I have a question, please.

If Boehner refused to bring the Senate’s clean CR to the floor for a vote by all congresspersons, would that be a violation of the Constitution?  Also, is there a rule that congresspersons should not be drinking while voting to shut down the government?

Thank you.

I have thought about the following for several years and I still cannot wrap my head around this as legal.  If elected to congress, this is the oath one must take:  The current oath was enacted in 1884:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Now I always thought that taking that oath would preclude one from signing a pledge with anyone or any organization that would curtail any of one’s duties in regard to the Constitution.  Why then is it permissible to sign the following pledge with Norquist?(2)

Taxpayer Protection Pledge

I,________, pledge to the taxpayers of the ___ district of the state of ___________ and to the American people that I will:

One, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and

Two, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

I think that if an elected official to the Congress or Senate said that oath, then they would be required to uphold the Constitution.  Article I, Section 8 states:

The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Currently there are 219 representatives and 39 senators in this 113th Congress and added together make 258.  The House and Senate together have 435 officials.  The majority of each, 218 and 51, equal 259.  The majority in the House is 218.   The pledge signers start with a one vote advantage for any bill that attempts to raise any taxes in any form.  Raising taxes is dead in the water.  What about taxes to replace bridges, schools, fire and police protection, etc. etc. etc.?

Why is this allowed?  A professor at Columbia, Robert Thurman, thinks the Grover Pledge as Seditious and treasonous.(1)  I wholeheartedly agree.  Any pledge to any individual or group that prevents one from upholding one’s oath, especially as serious as being a representative of the people, should not be permitted.  One could argue that the Grover Pledge is to the people of his/her district/state and is legal.  How can that be?  The oath of office comes first and foremost.  Any pledge outside the Constitution that contradicts the fulfillment of that oath simply should not be allowed and therefore illegal.  That’s what I think.

Now, some have argued that if one did not sign the Grover Pledge, then they would be taking money away from the people that would give them money for campaigns.  The more money donors get to keep means the money more they will have to give to the pledge signer.  That sounds like quid pro quo to me.  I have tried to work this out logically and to no avail, I have yet to understand why this is allowed.

If anyone has any suggestions or thoughts in regard to showing me that this pledge is legal for our elected officials to sign, then please comment.  I’m pretty set in my ways on thinking that being, legally correct and morally wrong, is not right.  Simply put.  Thank you.

(1) http://www.mediaite.com/online…

(2) http://s3.amazonaws.com/atrfil…

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com…

Constitution

I am an unnerd.  Meaning I do not have a cell phone and I do not know how to text or twitter.  But, I do know this.  The internet is the Fifth Estate.

When our forefathers set up our government, there were three branches of government.  This is a test.  You name the three branches of government.  And a free press was called the fourth estate.  A free press was supposed to keep the government in check.  However, at this point in our nation’s history, a free press controlled by the corporations has really not kept up to its vaulted position of keeping a watchful eye on the government, or themselves for that matter.

With the advent of the internet the arrival of websites such as thestarshallowgazette, dailykos, talkingpointsmemo, truthout among just a few, and I might add, just a tiny fraction of what is out there.  It has fallen upon us to create the Fifth Estate.  We are now the voices of the people, because we are the people.

It cannot be relied upon the current Fourth Estate to disseminate all the facts without the spin of political or corporate overtones.  More or less blatant subliminal messaging.  Propaganda, whatever.  I understand that not all websites display the truth and/or are filled with something other than politeness for all.  To each his own.  But, I sincerely believe there are more of us out here in the Fifth Estate that believe in doing the right thing.  The truth will prevail.

We have all this information gathering at our fingertips, cell phones, cameras, etc.  Can you imagine if Kennedy had been assassinated last week, just how many photos, video would have been available?  Then we would really know about the Grassy Knoll.  When we speak through the Fifth Estate, good things can and do happen.  Ask Rush about his advertisers for an example.  Newspapers are being purchased by large corporations and what Murdoch has done to the media in that regards does not bode well for what going to be in the local daily that arrives somewhere out by the corner under the juniper.

Call me cynical, but I have been cheated, lied to and downright robbed at some point in my life by corporations, especially large ones and having them control what I read with my coffee is not what I want to start my day.  I rely on the Fifth Estate for my search of the truth.  I read more than one website on any given issue or subject.  I read the comments on the stories, pro and con.  This is us folks.  We are the Fifth Estate.  Let’s protect it and use it for good for all.  Thank you.  

Lack of Common Sense

I believe we seriously have a problem with our elected representatives in that there is a lack of common sense.  Let me ask a few questions.

Why does anyone need an automatic weapon with a 100 round clip?  Common sense tells us; no.  The second amendment would still allow handguns, shotguns and rifles.  This rush to protect automatic weapons from governmental laws will only increase violence.  More guns, more deaths.  Multiple deaths of innocents.  If I have to get a license to drive a car from the DMV and I have to get a license for my dog at City Hall, wouldn’t it make sense I would have to get a gun license from a place within our government?  I would think background checks would be more accurate than at a local gun show.  I also have to have insurance for my car and my dog is covered by my house insurance in case of any unforeseen accidents.  This would be a boondoggle for the insurance companies if insurance was required for any type of weapon.  The bigger the gun, the bigger the policy.  Why are we continuing to be a violent nation when all we have to do is use a little common sense?  How many dead children and devastated families does it take before we do the right thing?  Please give me the number and I will cry until we reach it.

When an individual is elected and swears to uphold the constitution, why are they allowed to sign a pledge with someone to not raise taxes?  Two masters is one too many.  Choose one or the other.  Is Grover more important than the constitution?  To me this seems treasonous.

Come on now, is a corporation really a person?  When a corporation signs up for a colonoscopy, I personally will grant them personhood.

Money is speech?  Here’s a dollar.  I have two words for you.  Get’em for fifty cents apiece.

Torture not prosecuted?  Dick Chaney and Dubya and Rumsfeld did more to tarnish our image around the world than any other administration in the history of our nation.  Why do we allow this from our elected officials?  We say we are a nation of laws, but only for the people, not the Executive Branch?  I wrote this to Holder way back when:

To have accountability or not to have accountability,

That is the question:

Whether tis nobler in the mind to just look forward

And forget the torture and lawlessness of the Bush Administration,

Or, to take up the rule of law, and prosecute them.

And by investigation and prosecution, end them.

Accountability or not-

No more-and by that we say, stop this.

This heartache and thousand felonious shocks

That Bush suffered the country with his legacy.

Tis accountability, devoutly to be wished.

Accountability or not-

Investigation and prosecution.  Ay, there’s the rub,

For with that sunshine of facts what crimes may come

When we have revealed the truth of the Neocons

Must give us pause.  There’s the respect

For the rule of law that makes us all equal.

For who would spurn the Constitution and its laws,

The cronies backdoor, the corporations outsourcing,

The pangs of Darth Vader, Gonzales’ no recall,

The insolence of Bush, the spurns

That merited the cries of Impeachment!

Then we learned the house and senate

Left our table bare.

How can these representatives say,

To those that grunt and sweat under a weary life,

That the dread of something other than Bush,

That history will prove him a great visionary,

It puzzles the will.

And makes us bear this shame upon our country,

That will last for eternity.

Will investigation make cowards of us all,

Will prosecution derive a resolution

Of the administration that had no law?

With this regard the rule of law

Must not lose the name of action.

Let’s just start with these issues.  Why can’t our elected officials deal with these issues with common sense?  What is stopping them from doing the right thing?  Someone please tell me.  Thank you.