Something You Might Not Hear In The Mainstream Media

Jury Convicts Five in Federal Vote Fraud ? Las Vegas Sun
?A federal jury Wednesday convicted the chairman of the city’s Democratic Party and four others of scheming to buy votes with cash, cigarettes and liquor last November.?

When asked for comment John Liberal replied: “What? That cannot be! After all the Democratic Party is so virtuous and ? HEY! Look over there! Is that an EVIL Republican stuffing ballots and preventing minorities from voting in Ohio! NO NO NO! Don?t look at us! LOOK AT THE EVIL REPUBLICANS! OVER THERE! SEE! SEE!”

5th Amendment Fight Still Not Over

Michael Cristofaro is one of the seven homeowners in Connecticut that is in danger of having their property seized for private use by the local yahoos in the government. “They’ll have to rip us apart from it. We’ll fight them tooth and nail.” he told Joseph Farah’s WorldNetDaily RadioActive. He also said “I was amazed about the outrage, the response we’ve received from fellow Americans.”

I?ll tell you what. I however was not ?amazed?.

Michael Cristofaro?s remarks draw a line in the proverbial sand that we are going to have to see if the local dictators in New London are willing to cross. In all likely hood they will continue their intimidation tactics to try and get the remaining 7 home owners including Mr. Cristofaro to leave. He defined this intimidation as

hiring real estate agents who showed up at all hours insisting there was no choice but to sign over ownership.

Also, the road to some homes was blocked, and demolition began on the structures around them, he said. Bulldozers were parked across the street and the engines were revved in the early morning hours for no apparent reason.

according to WorldNetDaily.

I have no doubt that of the remaining seven one or more may eventually give in to political pressure and sell for less than their homes are appraised at by the government. But what of Mr. Cristofaro and any others that remain steadfast?

Well, it wouldn?t surprise me if the goon squads are sent to teach these uppity troublemakers in the eyes of the government a lesson. But it also wouldn?t surprise me if a couple hundred militiamen show up to help defend the properties either. It would not surprise me if some are steadfast in their defiance that blood is spilled over some prime beachfront real estate that the government just wants for itself.

I certainly do not revel in the prospect of such a confrontation. But if it comes down to it, may God teach the tyrants a lesson they will never forget.

Keeping An Eye On FEC v. Bloggers

FOX News reports that the FEC is wrapping up hearings on how Blogs (such as this one) should be regulated. Watch the video.

This issue doesn’t seem to want to die as politicians and bureaucrats with limited mental capacity continue to struggle with the words “Congress shall make no law” with regards to the issue of free speech. It’s a typical reaction from a bloated government more intent on maintaining power than actually acting in the best interests of the people.

Some of you may say “Well, yeah, but the FEC is not Congress!” No, you are right. They are not Congress. They are however only in existence because of an act of Congress in 1975 to enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). As such they are a direct arm of Congress and act only with the authority of Congress and are a de facto agent of Congress.

Congress is not allowed to skirt the Constitution by creating a new entity to violate rights it is strictly prohibited from violating. If it were, it would be the biggest loophole in the Constitution ever and render our protections from over reaching government moot.

Bloggers really get the blood going of many in government because the media is massive and allows for the quick exchange of idea. These ideas often show favor for one political candidate over another and can easily be considered endorsements, advertisements, and other items that the government has attempted to restrict over the years through legislation (and unconstitutionally) like Campaign Finance Reform.

What ever reason you think you can come up with however for the FEC to try and stick it’s grubby little fingers into the free speech of American citizens it still ultimately violates the first amendment.

After All John Kerry Should Know …

Senator John Kerry got in trouble during his pitifully failed Presidential campaign in 2004 for lying and waffling. So today, ahead of President Bush?s prime time speech he warned that for the President it was time “tell the truth to the American people.?

Although we really aren?t sure what ?truth? John Kerry refers to. Most likely he refers to the ?truth? of the peace weenie left that are hell bent in hearing the words ?We were wrong to invade Iraq.? Sorry John, but I don?t think that what President Bush is going to say.

Kerry also, in a vain attempt to find relevance wrote recently: ?The president must also announce immediately that the United States will not have a permanent military presence in Iraq,? to, as he said, erase “suspicions that the occupation is indefinite”

But one has to wonder why he is throwing out that red herring. No one has ever seriously talked about a ?permanent? military presence in Iraq or in occupying Iraq ? that is except for the radical anti any war that is not theirs left who are Hell bent on believing that our purpose of being in Iraq is to make them a de facto 51st state.

No, John Kerry is just babbling again attempting to find face time on TV and voice time on the radio. And all this from the man that voted for the 87 billion before he voted against it, and at the same time voted against needed supplies for our troops.

Go away John. Go away.

In Case You Willfully Forgot

Today marks the 1 year aniversary of the United States transfering power to the sovereign nation of Iraq. And if you think the war was wrong and the sacrifice was not worth it, tell that to the people of Iraq and tell them that you would rather they still be under the thumb of Saddam Hussein.

Americans Strike Back! Or When Souter Looks Dumb!

Logan Darrow Clements of Freestar Media, LLC is taking the fight to Justice Souter after he helped to destroy the 5th Amendment and allow land to be seized by eminent domain for “private” use instead of the Constitutionally normal “public” use.

On Monday, Mr. Clements got the ball rolling with the following letter:

Dear Mr. Meany,

I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.

Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, “Kelo vs. City of New London” clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.

As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.

Thank you.

And has since issued a press release concerning his intentions.

Not only do I support this effort but I think it should be expanded to target the land of each of the other Justices that signed on to this decision (ie. Ginsburg, Kennedy, Stevens and Breyer). And when their current land is seized and they buy a new home somewhere else that land should be immediately targeted as well and so on until they GET A FREAKING CLUE and come back and reverse their opinion.

Condoleezza Rice Gets It

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hit the circuit ahead of President Bush’s prime time address to the Nation about the War on Terror and Iraq. As the polls show higher disapproval ratings for the situation in Iraq due to a combination of the standard “War Is Never The Answer” simpletons and Americans frustrated with what appears to be, at times, a lack of a desire to put a boot on the insurgency’s neck, Ms. Rice points out correctly that the terrorists “have no political program, but simply want to destroy innocent life” (”Today Show” with Katie Couric).

Our enemies in Iraq are the enemies of not just America, but all peace loving people around the world who just want a chance to practice their God given rights. Condoleezza Rice actually gets this. Too bad there are many in America that do not.

Impeach The Judicial Tyrants Petition

To: U. S. Congress

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES

We the People of the United States, do hereby demand that our duly elected representatives in both houses of Congress, initiate impeachment proceedings against the following Supreme Court Justices:

John Paul Stevens
Anthony Kennedy
David H. Souter
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen G. Breyer

We, the undersigned, consider the Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London, 04-108, rendered June 23, 2005, not only unacceptable, but to be in criminal violation of the Justice’s oaths to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Be advised that We the People regard elected officials to be our public servants. Failure to take action against the Justices specified shall be considered support for the decision rendered in the aforementioned case, and will result in our resolve to ensure your defeat in the next election.

Being from myriad political and ideological spectra, we are united in our belief that our right to own property is inalienable.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Supreme Court Botches It AGAIN!

Today the Supreme Court ruled against the public display and govenrment sanctioning of Religion ruling that the 10 Commandments could not be displayed in courthouses.

The Supreme Court needs to do a little more research before rendering opinions. If they had they would have found that public displays of God sanction by the government were supported by our founders:

“Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the Providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor, and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint committee requested me to commend to the people of United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness, now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next, to be devoted to the service of that great and glorious Being, Who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or will be.” - George Washington (THE FIRST THANKSGIVING PROCLAMATION - OCTOBER 3, 1789)

It doesn’t get much more PUBLIC or GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED than that folks!

More On The Death Of The Fifth Amendment

Boy oh boy do some of the emails from readers I am getting about how I don’t know what I am talking about just don’t get it themselves! I know for some of you, it is hard to understand how low income persons are really the ones most affected by this ruling by the Supreme Court. For example Tom writes:

Stop with your lies about how it is really low income blacks that are going to be most at risk with this ruling! I find your attempt at lies appalling! Who is really going to get affected is you and your wealthy white land owners that have been screwing the little guy for all these years!

I take Tom’s email because it is so typical.

First of all, I never mentioned “blacks” in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Higher Taxes. I do however admit to mentioning the “little guy”. And for those of you STILL insistent on saying that these are not the folks targeted, I turn your attention to this exchange during the hearing between Justice Scalia and the attorney for New London (who wants to take the private property of others for private use):

Justice Scalia: Let me qualify it. You can take from A to give to B if B pays more taxes?

Wesley W. Horton: If it’s a significant amount. Obviously, there is a cost ?

Justice Scalia: I’ll accept that. You can take from A and give to B if B pays significantly more taxes.

Wesley W. Horton: With that ?

Justice Scalia: You accept that as a proposition?

Wesley W. Horton: I do, Your Honor.

There, you see that all you nay-sayers that STILL want to try and defend these liberals as being out for the “little guy”? Did you catch Mr. Horton admitting, on the record, that this is specifically for the purpose of taking you modest home to build higher rent structures?

So please, enough with the emails defending the decision. Wake up and realize who your enemies really are.