Sunday, Bloody Sunday

Okay.

Lemme start this by saying I'm not racist.

I'm about accuracy. And this article from CNN--compelling and empathetic as it may be--is not accurate.

Oh, sure. The events occurred and everything that's in there is true--except for one small thing. Anyone catch it?

The Voting Rights Act of 1965.

This Act did not, in my opinion, do anything. Why do I say this? Because.

IT WAS ALREADY WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION ALMOST 100 YEARS EARLIER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

One of my all-time favorite orators is Frederick Douglass. This man fought for what wanted. As a slave, he taught himself to read. He educated himself. He became the very thing that the white men were so afraid of--a literate slave. He escaped his slavery and began speaking around the country for abolition. Do NOT tarnish this man's work simply because there were Southern states who were NOT upholding the US Constitution!

It's there in black and white, folks. Amendment 15, ratified in 1870:

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

That's right! No STATE can deny the right of a black, red, yellow, brown, pink, purple, turquoise man (at that time) the right to vote. None. Zero. Zip. And the States knew this! How do I know? Because it's a Constitutional Amendment which requires 2/3 majority for ratification.

Guess what?

The Voting Rights Act is REDUNDANT! The Civil Rights Division even states that Act follows the 15th Amendment's wording. They claim that there was no way to effectively enforce the 15th Amendment. Sure there is! If I were to violate the Constitution, my butt get slapped in prison with a felony charge. Why not try levying that on the people responsible for not following the Constitution that they've sworn to uphold?

Oh, right...because the entire GOVERNMENT would be in the slammer.

I fully believe that the government is trying to disempower its own people because, where there's a lack of knowledge and understanding, the people become sheep and accept whatever malarky is shoveled in their faces.

Is the Voting Rights Act wrong? No. It did do some very important things. What is -wrong- is that people believe this to be the time when blacks were given the right to vote.

WRONG.

Blacks had the right to vote (covered in a legal, federal document) in 1870. In some states, blacks always had the right to vote. Don't buy the bull that the 1960's brought all these revolutionary changes that had already happened long before you and I were even thought about. Did great things come out of the '60's? Yep. Is it something to celebrate? If you really want. But, know your history. Know your rights under the Constitution. Know these documents the government likes to say they hold in high regard.

...and when you go on Final Jeopardy, just remember, 1870 granted blacks the right to vote and 1920 gave women the right to vote. Douglass made this very telling statement to a rather vocal Women's Rights advocate: "When women because they are women are dragged from their homes and hung upon lampposts, .....then they will have the urgency to obtain the ballot."

Double Jeopardy?

Legal situations are always touchy. Especially as an outside person looking in. Especially when I am the outside person. Now, this article could just be shoddy journalism (lord knows there's a ton of that on CNN.com), but my mind chooses to give the author the benefit of the doubt (something I know I shouldn't do) and take what's there at face value.

Read this.

Note especially where, when, and for what he was convicted.

Feel free to correct me, if you want. I don't really care. But, to me...it seems this man's had some basic Constitutional rights violated, here. Namely, Double Jeopardy as seen in the following:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The way this particular article reads, it looks like the civilian court and the military court found this guy guilty of the same crimes. I can understand why they'd want to try him twice--he raped and killed a civilian and raped and killed/attempted to kill a couple of Army personnel. According to the article. That's three people. If you re-read the first part of that article, the civilian court convicted him on two counts of murder and five counts of rape (which is impressive for having three known victims). Then the following year, a court martial also found him guilty of two murders, one attempted murder, and three rapes. That equates to the two military personnel and the civilian.

Now, don't get me wrong. Y'all should know by now how I feel about murderers and rapists and the death penalty. But, I'm also a very big supporter of the US Constitution. It's there for a reason. It's there so the government can't tell us to just bend over and take it--even though they try. The government can get away with a lot. Know why? Because they rely on the fact that Americans, as a whole, are uninformed. With the way trends are for the education of the youth of America, I'd say the government is trying to make it so that very few are even literate in this country. That way, when the citizens willingly give up their rights because they don't know any better, the power-hungry Federal Government will just pat them on the heads and send them on their merry little way.

I, for one, don't plan on allowing that to happen. What am I going to do about it? I'll write my congressmen. I'll petition Mr. Obama. I'll even run for office, if I have to. Ooooh...yesh, I said it. I'll run for OFFICE, if I have to. I'll make sure my Libertarian view of government gets broadcasted the world over. So, if you don't like the fact your rights are slowly being stripped from you, do something about it.

READ the Constitution.

KNOW your rights.

WRITE your congressman.

Don't settle for the standard answers. Make them accountable for their decisions. Let them know they can't just make arbitrary decisions that affect your life. Let them know that they can't just overwrite the Constitution. And I'm not talking about minority groups here. I'm talking about US CITIZENS. I'm talking about reading the articles of the Constitution of our country and the Amendments. Know them. Understand them. That way when someone says to you, "Hey, don't you think Schwartzenegger should run for President?" You can say (with confidence, knowledge, and accuracy), "Yes, but sadly, he can't. He doesn't meet the qualifications. Neither does RA, but give her a few years and she'll be a-okay!"

Vote RA/Cthulu in 2012! You'll be glad you did.