Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
chic  day  founder chic  founder  july  oligarchy  political  president senate  president  rule  senator  states  vice president  vice 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics



Updated: 2018-03-08T09:17:33.811-06:00


On Election Hiatus


Dear Fellow Founder-Stalkers,

We noticed that our posts were more and more frequently about the 2008 Presidential election and less and less about proper founder stalking, so we joined a group blog that allows us to discuss more modern-day issues without sullying our reputation as an unimpeachable founder-stalker. We shall resume founder stalking after the election, or whenever we feel like it.

Please read Political Cotton Candy for now.

And don't cry darlings, we'll be back soon.


Did You Hear That Obama Actually Won Texass? We Wonder Why Not?


Dear Fellow Founder Stalkers,

Behold, the CNN Election Center Results for Texass' March 4, 2008 Primary AND Caucus. As you know the Texass Two-Step allocates 2/3 of the state's delegates for the primary vote and 1/3 for the caucus vote. Texass has (sortof) finally finished counting up the day's votes and Senator Obama has emerged victorious!

Senator Obama 99

Senator Clinton 94

We have not seen this much reported in the news, so we thought that we would draw your attention to these facts. Enjoy!

Keith Olberman Gets it, Gives it to King George


Dear Founder-Stalkers,Have you ever thought about the fact that from 1988 to 2008 the President of the United States has been named either Bush or Clinton? That is twenty years of two families dominating the presidency--twenty years! Let's look at the definition of an oligarchy, shall we?Oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) is a form of government where political power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society (whether distinguished by wealth, family or military powers). The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (ὀλίγον óligon) and "rule" (ἄρχω arkho). Compare with autocracy (rule by one person) and democracy (rule by the majority).Yes, dear Founder-Stalkers, there are important differences between an oligarchy and a democracy. When the same two families dominate the presidency, then we can say that our political system is the rule of the few, not the rule of the majority. With the presidency controlled by two families and with the consolidation of political power into the Executive Branch that we've seen over the past twenty years, our government has become less majority rule and more oligarchic rule. For the past twenty years--a generation--we have allowed the same two families to control our government. If we saw another nation allow two families to dominate their politics, then we would not hasten to call that nation an oligarchy. But, when we look at ourselves we somehow still think that we still live in a democracy. How strange, we think. Of course, we know that many of our leaders have been born to privilege and have been somehow distant relations, but we believe that our current oligarchy is different in kind and we fear the effects of an entire generation (current college students were born between 1986-1990) that knows no other president than either Bush or Clinton.Many of the Founders were concerned with the question of how to limit political family dynasties. GW was the perfect choice to be our first president many argued, in part, because he did not have a son and thus would not be allowed to set up a hereditary president-monarchy. John Adams was feared on account of his politically active son, JQA, and the family was often tarred with the "monarchist" label by politicians of both the first and the second generations. Since the Adamses we've had other important political dynasties--the Harrisons, the Roosevelts, and the Kennedys--but, none of these family members ruled back to back like we've had recently. In fact, we've not had two families so completely dominate American politics since the Hutchinsons and the Olivers divided all of Massachusetts Bay Colony's political offices between them--and, we know what happened to them.Tommy wrote a letter to Gerrymander on January 26, 1799 when he was hoping to become president that pretty well sums up his political principles and pointedly denounces hereditary office holding:I do then, with sincere zeal, wish an inviolable preservation of our present federal constitution, according to the true sense in which it was adopted by the States, that in which it was advocated by it's friends, & not that which it's enemies apprehended, who therefore became it's enemies; and I am opposed to the monarchising it's features by the forms of it's administration, with a view to conciliate a first transition to a President & Senate for life, & from that to a hereditary tenure of these offices, & thus to worm out the elective principle. We understand that Senator Clinton, and indeed one day Chelsea Clinton and Jenna and Barbara Bush, have the right to run for president under our Constitution. We understand further that if the people choose them, then these Clintons and Bushs are justly the President of the United States. We just wonder if this kind of oligarchy is really in the best interest of the nation.M.O.W. believes that when Senator Obama argues that Senator Clinton represents "politics as usual," that this might be a part of what he means.What say you, Fou[...]

Founder Chic: Happy Independence Day America!


Here is the play by play:June 7, 1776.Richard Henry Lee moves that the Continental Congress consider three motions: first, “that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved"; second, that the newly independent states form “foreign Alliances”; and, third, that they create a “plan of confederation.”The Continental Congress delays consideration so that Delegates can get instructions from their colonies.When the debate resumed on July 1 four colonies refused to approve: South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New York. The hero of this tale has to be Caesar Rodney, who rode the eighty miles between Dover, Delaware and Philadelphia that night just in time to swing his colony’s vote on July 2. After that, John Dickinson and Robert Morris abstained and allowed James Wilson to cast Pennsylvania’s vote for independence; South Carolina changed its mind and now approved; and, New York abstained entirely until the next week when it also voted in favor of independence. 12 states voted for independence on July 2 and the Continental Congress called it "unanimous"--we were independent!Thus, July 2, 1776 is America's birthday. In his excitement for the act that he had done so much to bring about JA wrote to Abby that: "The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not."Why do we celebrate July 4 instead of July 2 as Adams believed that we would?There are at least two answers that we can think of: first, there was a war on during the first anniversary and we simply forgot. The Records of the Continental Congress for July 2, 1777 show a deliberative body busily conducting the business of war: they empowered a Commission to find a Minister Plenipotentiary to go to Holland (M.O.W would LOVE to be a Minister Plenipotentiary some day, it sounds so grand!); they got a new surgeon general and a new member for the Board of War; they paid people for supplies; planned a discussion of the still un-ratified Articles of Confederation for the next day, etc. They were very, very busy boys on July 2, 1777. They continued their very busy schedule when they met again on July 3, they had Friday July 4 off and then met again on July 5. So they celebrated on July 4 because they had the day off--just an accident of history. In 1781 Massachusetts legislature was the first to make the celebration of Independence on July 4 official. Boston and North Carolina both made it an official holiday in 1783. The second reason that we celebrate the Declaration of Independence rather than the day that we became independent is because of the politics of the 1790s--especially the second half of the 1790s.Tommy didn't like A-Ham, nor did he like his politics or his view of an ideal America. A-Ham felt the same about Tommy. Founders picked sides, gloves were taken off, bitch-fighting began. Some folks--like GW--got caught in the middle; some folks--like JA--tried to stay out of it. [...]

Founder-Chic Fact or Fiction: Fourth Branch Edition


We try not to get involved in petty political issues. After all, Founder-Chic does not like to use her fine powers for evil. Nor, however, do we like to see the U.S. Constitution so carelessly perverted. That document has enough problems of its own, we believe. Therefore, we've decided that a brief Founder-Chic Fact or Fiction is necessary to clear up this nonsense about the Vice-President not being a part of the Executive Branch. Fourth Branch, indeed!

Fact or Fiction: The Vice-President is NOT a part of the Executive Branch, as current VP Dick Cheney claims.

Verdict: FICTION. Let's turn our attention to the September 7, 1787 Constitutional Convention Notes, shall we? (pg. 596) Things were wrapping up; folks wanted to go home; everybody was bitchy--you get the idea. They were discussing this new post that they had just made up called the Vice-President. No body knew exactly what it was or why they made it...all of a sudden, poof! presto! there is a Vice-President. Now, what does the Vice-President do?

Article 1, Section 3 (in the final version) of the Constitution states, "The vice President shall be ex-officio President of the Senate."

Gerrymander, "opposed this regulation. We might as well put the President himself at the head of the Legislature. The close intimacy that must subsist between the President & vice-president makes it absolutely improper. He was against having any vice President."

GM, "The vice president then will be the first heir apparent that ever loved his father. If there should be no vice president, the President of the Senate would be temporary successor, which would amount to the same thing."

Shermy, "saw no danger in the case. If the vice-President were not to be President of the Senate, he would be without employment, and some member by being made President must be deprived of his vote, unless when an equal division of votes might happen in the Senate, which would be but seldom."

The states eventually voted 8 to 2 to approve the Vice-President as president of the Senate, even though he had a "close intimacy" with the President. John Adams was the first V.P. and was miserable--both at the job and in the job--earning himself the nickname "His Rotundity."

Therefore, Mr. Cheney, I believe that you are, in fact, a member of the Executive Branch. And, remember this: information wants to be FREE.

Oh, and here is a cute little Jon Stewart YouTube on this whole thing.