Posts Tagged ‘Supreme Court’

Obama’s ineligibility for office

February 9, 2011

Look at this comment thread. HOW IN THE WORLD did we let this guy get in??? Congress spends days or even weeks vetting nominees for the Supreme Court. How is it that no one even questioned ANY of the qualifications that Obama supposedly presented? Or that he has spent nearly $2 million to suppress access to his personal records- (school, work, residence, birth certificate, etc.)? Obama has lied to the American people (hidden the truth), used his position to push his Socialist agenda and put this country so far in debt that we may never recover. He has engaged in behavior, that were it any other person, Congress would be asking for his head on a stick!

Congress is also complicit in this unbelievable assault on the USA. No one reads the Constitution, no one even follows the Rule of Law; no one cares about what is happening to their neighbors; millions of people are unemployed, with no jobs in sight; people are losing their homes as foreclosures and bankruptcies run rampant. Congress has ignored the very people who elected them to office, and “We the People” responded in November, with more to come in 2012.


//

Wvcrowcall I have just received an email which states that the SCOTUS is currently reviewing one of the lawsuits brought to determine/expose O’s status as a resident or not. Is there any truth to this, or is it more of the usual wishful thinking? I have seen no mention of it here or anywhere else. Thanks!  

23 hours ago .

Yottyhere I had not heard that was happening from any of our sources. Will be interesting to see if anyone has heard it. 

22 hours ago .

Belwhatter It may have come from World Net news – they have been staying on top of this issue very doggedly in spite of some derisory comments from high places. 

22 hours ago .

Ramasis World Net Daily or wnd.com 

22 hours ago .

OnTheBall There are so many on-going law suits against Obama now before the Supreme Court, that were this George Bush, the entire ‘alphabet news media’ would be marching in the streets ripping off their clothes in ‘high dugeon’ as they say. Orley Taitz alone is representing dozens of active duty and retired military members law suits against Obama. If you accept Obama’s own written and oral testaments to his own recorded history, he stands convicted as an illegal occupant of the White House. His mother had him when she was 17 or 18 yrs of age. By Federal Law she had to have been an adult for five (5) full yrs ~prior~ to Barry’s birth for her to confer the Federal status needed to allow Obama to run for President. That and that alone pre-empts Barry from having ever run for president. He is an illegal occupant of the White House and was assisted in arriving there by Nancy Pelosi’s willing and knowing HIGH TREASON against this nation! 

21 hours ago .

OnTheBall high dudgeon ….that is to say…. 

21 hours ago .

Yottyhere oh geeze 

21 hours ago .

OnTheBall Yotty the Federal Laws are very clear. When a person wishes to run for president and one of their parents is not an American citizen, the remaining American parent has to have lived inside the USA for five (5) full years, prior to that person’s birth. Clearly Obama ”’IF”’ he had been born inside this nation, does NOT qualify and as such Nancy Pelosi violated Federal Law, in allowing him to be certified. Facts are facts. 

8 hours ago .

OnTheBall the remaining Ameircan parent has to have lived in the USA a full five (5) yrs AS AN ADULT prior to that child’s birth…. 

8 hours ago .

OnTheBall Obama’s mother was under twenty when he was born, case closed. 

8 hours ago .

Yottyhere I repeat oh geeze. 

Enough other stuff to worry about than that inane claptrap.

 

5 hours ago .

MsCharlotteVale Our laws haven’t been followed in some years so it really doesn’t matter nowadays. We have millions of foreign nationals here who are demanding special treatment and their own system of law. They want the same system of law from the hellholes they left. Go figure. 

3 hours ago .

//

Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days?

September 6, 2010

Very interesting …either they don’t or can’t read or worse just ignore or more likely think they are above the Constitution…..  Another “Must Read
This was sent to me by a fellow Oath Keeper, who lives in Maine near the Canadian border.

U.S. Constitution saves the day! Why won’t the feds read the constitution before they file a lawsuit against a sovereign state?

Explosive evidence shows ruling of AZ judge illegal…

July 31, 10:07 AM Conservative Examiner Anthony G. Martin

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.

(Daniel Bayer/CBS News via Getty Images)
The inept U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press.  Her argument states in part, “Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days?  American lawyers don’t read it.  Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder.  But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

“Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 of our Constitution says:

“In all cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.  In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction.”

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled.  As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state.

This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue.

Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.

The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press.

In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously.  The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the Federal Government. This information was cited by United Patriots of America.

From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words:

“No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.”

No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder, 115 bodies recovered in AZ entry routes, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican border.

This is as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.

The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.

This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.

Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant, lawless federal government.

This missive must be circulated around the USA; we must all get involved this is OUR case too.

“The law is reason free from passion.” Aristotle

Kagan’s “Kiss of Death”

July 12, 2010

By Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman

Liberty Counsel

The Washington Times called it Elena Kagan’s “kiss of death.”  The more you learn about her successful twisting of expert testimony on abortion and then waffling about it in hearings last week, the more incensed you will become about her nomination to the Supreme Court. Please read my urgent message below.  – Mat.

More than a decade ago, Elena Kagan manipulated expert medical evidence submitted to the Supreme Court. What she did played a key role in the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the ban on the horrendous partial-birth abortion procedure. She did it for political reasons while working for the Clinton administration.

The Washington Times says Kagan “may be more responsible than anyone for keeping partial-birth abortion legal for an extra decade.”  Pause for a moment to think about that.

In part because of Elena Kagan’s political activism, this horrific abortion procedure – which amounts to infanticide and culminates with a near full-term baby’s brains being sucked out so the skull will collapse – continued to be performed across this country.

Elena Kagan’s “handwritten notes” show that she personally re-wrote the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ (ACOG) official assessment of partial-birth abortion to better comport with her political views on abortion.

During her Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Elena Kagan did everything in her power to avoid taking responsibility for manipulating ACOG’s expert testimony, but her defensiveness only spurred closer questioning.

Senator Orrin Hatch asked Kagan a very direct question: “Did you write that memo?” Kagan never actually admitted she wrote the memo but was finally forced to reluctantly acknowledge that, “the document is certainly in my handwriting.”

This hand-written document should be the “kiss of death” for Kagan’s confirmation!

The memo proves that she is a political activist who intentionally corrupted key expert evidence. And it proves that she holds radical pro-abortion political views that make it impossible for her to use the impartiality required of a Supreme Court Justice.

In the final analysis, Elena Kagan’s past actions show that she is a political operative who would use a seat on the Supreme Court to advance a radical political agenda.

++ Unleashing our powerful fax barrage on Monday.

As you know, Liberty Counsel is joining other pro-family groups in calling for a FULL INVESTIGATION of events that took place during Elena Kagan’s tenure in the Clinton White House.

We are also calling for a full review of discrepancies in her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, especially concerning her notes to President Clinton giving political advice about abortion cases being considered by the federal judiciary.

We believe this investigation needs to be completed BEFORE the full Senate takes up Kagan’s nomination.  If the pro-Kagan camp doesn’t accept this course of action, a filibuster should be enacted until the investigation is complete and all relevant documents receive proper review!

I am asking every Liberty Counsel team member to press Senators to examine ALL the evidence that may weigh upon Kagan’s qualification for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

And the Senate MUST NOT BE RUSHED by the all-too-familiar Obama/Reid/Pelosi arm twisting.

We have included new language in our faxes calling for an investigation and review of all pertinent documents, including Kagan’s writings.  The fax barrage will begin when the Senate reconvenes this coming Monday.

Please go here to initiate your faxes to your two Senators and other key Senators:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29683&CID=312&RID=25686122

If you prefer, we encourage you to send your own faxes. We have provided all the information you need to reach Senators here:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29684&CID=312&RID=25686122

++Kagan’s radical political activism should disqualify her.

As I wrote to you earlier, Elena Kagan’s activities in the Clinton Administration should not be characterized as merely the actions of an ambitious young attorney whose zeal temporarily overrode her better judgment.

Rather, they appear to be calculated attempts to manipulate testimony by a seasoned lawyer who was at that time serving as counsel to the President of the United States.

If Kagan purposefully manipulated expert findings, then that was at the very least a disrespectful slap at the Court upon which she aspires to serve.  Some have said that her manipulation of expert testimony approaches the crime of evidence tampering – more than sufficient reason to call for Kagan’s removal from consideration.

The evidence clearly shows that Elena Kagan does NOT have the ability to separate her quest to implement a radical personal agenda from the sacred duty of impartially judging as a Supreme Court Justice.

And if Elena Kagan is seated, she would be in position to review the lawsuits against ObamaCare when they make their way to the Supreme Court.  That is totally unacceptable!

++ Stand with us in opposition to Elena Kagan’s confirmation.

Last week, Liberty Counsel supporters generated tens of thousands of citizen contacts to our United States Senators saying…

“FULLY INVESTIGATE ELENA KAGAN AND OPPOSE HER CONFIRMATION”

There is STILL TIME for all of us to make our voices heard by those on the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Senators uncommitted in their votes, and your own two Senators.  This is especially true now that Elena Kagan has waffled during testimony about her personal notes to President Clinton on partial-birth abortion.

Your faxes to the Senate will be delivered along with thousands of other citizens’ faxes as part of our massive FAX BARRAGE that resumes on July 12th.

Go here to schedule your targeted faxes:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29685&CID=312&RID=25686122

++ The tide is turning.

Americans are getting wise to the true Elena Kagan. Many Senators have already declared their “no” vote on her nomination.

Kagan’s confirmation is far from being a “done deal,” contrary to what you hear in the mainstream media. We can still stop this dangerous nominee from being seated on the Supreme Court!

Please, increase your personal impact on this vital issue by taking advantage of our FAX BARRAGE and telling your Senators and other key Senators to deny confirmation to Elena Kagan.

Even if you have already sent faxes, you can add to the volume next week by ordering another set.  This battle warrants our very best efforts!

As I mentioned, we have provided sample letters for you – all you have to do is click on the link below to participate in our powerful FAX BARRAGE of the United States Senate. Also click here for a free seven-page White Paper on Elena Kagan’s legal and political philosophy:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29686&CID=312&RID=25686122

Thank you and God bless you!

Mathew Staver, Founder and Chairman

Liberty Counsel

P.S.  Elena Kagan has a track record as a radical political operative. The Senate MUST carefully consider ALL the evidence and avoid pressure to rush to a confirmation vote.  We must continue doing everything we can to stand against Elena Kagan’s confirmation!  Go here to access your free White Paper and to schedule your targeted faxes to the Senate:

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29687&CID=312&RID=25686122

+   +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +  +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +

Note: Please do not “reply” directly to this e-mail message. This e-mail address is not designed to receive your personal messages. To contact Liberty Counsel with comments, questions or to  change your status, see the link at the end of this e-mail.)

+   +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +  +  +   +   +   +   +   +   +   +

http://www.libertyaction.org/r.asp?U=29688&CID=312&RID=25686122

Liberty Counsel, with offices in Florida, Virginia and Washington, D.C., is a nonprofit litigation, education and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family.

Liberty Counsel

PO Box 540774

Orlando, FL 32854

800-671-1776

{Editor’s Note:  Elena Kagan is another attempt by Obama to stack the government with leftist liberals that will bow to his bidding. We must let the Senate know that this is totally unacceptable and we are not going to stand for it! Make your voices heard. This corruption must stop NOW!}

Second Amendment Decided Tomorrow

June 27, 2010

Time is up for the U.S. Supreme Court to issue its decision in the monumental gun-rights case, McDonald v. Chicago. The case basically asks the question, “Do the states have to obey the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms?” As originally written, the Bill of Rights was a limit on federal power only. However, under the 14th Amendment of 1868, the states were gradually brought under the control of the Bill of Rights, one small piece at a time, by Supreme Court decisions.

Chicago (and hence Illinois, along with many other localities around the nation) have basically thumbed their noses at the right to keep and bear, and hence this case to determine whether local governments can do that, or whether they are obligated to respect the rights, due process, privileges and immunities, and equal protection of all Americans. June 28 marks the end of the High Court’s season, and as expected, they’ve waited until the last day for this blockbuster. The decision will come sometime after 7 a.m. Arizona time (10 a.m. in D.C.). Pro-rights advocates are waiting to see the word “Reversed,” meaning the lower court ruling that says you have no rights is overturned, and the states are bound by 2A. Anti-rights advocates hope to see “Affirmed,” meaning Chicago can continue to deny the right to keep and bear arms to anyone in the city, as it sees fit.

A word of caution — “news” outlets will race to report on the decision, which past experience has shown will be highly inaccurate, replete with misunderstandings and bad characterizations, deliberate distortions (like, the world will end thanks to the decision), and blatant spin (we’re doomed, what is the Supreme Court doing to us, what about crime — whichever way the decision goes). They will likely get the headline right (affirmed or reversed) and summarize the unofficial non-binding summary (called the syllabus, published at the head of each case).

But keep in mind it will be impossible to read and comprehend the thick pages of legaleses that are the decision, when a well groomed talking head with little understanding of firearms policy or High Court procedure talks to you within five minutes of the decision coming out. See how they did this in words and pictures http://www.gunlaws.com/SCGC-HellerPhotos4.htm in the previous case, from my detailed account in Heller http://www.gunlaws.com/hc.htm. I will release a detailed evaluation and analysis of McDonald, after conferring with experts nationwide, after enough time to do the legwork. Watch for it.

The Lawyers’ Party By Bruce Walker

April 9, 2010

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers’ Party…
Barack Obama is a lawyer.
Michelle Obama is a lawyer.
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.
Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress: Harry Reid is a lawyer. Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.
President Bush is a businessman.
Vice President Cheney is a businessman.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution:
Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
Tom Delay was an exterminator.
Dick Armey was an economist.
House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976.

The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.

The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming.  Some Americans become “adverse parties” of our very government.  We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit.  We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.

When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy. Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66% of the world’s lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as “spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you” and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party.

When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association go to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

Please — DO PASS THIS ON!!!

The REAL TRUTH about the State of the Union

January 31, 2010

The lamestream media told you:

Mr. Obama’s state of the union address was this, it was that, it was another thing, he should have said this, he didn’t say that, this was true, untrue, twisted, spun, deceptive, hope-filled, dope-filled, accurate, fair and balanced, blah blah blah.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Page Nine special guest columnist Craig Cantoni is the only one who got it right:

It’s embarrassing to admit this, but the reason I haven’t watched a State of the Union (SOTU) address in 20 years is that I’m a slow learner. If I had been a fast learner, I would have had my epiphany and stopped watching long before 20 years ago.

The delayed epiphany was this: that the SOTU is a charade put on by both political parties and the players in the audience, including members of Congress, the Supreme Court, the Cabinet, the head of the Federal Reserve, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the “news” media. All of them know that the SOTU and other solemn performances throughout the year are designed to distract citizens from the ugly truth.

The ugly truth is that the federal government is insolvent, meaning that it can’t pay all of its debts, obligations, and promises. And it is insolvent it is deceitful, dishonest, and corrupt. Everyone in the SOTU audience is guilty of a massive fraud. Instead of wearing expensive suits in a marble room, they should be wearing striped uniforms in a federal cell of bare concrete.

Their crimes are many. Let’s look at the four most serious ones.

First, the official accounting books of the United States are cooked. The government’s own auditor, the General Accounting Administration, has said so, but in nicer words. Among other cooking, the books don’t account for all of the government’s liabilities. A full accounting would show that the government’s true indebtedness is nearly $100 trillion.

Second, the miscreants know that there is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund. They have been robbing the fund to pay for their salaries, their marble offices, their large staffs, and their jaunts around the world on military airplanes.

Third, they know that the Capitol Mall is a Potemkin village of monuments, museums, reflecting pools, and other tourist attractions. Behind the facades are huge, out-of-control, unaccountable bureaucracies, staffed with minions who, on average, are paid twice as much as the average American worker in a real job in the private sector.

If Americans wanted a real education about the workings of their government, they wouldn’t come to Washington and visit the Smithsonian. They’d demand a tour of the Department of Agriculture, which is housed in a granite building just a rotten tomato’s throw from the Mall. Three stories high, two blocks wide, and three blocks long, it is the most visible example of all that is wrong in Washington. Does anyone really believe that farmers wouldn’t grow crops, food companies wouldn’t process the crops, and supermarkets wouldn’t sell groceries if the building were to be razed and the employees had to find real work?

Fourth, the biggest crime of all takes place at the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve. In a complicated shell game that the average citizen doesn’t understand and the media doesn’t illuminate, money is created out of thin air in these houses of ill-repute. Or to be more accurate, the fiat money of the national government is debauched in a sordid menage a trois for the benefit of the johns in the White House and Congress and their banker friends. In a very real sense, the johns are covering up their corruption with Monopoly money.

Since 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created, the purchasing power of the dollar has fallen by over 95 percent. When FDR abandoned the gold standard, the debauchment turned into a screw-the-public orgy that would make Tiger Woods envious. Later, all remaining spending restraint was removed when Nixon closed the gold window to foreign governments.

Unless the four crimes are soon stopped and punished, the U.S. will end up as just another country in a long line of countries that spent themselves to death with phony money.

I didn’t watch the SOTU charade last night, but I know that President Obama didn’t talk about any of these crimes. That’s because he is a criminal like everyone else who was there.

Mr. Cantoni can be reached at ccan2@aol.com

[This information from Page Nine newsletter]

PAGE NINE — No. 77
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America

The Lesson of an Affirmative Action President

January 29, 2010

The Lesson of an Affirmative Action President

By James Lewis

You don’t pick brain surgeons by the color of their skin. You pick them by competence only. Same thing with airplane pilots. But we have allowed the profoundly irrational liberal media to persuade the American public that we are supposed to pick a U.S. president by affirmative action. Obama was elected to universal Hosannas because he is black. It wasn’t a secret. That’s why the Left around the world went into ecstasies when Obama ran and got elected.

We’ve been using affirmative action to hire and promote teachers and cops and to popularize movie stars and media heroes. We’ve had a generation of affirmative action agitprop, 24/7/365. Hillary Clinton was going to dictate racial and gender preferences for medical school admissions under HillaryCare. You can bet that reverse-racism is all over the 2,200 pages of ObamaCare. It’s reverse-racism forever!

In America today, competence is suspect, and incompetence gets all the attention. Yet competence is what keeps us alive.

Affirmative action was allowed by the Supreme Court as a temporary exception to the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution until blacks had the same opportunities others did. It has now been about forty years, and the goal posts have just moved farther and farther Left. Today it’s not just blacks — it’s women, homosexuals, and illegal aliens. And it’s no longer equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome, which was the goal of Communism for seventy years in the Soviet Union, until the whole Soviet Empire crumbled as a result.

In the Soviet Union, everything was politicized. Incompetent people ran agriculture along Stalinist lines. Everything turned into a lie, and lies accelerated as they propagated through the system, in exactly the way the Climategate lies get worse and worse as they get passed along by politically correct bureaucrats and scientists. When political loyalty controls the outcomes, honesty and competence are driven out at every level of society. Nobody can point to Obama’s anti-terrorist policies and say that’s wildly incompetent — without fearing they will be accused of racism.

From a temporary policy to give black people a better chance in life, we have now arrived at a Marxist goal of universal equality for everyone — except for white, male, heterosexual, and excessively normal people. We have reversed racism, but guess what? Reverse-racism is still racism. As a direct result, corruption now pervades the big cities and Washington, D.C. That’s because race, gender, and victim status have taken over as the criteria for all the benefits society has to offer.

Obama’s election to the nation’s most powerful office is the direct outcome of racial reasoning. It was race that put him over the top against Hillary, in a thousand media endorsements, and finally, against John McCain, who was old, male and white. Three strikes against McCain, who for all his faults is vastly more experienced and knowledgeable than the Obamessiah.

Meanwhile, blacks are still suffering from the pervasive social pathology of the inner city — almost all self-inflicted, with the help of the welfare state. Europe shows exactly the same results, except that the victims of welfarism aren’t black, but mostly white and Muslim immigrants. American blacks today are more bitter and more racially enraged than ever before, after forty years of affirmative action. Affirmative action hasn’t helped women, who now have to work two jobs, one at home and one for income, especially because so many men have walked away from their families under liberal cultural values. Reverse-racism has actively hurt generations of children, who have grown up in broken homes as a direct result of pernicious social policies which Obama has actually tried to make worse. One of the first things he did was to reverse Clinton’s welfare reform so that social pathology in the black community can spread its poison even wider and deeper. Obama isn’t good for black people — but then, blacks consistently vote for those who do them the most harm.

Reverse-racism has hurt Asian-Americans, who don’t usually count as disadvantaged non-whites, but who by dint of talent and hard work are now among the largest ethnic groups in many colleges and universities and a majority at Berkeley and UCLA, where race engineering is banned by a California law passed by voters over the objection of the political establishment.

Any time a Muslim tries to explode a bomb on an airplane, Obama sticks his nose in the air and pretends he doesn’t know what’s up. But he knows, he knows. The next time an airplane blows up in flight, Obama will be history, but he will never blame himself for his own truly stupid and perverse policies. On the contrary, Obama will be around for the next forty years blaming White America for his own folly.

We’ve now been taught by the media to hire and elect people by the color of their skin, or by gender, or by sexual preferences — including, in the case of Kevin Jenkins, their ability to peddle gay sexuality to kids and teachers for the Queering of the Elementary Schools.

Is it any surprise that a president who ran as the historic first black — that is, on affirmative action grounds — is not just incompetent, but perverse, so that we deliberately don’t check the passenger lists for young Muslim males who were brought up in radicalized cultures, even if they are already in the terror database, even if they buy a one-way ticket with untraceable cash and don’t check any luggage at all on their one-way flights from Nigeria to Detroit?

Obama’s anti-terror policies are not just incompetent. They are suicidal.

They are exactly like all the other social policies that are supposed to help the poor, the disadvantaged, the black, females, homosexuals — all of which invariably end up punishing and degrading the very people they are supposed to help. Who do you suppose is in the teachers’ unions that are keeping black kids from escaping the inner city ghettos? Yes, it’s black and liberal teachers. Who do you suppose is actively importing Muslim radicals into Europe and the United States? Who do you suppose has done more to spread HIV? Yes, it is the very Leftists who are always telling us how much compassion they feel for those very people.

The vote in 2008 was even crazier than picking your brain surgeon by the color of his skin. If the knife slips in the surgeon’s hand, you might die, but the nation as a whole doesn’t. But if the president has a nervous breakdown in the Oval Office, the whole world is at risk. It’s a mad, mad, mad idea to elect people on the basis of race or gender.

We have been so PC-whipped as a nation that Obama’s election as a black man — not as a competent black man, not as an experienced and well-qualified black man — was celebrated by liberals and Leftists around the world. It is the victory of brain-dead ideology over common sense. The guy in the White House today is potentially the most dangerous, mentally fixated, and irresponsible demagogue we have ever known. Those wacky ideas are once again on the rise, not just in the schools and colleges, but even at the very centers of power. The election of Obama was by far the screwiest thing American voters have ever done. It throws doubt on the whole American experiment, because we have inflicted this disaster on ourselves.

The lesson of the Obama presidency is exactly the opposite of what our stuck-on-stupid media are telling us. It is that we must never, ever hire, promote, or elect somebody to a position of power and responsibility merely because of his race. Abraham Lincoln would not have been surprised. Neither would Martin Luther King, Jr. Even the editors of the New York Times choose schools for their kids not by race, but by educational competence. Somehow the American people have forgotten their common sense while Obama was rifling their wallets.

The captain is drunk in the deckhouse, and the ship of state is heading for the rocks. Our enemies are trying to take advantage of our failure to elect even sensible leadership. If you don’t think al-Qaeda, Ahmadinejad, and the Russians will try to screw us royally under this perverse and incompetent leadership, just wait a month or two. The Chinese have taken the measure of this guy. So have the other jackals prowling around the small campfire of civilization. They know he’s a pushover, and they will act accordingly. The only question is how badly we’ll get burned.

The Left has advocated suicidal policies, and now they have found their way to power. But ultimately this is a failure of the American people, of our pathetic excuse for a media, and of the anti-American hatred that pervades the Left.

Yes, God protects orphans, widows, and the United States. But you can rely on pure dumb luck for only a little while before the ship of state comes to grief on that unforgiving iceberg.

Link to original article –

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/the_lesson_of_an_affirmative_a.html

Comments posted to original article – Worth reading. Some of these people have some great insight and thoughts on this…

http://comments.americanthinker.com/read/42323/527170.html

545 PEOPLE – ABOUT OUR CURRENT CONDITION

January 17, 2010

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper, and has been a journalist for 49 years.

545 PEOPLE

By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget.

The president does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations.

The House of Representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices–545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes. Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con game regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted–by present facts–of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red.

If the Marines are in IRAQ, it’s because they want them in IRAQ.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like ‘the economy,’ ‘inflation,’ or ‘politics’ that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

What you do with this article now that you have read it is up to you, though you appear to have several choices.

1. You can send this to everyone in your address book, and hope they do something about it.

2. You can agree to vote against everyone that is currently in office, knowing that the process will take several years.

3. You can decide to run for office yourself and agree to do the job properly.

4. Lastly, you can sit back and do nothing, or re-elect the current bunch.

Independence Day Quiz

January 14, 2010

Supposedly 96% of all High School Seniors FAILED this test….
AND if that’s not bad enough, 50+% of all individuals over 50 did too!!

Take the test and be surprised at what we don’t know.

TOAST.net Internet Service Independence Day Quiz

1. What is the title of the National Anthem?

A – Oh, Say Can You See C – America the Beautiful
B – God Bless America D – The Star Spangled Banner
2. Which of the following rights is guaranteed by the first amendment?

A- Right to Bear Arms C- Freedom of Religion
B- Right to Vote D – All of the Above
3. What is the title of the head of a city government?

A – Mayor C – Chancellor
B – Governor D – Chairman of the Board
4. Who has the ability to declare war?

A – The President C – The Joint Chiefs
B – The Secretary of Defense D – The Congress
5. How many full terms may a Senator serve?

A – 1 C – 4
B – 2 D – No term limits for Senators
6. How many full terms can a President serve?

A – 1 C – 4
B – 2 D – There are no term limits for Pres.
7. How many years is a full term for a Representative?

A – 1 C – 4
B – 2 D – 6
8. Which amendment sets the minimum voting age to 18?

A – 1st C – 18th
B – 19th D – 26th
9. Who becomes President if both the President and Vice President die?

A – The Speaker of the House C – The Chief Justice
B – The Secretary of Defense D – The First Lady
10. On July 4th, 1776 we declared Independence from whom?

A – Germany C – Spain
B – Great Britain D – Rome
11. How many branches of government do we have?

A – 1 C – 3
B – 2 D – zero
12. Which is part of the Judicial branch at the federal level?

A – The Supreme Court C – The Senate
B – The Congress D – The Presidential Cabinet
13. Who elects the President of the United States?

A – The House of Representatives C – The Senate
B – The Electoral College D – The State Governors
14. How many states are there?

A – 10 C – 50
B – 13 D – 100
15. How many stripes are there on the American Flag?

A – 10 C – 50
B – 13 D – 100
16. Who was the President of the United States during the civil war?

A – Abraham Lincoln C – Ulysses S Grant
B – George Washington D – Lyndon B Johnson
17. Who is the current President of the United States?

A – Bill Clinton C – Colin Powell
B – Barack Obama D – Dick Cheney
18. Who is the current Vice President of the United States?

A – Bill Clinton C – Colin Powell
B – Hillary Clinton D – Joe Biden
19. Why did the Pilgrims come to America?

A – to establish a trade route with India C – to establish a new nation
B – to set up fur trade with the Natives D – to find religious freedom
20. How many total Senators are there?

A – 10 C – 50
B – 13 D – 100

Now for some Advanced Questions!
21. The Constitution has how many Amendments?

A – 23 C – 31
B – 27 D – 33
22. How many Amendments have been proposed officially by Congress but never ratified?

A – None C – 6
B – 1 D – 12
23. Which of these amendments is a ratified and current amendment?

A – Declaring it illegal to desecrate the American Flag
B – Equality of rights regardless of Gender
C – Restricting marriage in all States to be between a man and a woman
D – Prohibiting the importing of liquor into States where it is illegal
24. In what year was the last amendment ratified?

A – 1868 C – 1961
B – 1920 D – 1992
25. What is the Official Language of the United States?

A – None C – English
B – Latin D – Esperanto
26. Who was the first Vice President of the United States?

A – George Washington C – Thomas Jefferson
B – John Adams D – Andrew Jackson
27. Who said “Give me liberty or give me death?”

A – Nathan Hale C – John Wilkes Booth
B – Patrick Henry D – Thomas Paine
28. How many Presidents were assassinated while in office?

A – 1 C – 4
B – 2 D – 6
29. Which of these Presidents was born in Texas?

A – Dwight D. Eisenhower C – Ronald Reagan
B – Richard Nixon D – George W. Bush
30. How many Presidents have been impeached?

A – None C – 2
B – 1 D – 4

Click the link below to take the quiz and see how much you know, or don’t know! At the end of the quiz click submit to get the answers.   Good Luck!

http://games.toast.net/independence/

Click here to compare your scores with others in your age and state!

Question Your Answer Correct Answer
1 What is the title of the National Anthem? D D: The Star Spangled Banner
2 Which of the following rights is guaranteed by the first amendment? C C: Freedom of Religion
3 What is the title of the head of a city government? A A: Mayor
4 Who has the ability to declare war? D D: The Congress
5 How many full terms may a Senator serve? D D: No term limits for Senators
6 How many full terms can a President serve? B B: 2
7 How many years is a full term for a Representative? C B: 2
8 Which amendment sets the minimum voting age to 18? D D: 26th
9 Who becomes President if both the President and Vice President die? A A: The Speaker of the House
10 On July 4th, 1776 we declared Independence from whom? B B: Great Britain
11 How many branches of government do we have? C C: 3
12 Which is part of the Judicial branch at the federal level? D A: The Supreme Court
13 Who elects the President of the United States? B B: The Electoral College
14 How many states are there? C C: 50
15 How many stripes are there on the American Flag? B B: 13
16 Who was the President of the United States during the civil war? C A: Abraham Lincoln
17 Who is the current President of the United States? B B: Barack Obama
18 Who is the current Vice President of the United States? D D: Joe Biden
19 Why did the Pilgrims come to America? D D: to find religious freedom
20 How many total Senators are there? D D: 100
21 The Constitution has how many Amendments? B B: 27
22 How many Amendments have been proposed officially by Congress but never ratified? D C: 6
23 Which of these amendments is a ratified and current amendment? A D: Prohibiting the importing of liquor into States where it is illegal
24 In what year was the last amendment ratified? D D: 1992
25 What is the Official Language of the United States? C A: None
26 Who was the first Vice President of the United States? B B: John Adams
27 Who said “Give me liberty or give me death?” B B: Patrick Henry
28 How many Presidents were assassinated while in office? B C: 4
29 Which of these Presidents was born in Texas? D A: Dwight D. Eisenhower
30 How many Presidents have been impeached? B C: 2

What if there was no justice in Arizona?

November 7, 2009

What if there was no justice in Arizona?

By John Donnelly

What would you do if you were a successful dentist and had been falsely arrested and held for several months under charges that were made up by your scheming wife (long-term drug addict and alcoholic) who was trying to get a divorce, obtain a strategic position for custody of your two children, gain control of all your money and property by lying to police in order to have you kept in jail so she could loot your bank accounts (corporate and joint accounts), steal drugs (DEA controlled narcotics), patient dental records, personal firearms collection (99 guns, ammo & accessories)?

What if your wife and her lawyer, accompanied by the lawyer’s paralegal, the paralegal’s husband (a Phoenix firefighter) 2 Sheriff’s detectives and another un-named person came into your house at midnight while you were in the hospital, opened your gun safes and removed your ninety-nine (99) guns and accessories, supposedly under a court order, for placement at a gun shop for consignment? What if there has NEVER been any court order produced to show the need to remove your firearms? What if the detectives were supposedly there for a civil standby, but have no official documents requesting their presence? What if they never made an accurate accounting (make, model and serial number) of the items removed? (Chain of custody) What if between the house and the gun shop, thirty-three (33) of the firearms disappeared? What if the lawyer denied the existence of these firearms for several months, and in several certified letters requesting information, the truth finally came out that he and the detectives had bought some of these guns and ammo? (Grand Theft) What if the gun shop where the other guns were taken refused to give you a list of firearms that they received and subsequently sold? (ATF form 4473 – Federal requirement for firearms transfer) What if, under a court-ordered subpoena, they still refused to provide this information? (Contempt of court) What if the gun shop owners sent a letter to the judge on your divorce trial telling him that they sold a large number of your guns for about $3,000? (Way under market value)

What if your wife had been seeing at least 18 different doctors (doctor shopping) in order to get prescriptions for narcotics? What if she had been taking these drugs behind your back for several years? What if she was writing prescriptions in other peoples’ names, and calling them in to pharmacies for herself (using your DEA license) and getting more drugs in that manner? What if, in addition to the illegal narcotics that she was taking, she also was taking prescription drugs for depression and schizophrenia? What if you found out that your wife had been stealing drugs from your office as early as one year after you had been married? What if she met an attorney at the gun range whom she kept in contact with for several years, and used this attorney later when your guns were stolen? What if she obtained a confidential list of judges (and their home addresses) from this attorney, and this list was found in your vehicle when you were arrested? What if it is not illegal or unlawful to have a copy of this list?

What would you do if the attorney that represented your wife, had you allegedly sign papers (with her attorney acting as the Notary) while you are in the hospital due to a head injury and under heavy medication (vulnerable adult), giving her access to your corporate bank account, and then she promptly cleaned out the account of about $22,000? (NOTARY FRAUD by the Attorney, and conflict of interest, assisting another in commission of a Felony)

What if she (the wife) stole vehicles and property that belonged to the corporate trust and concealed their whereabouts? What if she stole your computers, over 2,000 patient records [HIPAA violation (Federal) Identity theft] gold, DEA controlled narcotics (drugs), DEA controlled substance logs, and prescription pads from your office.

What if your wife filed a restraining order against you in order to keep you away from your house in order to conceal the fact that she had cleaned out the house, safes and office, of all your money, property ($663,000) and possessions? What if she sold some of that property (that was not hers) in order to buy drugs, go on uncontrolled spending sprees, and take trips to Mexico and California?

What if the local police department assisted her in removing your property from your house, locked safes and office, and when you tried to report the theft of property, the police failed and refused to respond or act on the report or any other reports that you attempted to make and treated you in a hostile manner?

What if the wife was found passed out in the gravel in front of Walgreens, with an open bottle of rum? (PUBLIC DRUNKENESS) What if her employer drove her home from work, (the school where she teaches) because she was drunk on the job? What if she was drunk and running through her apartment complex late at night, banging on doors and screaming that she was sexually assaulted, and when the police came, denied it? What if the wife was charged with 3 DUI’s within 2 years, one involving an accident where she INJURED a young man, who was required to be in the hospital for several weeks for treatment and recovery, destroying his semester at ASU? What if she didn’t get any REAL punishment or jail time for these 3 DUI’s, and what she did get, amounted to a slap on the wrist?

What if during one of the DUI’s she was involved in an accident, WHILE your child was in the vehicle? (FELONY CHILD ENDANGERMENT) What if the detectives and county prosecutor were covering up all these crimes by the wife (a known drug addict and alcoholic), because she was the only witness that they had against you? What if the wife had tried to commit suicide on at least 2 occasions, while your children were in her care (drugs and/or alcohol) and CPS refused to remove your children from her home? What if her own daughter expressed to police deep concern for her mother’s behavior? What if the police came and made a report, called CPS and they did NOTHING about removing the children from this home? What if you weren’t allowed to see, or have any contact with, your own children for over 3 years?

What if her attorney, and the detectives who were present when her lawyer cleaned out your gun safes, (99 guns, ammo, and accessories) purchased some of these guns for much less than fair market value, and lied about it to you and the State Bar, for several months before being caught in a lie? What if this attorney “gave” one of the guns to his brother out of state? (Federal firearms violation – interstate transportation of a stolen firearm)

What if the Arizona State Bar ADMITTED that this attorney was guilty of lying and theft, but failed to file sanctions against him (censure) or recommend disbarment for his crimes?

What if the attorney that you hired to defend you, pretended to act in your interests and failed to provide a reasonable defense, (ineffective counsel) failed to file objections and motions needed in a timely manner, and all the while charging you exorbitant amounts and when you ask for an itemized billing, made excuse after excuse and never provided the requested information? What if this attorney also had possession of 12 of your firearms, (that were given to him by the wife’s attorney) and sold those firearms for his personal gain? (Grand Theft) What if this attorney knew of the firearms theft by the wife’s attorney and (by state law) FAILED to report him to the state bar for punishment?

What if the Sheriff made inflammatory public statements (SLANDER) to the media about you regarding the false charges? What if the Sheriff also put you in jail among the general population, endangering your life?

What would you do, if, while you are being held in jail illegally, the detectives who were working on your case, lied to the grand jury (PERJURY) about evidence that they had in their possession, that POSITIVELY cleared you of the charges that you were being held for?  What if they held you in jail for several more weeks, AFTER they KNEW of the evidence EXCLUDING you from the alleged crime? What if they made you pay a ridiculously high bond, ($360,000.00) that didn’t fit the crime, in order for you to get out of jail?

What if the county prosecutor called herself the “ANGEL OF DEATH” (and was so proud of this name she used it for her email name) and had previously worked with these lying detectives and was now trying to put you away for several felony counts? (CONSPIRACY) What if her motives were to keep you quiet, so the REAL TRUTH about the trumped-up charges, and her involvement with the lying, thieving detectives were never known?

What if the judges assigned to your case kept making delay after delay (usually 30-60 days) WITHOUT making any rulings, and then recusing themselves when things started getting hot, and judge after judge refused to hear the case, because it was a political hot potato? What if the judge kept making delays that pushed your trial date PAST the legally allowed time (over 3 years since your initial arrest) to deny your constitutional right to a speedy trial? What if the judge failed to follow both Arizona Constitution and the U.S. Constitution laws guaranteeing your rights? What if the judge got sick and never recused himself?  The Supreme Court acted to intervene, without obtaining his recusal! (More delays)

What if they finally got a judge from an adjoining county, (who continued making 60-day delays) that held a hearing in the next county, that you were unable to attend, (and judge refused to allow you to appear telephonically) because it would violate your bond release agreement?

What if the wife’s lawyers pushed this judge to revoke your bond to restrict your movements and hamper your efforts to get the truth, work on your defense and in order for your wife to try and claim your house to get money? What if you were put back in jail because of this supposed bond revocation?

What if a good friend worked all night to file a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the Supreme Court and they refused to order your release? What if the judge failed to follow both Arizona Constitution and the U.S. Constitution laws guaranteeing your rights? What if all the law enforcement officers, attorneys, prosecutors, and judges involved in your case were totally ignored the rule of law, violating both STATE and FEDERAL statutes and DENYING YOUR CIVIL and HUMAN RIGHTS?

What if, because of these problems, you were not able to practice in your profession, and have lost out on over $300,000.00 in income? What if your mother (retired) had been paying your bills and helping in your legal defense for the past three years, expending all of her retirement savings?

What if your attorney at your divorce trial was inexperienced and didn’t get any help in defending you after being asked to? (Ineffective counsel) What if he failed to file motions in a timely manner or even to object to the nonsense that the wife’s attorneys were pulling and just kept billing you $300 an hour for doing nothing? What if the police pulled your mother over on the freeway, removed her from the car at gunpoint, and took away the car she was driving, even though she had a legal right to possess the car? What if your attorney didn’t even check on the status of the car for several days, to try and recover it for your mother, until after the wife had picked up the car from impound?

What if, during your criminal trial, you were taken from your cell at about 5:30 AM to be transported to the courthouse, without having anything to eat? What if you were put in a holding room until court started at 9:00 AM, sat in court until they recessed for lunch, were put back in the holding room (without getting any lunch) until court resumed at about 1:30 PM, and were taken back to your cell after court adjourned at 5:00 PM and didn’t get any dinner? What if this went on for 4 days a week for the entire time of your 3-week trial?

What if, during your trial, the prosecutor submitted circumstantial evidence that was never positively linked to you by DNA or fingerprints? What if the judge denied every motion from your defense attorneys to present evidence that disproved the prosecutions allegations? What if the judge had been talking to other judges and had a preconceived notion of your guilt, even before the trial commenced?

What if this judge denied your defense, in violation of your Constitutional rights guaranteed by the Arizona and U.S. Constitutions? What if, the judge prohibited the defense attorneys from giving the sentencing guidelines to the jury. What if the jury, after listening to the lies fabricated by your wife and the prosecutors, failed to understand the true legal definitions of the charges against you because of the interpretation given to them by the prosecutor, and found you guilty on all charges?

What if the judge sentenced you to 17-year (123.5 years total) consecutive terms on each charge? What if the sentence was excessive for a non-violent charge and this was your first offense? What if your defense attorneys ask the court to grant them an executive clemency hearing and were flat out denied? What if they explained to the judge that his sentence was extremely excessive for a non-violent charge, and that if you had committed something like a rape or murder, you would have received less time, and would be eligible for parole and the judge denied them again?

What if, 2 days after your sentencing, while you were in county jail, supposedly in protective custody, you were put in a cell with a convicted murderer, (ex-Mexican Mafia) who knew several of the judges, attorneys, etc. involved in your case? What if he came up behind you at 4:00 AM and severely beat you and knocked your 8 front teeth loose? What if, when you were taken to county hospital for treatment, and when you were taken back to jail, you were denied ANY pain medication? What if you were taken a few days later to a state facility for classification, while you were supposed to be in protective custody, where 2 inmates beat you again while the detention officers turned their heads? What if you heard that there was a contract out on you, because the (guilty) people involved in your case didn’t want you to talk about the case or ever see the light of day again?

What if, a month after your trial, a copy of the sheriff’s detective’s report turned up, showing that they were at your house the night that your guns were stolen?  [and the report was concealed from evidence]

What would you do if all these things were TRUE? And you were not guilty of anything.

Would you finally believe there is no justice in Arizona?

IF you still have doubts, ask me – I have PROOF!

www.justicefordrkennedy.info


%d bloggers like this: