copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert>
I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!
~ Will Rogers [1879-1935]
Those were the days, now long past. When Author, Philosopher, Philanthropist Will Rogers was alive, people had the freedom to think for themselves. Citizens were not told they must follow the lead of autocrats. Less than one hundred years ago, the United States Constitution was considered the supreme law of the land. In the twenty-first century, the Democratic National Committee sets the standards. Party officials determined that law abiding Congressman, and Presidential hopeful, Dennis Kucinich will not appear on the Texas primary ballot. |
| The parchment pronouncement that once guided our nation was adopted on September 17, 1787. The framers accepted the principles outlined on behalf of the "People." Later, each state ratified the text in order to affirm these laws acceptable to all citizens of this new country. Indeed, according to the terms laid down in the Constitution, in a democratic nation, the common folk have a right to choose what decrees will govern them. The populace decides how laws will be implemented. The general public also selects who will enforce the edicts.
Although the United States Constitution was sanctioned, long before the birth of esteemed and Syndicated Columnist Will Rogers, reverence for the document remained throughout Rogers' life. Today the eleventh commandment governs the people. A person of a particular political persuasion shall not criticize or condemn another individual within the alliance. The penalties for any violation are strict. A lawful declared Presidential candidate can be removed from a state ballot if he decides to stand in support of a peaceful philosophy.
On January 3, 2008, Congressman, and Presidential aspirant, Dennis Kucinich Filed a Lawsuit With U.S. District Court. The man intimately familiar with the United States Constitution, with the support of the law would not agree to endorse the Democratic nominee whomever that shall be.
Dennis Kucinich believed as the Constitution states, he has the right to support the candidate of his choice.
As Americans, we cannot be required to vote in accordance with a Party decree. Yet, under the National Democratic Committee diktat any aspirant who does not sign a statement, which commits them to forego their right to freedom and choice will not be placed on the state ballot. In this situation, even officials within a given region do not have the authority to override the Party statute.
Kucinich Files Lawsuit With U.S. District Court
January 3, 2008
Thursday, Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich found out he's off the Texas ballot. That's because the Texas Democratic Party said his application was "defective."
There was a hearing in federal court about this controversy around 11 a.m. Thursday.
On the application, candidates must sign an oath that requires them to support the Democratic nominee, whoever that shall be.
Kucinich crossed out that section. The Texas Democratic Party said it contacted the Kucinich campaign, and they told them he would sign it on the condition that the nominee pledge not use war as part of foreign relations.
It turns out the chairman of the Texas Democratic Party does not have the authority to allow such a change, because the Democratic Executive Committee and the Democratic National Committee approve the applications.
Since Kucinich did not resubmit his application by the deadline, he has been taken off of the Texas primary ballot. It doesn't end there.
Kucinich, along with his faithful supporter Willie Nelson, have filed a civil lawsuit with the U.S. District Court, requesting a temporary restraining order, charging that such a "blind loyalty oath" is a violation of the 1st and 14th amendment.
The outline of principles by which America is governed, has been amended twenty-seven times. None of those modification allowed for the possibility that if one Party or another assumed an autocratic posture, all the individuals within that delegation must do as the leaders dictate. Yet, more than a century later, despotic rule is the law of the land. Apparently, we are told there is just cause for such a change. Dictums are designed with reason.
The chairman of the Texas Democratic Party said the oath is there for a reason.
"I think it's important for party unity. I think it's important for association of people of like minds, so that we don't have a situation where you've got someone who says, 'Well, I'm going to take advantage of running under your banner,'" said Texas Democratic Party chairman Boyd Richie.
There was a time when to be a Democrat was to be free to think for one self. Unity existed within the Party; people shared common principles. The façade of agreement does not advance harmony. Divisions cannot be eliminated by demand. Yet, the Democrats, who no longer support the doctrine of freedom and justice for all, defensively declare despotic rule works well. They do not tell us for whom.
While Freedom of Speech, the First Amendment of the constitution, in the Bill of Rights provides and protects our right to express our opinions, the Democratic National Committee does not recognize this canon.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
On the other hand, perhaps they do. Perchance, Democratic leaders proclaim, they are not Congress. Thus, they can restrict the right to free speech. The Party of the people apparently believes they are privileged, above the law. The Progressive powerbrokers who call tell us they protect our rights, deny us what the Constitution provides.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. . .
Again, we can only conclude that what the Constitutions affords our citizens, does not apply when Party politics are involved. Presidential aspirants, who threaten the corporate culture and the candidates the elite sponsor cannot be given a chance, regardless of conformity with reasonable writs.
Except for Kucinich's refusal to sign the oath, his application is in compliance with the state's party requirements.
When an individual lives within a totalitarian territory, such as the Democratic Party, any offense might be punishable by omission. If the Democratic National Committee believes they have the "right" to deny the citizenry their vote, what else might they think true. Watch your words, your p's, and q's. Argue against the rulers and you may find yourself diminished and denied a choice, a Dennis Kucinich Presidency.
Sores and Sources . . .
|
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
