Insanity spreads through Article II agencies

June 26, 2007

From the Chicago Tribune:

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the president and vice president are not executive “agencies” and are therefore not covered under the executive order, but he stopped short of placing Cheney exclusively in the legislative branch. Snow He said the vice president has served “in an executive capacity delegated to him by the president” and noted that, constitutionally “there are no specified executive activities for the vice president,” and that his role “is a wonderful academic question.”

Chicago Tribune, “Emanuel seeks to cut funding for Cheney’s office, home,” June 26, 2007

Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section 1:

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows . . .

2 Comments | Bogus history, Ethics, Government, History Revisionism, Politics, Presidents, U.S. Constitution, Voodoo history | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

40 years of Loving — the changes we see

June 15, 2007

1968 propelled history in dramatic fashion, much of it tragic. History teachers might await the 40th anniversary stories of 1968’s events, knowing that the newspapers and television specials will provide much richer material than any textbook could hope for.

Was 1967 less momentous? Perhaps. But an anniversary this week only serves to highlight how the entire decade was a series of turning points for the United States. This week marks the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s issuing the decision in Loving v. Virginia. The Lovings had been arrested, convicted and exiled from the state of Virginia for the crime of — brace yourself — getting married.

Richard and Mildred Loving, Bettman-Corbis Archive

Photo of Richard and Mildred Loving from Bettman-Corbis Archive.

You see, Virginia in those days prohibited marriage between a black person and a white person. So did 15 other states. In language that is quaint and archaic to all but Biblical literalist creationists, the trial judge said:

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

The Lovings appealed their conviction. They appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down laws that prohibit a person of one “race” from marrying a person of another. (I put “race” in quotes because, as we have since learned from DNA studies, there is just one race among us, the human race. Science verifies that the Supreme Court got it right, as did the Americans before them who wrote the laws upon which the Supreme Court’s decision was based.)

From 1958 to 1967 — nine years the case wended through the courts. Oral argument was had on April 10 — the decision coming down in just two months seems dramatically quick by today’s standards. This was one of the cases that angered so many Americans against the Court presided over by Chief Justice Earl Warren.

Ed Brayton at Dispatches from Culture Wars points to a statement from Mildred Loving on this anniversary. The statement is below the fold. Read the rest of this entry »

8 Comments | 1968, Citizenship, Civil Rights, Fourteenth Amendment, Freedom - Political, Heroes, History, Human Rights, Jurisprudence, Justice, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Have you spoken against intelligent design, or other dangerous superstition, today?

April 6, 2007

Imagine you live in Dallas, Texas, where it is generally assumed that one is Christian and that one attends church on Sunday, and Wednesday (so much so that school activities are not scheduled Wednesdays, because everyone is expected to be at church). Imagine that you teach science at a major Christian-affiliated institution in Dallas.

Now imagine that your institution is the site of a major conference extolling the virtues of superstition, specifically against a scientific theory that is the foundation and main supports for much of your work. Do you hunker down and hope no one notices, or do you speak up for science? Blog against theocracy logo, Statute of Liberty

20 professors at Southern Methodist University (SMU) signed an article on the opposite-editorial page of the Dallas Morning News, yesterday, calling out intelligent design and its advocates. (I mentioned it in this post, here.) They will most likely take a stand that there is no reason to “debate” intelligent design advocates, since the debate venue is stacked, the debate audience is stacked, and that intelligent design has not paid its dues to be admitted to the college of the sciences.

But I wish they would take a further stand: I wish the Christians among them would call on the advocates of intelligent design to repent, to stop asking people to turn away from science, to stop spreading false stories about science, to stop making false claims. Read the rest of this entry »

9 Comments | Blog Against Theocracy, Education, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Religious Freedom, Science, Science and faith, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Profiling: Cops target vehicles with Bible on the dashboard

April 4, 2007

Drug couriers, it appears, like to put off suspicion of their vehicles by putting a Bible on the dashboard as they travel.  So, in a countermeasure, cops target cars with Bibles on the dash to be pulled over as suspected for couriering drugs.

Isn’t that a violation of someone’s First Amendment rights?  Not according to the federal courts in Nebraska, no.  The case is Frazier v. Lutter, a March 27 decision, which Prof. Friedman details slightly more.

Say what?  Suddenly you have more sympathy for imams kicked off of airplanes?

Leave a Comment » | Justice, Law, Religious Freedom, Travel, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Quote to think by: Timothy J. Campbell and the Constitution

March 29, 2007

What’s the Constitution between friends?

–Timothy J. Campbell (1840-1904), Attributed, circa 1885

A little more below the fold? Certainly. Read the rest of this entry »

2 Comments | Bad Quotes, Famous quotes, Good Quotes, Patriotism, Politics, Presidents, Quotes, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Kid blogs for human rights, asks that kids be let out of U.S. jails

March 5, 2007

Really.

I can’t gloss this at all, and so far it checks out as presented. Political Teen Tidbits is a blog run by a bright young Texan with a conscience. She’s trying to draw attention to the bizarre cases that keep coming out of Texas’ immigration detention practices.

Political Teen Tidbits thinks we should let the 9-year-old Canadian kid out of jail. Go read the details — what do you think?

1 Comment | Dissent, Ethics, Human Rights, Immigration, Jurisprudence, Justice, U.S. Constitution, Weblogs | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

State of the Union

January 23, 2007

Clay Bennett cartoon, Bush at SOTU

Clay Bennett cartoon, copyright Clay Bennett. Bennett is the editorial cartoonist for the Christian Science Monitor and winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for his editorial cartoons there.

Tonight President Bush delivers his State of the Union speech to Congress. State of the Union speeches are increasingly the only time we get to see presidents live, and that may lead to the extreme crabbiness about the speech Ed Brayton shows over at Dispatches from the Culture Wars. It’s a Constitution-required exercise (Article II, section 3), though the prime-time television broadcast and other pomp and ceremony are not mentioned.

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

In our history as a republic, presidents have done everything from just sending the details in a letter to Congress to the current pageant. My recollection is that Richard Nixon gave the first prime-time speech — before that the speeches were given during the business day, and not broadcast live — and that Ronald Reagan was the first president to give all of his SOTUs in the evening. (I’m very willing to correct that information if you have better details.)

And while they have occasionally made history, such as Franklin Roosevelt’s 1941 SOTU (the “four freedoms”), my fondness for the events is mostly personal. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | Cartoons, Current History, Franklin Roosevelt, History, Political cartoons, Politics, Presidents, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Pentagon official calls for assault on Constitution

January 13, 2007

I used to marvel at the irony of attending Republican conventions in states and counties across the nation, where ceremonies would open with the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag, and the nation, ideals and government it stands for, and where speaker after speaker would then assault every aspect of that same nation and government. In the Vietnam era and a decade afterward, frequently these speeches would include rhetorical questions like, “Do we really need a First Amendment?” in reference to protestors, or the speech of anyone that the speaker found disagreeable.

This is a new height: The New York Times reports this morning that a top Pentagon official is bothered that lawyers defend prisoners in the U.S., especially prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — somehow forgetting that lawyers are obligated to do such things by their ethical canons, their state laws and state licensing rules, and by the Constitution. Then he urges corporations who use those same lawyers to stop paying them.

Is this a joke, or can someone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution actually be so clueless?

The senior Pentagon official in charge of military detainees suspected of terrorism said in an interview this week that he was dismayed that lawyers at many of the nation’s top firms were representing prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and that the firms’ corporate clients should consider ending their business ties.

The comments by Charles D. Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, produced an instant torrent of anger from lawyers, legal ethics specialists and bar association officials, who said Friday that his comments were repellent and displayed an ignorance of the duties of lawyers to represent people in legal trouble.

The Wall Street Journal joined in the assault on the Constitution in an editorial, according to the news story.

Stanley Kubrick is dead, or I’d think that this was just a review of a Stanley Kubrick follow-up to Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Bomb.

Any corporation official who fires the company’s attorneys for representing Guantanamo Bay detainees should be fired himself — he’s acting contrary to the interests of his stockholders in getting rid of the best legal team he could hire.

How do such barbarians an anti-American people get to be officials in the Pentagon, and editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal?

More information:

Blog reactions:

2 Comments | Civil Rights, Current History, Democracy, Dissent, Ethics, Iraq, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Patriotism, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Ford tells Nixon: ‘Take these guys’

January 4, 2007

President Ford, National Archives photo

[I hear from teachers who want lesson plans dealing with Gerald Ford. Here’s one I came across from the National Archives.]

Vice President Spiro Agnew was forced to resign in late 1973 in lieu of being prosecuted for bribery. The 25th Amendment allows a president to nominate a new vice president in the event of a vacancy. It was passed after the assassination of President Kennedy, when heart-attack victim Lyondon Johnson held office for over a year with no vice president, but it had never been used. With more than two years to go on his second term, Nixon was encouraged to fill the office.

Eventually Nixon picked Gerald Ford, putting Ford in line to become the first U.S. president to hold the office without ever having been elected to either the presidency or vice presidency, though that was unknown in the fall of 1973. What Nixon needed was someone who could pass the “advice and consent” test of the U.S. Senate. He got a letter from the Republican leader in the House, Gerald Ford, a long-time Michigan congressman, who named several others.

Whose names did Ford suggest to Nixon?

That letter is the focus of a lesson plan suitable for high school U.S. history or government classes, which comes with images of the letter and suggested activities from the National Archives.

The National Archives has lesson plans for all eras of U.S. history.

1 Comment | 25th Amendment, Gerald Ford, History, Lesson plans, Presidents, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Senate, Watergate scandal | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Rep. Ellison and the Islamic roots of American law

January 3, 2007

U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., delivered a lesson to critics today on the value of knowing history.

First, Los Angeles conservative radio host Dennis Prager embarrassed himself by calling on Ellison to use a Christian Bible to put his left hand on while being sworn in as a Member of Congress, the first Moslem to be a Member. Ellison pointed out that in the swearing-in ceremony, no book is used, and noted that other religious texts have been used by people of other faiths during the photo session afterward, when members re-enact the swearing in with the Speaker of the House. Prager compounded his history sins by refusing to back down. Ellison correctly stood his ground.

Then Virginia’s U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode pushed it farther, warning that unless we control immigration, Ellison will be the beachhead for a Moslem take-over of Congress. Ellison, defending the Bill of Rights, stood his ground and refused to get into a name-calling discussion.

Then Roy Moore of Alabama, who was rejected by voters for governor after having made a spectacle of himself and the Alabama Supreme Court over his efforts to install his own religious shrine in the Supreme Court Building, called for Ellison to be denied his seat. Ellison coolly ignored Moore, defending the First Amendment instead.

Now Ellison has acted, and his action comprises a neat, clean and witty rebuttal to the critics.

Read the rest of this entry »

4 Comments | First Amendment, History, Leadership, Politics, Religious Freedom, Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Dennis Prager’s bogus history

December 3, 2006

Conservative, sometimes-rational commentator Dennis Prager is in a dudgeon because someone suggested that our first Muslim Member of Congress might take his oath of office on the Qur’an, rather than a Bible. Prager’s irrational rant demands that Congressmen Keith Ellison of Minnesota be stripped of his religious freedom (really — go see). He claims, using bogus history, that swearing without a Bible would be a first. That’s dead wrong.

Minnesota State Rep. Keith Ellison at Macalester College

Then-State Rep. Keith Ellison speaks at a Macalester College seminar on environmental justice and human rights, in February 2006. On November 7, Ellison was elected to represent Minnesota in the U.S. Congress, the first Muslim to be elected. Photo from Macalester College, American Studies Department.

Prager claims in his bio to have done graduate study. Would it be too much to expect him to understand the U.S. Constitution?

First, the U.S. Constitution prevents anyone from requiring any official elected to federal, state or local office, from having to take any oath on any religious book. Really. It’s in Article VI: Read the rest of this entry »

14 Comments | Accuracy, Bogus history, Current History, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Religious Freedom, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

End the need for a flag desecration amendment

October 11, 2006

Title: Yankee doodle 1776 / A.M. Willard. Creator(s): Clay, Cosack & Co., lithographer Related Names: Willard, Archibald M., 1836-1918 , artist Ryder, James F., 1826-1904 , publisher Date Created/Published: Cleveland, Ohio : Pub. by J.F. Ryder, c1876.

Archibald M. Willard, “The Spirit of ’76,” one of the best-recognized icons of American patriotism; courtesy of the American Reserve Society Sons of the American Revolution (of which Willard was a member); Library of Congress data: “Yankee doodle 1776 “/ A.M. Willard. Creator(s): Clay, Cosack & Co., lithographer. Related Names: Willard, Archibald M., 1836-1918 , artist Ryder, James F., 1826-1904 , publisher Date Created/Published: Cleveland, Ohio : Pub. by J.F. Ryder, c1876.

Archibald M. Willard, “The Spirit of ’76,” one of the best-recognized icons of American patriotism; courtesy of the American Reserve Society Sons of the American Revolution (of which Willard was a member).

Scouters discuss issues of leadership and skill, a wide-ranging group of topics that pertain to Boy Scouting, on a list-server known as Scouts-L. I subscribe to the discussion, and at times have participated frequently in it. Looking over my own archives, I was amused to see that it was more than a decade ago that I addressed the issue of how to quell any need for a Constitutional Amendment on flag desecration.

The U.S. flag fascinated me from my early childhood. It always strikes me as unique among flags of nations, and I can truly say that I find it stirring to see it in good display. In court, in schools, in the Senate and executive branch of federal government, and in local government, I have had more than my share of occasions to participate in cermonies honoring the flag, or merely sit in contemplation of it during official proceedings. I always reflect on John Peter Zenger’s trial for telling the truth about the King’s governor of New York, and how our flag now means that we can tell the truth about our own government without fear of official reprisal.

I often reflect on the story of Virginia Hewlett, who was a member of the U.S. High Commissioner’s staff in the Philippines when Gen. MacArthur’s forces retreated, and who risked her life in order to strike the U.S. flag and prevent its capture by the Japanese. For this action she and several others were captured, tortured, and endured the war in a prison camp. When she was freed, to her husband and my old friend Frank Hewlett (who was a UPI war correspondent and later a Nieman Fellow and Washington correspondent for the Salt Lake Tribune), she weighed 78 pounds. Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | Flag etiquette, History, Patriotism, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Anti-First Amendment propaganda infects MSM

October 1, 2006

Conservatives complain constantly that “mainstream media” (or “MSM” as it is usually abbreviated in right-wing blogs, derisively) are biased to the left. That’s much contrary to my experience, as a reporter, as a PR flack, and as a consumer of news.

I do expect a striving for balance, however. So I was surprised to find, in an on-line test of American history and government at the site of Newsweek Magazine, that conservative misinformation about religious freedom had crept into “MSM.” A poster, Bernarda, pointed to the poll in comments to an earlier post.

When I saw this question, I rather expected Newsweek might have made the turn to the right — but I answered as the law is anyway. As you can see from what I copied off the answer screen, below, Newsweek’s poll said the legal answer is wrong:

 

2. The idea that in America there should be a “wall of separation” between church and state appears in:

  
 

The Constitution is not correct.
Thomas Jefferson’s letters
—Percentage of seniors who scored correctly: 27.2 percent

The idea that there should be a wall of separation between church and state was rather carefully and ambitiously developed in law by George Mason, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in Virginia, starting in 1776 with the Virginia Bill of Rights, and perhaps climaxing in 1786 when Madison engineered the passage of Jefferson’s Statute for Religious Freedom (one of the three things Jefferson thought noteworthy for his tombstone, above even his two-terms as president), and continuing through the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Read the rest of this entry »

2 Comments | 1776, America's founding, First Amendment, History Revisionism, Religious Freedom, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Easy to be wrong

September 30, 2006

Difficulties of getting flag etiquette right are demonstrated by this photo, which right now graces the website of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia:

It’s a photo of two people looking over a field. It’s a photo by Jonathan Hyman, copyright 2003. If I had to guess, I’d guess it is the field in Pennsylvania where United Flight 93 crashed on September 11, 2001. In this cropped version, you can see that the man is wearing a jacket with the U.S. flag emblazoned on the back. In other versions (which I could not get to copy), you can see the woman is wearing an identical flag on the back of her coat.

The Constitution Center’s use of this photo implies that they find it intrigueing, if not an outright display of patriotic citizenship worthy to commemorate those who died on the attacks on the United States. The photograph promotes a display of the work of Jonathan Hyman:

To commemorate the fifth anniversary of 9/11, the National Constitution Center presents an exhibition of original photographs by Jonathan Hyman, documenting how the American people responded to and remember the events of September 11th.

Few events in American history have elicited the outpouring of public displays of emotion provoked by the September 11th attacks. Over the past five years, photographer Jonathan Hyman has traveled the country photographing the roadside displays, murals, and personal memorials created by Americans in response to September 11th. Hyman’s photographs of this new American folk-art pay tribute to those who died and movingly depict a country coming to grips with a national tragedy.

The selection of 100 photographs featured in the exhibit inspires conversations about community, national identity, and how ordinary Americans have commemorated the day. From images of urban murals, flag-painted houses, memorials, and signs to tattoos and decorated cars and trucks, the photographs show America’s sorrow, patriotism, anger, and in some cases, calls for revenge, peace and hope, or justice.

Sponsors of the exhibit include a major network television outlet, and police and fire fighter groups who wish to honor sacrifices by Americans:

9/11: A Nation Remembers is proudly supported by the City of Philadelphia Police and Fire Departments.

CBS 3 is the official media partner for the 9/11: A Nation Remembers exhibition.

Wearing flags on the backs of the jackets is a violation of the U.S. flag code. Were we to amend the Constitution to make flag desecration a crime, this physical desecration could (in a fit of stupidity) lead to the arrest of these two patriots, and probably to the arrest of the webmaster and photographer.

We don’t need an amendment to protect this flag from physical desecration.  Citizens have already hallowed it far above our poor ability to add or detract.  What we need is a law that authorizes the popular display of the flag, as people actually display it.  We could use a law that would protect citizens in their display of the flag — a law rather like the one we have, called the First Amendment.

Leave a Comment » | Dissent, First Amendment, Flag etiquette, Freedom - Political, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Constitution Day, September 18

September 17, 2006

 

First page of the Constitution of the United States of America, image from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

On September 17, 1787, delegates to the Philadelphia convention met at Independence Hall to sign the document they had labored all summer to produce, to send it to the Continental Congress to be sent to the states for ratification. Ultimately 39 of the delegates would sign it.

We celebrate Constitution Day annually on September 17 in honor of this event (September 18 this year, because the 17th is a Sunday).

Texas requires all students to get a dose of Constitution (and Declaration of Independence) in social studies classes, each year — Freedom Week*. For that matter, there is a federal requirement, too (it would be fun to analyze whether such a requirement runs afoul of the law that requires the federal government to stay out of curricula, sometime). Where to find materials?

The Bill of Rights Institute has wonderful stuff — posters, videos, lesson plans. Much of what a teacher needs for Constitution Day is available for free on their website page for Constitution Day. I had the great good fortune to attend a week-long institute put together by this group, at Mt. Vernon, Virginia. Their scholarship is top notch; their materials are well researched, keyed well to the various age groups, and packaged to make their use easy. The Bill of Rights on Demand feature is good for quick lesson plans, too.

Christy Painting of Signing of the Constitution

Here is one of my favorite sources: Prof. Gordon Lloyd of Pepperdine University created an interactive version of Howard Chandler Christy’s famous painting of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. If you can project from your computer, you can show students the history — roll your mouse across the painting, and you get the name of the delegate with a link to get more history on that man.

The National Archives has lesson plans for Constitution Day, to get students to study and understand the Constitution and other contemporary documents directly.

This site, Constitution Day, makes me nervous. Yes, they have Colin Powell leading the nation in the Preamble this year — but they also highlight former Alabama Judge Roy Moore, who has little understanding or respect for the Constitution and Bill of Rights, in my opinion. Still, I haven’t found much other stuff that is objectionable, though I have a sneaking suspicion it’s there somewhere (they have car flags for sale, for example — they display of which is a violation of the flag code — but I digress). The authors appear to be well-intentioned, if less informed than I prefer.

Texas’ Region XIII Education Service Center features several lesson plans and other materials, keyed more to Texas but probably suitable for use in other states, too. Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment | 1789, Curricula, First Amendment, James Madison, Lesson plans, TAKS, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »