The Savage Republican

Don't know much about history...

At least one has to think that is the case with our esteemed friends on the left. They seem to have a glaring lack of historical knowledge or context, given some of the statements that they have made recently. For example:

Many claimed that President Bush should have never started the war in Iraq because "they didn't attack us", the implication being that America has never attacked countries that didn't attack us first. Well, FDR sent American troops into Europe, against Germany but Germany never attacked us - Japan did. JFK took American troops into Viet Nam when the Viet Namese never attacked us. Bill Clinton took American troops (who are still there by the way) into Bosnia - another country that never attacked us.

Many claim that the Iraq war is a "quagmire" that we must exit, a quagmire, like Viet Nam was. Let's take a look at the Viet Nam quagmire versus the Iraq "quagmire. In Viet Nam, we lost (on average) 5,900 soldiers lives a year. In Iraq, we have lost a little over 1700 soldiers in the year that we have been in there. In Viet Nam, we never made any progress against the Communists. In Iraq, we have gotten rid of a despotic leader and we are slowly cutting the "head" off of the foreign "insurgents" all the while restoring public services like electricity, water and phone service to levels not seen in Saddam's 30+ year rule. They claim that we need to have an "exit strategy". What was the exit strategey in Germany? Korea? Bosnia? I will give you that, at this time, there does not seem to be an "end date" of when our troops will leave Iraq, but you know what - we still have troops in Germany 60 years after the "end" of WWII, we still have troops in Japan and the Phillipines and Korea as well.

Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and officials at Amnesty International compared our treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay to Nazi death camps (like Auschwitz and Dachau) and the gulags run by Stalin in Russia. Really? No medical experiments are being done on the detainees at Gitmo like there were in the Nazi camps. No "ovens" to gas prisioners. No 6-12 million dead. Shoot we have not even detained 700 there. In Gitmo, there is no thin soup made of human refuse and fish heads as there was in Stalin's Gulags. Instead detainees eat orange glazed chicken and rice pilaf. I understand that there is a "Gitmo cookbook" being published so that we can eat like a detainee. I don't recall Stalin publishing a cookbook.

There is so much more we could talk about, but you get the picture don't you dear reader? I certain understand and appreciate an honest, principled opposition, but that is hardly what we have here. Instead we have intellectually bankrupt party that is more concerned with scoring political "points" than they are in doing the people's business. JFK, FDR, Herbert Humphrey II and even Paul Wellstone would be embarrased that this is what their party has come to. I know I am.....

AP/ABC News releases report confirming abuse at Gitmo

However, it is not the kind of abuse they were hoping for. This report, compiled from documents obtained by the AP from the US Government shows that the abusers at Gitmo are the detainees and not our military men and women.

Senator Durbin et al, you can announce the real apology (on the Senate floor) any day now!!!!! You owe it to the American people, our service men and women and to your constituents (for emabarassing the heck out of them). We expect it but I am not holding my breath waiting for it to come!

Voter Fraud in the 2004 election

This week, an East St. Louis (Illinois) jury convicted 5 people of voter fraud (hat tip Gateway Pundit). I have been following this story every since Gateway Pundit first filed it for a couple of reasons - 1) I grew up in Illinois and 2) I went to college in the St Louis (Missouri) area. What makes this case all the more troubling is that the 5 defendants were members of the East St Louis Democratic Party!!! The defendants were accused of using money, supplied to them by the St. Claire County (Illinois) Democratic Party to buy votes for the Democratic slate of candidates! One of the 5 defendants is next going to trial for the attempted murder of a state witness for the prosecution as well.

Last week, in Milwaukee, 2 more people were charged with voting twice in the ongoing voter fraud case in Wisconsin. More charges are expected as federal prosecutors are investigating more than 200 cases of felons voting (illegal in Wisconsin) and 100 people either voting twice or filing a voter reqistration card using an invalid address!

I find it interesting that these cases are not out of Florida or Ohio, but out of states that went to the Democratic candidate for President. In the one case (Wisconsin) the state was so closely contested, that it is plausible that such fraud could have changed the outcome of the election in that state.

It makes you wonder what motivated for the cries of "voter fraud" in Ohio and Florida. Could it be that certain parties wanted to throw those states in doubt so that if they got caught with their fingers in the fraud cookie jar it would be overlooked by a willing establishment media?????

Adios Swingin' Sandy

Swingin' Sandy Day O'Connor is going away. Now, I ain't going to celebrate until I see who GWB appoints. I'm going to hold my breath (and hopefully not my nose) until the appointment.

Just a thought on Miss Swing Vote.And God's sense of humor:
My most vivid memory of our top unpr

edictable female politician in a black robe (Justice Ruth "Buzzy" Ginsburg is entirely predictable) is this picture (to the left, of couse. Irony? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge?!?!?) from almost exactly two years ago.
The event was a dual event: the awarding of the Liberty Medal at the dedication and opening of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.
A mural and frame fell on the front row of honored speakers on the dais.
The incredible irony in all this was the combination of this event, where it happened, when and to whom came just days after Swingin' Sandy sided with the majority in finding McCain/Feingold constitutional (McCain/Feingold is also known as the badly and bogusly named Bi-Partisan Campaign Finance Reform Act). As soon as I saw the picture and description, I again thought "In The Lord's world there are no accidents and there is no happenstance."
If I had been Swingin' Sandy's counselor, I'd have advised her to immediately give back the medal, do a very public mea culpa after announcing her resignation, wear sackcloth underwear for the rest of her life and be a Johnny Appleseed of liberty by giving away copies of the Federalist Papers and "The Law" by Bastiat to anyone she met.
Now, the incredible importance of this resignation:
Swingin' Sandy was a/the swing vote on many issues. GWB needs to follow though on his comments that Scalia and Thomas are his models for Supreme Court appointments. The fact that the lefties are losing the swing vote is going to prove for very predictable actions by the usual gang of extreme constitutional criminals in the Senate.
I would HEARTILY recommend Janice Rogers Brown...this afternoon. No, on second thought, make the announcement on the 4th of July. In Philadelphia. At the National Constitution Center.
Let's roll!

Schweinfurt, WWII, choke points and the black vote

I'm a WWII history buff. Have been since I was 5. Yesterday I was in Little Falls at the Lindbergh Museum and House with the 8th Air Force Historical Society, of which I'm a lifetime member. I've written about them before.These are mostly WWII vets who flew and maintained the B-17's, B-24's. We've also got a number of Pacific pilots and ground crew. Anyhow, I flew up with a group of guys including Earl. He was a sgt. on a B-17 that was shot down on raid in July '44 on Schweinfurt (a center of ball bearing manufacturing in the 3rd Reich). Ball bearings were a choke point in war production. Nearly all the machines of war use ball bearings. Nearly all the machines that manufacture war material need ball bearings. All the transport vehicles for the war effort require ball bearings. Ball bearings were a choke point.
The black vote is a choke point for left wingers.
Without the lock-step black vote remaining at 90+ %, the lefties are relegated to permanent minority party status.If 30% of the black vote gets peeled away to Republicans (though I'd much rather say pro-liberty, small government Republicans, that is no longer the case) the lefties become small vine fruit. Forever.
Captains Quarters (www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/ ) has a great column called "The next Generation of Republican Leaders". I have always been amazed at how and why black voters consistently vote against their own best interests. Blacks consistently see education as vital to escaping poverty yet vote for lefties that bring disastrous education programs (most large cities have a combination of a black mayor, city council, school superintendent (see Mpls. and St. Paul for instance) and black teachers). And as Dr. Walter E. Williams (who is black) once said that the KKK could not have designed a better program to destroy blacks than government/public education. Social Security is a disaster for blacks, and yet they vote for the people who refuse to let them, and us, out of this unconstitutional scam. That well over 70% of blacks abhor the idea of gay marriage, and yet vote for the lefties that think gay marriage is hallowed. I wrote that at the 2004 MN Republican Convention, Mrs. Battle (wife of rev. Battle of St.Paul's Mt. Olivet Baptist Church) wanted to be an at large delegate to the National Convention on just the single issue of gay marriage). I saw this as a beachhead issue.
Now, perhaps, the national party has had a double espresso on the issue...maybe.

Short memories or political pandering?

That is what you have to wonder. Do the Democrats in the House and the Senate really have such short memories or are they simply trying to score political "points"? Why do I ask this? Well to hear the loyal opposition tell it(this week), there were no ties between Saddam Husseins regime in Iraq and Osama bin Ladin's al Qaeda organization. As I have shown in the last couple of posts, there do appear (to the logical mind) to be many, many reasons to suspect that the two were indeed working together. Now, let's take a look at a couple of things that came off of the Senate floor. First comes this speech - do you know who made the following statement?

"I have said publicly for years that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein pose a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. Saddam Hussein's record bears this out. I have talked about that record. Iraq never fully accounted for the major gaps and inconsistencies in declarations provided to the inspectors of the pre-Gulf war weapons of mass destruction program, nor did the Iraq regime provide credible proof that it had completely destroyed its weapons and production infrastructure. "

That would be the honorable junior Senator from Massachusettes - John Forbes Kerry! (from http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/kerry-iraq.html). Fast forward to 2004 where he campaigned on the "illegal" war meme stating that Saddam had no WMD's.

Then there is this little gem (hat tip to Powerline www.powerlineblog.com):

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

That dear reader is taken from the text of the Congressional resolution that approved military action in Iraq.

I know that the current meme is that the President "lied" about the WMD's - that he "made up" or "doctored" the intelligence. As I showed in the previous 3 posts, that would have been a pretty neat trick considering that William Jefferson Clinton was President back in 1999. So again this begs the question - short memories or political pandering?

More and more MSM denial

The Guardian (of London) is hardly a "conservative" publication. That is why this 1999 article should be given a second look.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

In the article, Julian Borger goes right into the dangers of a Hussein/bin Laden alliance:

"Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials. "

Go back and read that again. The talks bring closer the threat of a terrorist attack using "chemical, biological or nuclear weapons" What were those weapons called again????

"News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern. "There's a threat, and it's real," Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons "are being considered for use."

Oh yeah - that's right. The weapons that Saddam supposedly didn't have (if you would believe the recent press reports).

Now to be honest, the Guardian goes on to say that they do not know for sure if Osama accepted the Iraqi offer of assylum, an offer that Osama had previously turned down because of his disdain of the secular aspects of Saddam's Baathist regime, however it does conclude with the statement that Osama didn't have many choices......

It astounds me, that someone like me - a working mother of a very active school aged child - can find this information in the limited time that I have and yet no one in the so-called Main Stream Media can find this and they wonder why their circulation and viewship is going down at a rapid rate.....

More MSM reporting of WHAT???????

I have to admit, I have a lot of friends who have friends who have waaaayyyyyy too much time on their hands. Of course, if they didn't I would not have gotten the following information from said friends today.

The following was found via a Goggle and Lexus Nexus search of newspaper articles from 1999 - back during the Clinton administration! These are condensed summaries of the articles in question.

The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland), December 28, 1999.
Iraq tempts bin Laden to attack WestExclusive. By: Ian Bruce, Geopolitics Editor.THE world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq if his worldwide terrorist network succeeds in carrying out a campaign of high-profile attacks on the WestÝ ...
Now we are also facing the prospect of an unholy alliance between bin Laden and Saddam. The implications are terrifying.
"We might be looking at the most wanted man on the FBI's target list gaining access to chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons courtesy of Iraq's clandestine research programmes."
The U.S. intelligence community has been squeezing bin Laden's finances steadily for several years. His personal fortune of anything up to £500m has been whittled down to single figures ...
- - - - -
U.S. Newswire, December 23, 1999.
Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks.
... (author Yossef) Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."Ý ....
- - - - -
The Observer. December 19, 1999.
Sanctions reviewed in West as Saddam wields sword of Islam
The Iraqi dictator has rejected a UN deal to lift sanctions. The Western blockade, far from toppling the regime, has bolstered it. He's ditched the sunglasses and taken up the Koran to harness the fervour ofÝ fundamentalists.
By: Jason Burke, in Baghdad
... This time last year the U.S. claimed that another delegation had met Osama bin Laden, the alleged terrorist mastermind and tried to woo him to Iraq.
Senior officials claim that the Islamisation programme is an attempt to defuse the threat of Islamic militancy rather than encourage it ...
- - - - -
United Press International. November 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle.
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee ...
- - - - -
Akron Beacon Journal (Ohio). October 31, 1999. Sunday 1 STAR EDITION.
BIN LADEN SPOTTED AFTER OFFER TO LEAVEBy: From Beacon Journal wire services
DATELINE: JALALABAD, AFGHANISTAN:
... The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that the likely destination is Iraq.
A Clinton administration official said bin Laden's request "falls far short" of the UN resolution that the Taliban deliver him for trial....
- - - - -
The Kansas City Star. March 2, 1999, Tuesday.
International terrorism, a conflict without boundaries
By Rich Hood
... He (bin Laden)Ýhas a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States and any country friendly to the United States....
- - - - -
Los Angeles Times. February 23, 1999, Tuesday, Home Edition.SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 6; Letters Desk.HEADLINE: OSAMA BIN LADEN
Where is Osama bin Laden (Feb. 14)? That should be the U.S.'s main priority. If as rumored he and Saddam Hussein are joining forces, it could pose a threat making Hitler and Mussolini seem like a sideshow....
- - - - -
National Public Radio (NPR)MORNING EDITION (10:00 AM on ET)February 18, 1999.
THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW.ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDSREPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER
... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.
Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ... known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place.
SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony....
- - - - -
Agence France Presse. February 17, 1999.
Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition
Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday."If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in neighbouring countries."
... Islamic fundamentalist bin Laden, who has gone missing from his base in Afghanistan, would never seek refuge in secular Iraq on ideological grounds. "I think bin Laden would keep quiet or fight to the death rather than seek asylum in Iraq," the London-based dissident, who asked not to be named, told AFP last week.....
- - - - -
Deutsche Presse-Agentur. February 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle
Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq
DATELINE: Kuwait City
An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours.
The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).
Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.
Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.
The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq ....
- - - - -

Seeing all of this, I wonder exactly how bad the memory loss is at the DNC and in the newsrooms of America. All we heard (during the build up to the Iraq War and in the last Presidential campaign) was how there was NO connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Are they that forgetfull or are they willing do lie, cheat and steal in order to get back into power?

ABC News reported what??????

On January 14, 1999 Sheila MacVicar reported for ABC News that Mamhoud Mahmud Salim had been arrested. Salim was (at the time) close associate and confidate of one Osama bin Ladin. The US government alleged that Salim was under orders to procure enriched uranium for the purpose of developing nuclear weapons - a charge that Mr. bin Ladin never denied. During the course of the report. I am quoting the report now....."With an American price on his head, there weren't many places bin Laden could go, unless he teamed up with another international pariah, one also with an interest in weapons of mass destruction. Osama believes in the'enemy of my enemy is my friend, and someone I should cooperate with.' That is certainly the current case with Iraq. Saddam Hussein has a long historyof harboring terrorists: Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas. The most notorious terrorist of their era all found shelter and support at one timein Baghdad. Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Three weeks after the bombing, on August 31st,bin Laden reaches out to his friends in Iraq and Sudan. Iraq's vice president arrives in Khartoon to show his support for the Sudanese after theUS attack. ABC News has learned that during these meetings, senior Sudanese officials, acting on behalf of bin Laden, asked if Saddam Hussein would grant him asylum. Iraq was indeed interested. ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief, named Farouk Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey,made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.''

Did you get that dear readers? ABC News reported back in 1999 that Osama bin Ladin was in discussion with Saddam Hussein for assylum in Baghdad! Now fast forward to the days leading up to the Iraqi war....the same so-called independent media is now reporting that Saddam had "no ties" to Osama and al Qaeda. Which leads to one question....which report is correct?

Audio transcript of the whole report can be found at:

http://www.radioamerica.org/audio/MR_ABC-Osama-Hussein-connections.mp3

Follow up to a previous topic

The Washington Times reported today that the Montgomery County (MD) Board of Education has reached an agreement with a conservative parents group and a group of "former" homosexuals (see my May 6, 2005 post). The agreement says that the board must give Citizens for a Responsible Cirriculum and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) each a place on the new cirruculum committee that will be responsible for drawing up the new sex ed cirriculum for the Montgomery County Schools. While the agreement does not guarantee the content of the cirriculum, it does guarantee that the groups will have a say in what is presented to the students (and how).

The schools are also responsible for paying the court costs that the 2 groups incurred in suing to stop the last flawed cirriculum.

Maybe if the school district had not copped such an attitude toward the parents that objected to said cirriculum, they wouldn't be in the situation where they are having to incurr this extra "cost". I hope that they (and school districts across the nation) have learned a valuable lesson in being responsive and responsible to their employers - the taxpayers of their district!

Regarding Kelo vs. City of New London

I think the Founding Fathers had the right idea.....

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." --John Adams

I don't think it can be said any better than that!

Well, it WAS eradicated...

Some time ago I came across an article that talked about a silent killer that was raising it's head here in America. The reference was to Multi-Drug Resistant Tuberculosis (MDR-TB). It was an unknown disease here in the U.S. but was endemic to Mexico. The article went on to talk about the incredibly bad hygiene of third world aliens (such as throwing used toilet paper into the corner of the lavatory or into the wastebasket). Three years ago the Austin, MN police department came down with eight cases of TB. The reason? Contact with illegal aliens-illegal Mexicans (www.frostywooldridge.com/articles/art_illegal_immig_invades_small_town_2003.html )
Today I got an email with a list of articles. One that caught my attention was one titled Hospital to the world:Welcome illegals and contagious diseases" ( http://eco.freedom.org/el/20050602/cosman.shtml ).
I had been looking for a year or two for data on this unreported danger from illegals. I've wondered how many American citizens have died because of these diseases brought to this country by illegals.
The article by Dr. Cosman also alerts us to the fact that terrorist are in the market for highly contagious strains of bio-weapons. A combination of Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders" and "Teeth of the Tiger".
Read the article by Dr. Cosman.
And ask, AGAIN,why the incredible reluctance of the President and Congress to protect us and seal the border with Mexico.

"Congratulations, you are now officialy a modern serf", or "the fraud that lefties are for the 'little guy'"

Just read a great column by Vox Day at WorldNetDaily regarding the Kelso decision (local governments have the right to take from private property and give it to another private party, or, in other words, you don't own it. Period!) (www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44997 ) where he outlines that you and I have no private property any longer. The government has the final say over what you own, if you own it. And what you will do with it, or rather what you'd better do with it...or else. Basically”use it the way we want you to use it or lose it!"
I heard a talk show host make the cogent point that the reason your house or property has value is that it's protected to be used by you. And that that property therefore has value to someone that you'd sell it to as they also would enjoy the protection of use. Not anymore.
Day, in his column makes a chilling, and accurate analysis:
"Merely substitute a few terms in describing the system and it becomes clear that the Supreme Court has established a neofeudal oligarchy, where all land is held in the name of the federal government-king, governed by his local government-nobles and worked by taxpayer-serfs. Should one serf fail to produce a satisfactory harvest of crops-tax revenues, the noble can take the land from one serf and give it to another who promises to produce a more abundant harvest."
I tried to find a silver lining here in that the decision said local government knows best. From there I thought that we could make sure that local government won't do this taking. But on reflection, I'm thinking that that would be just as effective as King John at the water's edge ordering the tide not to come in.
Strange (not really) that the Supremes apply the 14th Amendment construing the FEDERAL Constitution into a NATIONAL Constitution and yet sided with the LGU's (local government units) and trying to make us believe that they really sided with states rights.
And how many times have you heard over the years, decades "The Republican Party is the party of the rich"? And that "Democrats look out for the little guy"? Well, the Supremes in Kelo put a wood stake through that fiction. From Day again:
"Although perhaps the court's actions would be better viewed as a great leap backward. For the Left has always been a fraud, and certainly Kelo serves to shine a bright light on the myth that the liberals on the court actually give a damn about the little guy and the less-fortunate."
The radical left wing jurists on the bench sided with the wealthy developers, the greedy, power hungry LGU representatives against the private property owner.The radical "living Constitution" lefties sided with government at all levels. And found that your only role is to feed the government. You are now the worker bee whose only function is to feed the queen bee.
The judiciary was SUPPOSED to be our firewall against the abuse of power by the government.
Now, the jurists have become the arsonists.

P.S. I noticed in Day’s column he makes a call to become Sons of Liberty (www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/sons.htm )

It’s the second time in 24 hours I’ve heard a call to physical action to protect our inalienable rights.

Oops...listening to Rush, make that three times.
Plus read this article, then be sure to read the postings following.
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1187052/posts

PPS-
Just read this at letters to WorldNetDaily (and there is a firestorm brewing over Kelo):

Property ownership a sham already

Though the recent decision by the Supreme Court shows egregious disrespect for the People, the Constitution and traditions of property ownership in our country, it is by no means surprising.

I recently ask a woman I know if she owned her home. She proudly responded that she does. I gently corrected her that, in fact, she did not and that she was, like me, only a renter. She strongly reasserted that she in fact owned her home and that she and her husband paid a mortgage.

I was forced then to explain that like me, she may own her home, but she is renting her property. If she did not pay her "rent" in the form of property taxes, her "landlord," the government, would have her evicted. If she resisted, she'd be jailed. This is the same thing that would happen if she rented an apartment or hotel room and refused to pay or leave.

She continued to assert that the difference was she was paying for the "right" to do what she wanted with her property. To which I responded by pointing out the numerous housing codes that regulate how tall her trees could be, what "aesthetically" pleasing colors she could paint her house, where her garbage cans could be and for how long they could be at the curb, how much water she was allowed to use in the flush toilet, etc.

The only real difference is that we elect our government landlords based on how little they say they'll raise the rent.

ML Hawk

The Savage Republican

Local Attractions

Favorite Links

Previous Posts

Archives

Saturday, July 02, 2005