Last week, an important victory for freedom loving Americans was recorded.
Certainly, given the majority of the mainstream media has fallen to nothing short of a propaganda arm for the Obama administration, few are likely aware of a significant win of a central tenant to the founding of this nation; private property rights.
A slow creep against property rights, perhaps from back as far as ideas expressed by Stuart Chase in "The Road We Are Traveling", hit a major road block as The Supreme Court ruled in favor for the good guys in a property rights case from Orange County, Florida, which is the greater Orlando market.
We chronicled the case in a blog post earlier this year, noting the results of the case, defended by The Pacific Legal Foundation, would have significant ramifications.
The Pacific Legal Foundation gives an overview of this meaningful victory and its relation to the rights of private property owners across the fruited plain. Take a listen:
Through excessive taxation and regulation, including environmental fees, the government, while not wishing to own your property outright, increasingly controls what you can do with your property with respect to improvements.
A recent study by the American Legislative Exchange Council reported that that the EPA has imposed “at least $13 billion in annual regulatory costs” through the “sue-and-settle” method. As reported by The Washington Times, That approach involves environmental groups suing the EPA for failing to meet deadlines for actions related to the Clean Air or Clean Water act, and the agency negotiating settlements on how to address the issues. The technique effectively removes states and other stakeholders from any involvement in federal environmental policy.
As we noted in a previous essay, if an ever increasing oppressive government, who already has tremendous power
through code enforcement and the permitting process, can shakedown owners
seeking permits to develop their owned property through imposing arbitrary fees,
penalties and or taxes as a condition of obtaining permits is an extension of
extraction that is unethical and unconstitutional.
A violation of the Constitution indeed!
Sadly, however, the rule of law is not always enough. Recently, the EPA, bypassing legislation by Congress relying on executive orders, has implemented plans to increase the already unprecedented power of the scandalous agency.
While the greater majority of these actions are presented as needed effort to limit man made damage to Global Climate Change, the reality is it is a vehicle for the transfer of wealth and control over the citizenry, with particular emphasis on energy and envormnental protection, both of which affect property owners. These are tenants involved in Agenda 21, as we previously noted.
In his writings, Stuart Chase never engaged global warming, but did discuss transforming the free enterprise system into something referred to as "X", joining the Fabian socialists into molding a society to their hearts content in the aftermath of a collapsed free market economy Cloward and Piven style.
The decision in favor of limiting the tentacles of an oppressive government from encroaching upon private property rights places a significant road block on the road the progressives are traveling. That, of course, assumes the rule of law if adhered to, which sadly is a reach these days.
We will take any victory we can, and thanks to the strong work of The Pacific Legal Foundation, we have reason to celebrate. Oppressionists never sleep, so tomorrow is another day.
Showing posts with label Supreme Court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Supreme Court. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Monday, January 14, 2013
External Government Obsolescence
The right of property is the guardian of every other right, and to deprive a people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their liberty --Arthur Lee of the Commonwealth of Virginia
On Tuesday, The Supreme Court of the United States will hear a case regarding property rights centering on government control over an owners right to maximize the productivity or utility of the property. Of course, the founding fathers regarded ownership of private property as the foundation of freedom and prosperity.
FOX News Shannon Bream, a Tallahassee native who earned Juris Doctorate with honors from The Florida State University College of Law, has a report.
The Pacific Legal Foundation, the oldest and most successful public interest legal organization that fights for limited government, property rights, individual rights and a balanced approach to environmental protection, will be in front of the Supreme Court working with the Koontz family. Here is more regarding the public sector shakedown that has handicapped the ability of the Koontz family to maximize return on and of the vacant parcel.
The Hoover Institution has weighed in, recognizing the case is central to property rights, something John Adams found integral to freedom. In fact, most are unaware that before becoming the father of our country, George Washington was a surveyor and mapper.
The Orlando Sentinel had a front page story on the case, as interestingly enough, the property in question is about twenty minutes away, right here in Orange County, Florida just east of lovely downtown Orlando. Please see the maps below of the parcel.
Find Law.com has a good overview of the lengthy goings on in the case, presented below:
Koontz proposed to develop 3.7 acres closest to Highway 50, back to and including the power line easement. In order to develop his property, he sought a management and storage of surface waters permit to dredge three and one quarter acres of wetlands. A staffer from St. Johns agreed to recommend approval if Koontz would deed the remaining portion of his property into a conservation area and perform offsite mitigation by either replacing culverts four and one-half miles southeast of his property or plug certain drainage canals on other property some seven miles away. Alternatively, St. Johns demanded that Koontz reduce his development to one acre and turn the remaining 14 acres into a deed-restricted conservation area. Koontz agreed to deed his excess property into conservation status but refused St. Johns' demands for offsite mitigation or reduction of his development from three and seven-tenths acres to one acre. Consequently, St. Johns denied his permit applications.
As PLF points out, the case asks whether the Constitution places limits on an agency’s ability to demand excessive amounts of money from a land use applicant in exchange for a permit to build on his property.
The American Farm Bureau Federation brilliantly summarizes the impact of the case to the agricultural community: To strengthen landowners’ ability to obtain compensation when permitting authorities impose an arbitrary or disproportionate requirement of money or services as a land-use permit condition, or when authorities refuse to issue a permit based on the landowner’s refusal to agree to an unconstitutional exaction of real property
This case will have significant national impact. Recently, we have been focused on the evil and restrictive policy issues surrounding Agenda 21, but the tentacles of this movement are very far reaching. If an ever increasing oppressive government, who already has tremendous power through code enforcement and the permitting process, can shakedown owners seeking permits to develop their owned property through imposing arbitrary fees, penalties and or taxes as a condition of obtaining permits is an extension of extraction that is unethical and unconstitutional, as I hope we are all about to find out.
A decision in favor of the government will no doubt open the door for the government to demand extraction wherever and whenever it wants. Be advised the government will utilize the decision to further seek the transfer of wealth and exponentially expand the globalist dreams found in Agenda 21, significantly reducing the freedom and liberty of property owners to see maximum return on and or their investment. This will curb investment, reduce utility and value of property, lower tax revenue and limit choice for consumers as development is reduced due to increased costs.
As James Madison noted, Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.
On Tuesday, The Supreme Court of the United States will hear a case regarding property rights centering on government control over an owners right to maximize the productivity or utility of the property. Of course, the founding fathers regarded ownership of private property as the foundation of freedom and prosperity.
FOX News Shannon Bream, a Tallahassee native who earned Juris Doctorate with honors from The Florida State University College of Law, has a report.
The Pacific Legal Foundation, the oldest and most successful public interest legal organization that fights for limited government, property rights, individual rights and a balanced approach to environmental protection, will be in front of the Supreme Court working with the Koontz family. Here is more regarding the public sector shakedown that has handicapped the ability of the Koontz family to maximize return on and of the vacant parcel.
The Hoover Institution has weighed in, recognizing the case is central to property rights, something John Adams found integral to freedom. In fact, most are unaware that before becoming the father of our country, George Washington was a surveyor and mapper.
The Orlando Sentinel had a front page story on the case, as interestingly enough, the property in question is about twenty minutes away, right here in Orange County, Florida just east of lovely downtown Orlando. Please see the maps below of the parcel.
Koontz proposed to develop 3.7 acres closest to Highway 50, back to and including the power line easement. In order to develop his property, he sought a management and storage of surface waters permit to dredge three and one quarter acres of wetlands. A staffer from St. Johns agreed to recommend approval if Koontz would deed the remaining portion of his property into a conservation area and perform offsite mitigation by either replacing culverts four and one-half miles southeast of his property or plug certain drainage canals on other property some seven miles away. Alternatively, St. Johns demanded that Koontz reduce his development to one acre and turn the remaining 14 acres into a deed-restricted conservation area. Koontz agreed to deed his excess property into conservation status but refused St. Johns' demands for offsite mitigation or reduction of his development from three and seven-tenths acres to one acre. Consequently, St. Johns denied his permit applications.
As PLF points out, the case asks whether the Constitution places limits on an agency’s ability to demand excessive amounts of money from a land use applicant in exchange for a permit to build on his property.
The American Farm Bureau Federation brilliantly summarizes the impact of the case to the agricultural community: To strengthen landowners’ ability to obtain compensation when permitting authorities impose an arbitrary or disproportionate requirement of money or services as a land-use permit condition, or when authorities refuse to issue a permit based on the landowner’s refusal to agree to an unconstitutional exaction of real property
This case will have significant national impact. Recently, we have been focused on the evil and restrictive policy issues surrounding Agenda 21, but the tentacles of this movement are very far reaching. If an ever increasing oppressive government, who already has tremendous power through code enforcement and the permitting process, can shakedown owners seeking permits to develop their owned property through imposing arbitrary fees, penalties and or taxes as a condition of obtaining permits is an extension of extraction that is unethical and unconstitutional, as I hope we are all about to find out.
A decision in favor of the government will no doubt open the door for the government to demand extraction wherever and whenever it wants. Be advised the government will utilize the decision to further seek the transfer of wealth and exponentially expand the globalist dreams found in Agenda 21, significantly reducing the freedom and liberty of property owners to see maximum return on and or their investment. This will curb investment, reduce utility and value of property, lower tax revenue and limit choice for consumers as development is reduced due to increased costs.
As James Madison noted, Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Fire Breathes Out of Overton Window
Word on the street is that one of the conservative Supreme Court Judges is considering retirement.
Now, as a conservative, thinking of my country, my fellow man and my children and grandchildren, under zero circumstance would I consider retirement with the current administration in office if I had the honor of being a member of The Supreme Court.
Are you familiar with the Overton Window theory? If not, please immediately familiarize yourself with the theory, as it will be a central tenant surrounding most if not all forthcoming actions by the Obama administration. The theory was highlighted in a recent editorial in The Wall Street Journal when the Chick-fil-a debate uproar was on the front pages.
With the media in criminally complicit concert with the current administration, alternative blog sites have become central to obtaining vital information. Among the top notch blogs I monitor is The Ulsterman Report . A unique and riveting highlight of the site has been an ongoing conversation between the host, Ulsterman, and secret operatives known as The White House Insider, The Military Insider and The Wall Street Insider.
At first review, I thought this may have been fiction, but as time went along I drew the conclusion the intriguing dialogues were very real; with topics and information alarming and dangerous. Information discussed in the interviews frequently became mainstream news weeks later.
In the aftermath of the election, Ulsterman has been introduced to an operative given the moniker of Republican Insider. The conversations remain must reads for Americans seeking the truth.
In the latest conversation with RI, The Ulsterman Report reports that Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to President Obama, has indicated The White House intends to nominate an openly gay individual for appointment to the Supreme Court. RI reports operatives "are testing these waters". Therefore, it is concluded Jarrett and staff are aiming to implement the Overton Window; having the president propose something far outside the majority of the American people only to retreat to an area they regard as a winning position.
The potential appointment of an openly homosexual individual is certain to create a fiery debate. The GOP will be weak as usual, not wanting to potentially alienate any potential supporters. Citizens will be pitted against one another in another chapter of class warfare, and the debate will expand beyond the appointment to gay marriage, which was profound religious effect, to racism and minority rights which could lead to civil unrest. A perfect mess of chaos, which the administration objective.
However, as indicated by RI, while Americans engage in the "Trojan Horse" gay debate and the GOP defends false accusations of being the party of hate, the aforementioned Overton Window position is that administration seeks is to nominate the most radical supreme court justice in the history of the United States.
The administration does not care about the homosexual community in any way other than to use them as a vehicle to promote individuals who share the radical ideas of the administration in their effort to transform the United States of America; moulding it to their hearts desire.
Although the similarities are substantial, this aspirations of this administration far exceed the socialist objectives of Franklin Roosevelt and America is in deep peril. To whomever the Justice is supposedly considering retirement, for the love of God and Man, that decision must be postponed as long as this administration, or those with similar objectives, are in charge.
Freedom may depend on it.
Now, as a conservative, thinking of my country, my fellow man and my children and grandchildren, under zero circumstance would I consider retirement with the current administration in office if I had the honor of being a member of The Supreme Court.
Are you familiar with the Overton Window theory? If not, please immediately familiarize yourself with the theory, as it will be a central tenant surrounding most if not all forthcoming actions by the Obama administration. The theory was highlighted in a recent editorial in The Wall Street Journal when the Chick-fil-a debate uproar was on the front pages.
With the media in criminally complicit concert with the current administration, alternative blog sites have become central to obtaining vital information. Among the top notch blogs I monitor is The Ulsterman Report . A unique and riveting highlight of the site has been an ongoing conversation between the host, Ulsterman, and secret operatives known as The White House Insider, The Military Insider and The Wall Street Insider.
At first review, I thought this may have been fiction, but as time went along I drew the conclusion the intriguing dialogues were very real; with topics and information alarming and dangerous. Information discussed in the interviews frequently became mainstream news weeks later.
In the aftermath of the election, Ulsterman has been introduced to an operative given the moniker of Republican Insider. The conversations remain must reads for Americans seeking the truth.
In the latest conversation with RI, The Ulsterman Report reports that Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to President Obama, has indicated The White House intends to nominate an openly gay individual for appointment to the Supreme Court. RI reports operatives "are testing these waters". Therefore, it is concluded Jarrett and staff are aiming to implement the Overton Window; having the president propose something far outside the majority of the American people only to retreat to an area they regard as a winning position.
The potential appointment of an openly homosexual individual is certain to create a fiery debate. The GOP will be weak as usual, not wanting to potentially alienate any potential supporters. Citizens will be pitted against one another in another chapter of class warfare, and the debate will expand beyond the appointment to gay marriage, which was profound religious effect, to racism and minority rights which could lead to civil unrest. A perfect mess of chaos, which the administration objective.
However, as indicated by RI, while Americans engage in the "Trojan Horse" gay debate and the GOP defends false accusations of being the party of hate, the aforementioned Overton Window position is that administration seeks is to nominate the most radical supreme court justice in the history of the United States.
The administration does not care about the homosexual community in any way other than to use them as a vehicle to promote individuals who share the radical ideas of the administration in their effort to transform the United States of America; moulding it to their hearts desire.
Although the similarities are substantial, this aspirations of this administration far exceed the socialist objectives of Franklin Roosevelt and America is in deep peril. To whomever the Justice is supposedly considering retirement, for the love of God and Man, that decision must be postponed as long as this administration, or those with similar objectives, are in charge.
Freedom may depend on it.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Hidden Costs
The Supreme Court is hearing the case of Obamacare this week, and everyone is trying to read the tea leaves. For me, and I am not a lawyer, there is no doubt the law is unconstitutional and I cannot imagine how the SCOTUS could see it any other way.
Beyond that, you recall that Nancy Pelosi and the gang, without reading the bill, were set to resort to deeming it passed if they could not pole vault over the fence against the will of the American people to get it done. The arrogance was beyond appalling.
Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, we were lied to about the costs. One may argue the costs were not known with any sort of accuracy, a problem in itself, but cost estimates were put forth as factual when everyone knew all along they were misrepresented and understated. One representative sounding the alarm was House Budget Chairman, Paul Ryan, (R:WI).
Ryan is the smartest guy in the room on these budgetary items, and he joined Larry Kudlow to inform the electorate once again about the extremely serious financial situation Uncle Sam find himself in, and how Obamacare will not help, but will ratchet debt up exponentially culminating in a crash of the system. Ryan describes it as the most forecast able crisis in history, and we are morally bound to take measurable steps to prohibit it from occurring. Kudlow issues his spot on take, and then Ryan weighs in. Take a listen:
No sane individual operates a budgetary balance sheet in this irresponsible manner, unless you are otherwise motivated to bring about significant economic harm to the prosperity of the United States.
The government running health care is socialized medicine, which gives government the key to the doorway of abandoning freedom for its citizenry. Ronald Reagan warned us about this 50 years ago.
One can only hope the Supreme Court puts our arrogant government of central planners in their place and keeps the power in hands of the people, as our Founding Fathers wanted.
Beyond that, you recall that Nancy Pelosi and the gang, without reading the bill, were set to resort to deeming it passed if they could not pole vault over the fence against the will of the American people to get it done. The arrogance was beyond appalling.
Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, we were lied to about the costs. One may argue the costs were not known with any sort of accuracy, a problem in itself, but cost estimates were put forth as factual when everyone knew all along they were misrepresented and understated. One representative sounding the alarm was House Budget Chairman, Paul Ryan, (R:WI).
Ryan is the smartest guy in the room on these budgetary items, and he joined Larry Kudlow to inform the electorate once again about the extremely serious financial situation Uncle Sam find himself in, and how Obamacare will not help, but will ratchet debt up exponentially culminating in a crash of the system. Ryan describes it as the most forecast able crisis in history, and we are morally bound to take measurable steps to prohibit it from occurring. Kudlow issues his spot on take, and then Ryan weighs in. Take a listen:
No sane individual operates a budgetary balance sheet in this irresponsible manner, unless you are otherwise motivated to bring about significant economic harm to the prosperity of the United States.
The government running health care is socialized medicine, which gives government the key to the doorway of abandoning freedom for its citizenry. Ronald Reagan warned us about this 50 years ago.
One can only hope the Supreme Court puts our arrogant government of central planners in their place and keeps the power in hands of the people, as our Founding Fathers wanted.
Monday, March 5, 2012
The Will of the People
Back when I was in college, before cable networks had a 24 hours news cycle, ABC's World News Tonight was my preferred source on national news matters. Man, have times changed.Washington Post opinion writer and ABC's George Will has some advice for Republicans as the 2012 presidential election draws near. With the likely nominee for the GOP being Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum, Will thinks both would lose to Obama, so he thinks the GOP should go with Plan B.
"If so, there would come a point when, taking stock of reality, conservatives turn their energies to a goal much more attainable than, and not much less important than, electing Romney or Santorum president. It is the goal of retaining control of the House and winning control of the Senate."
"Several possible Supreme Court nominations and the staffing of the regulatory state are among the important reasons conservatives should try to elect whomever the GOP nominates. But conservatives this year should have as their primary goal making sure Republicans wield all the gavels in Congress in 2013."
Will is among the most respected mainstream media pundits who lean right. That respect is held by many Americans who have not come around to recognizing who slanted the big three news organizations are. In the absence of this knowledge, these folks continue to respect the major network evening news programs, and this includes editorial commentator George Will.
Will is far off the mark on this line of thinking, and Americans had better come to know it and recognize the narrative being presented.
Barack Obama cannot be re-elected. Better stated, our country as we have known it all our lives will cease to exist should Obama win re-election.
The goals Will sets forth are only a part of what needs to occur to prevent our our freedoms from becoming significantly constricted. The goal is much larger than Will visualizes, and it must be, for a myriad of reasons. Sadly, Will obviously has no clue of the many reasons why, with sovereignty at the top of the lengthy list.
The most important action that must take place is to control the next Supreme Court Justice nominees. Presently, we are one Supreme Court justice from game over. This cannot be understated. If Obama were to place perhaps the next two justices, the balance of the court would tilt to a radical left court which would serve the interests of unions, anti-capitalist, entitlement friendly anti government loyalists. Freedom would then be lost to darkness.
While gaining control of the Senate, and keeping control of the House, is critical, that would only minimally prohibit Obama from harmful action. An Obama victory against a GOP Congress will damage his ability to win legislation, but he will just continue to operate outside the Congress through executive order, as he has been doing for some time. In an ongoing example, the inability to get cap and trade going legislatively only resulted in increasing burdensome regulatory actions being handed out by the EPA.
Sadly, there are Progressives in both parties. Many in the GOP unfortunately do not grasp the grave economic position Uncle Sam is in, and think it is just a normal political year where they may gain control the purse strings for their pet projects. Instead, all the purse strings need to be violently yanked back.
For Will to provide the false narrative in the mainstream media that it would be acceptable for Obama to win the presidency if the GOP could control the Congress is slap in the face to Americans out of work, a brake applied to economic growth, energy independence, and entrepreneurship across the fruited plain.
If members of the mainstream media presented the truth to the American people about how dreadful the Obama tenure has been, a ham sandwich could defeat him. Most folks are working their fingers to the bone to keep afloat, and spend time with their families when they get home. They do not have time to search alternative media outlets seeking the truth the mainstream media does not provide them. Therefore, these false narratives create far more harm than imagined.
If they knew, they would shout from the roof tops in support of whoever Obama's opponent is, Foghorn Leghorn included. No one could care about which companies or academic institutions offer birth control when the very existence of the country hangs in the balance.
Will should well know that. I suspect he does, and given that, he is no longer to be considered an honest broker. Patrick J. Buchanan thinks Will should have his pundit's license suspended. I quite agree.
Will will be at play in November. The will of the American people, that is.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Kick Kagan To Curb
This week, hearings to consider Elena Kagan, currently a US Solicitor General and formerly Dean of the law school at Harvard University, as the newest Supreme Court Justice will begin. This will be the second nominee for President Obama, and just as with the first, this nominee should be rejected.There are a slew of arguments to be made regarding her experience and background, including the fact that Kagan has never served as a judge, which would seem to disqualify her out of the gate. These items will hopefully be covered during the hearings.
I will argue reasons that go far beyond what will be discussed at the hearings.
Kagan is an individual who is mesmerized by Obama himself. She has commented publicly on the brilliance, decency, good looks and rock star image of President Obama, calling him "someone who will be, deserves to be and someone the rest of us need to be one of the truly great political figures and public servants of our time". Her hero! This was in 2005! Take a listen for yourself.
On this day, Obama went on to speak about the response to Hurricane Katrina by the Bush administration, which today seems criminal. Obama also spoke of the transfer of wealth for the purpose of reparations and social justice.
Unfortunately, most of those associated with Obama believe that same mantra. They believe this country to be evil and they want to work to secure collective rights they deem appropriate and implement their social justice platforms.
Dean Kagan goes back to the University of Chicago with Obama and has been a smitten supporter all along. Kagan is a progressive who will march to the drum of Obama's cast of characters. When considering a nominee for the position of justice to the SCOTUS, this is the last type of individual you should be seeking.
Elena Kagan is someone who will not be supporting the Constitution as written by our founders, she will be seeking to join her hero Barack Obama in attempting to divert the directive of the document and changing it to "fit" today's world and the interpretations they deem from "standing in your shoes".
I do not want to have my rights dictated to me by Barack Obama and his cohorts. My rights are given to me by my creator, not these imbeciles who think they can do a better job of looking through my eyes than I can.
After listening to these videos, you have all you need to know. Kick Kagan to the curb.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Imperial President of the World!
Did you hear the comments made recently by a top ranking weasel in Hollywood, Woody Allen, about Barack Obama? I know. You said to yourself "what a frickin idiot" and chuckled. Well, hold the laughter. Please listen to the following interview by Sean Hannity of the authors of "The Blueprint", Ken Blackwell and Ken Klukowski.
It is crystal clear to me that the premise of this book is right on target and the "transformation of America" President Obama engaged upon is reality, and it must be stopped immediately.
Don't buy it? Take a look around. The installation of some 40 Czars, who are not vetted by Congress, are a case in point as many have backgrounds and have previously stated positions completely out of sync with mainstream America. I wonder if many of them even know, but Obama has been stripping the Congress of it's power through corrupt mechanisms and subverting the constitution with the Czars dictating policy.
Then there was the takeover of the car companies, complete with picking winners and losers with respect to dealerships and pitching in the garbage the historical positions of bond holders.
Same with the courts. Obama railed against the campaign reform court decision on campaign finance even though he has dozens of lobbyists in his administration after vowing he would not and is the biggest campaign recipient from Fannie Mae, British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs, all in the news today for negative reasons. Remember the recent Appeals Court decision on net neutrality Obama did not like. Captain Earflaps declared he would bypass the court turning broadband service providers into public utilities in order to regulate under his direction rather than allowing free market principles to dictate. In addition, he aims through appointments to The Supreme Court to make it a rubber stamp for his radical positions, and both of his nominees fit his agenda perfectly.
These are just a few examples, and if you support Obama you may like the results of his actions. What if the other guy is in charge? It is these imperial actions, government taking away the rights of private citizens, subverting the Constitution and transferring power into a central position in the executive branch where Czars implement policy and can go unchecked, that represents a significant departure from the principles our government was founded on, and those include 3 equal branch's of government.
If you don't stand against Obama and behind our founding fathers, the transformation of America will become complete and life as we have known it will be nothing more than a memory.
It is crystal clear to me that the premise of this book is right on target and the "transformation of America" President Obama engaged upon is reality, and it must be stopped immediately.
Don't buy it? Take a look around. The installation of some 40 Czars, who are not vetted by Congress, are a case in point as many have backgrounds and have previously stated positions completely out of sync with mainstream America. I wonder if many of them even know, but Obama has been stripping the Congress of it's power through corrupt mechanisms and subverting the constitution with the Czars dictating policy.
Then there was the takeover of the car companies, complete with picking winners and losers with respect to dealerships and pitching in the garbage the historical positions of bond holders.
Same with the courts. Obama railed against the campaign reform court decision on campaign finance even though he has dozens of lobbyists in his administration after vowing he would not and is the biggest campaign recipient from Fannie Mae, British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs, all in the news today for negative reasons. Remember the recent Appeals Court decision on net neutrality Obama did not like. Captain Earflaps declared he would bypass the court turning broadband service providers into public utilities in order to regulate under his direction rather than allowing free market principles to dictate. In addition, he aims through appointments to The Supreme Court to make it a rubber stamp for his radical positions, and both of his nominees fit his agenda perfectly.
These are just a few examples, and if you support Obama you may like the results of his actions. What if the other guy is in charge? It is these imperial actions, government taking away the rights of private citizens, subverting the Constitution and transferring power into a central position in the executive branch where Czars implement policy and can go unchecked, that represents a significant departure from the principles our government was founded on, and those include 3 equal branch's of government.
If you don't stand against Obama and behind our founding fathers, the transformation of America will become complete and life as we have known it will be nothing more than a memory.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Sideline Sotomayor
Confirmation hearings begin next week for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor and it should prove very interesting. Over the years, thanks to the moonbat left wing of the Democratic party, these hearings have seemingly become more about character assassination than a fair overview of the candidates qualifications and body of work. Ask Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork.
Interestingly enough, it appears Sotomaoyor played a role in this type of candidate review. Reports The Washington Times, "A legal advocacy group advised by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in the 1980s actively opposed conservative Robert H. Bork's nomination to the high court calling him a "threat" to the "civil rights of the Latino community."
It is on the merit of her work and her apparent disposition to render decisions from her personal feelings that she should be disqualified.
She has had six decisions reach the Supreme Court and her decisions have been overturned four times, including a recent decision regarding the discrimination of firefighters in New Haven, CT.
Discrimination appears to be the centerpiece of trouble for Ms. Sotomayor. She is quoted saying the following: ""I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." A recent article in The Wall Street Journal says her defense of the comment is taking shape, but there is no defense. It sure seems this is the type of framework she uses to formulate her decisions, and this would not be good.
She also commented that "the court of appeals is where policy is made." This is far from accurate. President Obama offered that he hopes Sotomayor will judge with empathy. I firmly disagree as empathy is an emotion should not get in the way of the law.
However, casting all that aside, her association with The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, where Sotomayor has served as a board of director, is most troubling. 350 pages of material from the PRLDEF was presented, or dumped, to Senators last week.
"A cursory look at the limited material now in our possession raises several red flags, including a link between PRLDEF and ACORN, as well as information indicating Judge Sotomayor's deeper-than-previously thought involvement in developing the legal positions of the organization," said Stephen Boyd, spokesman for the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions (R-AL).
Like ACORN, the PRLDEF files lawsuits in an effort to overwhelm the system, essentially employing shakedown tactics. According to The New York Times, the group helped redraw voting districts. As we know, ACORN is being investigated for voter fraud among other things in over a dozen states. ACORN may be a portal to a vast criminal enterprise.
You remember the fine folks over at ACORN:
Common sense would dictate that an individual associated with left wing radical groups such as ACORN should be swiftly rejected from consideration for nomination for a spot on The Supreme Court.
Interestingly enough, it appears Sotomaoyor played a role in this type of candidate review. Reports The Washington Times, "A legal advocacy group advised by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in the 1980s actively opposed conservative Robert H. Bork's nomination to the high court calling him a "threat" to the "civil rights of the Latino community."
It is on the merit of her work and her apparent disposition to render decisions from her personal feelings that she should be disqualified.She has had six decisions reach the Supreme Court and her decisions have been overturned four times, including a recent decision regarding the discrimination of firefighters in New Haven, CT.
Discrimination appears to be the centerpiece of trouble for Ms. Sotomayor. She is quoted saying the following: ""I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." A recent article in The Wall Street Journal says her defense of the comment is taking shape, but there is no defense. It sure seems this is the type of framework she uses to formulate her decisions, and this would not be good.
She also commented that "the court of appeals is where policy is made." This is far from accurate. President Obama offered that he hopes Sotomayor will judge with empathy. I firmly disagree as empathy is an emotion should not get in the way of the law.
However, casting all that aside, her association with The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, where Sotomayor has served as a board of director, is most troubling. 350 pages of material from the PRLDEF was presented, or dumped, to Senators last week.
"A cursory look at the limited material now in our possession raises several red flags, including a link between PRLDEF and ACORN, as well as information indicating Judge Sotomayor's deeper-than-previously thought involvement in developing the legal positions of the organization," said Stephen Boyd, spokesman for the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions (R-AL).
Like ACORN, the PRLDEF files lawsuits in an effort to overwhelm the system, essentially employing shakedown tactics. According to The New York Times, the group helped redraw voting districts. As we know, ACORN is being investigated for voter fraud among other things in over a dozen states. ACORN may be a portal to a vast criminal enterprise.
You remember the fine folks over at ACORN:
Common sense would dictate that an individual associated with left wing radical groups such as ACORN should be swiftly rejected from consideration for nomination for a spot on The Supreme Court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
