Friday, January 22, 2010


LAPPIN’ IT RIGHT UP: Intellectuals and philosophy mavens can spend hours in sophomoric sophistry asking each other the question “if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it does it make a sound?”.

Let us clue you in- of course it freakin’ does... what are you a freakin’ moron?” (it seems to be that kind of week).

The ease with which people are bamboozled and bewildered comes to mind because what nobody seems to want to admit in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision allowing corporations to flood elections with cash is that if Americans weren’t too-stupid-to-live and as easily swayed as the mythical soundless trees they wouldn’t be influenced by all the bogus, distracting advertising bought by company capital.

So which is it? Are “American voters are smart enough to see though all the nonsense” as some suck-up pols suggest? Or is it that “you can never underestimate the intelligence of the American voter.”

Only the silent tree toppling proponents could pick the former.

But what can you expect from a country that can’t tell that a “person” is a flesh and blood human being and not a piece of paper with the words “corporate charter” written on it?

Corporate personhood goes back to an 1886 Supreme Court Case, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad and this absurd notion is behind yesterday’s Orwellian “free speech for those who can’t speak” piece of true fascist flack.

Many in the progressive movement are busy today promoting a narrow constitutional amendment dealing with banning corporate cash in elections but a small cadre including Howard Zinn, Bill Moyer, Tom Hayden, Jim Hightower, Medea Benjamin and dozens of others have put together a “Move To Amend” web site and petition to “firmly establish... that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights”.

But then again to think that a constitutional amendment under what passes for democracy in the USA Inc. is in the realm of reality probably means joining that confederacy of dunces who debates noiseless arboreal thickets.

No comments: