GROUNDS TO IMPEACH ERIC HOLDER

Trying to understand the Republican mind is sometimes difficult; why do they act the way do? This morning once again I heard Republicans are talking about impeaching Eric because he is fighting to make sure all Americans have “the right to vote”. The Attorneys General of the United States is fighting to insure that all Americans have the constitutional established right to vote: one-man one-vote. This is the most fundamental premise of our government. Colonial United States was the first place in the world that people collectively put governance in the hands of “all the people”; in other words, they acted selfishly to give the power to themselves. It was so incredible that this happened, it makes Democracy envy of all nations and the subject of book after book, history class after history class, and because it is so surprisingly contrary to innate individual human personality which, of course, makes it the subject of  psychology class after psychology class. The United States Constitution takes the power away from royalty; collections of individuals such as special groups; the economic elite, for example; as well as taking power out of the reach of dictators of every description including religious and military leaders, which are the banes of the third world countries as the Arab Spring shows. If this success of democracy were the case, and every finger points seems to at the veracity of it, why would a political party fight so hard to prevent the Attorneys General for doing his job in the fight to insure all people have the right to vote. On face value, it makes absolutely no sense.

The secret to understanding this political party mind-set seems to be in understanding what a ‘majority’ means in the minds of Republicans. According to the Constitution, in a free society, a majority is the majority of votes cast by those who “chose” freely to vote. To parliamentarians, therefore, the answer to the question is straightforward and only has to do with the mechanics of voting; a majority is the person or issue that receives the most votes cast by eligible voters. The vote tally that it takes to win is the majority of the number of people who legitimately voted. However, various societies corrupt this simple concept of a majority in a wide variety of ways, some of them very clever. If there are no specific by-laws, can leaders count absence ballots or not? Is a legitimate delegate or member of society involved in the votes by saying “here” or “present”, does simple attendance count as a vote; if it does, is it a yes or a no vote? Of course, this is all aside from stuffing ballot boxes, and other forms of illegal voting and counting votes. As a practical matter, the constitution allows all of this; the authors of the constitution wrote it is as a general document. If they didn’t, they would still be writing and we would not be a free society.

Therefore, what does the concept of “voting” and a “majority” mean in the context of

Republicans desire to impeach Eric Holder, the Attorneys General of the United States. How can they possibly see what they are doing as legitimate under the Constitution? It is apparent that they think it is “Constitutional” because they openly talk about it along with saying, what to the majority of us seem to be asinine things, such as they want to “take ‘our’ government back”. Back from what? Back from whom? We vote. We count the votes and abide by the results; the majority wins. How hard can it be to understand that?

To understand, one has to go to such primitive places as Republican controlled North Carolina, or in particular, others States that have a plantation background. They have passed laws in their state legislative bodies that they intended to restrict who can vote. Flip the question, who do they think can legitimately vote? These legislatures are legal entities; however, they have been fashioned these legislatures by gerrymandering voting districts, by the economic elite pouring big money into campaigns, by threatening elected officials to vote the way the moneyed interests want them to vote or they will be “primaried” and lose their jobs. My message is that the “majority in these legislatures” represents only the people “they” think can legitimately vote and excludes those they do not want to vote. The Republican majority, as fabricated as it is, voted to restrict voting and for Eric Holder to fight for voting rights is going against the will of the majority—he  should be impeached.

Therefore, what a Republican means when he or she says they want to “take back America”, they mean only people they think should vote should be the ones who make all the decisions. Down through the years, they tried to use poll taxes to restrict voting, they tried rewrite the Constitution to read that a black person a 2.3 citizen, they tired to make people cite the preamble of the Constitution to enable them to vote, they tried to restrict voting time, they tried to make undesirables use IDs they could not obtain, and many, many etceteras. Each time the majority of the American people rejected all their efforts.

The Republican effort to redefine democracy will fail; the Constitution says loud and clear, “all people are equal” even with the corrupted Supreme Court. The GOP can shame themselves all they want by trying to corrupt the constitution but they cannot change it—they cannot drag us back to the dark ages where they seem to want to be in their thinking.  

URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated