Kick Assiest Blog
Saturday, July 2, 2005
Waffles, milk cartons and duck costumes; lacking ideas, Dems turn to props
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
The Democrats are growing weary from trying to block initiatives from the President and the GOP controlled House and Senate. So, out of desperation, they are launching a series of PR campaigns with sad puns and gimmicky props more akin to a "Carrot Top" comedy routine than a party of political leadership.
Democratic group plans quirky campaigns
WASHINGTON - Rep. Bob Beauprez of Colorado will be confronted by waffles, be it breakfast, lunch or dinner. Rep. Nancy Johnson of Connecticut will see her face plastered on an oversize milk carton. When Rep. Jerry Weller of Illinois marches in a parade, he'll be tailed by someone in a duck costume.
As House Republicans move ahead with plans to vote on Social Security changes this summer, a Democratic opposition group will use the July Fourth recess to pressure GOP lawmakers it believes are undecided about the legislation or susceptible to criticism from their constituents.
The tactics will be far removed from the customs and decorum normally observed on the House floor.
"Beauprez is planning to run for governor; he cares about people all over the state. ... Bring waffles to all events," reads a plan drafted by Americans United to Protect Social Security, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press.
"Johnson is missing when it comes to defending Social Security. She refuses to take a stand. ... Major tactics: milk carton - 'Where is Johnson?' 'Johnson Missing,'" it also says.
The plan adds: "July 2-4, tailing Weller with duck costume (as in, stop 'ducking' the issue) at public events/parades."
The congressmen targeted are all members of the House Ways and Means Committee, which will be the first panel in the House to review the legislation. Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., the committee's chairman, expects a vote before Congress takes its summer recess at the end of the month.
While the panel is split 24-17 in favor of the GOP, and Thomas is known to rule it with an iron fist, even some of his fellow Republicans have been slow to embrace the changes proposed by President Bush, or outlined in recent weeks by four Republican committee members, Reps. Jim McCrery of Louisiana, Clay Shaw of Florida, Sam Johnson of Texas and Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
"The Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee, many of whom have straddled the fence, waffled or flip-flopped on the issue of privatization, are having their arms twisted nearly off by Thomas and the House Republican leadership to support this new privatization bill," Americans United writes in its battle plan.
The group proposes to fight back by picketing Shaw's congressional office with signs accusing him of forgetting about less-wealthy constituents. It also focuses on a fellow Florida Republican on the committee, Rep. Mark Foley, with unusually brusque language.
"Foley is not as concerned (as Shaw) about an electoral challenge, but has many seniors," it reads. "Thin-skinned squealer."
The congressman, who is undecided about any of the plans, said during an interview the campaign smacks of desperation by Democrats and their allies.
Democrats have pointedly refused to offer an alternative until the president drops his accounts proposal. They argue that establishing the accounts is part of an overall effort to transform the program from one providing a guaranteed benefit check to one that provides benefits subject to the ups and downs of the stock market.
"If you're describing a program that has such an impact on seniors, which Social Security is, and your rallying cry is to make such pejorative statements about members, I think you're starting off on the wrong foot," Foley said. "It's so juvenile that they're engaging in a debate without an option, an answer, but they're using a vernacular that indicates they're nothing more than a ragtag group of rebels."
Jordan Stoick, spokesman for Beauprez, said he expects his boss to chuckle when he sees the waffles.
"He's not politically naive and will take this for what it's worth: a ploy by liberal Washington, D.C., special-interest groups," Stoick said.
ON THE NET: Americans United to Protect Social Security
Columbus Ledger-Enquirer ~ Associated Press - Glen Johnson ** Democratic group plans quirky campaigns
Posted by uhyw
at 7:54 AM EDT
Dem in over her head caused IRS to seize Florida Dem Party accounts
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Can you run a state if you cannot balance your own books? The Florida Dem party has become a national laughing stock. Its failures at the polls are only the tip pf the iceberg as the state party organization has seen an IRS lien, seizure of their accounts and a humiliating audit that revealed not theft, but ordinary, sad incompetence. The party, which hopes to win back the governor’s mansion next year, has only 2% of the cash that the Florida GOP has.
Democrats Say No Money Is Missing
Audit also revealed no intentional tax fraud for the party.
TALLAHASSEE - With a hopeful tone that it finally had hit bottom, the Florida Democratic Party said Thursday that an audit showed no money missing and also showed no intentional fraud in the nonpayment of federal taxes in 2003. The audit also said former party chairman Scott Maddox had no knowledge of the myriad accounting woes that happened on his watch.
However, the audit concluded that his hiring of a woman he worked with while mayor of Tallahassee was a mistake that led to last week's run-in with the Internal Revenue Service over unpaid taxes.
"It is clear that the problems occurred because of a poor hiring decision, a lack of internal controls and a lack of strong oversight," said Melanie Hines, the former statewide prosecutor who oversaw the weeklong audit.
Party chairwoman Karen Thurman, on the job for less than two months, said Thursday she has spent most of her time cleaning up what she called "a mess" left by Maddox. Maddox resigned his post in May to run for governor after more than two years in the job.
"By now, I thought and expected that most of my time would have been focused on the future," Thurman said at a press conference in the party's headquarters Thursday. "It is clear we have to do things differently, and so we shall. This begins a new day for the Florida Democratic Party."
Thurman launched the audit by outside experts last week after the Internal Revenue Service placed a lien on the party's holdings, saying it was owed nearly $200,000 in unpaid taxes from late 2003 when Maddox headed the party.
Thurman used the $98,000 the party had on hand and secured a loan from the national Democratic Party to pay the taxes and penalties.
Hines' audit echoed Maddox's contention that the mistakes were largely caused and hidden by Debbie Griffin-Bruton, the party's comptroller whom Maddox hired.
In a letter earlier this week, Griffin-Bruton said the demands of the job were more than she expected and that she concealed the problems from Maddox. The former city of Tallahassee worker resigned her job as party comptroller on Thursday.
Hines said Thursday that Griffin-Bruton was "in over her head" and possessed only "rudimentary" skills for the job.
Maddox said he thought Griffin-Bruton could handle the work and hired other outside accountants to help her. Asked at a separate press conference why the problems lingered after GriffinBruton expressed a need for help, Maddox said "I was only at the party for two years.
"Had I had knowledge of it, I would have fixed it," Maddox said.
Hines' audit also reconciled discrepancies that led to the appearance that $900,000 was missing from the party. She said dataentry errors made by party workers led to the mistake and that no money was missing.
Hines and Thurman said numerous interviews with current and former employees showed Maddox had no knowledge of the problems, though an outside audit last year of the party's finances cited "significant deficiencies" in the party's system.
While Thurman, a former U.S. congresswoman from Dunnellon, was careful to avoid any direct criticism of Maddox, the message of the day was that a muchneeded change was coming to a party largely crippled in recent years.
"To quote a great Democrat, Harry Truman, from this point on, `The buck stops here,' " Thurman said, promising to hire "competent professionals" to prevent money-related woes in the future.
Maddox struck a defensive and vindicated tone Thursday, blaming his Democratic opponents for a "political chess game that insiders are playing" to discredit his candidacy.
Maddox didn't name his Democratic opponents -- U.S. Rep. Jim Davis of Tampa and state Sen. Rod Smith of Alachua. He did rip Gov. Jeb Bush, who called the state Democratic Party's condition "pathetic" last week.
"For a week now, the Democratic party and I have been subjected to a multitude of false reports and sometimes personal attacks from Jeb Bush and others which today have proven false, inaccurate or overblown," Maddox said.
Thurman's promise for a "new day" is dawning under ominously dark clouds, however.
Thursday, she said the party had about $80,000 on hand. That's less than 2 percent of the $7 million-plus raised by the Republican Party of Florida this year.
Republicans dominate the Florida House and Senate by 2-to-1 margins and hold the four statewide elected seats, including governor.
The dark clouds also are hovering over Maddox. Long considered the party's shining star for the future, Democrats have wondered aloud whether he should drop out of the race because of the likely vicious attacks from Republicans if he should win the Democratic nomination next year.
Lakeland, Florida - The Ledger ~ Joe Follick ** Democrats Say No Money Is Missing
Posted by uhyw
at 7:47 AM EDT
Updated: Saturday, July 2, 2005 7:57 AM EDT
Friday, July 1, 2005
Democrats' own mood poll scares them
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Democrats' own mood poll scares them
A poll on the political mood in the United States conducted by the Democratic Party has alarmed the party at its own loss of popularity.
Conducted by the party-affiliated Democracy Corps, the poll indicated 43 percent of voters favored the Republican Party, while 38 percent had positive feelings about Democrats.
"Republicans weakened in this poll ... but it shows Democrats weakening more," said Stanley Greenberg, who served as President Clinton's pollster.
Greenberg told the Christian Science Monitor he attributes the slippage to voters' perceptions that Democrats have "no core set of convictions or point of view."
Fellow strategist James Carville said the war in Iraq and rising fuel prices are affecting party loyalty as well.
"The country is just in a foul mood," Carville said. He noted within the same poll, 56 percent of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction.
The poll was conducted June 20-26 and queried 1,078 likely voters. The margin of error was pegged at 3 points.
Washington Times ~ United Press International ** Democrats' own mood poll scares them
Posted by uhyw
at 2:43 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, July 1, 2005 2:56 PM EDT
Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement Friday
LOL, soooo - it's moderate O'CONNER taking her leave from the Supreme Court, instead of conservative Rehnquist... the libtard's worst nightmare just came true! So at the very outset of this battle, I'd like to speak in words i know the left will understand... BRING IT ON, LIB LOSERS!!!
O'Connor Retires From Supreme Court
WASHINGTON - Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the Supreme Court and a swing vote on abortion as well as other contentious issues, announced her retirement Friday. A bruising Senate confirmation struggle loomed as President Bush pledged to name a successor quickly.
"It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms," the 75-year-old justice wrote Bush in a one-paragraph resignation letter. "I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure."
Little more than an hour later, Bush praised O'Connor as "a discerning and conscientious judge and a public servant of complete integrity." He said he would recommend a replacement who will "faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our country."
O'Connor's decision _ so closely held that a son did not know in advance _ marked the first retirement in 11 years on an aging court. It came as a modest surprise, particularly since Chief Justice William Rehnquist has been the subject of retirement rumors for months. Rehnquist, 80 and ailing with thyroid cancer, has offered no hint as to his future plans.
O'Connor's decision capped a pioneer's career. President Reagan broke nearly 200 years of tradition when he tapped her _ a top-ranked graduate of Stanford law school _ for the high court.
Over time, she evolved into a moderate conservative, but more importantly, a majority maker.
She voted with a 5-4 majority, for example, on the case that effectively awarded the disputed 2000 presidential election to Bush. She was on the winning side again when the court upheld the right of women to have an abortion if their health were in danger.
She expressed her views pungently at times. Last week, in a dissent in a 5-4 ruling that let local governments take personal property to build malls and other businesses, she wrote that the majority had unwisely handed more power to the powerful.
"The specter of condemnation hangs over all property," O'Connor wrote. "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing ... any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."
Bush pledged to send a nomination to the Senate in time for a vote by the time the court begins its new term in October, but aides said it would not be before he returns from a scheduled trip to Europe on July 8. He said he and his administration would consult with lawmakers, and said "the nation deserves a dignified" confirmation debate.
Officials said the president did not know until around 9 a.m. Friday that O'Connor was stepping down, although his top lawyer, Harriet Miers, was alerted on Thursday to expect news of some sort from the court.
O'Connor's retirement leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the only woman among eight remaining justices. One official said Bush's "short list" had included only men, and suggested a quick move to expand the roster of contenders.
O'Connor, in a separate one-sentence statement, cited her age and said she "needs to spend time" with family. She and her husband, John, a former classmate at Stanford, have three sons, Scott, Brian and Jay. She had breast cancer in 1988. Her resignation takes effect when a successor is confirmed.
Already, battle lines were forming in anticipation of a summer confirmation struggle in the Senate _ judicial philosophy, not gender, the key factor among outside groups as well as lawmakers.
"We'll look back on Justice O'Connor as someone who put reason ahead of ideological fervor, which stands her in stark contrast to many of the judges who might replace her if the radical right gets its way," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Progress for America, a conservative group, instantly launched a humorous Web-based advertisement meant to anticipate attacks on Bush's as-yet-unknown choice and mock them at the same time.
"The president nominated George Washington for the Supreme Court. Democrats immediately attacked Washington for his environmental record of chopping down cherry trees," it said.
Nowhere was O'Connor's judicial reasoning more widely studied than when it related to abortion _ an issue that divides the court as it does the country.
She distanced herself both from her three colleagues who say there is no constitutional underpinning for a right to abortion and also from others who argue the right is a given.
O'Connor initially balked at letting states outlaw most abortions, refusing in 1989 to join four other justices who were ready to reverse the landmark 1973 decision that said women have a constitutional right to abortion.
Then in 1992, she helped forge and lead a five-justice majority that reaffirmed the core holding of the 1973 ruling. Subsequent appointments secured the abortion right. Commentators called O'Connor the nation's most powerful woman, but O'Connor poo-poohed the thought.
"I don't think it's accurate," she said in an Associated Press interview.
The enormity of the reaction to O'Connor's appointment had surprised her. She received more than 60,000 letters in her first year, more than any one member in the court's history.
"I had no idea when I was appointed how much it would mean to many people around the country," she once said. "It affected them in a very personal way. People saw it as a signal that there are virtually unlimited opportunities for women. It's important to parents for their daughters, and to daughters for themselves."
At times, the constant publicity was almost unbearable. "I had never expected or aspired to be a Supreme Court justice. My first year on the court made me long at times for obscurity," she once said.
On the court, O'Connor generally favored states in disputes with the federal government and for enhanced police powers challenged as violative of asserted individual rights.
In 1985, she wrote for the court as it ruled that the confession of a criminal suspect first warned about his rights may be used as trial evidence even if police violated a suspect's rights in obtaining an earlier confession.
O'Connor wrote the 1989 decision that struck down as an unconstitutional form of affirmative action a minority set-aside program for construction projects in Richmond, Va.
In 1991, she led the court as it ruled in its first-ever decision on rape-shield laws that states may under some circumstances bar evidence that a defendant and his alleged victim previously had consensual sex.
O'Connor once described herself and her eight fellow justices as nine fire fighters.
"When (someone) lights a fire, we invariably are asked to attend to the blaze. We may arrive at the scene a few years later," she said.
O'Connor was 51 when she joined the court to replace the retired Potter Stewart. A virtual unknown on the national scene until her appointment, she had served as an Arizona state judge, and before that as a member of her state's Legislature.
A fourth-generation Arizonan, she had grown up on a sprawling family ranch.
The woman who climbed higher in the legal profession than had any other member of her sex did not begin her career auspiciously. As a top-ranked graduate of Stanford's prestigious law school, class of 1952, O'Connor discovered that most large law firms did not hire women.
One offered her a job as a secretary. Perhaps it was that early experience that shaped O'Connor's professional tenacity. She once recalled a comment by an Arizona colleague: "With Sandra O'Connor, there ain't no Miller time."
"I think that's true," confessed the justice whose work week most often extended beyond 60 hours.
But she played tennis and golf well, danced expertly with her husband, and made frequent appearances on the Washington party circuit.
O'Connor was embarrassed in 1989 after conservative Republicans in Arizona used a letter she had sent to support their claim that the United States is a "Christian nation."
O'Connor said she regretted the letter's use in a political debate. "It was not my intention to express a personal view on the subject of the inquiry," she said.
Washington Post ~ Associated Press - Gina Holland ** O'Connor Retires From Supreme Court
My Way News ~ Associated Press - Gina Holland ** O'Connor Retires From Supreme Court
Posted by uhyw
at 2:31 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, July 1, 2005 2:37 PM EDT
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Teacher's sex experiment went too far, says district
Now Playing: Let's Get it On...At School
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Teacher's sex experiment went too far, says district
Sexual harassment complaint from science experiment will continue
CLAREMONT - An investigation by Claremont schools into allegations of sexual harassment by a student found a teacher acted inappropriately in how he conducted a biology lab.
Freshman Gabriela Jimenez said she was distressed by teacher Robert Hoyle's March 31 class exercise on sexually transmitted diseases.
"It made me uncomfortable; I didn't want to do it," Gabriela said.
With the song "Let's Get It On" setting the mood, she said students were instructed to approach six classmates about exchanging water from their test tubes by asking, "Would you like to have sex with me?"
Parent Elizabeth Jimenez retained a lawyer with the Pacific Justice Institute and filed a formal sexual harassment claim for creating "an intimidating, hostile and offensive educational environment."
Devon Freitas, assistant superintendent of Claremont schools, did not return telephone calls, but in a written response to the institute's lawyer, Freitas acknowledged "decisions made by the teacher in the presentation of the lab ... were inappropriate, especially for the maturity level of most ninth-graders."
According to Freitas' response, other teachers at Claremont High taught the same lesson, and a memo was sent to all science teachers regarding Education Code protocol for lessons containing sexual references.
Kevin Snider, chief counsel at the Pacific Justice Institute, said they do not consider the matter resolved.
"We're in the process of filing a formal complaint," Snider said.
Hoyle's lab assignment, titled "Pathogens and Infection: Invisible Carriers of Disease," describes an exercise not uncommon in biology coursework.
In order to simulate the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, students were instructed to exchange "body fluids" with one another to see how rapidly a virus can spread.
Each student received a test tube, filled with water, to mix with six "partners" in the class. A tube was contaminated with a chemical, and after the students had poured, dripped or mixed with several others, the class examined how many ended up infected.
Jimenez, who said her daughter refused to participate, objected more to the method of the exercise than the message.
"There was lewd music," she said. "The problem is (my daughter) was uncomfortable, upset and embarrassed. Kids are saying things like "Hey, you want to suck my tube? You want to have foreplay?'"
She said less-popular students lacking partners to complete the assignment "were told to "experiment' and to 'have sex' with somebody of the same gender."
Jimenez said she was skeptical but became concerned after her two other daughters, one of whom took the class with another instructor, said they had the same test-tube sex experience.
Hoyle did not return calls seeking comment.
Jimenez said the district should have sent a notice to parents informing them of the content of the exercise so parents could opt to exclude their children.
Freitas said the district follows state law regarding parental notification, which requires parents to be notified about "instruction in comprehensive sexual education and HIV/AIDS prevention education."
CA - Inland Valley Daily Bulletin ~ Kenneth Todd Ruiz ** Teacher's sex experiment went too far, says district
This sounds to me like a teacher without any perspective, a malady common in Claremont, trying to "reach" the kids.
I mean, come on, what do kids want these days? They want open, frank discussions of sex with no limits on what they can say or do. This guy was jsut giving it to them. Isn't high school about giving the kids what they want? Afterall, we're there for the kids, and if giving the kids everything they want isn't what's best for them, I don't know what is.
Dang, thinking like a liberal makes my head hurt.
We also learned how to give massages in my American Lit class. Can you fathom sending your daughter to a class where a bunch of drooling bags of testosterone will be encouraged to grope and knead her and to do the same to said hormone bags? Well, such was and apparently is life at good ole CHS.
Posted by uhyw
at 10:42 AM EDT
Dems guilty of vote fraud
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Charles Powell Jr., the head of the city's Democratic Party, leaves the courthouse Wednesday, after he and four other defendants in the vote fraud trail were convicted in East St. Louis. >>>>>
Defendants guilty of vote fraud
All five defendants in the vote fraud trial in East St. Louis were convicted by a jury today after five and a half hours of deliberations.
The defendants showed little response when the verdicts were displayed on an overhead projector in federal court. Defendant Sheila Thomas dabbed her eyes, but the other four stared straight ahead.
Charles Powell Jr., the head of the city's Democratic Party, three precinct committeemen and an election worker had been accused of buying votes to get prominent Democrats elected in the Nov. 2 election.
Also convicted were Democratic precinct committee members Thomas, 31, and Jesse Lewis, 56, and City Hall worker Yvette Johnson, 46. Kelvin Ellis, the city's former director of regulatory affairs, along with Thomas, Lewis and Johnson also were convicted of one count apiece of election fraud for allegedly paying at least one person to vote -- or offering to do so. Powell was never charged with that count.
Jurors set aside defense claims that the government's case was flimsy because of unreliable witnesses whose testimony often contradicted each other and, at times, was recanted.
"I respect the jury, but I am disappointed," Ellis' attorney, John O'Gara, said after the verdicts.
O'Gara said the defense attorneys would consider asking for a new trial.
"I would say jurors looked at these tapes and listened to them, and I'm guessing they are using the interpretations these very faulty witnesses gave them to reach their conclusion," O'Gara added. "I would not have trusted the government's presentation."
Ron Tenpas, the U.S. attorney for southern Illinois, applauded the jury's conclusion that "we put together a well-founded case."
"We're not in the business of having ourselves validated," Tenpas said. "We think what the verdict represents is that -- in the judgment of 12 impartial citizens -- when all the evidence is put together we made a strong case."
A date for sentencing was not immediately set.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch ~ Michael Shaw ** Defendants guilty of vote fraud
Posted by uhyw
at 10:32 AM EDT
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Canada Becomes 3rd Nation to OK Gay Unions
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Canadian lawmakers OK same-sex marriage nationwide
TORONTO - Canada's House of Commons passed landmark legislation Tuesday to legalize gay marriage, granting same-sex couples legal rights equal to those in traditional unions between a man and a woman.
The bill passed as expected, despite opposition from Conservatives and religious leaders. The legislation drafted by Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority Liberal Party government was also expected to easily pass the Senate and become federal law by the end of July.
The Netherlands and Belgium are the only other two nations that allow gay marriage nationwide.
Some of Martin's Liberal lawmakers voted against the bill and a Cabinet minister resigned Tuesday over the legislation. But enough allies rallied to support the bill that has been debated for months, voting 158 to 133 to approve it.
Martin praised Tuesday's vote as a necessary step for human rights.
"We are a nation of minorities," Martin said. "And in a nation of minorities, it is important that you don't cherry-pick rights."
There are an estimated 34,000 gay and lesbian couples in Canada, according to government statistics. Before the measure passed, gay marriage was legal in seven provinces.
Alex Munter, national spokesman for Canadians for Equal Marriage, which has led the debate in favor of the law, was triumphant after the vote: "The genius of Canada, almost unparalleled in the world, is built on shared identity, out of respect for each other."
Martin, a Roman Catholic, has said that despite anyone's personal beliefs, all Canadians should be granted the same rights to marriage.
Churches have expressed concern that their clergy would be compelled by law to perform same-sex ceremonies, with couples taking them to court or human rights tribunals if refused. The legislation, however, states that the bill only covers civil unions, not religious ones, and no clergy would be forced to perform same-sex ceremonies unless they choose to do so.
The Roman Catholic Church, the predominant Christian denomination in Canada, has vigorously opposed the legislation, saying that it would harm children in particular.
Charles McVety, a spokesman for Defend Marriage Canada and president of Canada Christian College, called the vote an "onerous breach of trust and the deconstruction of so much that is dear to our hearts."
Flanked by clergymen, McVety vowed his group would work to vote out lawmakers who supported the legislation in the next general elections.
"This is the beginning of the formal fight against the redefinition of marriage," McVety said. "We will, in the next election, be able to correct this incredible democratic deficit before us today."
The debate in Canada began in December, when the Supreme Court ruled that passage of same-sex legislation would not violate the constitution.
According to most polls, a majority of Canadians supports the right for gays and lesbians to marry. In the United States, gay marriage is opposed by a majority of Americans, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll taken in November, shortly after constitutional amendments in 11 states to ban same-sex marriage were approved.
Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay marriages; Vermont and Connecticut have approved same-sex civil unions.
Roberta Sklar, spokeswoman for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in Washington, D.C., said same-sex American couples applaud Canadians.
"We know that it has been somewhat contentious in Canada, but at the same time the Canadians have largely approached this issue in a rational and democratic way and are providing a very positive model for the rest of the world," Sklar said.
Though hundreds of foreigners have come to Canada to seek civil ceremonies since gay marriages were first allowed in Ontario and British Columbia in 2003, not all countries or states recognize the unions. While a slew of Israeli men were married in Toronto City Hall earlier this year, for example, the Israeli Interior Ministry does not recognize those unions.
In the United States, the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriage and most states refuse to acknowledge marriage certificates from gay and lesbian couples, regardless of where they wed.
USA Today ~ Associated Press ** Canadian lawmakers OK same-sex marriage nationwide
CBC News ~ Canada ** Same-sex legislation passed
Posted by uhyw
at 1:19 AM EDT
Lib Loser Anti-war Teen 'Anarchists' Accused Of Setting Fire To American Flags
Topic: Lib Loser Stories
Fla. Teens Charged After Allegedly Burning American Flags
- Two Sarasota teens accused of burning six American flags have been charged with arson and manufacturing a firebomb.
Scott A. Baber and Brian A. Richard III, both 18, told deputies they burned the flags because they are anarchists and disagree with the war in Iraq and other U.S. government policies.
They set fire to six flags Sunday and tried to firebomb a car, the Sarasota County Sheriff's Office said.
Richard remained in jail Tuesday on $402,120 bail. Baber was released Monday on $101,120 bail.
The pair were charged with arson, manufacture of a fire bomb and criminal mischief.
Baber and Richard burned about five flags at homes in the Bent Tree subdivision, where they live with Baber's parents, then set fire to a flag at its clubhouse, said Lt. Chuck Lesaltato, a spokesman for the Sarasota County Sheriff's Office.
"Our deputies came up on them as they were returning to their car," he said.
The arrest of his son surprised Brian Richard II.
"His grandfather was a decorated military man. The whole thing really stunned me. I was really sad that they made that choice," the elder Richard said.
Residents of the golf course community were also upset.
"How stupid," Pat Davidson said, straightening the stones surrounding her blackened flagpole. "What kind of thrill would you get burning an American flag?"
WKMG - Central Florida TV 6 ~ Associated Press ** Fla. Teens Charged After Allegedly Burning American Flags
Posted by uhyw
at 12:58 AM EDT
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
EMINENT DOMAINED: Application submitted to NH city council to condemn Justice Souter's house for hotel
This is beautiful. Logan Darrow Clements of Freestar Media is throwing the Supreme Court's bullshit right back at David H. Souter, the head fucktard of the dumb-ass loss of property rights ruling. And gettin' to him right where he lives.
I hope Freestar Media pulls this off. It would be so righteous to see the top shithead libtard of the Supreme Court's decision to be one of his own first victims...
Below is our letter to begin the development process.
Mr. Chip Meany
Code Enforcement Officer
Town of Weare, New Hampshire
Dear Mr. Meany,
I am proposing to build a hotel at 34 Cilley Hill Road in the Town of Weare. I would like to know the process your town has for allowing such a development.
Although this property is owned by an individual, David H. Souter, a recent Supreme Court decision, "Kelo vs. City of New London" clears the way for this land to be taken by the Government of Weare through eminent domain and given to my LLC for the purposes of building a hotel. The justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic development and higher tax revenue to Weare.
As I understand it your town has five people serving on the Board of Selectmen. Therefore, since it will require only three people to vote in favor of the use of eminent domain I am quite confident that this hotel development is a viable project. I am currently seeking investors and hotel plans from an architect. Please let me know the proper steps to follow to proceed in accordance with the law in your town.
Logan Darrow Clements
Freestar Media, LLC
Freestar Media ~ Logan Darrow Clements ** Letter starting the project
Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.
Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.
On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.
Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.
The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Cafe" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."
Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.
"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."
Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.
Freestar Media ~ Logan Darrow Clements ** Press release explaining the project
Posted by uhyw
at 5:21 PM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 5:34 PM EDT
Newer | Latest | Older