Washington, DC (TLS). A very troubling piece of legislation has been proposed that would give the U.S. Attorney-General the power to revoke the gun licenses of millions of citizens, even if they have never been charged with a crime.
Frank Lautenburg, the Democrat who never saw a gun control measure he did not like, introduced this bill at the request of the BUSH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
The bill, S. 1237, is entitled, 'Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007,' but instead targets individual citizens who have never been charged or suspected of engaging in any act of terrorism.
Read the details here:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200705/CUL20070502b.html
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
FOX EXCLUDES GOP CANDIDATES FROM DEBATE
Washington, DC (TLS). The Liberty Sphere has learned that Fox News Channel is planning on excluding the majority of the GOP candidates from a debate scheduled for May 15, 2007, in Columbia, South Carolina. The South Carolina Republican Party is co-sponsoring the debate along with Fox News.
According to sources planning the event, Fox and the S.C. GOP is considering excluding 7 of the 10 GOP candidates from the televised debate.
Those sources also state that the agreement with the candidates was that only those who polled more than 1% of likely voters would be invited to the debate. This excludes candidates such as Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Sam Brownback, and Mike Huckabee, among others.
This would mean that the May 15 South Carolina debate will feature only Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.
However, on Thursday night of this week, May 3, MSNBC is sponsoring a GOP debate that features ALL of the announced candidates.
Needless to say, many conservatives are in an uproar about the South Carolina debate. It has even been suggested that the S.C. Republican Party is deliberately excluding the most conservative voices in the field of candidates, in order to showcase Giuliani, McCain, and Romney.
S.C.'s two Republican Senators may have a stake in this decision. Senator Lindsey Graham supports McCain, while Senator Jim DeMint supports Romney.
The vast majority of Republican voters in South Carolina, however, are solidly conservative, and many clearly do not feel that the top three candidates in the field best represent their views. This is why such a decision to exclude conservatives from the debate appears very odd to most GOP insiders in the state, given the fact that it is still very early in the campaign.
It is time for the South Carolina Republican Party and Fox News to hear from you, the voters. Demand that ALL GOP candidates participate in the May 15 debate. This is only fair.
Is a boycott in order unless the rest of the candidates are allowed to participate?
According to sources planning the event, Fox and the S.C. GOP is considering excluding 7 of the 10 GOP candidates from the televised debate.
Those sources also state that the agreement with the candidates was that only those who polled more than 1% of likely voters would be invited to the debate. This excludes candidates such as Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Sam Brownback, and Mike Huckabee, among others.
This would mean that the May 15 South Carolina debate will feature only Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.
However, on Thursday night of this week, May 3, MSNBC is sponsoring a GOP debate that features ALL of the announced candidates.
Needless to say, many conservatives are in an uproar about the South Carolina debate. It has even been suggested that the S.C. Republican Party is deliberately excluding the most conservative voices in the field of candidates, in order to showcase Giuliani, McCain, and Romney.
S.C.'s two Republican Senators may have a stake in this decision. Senator Lindsey Graham supports McCain, while Senator Jim DeMint supports Romney.
The vast majority of Republican voters in South Carolina, however, are solidly conservative, and many clearly do not feel that the top three candidates in the field best represent their views. This is why such a decision to exclude conservatives from the debate appears very odd to most GOP insiders in the state, given the fact that it is still very early in the campaign.
It is time for the South Carolina Republican Party and Fox News to hear from you, the voters. Demand that ALL GOP candidates participate in the May 15 debate. This is only fair.
Is a boycott in order unless the rest of the candidates are allowed to participate?
ALERT! Feinstein Scandal Hits Major Capitol Paper
Washington, DC (TLS). The scandal involving Senator Dianne Feinstein's scheme to funnel millions of dollars of military construction contracts to her husband's companies while chairing the very committee that approves those contracts has finally hit a major Capitol newspaper.
'The Hill' is reporting today that Feinstein's under-the-table activities that benefited her husband's companies is finally causing a stir among those responsible for appropriations in the Senate...not that her Democratic colleagues or any of the mainstream media fueled the uproar.
In fact, there has been a deafening silence among the mainstream media and Senate Democrats concerning Feinstein's obvious conflict of interest activities. Not a single major newspaper or any of the four mainstream TV news sources (CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN) have said a word about it. Harry Reid and company have conveniently allowed Iraq and other issues to hide this brewing scandal that is getting ready to blow like a dormant volcano in an earthquake.
Granted, The Hill is not a major national newspaper. But it is a VERY important source of news inside the Beltway among government movers and shakers. And this is why this story is so significant.
Until now the only ones talking about the Feinstein scandal have been The Liberty Sphere, World Net Daily News, and those whispering in the corners of Capitol Hill. The Liberty Sphere has dubbed this debacle as 'the Feinstein war profiteering scandal.' Very few, however, paid attention.
Today however, with 'The Hill' bringing those whispers and lone voices to the forefront, this scandal is about to take the Beltway by storm. The Democrats and their comrades in the mainstream media will be forced to deal with a corruption case that it had just as soon ignore.
Read the story in The Hill here:
http://thehill.com/david-keene/feinsteins-cardinal-shenanigans-2007-04-30.html
'The Hill' is reporting today that Feinstein's under-the-table activities that benefited her husband's companies is finally causing a stir among those responsible for appropriations in the Senate...not that her Democratic colleagues or any of the mainstream media fueled the uproar.
In fact, there has been a deafening silence among the mainstream media and Senate Democrats concerning Feinstein's obvious conflict of interest activities. Not a single major newspaper or any of the four mainstream TV news sources (CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN) have said a word about it. Harry Reid and company have conveniently allowed Iraq and other issues to hide this brewing scandal that is getting ready to blow like a dormant volcano in an earthquake.
Granted, The Hill is not a major national newspaper. But it is a VERY important source of news inside the Beltway among government movers and shakers. And this is why this story is so significant.
Until now the only ones talking about the Feinstein scandal have been The Liberty Sphere, World Net Daily News, and those whispering in the corners of Capitol Hill. The Liberty Sphere has dubbed this debacle as 'the Feinstein war profiteering scandal.' Very few, however, paid attention.
Today however, with 'The Hill' bringing those whispers and lone voices to the forefront, this scandal is about to take the Beltway by storm. The Democrats and their comrades in the mainstream media will be forced to deal with a corruption case that it had just as soon ignore.
Read the story in The Hill here:
http://thehill.com/david-keene/feinsteins-cardinal-shenanigans-2007-04-30.html
Cho Update! 5 Theories on Ismail Ax
Washington, DC (TLS). Several days ago The Liberty Sphere reported that Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs had information from a Virginia police officer indicating that Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung Hui was an Islamic terrorist.
The officer had seen the complete written text of Cho's manifesto, which has not been released to the public.
As a follow-up to that story, Verum Serum has postulated five theories concerning Cho, specifically revolving around his chosen name of 'Ismail Ax.'
A growing body of evidence is indicating that Cho was indeed an extremist Muslim who had renounced Christianity, capitalism, free enterprise, and every single value the West holds dear.
If we ever have the opportunity to actually see the printed text of the manifesto, rather than simply the edited excerpts of the videos, then we can see for ourselves the dark forces that drove Cho Seung Hui to murder 32 persons.
Read the 5 theories on Cho here:
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=1042
The officer had seen the complete written text of Cho's manifesto, which has not been released to the public.
As a follow-up to that story, Verum Serum has postulated five theories concerning Cho, specifically revolving around his chosen name of 'Ismail Ax.'
A growing body of evidence is indicating that Cho was indeed an extremist Muslim who had renounced Christianity, capitalism, free enterprise, and every single value the West holds dear.
If we ever have the opportunity to actually see the printed text of the manifesto, rather than simply the edited excerpts of the videos, then we can see for ourselves the dark forces that drove Cho Seung Hui to murder 32 persons.
Read the 5 theories on Cho here:
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=1042
A Liberty Sphere Classic on Global Warming
Washington, DC (TLS). The following is a reprint of a Liberty Sphere classic from November of 2006. It is a treatise on global warming and the political implications of the belief that mankind is to blame for climate change.
In anticipation of Glenn Beck's expose of the environmentalist movement's grand hoax this evening on the Headline News Network, I decided to post this Liberty Sphere classic for your consideration.
'HOW ENVIRONMENTALISTS CONSORT TO DESTROY AMERICAN FREE ENTERPRISE'
by D. Martyn Lloyd-Morgan
The responsible stewardship of the environment is not up for debate in modern times. Every responsible, thinking person is forced to consider the world around us and the impact the activity of man has upon the earth's ability to sustain and renew life. The debate, therefore, centers upon one single issue--globing warming and its cause.
Global warming itself is not really the issue at all. It is a fact. In the earth's long and sometimes violent history, there have been patterns of warming and cooling that run in cycles, usually in response to the sun's activity. As the sun increases in volatility with solar storms, the impact on earth is quite predictable. Earth's temperatures increase.
For example, during the Middle Ages, long before the burning of fossil fuels, the earth experienced a warming that is well-documented among feudal societies where written descriptions of the climate are preserved from the era. In reading those documents we are struck by the descriptions of various writers who describe warm temperatures in areas that are generally known for the cold.
During the modern industrial era, however, particularly at its infancy in the 18th and 19th centuries, we see descriptions of a much cooler climate than that of the Middle Ages. In fact, there was a mini ice age that occurred early on during the period where unusual cold and snowfalls were described by novelists and historians.
These periods of global cooling occur simultaneously with a leveling out of the sun's activity. As solar storms decrease, the earth responds by a cooling of global temperatures.
Presently we are in the midst of an increase in the sun's activity. This activity has been documented for quite some time, resulting in a slight but observable increase in the earth's temperatures.
Thus, the issue of global warming is not up for debate. It is a fact at present, just as it has been a fact many times throughout the cyclical life of the planet. The debate centers on man's role, if any, in the warming that is occurring.
The 'environmentalist movement' has come down on the side of man's culpability in the warming of the earth's temperatures. With a dogmatism that would put Medieval Catholicism to shame, those who belong to the movement insist, adamantly, that the blame for global warming lies squarely with human beings. Human activity, according to the environmentalist dogma, is the single largest contributor to the increase of the earth's temperatures, and thus, steps must be taken to curb man's activity.
The activity in question, of course, is free enterprise, capitalistic industrialism, and entrepreneurship that supposedly 'rapes the precious environment.' This, according to the High Priests and Priestesses of the movement, must be stopped cold.
At the opposite side of the spectrum lies conservatives, libertarians, and those who adhere strictly to 'hard science.' It isn't that these persons deny the possibility of global warming, or global cooling either, for that matter. Rather, these persons question man's contribution to the process. They are not convinced that human activity has much of an impact one way or the other on changes in the earth's temperatures.
Hard science definitely appears to confirm the notion of the latter group of persons.
Take the example of the mammoths in the North Pole region of the earth. Millions of years ago it is clear that the polar region was warm, blooming with plant life, and inhabited by life forms that fed on the plants that were abundant in the region. Hard science proves that this was the case.
Scientists discovered large mammoths frozen in the ice of the polar region that still had undigested green plants in their mouths. These majestic gargantuan creatures roamed the polar region during an era of the earth's history when there was no ice but plant life, grasses, and trees.
The startling discovery of the frozen mammoths in the polar ice region forced scientists to consider one basic fact--there are times when the earth's climate changes suddenly, unpredictably, and violently.
These mammoths had obviously been feeding on the plant life in the polar region, yet they froze to death so quickly that the plants they had just taken into their mouths were frozen along with them. Preserved in the ice for eons of time, these animals provided hard scientific proof of three basic postulates.
First, the polar region was not always frozen but teeming with plant life. Second, this plant life sustained animal life that in today's climate would not survive the cold of the region. And third, the earth is often unpredictable in its wide variances of temperatures, sometimes resulting in sudden, violent, and catastrophic shifts in temperature.
In short, the mammoths froze to death within seconds or minutes while munching on the plants that once grew in the Arctic.
In addition, the mere fact that the Arctic region contains some of the world's most abundant oil deposits is ample proof that the region was once inhabited by numerous animals that left behind fossils that eventually led to the 'fossil fuel' of oil. Such animals could not survive the harsh climate the region has today.
Thus, observable, documented hard science is in unanimous agreement concerning the earth's climate. In the grand scheme of things, mankind has little to do with it. The dramatic shift of the climate in the Arctic region occurred long before man appeared on the earth. The Ice Age was ushered in by forces totally outside the activity of human beings. The warming that has occurred since the end of the last Ice Age began long before humans began burning fossil fuels.
It can be documented without dispute, for example, that the earth has been warming for centuries. In actuality, taking the long view, the earth has been warming gradually ever since the end of the last Ice Age, long before there was any industrialization.
Why, then, do the dogmatists within the environmentalist movement insist so vehemently that global warming is a man-made phenomenon? Why are those who present an alternative view to the notion that man caused global warming presently referred to by these dogmatists as 'Holocaust deniers?' These are shockingly harsh terms.
This is not all. PBS was scheduled to do a documentary on global warming. They were planning to utilize the expertise of a world-renown scientist at the University of Oklahoma. However, when the scientist explained to the producers at PBS that he planned on basing his views solely on hard science, they told him in no uncertain terms that he MUST lay the blame for the phenomenon on human activity and the burning of fossil fuels. When the scientist protested that such a view is based upon speculation and opinion rather than hard scientific evidence, he was politely told his services would not be needed on the program.
Why? Why is the dogma of the environmentalist movement so important to its adherents that scientists must be browbeaten into submission and the documented scientific evidence ignored?
The answer is that today's environmentalist movement is not a scientific movement but a political one. The movement is a front for those with a definite political agenda.
Consider this. The scientists who belong to the environmentalist movement claim that their basis of authority on the subject of global warming is 'by consensus.' They have arrived at their viewpoint that man is responsible for global warming by consensus, that is, most of the scientists in the movement adhere to a viewpoint that is not universally held by the best minds within the scientific community.
And this is the source of the problem. If science is determined by consensus, it ceases to be science. It then becomes conjecture, opinion, and theory. Hard science is based upon one thing alone--the observable facts. Anything that cannot be verified with observable facts remains in the realm of opinion and theory. But it is not science.
Thus, the environmentalist movement has outed itself as a purely political movement. By admitting to the notion that scientific fact can be determined by consensus rather than hard evidence, the movement has immediately taken itself totally outside the scientific realm.
This leaves only one dire conclusion. The environmentalist movement is nothing more than a political movement that is dedicated to the destruction of capitalism, entrepreneurship, and free enterprise industrialism. Thus, Americans are told how horrible they are for driving SUVs. We are told how wicked are the oil companies. We treated to diatribes about how awful are the chemical companies. To express a belief that nuclear-powered energy sources are an acceptable, clean alternative is to commit the unpardonable sin. This is enough to get you excommunicated by the High Priests and Priestesses of the movement. You will surely go straight to hell.
Thus, the environmentalist movement is today the single largest threat to liberty in the world outside of terrorism. In the name of saving the planet from us wicked human beings, its adherents would dismantle American capitalism and free enterprise. Under the guise of 'doing good' the movement would destroy the basis of the American economy and totally change our way of life.
It is for this reason that many of the ex-Communists and Socialists from the Cold War have joined the environmentalist movement. When the old Soviet Union fell as a result of the policies of President Ronald Reagan, who brought them to the brink of economic disaster with our massive military buildup, the comrades were caught without a cause and with no place to go.
These people always have to have a subversive 'cause' to justify their existence.
Thus, they chose the environmentalist movement as the perfect vehicle by which to push toward their goal of destroying capitalism, dismantling the American economy, burying our prosperity, and eventually bringing the complete demise of a Republic that is dedicated to human liberty.
To buy into environmentalist pronouncements as the musings of concerned scientists is a big mistake. The practice of environmentalists to ignore hard science and smear the good names of respected scientists who do not subscribe to their views is ample proof of the subversive nature of this movement.
Thinking people can see right through the ruse. When science is decided by 'consensus' and not factual evidence, it is clear that anything the man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming crowd has to say is to be viewed with a grain of salt. They are not to be taken seriously, except for their massive and single-minded desire to dominate politics and alter the course of a free society.
As for their anti-American and anti-liberty scheme, we should quickly and forcefully repudiate their statements in the public arena whenever we have opportunity to do so.
In anticipation of Glenn Beck's expose of the environmentalist movement's grand hoax this evening on the Headline News Network, I decided to post this Liberty Sphere classic for your consideration.
'HOW ENVIRONMENTALISTS CONSORT TO DESTROY AMERICAN FREE ENTERPRISE'
by D. Martyn Lloyd-Morgan
The responsible stewardship of the environment is not up for debate in modern times. Every responsible, thinking person is forced to consider the world around us and the impact the activity of man has upon the earth's ability to sustain and renew life. The debate, therefore, centers upon one single issue--globing warming and its cause.
Global warming itself is not really the issue at all. It is a fact. In the earth's long and sometimes violent history, there have been patterns of warming and cooling that run in cycles, usually in response to the sun's activity. As the sun increases in volatility with solar storms, the impact on earth is quite predictable. Earth's temperatures increase.
For example, during the Middle Ages, long before the burning of fossil fuels, the earth experienced a warming that is well-documented among feudal societies where written descriptions of the climate are preserved from the era. In reading those documents we are struck by the descriptions of various writers who describe warm temperatures in areas that are generally known for the cold.
During the modern industrial era, however, particularly at its infancy in the 18th and 19th centuries, we see descriptions of a much cooler climate than that of the Middle Ages. In fact, there was a mini ice age that occurred early on during the period where unusual cold and snowfalls were described by novelists and historians.
These periods of global cooling occur simultaneously with a leveling out of the sun's activity. As solar storms decrease, the earth responds by a cooling of global temperatures.
Presently we are in the midst of an increase in the sun's activity. This activity has been documented for quite some time, resulting in a slight but observable increase in the earth's temperatures.
Thus, the issue of global warming is not up for debate. It is a fact at present, just as it has been a fact many times throughout the cyclical life of the planet. The debate centers on man's role, if any, in the warming that is occurring.
The 'environmentalist movement' has come down on the side of man's culpability in the warming of the earth's temperatures. With a dogmatism that would put Medieval Catholicism to shame, those who belong to the movement insist, adamantly, that the blame for global warming lies squarely with human beings. Human activity, according to the environmentalist dogma, is the single largest contributor to the increase of the earth's temperatures, and thus, steps must be taken to curb man's activity.
The activity in question, of course, is free enterprise, capitalistic industrialism, and entrepreneurship that supposedly 'rapes the precious environment.' This, according to the High Priests and Priestesses of the movement, must be stopped cold.
At the opposite side of the spectrum lies conservatives, libertarians, and those who adhere strictly to 'hard science.' It isn't that these persons deny the possibility of global warming, or global cooling either, for that matter. Rather, these persons question man's contribution to the process. They are not convinced that human activity has much of an impact one way or the other on changes in the earth's temperatures.
Hard science definitely appears to confirm the notion of the latter group of persons.
Take the example of the mammoths in the North Pole region of the earth. Millions of years ago it is clear that the polar region was warm, blooming with plant life, and inhabited by life forms that fed on the plants that were abundant in the region. Hard science proves that this was the case.
Scientists discovered large mammoths frozen in the ice of the polar region that still had undigested green plants in their mouths. These majestic gargantuan creatures roamed the polar region during an era of the earth's history when there was no ice but plant life, grasses, and trees.
The startling discovery of the frozen mammoths in the polar ice region forced scientists to consider one basic fact--there are times when the earth's climate changes suddenly, unpredictably, and violently.
These mammoths had obviously been feeding on the plant life in the polar region, yet they froze to death so quickly that the plants they had just taken into their mouths were frozen along with them. Preserved in the ice for eons of time, these animals provided hard scientific proof of three basic postulates.
First, the polar region was not always frozen but teeming with plant life. Second, this plant life sustained animal life that in today's climate would not survive the cold of the region. And third, the earth is often unpredictable in its wide variances of temperatures, sometimes resulting in sudden, violent, and catastrophic shifts in temperature.
In short, the mammoths froze to death within seconds or minutes while munching on the plants that once grew in the Arctic.
In addition, the mere fact that the Arctic region contains some of the world's most abundant oil deposits is ample proof that the region was once inhabited by numerous animals that left behind fossils that eventually led to the 'fossil fuel' of oil. Such animals could not survive the harsh climate the region has today.
Thus, observable, documented hard science is in unanimous agreement concerning the earth's climate. In the grand scheme of things, mankind has little to do with it. The dramatic shift of the climate in the Arctic region occurred long before man appeared on the earth. The Ice Age was ushered in by forces totally outside the activity of human beings. The warming that has occurred since the end of the last Ice Age began long before humans began burning fossil fuels.
It can be documented without dispute, for example, that the earth has been warming for centuries. In actuality, taking the long view, the earth has been warming gradually ever since the end of the last Ice Age, long before there was any industrialization.
Why, then, do the dogmatists within the environmentalist movement insist so vehemently that global warming is a man-made phenomenon? Why are those who present an alternative view to the notion that man caused global warming presently referred to by these dogmatists as 'Holocaust deniers?' These are shockingly harsh terms.
This is not all. PBS was scheduled to do a documentary on global warming. They were planning to utilize the expertise of a world-renown scientist at the University of Oklahoma. However, when the scientist explained to the producers at PBS that he planned on basing his views solely on hard science, they told him in no uncertain terms that he MUST lay the blame for the phenomenon on human activity and the burning of fossil fuels. When the scientist protested that such a view is based upon speculation and opinion rather than hard scientific evidence, he was politely told his services would not be needed on the program.
Why? Why is the dogma of the environmentalist movement so important to its adherents that scientists must be browbeaten into submission and the documented scientific evidence ignored?
The answer is that today's environmentalist movement is not a scientific movement but a political one. The movement is a front for those with a definite political agenda.
Consider this. The scientists who belong to the environmentalist movement claim that their basis of authority on the subject of global warming is 'by consensus.' They have arrived at their viewpoint that man is responsible for global warming by consensus, that is, most of the scientists in the movement adhere to a viewpoint that is not universally held by the best minds within the scientific community.
And this is the source of the problem. If science is determined by consensus, it ceases to be science. It then becomes conjecture, opinion, and theory. Hard science is based upon one thing alone--the observable facts. Anything that cannot be verified with observable facts remains in the realm of opinion and theory. But it is not science.
Thus, the environmentalist movement has outed itself as a purely political movement. By admitting to the notion that scientific fact can be determined by consensus rather than hard evidence, the movement has immediately taken itself totally outside the scientific realm.
This leaves only one dire conclusion. The environmentalist movement is nothing more than a political movement that is dedicated to the destruction of capitalism, entrepreneurship, and free enterprise industrialism. Thus, Americans are told how horrible they are for driving SUVs. We are told how wicked are the oil companies. We treated to diatribes about how awful are the chemical companies. To express a belief that nuclear-powered energy sources are an acceptable, clean alternative is to commit the unpardonable sin. This is enough to get you excommunicated by the High Priests and Priestesses of the movement. You will surely go straight to hell.
Thus, the environmentalist movement is today the single largest threat to liberty in the world outside of terrorism. In the name of saving the planet from us wicked human beings, its adherents would dismantle American capitalism and free enterprise. Under the guise of 'doing good' the movement would destroy the basis of the American economy and totally change our way of life.
It is for this reason that many of the ex-Communists and Socialists from the Cold War have joined the environmentalist movement. When the old Soviet Union fell as a result of the policies of President Ronald Reagan, who brought them to the brink of economic disaster with our massive military buildup, the comrades were caught without a cause and with no place to go.
These people always have to have a subversive 'cause' to justify their existence.
Thus, they chose the environmentalist movement as the perfect vehicle by which to push toward their goal of destroying capitalism, dismantling the American economy, burying our prosperity, and eventually bringing the complete demise of a Republic that is dedicated to human liberty.
To buy into environmentalist pronouncements as the musings of concerned scientists is a big mistake. The practice of environmentalists to ignore hard science and smear the good names of respected scientists who do not subscribe to their views is ample proof of the subversive nature of this movement.
Thinking people can see right through the ruse. When science is decided by 'consensus' and not factual evidence, it is clear that anything the man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming crowd has to say is to be viewed with a grain of salt. They are not to be taken seriously, except for their massive and single-minded desire to dominate politics and alter the course of a free society.
As for their anti-American and anti-liberty scheme, we should quickly and forcefully repudiate their statements in the public arena whenever we have opportunity to do so.
Don't Miss 'Climate of Fear' on Global Warming
Washington, DC (TLS). Tonight at 7 PM and again at 9 PM, Eastern Time, Headline News Network will air a special presentation on global warming entitled, 'Climate of Fear.'
The report will feature Glenn Beck and will focus on the vast fear-mongering that has accompanied the dire warnings and predictions of those who subscribe to the 'man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming' theory.
In addition, Beck will expose the hidden political agenda of those who are intent, no matter what the hard science says, to convince us that human beings caused global warming.
Needless to say, the Left does not want you to see this program!
That is all the more reason to watch. It is time that those who are actually concerned about truth and hard science put to rest once and for all the massive hoax perpetrated by those with a vested interest in causing the collapse of capitalism, free enterprise, and free human choice.
Glenn Beck's special report tonight should be an important step in that direction.
The report will feature Glenn Beck and will focus on the vast fear-mongering that has accompanied the dire warnings and predictions of those who subscribe to the 'man-is-to-blame-for-global-warming' theory.
In addition, Beck will expose the hidden political agenda of those who are intent, no matter what the hard science says, to convince us that human beings caused global warming.
Needless to say, the Left does not want you to see this program!
That is all the more reason to watch. It is time that those who are actually concerned about truth and hard science put to rest once and for all the massive hoax perpetrated by those with a vested interest in causing the collapse of capitalism, free enterprise, and free human choice.
Glenn Beck's special report tonight should be an important step in that direction.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
JILL MOORE VIDEO SURFACES IN WARE SHOALS
Ware Shoals, SC (TLS). A video of the interrogation of Jill Moore has surfaced in the Ware Shoals sex scandal case that cost Moore her job as cheerleader coach at the Ware Shoals High School. A local TV news outlet somehow secured a copy of the video, which it proceeded to telecast.
Upon Moore's arrest, law enforcement officials with the Greenwood County Sheriff's Department escorted Moore to the Sheriff's office to be questioned. These interrogations are routinely videotaped by law enforcement officials.
The portion of the interrogation that dealt with the subject of how much former Ware Shoals High School principal Jane Blackwell knew about Moore's activities is the part of the video that aired on a local news channel.
Greenwood County law enforcement officials state that they do not know at this time how a portion of the tape wound up in the hands of the news media.
The only persons who were given a copy of the tape were the Circuit Solicitor, attorneys for Moore and Blackwell, and the local Ware Shoals School Board attorney. The local state's attorney, Jerry Peace, stated that the airing of the tape compromises the integrity of the court case against Moore.
Peace indicated that a change of venue may be necessary for the trial, given the heavy local publicity the case has received in the local news.
In keeping with The Liberty Sphere's philosophy that criminal cases (and all other cases, for that matter) should be tried only in a court of law and NOT in the court of public opinion, we will not provide links to any source that had a part in distributing or telecasting this tape.
However, we would like to know who is responsible for the leak.
Upon Moore's arrest, law enforcement officials with the Greenwood County Sheriff's Department escorted Moore to the Sheriff's office to be questioned. These interrogations are routinely videotaped by law enforcement officials.
The portion of the interrogation that dealt with the subject of how much former Ware Shoals High School principal Jane Blackwell knew about Moore's activities is the part of the video that aired on a local news channel.
Greenwood County law enforcement officials state that they do not know at this time how a portion of the tape wound up in the hands of the news media.
The only persons who were given a copy of the tape were the Circuit Solicitor, attorneys for Moore and Blackwell, and the local Ware Shoals School Board attorney. The local state's attorney, Jerry Peace, stated that the airing of the tape compromises the integrity of the court case against Moore.
Peace indicated that a change of venue may be necessary for the trial, given the heavy local publicity the case has received in the local news.
In keeping with The Liberty Sphere's philosophy that criminal cases (and all other cases, for that matter) should be tried only in a court of law and NOT in the court of public opinion, we will not provide links to any source that had a part in distributing or telecasting this tape.
However, we would like to know who is responsible for the leak.
CNN Exposes Global Warming Hoax
Washington, DC (TLS). Tomorrow evening, Wednesday, May 2, 2007, CNN Headline News will present a special report by Glenn Beck that exposes the global warming hoax.
This program will air at 7 PM and again at 9 PM, Eastern Time.
The Liberty Sphere encourages all of our readers to watch this riveting report that will expose the hidden political agendas of the Leftwing in hoodwinking the public into believing that mankind is solely responsible for climate change.
As we have reported many times before, there is no doubt that the earth is in the midst of climate change. Our point of contention with the mainstream media and so-called 'scientists' of the environmentalist movement bandwagon is the claim that human beings brought this about.
In fact, the earth has ALWAYS undergone shifts in climate throughout its entire history. We have basically been in the midst of a period of gradual warming since the last Ice Age.
Obviously, there are many forces at work beyond the control of mankind that produce these temperature fluctuations. But members of the Leftwing have an agenda in laying the blame at the feet of mankind.
Ralph Nader admitted that the ultimate goal of the environmentalist movement is the destruction of capitalism, personal choice, and free enterprise.
Thus, the apologists for the Leftwing must convince us that mankind is to blame for global warming so that major shifts in public policy can be implemented to strip individual citizens of their rights and implement a socialistic, collectivist model of government which can then force lifestyle changes.
Don't forget! Tomorrow night at 7 PM and again at 9 PM, Eastern Time, on CNN Headline News. Glenn Beck will expose the hidden political agenda of the global warming hoax.
This program will air at 7 PM and again at 9 PM, Eastern Time.
The Liberty Sphere encourages all of our readers to watch this riveting report that will expose the hidden political agendas of the Leftwing in hoodwinking the public into believing that mankind is solely responsible for climate change.
As we have reported many times before, there is no doubt that the earth is in the midst of climate change. Our point of contention with the mainstream media and so-called 'scientists' of the environmentalist movement bandwagon is the claim that human beings brought this about.
In fact, the earth has ALWAYS undergone shifts in climate throughout its entire history. We have basically been in the midst of a period of gradual warming since the last Ice Age.
Obviously, there are many forces at work beyond the control of mankind that produce these temperature fluctuations. But members of the Leftwing have an agenda in laying the blame at the feet of mankind.
Ralph Nader admitted that the ultimate goal of the environmentalist movement is the destruction of capitalism, personal choice, and free enterprise.
Thus, the apologists for the Leftwing must convince us that mankind is to blame for global warming so that major shifts in public policy can be implemented to strip individual citizens of their rights and implement a socialistic, collectivist model of government which can then force lifestyle changes.
Don't forget! Tomorrow night at 7 PM and again at 9 PM, Eastern Time, on CNN Headline News. Glenn Beck will expose the hidden political agenda of the global warming hoax.
DC Madam--the Marketing of 'Palfrey's List'
Washington, DC (TLS). The nagging question among news reporters and news organizations today is, how did ABC News get a copy of the now-infamous 'Palfrey's List' when other news organizations were deprived of that opportunity?
What is quickly becoming known as 'Palfrey's List' is the documentation of the names and phone numbers of clients that alleged DC Madam Deborah Palfrey provided the Court in her prostitution ring case. Somehow ABC News winds up with a copy of at least a partial list of the clients.
How? Why? Who decided to release this information to the Press? Who decided it would be ABC News to receive a copy? Why were not ALL of the major news organizations given a copy?
More importantly, is this an indication of the marketing of Palfrey's List? If so, what was the price? What did ABC do to receive this favor from the Court?
The entire scenario smacks of privilege. It does nothing but raise suspicions for one news organization to have the opportunity to pour over these sensitive documents before anyone else besides the Court has a chance to see what's in them.
Until the questions concerning the involvement of ABC News are answered, a cloud of suspicion hangs over the entire process of making the list public.
What is quickly becoming known as 'Palfrey's List' is the documentation of the names and phone numbers of clients that alleged DC Madam Deborah Palfrey provided the Court in her prostitution ring case. Somehow ABC News winds up with a copy of at least a partial list of the clients.
How? Why? Who decided to release this information to the Press? Who decided it would be ABC News to receive a copy? Why were not ALL of the major news organizations given a copy?
More importantly, is this an indication of the marketing of Palfrey's List? If so, what was the price? What did ABC do to receive this favor from the Court?
The entire scenario smacks of privilege. It does nothing but raise suspicions for one news organization to have the opportunity to pour over these sensitive documents before anyone else besides the Court has a chance to see what's in them.
Until the questions concerning the involvement of ABC News are answered, a cloud of suspicion hangs over the entire process of making the list public.
Suspicions High Over Polk County DSS in N.C.
Columbus, NC (TLS). One thing you can say about the mountain folk of North Carolina other than the fact that they are some of most hospitable, good-hearted people on earth is that they don't take kindly to outsiders meddling in their business. And that goes for individuals who work in government agencies that tend to believe that they are the watchdogs of the behavior of private citizens.
A perfect example of this phenomenon is the case of Joyce Painter, a resident of the North Carolina mountain town of Columbus. Painter thought she was minding her own business, raising her 7-year-old son as best she could, when along comes 'Big Brother' to tell her that because her son is 'too fat' she is therefore a sorry Mother.
'Big Brother' in this case is the North Carolina Department of Social Services, which utilizes 'anonymous tips' to justify going after private citizens, usually with regard to cases of suspected child abuse. The Polk County Department of Social Services received such a tip concerning Ms. Painter, except in this case it was not about child abuse but about the weight of her son.
Considered 'morbidly obese' by medical definition, the Painter boy had at one time topped the scales at 254 pounds, despite being taken by his Mother on numerous occasions to see physicians about what to do to correct the problem.
Ms. Painter had placed her son on numerous eating programs recommended by various physicians, all to no avail. She insists that she fed her son only those foods prescribed by the physicians.
In spite of Ms. Painter's obvious concern about her son's health, DSS officials moved in and implicated Ms. Painter with innuendo concerning possible 'child neglect,' 'child endangerment,' or other such terms, all designed to place the blame for the boy's obesity squarely at the feet of his Mother.
Yet DSS had NO medical history of the boy and ordered none. How, for example, do they know that the boy does not have a hidden medical problem that contributes to the weight gain? Does his thyroid gland function normally? What about his digestive system? Does his digestive system function in such a manner that food is digested along a normal continuum?
Studies published in various medical journals indicate that persons who have what is called a 'slow rate of digestion,' that is, food tends to stay in the stomach for much longer periods of time before being emptied into the small intestine, tend to gain weight.
Has the boy ever been checked for this? If not, why?
It would seem that if DSS were actually doing its job rather than conducting a smear campaign against an overweight boy's Mother, it would want to know about potential medical problems that cause this kind of weight gain.
Yet so far, not a single indication has been made public that DSS has checked into these possibilities.
Rather, DSS decided to aggressively pursue Ms. Painter as an 'unfit Mother.'
But this is not the end of the story. DSS in its almighty wisdom decided that the Painter boy needed to have knee surgery at Duke University in Durham...several hours away from the Painter home. A mere 30 minutes to the north, however, is Asheville, North Carolina, a nice medium-sized city with several top-notched medical facilities that routinely do the type of surgery DSS claims the boy needs.
Rather than allow the boy to have the surgery closest to home, DSS instead decided to seize the child, remove him from his Mother, and place him in foster care--so that he could then have knee surgery in Durham.
On Monday a Judge in Columbus put DSS in its place by giving custody back to Ms. Painter, stating in essence that DSS did not have the authority or the proper rationale for removing the boy from his home.
Needless to say, this entire episode has the entirety of Polk County in an uproar. It is clear that DSS Social Workers are attempting to make an example of Painter and her son, but for what reason? At this point it is clear the boy has become nothing more than a football being passed between his Mother and DSS. DSS, however, has been called on a technical foul. In fact, DSS should not even be in the middle of this at all.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. There are rumblings among folks out and about that this is not the first time DSS has used heavy-handed, gestapo-like tactics in dealing with social service issues. And these folk are still in an uproar over the fact that DSS went to Ms. Painter's local grocery story to 'check up on her buying habits.'
A DSS official went to the local Ingle's Supermarket in Columbus to ask employees if Ms. Painter had been buying junk food and other treats for her son.
Store employees were so outraged over this that they immediately contacted a local TV News station and reported the actions of DSS officials who came to them to snoop on Painter's buying habits.
It is time we started to snoop into the Polk County Department of Social Services. Obviously something is terribly amiss in this department. Taxpayers do not pay the salaries of these persons to act as 'Big Brother' or to browbeat citizens who have overweight children. Employees of DSS are supposed to be public servants who act only at the pleasure of the citizens who pay their salaries.
Once they step out of that role and begin to act as if they have more power and authority than our Constitution allows, then drastic action needs to be taken to reign them in. If there ever were a government agency that needs to be reigned in, it is the Polk County Department of Social Services.
An immediate top-to-bottom investigation is in order. And if North Carolina won't do it, then perhaps the Federal Government will.
We as citizens CANNOT allow renegade organizations like DSS to run roughshod over the rights of individual citizens.
The Liberty Sphere intends to use every legal means within its power to expose the gross corruption, over-zealousness, and outright gestapo tactics of the Polk County Department of Social Services. Their reign of terror in North Carolina needs to be stopped.
A perfect example of this phenomenon is the case of Joyce Painter, a resident of the North Carolina mountain town of Columbus. Painter thought she was minding her own business, raising her 7-year-old son as best she could, when along comes 'Big Brother' to tell her that because her son is 'too fat' she is therefore a sorry Mother.
'Big Brother' in this case is the North Carolina Department of Social Services, which utilizes 'anonymous tips' to justify going after private citizens, usually with regard to cases of suspected child abuse. The Polk County Department of Social Services received such a tip concerning Ms. Painter, except in this case it was not about child abuse but about the weight of her son.
Considered 'morbidly obese' by medical definition, the Painter boy had at one time topped the scales at 254 pounds, despite being taken by his Mother on numerous occasions to see physicians about what to do to correct the problem.
Ms. Painter had placed her son on numerous eating programs recommended by various physicians, all to no avail. She insists that she fed her son only those foods prescribed by the physicians.
In spite of Ms. Painter's obvious concern about her son's health, DSS officials moved in and implicated Ms. Painter with innuendo concerning possible 'child neglect,' 'child endangerment,' or other such terms, all designed to place the blame for the boy's obesity squarely at the feet of his Mother.
Yet DSS had NO medical history of the boy and ordered none. How, for example, do they know that the boy does not have a hidden medical problem that contributes to the weight gain? Does his thyroid gland function normally? What about his digestive system? Does his digestive system function in such a manner that food is digested along a normal continuum?
Studies published in various medical journals indicate that persons who have what is called a 'slow rate of digestion,' that is, food tends to stay in the stomach for much longer periods of time before being emptied into the small intestine, tend to gain weight.
Has the boy ever been checked for this? If not, why?
It would seem that if DSS were actually doing its job rather than conducting a smear campaign against an overweight boy's Mother, it would want to know about potential medical problems that cause this kind of weight gain.
Yet so far, not a single indication has been made public that DSS has checked into these possibilities.
Rather, DSS decided to aggressively pursue Ms. Painter as an 'unfit Mother.'
But this is not the end of the story. DSS in its almighty wisdom decided that the Painter boy needed to have knee surgery at Duke University in Durham...several hours away from the Painter home. A mere 30 minutes to the north, however, is Asheville, North Carolina, a nice medium-sized city with several top-notched medical facilities that routinely do the type of surgery DSS claims the boy needs.
Rather than allow the boy to have the surgery closest to home, DSS instead decided to seize the child, remove him from his Mother, and place him in foster care--so that he could then have knee surgery in Durham.
On Monday a Judge in Columbus put DSS in its place by giving custody back to Ms. Painter, stating in essence that DSS did not have the authority or the proper rationale for removing the boy from his home.
Needless to say, this entire episode has the entirety of Polk County in an uproar. It is clear that DSS Social Workers are attempting to make an example of Painter and her son, but for what reason? At this point it is clear the boy has become nothing more than a football being passed between his Mother and DSS. DSS, however, has been called on a technical foul. In fact, DSS should not even be in the middle of this at all.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. There are rumblings among folks out and about that this is not the first time DSS has used heavy-handed, gestapo-like tactics in dealing with social service issues. And these folk are still in an uproar over the fact that DSS went to Ms. Painter's local grocery story to 'check up on her buying habits.'
A DSS official went to the local Ingle's Supermarket in Columbus to ask employees if Ms. Painter had been buying junk food and other treats for her son.
Store employees were so outraged over this that they immediately contacted a local TV News station and reported the actions of DSS officials who came to them to snoop on Painter's buying habits.
It is time we started to snoop into the Polk County Department of Social Services. Obviously something is terribly amiss in this department. Taxpayers do not pay the salaries of these persons to act as 'Big Brother' or to browbeat citizens who have overweight children. Employees of DSS are supposed to be public servants who act only at the pleasure of the citizens who pay their salaries.
Once they step out of that role and begin to act as if they have more power and authority than our Constitution allows, then drastic action needs to be taken to reign them in. If there ever were a government agency that needs to be reigned in, it is the Polk County Department of Social Services.
An immediate top-to-bottom investigation is in order. And if North Carolina won't do it, then perhaps the Federal Government will.
We as citizens CANNOT allow renegade organizations like DSS to run roughshod over the rights of individual citizens.
The Liberty Sphere intends to use every legal means within its power to expose the gross corruption, over-zealousness, and outright gestapo tactics of the Polk County Department of Social Services. Their reign of terror in North Carolina needs to be stopped.
Yet Another Border Patrol Agent Charged with Murder
Washington, DC (TLS). In what is becoming an all-too-familiar scene at our nation's southern border, yet another of America's Border Patrol Agents has been charged with murder.
Is it just me, or does it seem that nearly every week or so a Border Patrol agent is charged with murder?
In this case the agent was being threatened with having his head bashed in with a rock carried by an illegal alien. The agent shot the alien in self-defense.
Yet once again, at the bidding of the Mexican Consulate, U.S. Attorneys at our southern border are aggressively pursuing Border Patrol Agents who use deadly force to defend themselves against illegal aliens who are clearly intent on doing them harm.
Once again, Congress turns its head, the President does nothing, and the Mexican government is allowed to dictate prosecutorial discretion in these cases. The President, the Congress, and the Administration have abdicated their Constitutional mandate to protect our borders and have allowed undue meddling in the affairs of the U.S. judiciary by the Mexican government.
Read about the latest outrageous persecution of our Border Patrol here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55442
Is it just me, or does it seem that nearly every week or so a Border Patrol agent is charged with murder?
In this case the agent was being threatened with having his head bashed in with a rock carried by an illegal alien. The agent shot the alien in self-defense.
Yet once again, at the bidding of the Mexican Consulate, U.S. Attorneys at our southern border are aggressively pursuing Border Patrol Agents who use deadly force to defend themselves against illegal aliens who are clearly intent on doing them harm.
Once again, Congress turns its head, the President does nothing, and the Mexican government is allowed to dictate prosecutorial discretion in these cases. The President, the Congress, and the Administration have abdicated their Constitutional mandate to protect our borders and have allowed undue meddling in the affairs of the U.S. judiciary by the Mexican government.
Read about the latest outrageous persecution of our Border Patrol here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55442
Monday, April 30, 2007
Deborah Palfrey's List--a Sneak Peek
Washington, DC (TLS). As the drama and anxiety grow over 'DC Madam' Deborah Palfrey's list of high-profile customers in the Beltway, ABC News has given a sneak peek into what is to come as these names are made public.
ABC states that among the list of hundreds of customer phone numbers it has poured through, there is a major CEO, the head of a conservative think-tank, and yet another high-ranking government official.
In what is sure to become known in the days ahead as 'Palfrey's List' are the names and phone numbers of scores of individuals who utilized her services, which Palfrey maintains is 'perfectly legal.' She says that if some of her clients engaged in illegal sexual activity with the escorts in question, then these particular customers instigated such activity on their own and that she has no control over what the escorts or their customers do once they are 'on a date.'
Palfrey is in a legal fight of her own involving her activities as a suspected 'Madam' who ran a prostitution ring in the D.C. area. As part of her attempt to remain free from jail she is cooperating with investigators by turning over the names and phone records of former clients.
The entire scenario has put Washington on edge as some who occupy very public positions of power may well be identified as a name that appears in 'Palfrey's List.'
It will be most interesting to see how this story plays out in the days ahead as the light is shone into the dark corners of Washington.
ABC states that among the list of hundreds of customer phone numbers it has poured through, there is a major CEO, the head of a conservative think-tank, and yet another high-ranking government official.
In what is sure to become known in the days ahead as 'Palfrey's List' are the names and phone numbers of scores of individuals who utilized her services, which Palfrey maintains is 'perfectly legal.' She says that if some of her clients engaged in illegal sexual activity with the escorts in question, then these particular customers instigated such activity on their own and that she has no control over what the escorts or their customers do once they are 'on a date.'
Palfrey is in a legal fight of her own involving her activities as a suspected 'Madam' who ran a prostitution ring in the D.C. area. As part of her attempt to remain free from jail she is cooperating with investigators by turning over the names and phone records of former clients.
The entire scenario has put Washington on edge as some who occupy very public positions of power may well be identified as a name that appears in 'Palfrey's List.'
It will be most interesting to see how this story plays out in the days ahead as the light is shone into the dark corners of Washington.
Court Returns Overweight N.C. Boy to Mother
Columbus, NC (TLS). The overweight North Carolina boy who was seized by the Department of Social Services has been returned to the physical custody of his mother by the order of the Court.
Joyce Painter had her day in Court today to request that her son be returned to her after DSS officials seized the boy last week and placed him in foster care.
The ongoing dispute between Painter and DSS began when Social Workers, operating on an anonymous tip, began investigating the Painter home concerning the boy's eating habits. At one point the 7-year-old boy weighed 254 pounds.
The dispute was brought to a head last week when Social Workers insisted that the boy needed knee surgery and should be taken to Duke University. Painter maintained that doctors closer to home could perform any procedure that was needed.
At this point DSS seized the boy, removed him from his Mother, and placed him in foster care.
The outrage of citizens over this gross misuse of government power must have reached the ears of the Judge in this case, who promptly slammed the tactics of DSS by returning the boy to his Mother. Although DSS still has legal custody of the boy, he will remain in his Mother's care until a hearing in June to determine permanent legal custody.
It is The Liberty Sphere's opinion that this is only the first step in what the Court should do. DSS should be investigated for the gross misuse of power and overstepping their legal and ethical boundaries in removing a child from his Mother for no overwhelmingly pressing reason.
In fact, it appears that Social Workers in the Polk County Department of DSS are punishing Mrs. Painter for daring to defy their omniscient, omnipotent decisions concerning her son. They had threatened to remove the child months ago due to 'obesity.' Apparently they were met with resistance over that one, so they seized upon the surgery ruse to justify removing the child from his Mother.
The fact that this case has produced outrage among local citizens in Polk County is significant. The Judge slapped DSS on the wrist today by returning the boy to his Mother. But he needs to go much further.
Until DSS is fully investigated, it will operate under a dark cloud of corruption, misuse of power, gestapo tactics, and bullying.
Joyce Painter had her day in Court today to request that her son be returned to her after DSS officials seized the boy last week and placed him in foster care.
The ongoing dispute between Painter and DSS began when Social Workers, operating on an anonymous tip, began investigating the Painter home concerning the boy's eating habits. At one point the 7-year-old boy weighed 254 pounds.
The dispute was brought to a head last week when Social Workers insisted that the boy needed knee surgery and should be taken to Duke University. Painter maintained that doctors closer to home could perform any procedure that was needed.
At this point DSS seized the boy, removed him from his Mother, and placed him in foster care.
The outrage of citizens over this gross misuse of government power must have reached the ears of the Judge in this case, who promptly slammed the tactics of DSS by returning the boy to his Mother. Although DSS still has legal custody of the boy, he will remain in his Mother's care until a hearing in June to determine permanent legal custody.
It is The Liberty Sphere's opinion that this is only the first step in what the Court should do. DSS should be investigated for the gross misuse of power and overstepping their legal and ethical boundaries in removing a child from his Mother for no overwhelmingly pressing reason.
In fact, it appears that Social Workers in the Polk County Department of DSS are punishing Mrs. Painter for daring to defy their omniscient, omnipotent decisions concerning her son. They had threatened to remove the child months ago due to 'obesity.' Apparently they were met with resistance over that one, so they seized upon the surgery ruse to justify removing the child from his Mother.
The fact that this case has produced outrage among local citizens in Polk County is significant. The Judge slapped DSS on the wrist today by returning the boy to his Mother. But he needs to go much further.
Until DSS is fully investigated, it will operate under a dark cloud of corruption, misuse of power, gestapo tactics, and bullying.
Buckley Warns Iraq May Bury Republicans
Washington, DC (TLS). The quintessential conservative intellectual, the venerable William F. Buckley, is warning today in a special article in National Review that the War in Iraq has the potential of burying the Republican Party.
All of the signs point to a Republican free-fall of historical proportions over one single issue--the war. The Rasmussen organization, in its latest poll, indicates that the number of people who call themselves Republicans is at its lowest point in 6 years. The only issue that is precipitating the exodus is the War in Iraq.
Public sentiment has turned against the war and against the President. It wasn't so much that they did not see the need to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, but they simply do not believe the Bush administration has conducted the war in an effective and efficient manner. They wanted us in and out in timely fashion.
Buckley indicates that Bush may well be the demise of the Republican Party, not because people do not like him personally but because of the stubbornness exhibited in the face of a growing catastrophe in Iraq, which seems to have no end in sight.
Admittedly, I have been one of the President's most ardent supporters in the War on Terror. I believed that Saddam Hussein had to go. But, I also trust the wisdom of William F. Buckley, who for 50 years has been a steady voice of reason, reliability, and resilience on the conservative side of politics.
In short, I take Buckley's latest warning very seriously. His voice must be heard and heeded in the highest levels of the Republican Party.
Read Buckley's article here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjMDBlZDg2MDlmMDM4MmE1MGFmNjlkOTE5OWVkOTc=
All of the signs point to a Republican free-fall of historical proportions over one single issue--the war. The Rasmussen organization, in its latest poll, indicates that the number of people who call themselves Republicans is at its lowest point in 6 years. The only issue that is precipitating the exodus is the War in Iraq.
Public sentiment has turned against the war and against the President. It wasn't so much that they did not see the need to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, but they simply do not believe the Bush administration has conducted the war in an effective and efficient manner. They wanted us in and out in timely fashion.
Buckley indicates that Bush may well be the demise of the Republican Party, not because people do not like him personally but because of the stubbornness exhibited in the face of a growing catastrophe in Iraq, which seems to have no end in sight.
Admittedly, I have been one of the President's most ardent supporters in the War on Terror. I believed that Saddam Hussein had to go. But, I also trust the wisdom of William F. Buckley, who for 50 years has been a steady voice of reason, reliability, and resilience on the conservative side of politics.
In short, I take Buckley's latest warning very seriously. His voice must be heard and heeded in the highest levels of the Republican Party.
Read Buckley's article here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjMDBlZDg2MDlmMDM4MmE1MGFmNjlkOTE5OWVkOTc=
New Poll: Obama Edges Passed Hillary
Washington, DC (TLS). A new Rasmussen poll just released today shows that Barack Hussein Obama has for the first time edged passed Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination.
If likely Democratic voters were to make their choice today, Obama would win by 32%. Hillary would get 30% of the vote. John Edwards would come in third with 17%. The other candidates would lag far behind with totals under 5%.
This poll is significant in that it is the very first time since the start of the campaign that Obama has surged ahead of Hillary, who up until now has been the front-runner. But even more significant is the trend that these poll results show.
For the past 6 weeks or so, pollsters have noted a shift in voter preferences among Democrats. Hillary has been gradually losing support, particularly among those under the age of 40. Obama has been gaining steadily. The Rasmussen organization sees no indication that this trend will reverse in the near future.
However, it is to be noted that the razor-thin lead for Obama falls within the 4% margin of error. Thus, statistically, Obama and Hillary are tied.
The poll also notes that Hillary has opened a broad lead among voters over the age of 65--those who are most likely to vote. Conversely, Obama has opened a major lead among voters under the age of 40--those who are less likely to vote.
Thus, the battle is for those voters who are between the ages of 40 and 65.
If likely Democratic voters were to make their choice today, Obama would win by 32%. Hillary would get 30% of the vote. John Edwards would come in third with 17%. The other candidates would lag far behind with totals under 5%.
This poll is significant in that it is the very first time since the start of the campaign that Obama has surged ahead of Hillary, who up until now has been the front-runner. But even more significant is the trend that these poll results show.
For the past 6 weeks or so, pollsters have noted a shift in voter preferences among Democrats. Hillary has been gradually losing support, particularly among those under the age of 40. Obama has been gaining steadily. The Rasmussen organization sees no indication that this trend will reverse in the near future.
However, it is to be noted that the razor-thin lead for Obama falls within the 4% margin of error. Thus, statistically, Obama and Hillary are tied.
The poll also notes that Hillary has opened a broad lead among voters over the age of 65--those who are most likely to vote. Conversely, Obama has opened a major lead among voters under the age of 40--those who are less likely to vote.
Thus, the battle is for those voters who are between the ages of 40 and 65.
'DC Madam' Sends Politicians Scurrying
Washington, DC (TLS). Deborah Palfrey, the infamous 'DC Madam' who ran an escort service inside the Beltway, has turned over to the Court hundreds of pages of telephone records that could implicate major power-players in Washington.
Ms. Palfrey's trial has already led to one casualty at the State Department.
Word has been received this afternoon that ABC News has some of the telephone records provided to the Court by Ms. Palfrey. This news has people all over Washington shaking in their boots, particularly some high-profile leaders in government.
The fact that one government insider has already lost his job over the scandal is sending shock waves throughout the Beltway, as it is anticipated that when ABC News releases some of the names gleaned from Palfrey's records, many more will go to the chopping block.
And this brings us to the issue of the day. Should prostitution be illegal? Is this a legitimate role of government in a free society?
Obviously there are certain moral/ethical issues that must be provided the prohibition of legislation, such as murder and theft. Thus, the old adage, 'You can't legislate morality,' simply does not wash. We have always legislated certain moral precepts. No civilized society can survive without it.
Yet when it comes to prostitution we are faced with a dilemma similar to that which we face with illegal drugs. Should government be spending precious resources, taxpayers' money, to fight personal behavior that probably will not change, no matter what laws are passed?
The time, money, and resources spent on the 'war on drugs' and the fight against prostitution could be much better spent on far more important matters. The war on drugs has been lost, despite the billions spent on it for over 25 years, and prostitution has not gone away for centuries, not even in the face of stiff penalties.
I would like to hear from you, our readers. You can post your opinion anonymously, of course. But what do you think about the publicity surrounding the DC Madam? Should we be spending taxpayers' money on things of this nature? Should we legalize activities such as prostitution and the use of illegal drugs, with important legal safeguards to protect human life?
Ms. Palfrey's trial has already led to one casualty at the State Department.
Word has been received this afternoon that ABC News has some of the telephone records provided to the Court by Ms. Palfrey. This news has people all over Washington shaking in their boots, particularly some high-profile leaders in government.
The fact that one government insider has already lost his job over the scandal is sending shock waves throughout the Beltway, as it is anticipated that when ABC News releases some of the names gleaned from Palfrey's records, many more will go to the chopping block.
And this brings us to the issue of the day. Should prostitution be illegal? Is this a legitimate role of government in a free society?
Obviously there are certain moral/ethical issues that must be provided the prohibition of legislation, such as murder and theft. Thus, the old adage, 'You can't legislate morality,' simply does not wash. We have always legislated certain moral precepts. No civilized society can survive without it.
Yet when it comes to prostitution we are faced with a dilemma similar to that which we face with illegal drugs. Should government be spending precious resources, taxpayers' money, to fight personal behavior that probably will not change, no matter what laws are passed?
The time, money, and resources spent on the 'war on drugs' and the fight against prostitution could be much better spent on far more important matters. The war on drugs has been lost, despite the billions spent on it for over 25 years, and prostitution has not gone away for centuries, not even in the face of stiff penalties.
I would like to hear from you, our readers. You can post your opinion anonymously, of course. But what do you think about the publicity surrounding the DC Madam? Should we be spending taxpayers' money on things of this nature? Should we legalize activities such as prostitution and the use of illegal drugs, with important legal safeguards to protect human life?
Fred Thompson on Concealed Guns and Virg. Tech
Washington, DC (TLS). Fred Thompson, the man who is the 3rd most popular choice among Republicans for the Presidential nomination, although he has yet to decide to run, is picking up quite a bit of support among gun rights activists with his comments on concealed weapons and the Virginia Tech massacre.
If there were ever any doubt that Thompson is a true stalwart on 2nd Amendment issues, his comments in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre should quickly dispel any such doubt. We can count Thompson in as one of those who believes that had students been allowed to carry concealed weapons, Cho Seung Hui would have been stopped long before the body count grew passed three.
Here is an excerpt from Thompson's article on the subject:
' Whenever I've seen one of those "Gun-free Zone" signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I've always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don't mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.'
Read the rest of Thompson's essential must-read here:
http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=389928&SPID=15663
If there were ever any doubt that Thompson is a true stalwart on 2nd Amendment issues, his comments in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre should quickly dispel any such doubt. We can count Thompson in as one of those who believes that had students been allowed to carry concealed weapons, Cho Seung Hui would have been stopped long before the body count grew passed three.
Here is an excerpt from Thompson's article on the subject:
' Whenever I've seen one of those "Gun-free Zone" signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I've always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don't mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.'
Read the rest of Thompson's essential must-read here:
http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=389928&SPID=15663
Eric McLean Released on Bond
Knoxville, TN (TLS). Eric McLean, the man who is charged with murder in the shooting of 19-year old Sean Powell, has been released from jail on bond. McLean's bond was set at $150,000 at a court hearing earlier in the month.
McLean's wife, Erin, had been a student teacher from the University of Tennessee, doing a teaching internship at West High School in Knoxville. It was there that she met a student by the name of Sean Powell.
An altercation occurred at the McLean home when Powell reportedly went to see Erin. Eric McLean has stated that he knew of a relationship between his wife and Powell, which was confirmed by his own son when the son informed his Dad that he had seen his Mother walking hand-in-hand with Powell at a nearby park.
Sean Powell's mother also confirms that her son confessed to her concerning the affair.
On the night of the shooting, Eric McLean called 911 to report a break-in. Minutes later Erin Powell called 911 to say that her husband had shot Sean Powell outside their home.
Powell had reportedly slept outside the McLean home for several nights in his auto.
Eric McLean was apprehended by police several hours after the shooting as he walked down a railroad track carrying a gun. He had left his vehicle parked at the school where his wife had taught and met Sean Powell.
According to the terms of his bail, Eric McLean is not allowed to have contact with either his children or his estranged wife, who is living with relatives in Nashville.
McLean's wife, Erin, had been a student teacher from the University of Tennessee, doing a teaching internship at West High School in Knoxville. It was there that she met a student by the name of Sean Powell.
An altercation occurred at the McLean home when Powell reportedly went to see Erin. Eric McLean has stated that he knew of a relationship between his wife and Powell, which was confirmed by his own son when the son informed his Dad that he had seen his Mother walking hand-in-hand with Powell at a nearby park.
Sean Powell's mother also confirms that her son confessed to her concerning the affair.
On the night of the shooting, Eric McLean called 911 to report a break-in. Minutes later Erin Powell called 911 to say that her husband had shot Sean Powell outside their home.
Powell had reportedly slept outside the McLean home for several nights in his auto.
Eric McLean was apprehended by police several hours after the shooting as he walked down a railroad track carrying a gun. He had left his vehicle parked at the school where his wife had taught and met Sean Powell.
According to the terms of his bail, Eric McLean is not allowed to have contact with either his children or his estranged wife, who is living with relatives in Nashville.
Important Notice From Firearms Coalition
Washington, DC (TLS). Gun Law News has an important notice from the Firearms Coalition concerning the renewed assault on 2nd Amendment rights by politicians in Washington. This is an article worth reading. It is even more essential that we take action.
Here is an excerpt from the notice:
'Even though the American people have made it pretty clear that they are not interested in seeing additional restrictions on firearms, and the politicians from both sides of the aisle in Washington are reticent to make calls for new gun control measures, the threat remains. Many – if not most – politicians have an inclination toward government control, including government control of firearms. The only thing holding these tendencies in check is the well-founded belief that taking action in support of gun control is political suicide.'
Click here to go to Gun Law News for the rest of this must-read:
http://www.gunlawnews.org/News/fc042607-2.html
Here is an excerpt from the notice:
'Even though the American people have made it pretty clear that they are not interested in seeing additional restrictions on firearms, and the politicians from both sides of the aisle in Washington are reticent to make calls for new gun control measures, the threat remains. Many – if not most – politicians have an inclination toward government control, including government control of firearms. The only thing holding these tendencies in check is the well-founded belief that taking action in support of gun control is political suicide.'
Click here to go to Gun Law News for the rest of this must-read:
http://www.gunlawnews.org/News/fc042607-2.html
Sunday, April 29, 2007
The Disarming of America Has Begun
Washington, DC (TLS). Well, my friends, the disarming of America has begun. As soon as there is a stated, step-by-step, cohesive plan in place, the process of confiscating the guns from American citizens has begun, even before a law has been passed.
The very first step in a systematic, large-scale process of confiscation is the development of a concrete plan.
The gun-grabbers of the Leftwing in this nation have such a plan, and they have been so brazen as to publicized it.
Wasting no time in getting to work on capitalizing from the carnage of a crazed madman at Virginia Tech, Senator Carolyn McCarthy issued a Trojan horse by stating there would be no attempt at gun control in this Congress. Little Chucky Schumer did the same thing.
But it was all a ruse...an attempt to quell the fears of law-abiding citizens that their rights were endangered in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre. Yet, even as they issued such reassurances to the public, both Little Chucky and McCarthy were busy at work behind the scenes crafting an unholy alliance with some Republicans and the NRA to pass a gun control measure, supposedly aimed at tightening background checks.
The problem is that this bill punishes millions of non-violent, ordinary citizens by banning them from gun ownership even if they have so much as visited a doctor's office with depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, attention-deficit, hyper-activity disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a myriad of other legitimate medical diagnoses for which there are proven effective treatments.
No matter. If you are a U.S. Veteran to whom your country called to carry a weapon in wartime, you will be effectively barred from gun ownership as a civilian if you have received treatment for post-traumatic stress resulting from your service to your country.
You were good enough to carry a gun as a soldier, but now your government will deem you to be unfit to carry a gun as a civilian merely because you are now considered damaged goods.
My friends, this is an outrage of gargantuan proportions. The ONLY major gun rights group in America that will not compromise on this obvious attempt to steal rights is the GOA. Even the NRA caved to the gun grabbers on this one.
Now, back to the plan to confiscate guns. It is printed in the Toledo Blade in an op-ed column written by Dan Simpson. It is a shockingly candid admission that the Left has a definite plan to implement gun confiscation...that is, if they can succeed in convincing enough lawmakers in Washington to bite the bullet.
Impossible, you say? Don't be so quick to dismiss it. After all, they have just succeeded in getting the NRA to cave in to a McCarthy ruse to rob millions of citizens of the right to own a gun!
As I have said many times before, these attempts to rob citizens of their rights will only create a massive underground black-market for guns without serial numbers. This way they cannot be traced or registered. Those who squelch human rights usually find that such attempts only backfire on them in the end, just like Prohibition.
The very same thing will happen with guns, if the present trends continue. Gun owners by the millions will merely tell their politicians, 'To hell with your rules and regulations!'
If they want to play this game with over 100 million gun owners in America, we can sure devise methods to keep our rights if we have to. And we will not hesitate to do it.
Read the entire plan here:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070425/OPINION04/704250310/-1/OPINION
The very first step in a systematic, large-scale process of confiscation is the development of a concrete plan.
The gun-grabbers of the Leftwing in this nation have such a plan, and they have been so brazen as to publicized it.
Wasting no time in getting to work on capitalizing from the carnage of a crazed madman at Virginia Tech, Senator Carolyn McCarthy issued a Trojan horse by stating there would be no attempt at gun control in this Congress. Little Chucky Schumer did the same thing.
But it was all a ruse...an attempt to quell the fears of law-abiding citizens that their rights were endangered in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre. Yet, even as they issued such reassurances to the public, both Little Chucky and McCarthy were busy at work behind the scenes crafting an unholy alliance with some Republicans and the NRA to pass a gun control measure, supposedly aimed at tightening background checks.
The problem is that this bill punishes millions of non-violent, ordinary citizens by banning them from gun ownership even if they have so much as visited a doctor's office with depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, attention-deficit, hyper-activity disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a myriad of other legitimate medical diagnoses for which there are proven effective treatments.
No matter. If you are a U.S. Veteran to whom your country called to carry a weapon in wartime, you will be effectively barred from gun ownership as a civilian if you have received treatment for post-traumatic stress resulting from your service to your country.
You were good enough to carry a gun as a soldier, but now your government will deem you to be unfit to carry a gun as a civilian merely because you are now considered damaged goods.
My friends, this is an outrage of gargantuan proportions. The ONLY major gun rights group in America that will not compromise on this obvious attempt to steal rights is the GOA. Even the NRA caved to the gun grabbers on this one.
Now, back to the plan to confiscate guns. It is printed in the Toledo Blade in an op-ed column written by Dan Simpson. It is a shockingly candid admission that the Left has a definite plan to implement gun confiscation...that is, if they can succeed in convincing enough lawmakers in Washington to bite the bullet.
Impossible, you say? Don't be so quick to dismiss it. After all, they have just succeeded in getting the NRA to cave in to a McCarthy ruse to rob millions of citizens of the right to own a gun!
As I have said many times before, these attempts to rob citizens of their rights will only create a massive underground black-market for guns without serial numbers. This way they cannot be traced or registered. Those who squelch human rights usually find that such attempts only backfire on them in the end, just like Prohibition.
The very same thing will happen with guns, if the present trends continue. Gun owners by the millions will merely tell their politicians, 'To hell with your rules and regulations!'
If they want to play this game with over 100 million gun owners in America, we can sure devise methods to keep our rights if we have to. And we will not hesitate to do it.
Read the entire plan here:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070425/OPINION04/704250310/-1/OPINION
Today's Political Roundup from Major News Sources
**From My Way News: Rudy Blasts Democratic Candidates' Socialized Medicine Plans
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070428/D8OP937O0.html
**From the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star: Gun Charges Dropped Against Aide of Senator Jim Webb, D-Virginia
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/042007/04282007/279797
**From Threats Watch: Senator Joe Lieberman Jolts Democratic Colleagues on Iraq
http://rapidrecon.threatswatch.org/2007/04/liebermann-jolts-senate-debate/
**From Robert Novak in HUMAN EVENTS: McCain's Complaint
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20460
**From CNS News Service: Hate Crimes Bill Moves to Full House (this is the bill that will criminalize your preacher for merely speaking about homosexuality as a sin!)
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200704/CUL20070426b.html
**From CNS News Service: Pennsylvania Bill of Rights for Gun Owners
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070425a.html
**From CNS News Service: Foolish Democratic Sponsored Bill on Background Checks for Gun Owners (H.R. 297, sponsored by gun-grabber Carolyn McCarthy--this is the one that would disqualify U.S. Veterans from owning a gun if they have ever seen a doctor about post-traumatic stress disorder)
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200704/NAT20070423a.html
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070428/D8OP937O0.html
**From the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star: Gun Charges Dropped Against Aide of Senator Jim Webb, D-Virginia
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/042007/04282007/279797
**From Threats Watch: Senator Joe Lieberman Jolts Democratic Colleagues on Iraq
http://rapidrecon.threatswatch.org/2007/04/liebermann-jolts-senate-debate/
**From Robert Novak in HUMAN EVENTS: McCain's Complaint
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20460
**From CNS News Service: Hate Crimes Bill Moves to Full House (this is the bill that will criminalize your preacher for merely speaking about homosexuality as a sin!)
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200704/CUL20070426b.html
**From CNS News Service: Pennsylvania Bill of Rights for Gun Owners
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070425a.html
**From CNS News Service: Foolish Democratic Sponsored Bill on Background Checks for Gun Owners (H.R. 297, sponsored by gun-grabber Carolyn McCarthy--this is the one that would disqualify U.S. Veterans from owning a gun if they have ever seen a doctor about post-traumatic stress disorder)
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200704/NAT20070423a.html
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Transcripts of Final Report on Duke Rape Hoax
Washington, DC (TLS). North Carolina Attorney-General Roy Cooper has issued the final report on the Duke lacrosse rape case. The 21-page document, which fully proclaims the innocence of the three accused Duke students, concludes that none of the charges made by accuser Crystal Mangum could be corroborated by supporting evidence.
In fact, the report makes clear that NONE of the claims of the accuser actually took place.
Thus, this particular chapter in one of the most sordid and shameful sagas in American jurisprudence is closed. But the story is far from over. There will be lawsuits a-plenty. And then there is the subject of Mike Nifong's fate before the N.C. Bar, and potentially before a criminal court.
So there is much more to come.
The full transcripts of the final report can be found here:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0427071duke1.html
In fact, the report makes clear that NONE of the claims of the accuser actually took place.
Thus, this particular chapter in one of the most sordid and shameful sagas in American jurisprudence is closed. But the story is far from over. There will be lawsuits a-plenty. And then there is the subject of Mike Nifong's fate before the N.C. Bar, and potentially before a criminal court.
So there is much more to come.
The full transcripts of the final report can be found here:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0427071duke1.html
ALERT! H.R. 297 Gun Rights Ban on Fast Track
Washington, DC (TLS). Little Chucky Schumer was on Bill O'Reilly recently to talk about gun control. Since the Democrats took control of Congress, they have basically laid low on the subject of guns, with the exception of the introduction of the McCarthy bill. But the lack of support led McCarthy to state that gun control was dead in this Congress.
However, the Virginia Tech massacre has the gun-grabbers coming out of the woodwork, seizing the actions of one crazed madman to enact massive, sweeping gun control legislation upon law-abiding citizens. Little Chucky has a plan, and it ain't pretty.
In a bold move that has shocked even the most astute observers of Congress, Schumer and his colleagues are going to try to ram this legislation through Congress BY ACCLAMATION without even as much as a vote!
Clearly, this is an all-out attack on the rights of American citizens. The politicians in Congress do not even have the courage to go on the record with a 'yea' or 'nay' vote.
H.R. 297 will treat gun owners worse than terrorists. It is one terrible piece of legislation, introduced in the name of protecting us against mass murders such as Cho Seung-Hui. It is always interesting as to how politicians will use one single crazed idiot as a tool by which to hit ordinary citizens over the head and rob them of their rights.
GOA has issued yet another alert on this debacle. It is time to contact Congress about this foul scheme to ram through H.R. 297. This will be a major knock-down, drag-out fight that pits the NRA against 2nd Amendment rights, and Republican against Republican.
Perhaps we can garner the support of the so-called 'Blue-Dog' Democrats who have yet to prove they can stop the steam-roller of the ultra-liberal Democratic Congressional machine. If ever there were a time to stop them, the time is now.
Go here to the GOA website for complete information:
http://www.gunowners.org/a042607.htm
However, the Virginia Tech massacre has the gun-grabbers coming out of the woodwork, seizing the actions of one crazed madman to enact massive, sweeping gun control legislation upon law-abiding citizens. Little Chucky has a plan, and it ain't pretty.
In a bold move that has shocked even the most astute observers of Congress, Schumer and his colleagues are going to try to ram this legislation through Congress BY ACCLAMATION without even as much as a vote!
Clearly, this is an all-out attack on the rights of American citizens. The politicians in Congress do not even have the courage to go on the record with a 'yea' or 'nay' vote.
H.R. 297 will treat gun owners worse than terrorists. It is one terrible piece of legislation, introduced in the name of protecting us against mass murders such as Cho Seung-Hui. It is always interesting as to how politicians will use one single crazed idiot as a tool by which to hit ordinary citizens over the head and rob them of their rights.
GOA has issued yet another alert on this debacle. It is time to contact Congress about this foul scheme to ram through H.R. 297. This will be a major knock-down, drag-out fight that pits the NRA against 2nd Amendment rights, and Republican against Republican.
Perhaps we can garner the support of the so-called 'Blue-Dog' Democrats who have yet to prove they can stop the steam-roller of the ultra-liberal Democratic Congressional machine. If ever there were a time to stop them, the time is now.
Go here to the GOA website for complete information:
http://www.gunowners.org/a042607.htm
Friday, April 27, 2007
Ratings of Democratic Presidential Candidates
Orangeburg, SC (TLS). The first major debate of the upcoming campaign cycle took place tonight in Orangeburg, South Carolina, at the campus of a traditionally black college, South Carolina State University. The University has a first class facility that only bolstered its reputation, and the debate was professionally conducted.
The Democratic candidates gathered on the stage to discuss the major issues of the day and to present their views about America's future.
The Liberty Sphere has rated each of these candidates as a service to those who study politics and public discourse, and to those who are honestly seeking clarification on a myriad of issues that can appear daunting and confusing.
According to the mission statement of The Liberty Sphere, we are here to advocate for groups, candidates, Parties, and organizations that promote human liberty all around the world. Thus, the heart of our rating system revolves around the candidates' views on those issues that we deem to be essential to human liberty.
More about that in a moment.
First, however, we would like to rate the candidates in tonight's debate based upon the strength of their presentation alone. A central element to being a good leader is being a great communicator. We will first rate the candidates based upon their style, manner of presentation, clarity, persuasiveness, and that often elusive quality of ANSWERING THE QUESTION that is posed.
Based upon our analysis of these elements of communication, we feel that John Edwards was strongest. He rarely dodged the question, although he did so a couple of times, and his style of communication was relaxed, succinct, and substantive, all encapsulated in a pleasant, deliberative demeanor that came across very well.
Three candidates tied for second place when it comes to strength of presentation...Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and Dennis Kucinich. Each of these presented their case very well, but none came up to the level of Edwards.
In third place is Chris Dodd, who is no slouch as a debater but who often came across this evening as a bit tentative at times.
Fourth is Hillary Clinton. Her performance was predictably lackluster and did nothing to change the opinions that have already been formed of her. To those who love her, she did nothing to disappoint. To those who dislike her, she did nothing to persuade the leery.
Surprisingly, Barack Hussein Obama came in fifth. Obama was unusually ill-prepared in our view. He seemed to strain for his sentences, coming off as rather hesitant, disjointed, haphazard, and lacking in his usual energy and charisma. One wonders if this was simply a bad night for Obama...one of those days when a person is off their game, or if more significantly, being on the same stage with Democratic veterans was sufficiently intimidating to knock him off-balance.
But for whatever reason, Obama certainly did not help his case at all this evening, and if anything he may have hurt himself with many voters.
Coming in last is the former Senator from Alaska, Mike Gravel, who is such an unknown that his performance would be totally unremarkable, except for his striking anger and vitriol. The candidate came across as a gruff, angry, and irritable curmudgeon who is a bit frightening.
Now, on to the more substantive issues.
In rating the candidates in tonight's debate, The Liberty Sphere looked at 8 key issues that are central to the cause of liberty--national defense, taxes, healthcare, gun rights, abortion, the war on terror, U.S. foreign policy, and immigration control.
National defense is the ONLY thing mandated by the U.S. Constitution as a legitimate role of government, other than to protect and preserve basic human freedom. Without a strong defense, we cannot expect to maintain liberty in a world full of oppression and danger.
Taxes can be oppressive or they can be an adjunct to a healthy society. When taxes become so burdensome that average citizens feel oppressed, with little or no recourse or adequate representation, then liberty suffers. Currently the U.S. Tax Code is oppressive by its sheer size, scope, and contradictory provisions, leaving the electorate with nothing but mass confusion. The IRS is the single biggest example of taxation without representation in America today.
Healthcare is an issue that collectivists are using presently to take away more of the freedoms we enjoy as Americans. If this nation goes with a 'nationalized healthcare plan' funded by tax dollars, all freedom of choice goes out the window both on the part of patients AND doctors.
Gun rights are paramount in the preservation of liberty. Enough said.
Abortion is an issue of human freedom due to the fact that no government can maintain the moral authority to govern if it sanctions atrocity, murder, and barbarism. The Supreme Court passed an important corrective to absolute abortion rights by placing rational restrictions on the practice based upon the view that even medical procedures should be humane and not barbaric. Partial birth abortion is simply barbaric, and every single Democratic candidate stated on the record that they oppose the recent Court decision to ban this blood-thirsty, savage procedure.
This alone was enough to rob every single candidate of a top rating.
America must fight the War on Terror with the resolve to win or else we will not exist as a nation. Our enemies have sworn our annihilation. To back off, cut and run, or proclaim defeat is to accept our demise. We can do much better. The Democrats have little to offer in this most important endeavor.
U.S. foreign policy is crucial in the preservation of liberty. Do we stand with the EU with its Leftist leanings? Do we continue to support the U.N., which has become an organization of murderous thugs that bash America constantly? Or do we stand with our friends, such as NATO, Israel, Australia, Japan, and the eastern European block?
The support of Leftists and their anti-American rhetoric is a prescription for disaster for liberty.
Finally, without immigration control the nation is lost as a bastion of freedom. We CANNOT continue to allow non-citizens to come here illegally, benefit from our way of life without a willingness to adopt our language and customs, and make a mockery out of law-abiding immigrants who obey the law and go through the legal procedure for becoming citizens.
We MUST begin to enforce the nation's immigration laws, or else every single freedom for which our forefathers fought will come to naught.
Thus, based on these 8 key, critical issues that are central to the cause of liberty, The Liberty Sphere rates the Democratic candidates as follows, on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the best score), based upon tonight's debate and the previously-stated views of the candidates:
Governor Bill Richardson--6
Former Senator John Edwards--4
Senator Hillary Clinton--2
Senator Joseph Biden--2
Senator Chris Dodd--2
Rep. Dennis Kucinich--1
Senator Barach Obama--1
Former Senator Mike Gravel--1
As you will note from our ratings, of the 8 Democratic candidates in tonight's debate, Bill Richardson rates way ahead of the pack on the issues that impact liberty. But even then he has rated only a '6.' Thus, while there are aspects of Richardson's views that are encouraging, such as his stance on gun rights, there is actually little to recommend any of the Democrats thus far as potential guardians of our precious liberties.
The Democratic candidates gathered on the stage to discuss the major issues of the day and to present their views about America's future.
The Liberty Sphere has rated each of these candidates as a service to those who study politics and public discourse, and to those who are honestly seeking clarification on a myriad of issues that can appear daunting and confusing.
According to the mission statement of The Liberty Sphere, we are here to advocate for groups, candidates, Parties, and organizations that promote human liberty all around the world. Thus, the heart of our rating system revolves around the candidates' views on those issues that we deem to be essential to human liberty.
More about that in a moment.
First, however, we would like to rate the candidates in tonight's debate based upon the strength of their presentation alone. A central element to being a good leader is being a great communicator. We will first rate the candidates based upon their style, manner of presentation, clarity, persuasiveness, and that often elusive quality of ANSWERING THE QUESTION that is posed.
Based upon our analysis of these elements of communication, we feel that John Edwards was strongest. He rarely dodged the question, although he did so a couple of times, and his style of communication was relaxed, succinct, and substantive, all encapsulated in a pleasant, deliberative demeanor that came across very well.
Three candidates tied for second place when it comes to strength of presentation...Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and Dennis Kucinich. Each of these presented their case very well, but none came up to the level of Edwards.
In third place is Chris Dodd, who is no slouch as a debater but who often came across this evening as a bit tentative at times.
Fourth is Hillary Clinton. Her performance was predictably lackluster and did nothing to change the opinions that have already been formed of her. To those who love her, she did nothing to disappoint. To those who dislike her, she did nothing to persuade the leery.
Surprisingly, Barack Hussein Obama came in fifth. Obama was unusually ill-prepared in our view. He seemed to strain for his sentences, coming off as rather hesitant, disjointed, haphazard, and lacking in his usual energy and charisma. One wonders if this was simply a bad night for Obama...one of those days when a person is off their game, or if more significantly, being on the same stage with Democratic veterans was sufficiently intimidating to knock him off-balance.
But for whatever reason, Obama certainly did not help his case at all this evening, and if anything he may have hurt himself with many voters.
Coming in last is the former Senator from Alaska, Mike Gravel, who is such an unknown that his performance would be totally unremarkable, except for his striking anger and vitriol. The candidate came across as a gruff, angry, and irritable curmudgeon who is a bit frightening.
Now, on to the more substantive issues.
In rating the candidates in tonight's debate, The Liberty Sphere looked at 8 key issues that are central to the cause of liberty--national defense, taxes, healthcare, gun rights, abortion, the war on terror, U.S. foreign policy, and immigration control.
National defense is the ONLY thing mandated by the U.S. Constitution as a legitimate role of government, other than to protect and preserve basic human freedom. Without a strong defense, we cannot expect to maintain liberty in a world full of oppression and danger.
Taxes can be oppressive or they can be an adjunct to a healthy society. When taxes become so burdensome that average citizens feel oppressed, with little or no recourse or adequate representation, then liberty suffers. Currently the U.S. Tax Code is oppressive by its sheer size, scope, and contradictory provisions, leaving the electorate with nothing but mass confusion. The IRS is the single biggest example of taxation without representation in America today.
Healthcare is an issue that collectivists are using presently to take away more of the freedoms we enjoy as Americans. If this nation goes with a 'nationalized healthcare plan' funded by tax dollars, all freedom of choice goes out the window both on the part of patients AND doctors.
Gun rights are paramount in the preservation of liberty. Enough said.
Abortion is an issue of human freedom due to the fact that no government can maintain the moral authority to govern if it sanctions atrocity, murder, and barbarism. The Supreme Court passed an important corrective to absolute abortion rights by placing rational restrictions on the practice based upon the view that even medical procedures should be humane and not barbaric. Partial birth abortion is simply barbaric, and every single Democratic candidate stated on the record that they oppose the recent Court decision to ban this blood-thirsty, savage procedure.
This alone was enough to rob every single candidate of a top rating.
America must fight the War on Terror with the resolve to win or else we will not exist as a nation. Our enemies have sworn our annihilation. To back off, cut and run, or proclaim defeat is to accept our demise. We can do much better. The Democrats have little to offer in this most important endeavor.
U.S. foreign policy is crucial in the preservation of liberty. Do we stand with the EU with its Leftist leanings? Do we continue to support the U.N., which has become an organization of murderous thugs that bash America constantly? Or do we stand with our friends, such as NATO, Israel, Australia, Japan, and the eastern European block?
The support of Leftists and their anti-American rhetoric is a prescription for disaster for liberty.
Finally, without immigration control the nation is lost as a bastion of freedom. We CANNOT continue to allow non-citizens to come here illegally, benefit from our way of life without a willingness to adopt our language and customs, and make a mockery out of law-abiding immigrants who obey the law and go through the legal procedure for becoming citizens.
We MUST begin to enforce the nation's immigration laws, or else every single freedom for which our forefathers fought will come to naught.
Thus, based on these 8 key, critical issues that are central to the cause of liberty, The Liberty Sphere rates the Democratic candidates as follows, on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the best score), based upon tonight's debate and the previously-stated views of the candidates:
Governor Bill Richardson--6
Former Senator John Edwards--4
Senator Hillary Clinton--2
Senator Joseph Biden--2
Senator Chris Dodd--2
Rep. Dennis Kucinich--1
Senator Barach Obama--1
Former Senator Mike Gravel--1
As you will note from our ratings, of the 8 Democratic candidates in tonight's debate, Bill Richardson rates way ahead of the pack on the issues that impact liberty. But even then he has rated only a '6.' Thus, while there are aspects of Richardson's views that are encouraging, such as his stance on gun rights, there is actually little to recommend any of the Democrats thus far as potential guardians of our precious liberties.
Update on Overweight North Carolina Boy
Columbus, NC (TLS). Joyce Painter, the mother of the overweight boy who was seized by the North Carolina Department of Social Services, states that she has a court hearing scheduled for Monday morning in an attempt to regain custody of her son.
Painter's nightmare resulted from being investigated by DSS due to her son's weight. The boy is 7 years old and weighs 250 pounds.
Despite Painter's documented consultation with numerous physicians concerning her son's obesity, DSS officials decided to go aggressive. In the weeks prior to his being snatched from his Mother by government officials, the boy had lost 14 pounds in a special program for obese children at Duke University.
In spite of the progress, DSS officials proceeded to seize the boy, remove him from the home, and then 'ask around' about Mrs. Painter's food choices at the local grocery store.
Outraged store employees contacted the news media about the tactics of DSS officials. Yet thus far, no amount of public outrage about this case has been enough to move DSS one inch away from their heavy-handed, gestapo tactics.
My friends, if the government Gestapo can seize a child because they deem him to be 'too fat,' then no parent in North Carolina is safe from the outrageous intrusion of DSS.
What will be next? Removing a child from a home because grandpa comes over once a week and smokes a cigar during his visit?
Give me a break. This stuff is WAY over the top.
Painter's nightmare resulted from being investigated by DSS due to her son's weight. The boy is 7 years old and weighs 250 pounds.
Despite Painter's documented consultation with numerous physicians concerning her son's obesity, DSS officials decided to go aggressive. In the weeks prior to his being snatched from his Mother by government officials, the boy had lost 14 pounds in a special program for obese children at Duke University.
In spite of the progress, DSS officials proceeded to seize the boy, remove him from the home, and then 'ask around' about Mrs. Painter's food choices at the local grocery store.
Outraged store employees contacted the news media about the tactics of DSS officials. Yet thus far, no amount of public outrage about this case has been enough to move DSS one inch away from their heavy-handed, gestapo tactics.
My friends, if the government Gestapo can seize a child because they deem him to be 'too fat,' then no parent in North Carolina is safe from the outrageous intrusion of DSS.
What will be next? Removing a child from a home because grandpa comes over once a week and smokes a cigar during his visit?
Give me a break. This stuff is WAY over the top.
Former Ware Shoals Principal Gets New Job
Ware Shoals, SC (TLS). Former Ware Shoals High School principal Jane Blackwell, who was relieved of her duties this week by the School Board, has been given a new assignment in the technology department of the district office.
Blackwell will begin her new assignment Monday morning.
The Ware Shoals School Board decided this week after more than 20 hours of testimony that although they feel there is no evidence to implicate Blackwell in any wrongdoing, it is a prudent course to reassign her, given the publicity of the scandal at the high school which she served as principal.
Thus, although the Board removed Blackwell as principal of the high school, they agreed that she could remain as an employee of the school district.
Blackwell's woes began when law enforcement officials charged former cheerleader coach Jill Moore with several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The Sheriff's department charged Blackwell with obstruction in their investigation of Moore.
Upon her arrest, Moore resigned as a school employee. Blackwell, however, maintained her innocence and requested hearings before the School Board to make her case for continued employment with the Ware Shoals School District.
Blackwell will begin her new assignment Monday morning.
The Ware Shoals School Board decided this week after more than 20 hours of testimony that although they feel there is no evidence to implicate Blackwell in any wrongdoing, it is a prudent course to reassign her, given the publicity of the scandal at the high school which she served as principal.
Thus, although the Board removed Blackwell as principal of the high school, they agreed that she could remain as an employee of the school district.
Blackwell's woes began when law enforcement officials charged former cheerleader coach Jill Moore with several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The Sheriff's department charged Blackwell with obstruction in their investigation of Moore.
Upon her arrest, Moore resigned as a school employee. Blackwell, however, maintained her innocence and requested hearings before the School Board to make her case for continued employment with the Ware Shoals School District.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
The Capitalist in All of Us
Washington, DC (TLS). The venerable Walter Williams (our favorite intellectual) put forth a proposal in a recent column that put our minds into overdrive. His column was on the subject of tobacco smoke and how much smoke-free air is worth to those who seem determined to ban smoking entirely.
Williams decided to try a little experiment. It went something like this. When a sponsor called to ask Williams to deliver a keynote address, he would say, 'Yes, I will do it, but only if I am allowed to smoke.'
The last time he tried this the sponsor was a representative in the U.S. Congress who had asked Williams to deliver an address in one of the forum rooms at the U.S. Capitol. Smoking, of course, is not allowed in those particular areas.
Williams informed his sponsor that he would not come unless he were allowed to smoke.
The Congressman got permission for Williams to smoke. Why? Because he placed more value on Williams' words of wisdom than he did smoke-free air.
This got us to thinking. Perhaps we could try this experiment on a more personal level, such as a private residence.
You see, I maintain that no matter how vehemently certain persons denounce capitalism, there is a capitalist lurking inside each and every member of the human race. How do I know this? Because everyone has their price.
In this case, I wanted to know how much a smoke-free environment in a private residence was worth to the owners.
I realized there are those who cannot under any circumstance be around tobacco smoke for various reasons, such as allergies, asthma, or other various and sundry lung problems that effect breathing. In those circumstances, no price can be placed on the value of smoke-free air...in most cases. But certainly not all. Even many of those have a price. regardless of their health status.
My experiment would commence on a recent trip out of town to a place where I was covering a story in East Tennessee. I was to stay in the home of some close friends overnight. These friends are non-smokers.
After I had come in from a long day, we shared a meal and settled down to a DVD and some fine Scotch. This seemed a good time to begin my experiment. So, I asked, 'I know you folks don't smoke, but I gotta tell ya, this Scotch just seems to cry out for a good cigar. How much are you willing to take as payment for granting me permission to smoke?'
They looked at each other with an uncomfortable but amused deportment, and stated that they did not want any smoke in the house, period. It was then that I upped the ante.
'Would you take 100 bucks for the right to smoke?'
This brought forth laughter. When they saw I was dead-serious, they said, once again, 'We don't place a premium on smoke-free air.'
I calmly stated, 'Ok, I understand, but I do believe that everyone has their price. And I sure would like a cigar with this Scotch. So, would you take 500 bucks?'
The amused and uncomfortable deportment changed almost immediately to dead-seriousness.
'You would pay us 500 dollars to allow you to smoke your cigar?'
'I sure would,' I said.
They whispered to each other for a bit, and then said they didn't know if 500 would be enough, given the fact that they would need to deodorize their furniture and clothing.
Then, I dropped the biggie on them. I said, 'Ok, I want to be completely fair about this. I am willing to give you 1000 dollars to smoke. 1000 bucks...in cash.'
The wife looked at her husband in astonishment and said, 'Dang, honey, that will pay for 6 months' worth of your medication!' Her husband has a digestive disorder.
'One thousand dollars in cash, tonight, for the permission to smoke your cigar....' they said.
'That's right,' I said, '1000 big ones, cash on the barrel-head.'
They looked at each other and nodded. 'We'll take it!!'
I gave them the 1000 bucks, I lit up my cigar, and everyone was happy--that is, with the exception of that part of me that was moaning over the fact that I just dropped 1000 big ones just to prove a point.
Thus, in this case, smoke-free air inside a private residence was worth the grand sum of 1000 dollars. They can denounce smoking with all the righteous indignation they can muster--up to the 1000-dollar line of demarcation.
But 1000 dollars in cash was their price. For that price they were willing to give up on their insistence on smoke-free air.
My friends, if the price is right, most of our supposed pet peeves go flying out the window, including tobacco smoke. Everyone has a price. And that is why I maintain that inside of every single human being on earth there is a capitalist lurking.
In the frenzied mad dash of municipalities to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and other public places, perhaps business owners should demand to be paid by those municipalities for their clean air. How much is that clean air worth to the municipality? After all, it is that municipality that is demanding that business owners stop a practice inside of a privately-owned enterprise, thus meddling in the affairs of private property owners.
If those municipalities and taxpayers who demand a smoke-free environment are truly serious about the issue of smoke-free air, then how much is it worth to them? As a business owner I would demand that the municipality pay me 5000 bucks per month to prevent my customers from smoking.
If the taxpayers and the city officials think that smoke-free air is not worth 5000 bucks per month, then maybe they are not all that serious about the importance of 'clean air.' After all, I lose business when I prevent my smoking customers from smoking. Plus, you would be so pompous as to assume you have any right whatsoever to interfere in what happens on private property--which you do not. It seems to me that 5000 bucks per month is a fair price to ask for the right to dictate how I treat my customers and to insure smoke-free air.
Do I expect this to get anywhere with these collectivists who interfere in private enterprise? No. The 'pc' police in most metropolitan areas is much too strong and much too oblivious to common sense.
Williams decided to try a little experiment. It went something like this. When a sponsor called to ask Williams to deliver a keynote address, he would say, 'Yes, I will do it, but only if I am allowed to smoke.'
The last time he tried this the sponsor was a representative in the U.S. Congress who had asked Williams to deliver an address in one of the forum rooms at the U.S. Capitol. Smoking, of course, is not allowed in those particular areas.
Williams informed his sponsor that he would not come unless he were allowed to smoke.
The Congressman got permission for Williams to smoke. Why? Because he placed more value on Williams' words of wisdom than he did smoke-free air.
This got us to thinking. Perhaps we could try this experiment on a more personal level, such as a private residence.
You see, I maintain that no matter how vehemently certain persons denounce capitalism, there is a capitalist lurking inside each and every member of the human race. How do I know this? Because everyone has their price.
In this case, I wanted to know how much a smoke-free environment in a private residence was worth to the owners.
I realized there are those who cannot under any circumstance be around tobacco smoke for various reasons, such as allergies, asthma, or other various and sundry lung problems that effect breathing. In those circumstances, no price can be placed on the value of smoke-free air...in most cases. But certainly not all. Even many of those have a price. regardless of their health status.
My experiment would commence on a recent trip out of town to a place where I was covering a story in East Tennessee. I was to stay in the home of some close friends overnight. These friends are non-smokers.
After I had come in from a long day, we shared a meal and settled down to a DVD and some fine Scotch. This seemed a good time to begin my experiment. So, I asked, 'I know you folks don't smoke, but I gotta tell ya, this Scotch just seems to cry out for a good cigar. How much are you willing to take as payment for granting me permission to smoke?'
They looked at each other with an uncomfortable but amused deportment, and stated that they did not want any smoke in the house, period. It was then that I upped the ante.
'Would you take 100 bucks for the right to smoke?'
This brought forth laughter. When they saw I was dead-serious, they said, once again, 'We don't place a premium on smoke-free air.'
I calmly stated, 'Ok, I understand, but I do believe that everyone has their price. And I sure would like a cigar with this Scotch. So, would you take 500 bucks?'
The amused and uncomfortable deportment changed almost immediately to dead-seriousness.
'You would pay us 500 dollars to allow you to smoke your cigar?'
'I sure would,' I said.
They whispered to each other for a bit, and then said they didn't know if 500 would be enough, given the fact that they would need to deodorize their furniture and clothing.
Then, I dropped the biggie on them. I said, 'Ok, I want to be completely fair about this. I am willing to give you 1000 dollars to smoke. 1000 bucks...in cash.'
The wife looked at her husband in astonishment and said, 'Dang, honey, that will pay for 6 months' worth of your medication!' Her husband has a digestive disorder.
'One thousand dollars in cash, tonight, for the permission to smoke your cigar....' they said.
'That's right,' I said, '1000 big ones, cash on the barrel-head.'
They looked at each other and nodded. 'We'll take it!!'
I gave them the 1000 bucks, I lit up my cigar, and everyone was happy--that is, with the exception of that part of me that was moaning over the fact that I just dropped 1000 big ones just to prove a point.
Thus, in this case, smoke-free air inside a private residence was worth the grand sum of 1000 dollars. They can denounce smoking with all the righteous indignation they can muster--up to the 1000-dollar line of demarcation.
But 1000 dollars in cash was their price. For that price they were willing to give up on their insistence on smoke-free air.
My friends, if the price is right, most of our supposed pet peeves go flying out the window, including tobacco smoke. Everyone has a price. And that is why I maintain that inside of every single human being on earth there is a capitalist lurking.
In the frenzied mad dash of municipalities to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and other public places, perhaps business owners should demand to be paid by those municipalities for their clean air. How much is that clean air worth to the municipality? After all, it is that municipality that is demanding that business owners stop a practice inside of a privately-owned enterprise, thus meddling in the affairs of private property owners.
If those municipalities and taxpayers who demand a smoke-free environment are truly serious about the issue of smoke-free air, then how much is it worth to them? As a business owner I would demand that the municipality pay me 5000 bucks per month to prevent my customers from smoking.
If the taxpayers and the city officials think that smoke-free air is not worth 5000 bucks per month, then maybe they are not all that serious about the importance of 'clean air.' After all, I lose business when I prevent my smoking customers from smoking. Plus, you would be so pompous as to assume you have any right whatsoever to interfere in what happens on private property--which you do not. It seems to me that 5000 bucks per month is a fair price to ask for the right to dictate how I treat my customers and to insure smoke-free air.
Do I expect this to get anywhere with these collectivists who interfere in private enterprise? No. The 'pc' police in most metropolitan areas is much too strong and much too oblivious to common sense.
Vast Ignorance of American History
Washington, DC (TLS). For one reason or another, the United States has produced a generation or two of persons who exhibit a vast ignorance of American history. This is partly due to the dumbing down of the U.S. educational system, which is reluctant to reward students on the basis of merit for the fear of harming their 'self-esteem.'
At any rate, vast numbers of Americans are woefully ignorant of our nation's history, the nature of its form of government and how that government is supposed to work, and the importance of the private sector in American life--including the importance of private property and private, free enterprise.
Today there are many out there who are all too willing to exploit this ignorance for either ill-gotten gain or for subversive purposes.
Walter Williams exposes these charlatans in this eye-opening article:
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams041807.php3
At any rate, vast numbers of Americans are woefully ignorant of our nation's history, the nature of its form of government and how that government is supposed to work, and the importance of the private sector in American life--including the importance of private property and private, free enterprise.
Today there are many out there who are all too willing to exploit this ignorance for either ill-gotten gain or for subversive purposes.
Walter Williams exposes these charlatans in this eye-opening article:
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams041807.php3
What's Going on with Cities that Defy U.S. Law?
Washington, DC (TLS). First it was San Francisco. Now Oakland. And of course, Virginia Beach has been caught red-handed doing the very same thing.
What do these and other U.S. cities have in common?
They are breaking the law. In fact, they are committing felonies.
The Mayor of San Francisco stated earlier this week that his city would be a 'safe haven' for illegal aliens and would defy any federal order to stop the practice. Today, we received word that Oakland will do the very same thing.
Several weeks ago, Virginia Beach, Virginia was exposed by Bill O'Reilley for being a town that defies U.S. law by granting safe haven to foreign law-breakers.
There are several salient points we need to remember about this practice.
First, if the federal government allows these cities to get away with this, then George Wallace and the cities of Birmingham, Montgomery, and Tuscaloosa, Alabama were correct in defying de-segregation orders from the federal government during the Civil Rights era.
In short, if Constitutional law is not the prevailing law of the land--the entirety of the land--then those towns in Alabama had as much a right to defy the law by continuing segregation as San Francisco has to defy the U.S. Code in aiding and abetting illegal aliens (which is a felony).
Second, if these cities persist in defying federal law, then the rest of the country should demand that Congress immediately withdraw the funding of millions of dollars' worth of projects that benefit those cities, using our tax dollars. I don't want my tax money being used to support a municipality that willfully and openly defies the law of the land. And, to be fair, these cities should not even expect the government to give them any money, since they obviously have no respect for its Constitution and laws.
In addition, we should also make it clear to these towns that they will no longer be afforded the
protection of the U.S. military in the event of a terrorist attack or any other siege upon them.
If they don't play by the same rules that the rest of us are forced to play by, then they don't get the defense of the military I proudly support--particularly a place like San Francisco, which is unabashedly anti-military.
They can fend for themselves if they are attacked.
Third, it is time we began to demand that our elected officials enforce the provisions of the U.S. Code, which clearly states that aiding and abetting illegal aliens is a felony that carries with it certain punishments determined by the courts.
City government officials who defy the law and openly encourage others to do so should be immediately arrested and sent to jail. Once they are charged with the felonies they have committed, they can then argue their case in a court of law.
So, what, exactly, is preventing the immediate arrest of the Mayors of San Francisco, Oakland, Virginia Beach, and other so-called 'safe haven' cities? They have openly stated before all of America that they are defying the law and will continue to do so. We have them on tape stating these things. It should be fairly easy to prove in court that they are guilty of felonies.
Why are we not enforcing the rule of law in this country?
As it stands now, these are renegade cities that are run by renegade, out of control Mayors and other city officials. If we let them do this, then how can we with any integrity enforce ANY federal law ANYWHERE?
What if my town down south decides that it is going to be a 'safe haven' city for members of the Klu Klux Klan who are on the run from the FBI?
If San Francisco can pull this shameful, in-your-face defiance of the rule of law, then what is to prevent any town in America from doing the same thing with OTHER issues?
Until this practice is stopped cold by placing city officials under arrest and charged with felonies, then this nation is on the brink of imploding from the lack of the moral authority to govern. Without the rule of law as established by the Constitution and the U.S. Code, then we are stuck in a time-warp prior to the Civil War when some of us thought that local governments could defy federal law.
We already fought one war over that issue. We don't need another one. Put the perpetrators in jail where they belong.
What do these and other U.S. cities have in common?
They are breaking the law. In fact, they are committing felonies.
The Mayor of San Francisco stated earlier this week that his city would be a 'safe haven' for illegal aliens and would defy any federal order to stop the practice. Today, we received word that Oakland will do the very same thing.
Several weeks ago, Virginia Beach, Virginia was exposed by Bill O'Reilley for being a town that defies U.S. law by granting safe haven to foreign law-breakers.
There are several salient points we need to remember about this practice.
First, if the federal government allows these cities to get away with this, then George Wallace and the cities of Birmingham, Montgomery, and Tuscaloosa, Alabama were correct in defying de-segregation orders from the federal government during the Civil Rights era.
In short, if Constitutional law is not the prevailing law of the land--the entirety of the land--then those towns in Alabama had as much a right to defy the law by continuing segregation as San Francisco has to defy the U.S. Code in aiding and abetting illegal aliens (which is a felony).
Second, if these cities persist in defying federal law, then the rest of the country should demand that Congress immediately withdraw the funding of millions of dollars' worth of projects that benefit those cities, using our tax dollars. I don't want my tax money being used to support a municipality that willfully and openly defies the law of the land. And, to be fair, these cities should not even expect the government to give them any money, since they obviously have no respect for its Constitution and laws.
In addition, we should also make it clear to these towns that they will no longer be afforded the
protection of the U.S. military in the event of a terrorist attack or any other siege upon them.
If they don't play by the same rules that the rest of us are forced to play by, then they don't get the defense of the military I proudly support--particularly a place like San Francisco, which is unabashedly anti-military.
They can fend for themselves if they are attacked.
Third, it is time we began to demand that our elected officials enforce the provisions of the U.S. Code, which clearly states that aiding and abetting illegal aliens is a felony that carries with it certain punishments determined by the courts.
City government officials who defy the law and openly encourage others to do so should be immediately arrested and sent to jail. Once they are charged with the felonies they have committed, they can then argue their case in a court of law.
So, what, exactly, is preventing the immediate arrest of the Mayors of San Francisco, Oakland, Virginia Beach, and other so-called 'safe haven' cities? They have openly stated before all of America that they are defying the law and will continue to do so. We have them on tape stating these things. It should be fairly easy to prove in court that they are guilty of felonies.
Why are we not enforcing the rule of law in this country?
As it stands now, these are renegade cities that are run by renegade, out of control Mayors and other city officials. If we let them do this, then how can we with any integrity enforce ANY federal law ANYWHERE?
What if my town down south decides that it is going to be a 'safe haven' city for members of the Klu Klux Klan who are on the run from the FBI?
If San Francisco can pull this shameful, in-your-face defiance of the rule of law, then what is to prevent any town in America from doing the same thing with OTHER issues?
Until this practice is stopped cold by placing city officials under arrest and charged with felonies, then this nation is on the brink of imploding from the lack of the moral authority to govern. Without the rule of law as established by the Constitution and the U.S. Code, then we are stuck in a time-warp prior to the Civil War when some of us thought that local governments could defy federal law.
We already fought one war over that issue. We don't need another one. Put the perpetrators in jail where they belong.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Cho an Islamic Terrorist, Says Virginia Cop
Washington, DC (TLS). Pamela Geller over at Atlas Shrugs has received some explosive new information concerning Virginia Tech mass murderer Cho Seung Hui. According to a Virginia law enforcement official who has seen the text of the manifesto (which is still being withheld from the public), Cho quotes extensively from the Koran.
In addition, Cho's manner of shaving himself before a terrorist attack is reminiscent of the 9/11 terrorist attack.
All of this is in addition to his taking on an Islamic name prior to the massacre--Ishmail Ax.
This is big news, folks. So, click on the link below and go over to Atlas Shrugs to read this story. Read ALL of it. The most damning part of the videos have not yet been released, either!
Click here now:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/04/ismail_and_the_.html
In addition, Cho's manner of shaving himself before a terrorist attack is reminiscent of the 9/11 terrorist attack.
All of this is in addition to his taking on an Islamic name prior to the massacre--Ishmail Ax.
This is big news, folks. So, click on the link below and go over to Atlas Shrugs to read this story. Read ALL of it. The most damning part of the videos have not yet been released, either!
Click here now:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/04/ismail_and_the_.html
The Electability Factor--A New Look at Rudy
Washington, DC (TLS). Many conservative groups are taking a new look at Rudy Giuliani. The key issue at play--electability. Many believe that of the announced candidates, Giuliani is the one most likely to defeat either Hillary or Obama in November of 2008.
At the present time, they have the facts on their side.
Take Hillary, for example. In New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, Giuliani beats Hillary by ELEVEN POINTS in a head-to-head matchup, if the election were held today. In Florida, the race is tighter, but Giuliani is still ahead. In Ohio the two are in a dead-heat.
What does all of this mean? It means that Giuliani is strong in those states where Republicans have been weak in the past four Presidential elections.
It is for this reason that many staunch conservative groups, evangelical Christians included, are taking a second look a Rudy Giuliani. When compared to Hillary or Obama, Giuliani is a Jerry Falwell conservative.
All of this information assumes that Fred Thompson is not in the race, since he has not announced. It is generally believed that Thompson would also run a very strong campaign against Hillary and Obama.
Read the entire report here:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070424b.html
At the present time, they have the facts on their side.
Take Hillary, for example. In New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, Giuliani beats Hillary by ELEVEN POINTS in a head-to-head matchup, if the election were held today. In Florida, the race is tighter, but Giuliani is still ahead. In Ohio the two are in a dead-heat.
What does all of this mean? It means that Giuliani is strong in those states where Republicans have been weak in the past four Presidential elections.
It is for this reason that many staunch conservative groups, evangelical Christians included, are taking a second look a Rudy Giuliani. When compared to Hillary or Obama, Giuliani is a Jerry Falwell conservative.
All of this information assumes that Fred Thompson is not in the race, since he has not announced. It is generally believed that Thompson would also run a very strong campaign against Hillary and Obama.
Read the entire report here:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200704/POL20070424b.html
Gun Grabbers on the March--H.R.297
Washington, DC (TLS). No matter what the Democrats in Washington say publicly about there being no serious challenge to gun rights in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre, it is clear that the gun-grabbers are on the march with a vengeance.
H.R. 297 has been introduced in the House--the Dingell-McCarthy bill, which if enacted will take the Brady Bill to new heights in rolling back 2nd Amendment rights.
This bill is so serious and damaging that Gun Owners of America issued a special 'GOA Alert' to notify its members of an all-out effort to get this measure defeated. GOA states that this piece of legislation, under the guise of closing the so-called 'background check loophole,' will prevent millions of honest, law-abiding Americans from buying firearms.
For example, if you are a military Veteran who has suffered at any point in the past from post-traumatic stress disorder, you will be prevented from owning a gun under the provisions of this bill.
Your country called on you to bear a gun in the defense of this nation, yet your country is getting ready to claim you are unfit to bear a gun as a civilian, if this measure is passed.
YET THE NRA IS SUPPORTING IT!
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-New York, has failed in getting broad support for her relentless attempts at banning weapons thus far. She attempted to get us to lower our alert level by stating publicly this week that 'this Congress is pro-gun. There will be no anti-gun legislation from this Congress.'
McCarthy lied.
No sooner had she made that statement than she had introduced H.R. 297 along with Rep. Dingell. The two apparently have now gained some allies and support from some strange bedfellows, including some top Republicans and the NRA!
This bill is a farce and should be defeated. It is nothing more than one more veiled attempt at preventing millions of ordinary citizens from gaining access to guns.
Read the GOA Alert here:
http://www.gunowners.org/a042307.htm
H.R. 297 has been introduced in the House--the Dingell-McCarthy bill, which if enacted will take the Brady Bill to new heights in rolling back 2nd Amendment rights.
This bill is so serious and damaging that Gun Owners of America issued a special 'GOA Alert' to notify its members of an all-out effort to get this measure defeated. GOA states that this piece of legislation, under the guise of closing the so-called 'background check loophole,' will prevent millions of honest, law-abiding Americans from buying firearms.
For example, if you are a military Veteran who has suffered at any point in the past from post-traumatic stress disorder, you will be prevented from owning a gun under the provisions of this bill.
Your country called on you to bear a gun in the defense of this nation, yet your country is getting ready to claim you are unfit to bear a gun as a civilian, if this measure is passed.
YET THE NRA IS SUPPORTING IT!
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-New York, has failed in getting broad support for her relentless attempts at banning weapons thus far. She attempted to get us to lower our alert level by stating publicly this week that 'this Congress is pro-gun. There will be no anti-gun legislation from this Congress.'
McCarthy lied.
No sooner had she made that statement than she had introduced H.R. 297 along with Rep. Dingell. The two apparently have now gained some allies and support from some strange bedfellows, including some top Republicans and the NRA!
This bill is a farce and should be defeated. It is nothing more than one more veiled attempt at preventing millions of ordinary citizens from gaining access to guns.
Read the GOA Alert here:
http://www.gunowners.org/a042307.htm
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Blackwell Ousted as Principal of Ware Shoals High
Ware Shoals, SC (TLS). In a meeting that lasted until 2 AM, the Ware Shoals School Board decided to remove Jane Blackwell as principal of Ware Shoals High School in the wake of the scandal that involved former cheerleader coach Jill Moore.
Blackwell will be reassigned to another position within the school district, however.
This suggests that the Board accepted the core of Blackwell's position of innocence, yet it was felt that to return Blackwell to her former position as principal of the high school where the cheerleader sex scandal took place would be ill-advised.
Blackwell still faces charges of obstruction.
Thus, this particular chapter of the scandal that brought international attention to Ware Shoals is closed. But there is much more to come. Blackwell has yet to have her day in court. Circuit Solicitor Jerry Peace still has to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute Blackwell.
And then, there is the whole matter of Jill Moore.
Moore is charged with several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. She is not charged with criminal sexual conduct, according to the Circuit Solicitor's office, because the cheerleaders involved in the scandal were all over the legal age of consent.
Blackwell will be reassigned to another position within the school district, however.
This suggests that the Board accepted the core of Blackwell's position of innocence, yet it was felt that to return Blackwell to her former position as principal of the high school where the cheerleader sex scandal took place would be ill-advised.
Blackwell still faces charges of obstruction.
Thus, this particular chapter of the scandal that brought international attention to Ware Shoals is closed. But there is much more to come. Blackwell has yet to have her day in court. Circuit Solicitor Jerry Peace still has to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute Blackwell.
And then, there is the whole matter of Jill Moore.
Moore is charged with several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. She is not charged with criminal sexual conduct, according to the Circuit Solicitor's office, because the cheerleaders involved in the scandal were all over the legal age of consent.
N.C. Food Police Snatch Overweight Boy
Columbus, NC (TLS). Joyce Painter, of Polk County, North Carolina, is back in the news concerning the custody of her 7-year-old overweight son. Painter has informed the media that North Carolina DSS officials have called her to inform her of their intention to file a motion in court to seize custody of the Painter boy.
This is in spite of the fact that the boy has lost 14 pounds at a specially supervised program for overweight children at Duke University.
The Liberty Sphere reported on this case several weeks ago when it came to our attention that the gestapo-like tactics of the N.C. Department of Social Services had placed Mrs. Painter in a quandary. They told her that her son was too fat. They told her if he did not lose weight he would be removed from the home.
The jackbooted government thugs even went to Mrs. Painter's local supermarket to inquire about her food-buying habits...an action that resulted in the supermarket contacting the local news media to complain about the heavy-handed tactics of DSS.
A local TV News station sent a reporter and a camera to the Painter home to confront the Social Worker from DSS concerning their questionable tactics in dealing with the case. The case worker stated she could not conduct the meeting due to 'confidentiality issues.'
This is in spite of the fact that DSS had already violated confidentiality by going to Mrs. Painter's grocery store to 'ask around' about whether or not she had been buying 'treats' for her son.
And now, in spite of the fact that the Painter boy is losing weight, DSS plans to proceed with the motion for a court order to remove the boy from the home.
We at The Liberty Sphere have never attempted to hide our utter disdain for government power run amok. If ever there were an example of the ominous tentacles of 'big brother,' this is it. It seems to us that a court order is in order, alright...an order to shut down the Polk County DSS pending a full investigation into unprofessional conduct, harassment, bullying, and gestapo tactics aimed at Mrs. Painter, simply because her son is overweight.
Let the food police be damned.
This is in spite of the fact that the boy has lost 14 pounds at a specially supervised program for overweight children at Duke University.
The Liberty Sphere reported on this case several weeks ago when it came to our attention that the gestapo-like tactics of the N.C. Department of Social Services had placed Mrs. Painter in a quandary. They told her that her son was too fat. They told her if he did not lose weight he would be removed from the home.
The jackbooted government thugs even went to Mrs. Painter's local supermarket to inquire about her food-buying habits...an action that resulted in the supermarket contacting the local news media to complain about the heavy-handed tactics of DSS.
A local TV News station sent a reporter and a camera to the Painter home to confront the Social Worker from DSS concerning their questionable tactics in dealing with the case. The case worker stated she could not conduct the meeting due to 'confidentiality issues.'
This is in spite of the fact that DSS had already violated confidentiality by going to Mrs. Painter's grocery store to 'ask around' about whether or not she had been buying 'treats' for her son.
And now, in spite of the fact that the Painter boy is losing weight, DSS plans to proceed with the motion for a court order to remove the boy from the home.
We at The Liberty Sphere have never attempted to hide our utter disdain for government power run amok. If ever there were an example of the ominous tentacles of 'big brother,' this is it. It seems to us that a court order is in order, alright...an order to shut down the Polk County DSS pending a full investigation into unprofessional conduct, harassment, bullying, and gestapo tactics aimed at Mrs. Painter, simply because her son is overweight.
Let the food police be damned.
School Board Meeting in Ware Shoals Drags On
Ware Shoals, SC (TLS). The Ware Shoals School Board's meeting to determine the fate of high school principal Jane Blackwell is dragging into the wee hours of the morning, with the decision concerning Blackwell's continued employment still hanging in the balance.
News sources report that in spite of the fact that the Board has made its decision concerning Blackwell continuing as principal of Ware Shoals High School, the Board is delaying the announcement of that decision so that it can provide a complete oral report of all of the testimony that led to its decision.
This means that page after page of testimony is being read at the meeting prior to making the announcement concerning Blackwell.
Blackwell has consistently maintained her innocence of the obstruction charge resulting from the investigation into former Ware Shoals High School cheerleader coach Jill Moore and the cheerleader sex scandal that involved two S.C. National Guardsmen.
The Ware Shoals School Board began today's meeting at 5:30 PM, and as of this moment the meeting is dragging on as the Board provides full details of all of the information it gathered concerning Blackwell's handling of the Jill Moore-Cheerleader scandal.
At the present rate, it could take the Board several more hours to complete the reading of the testimony.
The Liberty Sphere will provide an update as soon as it is available.
News sources report that in spite of the fact that the Board has made its decision concerning Blackwell continuing as principal of Ware Shoals High School, the Board is delaying the announcement of that decision so that it can provide a complete oral report of all of the testimony that led to its decision.
This means that page after page of testimony is being read at the meeting prior to making the announcement concerning Blackwell.
Blackwell has consistently maintained her innocence of the obstruction charge resulting from the investigation into former Ware Shoals High School cheerleader coach Jill Moore and the cheerleader sex scandal that involved two S.C. National Guardsmen.
The Ware Shoals School Board began today's meeting at 5:30 PM, and as of this moment the meeting is dragging on as the Board provides full details of all of the information it gathered concerning Blackwell's handling of the Jill Moore-Cheerleader scandal.
At the present rate, it could take the Board several more hours to complete the reading of the testimony.
The Liberty Sphere will provide an update as soon as it is available.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Announcement on Jane Blackwell/Ware Shoals Tonight
Ware Shoals, SC (TLS). The Ware Shoals School Board has informed the media that an announcement concerning Ware Shoals High School principal Jane Blackwell's continued employment will be made tonight.
A meeting will be held at 5:30 PM Monday in the Ware Shoals High School Auditorium. The Board had determined that it needed to review all the evidence before making its decision.
In addition, the attorney for Ms. Blackwell stated that he needed to present police report evidence to the Board for review before they take a vote on the employment of his client.
Blackwell was arrested in January for obstruction following a cheerleader scandal at the Ware Shoals High School, involving the activities of former cheerleader coach Jill Moore, who was charged on several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Allegations that Moore had taken several cheerleaders to a local motel to have sex with two National Guard recruiters resulted in disciplinary action and re-assignment for the two National Guardsmen.
The Ware Shoals School Board for the first time heard Blackwell's side of the story at a special meeting two weeks ago. That meeting went behind closed doors when WSPA-TV channel 7, a CBS affiliate, refused to turn off its cameras during the testimony period of the meeting, as requested days prior to the meeting.
The Board had indicated that it was willing to consider allowing Blackwell to keep her job as principal of Ware Shoals High School if she could demonstrate that she had no intent to obstruct an investigation into Moore.
At tonight's meeting, the Board will review prior testimony, hear further evidence from Blackwell's attorney, and then go into executive session for a vote on Blackwell's continued employment. A Board spokesman stated that when a decision is reached, the Board will make a statement to the media this evening.
The Liberty Sphere will keep you updated on breaking developments....
A meeting will be held at 5:30 PM Monday in the Ware Shoals High School Auditorium. The Board had determined that it needed to review all the evidence before making its decision.
In addition, the attorney for Ms. Blackwell stated that he needed to present police report evidence to the Board for review before they take a vote on the employment of his client.
Blackwell was arrested in January for obstruction following a cheerleader scandal at the Ware Shoals High School, involving the activities of former cheerleader coach Jill Moore, who was charged on several counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Allegations that Moore had taken several cheerleaders to a local motel to have sex with two National Guard recruiters resulted in disciplinary action and re-assignment for the two National Guardsmen.
The Ware Shoals School Board for the first time heard Blackwell's side of the story at a special meeting two weeks ago. That meeting went behind closed doors when WSPA-TV channel 7, a CBS affiliate, refused to turn off its cameras during the testimony period of the meeting, as requested days prior to the meeting.
The Board had indicated that it was willing to consider allowing Blackwell to keep her job as principal of Ware Shoals High School if she could demonstrate that she had no intent to obstruct an investigation into Moore.
At tonight's meeting, the Board will review prior testimony, hear further evidence from Blackwell's attorney, and then go into executive session for a vote on Blackwell's continued employment. A Board spokesman stated that when a decision is reached, the Board will make a statement to the media this evening.
The Liberty Sphere will keep you updated on breaking developments....
Transcripts on April 13 Nifong Bar Hearing
Durham, NC (TLS). The North Carolina Bar is continuing its investigation into charges of prosecutorial misconduct, lying to the court, and ethics violations on the part of Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.
A hearing of the Bar was held on April 13. A transcript of that hearing is available below.
Nifong's legal woes began in the aftermath of the Duke lacrosse rape hoax scandal, the result of which was the proclamation of complete innocence of the students by N.C. Attorney-General Roy Cooper. Nifong's gross mishandling of the case, including that of prosecuting three innocent citizens for political gain, sent him before the Bar for possible disciplinary action that could result in his disbarment.
Liestoppers has provided the complete transcripts of the April 13 hearing. Click here to read:
http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/04/april-13-state-bar-hearing.html
A hearing of the Bar was held on April 13. A transcript of that hearing is available below.
Nifong's legal woes began in the aftermath of the Duke lacrosse rape hoax scandal, the result of which was the proclamation of complete innocence of the students by N.C. Attorney-General Roy Cooper. Nifong's gross mishandling of the case, including that of prosecuting three innocent citizens for political gain, sent him before the Bar for possible disciplinary action that could result in his disbarment.
Liestoppers has provided the complete transcripts of the April 13 hearing. Click here to read:
http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/04/april-13-state-bar-hearing.html
Virginia Tech History--Concealed Guns Save Lives
Blacksburg, Virginia (TLS). Before Virginia Tech enacted a ban on guns on campus, a crazed gunman was subdued by students who were carrying handguns, resulting in a minimum of loss of life. This was five years ago.
Before being subdued by gun-totin' students, the gunman had shot and killed three persons on campus and injured three others--a far cry from the 32 killed and 15 injured last week on a campus that had made sure its students were disarmed and unable to defend themselves.
This story is being retold time and again across the country in similar situations. Citizens who are allowed to carry firearms minimize the loss of life in the face of crazed murderers. Unarmed citizens are sitting ducks.
Virginia Tech made sure its students were sitting ducks through its ridiculous and totally illogical ban on guns.
Read the complete story here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55326
Before being subdued by gun-totin' students, the gunman had shot and killed three persons on campus and injured three others--a far cry from the 32 killed and 15 injured last week on a campus that had made sure its students were disarmed and unable to defend themselves.
This story is being retold time and again across the country in similar situations. Citizens who are allowed to carry firearms minimize the loss of life in the face of crazed murderers. Unarmed citizens are sitting ducks.
Virginia Tech made sure its students were sitting ducks through its ridiculous and totally illogical ban on guns.
Read the complete story here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55326
Sunday, April 22, 2007
The Dog Who Stole My Heart Away
Saluda, NC (TLS). As soon as I first saw him he was my dog. He was a bit shy at first, exhibiting the natural reluctance of a sensitive canine who had been given away three times. I vowed that very day that no one would ever give him away again, and frankly, I could never understand for what good reason 3 different persons would give away a dog with so much to offer. He was loving, playful, loyal, protective, and very smart.
I kept him with me throughout the night so as to engage in that often elusive but most definite phenomenon known as 'bonding.' He was small enough to sleep comfortably in my queen-sized bed. I wondered how he would respond to being with a complete stranger. But when he approached me wagging his tail, licking my hand, and exhibiting the body language of submission, I knew that the bonding had begun.
Beau was the most beautiful dog I had ever seen, a 5-year-old black Lhasa-Apso/Poodle mix. He had the personality of a Lhasa and the keen intelligence of a Poodle. I never ceased to be amazed at the many ways he read my moods, and responded accordingly.
He took care of me as no human being has known how to do, with the exception of my Mother. Fiercely protective and uniquely loyal, he could be ferocious in the face of those he thought meant me harm. He then would gaze at me with those piercing and longing eyes for the slightest hint of approval. He would watch me intently until I patted his head and told him what a good boy he was, and how he had done a good job.
Then, he would wag his tail and lick my hand as if to say, 'I'm glad you approve of me.'
There was never a day that went by in nearly eleven years that I did not approve of him. He was in my thoughts whenever I was away from him. I could not wait until I got home so that I could join him in a glad reunion. He always acted as if I had been gone for weeks and would whimper and whine for several minutes while I rubbed him and patted his little head.
Gradually Beau grew old, and with age came the normal aches and pains--and illnesses. His cataracts gradually took 80% of his sight. His hearing went bad. In his last months of life he had begun to have occasional seizures. And, I could tell he was having some difficulty with his joints.
I had considered euthanasia and had promised myself that I would do it if I perceived he was in constant severe pain. But I never had to make that decision.
One day I heard him wail--a chilling sound that made my heart sink. I had never heard him make that sound before, so I picked him up and cuddled him for a while. He gave me one or two slight licks. I could tell he was tired, so I laid him on his blanket beside me on the sofa.
He immediately went to sleep after giving me one small lick. He rested all night without pain.
I had determined that come morning I would check into arrangements for euthanasia.
Throughout the night Beau slept...snoring. This was nothing new, and I took comfort in the fact that as long as he was snoring he was sleeping comfortably. But with the breaking of the dawn I noticed that the snoring became labored and erratic.
And then there was complete silence.
I reached over and rubbed him, but Beau was gone.
I was struck by the peaceful look of satisfaction on his face. He was just as beautiful in death as he was in life.
It dawned on me that he had died in the manner he had chosen--to be with me at the final moment. That was why he gave me that loud moan I never heard before. He was telling me it was time and that he wanted to be with me.
Beau had been my constant companion, my friend, my baby, for eleven wonderful years. I will always miss him and love him. As the days go by I am only reminded even more of the hole he left in my heart with his passing.
He was simply the very best--the best that ever was. I will have other dogs, no doubt. But there will never be another dog like Beau, the one dog in my entire life who stole my heart away.
I kept him with me throughout the night so as to engage in that often elusive but most definite phenomenon known as 'bonding.' He was small enough to sleep comfortably in my queen-sized bed. I wondered how he would respond to being with a complete stranger. But when he approached me wagging his tail, licking my hand, and exhibiting the body language of submission, I knew that the bonding had begun.
Beau was the most beautiful dog I had ever seen, a 5-year-old black Lhasa-Apso/Poodle mix. He had the personality of a Lhasa and the keen intelligence of a Poodle. I never ceased to be amazed at the many ways he read my moods, and responded accordingly.
He took care of me as no human being has known how to do, with the exception of my Mother. Fiercely protective and uniquely loyal, he could be ferocious in the face of those he thought meant me harm. He then would gaze at me with those piercing and longing eyes for the slightest hint of approval. He would watch me intently until I patted his head and told him what a good boy he was, and how he had done a good job.
Then, he would wag his tail and lick my hand as if to say, 'I'm glad you approve of me.'
There was never a day that went by in nearly eleven years that I did not approve of him. He was in my thoughts whenever I was away from him. I could not wait until I got home so that I could join him in a glad reunion. He always acted as if I had been gone for weeks and would whimper and whine for several minutes while I rubbed him and patted his little head.
Gradually Beau grew old, and with age came the normal aches and pains--and illnesses. His cataracts gradually took 80% of his sight. His hearing went bad. In his last months of life he had begun to have occasional seizures. And, I could tell he was having some difficulty with his joints.
I had considered euthanasia and had promised myself that I would do it if I perceived he was in constant severe pain. But I never had to make that decision.
One day I heard him wail--a chilling sound that made my heart sink. I had never heard him make that sound before, so I picked him up and cuddled him for a while. He gave me one or two slight licks. I could tell he was tired, so I laid him on his blanket beside me on the sofa.
He immediately went to sleep after giving me one small lick. He rested all night without pain.
I had determined that come morning I would check into arrangements for euthanasia.
Throughout the night Beau slept...snoring. This was nothing new, and I took comfort in the fact that as long as he was snoring he was sleeping comfortably. But with the breaking of the dawn I noticed that the snoring became labored and erratic.
And then there was complete silence.
I reached over and rubbed him, but Beau was gone.
I was struck by the peaceful look of satisfaction on his face. He was just as beautiful in death as he was in life.
It dawned on me that he had died in the manner he had chosen--to be with me at the final moment. That was why he gave me that loud moan I never heard before. He was telling me it was time and that he wanted to be with me.
Beau had been my constant companion, my friend, my baby, for eleven wonderful years. I will always miss him and love him. As the days go by I am only reminded even more of the hole he left in my heart with his passing.
He was simply the very best--the best that ever was. I will have other dogs, no doubt. But there will never be another dog like Beau, the one dog in my entire life who stole my heart away.
Coulter Makes the Case for Concealed Carry
Washington, DC (TLS). Ann Coulter's latest column makes the case for allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre. Virginia Tech is a 'gun-free zone.' Thus, no law abiding citizen was allowed to carry their concealed handguns on the campus. They were sitting ducks for a madman like Cho Seung-Hui.
As we saw with the case of the Muslim who went on a shooting spree in Salt Lake City, a concealed handgun carried by an off-duty police officer took down the perpetrator before he could take more lives.
Had someone been on the campus of Virginia Tech with such a concealed weapon, Cho would have been gunned down long before his rampage became the largest single-perpetrator massacre in U.S. history.
Click here for Ann's article:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=179
As we saw with the case of the Muslim who went on a shooting spree in Salt Lake City, a concealed handgun carried by an off-duty police officer took down the perpetrator before he could take more lives.
Had someone been on the campus of Virginia Tech with such a concealed weapon, Cho would have been gunned down long before his rampage became the largest single-perpetrator massacre in U.S. history.
Click here for Ann's article:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=179
The Case for a Fred Thompson Candidacy
Washington, DC (TLS). As they say in politics, things can change overnight. But in these days of instantaneous coverage on the Internet and the primaries moving up to February of 2008, things can change on a dime.
We still have some time to go before we can make any definitive commitment to THE one candidate who can unite libertarians, conservatives, and others who adhere to the principles of the U.S. Constitution. We still like Duncan Hunter, but as the days go by, unless Hunter can begin to amass a war chest that will make him competitive, the likelihood of his being the Republican nominee slowly fades.
Despite Newt Gingrich's popularity with conservatives, and despite his obvious gifts and grasp of the issues, he nonetheless has some negatives that make me nervous...particularly if he is in a showdown with Hillary Clinton. I am not certain that the general population would go for Newt.
This bring us to Fred Thompson. As we have reported on The Liberty Sphere, Thompson's immediate popularity after the mere hint he may run has given conservatives reason to hope again. There are many reasons why Fred Thompson should throw his hat into the ring.
First, Thompson has instant name and face recognition. With that comes free coverage that all the money in the world can't buy. Wherever he goes there is an entourage of admirers and news reporters. The man simply creates a sense of excitement wherever he goes.
This means the campaign cash will most definitely come rolling in.
Second, Thompson has all the right qualities libertarians, conservatives, and independents are looking for--populist appeal, charisma, the quiet but firm resolve of a strong leader, great communication skills, and a very public and no-nonsense support for gun rights, border security, immigration reform, tax cuts, a strong military presence in a dangerous world, and an intent to appoint judges who demonstrate that they have reverence for and are restrained by the U.S. Constitution.
And that means that original intent is the primary guiding principle in interpreting the Constitution.
Third, Thompson doesn't need to be President. This is more important than most people realize. When one reads the writings of the great American statesmen of the past, one gets the strong notion that these men did not enter the public arena because they had some burning personal or selfish desire to be 'career politicians.' They were constrained to enter politics because of the burning issues of the day that had to be addressed.
We have been stung far too many times by career politicians who have had a selfish desire their entire lives to either be President or serve in the Congress. These offices should never be occupied by the power-hungry, but sometimes they are. Ambition can be a good thing, but only to a degree. Selfish ambition in politics is dangerous.
Fred Thompson is not driven by some overriding personal and selfish need to be President. He has had a very successful career both as an attorney and as an actor. One gets the sense from Thompson that he is considering entering the race because of a great need, and because citizens who love liberty and freedom--and who believe in the ultimate wisdom of the Constitution--sincerely want him to run.
In this manner he is more like Ronald Reagan than anyone in the field of candidates in either Party. Reagan did not live to be President. He did not crave the power and attention. He had already made his mark and was quite successful--and wealthy--when he entered politics.
But the burning issues of the day beckoned to him. The people who love liberty called to him. And he answered that call magnificently.
It is hoped that Fred Thompson will hear that same call, that same beckoning.
Political pundit and campaign guru Dick Morris has a stunning article on Thompson this week at Townhall.com. Morris says that Thompson needs to jump in the race NOW rather than later, or else it may be too late. Read how Morris makes the case for an immediate Thompson candidacy, and how an announcement now will more than likely catapult him to front-runner status:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2007/04/20/run_fred,_runnow!
We still have some time to go before we can make any definitive commitment to THE one candidate who can unite libertarians, conservatives, and others who adhere to the principles of the U.S. Constitution. We still like Duncan Hunter, but as the days go by, unless Hunter can begin to amass a war chest that will make him competitive, the likelihood of his being the Republican nominee slowly fades.
Despite Newt Gingrich's popularity with conservatives, and despite his obvious gifts and grasp of the issues, he nonetheless has some negatives that make me nervous...particularly if he is in a showdown with Hillary Clinton. I am not certain that the general population would go for Newt.
This bring us to Fred Thompson. As we have reported on The Liberty Sphere, Thompson's immediate popularity after the mere hint he may run has given conservatives reason to hope again. There are many reasons why Fred Thompson should throw his hat into the ring.
First, Thompson has instant name and face recognition. With that comes free coverage that all the money in the world can't buy. Wherever he goes there is an entourage of admirers and news reporters. The man simply creates a sense of excitement wherever he goes.
This means the campaign cash will most definitely come rolling in.
Second, Thompson has all the right qualities libertarians, conservatives, and independents are looking for--populist appeal, charisma, the quiet but firm resolve of a strong leader, great communication skills, and a very public and no-nonsense support for gun rights, border security, immigration reform, tax cuts, a strong military presence in a dangerous world, and an intent to appoint judges who demonstrate that they have reverence for and are restrained by the U.S. Constitution.
And that means that original intent is the primary guiding principle in interpreting the Constitution.
Third, Thompson doesn't need to be President. This is more important than most people realize. When one reads the writings of the great American statesmen of the past, one gets the strong notion that these men did not enter the public arena because they had some burning personal or selfish desire to be 'career politicians.' They were constrained to enter politics because of the burning issues of the day that had to be addressed.
We have been stung far too many times by career politicians who have had a selfish desire their entire lives to either be President or serve in the Congress. These offices should never be occupied by the power-hungry, but sometimes they are. Ambition can be a good thing, but only to a degree. Selfish ambition in politics is dangerous.
Fred Thompson is not driven by some overriding personal and selfish need to be President. He has had a very successful career both as an attorney and as an actor. One gets the sense from Thompson that he is considering entering the race because of a great need, and because citizens who love liberty and freedom--and who believe in the ultimate wisdom of the Constitution--sincerely want him to run.
In this manner he is more like Ronald Reagan than anyone in the field of candidates in either Party. Reagan did not live to be President. He did not crave the power and attention. He had already made his mark and was quite successful--and wealthy--when he entered politics.
But the burning issues of the day beckoned to him. The people who love liberty called to him. And he answered that call magnificently.
It is hoped that Fred Thompson will hear that same call, that same beckoning.
Political pundit and campaign guru Dick Morris has a stunning article on Thompson this week at Townhall.com. Morris says that Thompson needs to jump in the race NOW rather than later, or else it may be too late. Read how Morris makes the case for an immediate Thompson candidacy, and how an announcement now will more than likely catapult him to front-runner status:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2007/04/20/run_fred,_runnow!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)