Congressional Constitutional Contempt

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/07/congressionalconstitutionalcontempt.htm

A MINORITY VIEW
BY WALTER E. WILLIAMS
RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2007, AND THEREAFTER

Congressional Constitutional Contempt

Here's the oath of office administered to members of
the House and Senate: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm)
that I will support and defend the Constitution of the
United States against all enemies, foreign or
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance
to the same; that I take this obligation freely,
without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;
and that I will well and faithfully discharge the
duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So
help me God." A similar oath is sworn to by the
president and federal judges.

In each new Congress since 1995, Rep. John Shadegg,
R-Ariz., has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act (HR
1359). The Act, which has yet to be enacted into law,
reads: "Each Act of Congress shall contain a concise
and definite statement of the constitutional authority
relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that
Act. The failure to comply with this section shall
give rise to a point of order in either House of
Congress. The availability of this point of order does
not affect any other available relief."

Simply put, if enacted, the Enumerated Powers Act
would require Congress to specify the basis of
authority in the U.S. Constitution for the enactment
of laws and other congressional actions. HR 1359 has
28 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives.

When Shadegg introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, he
explained that the Constitution gives the federal
government great, but limited, powers. Its framers
granted Congress, as the central mechanism for
protecting liberty, specific rather than general
powers. The Constitution gives Congress 18 specific
enumerated powers, spelled out mostly in Article 1,
Section 8. The framers reinforced that enumeration by
the 10th Amendment, which reads: "The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for
the States respectively, or to the people."

Just a few of the numerous statements by our founders
demonstrate that their vision and the vision of
Shadegg's Enumerated Powers Act are one and the same.
James Madison, in explaining the Constitution in
Federalist Paper No. 45, said, "The powers delegated
by the proposed Constitution to the federal government
are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the
State governments are numerous and indefinite. The
former will be exercised principally on external
objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign
commerce."

Regarding the "general welfare" clause so often used
as a justification for bigger government, Thomas
Jefferson said, "Congress has not unlimited powers to
provide for the general welfare, but only those
specifically enumerated." James Madison said, "If
Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be
done by money, and will promote the general welfare,
the government is no longer a limited one possessing
enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to
particular exceptions."

Congressmen, openly refusing to live up to their oath
of office, exhibit their deep contempt for our
Constitution. The question I've not been able to
answer satisfactorily is whether that contempt simply
mirrors a similar contempt held by most of the
American people. I'm sure that if founders such as
James Madison, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson were
campaigning for the 2008 presidential elections,
expressing their vision of the federal government's
role, today's Americans would run them out of town on
a rail. Does that hostility reflect constitutional
ignorance whereby the average American thinks the
Constitution authorizes Congress to do anything upon
which they can get a majority vote or anything that's
a good idea? Or, are Americans contemptuous of the
constitutional limitations placed on the federal
government?

I salute the bravery of Rep. Shadegg and the 28
co-sponsors of the Enumerated Powers Act. They have a
monumental struggle. Congress is not alone in its
constitutional contempt, but is joined by the White
House and particularly the constitutionally derelict
U.S. Supreme Court.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at
George Mason University. To find out more about Walter
E. Williams and read features by other Creators
Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators
Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com

A Visitor From The Past

I had a dream the other night, I didn't understand.
A figure walking through the mist, with flintlock in his hand.
His clothes were torn and dirty, as he stood there by my bed.
He took off his three-cornered hat, and speaking low, he said:

"We fought a revolution to secure our liberty.
We wrote the Constitution, as a shield from tyranny.
For generations, this legacy we gave,
In this, the land of the free and home of the brave."

"The Freedom we secured for you, we hoped you'd always keep,
But tyrants labored endlessly while your parents were asleep.
Your freedom gone, your courage lost, you're no more than a slave,
In this, the land of the free and home of the brave."

"You buy permits to travel, and permits to own a gun,
Permits to start a business, or to build a place for one.
On land that you believe you own, you pay a yearly rent.
Although you have no voice in choosing how the money's spent."

"Your children must attend a school that doesn't educate.
Your Christian values can't be taught, according to the state.
You read about the current news, in a regulated press.
You pay a tax you do not owe, to please the I.R.S."

"Your money is no longer made of Silver or of Gold.
You trade your wealth for paper, so your life can be controlled.
You pay for crimes that make our Nation, turn from God in shame.
You've taken Satan's number, as you've traded in your name."

"You've given government control to those who do you harm,
So they can padlock churches, and steal the family farm.
And keep our country deep in debt, put men of God in jail,
Harass your fellow countrymen, while corrupted courts prevail."

"Your public servants don't uphold the solemn oath they've sworn.
Your daughters visit doctors, so their children won't be born.
Your leaders ship artillery, and guns to foreign shores,
And send your sons to slaughter, fighting other people's wars."

"Can you regain the freedom for which I fought and died?
Or don't you have the courage, or the faith to stand with pride?
Are there no more values for which you'll fight to save?
Or do you wish your children, to live in fear and be a slave?"

"People of the Republic, arise and take a stand!
Defend the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land!
Stop defending democracy, which can never stand!
Preserve our Great Republic, and God-given Right!
And pray to God to keep the torch of Freedom burning bright!"

As I awoke he vanished, in the mist from whence he came.
His words were true, we are not Free, we have ourselves to blame.
For even now as tyrants, trample each God-given Right,
we only watch and tremble, too afraid to stand and fight.

If he stood by your bedside, in a dream, while you're asleep,
And wonders what remains of our Rights he fought to keep,
What would be your answer, if he called out from the grave:
"Is this still the land of the free and home of the brave?"

Author Unknown

Thomas Jefferson - Peace and War - 1810

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"In times of peace the people look most to their representatives;
but in war, to the executive solely."

-- Thomas Jefferson (letter to Caeser Rodney, 10 February 1810)

Reference: Jefferson: Writings, Peterson ed., Library of America
(1218)

Thomas Jefferson on Taxes - 1784

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by
the individual."

-- Thomas Jefferson (letter to James Madison, 1784)

Reference: The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Memorial Edition),
Lipscomb and Bergh, eds., 4:15.

James Madison Tyranny - 1788

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value, or is
stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty
than that on which the objection is founded. The accumulation of
all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same
hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary,
self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very
definition of tyranny."

-- James Madison (Federalist No. 48, 1 February 1788)

Reference: Madison, Federalist No. 47.

Alexander Hamilton on the Constitution - 1802

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"[T]he present Constitution is the standard to which we are to
cling. Under its banners, bona fide must we combat our political
foes - rejecting all changes but through the channel itself
provides for amendments."

-- Alexander Hamilton (letter to James Bayard, April 1802)

Reference: Selected Writings and Speeches of Alexander Hamilton,
Frisch, ed. (511)

Ben Franklin on Living Well

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Wish not so much to live long as to live well."

-- Benjamin Franklin (Poor Richard's Almanack, June 1746)

Reference: Franklin: Writings, Lemay, Library of America (1209)

George Mason on Elected Senators

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Those gentlemen, who will be elected senators, will fix themselves
in the federal town, and become citizens of that town more than
of your state."

-- George Mason (speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention,
14 June 1788)

Reference: The Debates of the Several State..., Elliot, vol. 3
(405)

Media Assault on the 2nd Amendment

http://www.cultureandmediainstitute.org/eoc/2007/pdf/eoc-20070827.pdf

While many groups are working on your behalf to protect our
Second Amendment rights, few are battling the anti-gun bias
in the liberal media more effectively than the MRC.

That's why the MRC's just released Culture and Media Institute
report "The Media Assault on the Second Amendment," is so
important in this boiling debate. This report clearly exposes
the liberal media's anti-gun agenda!

A. Hamilton & J. Madison on Laws - 1788

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made
by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they
cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood;
if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or
undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the
law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow."

-- Alexander Hamilton and James Madison (Federalist No. 62, 1788)

Reference: The Federalist

Alexander Hamilton on human passions - 1788

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"To judge from the history of mankind, we shall be compelled to
conclude that the fiery and destructive passions of war reign in
the human breast with much more powerful sway than the mild and
beneficent sentiments of peace; and that to model our political
systems upon speculations of lasting tranquillity would be to
calculate on the weaker springs of human character. "

-- Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 34, 4 January 1788)

Reference: Hamilton, Federalist No. 34 (208)

George Washington - 1789

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Your love of liberty - your respect for the laws - your habits
of industry - and your practice of the moral and religious
obligations, are the strongest claims to national and individual
happiness."

-- George Washington (letter to the Residents of Boston, 27
October 1789)

Reference: Maxims of George Washington, Schroeder, ed. (139)

Alexander Hamilton on politicions - 1787

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the
greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious
court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants. "

-- Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 1, 27 October 1787)

Reference: Hamilton, Federalist No. 1 (35)

Thomas Jefferson on the Constitution

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written
Constitution.  Let us not make it a blank paper by construction."

-- Thomas Jefferson (letter to Wilson Nicholas, 1803)

Reference: The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Memorial Edition),
Lipscomb and Bergh, eds., 10:419.

John Adams - 1765

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among
the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to
knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has
given them understandings, and a desire to know; but besides this,
they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible,
divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge;
I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers."

-- John Adams (Dissertation on Canon and Feudal Law, 1765)

Reference: Our Sacred Honor, Bennett, 253.

Bill of Rights

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are
left in full possession of them."

-- Zacharia Johnson (speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention,
25 June 1778)

Reference: The Debates of the Several State..., Elliot, vol. 3
(646)

Men/Women of wisdom

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be,
first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern,
and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in
the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping
them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

-- James Madison (Federalist No. 57, 19 February 1788)

Reference: Madison, Federalist No. 57.

Founders' Quote Daily - 08-19-07

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the
right of the people at large or considered as individuals...[I]t
establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and
which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of."

-- Albert Gallatin (letter to Alexander Addison, 7 October 1789)

Reference: That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution
of a Constitutional Right, Halbrook; original MS. in
N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2

"These United States Of America . . . Are Not a Democracy!"

"These United States Of America . . . Are Not a Democracy!"

by James Kraft-Lorenz

Introduction

The United States of America was founded as a federation of Republics whose sole purpose was to protect persons and their property. Without regulations, subsidies and other privileges, individuals and businesses co-evolved in a competitive environment to be the most inventive and efficient on earth. Democracy—rule by the majority; disregard for individual rights—has perverted what was once a symbiotic relationship among individuals and businesses into a parasitic relationship. Even our massive deficit spending can no longer hide our decline.

This nation was never intended to be a democracy. The framers and ratifiers meant to impose the stable rule of law and not the rule of men, motivated, at the instant, by whim and passion. Democracy is the antithesis of the rule of law, for it is precisely the rule of the voters: that is, rule without limits, obtaining its power from 50%, plus 1, regardless of the established law. Under demos (populace) kratos (master), from the Greek, the mere whim of the majority, right, wrong or indifferent, becomes the law. A lynch mob is democratic within this definition.

Look at the Internal Revenue Service or the DEA—do they not violate the Law guaranteed by the Bill of Rights? Aren't they a product of the legislative democracy, outside the rule of the ratified Law? Yes, but they are certainly democratic. The voters in the States elected the whole Congress. The majority in Congress voted to empower these agents beyond the powers given to Congress by the People. Both votes, the direct election of Senators and the Congress's vote to bestow powers they do not Lawfully have, are contra to the Constitution as Lawfully ratified.

Consensus facit legem is an incontrovertible rule of law which means 'consent makes law.' How does a minority in the right oppose a majority in the wrong, without resort to a fixed rule of law? It cannot. Without a republican form of government a peaceful defense of rights may not be possible.

In short, the operative word is republican. (Not to be confused with the modern Republican party.) Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." A serious and potentially damaging bit of misinformation usually follows this line: "Our Treasured Basic Freedoms . . . the historical basic documents that laid the foundation for our democracy, etc." The author of this mistake is usually innocent. He or she is not aware of the real foundation of our federated government.

The closest American dictionary to the ratification period is Noah Webster's "An American Dictionary of the English Language," printed in 1828. Noah Webster says in part:

REPUB'LIC, n. [L. respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.
REPUBLICAN, a.
Pertaining to a republic; consisting of a commonwealth; as a republican constitution or government.

Seems pretty clear, for the then commonly understood definition of 'republican.'

The Declaration of Independence (the Primary statute), along with the Constitution (the Organic Law), as properly ratified, by two- thirds of the states' votes, is the total and perfect definition of the American republic. The only external interpretation is the intent of the framers and ratifiers.1

Our nation is, properly, a limited constitutional federal republic, formed of limited constitutional state republics, all using majority rule to fill certain elective offices and decide certain matters. With the ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the People reserved only four direct (majority) votes:

1. Direct election of Representatives to Congress;

2. Direct election of Presidential Electors;

3. Direct votes as Jurors;

4. Direct votes as Grand Jurors.

We are democratic to the extent of these direct votes of the People. Our government's model is republican in form.
The Fully Informed Jury

What is to keep the Republic just and free? Who watches the watchers? Fully informed jurors are the palladium of liberty.2 Statutes are formed by the various legislatures, and must be confirmed by fully informed Juries of the People, who have no tenure to earn, no election to win, no office to save but one: a safe home protected by peace and justice.

What is the Common Law? It is the law of common sense. It is the pursuit of justice tempered with mercy. It is the final barrier to overzealous legislation and enforcement. If there is no injury, there is no crime. No one can be arrested without probable cause. No ex post facto tricks; Habeas Corpus; no entry or search without a valid warrant. No life, liberty or property can be taken absent a judgment of peers, with all due process.

Grand Juries are required to return True Bills of indictment, or no trial may begin. Juries know of their right, power and duty to judge the statutes, the law and the facts, and the application of all to the case in question. This is the Law of which no competent adult can plead ignorance. It is based on the presumption that all are innocent persons of goodwill until conviction on charges of a crime that has caused injury.

What did Noah Webster say on the subject of the jury?

JU'RY, n. [Fr. juré , sworn, L. juro, to swear.]
A number of freeholders, selected in the manner prescribed by law, empannelled and sworn to inquire into and try any matter of fact, and to declare the truth on the evidence given them in the case. Grand juries consist usually of twenty four freeholders at least, and are summoned to try matters alledged in indictments. Petty juries, consisting of twelve men, attend courts to try matters of fact in civil causes, and to decide both the law and the fact in criminal prosecutions. The decision of a petty jury is called a verdict.

It is on the authority of the People that the Constitutions for the States and for these United States of America exist in the first place. When an American Jury renders a verdict, they have spoken, as WE THE PEOPLE, resuming their delegation of legislative, executive and judicial authority, limited to the circumstances in the instant case. The verdicts of fully informed American Juries are not subject to rebuke or censure: they are the in-person voice of the true Sovereigns. The government can create any 'law' by statute, rule or regulation, but as long as the Jury stands between the accused and the accuser, neither life, liberty nor property can be taken without the knowing consent of twelve other potential victims of the same bad law. This right to trial by Jury is the glory of our English legal heritage and the cornerstone of our Republic.

American Juries are limited by due process and the common law, preventing legal murder. Juries have no power to create legislation, only to veto the statute before them. Juries have no power to execute law that is not already in existence, but they can refuse to act on it. Juries cannot judge the conduct of the defendant beyond the scope of the indicting charges, but they can refuse to convict. Juries of the People are, comparably to the Supreme Court, not bound by any precedent. If a legislated 'crime' is no longer seen as such by Juries, they can and do ignore the statute, acquitting in the face of the law and the facts.

This was the trend in the Fugitive Slave Law cases and in the Volstead Act cases during alcohol prohibition.

All action to legislate, to execute, and adjudicate, was delegated by the people, under the Constitution (the rule of Law), to the States and the threemajor branches of the National Government. All officers of State and National Government swear or affirm to protect and defend the appropriate constitutions. But Jurors do not take that oath, for they are not bound as servants: here, they are masters in their own house. This is the essence of res publica (affairs of the public).
Republic: Loss and Restoration

In our current society the word 'democracy' is used to signify a move away from the limited, enumerated constitutional powers. Away from the specific grants of power, delegated by the people, that are required to exist within our republican form. It is important to remember that what has been delegated can be resumed by the lawful holder of the power ...

Read more ...
http://www.banned-books.com/truth-seeker/1994archive/121_3/ts213d.html
-----

Bush's Mexico-domiciled trucks plan flunks safety rules

Bush's Mexico-domiciled trucks plan flunks safety rules
6/20/07

The Bush administration is continuing to ignore the law and failing to
protect the public as it barrels ahead with a pilot project allowing
trucks from Mexico to travel throughout the United States, even though
the public disapproves of the plan, according to new data released today
by safety advocates.
Organizations representing highway and truck safety groups, labor, and
independent truck drivers joined members of Congress today to criticize
the Bush administration for ignoring federal safety laws concerning the
implementation of a pilot program allowing trucks from Mexico to travel
throughout the United States.

The groups – including Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Owner-Operator Independent
Drivers Association, Public Citizen and the Truck Safety Coalition –
released an analysis of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT)
program showing the agency failing to comply with federal law. They also
released a recent opinion poll revealing the public’s opposition to the
plan. Overall, the groups conclude, the Department of Transportation
receives a failing grade on the pilot program.

About the “Pilot Program”

In February, the administration announced plans to conduct a “pilot
program” allowing up to 1,000 Mexico-domiciled trucks to travel beyond
the current border zones. In 2001, Congress required the
administration to put a premium on upgrading inspection facilities,
computer databases, and other safety-related requirements before opening
the southern border for long-haul trucks. The Bush administration has
still not finished implementing the safety requirements in that law, but
decided this year to rush ahead with the pilot program in an attempt to
open the border.

Hearings in the U.S. House and Senate, featuring testimony from
Advocates and Public Citizen, identified serious safety problems with
the program. On May 24, Congress approved provisions in a supplemental
Iraq War funding bill to ensure that any pilot program to allow
Mexico-domiciled trucks full access to the nation’s highways would not
circumvent safety standards or congressional oversight. The provisions
ordered the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), which
is responsible for implementing the administration’s cross-border pilot
program, to obey a number of requirements that the agency is still
ignoring.

These provisions, signed into law by the president, require:

* the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to follow all
applicable rules and regulations concerning the formulation of pilot
programs and cross-border trucking;
* Mexico-based trucking companies and trucks to comply with all
applicable U.S. laws; and
* the administration to ensure that the operation of these trucks
within the United States would not have a negative impact on safety.

The groups today accused the administration of brazenly pressing forward
without meeting many of the safety provisions directed by Congress. Less
than three weeks after the legislation was signed into law, FMCSA
published a notice in the Federal Register on June 8 that in effect
declared that the agency had met all of the congressionally mandated
safety requirements to open the southern border.

New Report: Continuing Failure to Protect the Public
The report released today, however, identified every provision of law
that FMCSA has failed to comply with, including:

* failure to provide sufficient opportunity for public notice and
comments;
* failure to provide the public with information about the pilot
project;
* failure to comply with the requirements of §350 of the FY2002 DOT
Appropriations Act on the safety of cross-border trucking;
* failure to comply with requirements of the pilot program law to
test innovative approaches and alternative regulations under 49 USC
§31315(c);
* failure of FMCSA to keep its promise to check every truck every
time for compliance; and
* failure to establish criteria that are subject to monitoring
during the pilot program.

The report was released alongside a new poll conducted by the
nonpartisan Lake Research Partners, which found:

* A majority of Americans (56 percent) believe the Bush
administration’s plan to allow Mexico-domiciled trucks to travel outside
the current commercial zone and throughout the United States is
dangerous.
* Majority agreement that this is dangerous for U.S. drivers
transcends gender, age, political identification and region.
* Notably, self-identified independents (60 percent) are most likely
to agree that the Bush proposal is dangerous, though majorities of
Democrats (54 percent) and Republicans (58 percent) concur.

Bipartisan legislation included in Section 6901 of the Iraq War
supplemental appropriations bill directs the DOT Office of Inspector
General to report to Congress on whether or not the federal government
is in full compliance with the truck safety law enacted in 2001.
Unfortunately, the DOT continues to select parts of that law it wants to
obey and those it chooses to ignore.

These include provisions prohibiting cross-border trucking to occur
unless the U.S. and Mexico have reached an agreement on hazardous
materials, unless there are adequate inspection facilities available for
passenger buses and unless there are cures for deficiencies in data
systems used to monitor driving violations and convictions of
Mexico-domiciled commercial operators.

NOTE: report is from AHAS
PDF: 12 pages:
www.saferoads.org/press/press2007/Pilot%20ProgramSec6901Compliance062007
.pdf

From the Patroit Post

“It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” —Samuel Adams

“[T]here are three kinds of people in this world: Sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. The sheep form the largest segment of our society. According to Grossman, these are the people who are living in a constant state of denial. They are generally incapable of doing violence to another person and largely unaware of the existence of evil in this world—the true evil which is, thankfully, confined to a minority of the population...[T]here are others among us who are fully aware of the existence of another class of persons we will call the ‘wolves.’ These people are sociopaths who prey upon the sheep and wish to do them evil...[T]he third class of people: the sheepdogs... unlike sheep, are fully prepared to kill other human beings. But, unlike the wolves, they do so in order to protect those whom they love—most of whom are unable to fend for themselves. Their willingness to kill is a function of their love for their fellow citizens...[T]he wolves are still out there and we do not know when they will attack. But they will. And, for most of you, the sheepdog is your best and only hope.” —Mike Adams

On the roads, there's room for everyone

On the roads, there's room for everyone
http://www.poststar.com/articles/2007/06/17/opinion/editorials/9e4e87893aee7a02852572fc0082db5c.txt
Our view: Following simple rules can make summer safe.

Published: Sunday, June 17, 2007

On a really nasty roller coaster, your body will experience a gravitational force of 4.9 Gs.

The pressure on space shuttle astronauts during a launch is about 3.4 Gs.

A race car driver taking the turns at Texas Motor Speedway can pull almost 5 Gs.

And when you smack your head on the ground falling off a bicycle or motorcycle, the force transmitted to your brain at that instant can be more than 1,000 Gs.

You don't want to be one who fell of that bike. And you don't want to be the one who made the rider hit the deck in the first place through careless, aggressive or drunken driving.

Summer is Wild West time when it comes to accidents. Folks are out on the roads walking, jogging, riding their bikes. Motorcycles and ATVs come out of the garage. People pile into cars for trips to the beach or the drive-in. We're drinking alcohol. We're staying up late. Teenage drivers are out of school and out on the roads with their friends. There are more of us sharing the same road space than at any time of the year, and we're all a little distracted.

Kids are particularly at risk from highway accidents in the summer. The National Transportation Safety Administration lists July, June, September and August, in that order, as the months when the most teenagers die in car crashes each year.

It's not a coincidence. And nearly one third of all bicyclists killed in traffic accidents are between 5 and 15 years old.

So as the end of the school year approaches and summer ramps up into full throttle, we need to remind ourselves about the dangers we all face, and the dangers we all pose to one another, when we're out on the road.

You always hear drivers say that a bicyclist might have the right of way, but in a one-on-one battle with a car, it's the bicyclist that's going to lose.

A Guest Article.

The Sage of Baltimore
by Charley Reese

The sage of Baltimore, H.L. Mencken, once observed,
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a
false-face for the urge to rule it."

We could even indulge that old habit of division by
saying that people are divided into two classes –
those who are willing to leave others alone to pursue
their own happiness, and those who have a burning itch
to tell others how they should do it and, if they
don't listen, force them to follow instructions.

I've seen this in my own life. Even under the
influence of spirits, I never imagined that disliking
the flavor of brussels sprouts could spark anger in
another person, but as it turned out, I married just
such a person. She had a great many virtues, but it
did upset her to find out that people had different
tastes and opinions about things.

She thought, bless her memory, that her firm statement
that brussels sprouts were good was a universal and
indisputable fact. It frustrated her greatly when I
insisted that it was merely a matter of opinion, and
in my opinion they were not good and that their flavor
resembled the smell of sewage.

My philosophy, no doubt a result of my Celtic genes,
is that I will do what I like and other people are
free to do what they like. Differences of opinion,
tastes, even ideology don't bother me. I'm even
reluctant to give advice when people ask for it.

In fact, since the traditional definitions of liberals
and conservatives have been made obsolete by modernity
and its muddy thinking, we can even redefine them. A
liberal is person with a burning itch to run other
people's lives; a conservative has no desire to do so.

Look at our current society. People who think smoking
is bad are not content to quit the habit themselves;
they wish to forcibly prevent others from smoking.
People who think eating trans fat is bad are not
content to avoid it themselves; they want to ban it.
People who think owning a gun is a bad thing want to
prevent others from owning guns. People who think
using certain drugs is bad want to prevent others from
using them. People who dislike the Confederate battle
flag wish to prevent those who like it from displaying
it. And so on and so forth.

In every case, prevention is translated into a denial
of choice, and what is freedom but the liberty of
making one's own choices? The more areas of our lives
in which we are denied the freedom to choose, the less
liberty there is. Totalitarianism is the denial of all
choices. We haven't gotten to that point yet, but we
seem to be steadily marching in that direction, led,
of course, by liberal reformers who wish to save us
from ourselves. That's why I say that
authoritarianism, not democracy, is the direction the
world is headed toward.

Truly, I've never understood the psychology of those
people who want to control the lives of other people.
Granted, parents have to provide some guidance to
their children, but even that, I think, should be
limited to survival skills and a basic moral code.
Children come into the world their own persons, and
parents have no right to force them into some kind of
mold. Whether a child likes sports or reading should
be left up to the child, for example. All of a child's
inclinations should be encouraged, and none
discouraged. Conditional love is, in my opinion, not
love at all. No child should have to earn his or her
parents' love.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn said once that America had lost
its civic courage, and that might be our core problem.
It takes a great deal of courage to live free and to
allow others to live free. Maybe I've answered my own
question. People's itch to control others might be
motivated by fear. That's at least worth thinking
about.

May 19, 2007

Charley Reese [send him mail] has been a journalist
for 49 years.

© 2007 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.

The Patriot Post Founders' Quote Daily

The Patriot Post
Founders' Quote Daily

"If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free
country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the
disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the
national security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty,
an efficacious power over the militia in the same body ought,
as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the pretext
to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can
command the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call
for the military arm in support of the civil magistrate, it can
the better dispense with the employment of a different kind of
force. If it cannot avail itself of the former, it will be obliged
to recur to the latter. To render an army unnecessary will be a
more certain method of preventing its existence than a thousand
prohibitions upon paper."

-- Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 29, 10 January 1788)

MRF Opposition to HR 2093

MRF E-MAIL NEWS Motorcycle Riders Foundation
236 Massachusetts Ave. NE
Suite 510
Washington, DC 20002-4980
202-546-0983 (voice)
202-546-0986 (fax)
http://www.mrf.org (website)


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jeff Hennie, MRF Vice-President of Government Relations
jeff@mrf.org (e-mail)

07NR06 - MRF Opposition to HR 2093

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation reports its opposition to HR 2093, a
grassroots lobbying reform bill introduced my Marty Meehan (D-MA). HR
2093 attempts to give more transparency to how grassroots lobby groups
legally conduct business. More transparency in our government is most
certainly a good thing. However HR 2093 tramples over many of the
constitutional freedoms that our country is founded on.

Like most things in Washington, the devil here is the definitions.
HR 2093 specifically targets "lobby firms" however what or better yet
who is defined as a lobby firm. The Meehan legislation would re define
"lobby firm" to any person or entity who on behalf of "client"
(which can be any other person or entity), "receives income of,
or spends or agrees to spend a total of $100,000.00 in a quarterly
period" to engage in paid communications to influence the
general public to lobby congress. Sound like anyone you know of?

So, a single paid individual who direst the spending of as little as
$100K, from any number of sources, on public-influencing activities
would become, by definition, a lobbying firm. Once established as a
firm the individual would be required to report to congress quarterly
detailing the public influence campaigns participated in over the past
three months. The price of not reporting would be hefty campaign finance
fines of up to $200,000.00 per occurrence.

H.R. 2093 would regulate private communications to and among
the general public, and would violate five First Amendment rights;
speech, press, association, petitioning and religion

The bills sponsor initially stated that the legislation would close a
"Jack Abramoff type loophole". After reading the text of the
legislation it becomes apparent that neither Jack Abramoff nor
the kick-backs to him under the scandal would have been disclosed
under H.R. 2093.

Meehan also claims that the bill is targeted at so-called 'Astroturf'
lobbying. But the fact remains that the legislation doesn't target, and
never even attempts to define, 'Astroturf.' Instead, it regulates
genuine citizen-supported policy communications.

Not only is H.R. 2093 unconstitutional, it will leave well heeled
lobbyists, lawyers and wealthy special interests laughing all the way to
the bank.

It also fosters the creation of sham or "straw-man" entities as fronts
for corporations and billionaires, yet manages to have many harmful
consequences for genuine citizen-supported grassroots causes.

The Senate passed similar reform legislation (S 1) earlier this year.
S1 had all of the grassroots reform language stripped out on the Senate
floor. 43 Senate democrats voted in favor of heavily regulating and
punishing grassroots lobby organizations. (110th Senate: roll call vote
17)

The MRF encourages you to contact your federal elected officials and
voice your opinion on this important issue.

MRF Opposition to HR 984

07NR04 – MRF Opposition to HR 984

MRF E-MAIL NEWS

Motorcycle Riders Foundation
236 Massachusetts Ave. NE
Suite 510
Washington, DC 20002-4980
202-546-0983 (voice)
202-546-0986 (fax)
http://www.mrf.org (website)


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Jeff Hennie, MRF Vice-President of Government Relations
jeff@mrf.org (e-mail)

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation announces opposition to H.R. 984

April 3, 2007

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation today announced its opposition to H.R.
984, a bill introduced into the 110th congress by United States
Representative Henry Waxman. Mr. Waxman’s bill is referred to as the
"Executive Branch Disclosure Act of 2007." This bill would require certain
federal executive branch officials to make a record of and file a report
to the Office of Government Ethics of any "significant contacts" between
the executive branch official and any private party relating to any
government action.

In announcing its opposition to the Waxman bill, MRF Vice President of
Government Relations Jeff Hennie had this to say, "Communication with
executive level officials is a cornerstone of our lobbying efforts. We
believe that having the government create a database of citizens of who
exercise this right will have a chilling effect on our ability to mobilize
our members and the motorcycling public to contact the Secretary of
Transportation for example, on issues that effect motorcycles."

The bill goes on to define a significant contact as "oral or written
communication (including electronic communication) that is made by a
private party to a covered branch official in which such private party
seeks to influence official action by any officer or employee of the
executive branch of the United States."

In section 602 of this bill it states that the Director of Government
Ethics shall make "a publicly available list of all private parties who
made a significant contact; and computerized systems designed to minimize
the burden of filing and maximize public access to reports filed under
this title." Thus our employer, local elected officials, or even a nosy
neighbor may have easy access to our views on issues and with which
executive level federal official we chose to communicate.

This legislation is increasingly being referred to irreverently as "H.R.
1984" in reference to 1984, George Orwell’s classic novel depicting a
horrific totalitarian state.

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation encourages our members, our Sustaining
State Motorcyclists’ Rights Organization partners and all concerned
Americans to contact your member of the United States House of
Representatives and express opposition to H.R. 984, the Executive Branch
Disclosure Act of 2007. Ride Free Forever

Michael Kerr
MRF Vice President

Illinois Toll Road Fines.

The following is the opinion of a
NY Freedom Rider.

http://www.dot.state.il.us/press/r033005.html

While reading the press release from the Illinois DOT,
something struck me as odd when I came to and read these
statements.

“Next week is Work Zone Safety Week and the traditional beginning to highway construction season. We want to send a message to motorists now to slow down in work zones,” IDOT Secretary Timothy W. Martin said. “If you are caught speeding in a work zone, at minimum you will be looking at a fine of $375, at worst, you can kill yourself, a loved one or a worker.”

Under enhanced penalties passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Rod Blagojevich last year, first-time work zone speeders, including those caught on camera, will be hit with a fine of $375, with $125 of that sum going to pay off-duty State Troopers to provide added enforcement in construction or maintenance zones. Two-time offenders are subject to a $1,000 fine, including a $250 surcharge to hire Troopers, and the loss of their license for 90 days.

Starting in July, State Troopers will deploy specially equipped vans that can take photographs of drivers speeding in IDOT and Tollway construction and maintenance zones. Tickets will be issued by mail to vehicle owners.

In addition, drivers who hit a worker are subject for up to a $10,000 fine and 14 years in prison.”

Now, isn’t it odd that the fines for speeding in an Illinois
construction zone and “hitting a worker” are so much more
severe than hitting or killing a motorcyclist anywhere else?

Where is the equity, the equality, the justice?

Grey Wolf
a New York Freedom Rider.

A Guest Article.

Today, a Guest Article.

EXCELLENT ANALOGY OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE USA!!!!

From The Marion Star

I'm greatly concerned about the agenda of Nancy Pelosi, and liberals/socialists in the new Congress. The agenda contains items that will put the security of our country at risk; proposals that will take away the freedom of speech for conservative groups; bills that would give the UN more control over the sovereignty of our country; and promises of more financial handouts from the government. In other words, the government can do a better job of leading our lives, than we can do ourselves.

I am reminded of the words of Ronald Reagan: "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

I can best explain my concern about the new congress's agenda, by using this analogy given to me by a former student of mine.

Several years ago I was supervising a beginning teacher in a city school system. One day during our end-of-the-day feedback conference, the young man gave a facial grimace and began to rub his back. I asked him if he had strained his back in the school lab. After a long period of silence, he sat down at his desk and explained that he had immigrated to the United States because of political problems in his
native country. The discomfort in his back was caused by a bullet wound he had received while fighting the Communists who were trying to take over his country's government. He was then a member of the underground nationalist force.

Then he asked me a surprising question: "Dr. Hedges, do you know how to catch a wild hog?" The question was completely out of context regarding the day's classroom and lab teaching. I replied, "I'm not sure what you are talking about. Tell me."

"First," he said, "you find out where the wild hogs are roaming and feeding, and then you put some corn out in the field. Soon they will come to eat the corn. You keep putting out the free corn. More wild hogs keep coming to eat the corn."

"So what?" I said. "That's normal for any animal."

"Be patient. I will tell you what comes next," he said. "After the hogs get used to your free corn, you put up a length of fence along one side of the feeding area. The hogs get used to it. You keep giving them the corn. Then you put up another section of fence at right angles to the first. You keep giving them the corn. The hogs get used to the second fence. Then you put up another length of fence at right
angles to the second section. You now have a U-shaped fenced area. The hogs get used to that section of the fence. You keep giving them free corn. Then you put another section of fence with a gate in it, making a closed area except for the gate. You keep giving them corn. Now, the hogs no longer are out in the fields, working to find their own food. They keep coming into the area to eat the free corn. They get used to the fenced area with the open gate. Then, one day you slam shut the gate when the hogs are in

I understood then that the wild hogs were really the people of his native country, and that the free corn was the enticements that the Communists were giving to the people. "That's correct," the young man said. "Now, the hogs will not get anything to eat unless you give them food. You are in control. They depend on you to feed them, or they will starve. They can't get out into the fields and forests anymore to find their own food. They have probably forgotten how, as it is. They are your servants, your prisoners. They must obey you. Or else they starve.

"The hogs," he said, "were so accustomed to having the free corn, that they ignored the building of the fences that would eventually trap them. When the gate slammed shut, it was too late for them to realize what they had been blind to. The free corn was enticing, so effortless to obtain, but eventually the cause of their loss of freedom. The fence had been built; the gate had been shut."

At this point in our conversation, the young teacher, in a voice shaking with emotion and with fists hitting the desktop, loudly exclaimed, "This is what I see happening in America today! People are being offered free corn by the government. People are being blind to the fences being built around them by the liberals - the socialists - and that is what frightens me! Just like it was happening in my
homeland. The American people do not learn from history. And history shows that socialism/communism does not work. Take note of Russia . Has socialism been the best thing that ever happened to that country Absolutely not! But socialism is what the American people are being fed, and they don't realize it. All they can focus on is the 'free corn.' They want more and more of the 'free' corn. And this free corn is being fed to us little by little, and soon the gate will slam shut. I am very frightened, and also amazed.

With that said, the young man sat down at his desk and continued to rub his painful back. And I was silent in my chair. And afraid. For I could visualize the supposedly "free corn" being fed to our nation's people, and our growing addiction to the "free corn." And I could see the gate being slammed shut. We, the people of the United States of America , because of our ignorance of history, because of our addiction to the supposedly "free corn," could soon be prisoners of liberal socialism.

Along with this fighter for freedom from socialism/communism, I, too, wanted to slam my fists on the desktop and cry out in a loud voice for all to hear, "Wake up, America! The fences are being built! Don't you see what is happening to us?"

In the agenda of the new Congress governed by the liberal Democrats, there is much "free corn" being promised the American people. In our greed for this "free corn," will we ignore the incremental building of the fences, and the inevitable shutting of the gate?

As I ponder the building of the fences now underway by the new Congress, I remember the old adage, 'There is always free cheese in a mousetrap."

It seems the only thing we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.

Lowell E. Hedges is a retired associate professor of teacher education and a former superintendent of Elgin Local Schools.

http://www.academy-excellenceinteaching.org/faculty.html

from US Rider News

from US Rider News
http://www.usridernews.com/absolutenm/templates/News.asp?articleid=359&zoneid=1

In an exclusive interview with USRiderNews, GOP Presidential candidate Tommy Thompson, the former Governor of Wisconsin admitted that he’s ridden his motorcycle without a helmet and says that he would not support any type of national helmet legislation.

The Republican hopeful who was health and human services secretary during President Bush's first term announced today that he’s jumping in the crowded presidential race hoping to upset the leading GOP candidates including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Gov. Thompson said that a national helmet law isn’t something that the Federal government should worry about. “I’m against it.” Thompson said. “ It (the helmet law) should be dealt with by the states.” Thompson said the idea was off base. “Why would anyone want a national helmet law?”

The 2002 Sturgis Motorcycle Museum Hall of Fame inductee also answered questions about mandatory safety training for motorcyclists, and the Air Resource Board of California and about mandatory sentencing for motorists who violate right of way laws resulting in a motorcyclist’s death.

The interview will be published in the May edition of USRiderNews.

Bob Bancroft
New York Freedom Riders

A Roach Rave in South Carolina

from FastFreds Biker Ezine 04-04-07

Roach’s Rave (May 2007)

First off I would like to thank everyone on the legislative team for all the
hard work that has been put into the bills of interest. In saying that, a few
of us went to lobby about three weeks ago on a Wednesday. We must have done
pretty well because I got a call from the Governor’s office on Monday the 2nd
of April. The call was to verify the 20 –30 pages of info that I left with his
secretary sitting outside his office, which I explained to her what they were
about and made sure she would give them to the proper persons. I had the
papers held together with a paper clip so I signed the first page placing my
phone #, address and VR #.

This year I wanted to go after bills with a different angle, instead of trying
to argue against the safety issues and the nannies that push these issues I
figured to find and use only Supreme Court decisions to argue different
violations of the constitution I could find hidden in the wording, believe me
every time you read the same bill you will find something else hidden. Once
you have located the violations that are hidden and the potential that would
make the bill unconstitutional, the heat is on to find the Supreme Court
rulings that prove the bill is flawed. Hey when you hit the jackpot its like
your first date or something. Then its time to start writing letters; these
letters are a ruff draft and not what you want to send to your delegates, but
getting your concerns on paper is crucial so you can go back to them and
rewrite them for your delegates; in my case I would post them to the
legislative list and ask for some to help me out with that process while, at
that time, I was putting another letter for the next day to post and ask for
help polishing.

During the time things were at a loll, I got a call from one of my chapter
coordinators to put some stuff together and come speak to some clubs that he
had been talking to about the gang bill; also he asked if I could get Fred to
come along. Anyway The wife and I went to work; we printed every letter that
had been posted on the legislative list, the law firm article, Fred’s article
from his website, Ed’s Muckraker Report, my article I had written for the next
months NL; all in all we put together 40 copies of all this info to take to
the VFW here in Georgetown and to the clubs, about 3 hard nights work, man I
sure am blessed with a good wife. This doesn’t account for the many long hours
done by all in the research to write all this info on paper. If this monster,
the legislative TEAM, were to be paid for the hours that have been spent
working the bills, ABATE would go broke very fast, I know it takes a lot of my
liberty.

Ok back to the phone call from the Governors office. After all the meetings
Fred and myself went to over that weekend delivering info to the troops in the
field, I had about 10 copies left of the info that was put together, so I
figured I would take them with me to lobby that Wednesday. That day I saved 5
copies for me and gave the rest to the other fine troops that showed up that
day to give to their delegates. I gave one to my senator when talking to him
about the issue; also I gave one to my representative and another to one other
rep. in my area. Then it was down to the Governors office to give him one.
Brother Dennis aka Drill sergeant, our Legislative Coordinator, gave me a call
at about the time I was talking with one of my reps so Carla took the message,
telling me I had to go find one more person to talk to; so after leaving the
Governors secretary I found that person, which was the Secretary/Lawyer for
the Judiciary committee.

All right now to the phone call. The gentleman that called said that he wanted
to confirm that the packet I left was from me and did I have anything else
that I wanted to add to it. Well you know me, I couldn’t pass up the chance;
so I started telling him Carman Crawford’s thoughts about how the state was to
hook up with the Fed list and how we believe we are already on that list from
association with the different clubs in the area, making us automatically
suspect under this proposed Gang bill in violation of our first amendment
rights under the constitution, not to say the 4th, 5th, 9th, 14th, and only
God knows how many more. In closing the phone call, which took over thirty
minutes, I asked that if this bill happens to pass the house as it did the
senate and got to his desk, would he please ask Governor Sanford to Veto it?
He said he would and that was about the extent of it.

Now I want to ask, after the screeching halt this bill got when it went to the
House of Representatives for passage, do you wonder if using Supreme Law
instead of just ratting of at the mouth about how you don’t like what a bill
is going to do to you, made a difference? I have never gotten a call from the
governor before until now that I have changed tactics, but I will let you
decide that question. Remember that is how ABATE got the helmet law repealed.
Arguing statistics is useless and a waste of time. However we have Supreme Law
on our side and it just takes a little time to find it. Wonder why stats are
so easy to get when truth in the law of the land is so hard to come by, by design?

Motorcycles and Tennis

from Spalatt at www.bikernation.net

What's all the Racquet About?

Surely you've heard by now that some big name motorcycle builder was slapped with an even bigger monetary fine by a group of underpaid whack-jobs who can't find real jobs; the California Air Resources Board. (CARB) The six figure fine was handed to this disingenuous parasite for selling a batch of bikes that didn't meet state "emissions standards." I've been telling you for years that smog check for bikes looms large on our horizon (confirmed by CARB this year) but nobody listens. It seems only a select few of us actually give a damn while guys like this live in denial and blame US when THEY get fined, because they expect someone else to fight for their "rights." I try to keep everyone updated on all the ridiculous fines being handed down, but the community didn't take any real interest in the fines of the REAL shops that keep our sport rollin'.

Look, this is easy, the guy fancies himself as a Biker, with the cutesy little thug uniform and all that hoopla, but his bad-ass reputation was entirely bought and paid for, years ago, by somebody else who's walkin' around with a couple of teeth missing. As an avid rider, I can tell you the guy just doesn't exist in my world. I tell people outside our realm that he really isn't one of "us." He's just another porous ego-sponge who's momma didn't pet him enough as a child. How unfortunate…for us.

To maintain my ideological consistency on relevant real-world issues, I apply a few simplistic analogies to matters that might cause moral conflict within my psyche. On immigration, I apply the "Not in My House Analogy." On religion (and riding IS my religion) I apply the "Not in My Church Analogy." On issues regarding Club L.A.M.E., (Look At Me Everybody) the preening peacocks who go around revvin' their pipes and spoiling things for the rest of us, the Chrome-O-Sexuals™ who salivated at seeing one of us at a stop light and traipsed right down to the Stealership™ to BUY that attitude and freedom lifestyle for themselves without any regard for the social responsibility of tithing to our church, for them, I created the "Tennis Analogy."

The Tennis Analogy, applied to those who perpetuate the myth of being cool without sacrifice, let's say, builders, goes like this; You make fancy tennis racquets but you don't really like to play tennis. You're an artisan with fiberglass and strings, but you've never given support to the tennis community. You don't join the various tennis organizations and you don't even know who it is that keeps the tennis courts lit up at night. When volunteers from the tennis organizations stop by your shop because they need help, you say, "WHO are you? And what can you do for ME?" (True, he did)

You aren't there on the state capitol steps with the rest of us at any protest rally for "Tennis Rights" and you certainly aren't there for "Tennis Awareness Month" which is now recognized by the legislature because of US. No, you get an exemption because you're somebody special. Well, you might fool a bunch of mindless couch potatoes with chrome grip tape and titanium doo-dads, but your tennis racquets have no soul if they aren't played with. Who needs a useless tennis racquet in their garage? The REAL tennis players have REAL life tennis stories to tell about their racquets, matches won and lost. The time they got a haircut with Jimmy Connor or bought a drink for Arthur Ashe. Picking up balls for Martina Navratilova.

You never gave a dime to the Tennis Voter Guide, you don't even vote. You want the prestige of being the go-to-guy in the tennis world and you certainly dress the part. You wear the fancy little tennis bracelet, you sport the sexy white tennis shorts and you mug it up for the camera. That racquet in your hand brings fame and fortune. You wear the same goofy little sweat band that Agassi wears, but when it comes to brass tacks, you're only doing it to pillage what ya can out of the tennis community before you get bored and move on. You NEVER give back, it's just take, take, take. Count the money and let somebody else bleed for the right to swing a racquet around. You just make the tennis racquets and you paint 'em up pretty, it's not your job. Uh huh, right.

If I'm gonna play tennis, I'm gonna play with someone who actually enjoys the sport and understands what it is to preserve tennis for future generations, by doing good deeds and hard work. One of the more popular shirts to come out of Wimbledon said, "_ _ _ _ _ Who?" I live my life by that creedo and the other shirt I own that says, "Fifteen grand and 15 matches doesn't make you a tennis player." The back of that shirt sez: "If you see my racquet on a trailer, call 911, it's being stolen!"

Don't play coy, conveniently forget to get involved, make a Ka-Zillion dollars by breaking all the rules and then have the audacity to ask US why WE didn't do enough to protect you. Ka-Zillionaire that he is, he STILL can't find the chump change in the petty cash drawer to join an MRO. (Motorcyclist Rights Organization) SAME as those other bozos on the east coast, and they're Ka-Jillionaires. If they won't support us, why on earth should we support them? We're VOLUNTEERS, willing to sacrifice our left nut for the sport while their leech-like conceit exists only to take FROM the sport.

So, be honest. How many of you have a fancy tennis racquet with a slick paint job in your garage? Now, how many of you actually PLAY tennis with that racquet? And here's the grand slam; How many of you drive around with a tacky tennis sticker on the rear window of your pick-up truck because it makes you look cool?

~splatt

Open Letter to Motorcyclists

March 3, 2007

To All Motorcyclists:

New York Freedom Riders R.A.C.E., Riders Against Constitutional Erosion, is an organization dedicated to protecting and restoring personal freedoms, liberties, and individual rights. Our members also monitor current legislation being introduced into the New York State Assembly and Senate to insure our rights are not being taken away. We have found a bill that we feel is discriminating and can jeopardize your right as an individual and is the reason why we are contacting you.

Assembly bill A04755 and Senate bill S01739 states: Authorizes the superintendent of state police to establish and maintain a statewide gang database consisting of information pertaining to criminal street gang members in order to assist state and local law enforcement agencies in the apprehension and prosecution of such criminal street gang members.

The reason given for these bills to be written are as follows: “Gang members are always looking to expand their gang's membership or turf. This legislation would allow the State police to establish a database for all law enforcement agencies in New York State to use in fighting gangs. Many gangs send members from one area to another to recruit members, sell/buy guns, drugs or other stolen property where their members are not well known. This would create one source for law enforcement agencies to check when they arrest or suspect new individual(s) in their area of committing gang-related crimes.”

In these bills it classifies “gang” as an individual who is a member of a formal or informal group, club, organization, or association of three or more individuals who participate, or agree to participate, in criminal activity. It also states the database will contain information on individuals who affiliate with the person who has been arrested and the statewide database will be used for investigations, apprehensions, and prosecution of individuals. We feel New York State does not have the right to compile files and prosecute individuals on what others have done. “Guilt by association” should never be used as a legal excuse to prosecute.

New York Freedom Riders will be monitoring this bill and we will inform you of any developments that may occur. If you have any questions pertaining to this bill or any bills that you feel take away your rights, please contact us at: nyfreedomriders@localnet.com or visit our website at: www.newyorkfreedomriders.com.

Thank you,

Bill Cox, President

New York Freedom Riders

Helmets for Skiers!

More helmet laws - this time for anyone who wants to ski in NY State!!
Here are 4 NY Bills that anyone who ski's in NY need to be concerned about.

Visit http://www.newyorkfreedomriders.com/ for information on the members
of the relevant Legislative committees to whom you may wish to express your
opinion. It is a matter of "Freedom of Choice" folks, your freedom.


Bill Number: A05606
SAME AS: No same as
SPONSOR Lopez V
COSPNSR
MLTSPNSR

Add S18-105-a, Gen Ob L

Requires skiers to wear helmets and imposes civil penalties for failure
to do so; such penalties shall be $50 for the first offense and $100 for
each subsequent offense; parents would be responsible for payment of
fines if minor less than 16 years of age commits a violation hereof.

Status: 02/20/2007 referred to judiciary

Ski related bills: 2007 -2008
[as of 2/07]

Bill Number: A02330 [assembly]
SAME AS: No same as
SPONSOR Ortiz
COSPNSR Millman, Scarborough
MLTSPNSR Clark, Cook, Hikind, Mayersohn

Amd SS18-103, 18-105 & 18-106, Gen Ob L; add S867-a, Lab L

Requires skiers to wear protective helmets and requires that ski area
operators make educational literature regarding injury prevention and such
helmets available to the public and require their use; provides for
penalties for violations by ski area operators.

Status: 01/16/2007 referred to judiciary


Bill Number: A05121 [assembly]
SAME AS: No same as
SPONSOR Wright
COSPNSR
MLTSPNSR

Amd S18-105, Gen Ob L

Prohibits a skier from skiing in any area unless he or she is wearing a
protective helmet; applicable to skiers between one and fourteen years of
age.

Status: 02/12/2007 referred to judiciary

Bill Number: S02534 [senate]
SAME AS: No same as
SPONSOR: KRUGER
COSPNSR
MLTSPNSR

Amd S18-103, Gen Ob L

Requires ski area operators to provide helmets on-site for optional rental
by skiers and snowboarders.

Status: 02/07/2007 REFERRED TO JUDICIARY


New York Freedom Riders
Riders Against Constitutional Erosion
"Freedom Is NOT A Spectator Sport"

New York Freedom Riders
PO Box 92151
Rochester, NY 14692

Press Release From the World Health Organization

Press release from the World Health Organization

In a conjunction with NTHSA, All the world health organizations and all Major Car Manufacturers.
WHO released their findings of a 5 year study into the cause of
Transportation Accidents.

The major cause has been determined to be the “HUMAN FACTOR”.

All Human intervention with Transportation vehicles will be phased out by the end of the year. All major participants feel that this is a viable timetable that is achievable with cooperation and funding from the UNITED NATIONS and NHTSA general funds. Grants have already been dispersed to ONSTAR for the GPS upgrades they will also work with Magellan Mapping systems to better improve Transportation flow. All Interstate ITS programs will be under the control of OnStar. With some minor changes in software this will be an easy transition.
Technological changes in the last 20 years including but not limited to: Electric Steering, Electric Brakes, Bidirectional Computers, and Cell Phones, also Satellite Radio Systems. The networking of all these systems and removing control from the “HUMAN FACTOR” is nothing more than a few more wires. This will also increase the MPG of all vehicles by removing the excess weight of the steering wheel and control pedals.
All “End Of Life” Vehicles will be turned in to the “Appropriate” Recycling plants. A one time by back plan funded by the UN will give a Thousand Dollars for each Vehicle turned in. Exceptions will be two and three wheel modes of transportation they will only be worth One Hundred dollars. Their existence is no longer considered viable. Having for years resisted the “Technological” advances they have become “uncontrollable” And will no longer be tolerated. At the end of the year all vehicles that are not in compliance with these new regulations will be confiscated by UN forces and disposed of without regards to personal attachments also the owners will not be compensated. Minimal resistance is expected since the destruction of all personal protection items took place several years prior.
It is expected that a vast majority of the world population will come into compliance having the media campaigns in place to inundate them with the value of not ever having another person killed in a traffic accident, which will persuade them that this is the correct course for us to take. All dissident opinions will be dealt with swiftly and without incident. That job will fall under the Homeland Security dept.



Sound farfetched? Don’t count on it. They said I was crazy when I told them they would get tickets for traffic violations if they used “Easy Pass” it happens every day. Also the new cars that park themselves is another step in removing; “The HUMAN FACTOR”
BILL