**k you comment about?
January 5th, 2012 at 11:48 am
Zen Lill, thanks for thinking of me. I was covering a piece on Santorum in Iowa and got bogged down.
It’s not hard to imagine you being admired the way Ym does his lady. You are a class act.
Larry
January 5th, 2012 at 11:50 am
Dear Fellow “Billionaire/Corporate Jet Owner”,
Even though my new book is riding high on the bestseller lists, I want to send you a free copy. Yes, free.
That’s how important I believe it is for you to read Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America.
I’ll tell you how to receive your gift copy in just a second. But first, I want to ask you one question:
Did your blood boil as you watched the violent spectacles in Wisconsin staged by Democrat-led public-sector unions?
If so, brace yourself for what’s ahead. As the 2012 election draws nearer, I fear sickening scenes like this will become as frequent as Nancy Pelosi’s Botox appointments. Heck, some blunt-speaking Democrats already admit they’re going to get rough.
“It’s not going to be 2008 ‘Yes, we can’ anymore. I think it’s going to be slash-and-burn,” said Democratic pollster Paul Maslin.
Translation: The outright thuggery we witnessed in Madison was a preview of how Democrats will use mob tactics to try and re-elect their failed president whose catastrophic policies have brought America to the brink of ruin.
I agree with the candid pollster that Obamacrats, driven by their mob mentality, will decide they have little choice but to resort to bullying in 2012.
You see, in 2008 (AKA “the Year of the Second Coming” to liberals), Barack Obama had no record to run on. He was free to campaign with vague promises of “hope and change” while counting on foolish independents and naïve young people to project their own wishes upon him like a blank screen.
But in 2012, Obama will have no such luxury. We know who he is now. He can’t hide behind hope. Or change. His record, as the old political saying goes, “stinks and shines like a mackerel in the moonlight.” Which is why…
Democrats will use the same vile “Wisconsin Strategy” to frighten conservatives and independents and make them fearful of daring to unelect the first African-American president of the United States.
Liberals and Mobs: A Long Love Affair
Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America reveals why mob strategy is essential to motivating modern liberalism. From union thugs to student radicals to pro-ObamaCare fanatics, use of mobs IS the grand tradition of Stalin, Mao, Hitler, gas chambers and the guillotine.
Ask yourself… Have you ever seen a “conservative mob?” Can you imagine a “Republican riot?” The notion is absurd.
Yet, riots, strikes, demonstrations, civil (and uncivil) disobedience, beatings, protests, sit-ins, boycotts, firebombings, and general public mayhem are the mother’s milk of the liberal mob mentality.
In Demonic, you’ll find answers to questions you’ve probably asked yourself dozens of times as you watched news clips of enraged liberals running amok:
Why do liberals activate mobs, depend on mobs, coddle mobs, publicize and celebrate mobs? (The tradition goes way, way back, as I prove.)
What do highly educated liberals find so admirable about brutal, violent thugs like Castro, Stalin and Mao? (You’ll be repulsed, but fascinated, when I reveal the shocking truth.)
Why is it that conservatives revere the American Revolution (which was about ideas) — but liberals find inspiration in the horrors of the French Reign of Terror, the Bolshevik Revolution, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s slaughter and today’s deranged anarchist smashups wherever bankers come to town? (The answer will prepare you for what’s coming.)
I’ve arranged for you to receive a gift copy of Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America just for trying my favorite newspaper on the face of the planet… Human Events.
Human Events is the publication I have called my editorial home for 14 years. Not only do I write regularly for Human Events, I devour it from cover to cover every week.
Why? Because it’s the one news source I can count on to bring me the absolute, unvarnished, hard-hitting truth. And so should you.
Human Events is written and edited by gutsy people who will rescue you from the sticky tar pit of political correctness that passes for contemporary reporting… not girlie-boy editors afraid of sticking to their guns!
That means by reading Human Events, you and I can count on learning the news the liberal media try so hard to keep from us!
For example…
In a recent issue of Human Events, I learned that of all those “thousands of acres” Obama speaks of as ready for oil drilling in U.S. waters…virtually none have been found to have any oil! In other words, Obama has no intention of opening new drilling anywhere in the U.S. — no matter how high the price of gasoline soars.
I also learned in Human Events that Obama’s “economic stimulus” was simply a gargantuan gift to the states — to make sure pampered government workers did not share the same painful fate as private-sector workers who lost jobs by the millions.
I found out in Human Events that ObamaCare is so brilliant and so wonderful that trade unions and companies friendly to the president are fleeing it by the thousands. In fact, Obama’s health plan is so desirable that 20% of the exemptions have gone to Nancy Pelosi’s posh district in San Francisco!
You could search the liberal press from now until Whoopi Goldberg votes Republican, and you wouldn’t find news items like these seeing the light of day.
Now you know why I think you and Human Events should get together.
There’s so much at stake today. America is facing its biggest financial crisis of modern times and liberals just don’t get it. Never has it been more important for you to get the truth — and not just the P.C. pabulum dished up by the mainstream media.
And now you can try Human Events with this special introductory offer — a full 30-week trial subscription at the reduced rate of just $39.95… a little more than a dollar an issue.
And don’t forget — you’ll also receive as a FREE gift my just-published and (what else?) very provocative book…
Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America
My book will not only give you a mesmerizing peek into the fever-swamp that passes for liberal thinking, it will also prepare you for the onslaught that is coming in 2012.
You know how liberals worship their “deities” — FDR, JFK, RFK, MLK, the list goes on and on — but can you imagine their rage at even the thought of Barack Hussein Obama becoming a failed, one-term president? How dare you, America!
Thousands of Americans will be caught off guard by liberals’ outrageous actions in an attempt to save Obama. Not you. You’ll know every step of the way what’s coming — from the public sector unions, the left-dominated universities, the Obama-obsessed popular culture, and the hard-core liberal media — because you’ll know exactly how their mob-loving, totalitarian minds work.
Try Human Events Risk-Free and Get Your Gift Copy of
Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America
ABSOLUTELY FREE
I think you’ll thrive with Human Events. After all, there’s a certain cachet to reading a publication that is universally damned by liberal elites who increasingly resemble the idle degenerates who once populated the czar’s court.
Frankly, not everyone has the courage to read Human Events. It is far easier to just swallow what the establishment media dish out and nod in agreement with the bovine herd. Sad but true.
But I think you’re exceptional. You have the courage to think for yourself. You’ve read this far, haven’t you?
Why not take the next step? Try Human Events for yourself.
But please don’t delay. Only a limited number of copies of my new book, Demonic: How The Liberal Mob is Endangering America, can be set aside for complimentary distribution. Be sure to claim your copy below!
Yours for a one-term Obama presidency!
Ann Coulter
Legal Affairs Correspondent, Human Events
January 5th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Zen Lill:
It was wrong of me to snap at you for your comment. I am TRULY SORRY that we had a misunderstanding in communication this morning when I commented about using my name in your post #38 on yesterday’s blog.
I was confused about where you were coming from when you said “just ask Howie”. I did not understand the context.
We have been friends for about 4 years and I HOPE this will not interfere with our friendship. Try not to lose any sleep over it. It was blown way out of proportion.
Are we friends again? Do you get where I am coming from?
Sorry it took so long for me to respond. I had a long morning and afternoon at my Orthopedic Doctor and Physical Therapy. I just returned and read all the nasty comments to me and responded immediately.
I do not like being thought of as the “Bad Guy”. It truly hurts me.
HOWIE
January 5th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Hey there Zen Lill, How’s it hanging? I would have to say, just like it is supposed to. Maybe a little to the left, not sure. And how might you be feeling young lady? Was Santa Claus nice to you this year, or were you too naughty?
Don’t answer that if you don’t want to. Good to hear from you, and thanks for asking about me. Have a Happy One.
Bye-de-Bye, and stop picking on my roommate please, He’s had a bad day and he doesn’t mean any harm to anybody.
Luv,
Chris
January 5th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Howie, we were and are friends and that very minor admonishment wasn’t taken nearly as harshly by me as it was by others. I figured you woke up on the wrong side of the bed, and thought the gentle ribbing was enough to set things straight. I rarely let minor issues like that get to me, though I do thank you for being polite in apologizing, I always know your heart is in the right place and RobertRt, thank you, too.
Zabal, I was lucky, very much so. I don’t think I understood just how much at the time, though it is amazing to see love that strong in someone’s eyes and feel it in their touch. It is unsurpassed. Maybe Anonz will get back here and hit me with all that though I believe he’s in hiding for safety reasons, too bad, I do miss him here.
Larry, thank you. I’m glad you’re well and covering the stories Mischa is writing about, any inside detes (that’s details) you’d like to share?
- ZL
January 5th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
Oops, my holiday alter ego. Don’t tell anyone.
Al’a'Mode
January 5th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Zen Lill, I just want to add that It was 4:29 AM your time or 7:29 AM my time this morning.
I had to rush off to my Doctors appointment and was still groggy. Perhaps I did wake up on the wrong side of the bed?
Robert, Rt: I want to thank you for excellent advice today. I appreciate it.
HOWIE
January 5th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
What if YM only professes his love for his lady here? And what if his lady love isn’t able to read it? It’s kind of sad to think she’s missing out on the words we are all enjoying.
I use to have a love just like that. It made many years of my life worth living. Now I have nothing.
January 5th, 2012 at 1:59 pm
Howie, I didn’t say anything because I knew you would come back appropriately.
Howie, always the gentleman.
You are still my favorite.
Lorrie
January 5th, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Virginia, all is not lost if one sole finds solace in his sweet words.
January 5th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Howie, I was not aware of the accomplishments of Genghis Khan. Thank you for sparking my interest.
January 5th, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Zen Lill I would love to see you and Anonz back together. I thought your connection was so romantic.
I used to read the blog for the little back and forwards you used to have. I imagined that you two were trysting and enjoying each other’s comfort in some wonderful private place.
I still do occasionally. It is so romantic. Two brilliant minds finding that their bodies respond to each other too.
All the best
Traci
January 5th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
I bet you fags are planning on sucking Obummer’s black cock in 2012 because he looks like the idiots you saw in rap videos. LOL.
Grow a fucking brain. Obama has failed this country in every way imaginable. He wasted $800 billion on a failed stimulus package.
He failed to keep unemployment from skyrocketing. He failed to close Guantanamo. He failed to win in Iraq. He failed to save the economy.
He is a fat fucking presidential failure. Now Romney has to clean up his mess!
January 5th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Alycedale,
Under normal circumstances, a Supreme Court justice is awarded a lifetime commission.
However…A Supreme Court Justice may be impeached by the House of Representatives and removed from office if convicted in a Senate trial, but only for the same types of offenses that would trigger impeachment proceedings for any other government official under Articles I and II of the Constitution.
Article III, Section 1 states that judges of Article III courts shall hold their offices “during good behavior.” “The phrase “good behavior” has been interpreted by the courts to equate to the same level of seriousness ‘high crimes and misdemeanors” encompasses.
In addition, any federal judge may prosecuted in the criminal courts for criminal activity. If found guilty of a crime in a federal district court, the justice would face the same type of sentencing any other criminal defendant would. The district court could not remove him/her from the Bench. However, any justice found guilty in the criminal courts of any felony would certainly be impeached and, if found guilty, removed from office.
In the United States, impeachment is most often used to remove corrupt lower-court federal judges from office, but it’s not unusual to find disgruntled special interest groups circulating petitions on the internet calling for the impeachment of one or all members of the High Court.
The Impeachment Process
Impeachment is a two-step process; the impeachment phase is similar to a Grand Jury hearing, where charges (called “articles of impeachment”) are presented and the House of Representatives determines whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant a trial. If the House vote passes by a simple majority, the defendant is “impeached,” and proceeds to trial in the Senate.
The House of Representatives indicts the accused on articles of impeachment, and, if impeached, the Senate conducts a trial to determine the party’s guilt or innocence.
The Senate trial, while analogous to a criminal trial, only convenes for the purpose of determining whether a Justice, the President (or another officeholder) should be removed from office on the basis of the evidence presented at impeachment.
At the trial a committee from the House of Representatives, called “Managers,” act as the prosecutors. Per constitutional mandate (Article I, Section 3), the Chief Justice of the United States (Supreme Court) must preside over the Senate trial of the President. If any other official is on trial, an “Impeachment Trial Committee” of Senators act as the presiding judges to hear testimony and evidence against the accused, which is then presented as a report to the remained of the Senate. The full Senate no longer participates in the hearing phase of the removal trial. This procedure came into practice in 1986 when the Senate amended its rules and procedures for impeachment and has been contested by several federal court judges, but the Supreme Court has declined to interfere in the process, calling the issue a political, not legal, matter.
At the conclusion of the trial, the full Senate votes and must return a two-thirds Super Majority for conviction. Convicted officials are removed from office immediately and barred from holding future office. The Senate trial, while analogous to a criminal trial, only convenes for the purpose of determining whether a Justice, the President (or another officeholder) should be removed from office on the basis of the evidence presented at impeachment.
Impeachment and Near Impeachment
Only one Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase (one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence), has ever been impeached. The House of Representatives accused Chase of letting his Federalist political leanings affect his rulings, and served him with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804. The Senate acquitted him of all charges in 1805, establishing the right of the judiciary to independent opinion. Chase continued on the Court until his death in June 1811.
In 1957, at the height of McCarthyism, the Georgia General Assembly passed a joint resolution calling for “The Impeachment of Certain U.S. Supreme Court Justices” believed to be enabling Communism with their decisions. The resolution targeted Chief Justice Earl Warren and Associate Justices Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Tom Campbell Clark, Felix Frankfurter, and Stanley Forman Reed (as well as several unnamed deceased Justices) for “…[usurping] the congressional power to make law in violation of Article I, Sections I and 8, and violated Sections 3 and 5 of the 14th Amendment and nullified the 10th Amendment of the Constitution.”
January 5th, 2012 at 5:42 pm
To all you who were so quick to criticize HOWIE this morning because of his mischoice of words (or not), jut think that you may be judged as harshly and quick by those you interact with in your lives. Who gave you the right to judge someone else? What happened to all the admiration and ‘loyalty’ for HOWIE
January 5th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
To all you who were so quick to criticize HOWIE this morning because of his mischoice of words (or not), jut think that you may be judged as harshly and quickly by others. How would that make you feel? More importantly, who gave you the right to judge someone else? What happened to all the admiration and ‘loyalty’ for HOWIE you’ve professed on this blog? It’s amazing to me how quickly you change your views about someone because of a choice of words that had nothing to do with any of you. They were not directed at you, were they? I’m sure that Zen Lil and HOWIE can work their differences out without the help of all of you who had to put in your two cents’ worth.
Shame on you all!
Christine Elizabeth/
January 5th, 2012 at 7:12 pm
Christine Elizabeth:
None of us are above criticism whether it is deserved or not. That is the nature of a true open forum. You just exercised that right when you criticized others for, in your opinion, a lack of one thing or another towards Howie.
That is what makes this blog so different. The lack of censorship. We are left to our own to work out the kinks.
I like Robert, Rt’s post. Undoubtedly Robert, Howie, Zen Lill, PrP, Social Butterfly and others will have their turn at the acid tongue of one or the other poster.
So should it be. It will keep them humble, and the rest of us believing in equal treatment for all.
Howie manned up and he is better for it. We are better for it because we see those we raise so high respond to us when we feel let down by one thing or another.
I respect your opinion, and I gave you mine.
Clark
January 5th, 2012 at 7:34 pm
Christine:
Just as you felt loyalty to Howie and you voiced it so some of us felt the same loyalty to Zen Lill and we voiced it.
It’s all good.
Missy
January 5th, 2012 at 7:51 pm
Clark, thank you for your opinion – I, too, respect yours. I was referring to the quick and almost vicious-like verbal attack on HOWIE for a comment he made to Zen Lil – not regarding any issues or events – but something that had nothing to do with anyone else. I was struck by the almost vicious-like response from other bloggers here against HOWIE. How quick we are to judge one another, not for our actions, but for a mischoice of words. Let us not be so quick to judge one another lest someone (more powerful than us) judges us for such a minor issue. This is the point I’m trying to get across. And its not because it was HOWIE and Zen Lil, I would have commented the same way had it been anyone else too…(Forgive me if I didn’t express myself correctly the first time, but English is not my first language.) We have real issues to worry about…the political issues, the economy, making ends meet, children, our seniors, our World, wars, famine, rape, murder, etc. Let us not be so quick to react to a minor issue lest we similarly be too quick to react (note I’m not saying “act”) to what is important.
That is all I wanted to say. I’ve gotten it off my chest, and now will gracefully slip back and continue to be an avid reader of this incredible blog.
Thank you all.
Christine Elizabeth/
January 5th, 2012 at 8:21 pm
Traci, that would be a wish come true, in the meantime I just hope he’s somewhere safe and healthy as he can be…would love bantering and trysting and I cannot do that with his desk.
Christine Elizabeth, Clark and Missy, I’m actually rather impressed and touched that you all took an interest of any kind, thank you. Keep in mind that I know Howie for a while now and I have had much contact in life with people of chronic and episodic illnesses and I try to remember when a statement feels ‘not so Howie’ to me that he may be having a moment and we all have them. I’m known for cutting people slack even when they don’t actually deserve it sometimes bc it wastes my positive energy to do otherwise and I’ve no time for that bc you cannot be all about the love with that kind of ‘tude : )
Doug TMD, great info on impeachment of supreme court justices, the second 2 para’s kind of sum up why it’ll never happen though, we’d have to take out all the crooks and well…that’s a lot of people…it was an excellent read so again, thank you. And dude, if you think it’s something that could turn into a movement the size of ‘occupy…’ let me know, I’ll march washington with you!
- ZL – it’s been really fun to be here on and off almost all day, reminds me of the good ole days : ) I can’t do it all the time but when I can I love doing it, and I had a very productive work day and cleaned the house and some other fun stuff, too…amazing…
January 5th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Hafa adai:
How dumb are these guys the white boy party is putting before us as candidates for President? I mean is the only qualification being white?
That worked for the first 43, but now the rules have changed. Being a white male isn’t the only qualification needed. You have to be able to think a little.
That may disqualify Santorum. The dumb as a box of rock white boy doesn’t know that Guam is part of the 9th Circuit.
====================
Jan 5, 2012 5:39pm
Um, Does Santorum Know That the 9th Circuit Already Has Jurisdiction of Guam?
Rick Santorum likes to trash the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Like Newt Gingrich and other conservatives, he is deeply critical of the court for some of its rulings in the past.
Today, he took his criticism further, joking about moving the judges.
“Maybe we can create a court that puts them in Guam or something like that,” he said.
But does Santorum know that Guam is already under the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction?
He also referred to the “reign of California judges,” even though many of the judges come from the other eight western states.
He was joking right?
Courtesy of ABC News’ Shushannah Walshe, here are his extended comments:
“Now, there’s a question as to whether we abolish the circuit, what do we do with all these judges that are on there? I have some ideas that I won’t share publically, but you know, I actually drill through this and I want to be responsive, I want to be respective of the Constitution, because there is a provision that judges are appointed for life.
Now, maybe we can create a court that puts them in Guam or something like that and keep their life appointments, and appoint a whole bunch of new judges to two different circuits.
Realistically, we can probably do something that’s actually been proposed actually a lot in the past, which is to take the 9th Circuit, which is by far the biggest circuit, and cut it in two, and take maybe all the judges and stick them in California, and give all these states that have had to suffer under the reign of California judges and give them their own so they can actually reflect the values of the people of the western states.”
====================
This a real piece of work. Only another white boy could find a reason to support this piece of shit for anything. I can’t understand why a woman would support this latent homosexual.
I guess you have to be white.
Peter
January 5th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
Christine:
You are tenacious if nothing else. One man’s “vicious-like verbal attack” is another’s light reprimand.
Your logic escapes me. Is this really about Howie or do you have other issues? Your “something that had nothing to do with anyone else” is troubling. That is what people say who stand around and watch others being abused.
It had nothing to do with anyone else is the excuse used to avoid taking a stand when someone, or some government entity is abusing someone.
We are our brothers and sisters keepers. We should support those we feel are in need of support.
We should never look the other way because the bad behavior had nothing to do with anyone else except the victim of the bad behavior.
“How quick we are to judge one another, not for our actions, but for a mischoice of words. Let us not be so quick to judge one another lest someone (more powerful than us) judges us for such a minor issue. This is the point I’m trying to get across.”
You have made your point. Why beat the dead horse? And how quick you are to judge those you feel over reacted.
And who died and made you god so you could pronounce that it was only a “minor issue?”
If we took more time to address the “minor issues” such as civility to each other, then maybe events would not escalate into major issues.
You my dear have other issues bothering you. We are here. Change your name, if it makes you more comfortable, and let’s talk.
Ruth
January 5th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
Peter, you have me backing you up. I just read the report that The white boy has been poisoning us via toxic chemicals released into Guam’s environment at an all
time rate.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Toxic chemicals managed, treated or released into the environment from facilities operating on Guam increased in 2010 when compared to 2009, according to the latest data available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The data comes from the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory. It’s one of the EPA’s largest publicly available databases, providing communities valuable information on more than 650 toxic chemicals that are managed or released by various industries, according to a press release.
In 2010, there were 487,190 pounds of toxic disposals and releases on Guam, the release states.
That release mediums such as air, water and land. In 2008, there were 271,004 pounds and in 2009, there were 224,508 pounds.
The chemical information in the inventory is calculated by industrial facilities and reported to the EPA, as required by Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
“Twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the law that gave communities the ‘Right-To-Know’ about potential toxic hazards in their area,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest.
“The annual toxics report helps residents and local governments make informed decisions, and by working together with businesses, they can reduce chemical use.”
Total releases include toxic chemicals discharged by facilities to air, water, land, and underground, and the amount transferred off-site for disposal, the release states.
Pollution controls apply to many of the reported releases. Reporting facilities must comply with environmental standards set by local, state and federal agencies.
Release data alone are not sufficient to determine exposure or to calculate potential risks to human health and the environment, the release states.
TRI data, in conjunction with other information, such as the toxicity of the chemical, the release medium, and site-specific conditions, may be used in evaluating exposures that may result from releases of toxic chemicals.
==================================
These are the hypocrites that are demanding we accept their attempt to take political control of native peoples of Guam by importing thousands of white boys and giving them the instant vote.
They resist every effort on the mainland to allow qualified OTWs the right to vote. They destroyed ACORN with fabricated lies and crimes. They set every obstacle they can legally to stop the OTW from voting and when they can’t do it legally they do it illegally.
Yet, we have to endure their self-righteous claim to discrimination. Playing the race card is so all right when it is being done by the white boy.
I am sick of them too. Guam needs to do whatever it can to gain self determination. I so look forward to kicking their butts off our island as the Philippines did.
Take your bases and shove them up your ass, white boy. Just get the hell off our island.
Anna
January 5th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Ym, I just read your post to your sweetheart. I cried. It was so special. If Zen Lill hadn’t said that she had had a similar experience, I would have suggested that you must be an alien because I can’t imagine human mails with that kind of devotion.
I copied it for my bad days. I will have it lamented and put under my pillow. The words will lull me to sleep.
Jackie
January 5th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Yesterday President Obama decided to do away with that pesky little “Constitution” thing, and assign himself the power to make recess appointments when the Senate is not in recess.
The Constitution could not be clearer about this: “The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.” The meaning of this power is equally clear, providing a mechanism for the president to expediently fill important offices left vacant by sudden illness or resignation. The president is most certainly not granted the power to unilaterally decide whether the Senate is in recess or not.
This was all done for the purpose of installing Richard Cordray as director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is not what the Founders had in mind when they contemplated the need to swiftly fill crucial offices so the government could discharge its limited Constitutional duties.
“When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them,” President Obama explained. “I will not stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people they were elected to serve.” And yet, somehow the Republic prospered quite nicely without a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau until now. In fact, it prospered quite a bit more than it has under Obama’s job-killing policies and budget-busting corruption.
The Constitution of the United States obliges you to stand by sometimes, Mr. Obama. That’s the entire point of placing limits upon your imperial power. Those limits do not exist to be discarded when a really brilliant President becomes especially angry at a minority he judges unfit to fulfill its representative duties. What chills every American should feel, hearing this extremist, arrogant President declare that he “will not stand by” while a minority takes lawful actions he disapproves of!
—John Hayward
January 5th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
It’s funny how conservatives scream about activists judges and the bench is filled with just that. The citizens decision being the main point.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
We “liberals” only love the fact that this will divide an already conflicted conservative base because they will have to decide if they are for states rights or will march in lock-step with a SCOTUS who made a biased and decidedly UNConstitutional decision.
I see it this way. Montana cannot have laws that conflict with the Constitution.
So their law is null-and-void UNTIL we override the obviously UnConstitutional decision by the Roberts Court with an amendment once again making corporations soulless entities without the rights and privileges afforded real citizens.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:40 pm
THE DRIVING DANGER THAT YOU’RE IGNORING
Would you let a friend get behind the wheel of a car if he’d just been drinking and wasn’t steady on his feet?
The answer is certainly “No.” But if you’re like most people in the US, you wouldn’t hesitate to let a friend drive when he’s incapacitated for another reason — drowsiness.
It’s time to wake up to a danger that causes nearly 5,500 deaths a year.
Surprisingly, drowsy driving has gotten little attention compared with other driving dangers, including speeding, drinking alcohol, failing to fasten seat belts or being distracted by cell phones and other devices.
That’s why the AAA’s recent campaign against drowsy driving caught my attention.
I phoned J. Peter Kissinger, head of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, who told me that, in his opinion, drowsy driving is the largest unrecognized problem on the highways.
In a recent AAA survey of 2,000 drivers age 16 and older, 32% said that they had driven while on the verge of falling asleep at some point in their lives, and 41% admitted to actually falling asleep at the wheel at some point in their lives.
And that’s despite the opinion of 96% that it’s unacceptable to drive while drowsy! So why don’t we practice what we preach?
BELTS, BOOZE AND SPEED
The 96% have it right. According to the National Sleep Foundation (NSF), drowsiness is very similar in its effects to drunkenness.
It causes slower reaction times, vision impairment, lapses in judgment and delays in processing information.
In fact, NSF, which has joined AAA in publicizing the problem, says that being awake for more than 20 consecutive hours results in impairment equal to that caused by a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08%, which is the legal limit for driving in all states.
And if you’ve undergone stress or slept poorly the night before, you don’t have to be awake for even that long to experience this level of impairment.
So why are we just now learning about this? As Kissinger put it, traffic safety experts have focused on “belts, booze and speed” and more recently on distractions by cell phones and other electronic devices.
Also, statistics, he said, have downplayed the role of drowsiness in fatal crashes because it’s often difficult for investigators to determine if the cause of a crash was drowsiness, drunkenness, distraction or a combination of factors — in other words, there’s no breathalyzer or blood test for drowsy driving.
If a driver veers off the road and hits a tree, for instance, there’s often not any way to tell whether he fell asleep or instead was distracted when he tried to change the station on the radio.
As a result, US traffic statistics typically show that drowsiness is involved in only about 3.6% of fatal crashes, compared with more than 30% for alcohol.
AAA has now recalculated the statistics by extrapolating data from accident reports and adjusting for unknown or missing data (like drowsiness).
New calculations, Kissinger said, show that nearly 17% of fatal car crashes result from drowsy driving — that’s on a par with distracted driving, which is thought to account for 16% of crashes.
Plus, he added, 60% of people who “nod off” at the wheel do so when driving for less than one hour. “Drowsy driving doesn’t just occur on a long trip,” he said.
“It can also happen on a shorter trip, such as driving home after a date night with your significant other.”
YOUR STRATEGY FOR SAFETY
To prevent an accident caused by drowsiness, Kissinger urges us to…
Take a 30-minute break from driving every two hours or 100 miles to drink coffee or another caffeinated beverage. It takes about 30 minutes for caffeine to enter the bloodstream.
Sleep at least seven hours the night before a long trip.
If possible, travel with an alert and well-rested passenger who will help keep you awake.
Stay somewhere overnight instead of extending your drive time beyond the length of your typical day.
In addition, he said, besides the obvious case where you have trouble keeping your eyes open or your head up, you are too sleepy to drive when you…
Can’t remember how far you’ve traveled or what you’ve recently passed.
Find yourself tailgating or drifting out of your lane.
Daydream or have disconnected thoughts.
Often yawn or rub your eyes.
Miss signs or drive past your exit.
Veer off the road and hit the rumble strips on the shoulder.
Have to blast the radio and/or roll down the windows in an attempt to stay alert.
What can you say to friends who insist on driving drowsy? Try to talk them out of driving, and if possible, offer to drive them where they’re going.
If that fails, take away their keys, and don’t be afraid if they become angry. They’ll likely thank you later on, Kissinger said, especially after you mention the statistics on fatalities caused by drowsy driving.
A look at the stats will tell them that you may have saved their lives.
Source:
J. Peter Kissinger, president and chief executive officer of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety in Washington, DC.
January 5th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
Ym I was tempted to copy your line and send it to my woman. But I don’t know if she reads this blog.
Damn, Michelle, you could be getting too big.
January 5th, 2012 at 11:12 pm
I discovered this blog. But what is it about? There are so many topics and so many issues.
What is your main purposes.
Nick
January 6th, 2012 at 6:50 am
Forgot to address you Al’a'mode sorry, got tired, but now it’s a new day : ) Santa was good to me, thanks for asking…I’m not much into things, I’ve got ‘stuff’ and so he gave me VIP tickets to the horse races, I’ve never been before and now I have. I can understand the draw, the buzz in betting and all that. I bet the winning horse on the last race and won $50 : )
Jackie, I often wonder if mine was an alien or just an anomaly of a human man, he was a gentle giant in every way AND had an adonis body, a very handsome face and it was magical in a harmonious mind/body/spirit affinity kind of way, and my friends would often comment about how he and I seemed under a spell and yes, we lived in our own private bubble even when we were not together. It’s tough to beat that feeling though I’m not one for clinging to what was, esp right now when I realize that at least I experienced it once when so many others never have. I’d like to feel that way again and though that may not occur in this lifetime again, is it greedy to want it one more time?
I wish it for all of you also because when you are loved like that you never lose that feeling of being very lovable. That’s not in an egoistic way either, it just makes you easier on yourself and others and if that’s all I get to keep out of the experience well then that’s enough. Now I can understand by just writing this why my marriage didn’t hold up, the power of a love like that wasn’t there and love power is hard to find but well worth sustaining…ah…now I’m feeling nostalgic…Mischa, change the subject – please?
I can’t wait to hear Mischa’s response to Nick : )
-ZL
January 6th, 2012 at 8:15 am
Nick, I’m not Michelle but I can tell you what this blog means to me and what I think it is about.
It is a place I can go to hear the truth about how people really feel about stuff.
It is a place I can go to purge my anger about anything that comes to mind or that happens to me.
It is a place where I can go to hear the truth. People don’t hide their true feelings because they are unknown.
I get to make friends without having to risk embarrassment or worry about how I look or if I am the right race or height or weight.
Every day my friends are here. They may take a break or just stop writing in for a while. But if I continue to remind them of their absence they will return.
It’s my extended and close family.
Thanks Michelle
Sarah
January 6th, 2012 at 9:00 am
Exactly, Sarah, cheers for putting it to words.
- ZL
and THANK YOU Mischa for giving us all this forum (and including aliens, too!), and after my previous comment this am I drove my kid to school is a hypnotic state about what once was and now I’m back in the moment, I’m glad I have this space to make admissions like that.
January 6th, 2012 at 9:01 am
DITTO. Sarah, I agree. I have been here of and on for almost 4 years. I come and go. Mostly I come. It is the first thing I check in the morning.
Well, first I have my coffee, then I check to see if Michelle has started a new one. LIke today She hasn’t.
My second time writing in this is. Actually it is my first the original first I trashed because after proofing it I thought it came off lame.
Maybe I will feel this way this time or maybe I will not bother to proof just hit the submit button.
I like to think I have friends on this blog. I like that highly opinionated black guy Robert and the I’ve been their done that girl Zen Lill and of course the super sensitive don’t tread on me Howie.
But my favorite is Social Butterfly how could you not like that name and she is as light and clever as the name implies. I miss Bob and Ellen’s post they were so funny.
Like Sarah said friends that come and go. If they haven’t been reminded of their absence so that they will return consider it this you two.
This place is a soap and an ongoing political battle for the hearts and minds of us all. I go from being a republican to having been convinced to vote for Obama and not I have switched to being an independent.
What a ride. I am 41 married with 4 children and working on my second marriage. I am a full time screen writer and reading this blog helps me “keep it real.”
Martin
January 6th, 2012 at 9:21 am
Ym, reading your love letter to your Mrs. was so moving. I cried for your loss and smiled with envy for her luck.
I wish I could meet this extraordinary woman. She has inspired such passionate and devoted emotions in you, I can only imagine what she has done to the other men and perhaps women in her wake.
The poetry and prose she must have inspired. What a loss to humanity that we are not privy to it.
But who is this dynamo of sensuality? I translated your words into Japanese and posted them in my blog and it was such a hit.
Is she Japanese? This super desirable woman? No don’t answer that. Leave it to the imaginations of the readers.
But what woman wouldn’t want to imagine that they have experienced the powerful emotional response to their presence you have written so wonderfully about.
To be adored so is to be honored beyond mere love. So Mrs. if you are reading this. Please write in
I would very much like to know what it feels like to experience the love of a man whose lust can be erased and heightened by the presence of the woman he loves in the same moment. How does it end?
Junko
January 6th, 2012 at 9:33 am
Al I also am pleased to see you back. I thought that Howie sent you off on some space mission.
I wonder what it is like to live with an alien. I don’t expect you to answer. I know you wouldn’t reveal whether Howie is an alien or not.
But most of the UFO nerds that I hang out with believe that Howie is an alien. We have been putting together a series of questions to prove it.
But I don’t think we will ask them. We are an all girl club and he seems scary when he gets angry.
We do really like his stories. They are so authentic like. I mean it is so difficult to refute them.
Anyway I just want to welcome you back.
Grace from Buffalo Wyoming
January 6th, 2012 at 9:41 am
I like your blog Michelle because you allow everyone a chance to express themselves without fear of physical harm.
I also like the fact that everyone knows that anyone can take issue with what they say and go off on them. Indeed I look forward to that.
Nothing like a good taking down from someone a world away from you to shrink the world.
It’s 1740 hrs or so here in
January 6th, 2012 at 9:46 am
It’s 1740 hrs or so here inInverness, Scotland. But I like to think I’m sitting in someone’s livingroom in America having a discussion about the issues.
I love politics.
Reggie
January 6th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
Hi Zen Lill, I am glad to hear from you. I thought for a moment that you might be upset with me for being somewhat less than a gentleman last time I addressed you. But then I thought, nah, we’ve known each other going on what…. about four years? And that’s how we are sometimes.
Happy to hear you enjoyed going to see the ponies run. You know Hialeah has or had one of the finest tracks in the world when I was a youngster.
What a thrill it is to have your horse win, I’ll bet you were jumping up and down, screaming go baby, go, go, go, when your horse was coming up to the wire. Was it a neck and neck, or an easy win?
I have been to the Hialeah track many times for a fun and cheap date and many free concerts way back once upon a time, what a beautiful place it was, the gardens, flora, fauna and hundreds of bright pink flamingos. What can I say, but I just love pink. I grew up within walking distance of this place.
I believe the land was planned for condominiums and stores. What a shame, but 2001 came and the last race was run there. This was such a beautiful park and historical. Progress-Greed, same old story.
So, I see that you were not too naughty this past year, and Santa was cool enough to let you win on the very last race “WOW”, I’ll bet you had a lot of fun. It seems that women naturally love horses, and animals in general (not trying to sterotype the female gender). Everyone likes picking the winner.
Be smart and don’t spend all your winnings in one place.
And their off,
Al