Posts Tagged ‘Theodore Roosevelt’
US Supreme Court on Presidential Election Contribution: “Unlimited spending on negative ads…”
Posted by: adonis49 on: January 23, 2012
US Supreme Court on Presidential Contribution: “Unlimited spending on negative ads…”
The US citizens have been exercising successive pressures to limit the influence of money of the elite 1% class on selecting the candidates in campaign contributions.
It is obvious that money contribution selects the candidates for the final show down, on the assumption that it is the “people” who has the final say in selecting between the final two contenders of the two main parties.
For a century, there has been slow but steady improvements to reforming election contribution. For example, Theodore Roosevelt prohibited in 1907 the large companies to directly contributing to candidates. During the last Obama campaign, the little people amassed enormous cash flow with small amounts.
Lately, the Supreme Court butted in and upheld that “monetary contribution is a form of free expression…” such as free speech and writing of the richest citizens?
Sure, contributing money is a serious form of expressing opinions, but the Supreme Court took the extra step for codifying how the collected contribution should be spent. And what are the constraints?
The Supreme Court opened the door wide for establishing “Super PACS” with the specific purpose of collecting “unlimited” amount of contribution. And what are the constraints?
First, the “Super PACS” must be “independent” of the campaign staff of the candidate. Like, the head of the “Super PACS” that contributed $5 million to Newt Gingrich in South Carolina was his former spokesman…Most of that contribution was from a single rich person…
Second, all “Super PACS” contribution money should be spent on negative ads. For example, the “Super PACS” can generate contributions from the rich in outside States, as long as the money is spent on negative images of the candidates in the other States…
Do you think the Supreme Court is being captured by the financial multinational liberal capitalists?
Something is going awry in this formation of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is another branch of the power-to-be, and if all the branches at a particular period converge on a consensus, dictatorship is well rooted.
Should the citizens start another campaign of Occupy the Supreme Court?
In any case, the people have this right, guaranteed by the Constitution and confirmed by Supreme Court to occupy the Court.
Note: Post inspired from an article by Hisham Melhem in the Lebanese daily Al Nahar
Black integration or autonomy?
Posted by: adonis49 on: February 24, 2010
Black integration or autonomy? (Feb. 24, 20120)
Booker T. Washington was born in 1856 of a “white” father; he founded “Tuskegee Institute” in Alabama in 1881. Booker was the first black leader to be invited to the White House during Theodore Roosevelt in 1901. In 1895, Booker presented a program at the Atlanta International Trade Fair that focused on three issues for the duration of a period:
First, accepting to decline any demands relative to political civil rights;
Second, accepting segregation with the white society; thus agreeing on a lower status for the black citizens;
Third, agreeing not to have Federal financial aids for black formation at universities.
The rationales for Booker was that blacks had to focus on technical skills, contribute to internal market trade, and accumulate wealth in the process before demanding equality in civil rights. Booker believed that there were phases to progress; when blacks reach adequate proper means then demanding political rights will be reasonable. It happened that in that period the northern States were investing heavily in the southern States and blacks were reaping a good part of that investment and jobs. Thus, Booker’s program finally enjoyed the majority acceptance of the southern blacks.
William Du Bois begged to differ: “B.T. Washington represents the old black attitude of submission. Is it admissible and feasible for millions of blacks to accomplish effective progress if they are deprived of their basic political civil rights? Can the blacks ever dream of any real progress if they are treated as slave caste and denied quality opportunities to moving ahead? It has been proven, again and again, that when blacks submit then prejudices increase. When racism is on the rise then blacks react vehemently and demand political rights and power as equal citizens under the laws. Blacks discover that it is more valuable to preserving self-esteem than acquiring tainted wealth that can be robbed from them in due time. It is not possible to civilize a people who have relinquished his value for self-esteem and the natural rights to struggle as free men.”
This dichotomy is almost identical in apartheid Israel. Moderate and so called “democratic forces” among the Israelis and Palestinians demand integration of the two people within one State. The radical factions among the two people demand two separate States. It is the right of the Palestinian people of all religious sects, after 60 years of racial discrimination, to demand a separate, self-sufficient, and autonomous State. The Palestinians need to re-gain self-esteem in planning and running a State; the Israelis need a period of decolonization to mentally re-gain humanity and abidance by the UN charter.
Adonis Diaries 