Supreme Court Justices - The True Challenge

Now that we are on the other side of celebrating the life of Michael Jackson the circus show of the venting nominee Sonia Sotomayor is in full rigor. I find it very interesting our highest court consists of all white men and women along with the Uncle Tomish Clarence Thomas and the big issue for Sonia is if she will allow her experiences of growing of in America as a minority to affect her judgment. How could she possible separate the two when it is the body of those experiences that contribute to the Sonia Sotomayor she is today? The real question for me is the need for such a court when, “We the People” have absolutely no input on who is nominated nor is there any recourse if we wanted to have a judge removed because this is the only job that is guaranteed for life. This I find quite troubling when America is more brown than white, how do we have the justices that we do today?

Think on these things if you are out of work or living in fear of losing your job.
1. Why the Supreme Court justices’ are appointed for life vice a termed appointment? This would ensure as our customs and practices change and move into different directions, these changes would be reflected in our justices whom have the final say on a number of sensitive issues to include the right of women to have abortions, gay marriage, and of course the big issue that receives very little attention in our media and legal courts - the reformation of the federal income tax system. What job can an average citizen obtain where the job and pay are guaranteed regardless of productivity or sustained ability?

2. If the Supreme Court will remain the highest court in the land, and understanding all other judges are elected (for better or worse) why in a democracy “We the People” have no voice?

3. Does the ‘average citizen’ know who is currently serving on the Supreme Court? Yet, the very rights that allow me to speak freely can be challenged and reversed through the court system and could possibly be fought all the way to the Supreme Court. Granted we have to first assume I have the resources to sustain a prolong pledged effort to sway the Scales of Justice to acknowledge my entitlement as expressed in the Amendment 1 of the constitution. http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/Speech/overview.aspx

4. Salaries: Chief Justice receives $217,400 per year while the other eight Associate Justices make $208,100. This does not include the full time protection they receive from the Federal Marshalls, their taxed paid drivers, and great retirement benefits.

I elect to avoid the staged commotion of this venting process and ask the people of the United States to lift the curtain and ask more pointed questions regarding our Justices and look to redefine our court system. That is only if you are not 100% satisfied with our current system….

Keeping You Kuncous

Power Brokers Meeting May 14th - 17th

Keeping You Kuncous|

If the Finance Minister really wants to know the depth of this "global economic firestorm", all he has to do is to ask the people who created it.

About 150 of the world's most influential powerbrokers in government, industry, banking, media and academia are meeting from May 14 to 17 at the Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel in Vouliagmeni, Greece.

This group is called the Bilderberg Group and operates under the Chatham House rules -- meaning that no details of whatever has been discussed can ever be leaked to the media.

It seems, however, that top of their agenda this year is whether to have a prolonged depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation and poverty or an intense short depression that eventually leads the way to a sustainable economic world order.

Bilderberg could also be fostering a false picture of economic recovery, encouraging people to invest in stocks and shares again only for them to lose their money as another massive downturn is created by an economic false flag operation.

It is frightening that decisions made by this non-elected cabal can affect every citizen in the world today.

Propaganda = The Media + CIA (Black Operations)

Keeping You Kuncous| Journalists at Work: Who's Watching the Watchdogs?

In the handful of self-critical articles about the media that appeared twenty years ago, the matter of CIA connections with executives, editors, and reporters was emphasized. While this makes for good copy and is certainly worth repeating, it also fails to challenge American journalism at it weakest point: the corrupting influence of fame and fortune. Someone who has looked at this issue recently is James Fallows, formerly of Atlantic Monthly. Fallows argues in his recent book, Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy, that his profession is becoming seriously compromised.

The name recognition that comes from flaccid punditry can be lucrative on the lecture circuit. Or if you have a name already, perhaps by doing something useless or naughty at the White House, you can acquire pundit status by writing a kiss-and-tell book. Big stars such as Cokie Roberts (Imagine Barbara Walters and Katie Couric money in 2009, the stakes are MUCH higher which means you are more controlled) can collect five figures simply by offering up flattering platitudes at a corporate convention.

Another problem is the revolving door between the media and government. It's considered a badge of honor for a journalist to have spent time working for the White House, whereas it should be seen as a conflict of interest. Some suggest that it's okay to make the switch once -- Bill Moyers can call himself a journalist after working for Lyndon Johnson, but David Gergen has been spinning through the door so often that it makes the rest of us dizzy. Gergen flacked for Nixon, Ford, Reagan and finally Clinton, and between administrations, he was an editor at U.S. News & World Report and a commentator for PBS. James Fallows himself, the new editor at U.S. News & World Report, was the chief speechwriter for Jimmy Carter.

Pundits and superstars aside, the larger problem is that the media is owned by the ruling class. With the increased media centralization of the last twenty years, their lock on the masses is now so complete that when they maintain an appearance of objectivity, it's only out of habit. (Sentences containing the words "ruling class" are scribbled self- consciously these days -- a measure of how well they have cornered the market on perception, and perverted what class-consciousness we once had into a mass-consumer consciousness.)

How can one distinguish between news and propaganda when the overlaps and interlocks are so pervasive? John Chancellor was with NBC, then with Voice of America, and then again with NBC. John Scali was with ABC, and then with Nixon, and then again with ABC. Ben Bradlee, of Watergate and Washington Post fame, was once a propagandist in Paris, taking orders from the CIA station chief, and was friends with James Angleton. Bradley's sister-in-law was Mary Meyer, divorced from Cord Meyer. She was JFK's lover, and her 1964 murder was never solved. Robert John Myers was in the CIA for twenty years, at one time as an assistant to William Colby, and became publisher of the New Republic in 1968. Generoso Paul Pope, Jr. was in the CIA the year before he bought the National Enquirer in 1952. Laughlin Phillips, co-founder of the Washingtonian, was in the CIA for fifteen years. Former top CIA officials Cord Meyer, Jr. and Tom Braden became columnists (unlike Braden, Meyer rarely talks about his CIA career). George R. Packard and L. Bruce van Voorst were with the CIA before they joined Newsweek, and Philip Geyelin worked for the CIA while on leave from the Wall Street Journal.

There's always Katharine Graham, one of the world's richest women, who is now recognized as a victim of the male-dominated culture because her new autobiography says it's so. In a 1988 speech at CIA headquarters, Graham warmed to her audience: "We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."

Over 100 pundits, news anchors, columnists, commentators, reporters, editors, executives, owners, and publishers can be found by scanning the 1995 membership roster of the Council on Foreign Relations -- the same CFR that issued a report in early 1996 bemoaning the constraints on our poor, beleaguered CIA. By the way, first William Bundy and then William G. Hyland edited CFR's flagship journal Foreign Affairs between the years 1972-1992. Bundy was with the CIA from 1951-1961, and Hyland from 1954-1969.

What is free press? Imagine the bailouts our citizens have been TOLD we were coughing up to prop up the banks. When our government spends billions a year controlling us overtly, how can you know what is real. Whom is the battle against? Turn off your TVs and read a blog to understand what they invest heavily to keep away from you. WAKE UP! The matrix is your accepted reality!

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/05/11-11

Become inquisitive, follow the money, and armor yourself for that pain of truth will destroy all that it illuminates but like a planned forest fire. The beauty is in the renewal that results from the death of non-producing standing dead trees. Illuminate yourself, empower yourself, and rise with more power and strength that will only come from our 21st Century Renaissance.

What's Next, NewsPaper Bailout? Give me a Break!

LaToya Mack, Keeping You Kuncous

This will not come as a big surprise but I say to hell with the newspapers! Just today advocates of the industry are lining up for their bailout stating to Congress that Google and Yahoo have 'robbed' them of needed and deserved revenue. WTF!? On the payroll, I mean bandwagon of course was Senator John Kerry who was chairing the Commerce subcommittee hearing, called it vital to "preserve the core societal function that is served by an independent and diverse news media.", what paper is he reading? Independent and diverse news...... That is what we lack in this country. Most people will be shocked to learn America is #30 for free press. Kerry is right if our society were exposed to an independent and diverse news media the Change Barack promised would be a reality in no time, no thanks to him of course. Let us review a list of big things the media has suppressed from unsuspecting (ignorant) Americans:

What if people knew the truth behind 911 and understood it was an INSIDE JOB planned and prepared for nearly 10 years before 2001? Then there would be no war in Iraq; no Patriot Act; No fake war on Terror that WILL NEVER END people and all civil liberties would be safe; the entire George Bush administration would be on trial for crimes against humanity; no New World Order; no black president (I know that is a big adjustment for some people.)
What if people knew there were no laws mandating they pay Federal Income Taxes? Instead of the same propaganda our news media feeds us about April 15, we could have universal healthcare, free high caliber education; free everything instead of paying interest on debt we did not authorize and DO NOT benefit from.
What if people knew the Federal Reserve is just as federal as Bank of America, before the bailout of course?
What would happen if people knew the true nature of our government? Maybe then, we could have a democracy!

I can only imagine no make that DREAM of how progressive America and her values would be if only there were independent investigative reporters taking up our issues and holding our leadership accountable. No that is not what we have when the major network stations are all owned by the same group of folks and they call it NEWS….? Interesting!
The solution for the news industry is clear, go non-profit or go home. NPR seems to do just fine and I actually learn things from their information free of celebrity gossip and the latest news on the American Idol contestants. When will capitalism apply to ALL INDUSTRIES in America and not just for the working class?

Senator Kerry I ask you sir, investigative reporting, Where is it happening; When because I KNOW I missed it, and by whom? You choose a network or publication and I can tell you there views without knowing a single editor. Let them fail! If they were providing a service that people wanted or needed then they would not be in this dilemma. It is completely ludicrous to think the new wave of technology should somehow take a back seat to allow the primitive newspaper industry to thrive. This is yet another example where those in positions to lead are completely out of touch with the need of their constituents. I guess we need to create an American Lobby for American Interest, like AIPAC to have our voices heard!