Tuesday, March 6, 2012
"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
-- Norton v. Shelby County, US Supreme Court Decision 118 US 425, 442 (in 1886)
There will come a day, probably sooner than later, when freedom loving Americans arrive at the same conclusion realized by the passengers of United Airlines Flight 93. All one needs to do is read blogs like this one, multiplied by the hundreds across the internet, to realize that the passengers of Flight 2012 have had their fill and are about to take action.
We are not yet doomed like Flight 93, but we are in the same death spiral. In the same way that the passengers evaluated with excruciating pain their decision to take action, Americans everywhere are evaluating and re-evaluating to make sure they are right about their situation so as not to make the wrong decision.
There are many "Todd Beamers" among us thinking, "If we sit here we die. There are more of us, than there are of them."
It feels and sounds like we are very near to hearing a concerted, "Let's Roll!"
- What "brink?"
- What could push us over?
- If we go over the edge, what might pull us back?
- Most important of all: What measure(s) might pull us back from the brink?
The brink is the dividing line between two conditions of society: one that has at least some possibility of freeing itself by non-violent means, and one that can only reclaim its freedom by bloody revolution.
America will go "over the brink" if ever the following set of conditions should come to pass:
- The right of free expression is suspended;
- The writ of habeas corpus is no longer honored;
- Elections are suspended, or are rendered inherently untrustworthy;
- The preponderance of coercive force lies with institutions wholly subservient to the federal government.
Retired U.S. Military And Intelligence Officials Tell President Obama: There Is Political Space For Dialogue With Iran
"There is no evidence whatsoever that the Iranians have or are on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon, according to our own military people, our own CIA, according to the UN. So, I think it is blown way out of proportion, it's very reckless, and very dangerous. And the last thing this country needs, and our military agrees, is another war.
Yes, we can beat anybody militarily, but the military operations around the world is bankrupting this country so the greatest threat to us is a financial crisis, and this will enhance the chances of this financial crisis. Just look at what's happening to gasoline and oil prices right now. And that's going to get much worse once the bombs start dropping on Iran, whether it's Israel or the United States.
Believe me, this world is going to be in much chaotic shape, so they're worrying about something that they need not have such worries about. I don't want them to have a weapon, but I also lived through the 1960s, being in the military, being in the air force. The Soviets, a ruthless, terrible nation, we dealt with them. They had 30,000 nuclear weapons. So I think the war drums are beating much louder than they need to be. We need to defend our country, but we don't need to be the aggressor nation."
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said there are too many foreigners in France and the system for integrating them is "working more and more badly".
In a TV debate, Mr Sarkozy defended his plan to cut the number of new arrivals in half if he is re-elected next month.
Mr Sarkozy is trailing in the opinion polls behind the Socialist candidate Francois Hollande.
He is also competing for conservative voters with the far-right National Front party led by Marine le Pen.
The president said while immigration could be a boon for France, it needed to be controlled more tightly through tougher qualification rules for residency.
Mr Sarkozy, whose father was a Hungarian immigrant, also said he wanted to restrict some benefit payments to immigrants who had been in the country for 10 years.
By 1861, Napoleon III was drawn into a conflict in the New World by the long-standing turmoil in Mexico, which resulted in a default on loan payments that broke the Treaty of Soledad by the liberal Mexican government on debt owed to France, Spain, and England. To redress the situation, in late 1861, France led an expeditionary force into Mexico along with troops from England, Spain, and Austria. Within a short time, however, most of the other European forces went home, and France was left to move alone against the Mexican Army, supported by its sometime President Benito Juarez. The political and social situation in Mexico at the time was fractured, and Juarez represented the most prominent faction within a number of relatively small political groups. The northern states of Mexico, led by Santiago Vidaurri, were independent of the central government and soon allied themselves with the newly formed Confederate States of America (CSA). Meanwhile, various other groups, the Catholic Church, businessmen, and industrialists, mostly opposed Juarez.
Lisa Goude aimed a gun at her bedroom door as she waited for police to arrive.
“They’re trying to get in my house, but I’ve got a gun. I’m in fear of my life,” she told a 911 operator just after 1:15 a.m. Saturday.
Over the course of five minutes, the situation escalated. By the time police arrived at the house, one man lie dead from multiple gunshot wounds.
Gaston County Police released the chilling 911 call to news outlets Monday. Two minutes into the call Goude tells police that someone has broken glass and gained entry into her home.
The man broke out a kitchen window at Goude’sChapel Grove Roadhome just outside of Gastonia, according to police.
A minute later Goude could be heard interacting with the intruder. A shot rang out, and the man, later identified as Kenneth James Cox, screamed.
Goude told the operator that she had shot the man. She then instructed him to get out of her house.
Another shot could be heard on the recording – followed by more screams.
Goude told the operator that the man came at her after the first shot, so she fired again.
Sources inform Breitbart.com today that Pam Dickler, director of the 1998 production of The Love Song of Saul Alinsky in Chicago that included a panel discussion featuring then-State Sen. Barack Obama, has a video tape of the play.
And she won’t release it.
“There is only one archive tape of the play and I have it,” Dickler informed our source. “It is not in Chicago.”
Dickler told our source that she doesn’t believe she’s ever watched the tape, and she doesn’t know if it “can be viewed.” But she added: “No one is going to see the tape.”
Four years ago.
Nine Republican attorneys general declared Monday that the Obama administration is riding roughshod over the law, and is using its regulatory powers to impose huge costs on the states.
“You’re seeing now a federal government that’s doing everything in its power to circumvent the Bill of Rights,” South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said during a press conference during the Washington, D.C. meeting of the Republican Attorneys General Association.
“We are constantly being forced to sue the federal government to protect our states,” added Florida AG Pam Bondi.
Washington is waging an “across the board regulatory assault” on state governments, said Virginia’s AG, Ken Cuccinelli, who organized the event. This “administration repeatedly shows disdain for the law … the states, and the Constitution,” he said. “It is absolutely unprecedented.”
The nine AGs said their staffs are working on 70 cases, often cooperatively.
A North Carolina teacher has now been suspended indefinitely for her involvement in a food-police incident in which a preschooler’s lunch was “supplemented” with chicken nuggets, sparking national outrage last month.
The Carolina Journal reports parents of students in the pre-kindergarten program at West Hoke Elementary School in Raeford, N.C., received a letter from an assistant superintendent last week saying a substitute teacher would take over the preschool class until the “issue” is resolved.
The Feb. 28 letter from Bob Barnes reads:
Last week, Maryland joined the ranks of Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont and Washington DC in becoming more like Sodom and Gomorrah than part of the nation our Founding Fathers bled for so many years ago. Same-sex marriage is creeping into main stream America like a red tide that kills off everything else that’s descent.
Prior to passing the measure, the Maryland Senate took testimony from both sides of the issue. There was one young lady that felt so strongly against gay marriage that she chose to speak before the state senate hearing on her 14th birthday. Sarah Crank eloquently addressed the politicians in sharing her feelings on the measure. Listen to her testimony:
Since appearing before the senate on January 31, 2012, Sarah has received thousands of threatening messages and postings on the internet. The campaign of harassment and verbal abuse is beyond what anyone imagined this brave young lady would receive just for testifying and sharing her personal views.
However, we should not be shocked by the number of threats she has received as the far left liberals including the homosexual rights activists don’t want anyone else in the United States to have the same rights they do. They don’t want anyone to be able to express a view or opinion that is different from their own. And if you do, they accuse you of hate language.
But what about them and their threats? Isn’t that hate language? Evidently not! I couldn’t find any evidence of any legal action being taken against those making the threats against Sarah and her life.In today’s America, freedom of speech only applies if you’re gay, a minority or a Muslim. If you’re white and Christian, you no longer have the freedom of speech or religion as specified in the First Amendment of the Constitution and at the rate our nation is going downhill, it may not be much longer before we lose all rights and we find ourselves no better off than the pre-Civil War slaves.
The headlines on the three top stories on page one read:
"California judges asked to say if they are gay."
"'Tebow Bill' for home-schoolers dies in Virginia Senate panel."
"Opt-out on birth control defeated in Senate."
The California judges story dealt with the lately passed Judicial Appointments Demographic Inclusion Act, which mandates a survey of all of the state's 1,600 judges -- to find out how many are homosexual.
Purpose of the law: "Promote and increase the representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in the ... judicial branch."
The questionnaire sent to the judges asked each to identify themselves by race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation.
Forty percent of the judges balked, refusing to reveal their sexual orientation. One percent said they were gay. One percent said they were lesbian. One judge identified himself as transgendered.
Welcome to 21st century America.
Under the old American ideal, the lawyers who proved the most qualified by wisdom and experience were to be elevated to the bench.
The new ideal is that California's judiciary should mirror the diversity of the state. Whites, Asians, Hispanics, males, females, blacks, gays, straights and bisexuals are to be represented on the bench in the proportion that they are found in the population.
Yet another triumph of diversity over excellence.
Were an Olympic team or symphony orchestra to be chosen on the basis of this kind of diversity, they would be a joke.
Shocking revelations from a Wikileaks document dump show the Democrat Party committed a felony when it stuffed ballot boxes in Ohio and Philadelphia during the 2008 presidential election.
A memo further revealed that the so-called “Reverend” Jesse Jackson was paid a handsome figure to keep his mouth shut about candidate Obama, a man for whom he had little regard.
The same internal memo revealed that Obama’s campaign was taking Russian money surreptitiously. The memo:
From: Fred Burton [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 7:41 AM
Subject: Insight – The Dems & Dirty Tricks ** Internal Use Only – Pls Do
Not Forward **
** Internal Use Only – Pls Do Not Forward **
1) The black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio as reported the night of the election and Sen. McCain chose not to fight. The matter is not dead inside the party. It now becomes a matter of sequence now as to how and when to “out”.
2) It appears the Dems “made a donation” to Rev. Jesse (no, they would never do that!) to keep his yap shut after his diatribe about the Jews and Israel. A little bird told me it was a “nice six-figure donation”. This also becomes a matter of how and when to out.
3) The hunt is on for the sleezy Russian money into O-mans coffers. A smoking gun has already been found. Will get more on this when the time is right. My source was too giddy to continue. Can you say Clinton and ChiCom funny money? This also becomes a matter of how and when to out.
Because drones kill so well -- at what the government deems an acceptable level of precision (currently 60% hit the target w/o much collateral damage) and at a low cost (both economically and politically) -- they are driving US security policy into new, dangerous territory.
In a larger sense, drones are also changing the entire landscape of warfare and modern conflict, which is of interest to this writer/theorist. So, even though I'm not a lawyer, I'm going to give coverage of this policy shift a go.
What is this new killer drone policy? The Administration's Attorney General, Eric Holder, made a speech at the Northwestern School of Law on March 5, 2011 that lays out the US case for targeted killings (aka: The US Killer Drone Policy).