Tag Archives: Establishment

Cass Sunstein Is Certifiable; Absolutism, First Amendment New Deal & More Executive Power

Cass Sunstein is one of the scarier of Obama’s czars and the fact that he was confirmed by the Senate makes it 10x worse!  Sunstein may be a very nice man, but when it comes to ideology, theory, ideas, and his views on the constitution, it makes me want to pull my hair out and scream.  I’m not sure what it is about the world of academia and the absolute detachment from reality that many hold, but it’s time for America to get past the status  of holding ivy league degrees; the superficial, and vote for people with real world experience.  Teachers do live in the real world, but my question would be whether not they have actually worked in a job or a place where they have implemented these ideas first to see if they actually work and help people, not hurt.

Besides, Cass Sunstein’s idea of Internet regulation, whereby a panel or individual of some sort would decide what is inaccurate or false and ban content via their own opinion (more detail on this can be found in his book entitled On Rumors), he has also argued that animals should be able to have a lawyer and sue humans, and guns and hunting should be banned.  There is much more to Cass Sunstein and his regulatory ideas in Nudge, another book penned by the newly approved czar.

More information about Sunstein is slowly but surely beginning to trickle out as time passes.  Cass Sunstein is a proponent of absolutism which really is a sick, twisted theory of “no liberty without dependency”:

You owe your life — and everything else — to the sovereign. The rights of subjects are not natural rights, but merely grants from the sovereign. There is no right even to complain about the actions of the sovereign, except insofar as the sovereign allows the subject to complain. These are the principles of unlimited, arbitrary, and absolute power, the principles of such rulers as Louis XIV. Intellectuals have assiduously promoted them; think of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes.

A new intellectual champion of absolutism has now emerged. Mild-mannered University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein has been advancing the radical notion that all rights — including rights usually held to be “against” the state, such as the right to freedom of speech and the right not to be arbitrarily imprisoned or tortured — are grants from the state. In a book co-authored with Stephen Holmes, The Cost of Rights, he argued that “all legal rights are, or aspire to be, welfare rights,” that is, positive grants from the state. There is no difference in kind between the right not to be tortured and the right to taxpayer-subsidized dental care.
In his new book, The Second Bill of Rights, Sunstein seeks to give constitutional status to welfare rights. The title comes from Franklin Roosevelt’s 1944 State of the Union address, in which he proclaimed that “necessitous men are not free men” and proposed a “second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all.” Among the rights FDR proposed were the rights to “a useful and remunerative job,” “a decent home,” “adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health,” “adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment,” and “a good education.”

To further understand the radical nature of Sunstein’s theories, it’s imperative that we also take a look at his proposed First Amendment New Deal which would act as a new Fairness Doctrine, following the same lines of his Internet regulation ideas.

President Obama’s newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, drew up a “First Amendment New Deal,” a new “Fairness Doctrine” that would include the establishment of a panel of “nonpartisan experts” to ensure “diversity of view” on the airwaves.

Sunstein compared the need for the government to regulate broadcasting to the moral obligation of the U.S. to impose new rules that outlawed segregation.

Until now, Sunstein’s radical proposal, set forth in his 1993 book “The Partial Constitution,” received no news media attention and scant scrutiny.

In the book – Sunstein outwardly favors and promotes the “fairness doctrine,” the abolished FCC policy that required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance in a manner the government deemed was “equitable and balanced.”

Sunstein introduces what he terms his “First Amendment New Deal” to regulate broadcasting in the U.S.

It appears that Sunstein and Lloyd are two peas in a pod.  Both of these men believe that commercial broadcasting companies should fund strictly public broadcasting.  He also proposes more “democratic” means of control like “compulsory public-affairs programming, right of reply, content review by nonpartisan experts or guidelines to encourage attention to public issues and diversity of view.”

Believe it or not, that’s not the worst to come out of Sunstein’s mouth or from his pen lately.  Sunstein actually believes that Obama and those working as part of his administration should interpret federal laws, not the federal courts.

“There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him,” argued Sunstein.

This statement was the central thesis of Sunstein’s 2006 Yale Law School paper, “Beyond Marbury: The Executive’s Power to Say What the Law Is.” The paper, in which he argues the president and his advisers should be the ones to interpret federal laws.

See why I’m pulling my hair out and screaming? This is sheer insanity and the man still argues that this is all constitutional!

2 Comments

Filed under Big Brother, Constitution, Czars, Establishment, Fairness Doctrine, FCC, Media, Net Neutrality, Obama Administration, Progressivism, Radicals, Sunstein

Big Labor = Big Corruption; Jimmy Hoffa Would Be So Proud

It’s time to clean house!  I’d like to see a sweeping investigation into any and all big labor unions, “non-partisan” taxpayer funded groups, lobbyists, and major corporations that donate to politicians. 

Union bosses are still acting much like mafia characters, and some would argue that’s what they in fact are.  A union boss is admitting to using/exploiting his union members as political activists.   

An interesting admission by James A. Williams, president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades in Philadelphia, can be seen in an interview he did with the Philly Inquirer. It is an admission that confirms one of the things that anti-union folks have been saying for years, but one union officials are loath to admit.

While discussing the hard economic times, the Philly Inquirer asked how the recession was affecting the union. In his answer President Wilson admitted that his union uses out-of-work members for “political events.” Wilson mentioned that they lower dues to $1 a month after a member has been out of work for more than six months, but that isn’t just the kind hearted union looking out for its members. No, the union expects something in return for that lowering of dues. 

Would exploitation and quid pro quo be considered commendable by the bleeding heart liberals?  Union leadership has always been in the business of lining their own pockets and achieving their own objectives, no matter who gets stepped on along the way, including their own members.

Obama has long been a union advocate, as are many other Democrats.  Unions became part of the Democrat voting block after FDR focused his efforts on creating certain groups that could be used for votes.  Big labor, since that time, has been a large contributor to the DNC.  Obama has spoken at the UAW, SEIU, and AFL-CIO conventions numerous times and most recently this past week.  The latest push for union control of ports and the fact that Obama supports easing the rules of union organizing should give anyone pause. 

President Obama gave a corker of a campaign speech yesterday at the AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh, promising to deliver on his promise to ease the rules for union organizing. If you want to know what this means in action, consider the current Teamsters play to control California ports. 

[…]

The American Trucking Association sued to block the rule, and with good cause. Federal law has long pre-empted state and local regulation of interstate trucking “prices, routes and services,” for the reason that international and interstate trade depend on uniform regulation. The courts have recognized this, and even the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the new port rule had likely violated the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which led to a court injunction earlier this year. Trial on the merits of the rule has been set for next year. 

[…] 

Unionization would give the Teamsters enormous bargaining leverage over work rules and pay, sharply raising the cost of moving goods, as well the power to shut down ports in a strike. Some 32 trade groups, from farm organizations to the National Retail Federation, signed a recent letter to Mr. Oberstar opposing the legislation. The response of shippers would be to divert cargo to Mexico or Canada, or pass through an expanding Panama Canal for ports on the Gulf or East Coasts. California doesn’t need more reasons for business to flee the state. 

For a group who continues to point their finger at George Bush and the Republicans for the current state of the economy, it sure seems as though they would prefer the economy to stay stagnant and hand it over to big labor and government, two of the causes for our hardships now. 

An example of the sheer lack of morals and utter corruption that has corroded big labor for quite some time is the recent conviction of Jaime Enrique Feliciano, a 50 yr. old man sentenced to 25 years in prison for child molestation, possession of child pornography and the intent to manufacture child pornography.  So who is Feliciano?  He was the former district president of the California SEIU, a proud partner of ACORN.

It’s time to wake up and take control of our country again.  These big labor organizations and large non-profits that are acting as arms to the government, doing their bidding, need to be disbanded and swept clean.  People on both sides should be sick and tired of the corruption, the ponzi schemes, the pay-to-play politics, and the lack of consideration for the people of America.

Leave a comment

Filed under ACORN, Big Labor, Corruption, Democrats, Double Standards, Economy, Establishment, Obama, Unions

Uniting Against RINOs

This post is really just a plug for a new website that has been created for Independent Conservatives who are tired of Republicans In Name Only (RINO).  Those who would easily sell out their own family for corporate funding, lobbies, and their own power-hungry nature. 

As many recall a couple month ago, Mark Kirk (R-IL) voted for Cap and Trade in the House of Representatives.  He, along with 7 other Republicans, voted for the bill that made no mention of coal, nuclear energy, or our own oil resources.  The bill was a monstrous mechanism to control the lives of Americans and tax the middle class, however, the Cap and Traitors, whom are aptly named, went ahead and voted against their principles and their constituents. 

Mark Kirk is now trying to run for the open Senate seat that Roland Burris and Blagojevich tainted recently.  I could care less if the person who wins the seat is a Democrat or a Republican, as long as they stand on principle and not on power and greed.  It’s time for the establishment to be sent packing and Mark Kirk is the epitome of the problem in DC. 

To check out the site Republicans United Against Mark Kirk For US Senate – click here.

2 Comments

Filed under Cap and Tax, Cap and Trade, Congress, Constitution, Establishment, Republicans, RINO