HOW THE CONSTITUTION DESCRIBES PRIMARIES!

It doesn't! There is no reference whatever to primaries or how parties, which are likewise never mentioned, can select their candidates. In fact most of the Founding Fathers objected to parties altogether. Some conclude that Andrew Jackson was the originator of a political party system. 

So if Americans as a whole are so turned off by the primaries and political parties as they currently exist, is it not time to suggest Constitutional remedies for the concept of the two party system and the amazing amount of money that is spent by the parties? The reality is that in order to get an amendment through to ratification, there would have to be support for the change from one if not both political parties. Its kind of like drinking you own poisoned wine. 

Just or Unreasonable? Does the Constitution define . . .

Just or Unreasonable? Does the Constitution define . . .

Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled on strip searches during any arrest, regardless of the severity of the offense. It was a contiguous 5-4 ruling again pitting liberal justices against Conservative. So the Constitution has been determined to allow the word "reasonable" to include such actions by police in the name of safety to law enforcement and the prison population. While the ruling is not earth shattering it does bring into question the politics of the Supreme Court, which appears to have been established as an impartial arm of government. 

Mankind doesn't really fall into an impartial category no matter how hard we try. Certainly Presidents appoint Justices based on their past rulings and philosophical makeup which is going to support that President's political views. Those appointments are one of the strongest and most enduring actions of the Presidency. 

Can this be changed? Perhaps we should let computers select candidates for the vacancies. After all, they are impartial; provided the programmers are impartial. Ah, back to the original problem!

CONVICTION BY MEDIA. JUSTICE?

Justice in America by Media Examination

- or -

Media Investigation Creates National Awareness

Either way we are talking about marketing of the news services in America. Entertainment factor is at the crux of the on going barrage of interviews and analysis of every one of these "huge" national stories. 

Are we now on the verge of convicting an individual by a media campaign. This is not to say that the party in question is not guilty.  Freedom of speech protects American's ability to voice their opinion, but when those opinions become so obviously skewed there should be some responsibility on the part of the news media to curtail the onslaught. 

When Walter Cronkite reported the news, that generation knew it was the news. Today, news anchors are entertainers who are given or create a script and follow it regardless of the way in which the story is written. Perhaps it is time to have faith in the legal system and watch CNN, FOX, NBC, CBS, etc. for the entertainment factor. Let's face it lynch mobs ended about 130 years ago and it is doubtful that the Justice system will allow it to return. Have a little faith that, if there is any justification for an arrest and trial, it will happen! 

By the way that will be more entertainment advertising income for all of the news organizations.