It's finally happened. Only the wealthy will have the power to campaign. Oh- it's been coming on for decades, but with the Supreme Court's ridiculous decision last week to allow unlimited campaign spending by corporations- the elite have finally won.
One-hundred years of campaign law has been thrown out the window.
The lobbyists who take elected representatives to thousand-dollar dinners; fly them to private islands in their jets and push wads of money into the pockets of their three-thousand-dollar suits will now be able to openly give out checks in public view. The money of course, will come from the lobbyists "masters" (employers if you want to call them that).
Big oil. Big drug companies. Big insurancce. All with the ability to donate as much as they please to candidates running for office that promise them exactly what they want if they're elected.
Where is the media on this? Why does it seem that more editorial writers are talking about the color of Michelle Obama's dress during last night's State of the Union address than about this unholy Supreme Court alliance with huge-dollar companies aiming to run the world?
With the Court's latest asinine decision, insurance companies can spend as much as they want on Joe Lieberman's efforts to water down health care reform as thousands without insurance continue to die. And ExxonMobil (hummm.... another merger) can spend billions on candidates who will oppose clean energy.
Laugh if you will. Scoff if you prefer. Say this information is worthless and unpatriotic. But baby- you've come a long way now. Is this what Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Thomas Paine envisioned? Is this what your forefathers (and possibly sons and daughters) died on foreign soil to protect?
I personally, am ashamed, black-robed justices. Shame on you for what you've done. And shame on me for not screaming it from the rooftops when I first saw it coming.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Looking Back at History Prepares us to Read Current Events
This post has no commentary or opinion. It is all fact. It is very bare-bones material I am researching to compile into a nonfiction book, American Gestapo, that will be a follow-up to my last book, fiction-based-on-fact, Soft News. I would like to preface my report by saying I spent more than two years living in Germany as a military dependent, and some of my ancestors are from that country. I found the Germans very friendly, likeable, hardworking and although tremendously practical, fun-loving at the right time.
* * * *
Some people are trying to change history. Today we are only going to deal with one aspect of this: Germany immediately prior to World War II.
There have been recent news stories quoting historians who say the Holocaust never happened. Textbook "revisionists" engaged in Holocaust denial refer to their work as an historical re-examination of history, updating it with "newly discovered, less biased information." It is an academic approach that says historical accounts have not been properly told. To check out these facts, simply type "Holocaust denial" or delve into the work of Henry Rousso- a respected Frenchman who works as director of research at the French National Scientific Research Center and is considered a top expert on the World War II era.
History currently shows that in the late 1920s and early 1930s, economic times in Germany were tough; people were losing jobs; had little to eat; and newspapers were afraid to speak out for fear of offending those in power.
As the economic crisis became a Great Depression, a "savior" who promised much to the masses came to power. The media loved him. Just check your history. All he did was in the name of justice and change.
Germany was cultured, filled with music, art, laboratories and universities. The Germans were hardy, hardworking, and patriotic. Hitler had only been appointed Chancellor of Germany four weeks when he was invited by President von Hindenburg to lead a coalition government. But time passed and elections were upcoming.
On the evening of Feb. 27, 1933, six days before an election was scheduled that could have changed the balance of power, a huge fire broke out. It became known as the Reichstag Fire and was the reason used by those in power to put military law on the streets. It was (of course) said to be the only way to protect the people from harm.
Immediately following our "Reichstag Fire" (Sept. 11) The Patriot Act was put into place supposedly for those very same reasons. Have you studied it? I suggest you do. If certain portions of it are enforced, any law enforcement agent (from any branch, whether your local sheriff or DC SWAT team) can invade your home or business without a warrant. All they must say is "He (or she) might be a terrorist."
The text of the German Decree, officially called the Verordnung des Reichprasidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State) is available in your library and on line. Its Article 6 states that it went into effect the moment it was posted.
The decree resulted in military power that took over the streets. Killing sprees. Genocide. Turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. Concentration camps. Rounding up of all Jews and any others who opposed their tactics; scientists; great thinkers; philosophers; writers; journalists; photographers- anyone who wanted to speak out or report the truth.
This was not something that happened overnight. It had been building. All the elements were present and simply had to be enforced. As they are here in the United States of America today.
Simply read The Patriot Act for yourself and decide.
* * * *
Some people are trying to change history. Today we are only going to deal with one aspect of this: Germany immediately prior to World War II.
There have been recent news stories quoting historians who say the Holocaust never happened. Textbook "revisionists" engaged in Holocaust denial refer to their work as an historical re-examination of history, updating it with "newly discovered, less biased information." It is an academic approach that says historical accounts have not been properly told. To check out these facts, simply type "Holocaust denial" or delve into the work of Henry Rousso- a respected Frenchman who works as director of research at the French National Scientific Research Center and is considered a top expert on the World War II era.
History currently shows that in the late 1920s and early 1930s, economic times in Germany were tough; people were losing jobs; had little to eat; and newspapers were afraid to speak out for fear of offending those in power.
As the economic crisis became a Great Depression, a "savior" who promised much to the masses came to power. The media loved him. Just check your history. All he did was in the name of justice and change.
Germany was cultured, filled with music, art, laboratories and universities. The Germans were hardy, hardworking, and patriotic. Hitler had only been appointed Chancellor of Germany four weeks when he was invited by President von Hindenburg to lead a coalition government. But time passed and elections were upcoming.
On the evening of Feb. 27, 1933, six days before an election was scheduled that could have changed the balance of power, a huge fire broke out. It became known as the Reichstag Fire and was the reason used by those in power to put military law on the streets. It was (of course) said to be the only way to protect the people from harm.
Immediately following our "Reichstag Fire" (Sept. 11) The Patriot Act was put into place supposedly for those very same reasons. Have you studied it? I suggest you do. If certain portions of it are enforced, any law enforcement agent (from any branch, whether your local sheriff or DC SWAT team) can invade your home or business without a warrant. All they must say is "He (or she) might be a terrorist."
The text of the German Decree, officially called the Verordnung des Reichprasidenten zum Schutz von Volk und Staat (Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State) is available in your library and on line. Its Article 6 states that it went into effect the moment it was posted.
The decree resulted in military power that took over the streets. Killing sprees. Genocide. Turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. Concentration camps. Rounding up of all Jews and any others who opposed their tactics; scientists; great thinkers; philosophers; writers; journalists; photographers- anyone who wanted to speak out or report the truth.
This was not something that happened overnight. It had been building. All the elements were present and simply had to be enforced. As they are here in the United States of America today.
Simply read The Patriot Act for yourself and decide.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Happy New Year: Trouble Posting Comments?
I have had a dozen emails that say people are trying to sign up to "follow" so they can comment but they cannot. First you must have an account on either Yahoo, Google, WordPress, AIM, or some other online account. You must register for one if you don't already have one before trying to log in as a follower. These accounts are free, easy to get, and you don't have to mess with them but once; just the time you create it. It will ask all you sorts of things- do you want this, or that; just say "No." You just need an account. They will give you another email address for this account but you don't have to use it. I have never even checked my Google email. I use a Google account name and password for everything. Once you have one of these online accounts, you can sign up on just about any site, using the same name and password. If you upload a photo with the sign-up profile, it will even show every time (and place) you sign in next to the screen name you choose.
I began to question the difficulty of this when I offered that the first 50 "followers" my free Lesson 1 of my Creative Yarnspinning course. I had plenty of email saying people just couldn't sign in so I tried it and ended up making myself my own friend!
I get so many responses at my other blog on Alexandra that I really question the sign-up process here. Please try again, and let me know how it goes by mailing penny@pennyfletcher.com. If it is not working correctly, I will have it fixed.
Meanwhile, Happy New Year! Here's to great writing!
I began to question the difficulty of this when I offered that the first 50 "followers" my free Lesson 1 of my Creative Yarnspinning course. I had plenty of email saying people just couldn't sign in so I tried it and ended up making myself my own friend!
I get so many responses at my other blog on Alexandra that I really question the sign-up process here. Please try again, and let me know how it goes by mailing penny@pennyfletcher.com. If it is not working correctly, I will have it fixed.
Meanwhile, Happy New Year! Here's to great writing!
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Is This Happening in Your Town?
Since one of my main points for writing this blog and my other, found at http://aleksandreia.wordpress.com/, is to bring you facts, I always warn readers when there is commentary in a post. I mention my other blog because it seems to be easier to make comments on Wordpress as these blogs get so many responses there and so few here on Blogspot. (Perhaps those having trouble commenting here need to set up a Google or Yahoo account?)
Enough of that. Now for the story. What follows is a true account of what happened to one of my granddaughters, and I have checked the policy with a spokesperson for the school here in Hillsborough County, Florida. But since I am using the word "I" in a "news story" I wanted to be sure and begin by saying although it may be written like a column, the content of this story is factual. I am posting it in hopes many people who have children in public schools across the country will check and see if such policies are in force in their state and let me know by emailing penny@pennyfletcher.com or contacting me through my main site, http://www.pennyfletcher.com.
As many of my regular readers know, I am raising a granddaughter, who I have had since she was seven months old and is now 12. Last week while preparing for the holiday party in her classroom, we were in Walmart and she was carefully reading all the wording on the back of Christmas cards.
Since she was taking a particularly long time to do this (and of course I was in a hurry to continue shopping) I asked what was it she was looking for so I could help.
"I have to be sure there aren't any religious sayings or references in the cards," she told me. "If we take them to school, we could get in trouble."
OK people- I know my Constitution pretty well and it includes freedom of speech and freedom of the press. A card is a free gift; the buyer is "allowed" to purchase it and the recipient is "free" to read it. The written words on the card are protected under our Constitutional rights of freedom of both speech and press.
As for the meaning of the wording on the "holiday" cards: the word Christmas comes from the original meaning of the holiday. It is a shortened version of "Christ's Mass" (meaning Christ-based church service) and is hundreds of years old. The word "holiday" is a shortened version of "holy day" also rooted in a religious meaning.
These are facts. Ask any language arts or English teacher.
Warning: the next section is commentary based on what has just been reported.
The fact that a child in 6th Grade is not permitted to bring a card with reference to a religious meaning to a public school in America, is to me, a serious breach of Constitutional rights. They are also not permitted to wear any religious symbols or wording on jewelry or T-shirts, although the Simpson's crude remarks or skulls or peace symbols or any number of other symbols and wording are permitted and go unquestioned.
This smells of a class-action discrimination lawsuit if I ever heard of one.
The separation of church and state were created to assure that citizens had rights to worship or not worship as they chose- whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, or whatever.
This is not a religious issue and needs not be handled as such. If the religious right keeps talking about "persecution of Christians" it will continue to lose the Constitutional cause on which this dilemma is really based by making enemies outside its ranks who are also losing their rights but don't realize it yet.
I happen to be a Christian. I am active in my church and speak my mind about it but I have no wish to infringe on your Constitutional rights- which as a journalist, I will continue to defend. I have Jewish friends; a Muslim friend and several atheist friends. In my business I meet all kinds of people- my friends are multi-ethnic; multi-colored and may or may not choose the same type of worship as I do.
This is America and we all deserve each other's respect. Why are we shedding our military's blood on foreign soil for "freedom and democracy" we are losing here on our own ground?
If someone chooses to erect a Christmas tree or a Menorah or draw a Medicine Wheel in front of my City Hall, why is it so important to make an issue of removing them? The atheists I know say this is ridiculous; that as long as someone doesn't try and change what they do, they're fine with what others do. So who is it really behind all this "anti-religion of any kind" philosophy?
I want to know why the $#@! a 12-year-old child is trying so hard to keep from "getting in trouble" over a religious word on a "holiday" card. Don't you?
Enough of that. Now for the story. What follows is a true account of what happened to one of my granddaughters, and I have checked the policy with a spokesperson for the school here in Hillsborough County, Florida. But since I am using the word "I" in a "news story" I wanted to be sure and begin by saying although it may be written like a column, the content of this story is factual. I am posting it in hopes many people who have children in public schools across the country will check and see if such policies are in force in their state and let me know by emailing penny@pennyfletcher.com or contacting me through my main site, http://www.pennyfletcher.com.
As many of my regular readers know, I am raising a granddaughter, who I have had since she was seven months old and is now 12. Last week while preparing for the holiday party in her classroom, we were in Walmart and she was carefully reading all the wording on the back of Christmas cards.
Since she was taking a particularly long time to do this (and of course I was in a hurry to continue shopping) I asked what was it she was looking for so I could help.
"I have to be sure there aren't any religious sayings or references in the cards," she told me. "If we take them to school, we could get in trouble."
OK people- I know my Constitution pretty well and it includes freedom of speech and freedom of the press. A card is a free gift; the buyer is "allowed" to purchase it and the recipient is "free" to read it. The written words on the card are protected under our Constitutional rights of freedom of both speech and press.
As for the meaning of the wording on the "holiday" cards: the word Christmas comes from the original meaning of the holiday. It is a shortened version of "Christ's Mass" (meaning Christ-based church service) and is hundreds of years old. The word "holiday" is a shortened version of "holy day" also rooted in a religious meaning.
These are facts. Ask any language arts or English teacher.
Warning: the next section is commentary based on what has just been reported.
The fact that a child in 6th Grade is not permitted to bring a card with reference to a religious meaning to a public school in America, is to me, a serious breach of Constitutional rights. They are also not permitted to wear any religious symbols or wording on jewelry or T-shirts, although the Simpson's crude remarks or skulls or peace symbols or any number of other symbols and wording are permitted and go unquestioned.
This smells of a class-action discrimination lawsuit if I ever heard of one.
The separation of church and state were created to assure that citizens had rights to worship or not worship as they chose- whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, or whatever.
This is not a religious issue and needs not be handled as such. If the religious right keeps talking about "persecution of Christians" it will continue to lose the Constitutional cause on which this dilemma is really based by making enemies outside its ranks who are also losing their rights but don't realize it yet.
I happen to be a Christian. I am active in my church and speak my mind about it but I have no wish to infringe on your Constitutional rights- which as a journalist, I will continue to defend. I have Jewish friends; a Muslim friend and several atheist friends. In my business I meet all kinds of people- my friends are multi-ethnic; multi-colored and may or may not choose the same type of worship as I do.
This is America and we all deserve each other's respect. Why are we shedding our military's blood on foreign soil for "freedom and democracy" we are losing here on our own ground?
If someone chooses to erect a Christmas tree or a Menorah or draw a Medicine Wheel in front of my City Hall, why is it so important to make an issue of removing them? The atheists I know say this is ridiculous; that as long as someone doesn't try and change what they do, they're fine with what others do. So who is it really behind all this "anti-religion of any kind" philosophy?
I want to know why the $#@! a 12-year-old child is trying so hard to keep from "getting in trouble" over a religious word on a "holiday" card. Don't you?
Monday, December 14, 2009
As written, health care bill will make things worse
As a reporter for more than 35 years, I have covered voting, legislation and politicians in just about any situation imaginable. One thing I have noticed time and time again is that the important issues create a lot of debate which would be a good thing if people didn't view them as strictly black and white.
Labor unions, civil rights, voting of women, all struck the same hard responses in their time as abortion and health care do today. But everything- and I don't use that word lightly - everything you decide about current issues depends upon what will affect you and yours personally.
My health was covered by the media organizations I worked for until I quit to become a freelancer. I jumped ship before what I refer to as "The Great Layoff of 2008" in the media industry. Like "Sniff," one of the prototypes (that happened to be mice) in the famous business guide, "Who Moved My Cheese," I looked for new food before my supply ran out. I knew if I waited, there would be a lot of journalists "scurrying" (Scurry was another prototype in the book) for whatever freelance work was available.
I didn't do it stupidly; I obtained health insurance before I left my former company. But a month after I had set up my home-based business, I received a letter saying my acceptance into the plan was withdrawn and my check for premiums was returned. Six denials later, I realized no insurance company was going to insure me at my age with the chronic conditions on my medical record, despite the fact I live a healthy lifestyle.
That made me one of the 50 million Americans who have no health insurance. Not because I refused to buy it; but because I wasn't permitted to buy it. That's what many who are against a public option don't realize: right here in the good old U.S. of A people die every day because they aren't permitted treatment. Sure, laws say emergency rooms must stabalize a person who is brought in, but they won't admit without an insurance card. And you can't be sent for expensive tests. (Oh- you may have cancer, or some other disease, but why be screened only to find out it might be fatal if you can't do anything about its progression?)
If you don't believe me, ask your local hospital admitting or billing department. Now a few "charitable" hospitals will take you in, but sometimes (pardon the pun) it takes an act of Congress.
Even though I had done stories about people being denied necessary treatment in the past, suddenly, this situation became my situation and I stayed on top of every candidate and sitting politician's stance. So you'd think I'd be in favor of the bill that recently passed the House and is now in the Senate, wouldn't you? After all, passage would mean I (and others like me) could get whatever treatment I needed, right? Why, we should be jumping up and down clapping our hands yelling "Pass it now!"
Except for one thing: This bill is a sham. It is full of restrictive measures and government mandates that won't end up helping enough people to matter but will cost us all for generations to come.
There is still time to stop this bill by calling your Senators. I would suggest you call them today. Oh- many of us out here need health care, but even if this bill passes we may not get it. It's a "fox in charge of the henhouse" bill. And why shouldn't it be? Congress won't have to live (or die) with it. They have their own health care plan, and retirement plan too. One stint in politics; one term in the seat and they draw pay and benefits for life.
The key is to make Congress use the public plan they design for the people. Then, and only then, will a "public option" be acceptable.
Labor unions, civil rights, voting of women, all struck the same hard responses in their time as abortion and health care do today. But everything- and I don't use that word lightly - everything you decide about current issues depends upon what will affect you and yours personally.
My health was covered by the media organizations I worked for until I quit to become a freelancer. I jumped ship before what I refer to as "The Great Layoff of 2008" in the media industry. Like "Sniff," one of the prototypes (that happened to be mice) in the famous business guide, "Who Moved My Cheese," I looked for new food before my supply ran out. I knew if I waited, there would be a lot of journalists "scurrying" (Scurry was another prototype in the book) for whatever freelance work was available.
I didn't do it stupidly; I obtained health insurance before I left my former company. But a month after I had set up my home-based business, I received a letter saying my acceptance into the plan was withdrawn and my check for premiums was returned. Six denials later, I realized no insurance company was going to insure me at my age with the chronic conditions on my medical record, despite the fact I live a healthy lifestyle.
That made me one of the 50 million Americans who have no health insurance. Not because I refused to buy it; but because I wasn't permitted to buy it. That's what many who are against a public option don't realize: right here in the good old U.S. of A people die every day because they aren't permitted treatment. Sure, laws say emergency rooms must stabalize a person who is brought in, but they won't admit without an insurance card. And you can't be sent for expensive tests. (Oh- you may have cancer, or some other disease, but why be screened only to find out it might be fatal if you can't do anything about its progression?)
If you don't believe me, ask your local hospital admitting or billing department. Now a few "charitable" hospitals will take you in, but sometimes (pardon the pun) it takes an act of Congress.
Even though I had done stories about people being denied necessary treatment in the past, suddenly, this situation became my situation and I stayed on top of every candidate and sitting politician's stance. So you'd think I'd be in favor of the bill that recently passed the House and is now in the Senate, wouldn't you? After all, passage would mean I (and others like me) could get whatever treatment I needed, right? Why, we should be jumping up and down clapping our hands yelling "Pass it now!"
Except for one thing: This bill is a sham. It is full of restrictive measures and government mandates that won't end up helping enough people to matter but will cost us all for generations to come.
There is still time to stop this bill by calling your Senators. I would suggest you call them today. Oh- many of us out here need health care, but even if this bill passes we may not get it. It's a "fox in charge of the henhouse" bill. And why shouldn't it be? Congress won't have to live (or die) with it. They have their own health care plan, and retirement plan too. One stint in politics; one term in the seat and they draw pay and benefits for life.
The key is to make Congress use the public plan they design for the people. Then, and only then, will a "public option" be acceptable.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Legalizing the Marriage of News and Advertising
While there's been a lot of media attention given to different opinions concerning the right for gay couples to marry, there's been a near blackout on the disgusting marriage of news and advertising.
When I wrote my latest book, Soft News, in 2007, it was basically a "what if" type scenario, like when Dr. Robin Cook first wrote "Coma." The plot of Soft News shows what "could happen" if a large enough corporation takes over too many news outlets. People don't get the truth. Instead they end up with whatever slant or version of an event the "owner" of their news outlet wants them to believe. If the same corporation owns the local newspaper, weekly or bi-weekly magazine and television and radio stations, only one view is presented to an entire coverage area.
As of this week, the premise behind the plot of Soft News has not only become a reality, but is being put into play nationally on a damaging scale most won't realize until it's too late.
On Dec. 3 The Dallas Morning News announced what it calls its "bold new strategy:" news editors will report to sales managers.
That's right, sales departments will have the last say on what goes to press. Just hit your searchbars folks. Put in Dallas Morning News and strategy. You'll find links if you look for them. But where are the national headlines blasting this crazy scheme?
Shouldn't this be on front pages all across America?
Following this travesty, Dec. 4 Comcast Corp. announced its plans to buy NBC Universal. This means that Comcast, which already has 23.8 million cable television customers, 15.7 million Internet subscribers and 7.4 million customers for its telephone service, would control the Peacock network many have relied on for their news since the heyday of radio.
NBC Universal (which was a big enough merger to begin with) owns both NBC and Telemundo broadcasting, 26 television stations, an array of popular cable channels; the Universal Studio and theme parks and has a stake in Hulu, which distributes television programs online.
Although I have predicted the merger of television and the Internet for many years, the single corporate ownership is what is so dangerous. In other words, the lack of individual voices has reached a frightening level already and is about to decline by another 30 or 40 percent.
If this deal goes through, it will be similar to the previous AOL acquisition of Time Warner in 2001 which merged more than 1,000 brands.
Will rival stations (CBS or CNN for example) eventually have to "purchase" news from NBC?
We could eventually end up with "one voice" just like many countries in the former USSR.
People say that can't happen here because of free enterprise but the premise of "free enterprise" is the very guise that is being used to take our choices away.
When I wrote my latest book, Soft News, in 2007, it was basically a "what if" type scenario, like when Dr. Robin Cook first wrote "Coma." The plot of Soft News shows what "could happen" if a large enough corporation takes over too many news outlets. People don't get the truth. Instead they end up with whatever slant or version of an event the "owner" of their news outlet wants them to believe. If the same corporation owns the local newspaper, weekly or bi-weekly magazine and television and radio stations, only one view is presented to an entire coverage area.
As of this week, the premise behind the plot of Soft News has not only become a reality, but is being put into play nationally on a damaging scale most won't realize until it's too late.
On Dec. 3 The Dallas Morning News announced what it calls its "bold new strategy:" news editors will report to sales managers.
That's right, sales departments will have the last say on what goes to press. Just hit your searchbars folks. Put in Dallas Morning News and strategy. You'll find links if you look for them. But where are the national headlines blasting this crazy scheme?
Shouldn't this be on front pages all across America?
Following this travesty, Dec. 4 Comcast Corp. announced its plans to buy NBC Universal. This means that Comcast, which already has 23.8 million cable television customers, 15.7 million Internet subscribers and 7.4 million customers for its telephone service, would control the Peacock network many have relied on for their news since the heyday of radio.
NBC Universal (which was a big enough merger to begin with) owns both NBC and Telemundo broadcasting, 26 television stations, an array of popular cable channels; the Universal Studio and theme parks and has a stake in Hulu, which distributes television programs online.
Although I have predicted the merger of television and the Internet for many years, the single corporate ownership is what is so dangerous. In other words, the lack of individual voices has reached a frightening level already and is about to decline by another 30 or 40 percent.
If this deal goes through, it will be similar to the previous AOL acquisition of Time Warner in 2001 which merged more than 1,000 brands.
Will rival stations (CBS or CNN for example) eventually have to "purchase" news from NBC?
We could eventually end up with "one voice" just like many countries in the former USSR.
People say that can't happen here because of free enterprise but the premise of "free enterprise" is the very guise that is being used to take our choices away.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Millions Participate but Where's the News Coverage?
When a hundred people gather for a public event, it usually makes local news. When a thousand gather, chances are the event will be broadcast state-wide, if not nationally. But when millions meet for a common purpose, the news coverage should be tremendous; reaching every small town in all 50 states. Everyone should be told.
Where was the majority of the media from Nov. 8-22 when millions of citizens gathered in St. Charles, Ill., representing hundreds of organizations formed to defend the Constitution of the United States?
Continental Congress 2009 got some headlines in a few places but certainly not what it deserved. Besides the three delegates from each state (elected in October) millions- that's right folks- millions of people attended, carrying signs and banners telling of specific growing government violations of the Constitution during the past 10 years.
Thomas Jefferson said, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance," so somebody had better get vigilant in their reporting.
The "We the People" organization among others laid out a documented list of violations of property rights, privacy clauses and financial grievances the Congress has either ignored or approved.
According to the Constitution, when the people believe the government has violated its authority, they have the right "to petition for redress," which, by holding this Constitutional Congress, they have done.
The document is drawn and has been presented to those in power on Capitol Hill. When will we see the national media asking questions of those in power who have received it? When will the interviews begin, asking what's to be done? Where are the "Big Three" broadcast stations? The major newspapers?
Where the $@#* are the reporters who trained to be the eyes, ears and voice of "The People?"
Yes, there have been a few scattered stories. But this people, is the story of the day and will continue to be until these grievances are addressed. Rock concerts and Hollywood stars' divorces may continue to lead but we do not have to follow. Instead, go to http://www.cc2009.us for a full video report.
Where was the majority of the media from Nov. 8-22 when millions of citizens gathered in St. Charles, Ill., representing hundreds of organizations formed to defend the Constitution of the United States?
Continental Congress 2009 got some headlines in a few places but certainly not what it deserved. Besides the three delegates from each state (elected in October) millions- that's right folks- millions of people attended, carrying signs and banners telling of specific growing government violations of the Constitution during the past 10 years.
Thomas Jefferson said, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance," so somebody had better get vigilant in their reporting.
The "We the People" organization among others laid out a documented list of violations of property rights, privacy clauses and financial grievances the Congress has either ignored or approved.
According to the Constitution, when the people believe the government has violated its authority, they have the right "to petition for redress," which, by holding this Constitutional Congress, they have done.
The document is drawn and has been presented to those in power on Capitol Hill. When will we see the national media asking questions of those in power who have received it? When will the interviews begin, asking what's to be done? Where are the "Big Three" broadcast stations? The major newspapers?
Where the $@#* are the reporters who trained to be the eyes, ears and voice of "The People?"
Yes, there have been a few scattered stories. But this people, is the story of the day and will continue to be until these grievances are addressed. Rock concerts and Hollywood stars' divorces may continue to lead but we do not have to follow. Instead, go to http://www.cc2009.us for a full video report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
