Pages

November 28, 2014

Our government officials are deluded about the limits of their power "Local police departments seem to believe they are the military,rolling into suburbia in armored vehicles while aiming assault rifles and other weapons of warfare at the civilians they are supposed to serve and protect."

If the revered Founding Fathers had clear-cut ideas about which branch of government does what, how the powers counterbalanced one another and how jurisprudence and justice are supposed to be carried out, it’s all gotten a bit jumbled in recent months. At all levels of government — federal, state and local — public officials are exhibiting behaviors and exercising powers that no dutiful acolyte of “Schoolhouse Rock!” would recognize. 
Maybe “identity crisis” isn’t quite the right turn of phrase. It’s really more a series of delusions, or perhaps misunderstandings, about who’s actually responsible for what.
Consider the evidence.
●Public prosecutors seem to believe they are defense attorneys. At least that appears to be true in the case of St. Louis County Prosecuting AttorneyRobert McCulloch. Typically, grand jury hearings are one-sided affairs in which the prosecution gets to cherry-pick only the most incriminating evidence in order to obtain an indictment, leaving out any evidence that might help a potential defendant. Hence the famous quip that any decent prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. But McCulloch and his team effectively cross-examined their own witnesses to discredit their case against Darren Wilson, by gently, leadingly questioning Wilsonand aggressively challenging any witnesses who contradicted Wilson’s account. This can only be explained by McCulloch’s apparent confusion over who his client was.
●State legislators (and their constituents) seem to believe they are the Supreme Court. At least that appears true in one insubordinate state, Arizona, where voters this month approved a ballot initiative allowing the state to ignore any federal action or program deemed “unconstitutional.” How is a law’s federal constitutionality decided? By state legislators and Arizona voters. This is a power usually reserved for the judicial branch, and ultimately the Supreme Court, but no matter. The ballot initiative’s supporters say it will come in handy when trying to dismantle theAffordable Care Act, as well as federal directives on immigration. Speaking of which . . .
●President Obama seems to believe he is a “king” or “emperor,” titles he said he’d need to unilaterally suspend deportation actions en masse, right before he unilaterally suspended deportation actions en masse.
●Local police departments seem to believe they are the military, rolling into suburbia in armored vehicles while aiming assault rifles and other weapons of warfare at the civilians they are supposed to serve and protect. At other times, the police seem to believe they are tax collectors, seizing civilians’ cash without ever filing charges and then putting the proceeds into public coffers.
●Governors seem to believe they are mathematicians, capable of reversing the rules of arithmetic. Maryland Gov.-elect Larry Hogan (R) says he will make good on his campaign promise to cut taxes, despite next year’s projected budget shortfall of nearly $600 million. Back in Arizona, Gov.-elect Doug Ducey (R) promises to eliminate the state’s personal and corporate taxes, while somehow increasing spending on education, amid an existing budget shortfall. Of course, Kansas’s recently reelected governor, Sam Brownback (R), has been using similarly magical arithmetic for a while now.

5 comments:

  1. The passage by Arizona of a law stating that they can ignore unconstitutional Federal law isn't because of an "confusion" over who is supposed to decide these issues. They passed the law because of a real-world observation that the Supreme Court can no longer be trusted to strike down unconstitutional laws. Even at the time that the book _The Brethren - Inside the Supreme Court_ was written in 1979 the book's take-away lesson was that SCOTUS members were chosen for their ability to craft plausible-sounding arguments for decisions which had already been made for them by the Ruling Elites. The corruption of that court, and the ability to blackmail them via the NSA's total surveillance system that sweeps up all of the court member's emails and phone calls, has only made the problem worse since 1979. I'm almost surprised anymore when SCOTUS makes a decision that comes down on the side of fairness, reasonableness, or the Constitution, so rigid is their mandate to support the Ruling Elite's agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Consider Republican, and thereby the ruling rich class, plans for N.C. They want to eliminate public schools. Sell the ABC liquor store system, they already choose the purchaser. Privatize the State lottery an our newest governor ordered state agencies to consider industry as their boss, that their jobs were now to protect industry against the state and the people.

    The State lottery and ABC system fully fund all public schools in N.C. keeping property taxes low but that does not matter for any company moving or resident here with 1,000 or more employees because prior governor's and now this one continues, gave away zero property tax deals to every major employer so big players pay no property taxes, in some case don't pay for water and power and have their employees payroll taxes refunded to the company at the end of the year so their hiring of said persons contributes nothing to state coffers.

    Much easier to cry wolf when there is no funding being generated for public schools now isn't it?

    So a state filled with poor and uneducated people will then require what?

    Policing and prisons. Welcome to the, "future," Republicans plan for Carolina.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Founding Fathers would be "in arms" against these foul PSEUDO-Americans. They were well aware that an Educated Nation was a strong Nation,and that ignorance is WEAKNESS. Franklin opened the first PUBLIC Library. America is infested with whining BABIES who do not want to share their toys.

    ReplyDelete
  4. They believe that individual rights trump the rights of the people as a state or organized power therefore what they are really saying is they want no organized power or state government at all which puts it back to fiefdoms and oligarchies running communities based on personal egos.

    Those entities, that type of system existed in Greece under the Spartans and it eventually lead to their destruction by outside forces.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I never called the rich, "Republican," I

    ReplyDelete