Hightower Lowdown | Why are we letting corporate Supremists steal our democracy from us?

Good grief! Is there no code of ethics outlawing such rank conflicts of interest for federal judges? Yes. But, conveniently, Supreme Court justices have been exempted from the code.

via Hightower Lowdown | Why are we letting corporate Supremists steal our democracy from us?.

Jim Hightower really pegs these "men" as enemies of the people, enemies of the "commoners" and the poor whom Jesus taught to always remember. Not every poor person is good, of course. The point though is that many are. Many are innocent and simply oppressed by the takers (the self-authorized rich in mammon). It should be obvious to anyone who has read about the garbage these few so-called justices have been up to ("down to" rather than "up to" is more like it) that they are enemies of righteousness.

It's painful to say it, but Clarence Thomas's corruption is so blatant that it's just amazing he hasn't been removed. Society is at a low ebb in terms of integrity and what it demands of those who would sit in the judgment seat.

As a Christian, I would much rather see Clarence repent and atone than be removed; but short of his repenting and atoning (trying diligently), the people should remove him. Some of the others too have clearly and wittingly violated even the lowest standards of ethics for sitting judges.

I say all of that freely admitting that I have made more than my "fair" share of mistakes. I am not being hypocritical.

The people are supporting or allowing a corrupt system. It is a reflection. If it were up to me, I would say no to the takers, not to punish them but to protect the innocent. It is the state of salvation, deliverance. Deliver us from evil. That means deliver us from the selfish and greedy. Deliver us from those who take the rightful inheritance of others/all.

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Steve Tanton

      You provide us with plenty of subjectivity but few facts. It seems you may have this backwards as you feature only the conservative justices. I agree (if you mean it that way) that Roberts got the Obamacare decision wrong, but Geez Louise, you say this stuff and claim to be a Christian? I'm baffled. I see it the other way. (Besides, referencing Hightower as support is a lot like referencing Robert Reich for economics, or anything for that matter.)

      • Hightower's points about the Court and corporatism are backed up by clear statements, all of which may be easily substantiated by anyone willing to look around just a bit. What points were backed up by incorrect information that he held out as facts?

        As for the Obamacare decision, you're about a year off.

        You have some idea that Christianity is wed to Republican "conservatism" or what? Based upon the little you wrote, I strongly suspect you know very little about Christianity; but I'm willing to be disabused.

        I cite Hightower and Reich without agreeing with either on everything.

        There are times I agree with Scalia, for instance (rarely but nevertheless).

        Do you understand which site you're on here? Do you see the name?

        It would be extremely refreshing if anyone would try to find out first the basis of this site before tossing out a comment or a raft of them. In fact, in the more than a half dozens years it's been here, not one person has shown the brains to do it.