San Francisco liberals stand up and claim your Congresswoman. Please.

Or, at the very least, please explain to me how the intellectual left squares its view that democracy in the United States is constantly in jeopardy by capitalism and free-market greed, with its proposed solutions which continually tend toward a future goal of authoritarian fascism.

Think I’m going overboard here? With a nod to James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal editorial board in his “Best of the Web” column, he highlights this article describing a movement by Democrats in Congress, endorsed by Congresswoman Pelosi, to effectively enable the government to strip away first amendment rights of all legal entities who are not “lone individuals.” So that you know I am not overreacting or quoting out of context, I have included the body of the amendment in question following this paragraph from Eugene Volokh’s weblog article here: (He apparently took it from the site of the evil idiots who actually think this is a good idea – click through to meet your fellow anti-Americans.)

The People's Rights Amendment

Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.

Section 2. People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulations as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people's rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, and such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.


Here is where I say that I would love to hear all you liberals defend this, but in fact, I really want nothing of the sort. If you think that this is a defensible action that deserves support and recognition, then you and I are not even in the same universe ideologically, and no rational discourse is possible. The wording of this “amendment” (shudder) alone is general enough to virtually give the government, which, by the way, frequently does NOT align its interests with yours, (no matter how nearsighted you get when your own self-identified party is in power) free reign to do whatever it pleases to any legally established entity at any time for any reason, including depriving of life, liberty, or property without due process.

I simply don’t understand how liberals continually want to give government more and more power over our lives. All of the most horrific and unimaginable crimes against humanity on the grand scale throughout history have been committed by the authoritarian rulers and governments of nations. Even corporations that wield massive influence and power are still checked by a democracy that elects its representatives. There is no check to an authoritarian government.

Obviously, this “amendment” will not become law, as fortunately we are not a country of complete idiots who want to cede all of our rights to some hypothetical benign autocratic governing body that knows what’s best, but it’s scary enough to me that the former Speaker of the House of Representatives (second in line for the presidency in the chain of succession!) thinks that this is a good idea. San Franciscans, your city is beautiful, but a majority of you are morons.