[Rant] Disproving yet another lie from filth

"Even if you took all the income from the top 1%, it would barely pay for the government for a single year."

Net Family Wealth US: $54 Trillion.

Wealth held by the Upper 1%: 42% of all wealth.

54 Trillion * .42=22 Trillion.

That was a 2 minute google search.

So it's true if you just take the amount they earned from income and interest and capital gains that might not pay for a year, but if you look at how much they have STOLEN thanks to a bankrupt, corrupt and unequal system, looks like they could fund the US government for about 20-25 years, more if you established a sovereign wealth fund like Norway....

[Wall of Shame] Liberal or Progressive

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  But I really doubt the numbers will compare.

Cartoon: Get well gifts for the unvaccinated

[Revolution] An Alternative to my last post

I saw "House of Cards" yesterday where in one episode an officer randomly shot a gun at a fleeing bystander and it nearly cost him his badge...

And I got to thinking, we want anyone acting in a police capacity to be well trained.

This does not solve the problem that there seems to exist the feeling that they are 'a separate class', and also the default desire to please authority that the majority of society has has allowed officers who have clearly committed egregious abuses to get away with it because a jury won't hold them to account.

Step 2 involves fixing State Law Enforcement and Prosecutors....

But non violent revolution is not going to be easy, perhaps not even possible until law enforcement feels it is PART of the citizenry, rather than opposed to it - And I'm sorry....the blue wall of silence against fellow police, as well as the fact that the officers who crushed occupy as coordinated by the DHS proved that this is not the case.

All efforts of reform of this seem to fail....so I advocated simply dissolving professional police departments.

Random selection ala Jury won't cut it, even if it is only for beat patrol officers leaving core professional teams intact....BUT

We already have citizen soldiers, ala the National Guard.  They're both military and 'us'.....so why not do this with the police? They're only police 3 days a week and paid as much as national guard even though they're controlled by governors ala Militia?

It's not perfect, but its better than what we have now.  A LOT better.

[Cons] Article 1, Section 9 - Bills of Attainder and Ex Post Facto (3 of 4)

So first of all, what the hell are they?

If you don't know, here's the wikipedia definition:

Bill of Attainder: A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of pains and penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without privilege of a judicial trial. As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person’s civil rights, most notably the right to own property (and thus pass it on to heirs), the right to a title of nobility, and, in at least the original usage, the right to life itself. 

Or to Summarize: A penalty just for being somebody or a member of a specific group.

Ex Post Facto: An ex post facto law (Latin for "from after the action" or "after the facts") is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly called an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts or alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with lifelong imprisonment) retroactively. Such laws are also known by the Latin term in mitius.

Or to Summarize: It's about changing the rules after the fact so that even if you think you're obeying the law, it can still mean you're not.

Both of these are really important for the rule of law, because even though that rule of law is an illusion, it's a REALLY important illusion.  And if the law is not fair, then its almost impossible to believe in it.  So to the degree the law is fair, or at least gives the illusion of fairness, the law is strong.  That's why when we know the law is not fair, the law starts to lose strength and civilization itself is threatened.  That's the problem with being a Republic.

So, we should definitely include these in any constitution, and probably in the 'always' part, not the Hierarchy of Rights or the BrundleStaag, no matter how much I might want to punish Conservatives merely for being Conservatives.  After all, they might do the same thing to me...(in fact they probably would.)  

And yet....AND YET...

If the primary argument against Ex Post Facto and Bills of Attainder is that it makes the law seem unfair, what about instances where behavior of the offending parties in question also threatens the rule of law?  For those of you who have seen the movie, "Lethal Weapon 2" you likely remember the moment where the racist South African villain laughs that he will get away with murder because he has Diplomatic Immunity? Or what about the fact that millions of people are losing their homes but the bankers got away with it?  Or how I hear my entire life about how a war criminal is the worst thing EVER and they hunt them down until the end of time, and yet we let them get away with it.

The argument can be made that as bad as these things are, the alternative is worse.  This why we need to let Nazis and Racists and Liars have their political speech, because it helps keep the speech free for everyone.  I can see this.  It might be fun to imagine a world with blurry Rule of Law where Batmans whirl around and solve the grey areas, while the law still keeps the glue apart for everyone else.  But without script writers, I really doubt that would work out too well. 

But I think the argument can be made that there might be some areas where the willful ignorance is so high, so deliberate, and so evil that even if the law doesn't cover it, punishment still needs to be applied to cover the rule of law itself.  I think one excellent example of this was the efforts by the Tobacco Lobby to cover up the truth causing millions to die of cancer.  Yes, its true conventional laws were used to punish them....but what if that had failed? EVERYONE knew they were guilty and patently evil...I mean selling cigarettes to children....

And, quite frankly, I think we need to punish conservatives for AGW denial.  This isn't a joke any more.   There is no ambiguity and their willful ignorance is threatening all life on earth.  The cost will be in the TRILLIONS to fix it, and there is a deliberate effort not only to cover it up by the Koch brothers, but to ignore the consequences thereof...

I think they should pay.

Right now, I assure you, I am in the vast vast minority....but what about in the future? What about when the sea levels rise and every day is hot, August Hot?

What's better...a rampaging mob that moves to the south and tears the conservatives limb from limb...or a process...an organized threshold to actually PUNISH an organization so evil and destructive that everyone hates them, like the Westboro Baptist Church?

When people are sufficiently pissed off, there is going to be action....whether or not they have a loop hole in the law...so why not allow a mechanism in the rule of law?

I'll set the barrier at a simple one: 80%.  If a national vote (not a legislature because legislatures suck) can find 80% of the people voting against you? Yeah.  You're gone.

Banishment is the best alternative.  And yes, it can be abused, which is why I think it should also require voting over three years to make it happen, but it might also make some groups who abuse our hospitality...calm down a little.

[Wall of Shame] If a Conservative Is Speaking, a Conservative is Lying

This is my wall of shame for conservatism, not just the lies they tell. 

The 10 Most Corrupt States

Inaction over Climate Report highly likely.

Gun Advocates Spook Fast Food Workers Into Hiding in Freezer

Thailand court ousts prime minister after abuse-of-power verdict

How Censors Killed the Golden Age of Comics (Race, Women)

NRA threatens Surgeon General confirmation unless it gets what it wants

If conservatives are so concerned about the families, why did Mitt Romney make political hay of Benghazi before the families were even notified?

ABC and FOX lie by omission about false 'wind turbine sickness'

Bundy Militia thugs deny threatening Federal Agents

Spending by the Monster Brothers in Context

What if we stopped talking about Benghazi and started talking about what matters?

Top Conservative Blogger Gloats to "Libs" That Nigerian Girls Have Probably Been Sold

Will the BLM Reward Terroristic Threats, Desecration & Vandalism in Utah's Recapture Canyon?

GOP's Benghazi mob must support release of Senate torture report now

Christianists launch campaign to get HGTV to put Benhams back on the air

Allen West: Focus on Boko Haram Is Obama Ploy to Distract from Benghazi

Al Gore Explains The Real Motivation Behind Republicans' Climate Change Denial

Retired Army Col. Harry Riley expects that somewhere between 10 million and 30 million people will help him shut down Washington on Friday for Operation American Spring.

[Turkey] Image of Conservative PM's aide kicking protester stokes anger over Turkey mine fire

x

[Wall of Shame] The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

Citizens Storm a Public Meeting in Protest at City Council Indifference over Police Brutality.

A Refresher for someone who thought the police beat down of Occupy wasn't a big deal.

Judge Rules Citgo Petroleum owes nothing for 10 years of criminal pollution.

Family of Affluenza drunk driver to pay millions.

Judge halts investigation into corrupt politician.  (Reconfimed.)

Texas Officer Shoots 93 year old woman after having previously shot someone else a year previous.

USPO Grants Patent To Amazon for "Photographing Something with a White Background"

Why Nordic Countries are Better than America...and not because "Homogenous Populations" 

Oligarchy Judge ignores please from ignorant jury to spare Occupy victim harsh justice

Cops Raid Family Party, Pepper Spray Children, Taser Grandma

NSA, Metadata, and Congress

Just Because You Weren't Dancing is No Reason for Us Not to Beat You Up and Then Throw You in Jail.
x

[Cons] Article 1, Section 9 - Habeus Corpus/Revolution (2 of 4)

I'm starting a new thread in this blog called [Revolution] because we don't live in a democracy.  The conservatives are right...we live in a Republic.  A Roman Republic with corrupt, elite senators that report to royal houses who only throw some bread and circuses to the plebes to keep them from revolting.

I mean, take something as innocent as this article about the army taking Apache helicopters from the national guard for budget reasons.  Well, we definitely need a smaller military,but the question is, do we want our lethal weapons all in the hands of the federal government or shall the state militias retain any actual fire power?  See, the problem with being so psycho about the 2nd amendment that you interpret it only for self defense (it does apply there) you ignore the right of states to defend themselves if the Federal government goes berserk.  Where are the conservatives howling about the defanging of the national guard? I'll tell you where...they're too busy defending a thief in Nevada to care about preserving the actual organization most likely to protect us in a military coup.  Who are the citizen soldiers?  The national guard, that's who.

Whatever.

The constitution does not allow for the dissolution of congress by the president.  Lots of other countries do this.  Its a bad idea.  While legislatures suck, separation of powers are necessary.  Rights are rights, always and forever, so the idea that the Habeus Corpus or Hierarchy of Rights can ever be suspended is ludicrous.  It should NEVER be allowed.

But Tom, what if there's an emergency? I hear you say.

Well first of all, let's understand that emergencies are the first weapon of tyrants.  Hitler used them to take over Germany.  The dictator of Egypt used it there.  George W. Bush used the emergency of 9/11 to get us into a war with Iraq.  (Conservatives STILL will not admit Iraq was awful or still blame cowardly liberals as being 'co guilty'.  Victims all forever.)

If the separation of powers should never be abrogated to keep democracy in place, so too should rights. I argue that there is NEVER an instance where the rights as determined by a people shall be 'suspected' in secret courts.  Now, war is war, and sometimes you have to do extreme things.  But if they are extreme enough to actually be needed, then they are extreme enough that you should face the consequences of them.

Let me say that again because I cannot emphasize it enough.

IF YOU HAVE A SUFFICIENT EMERGENCY TO THROW THE HIERARCHY OF RIGHTS OUT THE WINDOW, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY YOUR ACTIONS IN A COURT OF LAW.

No blanket immunity for cops, for soldiers, for government officials or anyone else.  How do you keep them from being drowned in nuisance conservative style law suits? Very carefully.  Part of the whole reason I think we need to eliminate professional police departments as they currently exist is because cops are never basically held to account unless someone dies or they hack off a limb, and even then there is no guarantee.  Our public servants need enough latitude to do their job, not a blank check to set up Guantanamo Bay.