Greenville Candlelight Vigil for Marriage Equality

... tonight at the Unitarian Universalist church.

Candlelight vigils and supportive demonstrations are taking place throughout the nation tonight, and all week long. Legal arguments before the Supreme Court will begin tomorrow, for and against the constitutionality of gay marriage. From NBC:

The U.S. Supreme Court this week takes its first serious look ever at the issue of same-sex marriage, considering two cases that raise a fundamental issue: does the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection allow legal distinctions between same-sex couples and those of the opposite sex?

The greatest potential for a ruling with nationwide implications comes in a case from California, to be argued Tuesday, brought by proponents of Proposition 8. The following day, the court will hear a separate case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages in states where they are legal.

Approved by 52 percent of California voters in 2008, Prop 8 amended the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages. It was placed on the ballot after 18,000 couples had been legally wed there.

A federal judge in San Francisco declared the ban unconstitutional, and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the ruling. Once a state grants a fundamental right like marriage, the appeals court said, it cannot later take it away, even by voter initiative.

Photos of our vigil below, and you can click to enlarge all photos.

I hope you will also take part in one locally. Like the signs say, "Equality means everyone."

Move to Amend

At left, David Cobb, 2004 Green Party presidential candidate, presents the persuasive case for Move To Amend. (Second photo includes your humble narrator.)














MOVE TO AMEND:

On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. Human beings are people; corporations are legal fictions.

We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, the people rule.

We Move to Amend

". . . corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires. Corporations help structure and facilitate the activities of human beings, to be sure, and their 'personhood' often serves as a useful legal fiction. But they are not themselves members of “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."
~Supreme Court Justice Stevens, January 2010

Courtesy of Another Voice with Jason and Eric, here is the entirety of David Cobb's presentation here in Greenville last week:

Ron Paul in Greenville

At left: Presidential candidate, Congressman Ron Paul today in Greenville.



What does it mean that so many working class people packed into a drafty, cold, wet airplane hangar to listen to a rather unremarkable-looking 76-year-old doctor talk mostly about his interpretation of the Constitution?

And they hollered, screamed, and stomped appreciatively?

I dunno, but as usual, I am impressed. I met about a half-dozen or more people I knew, too. I can confidently tell you that I could never say the same about any other Republican candidate... and possibly even the Democrats, at this stage of the game.

The Ron Paul folks (see below) are real people and I like them. They are friendly, and not a single one said anything nasty about the Obama bumper stickers I have not gotten around to scrubbing off my car. One sign on the back of a pick-up, pointedly read: DEMOCRATS-YOU CAN VOTE IN PRIMARY! (You certainly don't see signs at other candidate's rallies, openly asking for votes from 'the other side'.) Just like the last time, I enjoyed the event.

Until someone can explain away Ron Paul's populism, I can't dismiss it. On my radio show tomorrow, I will be addressing the race-baiting politics of the South Carolina primary, which have notably been from Newt Gingrich, not Ron Paul. I will be talking about why Ron Paul is considered by many to be the most progressive choice at this point.

One out of four young African-American males is in prison (the percentage may even be higher here in South Carolina), largely due to the failed and expensive drug war. The sorrowful end-results of the drug war have decimated black communities, and left heartache, gangs and poverty in their wake. (Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs coke-fiends have all of their bills and legal fees paid for by OUR money.) Of all candidates, left and right, only Ron Paul calls for a total end to this barbarism.

And it must be underscored, this is a radical and anti-racist position.

However, I must be honest... I am disappointed the Paul campaign here in South Carolina has radically downplayed the good doctor's anti-drug war positions. Recent Greenville News articles did not mention Ron Paul's controversial positions a single time, even though it certainly was news the last time he debated here! Ordinarily, I would attribute this to the usual shoddy job by the Greenville News, and yet, I noticed the info table at the rally today featured position papers about the Patriot Act, Civil Liberties in general, and virtually everything else but the drug war specifically. Hmm. Why not? (The mainstream media keeps repeating that Paul has 'widespread youth support'--surely they know his opposition to the drug war is a big reason why?) Is this because they believe their best chances are with conservatives here in the Palmetto State?

I think Ron Paul's anti-drug-war politics are a big draw with Independents, liberals and other civil-libertarians, and in fact, I am disappointed the Paul campaign didn't target minority communities with political ads seeking crossover voters and support. (Or would that compromise support among conservatives?)

If the guy with the pickup truck gets it, surely the people running the campaign, can too?

~*~

I saw my old comrade, the venerable Ted Christian, who ran for congress against Bob Inglis in 2008. He informed me he would be voting for Ron Paul "from now on."

I offered that Dr Paul was 76 now and probably would not run for president again.

"I don't care, I will keep on voting for him after he's dead," he said. He then informed me that the van outside with "Ron Paul 2012" on it, was his.

Not at all surprised.


Below, some photos of the rally, starting off with Ted's van--and that's Ted and me in the last photo. As always, you can click to enlarge.

Occupy movement under attack by the Usual Suspects

Photo from our demonstration last night, Occupy the Debate! at the Republican debate in Spartanburg.




Not a single Wall Street thief has been tried for treason for destroying the country's economy. The millions of pensions stolen from old people, are gone. The old people were not bailed out, but the thieves were. When the thieves are tried for outright theft, they are (example) given five years for stealing $278 million. I've known people given stiffer sentences for stealing used cars.

In fact, Herman Cain declares that if people are poor, it is their own fault. He certainly doesn't want any of his rich cronies held accountable. He needs to keep that Koch Brothers money coming in, above all.

And now, I see attacks on the Occupy movement nationwide. Hundreds of arrests, and yet, none of the troublemakers who STARTED this movement, the Wall Street thieves, has faced any jail time. There are no riot police invading Goldman Sachs. Why not? Why are the thieves allowed to continue their business and their luxurious lives, after stealing from us? Oh, right, the theft was declared legal. So that makes it okay, and the police force exists to protect the rich.

I just watched a CNN "news report" about how the police are cracking down on Occupy Portland (Oregon) for a variety of bullshit reasons. The high-tech riot gear I saw those scores of cops decked out in (many of them laughing raucously, so eager are they to crack heads), cost lots more money than the Occupation could EVER cost. This crackdown, this overtime being paid on a Sunday, is costing the city of Portland plenty, but for some reason, those costs never get added in to the "costs of the occupation." After all, that might convince taxpayers that "cracking down" is not really worth it--and it is public money that pays police to dress up in their hyper-expensive, Batman-esque riot get-ups.

During the CNN report, a bunch of government flunkies spoke without interruption, and finally, they deigned to talk to an Occupier. It is notable that the newsreader did not interrupt the flunkies, but was very polite and even let one of them go on for about 5-10 minutes. The Occupier? Did not get even one minute without interruption. He interrupted her (I counted) about a half-dozen times. Then he cut her off and thanked her and moved on.

This is what passes for "objective" news coverage of the Occupy movement.

The Constitution says clearly, that people have the right to freedom of speech and PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY. That means what it says. It doesn't say, "except overnight" or "except in a public park"--no exceptions are delineated. The government is rewriting the constitution, the way they rewrote it for the Civil Rights movement. Just as they invented the right to turn fire hoses on children, they have now invented the right to clear out encampments because there might be a few rats. MY GOD, they are CAMPING ILLEGALLY! Bring in the riot police.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for the trials of the Goldman Sachs thieves. I think I'll be waiting quite a long time for that. Instead, they arrest someone giving a speech detailing their crimes, outside their corporate headquarters. Incredible, like something you used to read about the Soviet Union.

As Sinclair Lewis famously said, when fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross. And backed up with riot police, decked out in nothing but the fanciest, best gear. Paid for by us.