Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Government and Media Hypocracy? It's OK for our President to be King or Dictator?

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Is it Ok for OUR President to be King or Dictator, but not other countries?

Just found this Document online.

here

This is another re-try to amend the Constitution and get rid of the 22nd Amendment.

In the first session of the 111th Congress, this resolution was introduced, again.

Dated January 6, 2009, and introduced by Jose E. Serrano, a Democrat from New York, the Joint Resolution was apparently approved by 2/3rds of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and was sent on to the Committee on the Judiciary. 3/4th of the States have to ratify this amendment within 7 years.

Recently, Venezuela citizens voted on a referendum that would allow President Hugo Chavez and other politicians to stay in office indefinitely, apparently and the referendum passed.

I found this article on line regarding that event, and the article is very telling.

Link to article

Quotes from linked article above:


Allan Brewer-Carias, a former Venezuelan legislator and an opponent of President Hugo Chavez, says the referendum held on Sunday that overturned term limits on Chavez and other public officials will strengthen the country's authoritarian strain. But the result, he said, also showed nearly half the country disapproves of Chavez's government. He says even though Chavez controlled the media and used pressure on officials and recipients of public support to vote "yes" in the referendum, there still were 5 million people voting "no."


But 6 million people voting yes.


Venezuela had a referendum on Sunday, and the results of 54.4 percent for the amendment to the constitution and 45.6 percent against seemed to be a strong victory for President Hugo Chavez, who wants to change the constitution so that he can run for as many terms as he wants. What was your general impression of this referendum?

First of all, I don't consider it a 'strong victory.' The referendum was approved by six million votes, and the 'no vote' obtained five million votes, so it was not a strong victory. It was a very close victory. The closest difference in percentage in Venezuelan elections in ten years---except for the last referendum, which was an exception. This is a very important fact, because that means that the opposition has been growing, and these supporters of Chavez have been diminishing.


Read this next part, it's very interesting:


Will this referendum result send the country towards a dictatorship? We are already in a totalitarian government. So we are adding one aspect, one new aspect to a framework that the country and the government has been constructing, during the past 10 years. We have a country where there is no check and balance, no separation of powers at all. The executive controls the assembly, and through the assembly it controls the Supreme Tribunal, the attorney general, the prosecutor general, the defender of the people, the comptroller general. So all the branches of government are completely controlled, and the power concentrated in the executive. e are already in a totalitarian regime. But democracy is not only elections. Democracy is a lot more than elections. It is check and balance, it is pluralism, it is the respect of human rights, freedom of expression, and a lot more aspects that are in, for instance, the Inter-American Democratic Charter. So we are already in a totalitarian regime, and this is one step more that will allow the people who are governing to continue in government, to be reelected, using without limit the resources of the government in order to obtain reelection. And this is then one step more in this process of consolidation of an authoritarian regime.


You could almost switch "Venezuela" to "America" and the article would still make sense. What do you think?

Is American media and government hypocritical when they imply it's bad for Venezuela but say nothing about the same thing being put in place here?

Should Americans be worried about the Resolution above?

Should we at least get to vote on it like Venezuela did?




posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
No, the bill is only in sub committee. And it has been referred too the subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. It has no co-sponsors. I doubt this will go anywhere.

www.thomas.gov...

But, yes it is very hypocritical but this is our government we are talking about and wasn't hypocritical about them.

You have to remember that some districts have elected literally communist to office. So they like that government controls everything type deal.

With the state that America is in right now, if something like this was to ever happen it will only divide the country even more.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

The thing to be concerned about is the fact that the same type of bill has been introduced in the past. In February of 2005, these Democrats got basically the same exact bill rolling.

Rep Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) Rep Howard L. Berman [D CA-28]
Rep Frank, Jr. Pallone [D NJ-6]
Rep Martin Olav Sabo [D MN-5] (now florida)
Rep F. James, Jr. Sensenbrenner [D WI-5]


Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SABO, and Mr. PALLONE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


Mr. Serrano supposedly has been involved in proposing this bill several times,
in 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007... and now 2009? Why, if it seems as if it will never pass. It would still have to get through the states also.

There could be a real danger of the bill actually going somewhere and getting passed this time though, because of the fact that the Democrats basically control all branches of the government now. Heck, they probably control most of the States legislatures since the election as well.

One thing I will say, it's fascinating, and AGGRAVATING at the same time to look at what these people in our government do, some of the "Resolutions" they come up with are so out of the sphere of what they SHOULD be doing, it's not funny.


 



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by sezsue
 


Don't concern yourself with it. Believe me this is not something that would happen. It would take two thirds of the states to ratify it and there are still more red states than blue states.

It is pretty much a dead duck.



posted on Sep, 21 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by sezsue
 
i am now tracing bills www.govtrack.us... introduced to congress and this certainly will be one of them. thank you for bringing this to my attention. i have starred and flagged this thread.

this is what happens when the citizens of this country do not pay attention nor read the bills introduced. how can we allow this?

here is link to government tracing website www.govtrack.us... introduced january 9, 2009 sponsored by Rep. José Serrano [D-NY16]

i see you are into the constitution. i am presently reading the constitution and have of late become more involved.





new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join