30 July 2005

Hopefully This Is A Trend

Cross-Posted To Stop The ACLU
Under investigation by the FBI, under the microscope by us, and the American public is starting to wise up to their terrorist tactics, there seems to be some dissention in the ranks of the Most Dangerous Organization in America. This was in my Google Alerts via email (source):
Resignations, infighting eclipsse achievements of local ACLU branch By Peter Shinkle Of the Post-Dispatch 07/31/2005
Even as it challenges the FBI's tactics, the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri is being wracked by internal turmoil. Its legal director and two key volunteers have resigned, and a man seeking election as board president is fending off claims of racial bias.
Racial bias huh. Surprise, Surprise, Surprise! (in by best Gomer voice).
Denise Lieberman, the group's legal director since 1997, resigned effective July 15 for reasons that have not been revealed. Some ACLU members have expressed concern over her departure, and two volunteers have resigned from key positions. Katherine Goldwasser, an associate dean of Washington University's law school, said she resigned July 7 from the group's legal steering committee, which decides the cases the group will pursue. She said she tried to discover why Lieberman resigned but could not get to the bottom of the matter. "I lost confidence in the local ACLU, and I resigned," Goldwasser said.
"I lost confidence in the local ACLU...", wow that's a shock. The vast majority of the people in the United States have lost confidence in the ACLU. They are being exposed for what they are, judicial terrorists. From their founding by self professed Communists in 1920 until present day, their main goal was to turn the United States into a socialist nation. That is why Stop The ACLU was formed. And the goal of our organization is exposing the ACLU for what they really are, terrorists hell bent on destroying our way of life.
Meanwhile, board member Ray Hartmann said he wants to replace the current board president. Hartmann said he believes his own media experience will enable him to help the ACLU achieve a higher public profile at a time when civil liberties are threatened. Hartmann, 53, founded the Riverfront Times, a free weekly newspaper in St. Louis, in 1977. He sold the paper in 1998, though he continued writing columns for it until 2002. He also has been a regular panelist on a local public affairs TV show, "Donnybrook," for almost two decades. Pointing to his media experience, he said, "I'm in an unusually good position to give us a higher visibility on a lot of issues than we've had." Another ACLU member, longtime civil rights activist Percy Green, contends Hartmann's decision to run for the presidency has created perceptions of "racial overtones. The ACLU's executive director, Brenda Jones, is the first African-American ever to hold that position. She was hired 10 months ago during the term of the current board president, Adam Zaretsky, Green said. Under a long-standing tradition at the organization, once a person is elected to the board's presidency for a one-year term, that person's candidacy is not challenged in the subsequent two elections, ensuring a three-year tenure as board president. Zaretsky first won election as board president last year and is facing his first re-election Sunday. Hartmann, however, has placed his name on the ballot to contest the post. Green said Hartmann's candidacy shows that Zaretsky is "being punished" for his role in hiring the group's first black executive director. "I don't think that would happen if she weren't black," Green said.
Not a very PC stance for an organization which touts itself as the defender of civil rights is it? I thought they were founded to protect the "Civil Liberties" of all Americans. And they try to call us racists. What a laugh.
Green said he and Hartmann have been friends and have been on the same side on an array of issues over the years. "I think Ray Hartmann is a good person, but something is wrong with this challenge. Now is not the time." Hartmann responded that his candidacy is unrelated to the hiring of Jones or Lieberman's resignation. "It's not about Brenda, and it's not about race," he said. "I have the highest regard for Brenda Jones and have had since the first time I met her. She is a terrific director, period, end of report. "I have nothing but respect for Percy Green. It makes me sad that he would say that," he added.
Do I detect a level of hostility? The words being exchanged between these two sounds like the rhetoric between a lefty and a hard-right conservative. Isn't it great!
Hartmann declined to comment on Lieberman's departure, saying it is a personnel matter. He said he has no criticism of Zaretsky. Hartmann added that he wants to be president because he believes he can help improve the organization's communication with the board and with the public. "I'm talking to you. Is he?" Zaretsky, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis, did not return several calls seeking comment.
And around and around they go, where they stop nobody knows. And the survivor wins all the marbles and the criticism for life.
Lieberman also declined to comment on her reasons for resigning, saying her separation agreement with the group blocked her from speaking. In a June 20 e-mail to colleagues, she said she was announcing her departure "with great sadness" from a position she described as "the job of a lifetime." Karen Tokarz, a Washington University law professor and ACLU member, described Lieberman's departure as a "huge loss." "She's an exceptionally well-qualified civil rights lawyer," Tokarz added.
Of course she can't talk, do you think that the ACLU wants the truth to be known? Come on, this organization cries foul when the government tries to keep a secret for National Security reasons or incomplete investigations. But they go out of their way to shield their activities from the public.
She won't talk because she got a severance package from the organization and signed a non-disclosure agreement. She knows better than anyone what kind of tactics the ACLU uses and doesn't want to be their next victim.
Marilyn Teitelbaum, an attorney in private practice who has volunteered as one of the group's general counsels for more than a decade, also has resigned effective upon the group's finding a replacement. She declined to discuss the reason for her departure. The departures at the organization have set the backdrop for the election. ACLU members will gather at 2 p.m. today at Washington University Law School to vote on the board presidency. "We're not going to fall apart, and we're going to work through whatever issues we need to work through. There's no question about that," she said. No, go ahead and fall apart. It would be the best thing that you could do for the nation.
And here comes the propaganda. I'm only including it to be "fair and balanced". HA! Who am I kidding? I'm including it to back up my own claims.
The ACLU has deep roots in St. Louis. Roger Baldwin, a conscientious objector during World War I who taught at Washington University, went on to help found the ACLU in New York in 1920. A St. Louis civil rights group formed in that same year - the St. Louis Civil Rights Committee - changed its name to the ACLU of Eastern Missouri in 1968. The St. Louis chapter's cases have included one in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1993 that a Ladue ordinance violated a woman's First Amendment rights by barring her from having an anti-Gulf War sign in her window. Recently, the group has helped bring a lawsuit claiming that St. Louis police carried out arrests that violated the rights of people planning a protest at the World Agriculture Forum in 2003. In addition, the group publicly criticized the FBI for investigating three young Missouri men who planned a protest at the Democratic National Convention in Boston last year. The FBI has defended the probe as a justified response to a credible threat of violence. In addition, the group last year launched a racial justice initiative. It includes a program aiming to improve relations between citizens in north St. Louis and the police force, while at the same time protecting citizens' rights in cases of improper policing. Jones, a communications specialist who formerly worked for the Missouri Botanical Garden, said that for the ACLU the racial justice initiative is "a new way of thinking about how to work in these communities."
Here's the bottom line campers, they are imploding. This FBI report when made available to special prosecutors and eventually the public, will be the unraveling of this Un-American organization. And some of their own members know it. And like rats, they are deserting the ship before it sinks. Help us put another hole in that ship. Join our BlogBurst and take some shots. Thank you to our friends at Mudville Gazette. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

ACLU Alerts Round Up

I subscribe to google alerts sent to my yahoo email account for the purpose of knowing what the ACLU is up to in real time. I get on average 10 alerts per day containing anywhere from 1 to 8 links to sites that are either pro or con ACLU. They are all potential source material for anything that I may write here or at Stop The ACLU. Today I got 6 alerts, of which most was duplicated material from yesterday or something that I have already read. But a few were too good to pass up. So I decided to put up some teasers and links here. The first is a take on the ACLU and their strong arm tactics from Robert Rinearson from Fort Wayne courtesy of FortWayne.com.

Stall ACLU drive against faith

The American Civil Liberties Union must feel on top of the world these days. After all, it has been able to persuade judges to rule against students saying prayers at athletic events (Santa Fe Independent School District vs. Doe), as well as preventing prayers from being included in school graduation ceremonies (Lee vs. Weisman). In fact, it appears all the ACLU has to do these days is to snap its fingers, send an intimidating letter, and the entire country bows to its wishes. If you don'’t believe, then check out the recent actions where the ACLU threatened legal action against government agencies, including public schools that sponsored or allowed the Boy Scouts of America to hold meetings within their confines. The Boy Scouts'’ crime, of course, is offering their allegiance to God and country. How dare they offend the atheists while learning how to build campfires, pitching tents and being good citizens.
Next is a thread by the son of one of the greatest men who ever lived. I am of course talking about Ronald Reagan. Michael Reagan wrote in his column a little piece everyone should read. It comes to us through the courtesy of Front Page Magazine.com.
The Anti-American Counter-Liberty Union
If you are wondering where the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is standing in the War on Terror, one need only consult its record. This pillar of the Legal Left wants to humiliate U.S. troops, inflame anti-American Muslims, and oppose Homeland Security. The ACLU even wants U.S. courts to allow the Quran to be used instead of the Bible when administering the oath to Muslims in court. According to the Associated Press, denying the use of other religious texts would violate the Constitution by favoring Christianity over other religions, the ACLU of North Carolina said in a lawsuit. State law currently allows witnesses preparing to testify in court to take their oath either by laying a hand over a "Holy Scripture," by saying "so help me God" without the use of a religious book, or by using no religious symbols.
And a topic that my friend Jay from Stop The ACLU is writing about today that appeared on News 14 Carolina. There is some video on New 14's website that is worth a watch. It is only about a minute and a half long.
ACLU criticizes Knightdale teen curfew
A Wake County town trying to crack down on teen violence receives some criticism. The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina is hosting a community forum to talk about the Knightdale curfew Thursday.
And finally a little tidbit from the Montana News. It deals with the SCOTUS the Ten Commandments, and their ruling.
Washington, D.C. -– The ACLU has decided not to ask the Supreme Court to review the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals'’ decision in Books v. Elkhart County, Indiana, which upheld a Ten Commandments display in the County Administration Building in Elkhart County, Indiana. The "“Foundations of American Law and Government"” display is identical to the display in the Supreme Court decision involving the Kentucky case of McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky. Elkhart County is represented by Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, and Erik W. Stanley, Chief Counsel for Liberty Counsel.
And now a late addition courtesy of Michelle Malkin and the Washington Times. Although it isn't ACLU related, it is lefty related. In that the mouthpiece for the Socialists is Err Amerika, I felt that highlighting them here was prudent.

Robin Hood and Air America


Did Al Franken's liberal radio network Air America divert city money for the elderly and inner-city children to itself? That's the question people should be asking this week after the revelation that the New York Department of Investigation is looking into whether hundreds of thousands of dollars were illegally transferred from a Bronx community center to Air America. Only a community paper and a few Internet bloggers seem interested in what could be an egregious case of illegal funneling of tax dollars to a private, partisan organization.
In late June, city officials designated the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club, a nonprofit organization that runs mentoring programs for children and day care for Alzheimer's patients, a "non-responsible city contractor." Investigators found "significant inappropriate transactions and falsified documents that were submitted to various City agencies." The city subsequently suspended the club's contracts, which run well into the millions.
And that's Gribbit's Round up for the early morning hours of Saturday Juy 30, 2005.
Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

29 July 2005

The ACLU and Its Opposition To S. 1088

Senate Bill S. 1088, The Streamline Procedures Act of 2005, is somewhat offensive to the lunatic bats at the ACLU. Why? They seem to have their panties in a twist over the provisions relating to writs of habeas corpus.
Here is what they say on their site:
The Senate Judiciary Committee today has begun to consider legislation that would strip federal courts of their jurisdiction and take away defendant's safeguards against being wrongfully convicted and even executed. The committee will continue to consider this legislation after the August recess. The American Civil Liberties Union opposes this bill, saying it unconstitutionally violates the doctrine of Separation of Powers and threatens the independence of the federal judiciary. Senate bill 1088, the Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005, eliminates state prisoners'’ ability to access federal courts in order to have their criminal cases reviewed. If passed, it would prevent the federal courts from reviewing many types of legal errors in criminal cases. "This bill virtually eliminates a state prisoner'’s ability to call for a federal court to review their case, if for example, their lawyer fell asleep during trial." said Jesselyn McCurdy, an ACLU Legislative Counsel. "Inexperienced lawyers, and prosecutorial misconduct, among other things are some of the reasons why convictions are overturned as a result of habeas proceedings. This bill would eliminate state prisoners'’ ability to access federal court as a court of last resort." Since 1976, when capital punishment was resumed in some states, federal habeas corpus has been the principle means by which the federal courts have forced the states to adhere to constitutional standards for the imposition of the death penalty. Those standards are essential if capital punishment is to be administered in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner. Yet death penalty statutes are complex and state courts often fail to interpret them correctly. Thus, in many cases federal habeas proceedings become the court of last resort for state prisoners with claims of innocence. If S.1088 is enacted many wrongfully convicted people will never have the opportunity to establish their innocence in a federal court. Currently, courts determine whether states have established competent legal counsel for people sentenced to death. Under S.1088, the U.S. Attorney General, the chief prosecuting officer, would have the authority to decide whether states'’ indigent defense systems are providing adequate representation. It is inappropriate for the Attorney General, an unobjective observer, to make this type of decision and this demonstrates that supporters of this legislation are not sincerely interested in providing competent legal representation . "The bottom line is that this bill strips the federal judiciary of their power by taking away the ability for state prisoners to gain access to the federal courts," said McCurdy. "This bill should be called '‘the Steam Roller Procedures Act of 2005'’ because nothing will be left of habeas corpus in this country if this legislation is passed."
Steam Roller Procedures Act of 2005, and I thought they didn't have a sense of humor.
Now, I've read the bill. It puts restrictions on the jurisdiction of the federal court to second guess sentencing of the state courts. It puts limits on the review processes of the Attorney General. Establishes time limits on the filings of writs of habeas corpus. Restricts the review of Capital Punishment cases. And raises the burden of proof where state court procedure are challenged. The bill also changes guidelines for the review of Capital Punishment cases, the issuing of clemency, and pardons. The Bill addresses victims rights and Ex Parte Funding requests under the Controlled Substance Act (go figure). There isn't a person in this nation who believes in strict penalties for committing crimes against the people that will agree with the ACLU on this. Why? Because we believe in the Do the Crime Do the Time idea. But the leftists in this country love to put the blame for the plight of the criminal mind on others. Like inexperienced attorneys. According to the ACLU attorneys, all attorneys are inexperienced except them. In typical "progressive elitist" fashion, only they have the intelligence to save the nation. When in fact, they waste their abilities on a system that has failed each time it has been tried. We support the passage of Senate Bill S. 1088 on the grounds that hopefully it will limit the ability of the federal government to interfere in state matters. And put an end to the continued violations of the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution. You can review the provisions yourself in the pdf file. That is straight from the United States Senate not some watered down review by some leftist leaning ACLU attorney who wants you to believe every word that he says. Dear Lefties, When are you people going to wise up and realize that your rights are the last thing on the ACLU's minds. Obstructing progress of this free nation is. And they hide under words like Civil Liberties and Progressive Thought. When in fact it should be Restricting Liberties and Obstructive Thought. Continuing to follow them is an exercise of futility. America has figured them out, and we are now going to take them down. End of Rant.
Thanks to our special friends Indepundit, Mudville Gazette and Outside The Beltway. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge
If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

28 July 2005

Thursday Suppliment and Round Up

I got linked to this thread in my Google Alerts using Keyword ACLU:

Shoo, ACLU!

Random Bag Searches in New York City Should be the Least of the ACLU's Concerns By Pauline Millard Jul 28, 2005

The news has been all aflutter lately over the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) in New York conducting random searches of bags in the New York City subways, as well as on commuter trains coming in from the New Jersey and Connecticut suburbs. After two sets of attacks in the London tubes and on its busses, it only seems natural that New York City would want to do something, anything, to try and make its denizens a little safer.

One has to wonder what's taken so long. Immediately after September 11th, it seemed as if anything was an open target: a bus, a subway, even a crowded club or bar. To me, it seemed like just a matter of time before I would start to have to open my purse before walking into pretty much any building, much like they do in Israel.

One day shortly after the September 11th attacks I was walking along 86th Street when a plane flew low overhead, causing a rumble across the neighborhood. I think it was one of those F-14s that would regularly patrol Manhattan back then. Nevertheless, literally everyone along the thoroughfare stopped and looked up at the sky, as if another attack was headed our way. People were on edge. It wasn't until the plane was out of earshot that they commenced with their shopping or started pushing their strollers again.

I think of that minute-long interval whenever I see the footage on the news of people opening their bags for policemen in the subway. The soundbites are always the same, "If the searches are making the subways even a little safer, I don't mind waiting a minute to be searched." These comments are obviously coming from people who aren't carrying explosives in their backpacks. (Although I've always wondered about the explosive potential of hairspray, a book of matches and a particularly bumpy bus.)

It surprises me, then, why organizations such as the ACLU would want to look into this new practice as extensively as they seem inclined to do. They've gone so far as calling the random searches unconstitutional and suggesting that they encourage racial profiling. They plan to send monitors to train and subway stations to keep an eye on policeman in order to make sure they're not just pulling over people who look foreign. (Um, this is New York. Everyone looks foreign. Just last week someone asked if I was Greek.)

New York City police commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said in a recent interview in the New York Times that even he wasn't that thrilled with having to implement the searches. He said that he had felt since as early as February, 2004 that New York City may have to go down that road, but it wasn't until the London bombings this past July that he realized it was time to put the plan into action. There were legal issues to think about, especially since last year a court nixed the idea of bag checks at the Republican National Convention. However, after some careful planning, New York devised a way that would ensure a hopefully random and effective way to search bags that won't irritate New Yorkers. They are likening the searches to police checkpoints that deter drunken drivers, which is all based on a numerical sampling.

Look, I'm all for keeping an eye on The Man and not letting things get too Orwellian. I back Free Will as much as the next gal. I'm also familiar with the Fourth Amendment. But out of all the issues that the ACLU could be picking at, and judging from their web site they've got quite a few menu options, random bag checks in New York City seems like it should be the least of their concerns.

I would argue that New York has a pretty good grasp of the situation. Kelly seems like he's perfectly adept at overseeing this, being that he is the former commissioner of the United States Customs Service. Meanwhile, the ACLU is big enough and has the resources for things that seriously need further inspection, such as this behemoth we call the Patriot Act and Judge John Roberts's nomination to the Supreme Court. But a little rummaging through a back pack in an effort to nab a potential bomber? Come on. There are larger fish to fry. source

In other news, CAFTA passed narrowly in the wee hours of the morning. The vote was 217 to 215 and the measure now goes to the President for signature. I am of the opinion that CAFTA isn't good for the nation. Sure, free trade is something that I would normally be on board for, but there needs to be some assurances of protecting American jobs. And this bill does not do that. But regardless of what the working man thinks, the President will be signing the bill and it will become law. Just like NAFTA, it will mean that cash strapped US companies will be free to relocate operations to Costa Rica or some backwater like that where they can hire local labor at a weekly cost of less than a Happy Meal. And passage of this bill just reinforces the fact that the Fair Tax needs to be considered and passed. Thereby creating an incentive for US companies to keep existing operations here at home and return those that have left. The Fair Tax is the only shot the US has at becoming competitive in manufacturing again. It is a fact, that the best made products are made right here in the Good 'Ol USA. But that quality comes at a price. Our workers deserve to make a wage that would afford them the opportunity to buy the very products that they are making. And keeping competitive with the cheap foreign labor force, US companies have frozen wages while increasing prices for their products. And it has become so bad that an auto industry supplier cannot afford to pay it's workers a wage that would permit them to buy the very car that they are producing parts for. I know this from personal experience. As little as 2 years ago, I worked for a company that manufactured parts for GM. My particular job was to operate a paint system. But there is no way that I could have afforded to buy a new Trialblazer, Envoy, Trooper, Grand Am, or any other vehicle that we made parts for. It is time to give our employers an opportunity to keep business here at home. By passing the Fair Tax, all the hidden taxes incorporated in the end user cost of the product would be removed. Those savings will be passed onto the consumer, give the employer an opportunity to develop more products and hire more people to make them. And if the tax structure as it exists now is no longer there, profits go up, growth goes up, stocks go up, savings go up, spending goes up, personal incomes go up, and revenue for the government to waste goes up. Visit the Fair Tax website and check out the faqs. The plan is a win, win, win situation.
Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

Stop The ACLU BlogBurst July 28, 2005

The month of July has seen some incredible tragedy and some incredible successes. And are we to learn anything from either? If the ACLU has its way, no. Let me explain. On July 7th, 4 bombs exploded in London killing over 50 people and injuring over a hundred more. Two weeks later, an attempt to repeat this attack failed. Now ask yourself why. First off, the bombers were all killed on the 7th. But several arrests were made in Great Britain and other countries in relation to the attack. Why? Surveillance. Londoners are photographed over 300 times on their way to work every morning. And although one can claim Big Brother is starting to peek his nose out of Orwell's novel and into reality, it has equated into several important arrests. The British are vastly more experienced in battling terrorism that we are. And they have adopted means upon which to combat it that has proven most effective. Now I'm no fan of adopting European solutions for any problem in the United States. But, the use of cameras on public land, buildings, and transports, may be an important investigative tool that could be utilized here. But not until after provisions are adopted to limit the possibilities of abuse. There is no need to know what stores John Q. Taxpayer shops in. But there is a need to know if crimes are being committed. And if CCTV is able to curb these criminal activities, then so be it. But, as usual the ACLU has their panties in a twist over the entire idea.
From News24.com Washington - Americans are weighing the merits of an all-seeing network of 24-hour-a-day security cameras similar to the system that has aided Britain's recent terrorist investigations. Britain's extensive network of video cameras allowed police to quickly beam pictures of the suspects in the recent London attacks across the globe. But any bid to expand the fledgling US network of surveillance cameras could fall afoul of freedom and privacy guarantees in the US Constitution. "The ethos we have in this country is that government leaves you alone unless it has good reason to suspect you of wrongdoing," said Jay Stanley of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). "Videotaping everything you do when you leave your apartment or house doesn't really qualify as leaving you alone." Rudimentary Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, some US jurisdictions have improved their rudimentary closed-circuit TV (CCTV) systems, branded by opponents as "spy" cameras. "They are pretty scarce, as far as law enforcement CCTV is concerned. There are, of course, a lot of private CCTV networks," said Cedric Laurant, a policy analyst with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). Chicago has around 1 200 cameras, there are more than 200 in Baltimore and there are 20 to 25 police cameras in Washington, as well as a network in Metro subway stations, trains and buses, according to EPIC, a Washington-based civil liberties research centre. New York City has a burgeoning network, and there are also cameras in New Orleans and on transportation systems around the country, but analysts say there is neither the depth nor coordination of coverage that there is in Britain. Switched on Washington's system is only switched on for major events, like the July 4 Independence Day celebrations, though police have access to hundreds of cameras used by the Metro subway system and transportation networks in an emergency. Washington Mayor Anthony Williams sparked debate over CCTV following the first round of London attacks on July 7, which killed 56 people. "I have always been for broader use of cameras. I do not think that cameras are this big, mortal threat to civil liberties that people are painting them out to be," the July 14 issue of The Washington Post quoted Williams as saying. Inbred In the United States, a country with an inbred distrust of government, the question is: "Who watches the watchers?" "I do think it runs counter to the American ethos; the American tradition of our freewheeling national character is at risk of being chilled," said Stanley, stressing that the ACLU was not against technology being used in security but wanted checks on how it was introduced.
I believe that CCTV surveillance can be incorporated into the Patriot Act effectively. But I also feel that to remove the possibility of abuse of the system, an Amendment to the Constitution should be adopted concerning National Security and electronic technology setting limits on what it can and cannot be used for. Electronics are fast becoming more and more advanced to the point that abuses can and will happen. And it will be a fact of life that we will have to deal with video surveillance in the future. There is no way around it. But we can limit the ability of abuse. And it would seem prudent that limiting abuse be addressed before these technologies become a fact of life. Let's take an honest look at surveillance on a more local level. Casinos in Las Vegas are the most secure locations in the nation. Nobody dare to attempt to rob a Casino. Why? Because everything is watched. And everybody knows it. Yet, nobody complains. Why? People like the feeling of being safe. That's why. If adopted as a way to combat terrorism, CCTV would and should be available to local law enforcement in order to track down other felonies. That would only make sense. But again, there is no need to know what stores John Q. Taxpayer shops in, what he buys, or where he goes unless he is accused of a crime. The CCTV cameras can also be used to clear individuals of crimes which they have been falsely accused of. Thereby freeing up time of investigators to track down the actual criminal. There was a time in this country when there was a cop in every neighborhood. And that cop knew everyone in that neighborhood. And everyone knew him (at that time they were all male). CCTV can be a long overdue replacement for those cops who are no longer there due to budget concerns. Today's cities cannot afford to have a beat cop in every neighborhood, that knows everything about that neighborhood. But a camera which doesn't draw a salary could be those missing eyes.
A special thanks to my friends at Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

27 July 2005

Err Amerika, Missing Funds, and Possible Crime

Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin
Diverting federal funding to an organization or commercial business which has the purpose of advancing a political agenda, is that a crime? If it isn't, it should be. It seems that a "non-profit" organization in the Bronx, NY, has done just that. Illegally transferred funding to Err-America (spelling intentional) in the form of a loan. WHAT!?! If you are governing a non-profit organization which is supposed to be catering to the needs of children in your neighborhood, chances are your organization is so cash strapped that making bill payments is a struggle. But apparently, the Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club of the Bronx is just rolling in it. Because they have diverted federal funding intended to be used for providing activities for inter-city children to a highly liberal talk radio station. Now don't get me wrong, I believe that the Boy's & Girls Clubs of America do wonderful work. And if there is federal funding which they are able to receive to provide services for our youth, I believe that is money well spent. However, to divert those funds outside of the organization for any reason is criminal.
A Bronx congressman yesterday praised the smooth takeover of dozens of programs serving thousands of youngsters and seniors across the borough after the city yanked funding from two sponsoring agencies that have come under a cloud.

The nonprofit Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club and its affiliate Pathways for Youth found their city contracts, running into the millions of dollars, abruptly ended last month by the city Department of Investigation.

And it continues:

Crowley (D-Bronx, Queens) said he was "totally shocked - shocked is an understatement" when news of the loss of funding first broke.

He said he and other elected officials are still in the dark over the exact nature of the probe.

In its initial announcement, the DOI said it was probing allegations that program officials "approved significant inappropriate transactions and falsified documents that were submitted to various city agencies."

According to published reports, the allegations involve Charles Rosen, the founder of Gloria Wise who has stepped down as executive director, investing city contract funds in Air America Radio, the liberal talk radio network.

Evan Cohen, Air America's former chairman, had served as Gloria Wise's director of development. source

And the Bronx News says:

The Bronx News has learned, through informed sources, that the diversion of hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club in Co-op City to the liberal Air America Radio is at the center of the city'’s probe of corruption at the local club.

The money, which was reportedly paid to Air America as a loan, was supposed to be paid back with interest, two unidentified informed sources told the News. One source added that Air America officials, led by an official of the Gloria Wise Club, agreed to help the local club by publicizing its activities.

To date, no indictments have been handed down in the New York City Department of Investigation'’s ongoing probe of the Gloria Wise Club'’s reported transfer of funds to Air America.

Most of the Gloria Wise Club'’s programs are for the Co-op City community, but the club also runs after-school programs in the Baychester/Edenwald and Soundview areas.

At the center of the investigation, in addition to Charles Rosen, the charismatic leader of the local club for the last 15 years, is Evan Cohen, who resigned, under fire, as chairman of Air America Radio shortly after its start as an alternative to conservative talk radio.

Cohen, at the time the alleged transfers of funds from the Gloria Wise Club to Air America took place, was also the director of Development for the local boys'’ and girls'’ club, the News has learned.

One source told the News that $480,000 in funds from the Gloria Wise Club is involved in the city'’s investigation of illegal transfer of funds from the local club.

A second unidentified source stressed that Rosen never sought to profit personally from the reported loan that the Gloria Wise Club gave to Air America. The source emphasized that Rosen'’s sole motive, even if it was a bit naive, was to benefit the Gloria Wise Club with the interest that Air America would pay for its loan from the local club.

The city'’s DOI is pursuing the probe because the Gloria Wise Club depends heavily on city funding for its operations. These funds are subject to extensive audits, as are funds received through the state and federal governments.

The Co-op City-based club, which Rosen has built into an empire in the Co-op City community, reportedly has 19 contracts and at least one grant with the city, worth a total of $9.7 million.

Over the last year, Rep. Joseph Crowley has secured two major federal grants for the Gloria Wise Club, one for a day-care program for Alzheimer'’s patients and their caregivers and the other for the community'’s NORC program for senior citizens. The grant for the program for Alzheimer'’s patients and their caregivers was for $250,000, while the grant for the NORC program was for $99,410.

In 2003, Crowley secured a $218,500 grant for a mentoring program that the Gloria Wise Club runs.

Cohen, who is reportedly at the center of the Gloria Wise probe, is a Guam-based investors who was reportedly a key principal in the start-up of Air America, which has been billed as the liberals' answer to conservative talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Shaun Hannity, Bob Grant, Michael Savage, and G. Gordon Liddy. source

And and yet another story from the NY Daily News:
Two affiliated Bronx community programs serving thousands of youths and seniors have had their city funding yanked and their records reportedly seized amid an ongoing investigation.

Officials confirmed yesterday that the nonprofit Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club Inc., and its affiliate, Pathways for Youth Boys & Girls Club, have been determined to be "nonresponsible city contractors" in connection with several recently submitted contract proposals.

The city Department of Youth and Community Development said in a press release issued by Investigation Commissioner Rose Gill Hearn that its determinations were based on an ongoing DOI probe. The probe is investigating allegations that officials of the long-established community programs "approved significant inappropriate transactions and falsified documents that were submitted to various city agencies."

Last week, DOI investigators reportedly seized records from the two programs' offices at Co-op City.

DOI spokeswoman Emily Gest issued a terse "no comment" yesterday when asked if records had been seized and whether the probe rose to the level of a criminal investigation.

Local city, state and federal legislators involved in funding the programs met Sunday at the offices of Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley to discuss the situation, said Assemblyman Michael Benedetto (D-East Bronx).

He said it was his understanding that the city has brought in other nonprofit agencies, such as the Police Athletic League, to take over the various programs run by the two suspect groups, which have received $9.7 million in 19 contracts and one outright grant.

Benedetto said that workers at Gloria Wise have already been notified their last official day of work will be Thursday.

Besides the city Education Department and the Youth and Community Development Department, the DOI release stated that the Department for the Aging is terminating its contracts with Gloria Wise, and the city Housing Authority is terminating a grant agreement with Pathways for Youth. The Department for the Aging, according to a source, has contracted with the Jewish Association for the Aged to take over the senior center programs, starting July 5.

Calls yesterday to Charles Rosen, executive director of the organization, were not returned as of deadline. Originally published on June 28, 2005 source

Hmm, Err-Amerika with their hand in the cookie jar? Looks like it.
The leftist radio station has had trouble gaining momentum in the main stream. Why? Because they are so over the top. These are actors and comedians who claim that they know better than middle America how this nation is being run. And claiming that a Conservative approach to leadership is the ultimate evil. Nothing could be further from the truth. The only individuals that I know of who actually listen to these idiots are the moonbat bloggers like Daily POS (spelling intentional). Lefties who won't be satisfied until the nation is officially turned into the U.S.S.A. (United Soviet States of Amerika). So the diverting of federal funding in order so that Err Amerika can keep paying their bills while depriving the children of the Bronx services that the federal government is paying for should be considered a criminal enterprise. Does RICO apply? It may. Money has been extorted. Federal money. Do you actually think that Err Amerika is intending on repaying the money to Gloria Wise with interest? If you do, you are one simple SOB aren't you.
Thank you to our friends at Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway. And especially to Michelle Malkin Update: Just to clearify, I am aware that the articles that I've quoted specify that the grant money came from the City of New York. But where do you think that they got it? Keep that in mind before you send the hate mail. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

26 July 2005

Victory For The BSA

Last Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist introduced an Amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill. Well, it came to a vote tonight. And we have some excellent news via FoxNews.com

Senate Approves Boy Scout Events on Military Bases
WASHINGTON - The Senate voted Tuesday to allow U.S. military bases to continue to host Boy Scouts events, responding to lawsuits and a federal court ruling aimed at severing relationships between the government and the youth group.
The vote came one day after four adult Scout leaders from an Alaska troop were killed on the opening day of the National Scout Jamboree at the Army's Fort A.P. Hill in Bowling Green, Va., when a tent pole apparently struck a power line.
In a 98-0 vote, the Senate approved the provision continuing the hosting of Boy Scout events as part of massive bill setting Defense Department policy for next year. After the vote, Senate leaders decided to put off further debate and votes on the overall bill, probably until fall when Congress returns from a monthlong break.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., a former Boy Scout who sponsored the Senate provision, said it is necessary to push back on a spate of lawsuits to limit Boy Scout activities on government property. The provision adopted Tuesday says Boy Scouts should be treated the same as other national youth organizations. Frist said it "removes any doubt that federal agencies may welcome Scouts to hold meetings, go camping on federal property or hold scouting events and public forums" on government property. In 1999, the ACLU of Illinois filed a lawsuit claiming the Pentagon's sponsorship of such Boy Scout activities violates the First Amendment. The ACLU argues that direct government sponsorship of the group amounts to discrimination. Civil liberties advocates have assailed the Boy Scouts organization because it bans openly gay leaders and compels members to swear an oath of duty to God. On June 22, U.S. District Judge Blanche Manning ruled in the ACLU's favor, saying the Pentagon can't spend millions of dollars to sponsor Boy Scout events. She said in an earlier ruling that the government spent between $6 million and $8 million to host the Jamboree on a military base in 1997 and 2001. The House in November overwhelmingly passed a nonbinding resolution that recognized the Boy Scouts organization for its public service efforts and condemned legal efforts to limit government ties to the organization that has 3.2 million members. source
So as far as we are concerned, the ACLU can stuff that in their pipe and smoke it. A margin of 98-0 in the Senate in the current political state of Congress, is nothing short of a miricle. Unless, it is over a topic so obviously over the top that it couldn't help but gain bi-partisan supprt, it usually comes down to a battle over the simplest of language. Victory is sweet. But I'm sure all of you will join me in expressing our deepest sympathies to the families of the Scout Masters that were killed in Monday's electrical accident at the Boy Scout Jamboree. And pray for the speedy recovery of the injured. No better tribute could be paid to these men who gave their lives to bring a safe, moral, and constructive outlet for the youth of our nation, than this being approved. I congratulate all 98 Senators who voted on their wisdom and common sense in appoving such a neccessary activity. Both for our youth and our Armed Forces. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge
If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

The People Want Roberts

According to the latest numbers from the Gallop Organization, the people want John Roberts. The latest poll has the American public 59% for approval, 22% for not approving, and 17% with no opinion, and a +/- 1% error factor. (source: Special Report w/ Brit Hume FNC, July 26, 2005) That is a significant number. Almost 2/3 of all the people in this nation want John Roberts on the high court. How could that be if he is as controversial as the left is claiming. Today the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Arlen Spector (R PA), has announced that if he cannot get any assurances of a final confirmation vote prior to September 29, that he would call the Committee back from the summer recess a week early and begin the hearings on August 29th rather than September 6th. "We are looking for ways to have commitments or assurances that we can vote Judge Roberts no later than Thursday, September the 29, which would enable us to swear him in on the 30th, and have him get his seat on October 3," Specter said. "If we cannot have those kind of assurances, then it may be necessary to go to the August 29th date, because there are many unpredictable factors which can arise to delay the proceedings." source The document frenzy has already started. And it's the usual suspects requesting privileged information. "'I am disappointed that the administration has so quickly closed the door on providing Judge Roberts' documents to the Judiciary Committee. It is far too early to know whether the committee will need those documents and I hope the White House will keep an open mind on document requests,' Sen. Charles Schumer (D NY), said of the first Bush administration documents." source Only a client can release his/her attorney from his obligation to respect the Attorney/Client privilege. If the attorney does so without such a waver from his/her client, they are subject to disciplinary action including removal from the BAR. As Solicitor General, John Roberts' client was the President of the United States. And just because an attorney no longer represents a client, he/she is no less obligated to protect that privilege. To violate it without such a waiver, the attorney is assisting in the violation of his/her client's 5th Amendment Rights. Charlie is a moron of the first caliber. And there is no one denying that. He is the most incompetent individual on the Judiciary Committee. Knowing that if the political roles were reversed, he would be protecting the President's nominee unconditionally. But since the President is a Conservative, he is fundamentally opposed to anything less than obstructing the progress of the Committee. Why? To delay a vote on the floor. So Charlie the Moron... Take a look at the numbers Charlie. The people want Roberts. So shut your pie hole about documents that you are never in a million years are ever going to get. Give Chairman Spector his assurances so the Senate can proceed and confirm our next Associate Justice to the Supreme Court. You know that you don't have a snow ball's chance in Hell of blocking it once it hits the floor. So can we get on with the show? A special thanks to our friends from Mudville Gazette and Outside The Beltway.
Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

25 July 2005

Citizen Support For John Roberts

A growing voice of the American public is the "Letters to the Editor" sections of the Op/Ed page of local and regional newspapers. Except for the leftist litmus test applied by my local paper, most seem to let their readers views be read even if they contrast specific policies of the editorial staff. The Ashtabula Star Beacon is edited by a leftist idiot who prints nothing promoting or endorsing conservative view points. Even the "Letters to the Editor" are screened and all those which vastly oppose the policy of the editor are not printed. If I were to write an Op/Ed piece and submit it to the editor of the Ashtabula Star Beacon, it wouldn't even be considered. It would find its way into file 13 faster than the life span of a bottle of Scotch at Teddy "the Lush" Kennedy's house. I think that we could all agree that most major cities are life centers of liberal political thought. And their newspapers tend to print stories with an anti-conservative spin. But in my ACLU alerts I came across an article that appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer via philly.com written by a citizen of Doylestown, Pa.
Give Roberts a fair chance at top court

If Judge John G. Roberts Jr., the President's nominee to the Supreme Court, is a man of good character with a decent brain, a command of the law, and a respect for the importance of the high court in maintaining our republic as a viable institution for democratic governance, the Senate should provide a dignified, thorough examination and, if their findings agree, the senators should confirm his appointment.

Those senators and members of the body politic who consider any nominee who may have expressed an idea to the right of the views held by Ted Kennedy, the ACLU or Jesse Jackson, a sworn enemy of the nation, need a reality check. The tenor of the nation has become more conservative.

Not all the social change this nation has experienced over 40 years has been an unquestionable journey to social nirvana. Many good and necessary things have occurred along with woolly-headed and socially destructive notions rooted in a misguided concept that one has a constitutional right to say or do whatever an individual or group wishes, regardless of its impact on others and society in general.

We do not need a Supreme Court dedicated to taking us back to a time that no longer exists. We are a pluralist nation of 280 million people. But the powerful, underlying principles written into the Constitution at its inception need protection more than ever.

All citizens who truly care about the nation's future should reserve their wrath for keeping blatant, knee-jerk ideologues off the bench. Nominees who are thoughtful conservatives with superb credentials do not fall into that category.

Philip C. Rush


This article that Mr. Rush has authored voices the opinion of all of us on the right. Why? Because we are tired of having our rights stripped away from us through judicial activism. The Supreme Court of the United States comprises of 9 members, nominated by the President of the United States for a term of Life or Retirement. The reason why the term is for life is so that politics are removed from the equation. They are charged with being the legal review of challenges to federal, state, and local laws which may have an impact contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America. Their responsibility is to the people through the Supreme Law of the Land. They are to review laws passed by the Legislative Branch not to make laws themselves. The whole point of electing the legislators of our nation from the citizenry to represent the area of the nation from which they were elected, is so that the collective will of the people is represented in the debates over proposed legislation. So, in a sense, the people pass the laws of our nation. Hence the idea of a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." We have the ultimate authority over those decisions through our ability to remove an elected official through our right and responsibility to vote. But we have no such ability over federal judges and Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The one and only gage that the Justices of the Supreme Court should be measuring our laws against is the Constitution of the United States, not the Constitutions of France, Sweden, Germany, or Great Britain. The recent decision from the Supreme Court involved a measure of the Eminent Domain abilities of the government using a reference of European laws. This is a miscarriage of justice. Congress at this time is considering legislation to remedy this situation. But this comes too late to save some private property owners who are having their property seized in order for their local municipalities to receive more revenue in taxes. It is my opinion that we have got to review the life appointment provisions involving federal judges and Justices of the Supreme Court. These appointments have created an environment where we have 1/3 of our government unchecked and unbalanced. And in the current environment of judicial activism, has created a 9 person panel of something that is fast becoming reminiscent of the Supreme Soviet. And how did this come to being? Through encouragement from organizations such as the ACLU which, ironically, one of our Supreme Court Justices is a former General Counsel. Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg. Starting in the mid 20th century, the 10th Amendment of the Constitution has been sacrificed for the social welfare of the nation. A policy to promote "the Great Society" gained momentum in the Congress, the Presidency, and the SCotUS. This liberalization of society gained momentum in the free wielding 60s. And started to have an impact on all sectors of American life in the early 1970s. With the 1973 Roe v Wade decision, the SCotUS decided that the federal government had the ability to regulate what could be classified as a medical procedure. The last time that I checked, medical procedures are not spacifically addressed in the Constitution. Nowhere does the Supreme Document give the power to regulate medical procedures to the federal government. Nor does it prohibit the states from doing so. Therefore, according to the 10th Amendment, it is a state matter. With Roe, the SCotUS decided that they had the ability to make law not to just interpret law. Something that isn't included in their specific responsibilities as outlined in Article III of the United States Constitution. That responsibility is reserved to the Congress in Article I. The State of Texas had a law prohibiting abortions from being performed within the state. A regulation that is perfectly within the rights of Texas under the 10th Amendment. Judicial activism needs to find its demise as a practice. And hopefully, the appointment of Judge John Roberts will be the first step of accomplishing that goal. The appointment of Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court is one of the most important acts of President George W. Bush. The United States Senate has the responsibility to advice and consent of any nominee (Article II section 2 clause 2). This is done through a floor vote of the nominee. A simple majority is all that is needed to do this. The idea of the filibuster occurs nowhere within the Constitution. It appears in the adopted rules of the Senate which can be changed by the Senate whenever it so chooses. And we nearly had that happen with this supposed "Nuclear Option" dubbed by the Dumocrap leader Sen. Harry "the moron" Reid (D NV). Cyberspace is saturated with petitions that are designed to convince the Dumocrap leadership to approve Judge Roberts. No matter how many signatures that they receive, they will still do all that they can to oppose the appointment. Why? Because their goal is to obstruct any progress of the President until the next election. When, they hope to put forward a candidate which will reverse all of the progress that is made. It is up to us, the Conservative thinkers of America, to keep pointing out the obstructionism that is occurring in Congress spear-headed by Dumocraps like Harry "The Moron" Reid (D NV), Teddy "The Lush" Kennedy(D MA), Charlie "Mr. Liberal" Schumer (D NY), Nancy "The B****" Pelosi (D CA), and Dick "The Turban" Durbin (D IL). And the cooperation of RINOs like John McCain (RINO AZ) and George "I'll Never Be President" Voinovich (RINO OH). And a Special thanks to our friends at Mudville Gazette and Outside the Beltway.
Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

23 July 2005

Support For Scouts - It's About Time

Cross-Posted from Stop the ACLU.com
Thursday, Sen. Bill Frist introduced a bill called Support Our Scouts Act of 2005. Well I say it is about dang time. The Chattanoogan.com has a thread written by the Senator himself.
And here it is:
Frist: Standing Up For The Boy Scouts by Sen. Bill Frist posted July 21, 2005 Just hours ago, I introduced an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill ... "Support Our Scouts Act of 2005." Earlier this month, an appeals court judge declared Pentagon support for the Boy Scouts of America major gathering - the National Scout Jamboree - unconstitutional. Why? Well, in the words of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) -- who petitioned the court: the Scouts require members to "privately exercise their religious faith as directed by their families and religious advisors." That, they argued, was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (separation of church and state). Sadly, the court agreed. You're probably wondering what takes place at the National Scout Jamboree ... just what it is that had the ACLU so aghast. An American tradition, the National Scout Jamboree is a gathering of over 40,000 people -- scouts, moms and dads -- at Ft. A.P. Hill in Virginia (a military base). They come together every four years and learn important skills, such as canoeing, leathercraft, land navigation, first aid, and survival skills. They also come together to celebrate their bedrock values. They talk about patriotism; they talk about public service; they talk about conservation; they talk about civic virtue; and they talk about faith. No specific denomination, mind you, but rather the mere acknowledgment of a higher power. That was enough to set the ACLU attack machine in motion; they put this venerable organization in their crosshairs. Once again, the ACLU sued the Boy Scouts of America. This is an organization -- the Boy Scouts of America -- whose motto reads (in part): "On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country ..." They gather - as I once did, as my three sons did, as more than 40 members of the United States Senate and 150 members of the House of Representatives did - to talk about principles. Principles like honesty, integrity, and character. My friends, the Boy Scouts of America produce good kids ... the true leaders of tomorrow. They've been doing it proudly since 1910. And it's a sad day when we need to enact legislation to enable them to keep doing it ... particularly at a time when we face such unprecedented challenges at home and abroad. As they say, America's greatness is determined by our goodness. Well, let me tell you, these kids are as good as it gets. They make us proud. And we need to stand up for them. My amendment does the following: It makes clear that the Congress regards the Boy Scouts of America to be a "youth organization," not a religious organization. It asserts the view of Congress that government support of the National Scout Jamboree (by the Defense Department) helps with the training of our armed forces. It removes ANY DOUBT that federal agencies may welcome Scouts to hold meetings and go camping on federal property. I believe this amendment will receive broad, bipartisan support in both the Senate and the House, and that it will pass this year. And I hope you will join me in standing up for the Boy Scouts of America by calling your Senators and Representatives and asking them to support the "Support Our Scouts Act of 2005." As for me, I hope to proudly be among those attending their annual Jamboree next week. Bill Frist, M.D. Senate Majority Leader
Real leadership. Something the left lacks. I applaud Senator Frist for his courage in confronting these liberal activist judges by doing a legislative end run around them. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

Is Fark Worth It?

I'm beginning to wonder if Fark is worth all the hassle. I joined as a suggestion under the idea that it could increase my traffic. And it did. But then there are problems. I am careful about how often I submit a link. I only link to threads that I feel are more important. I don't change the title of my threads on the submission form, I don't file my threads under topics which tend to generate more traffic. I file my threads under asinine or misc. And always under politics. I never use all caps as one idiot claims that I have. But all that being said, since early in the AM on Thursday, I've been suspended from submitting links for whatever reason that I cannot figure out. Friday night Stop the ACLU started getting troll traffic. Well guess who is being blamed for submitting the link to the thread? Me. And I've been suspended since before the thread was written. And I didn't even write it. But you can't tell these idiots that. On top of everything, a few of them decided to use a government website as their email address. So I sent an email to the webmaster of the site. I'm sure the IG of the Federal Trade Commission will be real interested in these individuals. Here are their comments:

  1. Why do you people hate America so much that you’d speak out against civil liberties, and would deliberately lie to do so? The court didn’t “find the Jamboree unconstitutional” as you erroneously claim. It found government funding of the jamboree unconstitutional. If you were half as conservative as you claim to be, you wouldn’t want your tax dollars going to that either. Let the people attending the Jamboree pay for the Jamboree. You’re just a bunch of pinko liberals who expect the government to pay for everything, and you’ll distort the truth to hide that fact. Go back to the Soviet Union, you ungrateful bastards.

    Comment by John Q. Public — July 22, 2005 @ 11:48 pm

  2. you guys need to shut the hell up

    Comment by BEER — July 23, 2005 @ 12:06 am

  3. Gribbit, you clearly need to lay off the vodka, comrade. I didn’t speak out against the Jamboree, I just said that the people who attend shoud pay for it instead of me. You slimy liberals need to get your dirty fingers out of my wallet.

    Comment by John Q. Public — July 23, 2005 @ 12:10 am

  4. Gribbit, you’re the one advocating taxpayer dollars for the Jamboree, not me. How dare you call me a liberal, when you’re the one who is being all tax-and-spend, you hypocrite.

    Comment by John Q. Public — July 23, 2005 @ 12:17 am

  5. Gribbit, I’m too smart to give a pseudo-conservative such as yourself a link to my website. We want thoughtful Americans there, not someone who throws around American taxpayer dollars willy-nilly. Be more like Jay, who admitted to being a liberal. I may not agree with his ideas, but I can at least respect his desire to debate ideas with honesty and civility. You, on the other hand, are beneath me, so I’m done with you.

    Comment by John Q. Public — July 23, 2005 @ 12:37 am

  6. Man…Whichever one of you asshats keeps submitting this crap to Fark.com every single night…I’m donating $5 to the ACLU every time you do, from now on.

    And $10 when it’s done under a false headline.

    Comment by Magic — July 23, 2005 @ 12:43 am

  7. Oh! Hey! Whaddya know! It’s Gribbit submitting it.

    Congratulations, Gribbit. You are now responsible for multiple cash donations to the ACLU.

    So much for trying to stop them, eh?

    Comment by Magic — July 23, 2005 @ 1:17 am




    Comment by TotalFark — July 23, 2005 @ 1:20 am

  9. Y’know, damn…I never much cared enough about the ACLU one way or another…But after seeing all this stuff…I decided to read their website a bit after I donated…I think I’m going to make a habit of it - they sound like a pretty cool organization.

    Comment by Magic — July 23, 2005 @ 1:23 am

  10. A habit of donating, that is.

    Thanks, Gribbit, for opening my eyes, and showing me a better way of spending that $5 a week than Whataburger.

    Comment by Magic — July 23, 2005 @ 1:24 am

  11. Thanks for inspiring me Gribbit… to become a card carrying member of the ACLU after reading their website, which by the way, doesn’t look like it was designed by retarded monkeys.

    Pony up the $5 for Totalfark so we can flame you in person, or stop submitting pointless links that waste everyone’s time.

    Comment by Joe SixPack — July 23, 2005 @ 1:39 am

  12. Tell the ACLU I’m in for $25 a month. I might need them to defend my First Amendment right to talk to the press. Thanks Gribble for pointing me to them.

    Comment by K. Rove — July 23, 2005 @ 1:48 am

  13. You really, honestly think they’re anti-christ when they defend morons like Jerry Falwell?

    When they defend a Presbyterian church in Nebraska from being evicted?

    When their threat of lawsuit kept baptisms in public parks legal in Virginia?

    Just because you never read about them defending Christians on FreeRepublic, doesn’t mean it never happened.

    Comment by Joe SixPack — July 23, 2005 @ 2:30 am

So I sent this to the Federal Trade Commission. My reason? The person calling himself John Q. Public, Total Fark, and Karl Rove is the same person. I can tell by your IP. And this idiot is using an email address that leads to the Federal Trade Commission. Here is the email that I sent to the Webmaster of ftc.gov:
I am contacting you to inform you that someone using a ftc.gov email address is trolling Conservative Blogs leaving hateful comments.
I represent a group of Bloggers who are involved in politically oriented subject matter. We have been fielding comments from an individual who is attempting to hide his identity by using your website as a base for a fraudulent email address.
We felt that you should be made aware of this misuse in the event that it is a government employee doing so. I am including the email address that this person used and the IP that he sent the comments from for your examination.
Thank you for your time,
[my name]
Stop The ACLU.com
Used email and IP
under the names of Total Fark, Karl Rove, and John Q. Public
this individual also used http://www.whitehouse.com as their URL
It seems that we are starting to hit some nerves. Now I don't mind taking the blame for something that I did, but I didn't do anything. Nothing outside of my normal troll bashing. I did nothing to deserve to be suspended from Fark to begin with. I've linked maybe 3 of my own links, about 3 from Stop The ACLU on Jay's request, and one for Is It Just Me. And I love how I got the blame for submitting a link to a thread that wasn't authored until after I was suspended. Pay $5.00 to join Total Fark? I think not. Especially if it attracts individuals with such low mental skills as these idiots. Let me know what you think. Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

21 July 2005

Stop The ACLU BlogBurst July 21, 2005

The most revealing information released about the Most Dangerous Organization in America this past week has been the revelation that the FBI has over 1100 documents pertaining to the ACLU obtained during an investigation by the Counter Terrorism Taskforce. What have they been up to?
According to the ACLU nothing and I quote:
Government Has Amassed Thousands of Pages on National Peace and Civil Rights Organizations
NEW YORK -- The American Civil Liberties Union today revealed that the FBI has amassed more than 1,100 pages of documents on its organization since 2001, as well as documents concerning other non-violent groups including Greenpeace and United for Peace and Justice.
"We now know that the government is keeping documents about the ACLU and other peaceful groups - the question is why," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "We are urging the court to order that these documents be turned over immediately," he added. "If the FBI has nothing to hide, it should release the documents promptly. The government's claim that it needs nine more months to turn over these documents is a stalling tactic," Romero said, referring to the FBI's request for more time to "process" the 1,173 pages of documents it says it has on the ACLU. The ACLU also revealed today the contents of a report on United for Peace and Justice, a national peace organization that coordinates non-violent protests. The document, sections of which are redacted, is addressed to FBI "Counterrorism" personnel and quotes from UFPJ's website calling for a public demonstration prior to the 2004 Republican National Convention. The document was released in response to an ACLU lawsuit filed two months ago to expedite its FOIA request for FBI surveillance files on the ACLU, Greenpeace, United for Peace and Justice, Code Pink, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Muslim Public Affairs Council. "The UFPJ report underscores our concern that the FBI is violating Americans' right to peacefully assemble and oppose government policies without being branded as terrorist threats," said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU. "There is no need to open a counterterrorism file when people are simply exercising their First Amendment rights." The ACLU has launched a nationwide effort to expose and prevent FBI spying on people and groups simply for speaking out or practicing their faith. In addition to the FOIA request on behalf of the national organizations, the ACLU has filed similar requests on behalf of more than 100 groups and individuals in 16 states and the District of Columbia. The ACLU is seeking information about the FBI's use of Joint Terrorism Task Forces and local police to engage in political surveillance. The requests were filed in response to widespread complaints from students and political activists who said they were questioned by FBI agents in the months leading up to the 2004 political conventions. The FOIAs seek two kinds of information: 1) the actual FBI files of groups and individuals targeted for speaking out or practicing their faith; 2) information about how the practices and funding structure of the task forces, known as JTTFs, are encouraging rampant and unwarranted spying. For more information on the FOIA requests, go to www.aclu.org/spyfiles. The FBI Counterterrorism document on United for Peace and Justice is available online at: www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=18781&c=206. The government's response to the ACLU's lawsuit for expedited processing is available online at: www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=18779&c=206. Source
Peaceful Organizations my big toe. The ACLU has been undermining this nation ever since it's founding in 1920 by self-professed Communists Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman. Especially as of late with their attempt to grant Constitutional liberties to detained terrorists being housed at Guantanamo Bay Cuba. If they are so peaceful, then why are they backing enemies of the United States? If they are so peaceful why did they lose some of their funding earlier this year? Could it be that they wouldn't give up their defense of terrorists? The Ford Foundation has had some of their donated money returned to them by the ACLU because the ACLU refused to not participate in the defense of terrorists. If you believe that the ACLU is actually looking out for the civil liberties of all Americans, take a look at their own website. And I'm not talking about a summary look. Take a detailed examination of their site. Look into the current cases in litigation. Read their press releases. If you were to do so, I would be willing to wager that you would change your mind. Call them. Ask them about NAMBLA. Ask them why they defend NAMBLA. Ask them why they support legalization of possession and distribution of child pornography. Doubt that they do? Read this New York v. Ferber. Take a look who filed the AMICUS CURIAE of the case. Listen to the oral arguments (be warned, it takes an hour). Once you have listened to these arguments and read the brief, then tell me that they have your interests in mind. Ask yourself if this is an organization that you wish to be associated with. The FBI has a legitimate reason to investigate this harmful organization because they are tearing away at the foundation of our nation through their promotion of judicial activism. The ACLU is primarily responsible for the legalization of abortion. A procedure which kills a child every 20 seconds of every day in the United States. The ACLU is responsible for the expansion of the legal arm of the federal government into issues which should be left to the states. Powers granted to the states by the 10th Amendment are being short changed by the ACLU through their use of the court system. The ACLU's promotion of judicial activism is the cause of these expanded powers assumed by those who have unofficially proclaimed themselves "Kings of America" by committee through action. The Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed for life or retirement with no checks. They were empowered by our founding fathers specifically to judge the application of passed laws against the text of the Constitution. And they have fallen prey to an idea advocated by the ACLU that the Constitution is a living document. It isn't. The fact that one of our sitting Associate Justices is a former General Counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union may have something to do with that idea. The ACLU just has to threaten a state or local government with legal action in order to obtain the ends that they wish. By forcing cash strapped localities and states to cowtail to their will is extortion. And I for one am interested in seeing what the FBI has uncovered about these anti-Americans.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst! If you would like to join, it is very simple.

Go to our new portal at Protest The ACLU , click where it says "sign up now", and fill out a simple form. This will enable us to send you a weekly newsletter with information, and keep your email private. Current members, who have not registered, please do so. There are additional advantages and features that will be available for you there...you can opt to use them, or not. Thank you!
Sites on board (why aren't you?):
21st Century Paladin A Lady's Ruminations A Tic In The Mind's Eye American Dinosaur American Warmonger An American Housewife **And Rightly So **Angry Republican Mom Birth of a Neo-Con Blog Talker **California Conservatives 4 Truth Cao's Blog Christmas Ghost Common Sense Runs Wild **Conservative Angst Conservative Dialysis Conservative Rant Craig's Reflections Crosses aCross America Daily Inklings Def Conservative Euphoric Reality **Evil Conservative Blog Freedom Of Thought Freedom-Of Fundamentally Right GM's Corner Gribbit's Word Is It Just Me? Is This Life? It Is What It Is JackLewis.net Jo's Cafe Kender's Musings KiddSafe Blog Kill Righty Lady Madonna- Headlines Life Trek Mad tech Making Tomorrow's Military Today Mean Ol' Meany Meeyotch's so called "life" Merri Musings Miss Patriot **More Sense Than Money **Mr Minority Musing Minds My Political Soapbox MyView **NIF Obiter Dictum Blog **Ogre's View Parrot Check Patriots For Bush PBS Watch **Pirate's Cove RAGE Rancher Blog **Ravings of John C. A. Bambenek Red State Rant Regular Ron Respublica Right On! A Conservative Opinion Smithereen's Files Steve's Blog Stop The ACLU Stop The ACLU Illinois Stop The ACLU Kansas Stop The ACLU Nevada Stop The ACLU Ohio Stop The ACLU Oklahoma Stuff You Should Know **Swap Blog Sweet Spirits of Ammonia The American Patriots The Conservative UAW Guy The Kevin Show The Lesser of Two Evils The Life And Times The Nose On Your Face The Uncooperative Blogger The View From Firehouse **The Wide Awakes **third world county This Space For Rent Thoughts from the Right Time Hath Found Us TMH's Bacon Bits **Undiscovered Country Vista On Current Events What Attitude Problem? **White Lightning Axiom: Redux Xtreme Right Wing Zipcard2's Blog A special thanks to our friends at Outside the Beltway and Mudville Gazette.