Carol Folt is a Carpetbagger, a Yankee, a pointed headed intellectual of immigrant heritage. Southern Universities, whether Private or State are suffused with such, and they are primarily elevated to positions of high trust and responsibility by fellow travelers, Carpetbaggers and Scalawags, those Southern born apologists,who perpetuate a continual state of Reconstruction and cultural cleansing. 

If you doubt this, I would simply suggest that you gather the names and C.V.’s of the Administrators and Deans of your favorite University, be it Chapel Hill or Charlottesville, be it Sweet Brian or Emory and Henry, or Georgia and Emory, Sewanee or Washington and Lee. Most are not Southern born or bred, most are educated in foreign (outside the Mason Dixon Line) colleges and universities, and most are politically progressive, sexuallly deviant, and spiritually agnostic.

Shock yourself even more: ask to purchase or even peruse a Faculty Directory. Many are unavailable, privacy is cited, many are abridged with salient undergraduate and biographical information omitted or expunged. Did that PhD really spend a year at Patrice Lumumba University? In Moscow? You’ll never know! Most are without a link to the “Scholar’s” Thesis and Dissertation and without reference to published works and papers.

Our cherished Southern Institutions, our Great Universities, the pride and joy of our culture, have been contaminated and desecrated by ruthless and impoverished Euroamerican academics of bourgeois descent and progressive social-democrat inculcation.

These educators are, by and large, at best the fetid ideologues of urban culture and at worst, they are godless idolaters and wonton libertines of permissive and exploitive narcissism and behavioral deviance. They manipulate and cull Southerions, and Southern sympathizers, they wield their power with a bloated tumescent truncheon of arrogance and the presumption of victorious invaders and conquerors. 

Of course, this just my opinion, but ask yourself, who on the faculty of UNC stood up in opposition to these bloviating brigands? Who spoke up for Silent Sam, or for my great great grandfather, Abram Manning, Pvt., Co. D, 3rd Infantry Regiment, North Carolina State Troops, dead at Culp’s Hill, Gettysburg, Penn., on the morning of July 3, 1863? Did none of these “Educators” have an ancestor who fought in the cause of his Sovereign State of North Carolina? If even one member of the UNC faculty had such an ancestor, then I know of one Scalawag Educator unworthy of his or her heritage.

Esse quam videri? If we are now what we seem, then are we no longer what we should be?

Ah, Virginia, Sic semper tyrannis? “Thus always” the spoils of war “to” the “Tyrants,” and death to the memory of honorable men.

From the Blog of Mr. Shiver, a Democrat State Representative Candidate, 2018

https://shiverforthestatehouse2018.com/my-blog/f/two-teachers?fbclid=IwAR1h0WtDDKoFf5AicAF4_7YlRen_gncAjJz-NrD8We7gzGoP6WzywH4ckCY

My commentary in response to his Blog:

Mr. Shiver states his opinion well, and many of his points, particularly about the bureaucratic regulation of teachers and infringement, by the State Department of Education, within their local classrooms ring true to the sensibilities of most conservatives. The issue is not money as much as it is the State Board of Education treating local school systems as vassals and demanding costly and time-consuming tracking and testing paradigms, none of which have been proven to improve academic success in Secondary and Post-Secondary Education.

And as much as many of us agree with Mr. Shiver on these issues, we must disagree with his conjectures as to the causes of the lack of academic progress and the continuing plateau of academic achievement in Georgia’s classrooms.

The fault, if indeed that is an appropriate term, lies solely with parents of school age children, K-16, who continue to support the same failed and unproductive systems enacted and applied by elected and non-elected government officials.

In doing so they deny the parent’s responsibility as the primary cause our State’s failure to properly and compassionately educate the children of Georgia. Discipline in the home, and the corresponding respect between parent and child, are at a modern low; a nadir of immaturity, concupiscence and consumerism of the part of parents, and boredom, unstructured activities, and a lack of ambition on the part of children.

Firearms, in and of themselves, have little to do with the occurrence of horrific acts terrorism on school property. They do provide a weapon of convenience to deranged and mentally unstable youth (and adults) who are seldom diagnosed and treated for common, if often exaggerated, childhood behaviors. Children need love and attention, as well as guidance and discipline to fulfill their potential. Parents must be the focus of fulfilling such needs; teachers, while occasionally aware of pathology through parent teacher conferences, private discussions and information disseminated by school administrators and support staff, cannot function properly as educators if they are required to act as the primary caregiver, therapist and chief influence in a child’s life.

It is the parent who has been ignored as a focus of failure in school homicides by firearms. It is the parents who are responsible for the health, both physical and mental, of each child attending school, and it is the parents of these mentally unstable and ill children who bear responsibility for the senseless deaths and wounds of school shooting victims.

It is not politically correct, in a society that constantly excuses the failure of adults to provide a safe, nourishing and affectionate homes for their children; that inevitably excuses the lack of good parenting on the part of absent fathers and often overwhelmed single mothers, for society to properly lay the cause of these tragedies at the feet of the very person or persons who most often have spent the most time and shared the most intimate details of life with those who commit these atrocities.

When did you last hear an interview with the parent of a “shooter,” when was the last time read or even heard of an in depth forensic interview conducted with the parents, and close friends and relatives of the parents, of these mass murderers? Too sensitive, too likely to find parental failure, especially if those parents were doing all that the law requires, and what “everyone else” was doing to raise their child? How many other mal-adjusted and potentially pathogenic children are there? Empirically, not politically, what are the tells of potentially anti-social behavior? What are the symptoms, what are the common predicates, what is missing in modern parenting?

Modern Parents are, in the majority, irresponsible as adults and ignorant of childhood needs and their obligation to raise a good child and a good citizen. Disagree? Just ask any Public School teacher, and even quite a few private school teachers now observe ennui, resentment and regression.

Mr. Shiver should step up, and stop blaming the instrument of mayhem, most often now a firearm. Rather he should acknowledge our society’s laxity and apathy in creating responsible, well-informed and educated parents. What can the Georgia Legislature do about parents, all of them, not just those from ethic, cultural or racial demographic subsets, but for every parent in Georgia?

And Mr. Shriver, if you are ‘worried’ concerned about firearms, consider this, in today’s media and information driven society, it is possible, even as you read this, for a child, a middle schooler, to read on the Internet and learn how to easily make horrible toxic and lethal compounds such a Sarin or VX, with chemicals readily available on store shelves. See for instance:

https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/sarin#section=Top

Are you aware that even toxic Chlorine Gas (the same Gas used extensively by the Vierbund against the forces Triple Entente and the USA in WWI)  may be made in volumes sufficient to effect mass killings with products found under many kitchen sinks? When will the morally neglected and materially pampered juvenile and adult miscreants figure out what real weapons they possess?

I hope Mr. Shiver; with electoral success or absent victory, will consider the need to create methods to teach young adults parenting as a positive and compassionate lifelong experience boarding on a sacred obligation… Nothing could do more to insure all children’s safety and security and metal and physical wellness.

Carpe Diem!

To Kill a Watchman…

Good lord, is it so impossible to believe that a Southern Gentleman, born and bred in a post reconstruction culture, could still seek justice for a man he felt was innocent of the crimes he was accused? Do people actually believe that justice was absent from our Southern States for some 70 years after the War Between the States ended? Do they fail to realize that much of the antipathy between Negroes and Caucasians in Southern was occasioned by the legislative acts and actions of the Republican North, by the vindictive abolitionists and lying industrialists whose behavior was beyond the pale, and whose paid carpetbagging Yankees and draft dodging scalawags inflamed racial tensions in order to secure cheap foreclosed tax sale property and even cheaper labor for their mills and factories? I might add doing so then in much the same fashion as their descendants, Tri-Lateral Republicans and Globalist do now with NAFTA, the proposed TPP, and their patently deceptive “free” trade rhetoric.

Atticus Finch finally finds his voice, a survivor, a cynic, a man of his times, and yet a man who understands that “Justice” is the sine qua non of the Rule of Law, not some miss-perceived notion of “equality” and “fairness,” but Justice before the Bar and before God. Of course, Atticus didn’t have to pander to race, or tolerate incompetency; he didn’t have to break bread or mouth faint words of praise to appease a liberal press, or placate a politician. He simply had to hold true to the vision of Justice that Jefferson described and Madison codified, and that true American Patriots, not left wing Euroamerican partisans, espoused and died for in two revolutions, both of which were thought and fought primarily by Southerions, by gentleman just like Atticus Finch.

I believe Harper Lee hid away,for so many years, from the public eye not because she was ashamed of Southern culture or mores, but because she was ashamed she bent to the will of a progressive publisher who convinced her to prostitute her values and create a character who could never have existed, neither in Alabama, nor even in liberal New York. But like Harriet Beecher Stowe’s fanciful fiction, “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”, “To Kill a Mocking Bird” made for Lee, for Lippincott, a ton of, as the Apostle Peter called it in I Peter 5:2, “filthy lucre” for all. Worse, it failed to honestly portray her father, an honorable man as he was; it shamed him before a literary conceit, an idealized fable of manhood, her character Atticus Finch.

I thought “To Kill a Mockingbird” was simplistic and insulting when I read it in Fourth Grade, I rejoice that Ms. Lee belatedly gave her father the same feet of clay in her “fiction” that he had in life. Throughout modern literature, the novelty of Idealism runs strongly through the writing of the defeated and depressed, ordinary people are often dressed up as heroes, with the hope of the author absolution for some cultural sin. The shame is that the ordinary people, people like Ms. Harper’s father, or her mentally ill mother, perhaps portrayed in her writing as “Boo Radley,” are far more interesting in life than any glorified, embellished ideal of fiction.

Give me Zelda and Scott over “Jay Gatz” and “Daisy Fay” any day, and Thank the Lord that Ms. Lee finally let “Scout” admit the real Atticus, like her father, Amasa Coleman Lee, had feet of very ordinary, very human clay.

The article that follows is an introductory summary of my “Motivation Management, the Eesy Way Seminar,” presented in house at an aerospace company of which I was the Director of Commercial Products, and in other venues, circa 1977- 1993. And yes, I still believe that everyone does the best they can everyday, but we can always do better!

How many times have we heard someone say: “I’m doing the best I can!” How many times have we faced them in disappointment or even disgust and replied: “No, you’re not!” or “If that’s so, that’s pathetic!” or “You could have do a lot better!” or any other number of retorts that come to mind in anger or frustration. Whether we are speaking to our child, a co-worker or subordinate, I’m here to say we are wrong:  “They were doing the best they  could do”

Let me explain. The litany of responses I listed above, the endless number and  manner of criticisms we feel compelled to direct to that person who has disappointed us, failed to live up to our expectations or failed to accomplish a task we’ve assigned; they not only do no good, they are absolutely not true.

Listen to wisdom: “Everybody does the best they can every time.” I am going to repeat that, emphatically: “Everybody, child adult, man, woman, young or old, does the best they can every time.”

Your co-worker, the one you call a slacker, the one who never finishes what they start, the one whose work you often complete, they are doing the best they can.

Your child, the one whose room is a mess, whose grades are poor, who talks back and never pays attention, they are doing the best they can.

Your employee, the often tardy, sometimes surly hourly worker who always seems to “be in trouble” with you, co-workers, and customers, they are doing the best they can.

Your team member, the brilliant but unpleasant, the dumb but ingratiating, the callous and irritating, the “one with so much potential,” the one merely putting in their time until five PM, the one watching the clock, they are all doing the best they can.

If, as wisdom asserts, they are doing the best they can, could the solution to their lack of achievement, their lack of progress, their failure lie somewhere else?  Could it be that… you need to change, you need to understand human behavior just a little better than you do now, because frankly, you’re doing the best you can, and it’s not working.

Perception and expectation color if not create all our relationships. It is the nature of us to perceive each newly met human being first as ” Friend Or Foe (FOF).”  There is only one exception to this instinctive behavior, “Motherhood,” and I am not about to claim any understanding or expertise of this remarkable exception, other than to be thankful for it. I am one of  those about which it was often said “Only a mother could love….” For all other circumstances, believe me, just below the veneer of civilization, there lies a being who has evolved in fear of life or limb for eons, whose sense of smell and sensory acuity has been replaced by an acute discriminatory event, the seldom ignored, seldom changed “first impression.”  We respond viscerally to what we see and hear, overtly or subliminally to what we smell, to the first touch, be it handshake or hug, we instinctively decide which side of the FOF line the new acquaintance will fall, or if they will straddle the line until we know more about them.

The FOF line, the friend or foe line, is a powerful ever-present sensory demarcation line that exists in every initial experience we have with any other human, or for that matter, with any other animal we encounter.  This essay is not about that primal phenomenon, I mention it here to explain how we first develop expectations of behavior.

And do we ever develop expectations!   From the first sight of any human, we begin, subconsciously at first, and then with intent, to assign characteristics to that person. Even mothers do this with their babies! You or I do it with every new person we meet, and in fact, with every old acquaintance we see, every day. Assuming that we perceive them as a friend, we may expect friendship, “Will they like me” or if they are a new peer, “Will they work as hard as I do” or if they are a subordinate, “Will they do the job; will they fit into my team?”

Expectations are an inextinguishable part of human behavior. We form them based on our perceptions.  And they are often the most damaging element to forming and maintaining relationships.

Briefly, I want to examine that particular relationship that forms between employer and employee. It is critical on so many levels, and impacts so many events. Understanding how expectations undermine the nature of the relationship and how to avoid forming them, or at avoid acting on them, is the key to productivity and profitability. More importantly, you must come to the realization that “every employee has done the best they can!”

“That’s ridiculous!” you retort at that statement.  You can list 15 things the employee who popped into your mind, when you read that statement, could have done better. Answer me this, can you in any way alter the work which was done today, or yesterday, or last week or last month, by that employee? Can you make one more widget yesterday? Can you make one more sales call yesterday? Can they type one more letter yesterday? Can they undo that incredibly stupid accounting mistake…yesterday?

Of course, the answer is no, not you, or your company, or the Uncle Sam or even the Good Lord can, or in the Lord’s case will, change what happened yesterday.

If you want an employee to improve, the soonest they will start improving is tomorrow, and most importantly, that employee’s improvement must start with you!

The easiest and most cynical method of improvement is for you to lower expectations. I am not suggesting this, although this is society’s most common solution. Programs for improvement in social welfare, education, even entitlements like Medicaid and Social security all rely on this method of demonstrating “improvement,” and all are, by any objective, absolute standard, failures.

In fact, I believe that this is the usual and now ordinary way we deal with our children’s failures, our marriage failures, our personal lack of “success,” we lower our standards, we lower our expectations. Personal relationships share many of the characteristics of commercial relationships and are in many ways similar.  Here, however, we deal with you and your employee. Importantly, unlike our parents, we can choose who we hire. Here again, we often didn’t choose or hire the particular employee we brought to mind when I stated “every employee has done the best they could.” Suppose, in a small business, we had. This is a topic for another paper, another time, but obviously choosing the right employee, making the right hire is critical to your company achieving the goals it demands of itself.

Engagement, evaluation, education, encouragement, this is the EEEE process channel to employee achievement, or as I call it, “Eesy.” It’s eesy to build a  winning “team,” to be a championship “coach,” to be the leader you must become to achieve the results you know are possible.

Engagement is the method by which we select candidates and by which we hire them. Success in this initial and critical phase is the least costly to achieve. If done correctly, the candidate selected for hiring will be the best fit for the tasks required. Notice, I did not say the job required, but rather the task or tasks required for your company’s success.

Get over job descriptions, get into task descriptions. Job descriptions define what has taken place; task descriptions define what will need to occur, on an individual level, to achieve the goals that define success.

In a successful business, everything changes constantly but the employees. The job descriptions remain static, but the tasks required for success change, evolve, while those tasked with changing to meet the times, the new demands, are usually the same people. Engagement requires that we optimize our understanding of the value of adaptability, and recruit employees who don’t just “fill the bill” but appear to have the ability to improve the processes that define “filling the bill.”

Evaluation is the next phase of creating achievement.  You may or may not have had a hand in the engagement of the employee, but you are responsible for evaluating how to best use that new employee. If you have been sent a new hire by Human Resources to fill a “Job Description,” this is much harder, but still possible to achieve. In the bureaucracy of a government or union job, it may be impossible.  This is because of “job descriptions” and “work rules” that exist to benefit special interests. If you are an Eesy manager , you have already described your path to achievement of goals as a series of tasks requiring accomplishment, not as a collection of jobs. As an simplified example, to achieve a goal, it is necessary to accomplish 50 tasks. You have 10 employees, so each could be responsible for 5 tasks each. But which task to which employee, can one do eight easy tasks and another only one difficult task? Should some tasks be shared and others not?  Who is best at doing what? If you do not know who does what best, you could fail to achieve your goal, or fail to achieve it most efficiently. Learn the strengths and weaknesses of your employees. Learn what they do best, and what they do poorly. And always seek to have the right employee doing what they do best. It’s called leadership!

Education is the third phase of creating achievement. In the business world we call it training, but we really should use the terms often heard in elementary school. Mastering tasks, or task mastering. He has mastered fractions, she has mastered parsing sentences, and they have mastered choral. You can not go on to long division if you haven’t mastered the concept of fractions, you can not understand grammar if you can’t diagram a sentence, you can’t sing Mozart’s Requiem if you’ve never sung in a chorus. Whatever tasks you need to accomplish, analyze them, define the path, create hallmarks, and state clearly what is necessary for completion, for achievement.

Encouragement is the fourth step to achievement; motivation is created by continuous positive reinforcement of accomplishment. Your employee must share your knowledge of the tasks assigned, your vision of the goal and most importantly, clearly appreciate the value of their contribution. Your positive attitude and unquestioned willingness to help all employees be better at what task they necessarily must accomplish will assure achievement and success.

Always be positive; always seek to lift your team to its highest level of achievement. If you end your day firm in the belief that everyone has done the best they could today, you’ll find that tomorrow, they will do even better.

Let me close this paper with two observations: it’s team work that accomplishes great goals, “Just do It” is absurd, narcissistic crap. They just want you to do it, to buy the shoe! “Let’s do It” is a more honest and far superior motivational anthem, and will yield far greater results to a much greater purpose than a shoe line’s simplistic pitch.

The truth is that if you truly believe that your team could do better, that in the day that just passed, not every one did their best, look in the mirror. HR may not have “engaged” the right person, interviewing and testing may not have “evaluated” and identified that person’s strengths,  orientation, class work and OJT, may not have fully educated that person, but you have failed to manage, motivate, coach up, encourage that person to be the best they could be.

In business, the “whole” is greater than the sum of the parts, the collective experience is more memorable than individual experience, and the work of all together brings to each the highest personal achievement.

You are responsible for making sure you are correct in saying “ Everyone did the best they could today.” Your team will be responsible for that being said of you.

What Lincoln said…

“Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side,  My greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for god is always right”

What Scripture said…

“But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.”  Acts 4:19

It is impossible to consider than any man whose earthly beliefs lead him to cause the deaths of 800,000 humans, almost all of whom were US Citizens at birth, was on the side of God. This man is a mass murderer, the end never justifies the means, unless the end is peace and the means is prayer.

Regardless of his imputed intentions, the only lasting result of the War between the States was the death of these United States of America and the birth of the “Union”… a godless commercial, materialist oligarchy built on the notion that capitalism is a political rather than an economic system, seeking to exploit the natural resources and labor of all nations for the benefit of the privileged few.

Lincoln may, as all of Lucifer’s minions do,  invoke the name of God and assert his support for a cause, but the result, as it always is, is that people, common people, salt of the earth people, die, so that others may become rich.

His expansion of Presidential powers, his abuse of the Constitution, cannot be justified by the fact that “freed” the slaves, or that he “maintained” the Union. Nothing in the New Testament, not one word out of the mouth of Jesus Christ supports his actions, not one word justifies his acts of mass murder, for that, good Christian friends, is what War is, the murder of some “other” children of God to accomplish some necessary “National” need.

Since the death of Lincoln, this Union of States, United I think not, has participated in the death of nearly 100 million lives, whether or not those deaths were justified by the needs of man. We are all the children of God, every one of those lives was sacred, and many those deaths could well have been prevented had we, the people of America, stood up and asserted the very words written by our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Curiously, I find that our government seldom acts as if all men are created equal, or are even endowed with certain unalienable rights, just ask Negroes, Indians, Immigrants among others, and now I find, as did Alice down the Rabbit Hole, that “ certain unalienable rights” includes a strange menagerie of protected insanities and dubious proclivities. Moreover,  I find little evidence of domestic tranquility or the securing of the Blessings of Liberty, which devolve only from God, as in the motto of our Founding Fathers, “In deo speramus.”  If the truth be told, at no time in the history of this Nation, save the attempt at Lawful Secession, have our people been so discordant, so troubled, so close to rupture.

And now, the minions of Lucifer cry out, as did Lincoln against the South, against Islam, against Israel, against the Chinese, against Latinos, and against a Flag that honored the intentions of the Founding Fathers;  that individual rights, that personal responsibility, and that a limited Federal Government were the absolute requirements of a free and just society.

Believe it or not, the same documents that guaranteed all men freedom from a totalitarian government also allowed and legalized slavery, and severely restricted the rights of the illiterate, un-educated, uninformed and incompetent to vote. States were given sovereignty, and the Federal Government denied the notion, the power or even the capacity of suzerainty… look it up… over the States. Wise men were to govern, and wealthy men were to create industry and maintain commerce.

Now, Satan lives in mouths and hearts not just of the wealthy governing class, but in the hearts of all citizens who support military incursions, unbridled jingoism, domestic poverty, fraudulent profits, consumerism and materialism, abortion and euthanasia, and the normalization and legalization of abnormal and perverted behavior. .

Ave Caesar Obama, ave John Boehner, Lucifer est partris tui!  Lincoln will see you, and your followers in hell, Why? Why you ask? Why would we be condemned? Maybe those two weeks you spend on vacation, the times spent in Orlando, at Disney World, or at Universal Studios, maybe that is your little bit of heaven… maybe you are, in fact, enjoying your heaven on earth… think not?

How many hungry children could that vacation money have fed? Not kids in faraway Africa, but in America, In your home town! Does the thrill of that death-defying ride, the excitement of your fulfilled fantasy give you more pleasure than the smile of a feeding child, the thanks of the less fortunate for your hand-up? How about the computers and I phones you bought and carry, those devices that constantly broadcast evil, death, destruction and even graphic pornography, while silently desensitizing you, your children and grandchildren from their content’s filth and corruption? How about the lyrics of the music you buy, the violence of the movies you watch?

That multi-national company for whom you work, do they do God’s work as well? And frankly, do you really think there is a difference between what you do as you work for them, and what God commands you to do for Him? And do you stand with the progressives who maintain that free will is a myth, that people have no control over their actions, and that big government, global government, single government is inevitable? Are you powerless to stop this celebration of the flesh, or even willing to participate in it? Who, my fellow Americans, is your master, who is your god?

Eternity began for you at the moment of your conception, and if you are not living in accordance to the will of the God of Abraham, you better hope, as atheists and humanists do, that your eternity ends with your death.

So, really, How judge ye?

+ + +

This Article is a comment on a thread posted in facebook by my friend Richard Eib. His thread begins with a news feed from the NY Times, that venerable, liberal Old Lady of Newsprint, and a newspaper to which I subscribe. The Thread, like many of Richard’s, reflects the growing frustration of the influence of fundraising on the nature and outcome of political campaigns.  I recommend Richard Eib to my readers as a clear distinct voice which should be heard in our internet agora.

The original New York Times blog:  http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/where-did-they-get-the-money-for-that/?nl=opinion&emc=tya1

My Comment on Richard Eib’s Thread, posted below:

Richard et al, I am very sympathetic to your point of view, but please note that Congress can only pass legislation relating to the qualifications for election to each Chamber, and can not pass legislation relating to limits on campaign spending, or anything to do with qualifications or spending limits on Presidential campaigns, not if it is working within its Constitutional limits. Nor can Congress pass legislation relating to election qualifications or campaign spending in any of the 50 sovereign states, except as provided for under the 13th and 14th Amendments. It requires an Amendment to the Constitution to limit, or redefine, in any manner, the political free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. The Congress of the United States can not “override” any decision of the SCOTUS, it can merely clarify “legislative” intent, and submit and pass a new bill, which when signed by the President  may be legally challenged and submitted, through proper adjudication, for Judicial review and which may be heard, at the discretion of The Supreme Court. The framing fathers intended that all proposed Amendments to the US Constitution be initiated by the people’s representatives, and be submitted to the sovereign states for approval, I might add, in a manner determined by the states through actions of each state’s legislative body.
Let me note that in the opinion of many legal constitutional scholars, Title II of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is unconstitutional under any but the broadest interpretation of Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, commonly referred to as The Interstate Commerce Clause (TICC). TICC has been used by Congress literally free of constitutional restraint since enactment of The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887. Interestingly, PAC’s and Political Campaigns engage in interstate commerce, primarily in the purchase of media time or space, and could properly be regulated under the incredibly broad interpretation Court’s have allowed Congress. After all, if I, a private citizen, who built a business from ground up without a Federal cent given me, can be told to whom I may or may not serve or sell, or with whom I may or may not choose to associate, then surely, Congress may tell PACS and Political Campaigns with whom they may do business, and on what terms, so long as those terms apply equally to all interested parties. However, SCOTUS could well find this an unconstitutional attempt to skirt precedent, again referring to the broad interpretation given the means and nature of political speech as guaranteed under the First Amendment. It is clear Congress simply lacks the ability to regulate campaign spending in Federal Elections, or the will to regulate qualifications of voters in Federal Elections, a task it finds easy to do in State Elections.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not prohibit literacy tests, poll taxes, or any other restrictions of qualifications to vote in Federal and State elections, it simply required that they be applied equally to all citizens.  The Voting Right Act of 1965 did not require that all citizens be allowed to vote, it required that the (already constitutionally limited) right to vote not be denied by States enacting…   “Voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure … to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.”  So States could enact legislation that would restrict voting rights to all qualified citizens, and could make a simple qualification rule determined by all citizens passing a test, administered in the same fashion as a driver’s license test, determining the familiarity of the citizen with the Founding Documents, Framing Fathers, US History, and Federal Law. A passing result would allow participation in perhaps three four year electoral cycles. The test could be retaken by any citizen until passed, and a federally approved curriculum could offer a selection of 100 questions from perhaps 10,000 possible questions.

Now Richard, et al, would you pass such a test, would I? Would it be worth becoming acquainted with The Declaration of Independence, The Federalist Papers, The Works of Thomas Paine, The Articles of Confederation, The Constitution of the United States as passed, The Bill of Rights? And of Course my favorites, the Decisions of The Supreme Court of the United States and the complex constitutionally mandated relationship between the three, not at all co-equal, branches of the Federal Government.

Anyone wishing for the privilege, there is no constitutionally provided right, to vote in federal Elections would simply have to read and study for an amount equal to their one month’s dose of Reality TV to become enfranchised for 12 years!

This, Richard et al, is what you should be working to accomplish. Not a restriction of Constitutional Rights, but a refinement of electoral duty, a solemnization of electoral obligation, and the honor of well deserved participation in the body politic.

The thread as it appears:

This has got to be stopped.

Where Did They Get the Money For That?

campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com

We need to know who is funding super PACs before we cast our votes, not after.

 

• 5 people like this.
• • It is terrible that our politics have degenerated to a point where we can never really escape from campaign mode. As soon as someone is elected they are consumed with their re-election whether it’s soliciting donations or making a difficult policy decision that may make them unpopular or unelectable. Things need to change, we need both real campaign finance reform and we must revise the election process in a way that allows for actually governing the country. I have never been one for term limits since I actually think that some of the elected officials are good at their job but unless we can get control of the election process including all this PAC spending term limits may be the only reasonable alternative. We have term limits for President maybe it’s time for the rest.

    2 hours ago · Like · 1
  • This article only mentions Republican candidates. Is the implication that this is solely a Republican problem?

    2 hours ago · Like
  • I assisted a candidate for office once and that is all the candidate did, make calls and beg for money…
    The money .. has gotten way-way-way out of kilter and absolutly must be reformed. The US Supreme (arguable ruled wrong) but it is what it is and now it is up the Congress to rewrite the legislation for campaign financing.

    2 hours ago · Like · 1
  •  This will also apply to Obama during the General Election (very soon)… but right now, the spending is from the PAC’s supporting the GOP candidates …hence the article used the currently available information… we all know it applies across the board.

    2 hours ago · Like · 1
  •  From what I understand… there are several well funded PAC’s that will roll out positive Obama ads & Negative ads aimed at the GOP candidate… on top of that Obama will have almost a billion in campaign money to wage his re-election campaign…
    the word ridiculous is insufficient to describe how incomprehensible and destructive to everything America is… it is unamerican!

    2 hours ago · Like
  • The financial reform is essential, Senator Sanders has introduced a bill that would over ride the Supreme Court opinion in Citizens United that has let to this. But that only solves part of the problem. We need to reform of the actual election process itself. It is too dependent on a candidate having a huge bankroll in order to compete.