Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘laws’

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers’ Party.
by Bruce Walker


Barack Obama is a lawyer.
Michelle Obama is a lawyer.
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.
Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:
Harry Reid is a lawyer.
Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.

President Bush is a businessman.
Vice President Cheney is a businessman.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution.
Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
Tom Delay was an exterminator.
Dick Armey was an economist.
House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.

The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America . And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine, but it is an awful way to govern a great nation.

When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming.  This also results in some Americans becoming “adverse parties” of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.
We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66% of the world’s lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as “spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you” and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democratic Party. When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to the Democratic Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

I had heard recently that there is STILL OIL on Alaska’s beaches from the Exxon Valdez spill that happened twenty one years ago. So I decided to do some research and found this interview from “Democracy Now”, a daily TV/radio news program, hosted by Amy Goodman. The following is just part of an interview she had with Riki Ott, a community activist, marine toxicologist, and former commercial salmon fisher-woman and author of two books on the spill.

The reason I feel this interview is important to share with the masses is because of the issue of “corporations” having the same rights as a person. (being protected by law). She explains this in detail later, and I encourage you to think of what power is being given to corporations, and as long as they continue to have these same rights, justice will never be “for the people”.

Now with the oil spill off the coast of Louisiana, we will face yet many more years of litigation, which will of course not accomplish justice for the people, or animals that are now suffering (and will continue to suffer) because of this tragedy.

To read the complete interview, you may use this link:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/3/24/20_years_after_exxon_valdez_oil

AMY GOODMAN:

A report marking the twentieth anniversary of the spill has found oil still persists in the region and, in some places, quote, “is nearly as toxic as it was a few weeks after the spill.” The report was put together by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, which oversaw restoration efforts. It states, quote, “At this rate, the remaining oil will take decades and possibly centuries to disappear entirely.”

RIKI OTT:

Those ecosystem studies began in 1994, really too late for our trial. They didn’t get completed until about 2004—I’m talking about published papers now. And those studies show, sure enough, the oil that’s remaining on our beaches is still causing harm

AMY GOODMAN: Let me see. You have brought a little jar. This is Exxon Valdez oil, Smith Island, Prince William Sound. This is one year ago. This is not from—

RIKI OTT: This is July 2nd last year, not even a year.

AMY GOODMAN: This is astounding.

RIKI OTT: That’s what we think, too. I take children out on the beaches now who were born after the spill and say, “This is your legacy.”

AMY GOODMAN: It’s just covered in oil.

RIKI OTT: The oil specifically is polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs. This is actually coming out the tailpipes of our automobiles. It’s the fine soot. That’s kind of the codeword for it. And this is linked with genetic harm, not only in animals, but in people, as well, respiratory harm, reproductive impairment, cancers. Very low levels of this oil, these PAHs, cause incredible harm to people.

AMY GOODMAN: You’ve said that is not just an environmental disaster, but a crisis in democracy.

RIKI OTT: It is a democracy crisis. The question we started asking as our lawsuit went on and on and on, and we didn’t get paid, was how did corporations get this big, where they can manipulate the legal system, the political system? What happened here? And I thought that was a really good question, so I went to answer it. And that became the final chapter of Not One Drop.

And I learned from other people’s work that there’s actually two ways to amend the Constitution. One is formally, through people-made law, which we’ve done twenty-seven times. And one is informally, through what Thomas Jefferson called the engine of consolidation, the federal judiciary, the Supreme Court.

And in 1886, the Supreme Court made sort of a seminal decision, where it granted a railroad corporation equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, which is, of course, a civil rights amendment for due process and equal protection for African American men. For the first forty years after that passed, there were 307 lawsuits brought, nineteen by African American men, the rest by corporations.

And at that point, when the Fourteenth Amendment passed to corporations, this thing called a corporate person arose. And that corporate person, in the eyes of the law, is able to access our rights, human rights, the Bill of Rights, constitutional protections. This is wrong. The word “corporation” never appears in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. This is how we’ve lost freedom of speech. We still—we, as people, still have the First Amendment, but so do corporations. Free speech equals money. Those with more money have more speech. Pretty simple. So I began to understand that the legal system is broken. The election process is broken, all because of the same reason, this corporate personhood.

AMY GOODMAN: Riki Ott, I want to thank you for being with us. She has written the book Not One Drop: Betrayal and Courage in the Wake of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. I thank you for joining us.

RIKI OTT: Thank you. And I’m advocating the Twenty-Eighth Amendment to strip corporations of human rights. Thank you.

Gray Whale photo: (John Gaps III / AP)

Worker photo: latimesblogs.latimes.com/…/03/09/valdez.jpg


Read Full Post »

 

I have been thinking about the current administration leading our country, and the people who President Obama surrounds himself with. One in particular I would like to talk about is Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff to Obama. Has come under fire for his lack of self-control and frequent outbursts recently…..basically he is a “hot head”.

 It bothers me that there is a lack of good character, or “class” in regards to our leaders.  Well what does this mean?   Here are a couple of quotes to read and think about regarding this issue. 

Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters.”

 Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren on the subject of Character, November 4, 1775

It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.”

 Thomas Jefferson, notes on Virginia Query 19, regarding character, 1781.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: