Stop Texting-Drivers—or Lose Highway Funds

ALERT Drivers Act (HR 3535) along with SB 1536,
These are, bills designed to also curb texting while driving. Unfortunatly the way they are written it is nothing more than blackmail from the fed's again. while we all agree the texting has shown to have cause numerioua accidents and with the final judgment given this week the the train wreck that happen last year was an example, I feel that these bills will gain strength and we to see them changed.

To amend title 23, United States Code, to reduce the amount of Federal highway funding available to States that do not enact a law prohibiting an individual from writing, sending, or reading text messages while

MRF does not agree with these bills nor does The Governors Highway Safety Assn. (GHSA) has issue this statment:
" GHSA does not support the current version of the Alert Drivers Act of 2009—legislation that would require states to adopt laws prohibiting texting while driving or lose 25% of highway funds—as we feel states should be encouraged to pass texting bans with the carrot of financial incentives, not the stick of a sanction. In fact, this is a terrible time to consider reducing highway funding given the economic necessity of these dollars in the states. Additionally, 18 states have already passed these bans, with the majority of them having acted in 2009. We expect at least 30 more states will act in the next two years—all without federal intervention.

There are a number of other things the federal government can do to address texting while driving:

• Fund research to develop effective methods for enforcing texting and cell-phone bans. While a number of states currently have banned texting, enforcing such bans has proven difficult. Additional study of the effectiveness of state bans is needed.

• Sponsor research to determine the nature and scope of the distracted driving problem. It is very difficult to ascertain the entirety of the problem given that the public is unlikely to readily admit guilt in a crash investigation. Special studies are needed using subpoenaed phone records to determine the involvement of phoning or texting in a crash.

• Fund a media campaign to alert the public to the dangers of distracted driving. This effort is needed to help develop a culture that will make the practice socially unacceptable, similar to the way drunk driving has come to be perceived by the vast majority of the public.


Let the states decide, and stop the blackmailing to get your way.

Will corporate ads buy 2010 voters?

Be prepared for an on tons of propaganda about candidates now that this has been decided.

From the AP:

WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal campaigns.
By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for their own campaign ads. The decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.

The Supreme Court has opened the door to a new era of big and possibly shadowy election spending, rolled back anti-corruption laws and emboldened critics of fundraising limits to press on. In the middle of it all will be voters, trying to figure out who's telling the truth.
The court's ruling Thursday lets corporate America start advertising candidates much as they market products and tell viewers to vote for or against them. While it almost certainly will lead to a barrage of hard-hitting TV ads in the 2010 elections, its implications reach far beyond that.

The ruling was a victory for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO, the National Rifle Association and other interest groups most likely to run ads with money from their treasuries. It's unlikely major corporations would want their name on an ad, but they can avoid that by giving money to interest groups, who would then run ads and disclose the spending under the groups' names. It also presents a new option to wealthy individuals who were allowed to spend millions on their own to run election-time candidate ads before, but now can join forces to do so and get more bang for their bucks.

From the corporate titans of the early 20th century bribing candidates, to Watergate in the 1970s, Democratic fundraising scandals during the Clinton years in the 1990s and most recently, the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling case, Congress has periodically tried to rein in political spending only to have loopholes emerge or political players mount successful constitutional challenges to the rules.
The court seemed to sweep those concerns aside, saying that it doubted election-time ads could lead to the corruption of lawmakers and that in any case, proponents of the ban hadn't provided any proof of corruption.
Campaign finance watchdogs predict members of Congress now will cast their votes on controversial legislation with an eye to whether their position on it risks inviting a barrage of special-interest ads against them before the election, or on the flip side, could draw outside spending favorable to them.

And in the middle of it all are voters, the people whose opinions the new spending will seek to influence.
The court seemed to agree with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's contention that voters want more election ads and that they are craving the viewpoints and information that will be presented in them.

But if the country's experience in the years before the McCain-Feingold law, when corporations and unions poured millions of dollars into election-time ads that targeted candidates but stopped short of calling for their election or defeat, is any indication, much of the new ad spending will likely be aimed at turning voters against a particular candidate, rather than urging them to vote for one.
That may please voters who do not like the candidate anyway, but it could turn off some voters so much they tune out. Getting key voting blocs to stay home on Election Day can be as important as getting voters to turn out.

The bottom line ...we need to see beyond all the crap and lies that are going to thrown at us and lets see who is getting all the money and who is giving it to them and why??

PATRIOT ACT IS NOT NEW

Nations sometimes lose their bearings when confronted by an enemy. In a state of crisis or even panic, they implement measures that are later viewed as regrettable. From 1798 to 1800, the French were considered terrorists, pirating ships and making things uncomfortable for the fledgling American republic. The Federalist Party led a backlash against the French, and Thomas Jefferson and his Republican Party were seen as Francophiles. The XYZ Affair--a scandal centering on the fact that some French officials demanded bribes from American diplomats--brought relations between France and the U.S. to the breaking point. The Federalist Administration of President John Adams considered such solicitations to be grave insults. There were cultural differences as well. In the view of Abigail Adams, Frenchwomen were risqué at best.
The reaction to the threat from France came in the form of the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were championed by the Federalists, passed by Congress and signed by Adams in 1798. The Alien Act required immigrants to reside in the U.S. for 14 years instead of 5 to qualify for citizenship. The act also gave the President the legal right to expel those the government considered "dangerous." The Sedition Act punished "false, scandalous and malicious" writings against the government with fines and imprisonment. Most of those arrested under the Sedition Act were Republican editors, and instead of sending boatloads of aliens back to France, it resulted in no one's deportation. In a foreshadowing of the climate that inspired today's USA Patriot Act, at the turn of the century 200 years ago, it was common practice to question the patriotism of citizens, immigrants and the political opposition.
Jefferson, who was Vice President at the time, drafted his position in secret and wrote it into the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. James Madison, in collaboration with Jefferson, subsequently authored the Virginia Resolutions. In the second and fourth of the Kentucky Resolutions, Jefferson cited the 10th Amendment, which gives the states powers not delegated to the government by the Constitution, to declare the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional. Jefferson feared that a strong central government might put an end to slavery. Jefferson's fight against the Alien and Sedition Acts is often placed in the context of free speech, but it had unintended consequences beyond that. The Kentucky Resolutions were among the first to defend states' rights, and Jefferson had even threatened secession. Similar ideas helped spark the Civil War.
After Jefferson defeated Adams and was elected President in 1800, the Alien and Sedition Acts were allowed to expire. Adams, looking to distance himself from the mess, blamed the whole idea on Alexander Hamilton--who by then had been murdered by Aaron Burr.







Full text of it http://www.constitution.org/cons/kent1798.htm

Wisconsin SR-6 bill would free WI from acting as agent of USA

Wisconsin Senate Resolution 6 (SR-6)

April 9, 2009 − Introduced by Senators LEIBHAM, LAZICH, DARLING, GROTHMAN,
HARSDORF and SCHULTZ. Referred to Committee on Ethics Reform and
Government Operations.
Relating to: state sovereignty.
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads,
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”; and
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as
being that specifically granted by the U.S. Constitution and no more; and
Whereas, as the scope of power is defined by the Tenth Amendment, the federal
government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
Whereas, today the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
Whereas, the legislature has forwarded to the federal government numerous resolutions opposing federal encroachment on state powers but has received no response or result from Congress or the federal government; and
Whereas, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
Whereas, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992) that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
Whereas, a number of federal proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the U.S. Constitution; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the senate, That the senate hereby claims sovereignty under the
Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not
otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the U.S.
Constitution; and, be it further Resolved, That adoption of this resolution does not constitute an application for the calling of a federal Constitutional Convention within the meaning of Article V of the U.S. Constitution; and, be it further
Resolved, That this resolution shall serve as notice and demand to the federal
government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that
are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it further
Resolved, That the senate chief clerk shall provide copies of this joint
resolution to the president of the United States, to the speaker of the U.S. House of
Representatives, to the presiding officer of each house of each state legislature of the United States, and to each member of this state’s congressional delegation

Shows the states are getting tired of the fed's attempt taking over

Who said you can't make money in a recession!

Fed profits: $52 billion in 2009

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- The Federal Reserve banks made a $52 billion profit in 2009, reaping extra income on the government securities they bought in an effort to stabilize the financial system.
The Fed, in a statement on Tuesday, said its members returned $46 billion of that sum to taxpayers. The central bank is an independent arm of the government and its member banks are required to return all profits to the Treasury, after certain deductions.

Give Me Liberty !

This is an interesting site where they held a Continental Congress in November of 2009 with delegates from many states. http://givemeliberty.org/ http://www.cc2009.us/about-wtp/we-the-people-foundation-homepage.

Here is a little of what came out of it.

Articles of Freedom
Declaration and Resolves
of Continental Congress 2009
In Defense of a Free People, the time has come to reassert our God-Given, Natural Rights and cast off tyranny…
Let the Facts Reveal: The federal government of the United States of America was instituted to secure the Individual Rights of our citizens and instead now threatens our Life, Liberty and Property through usurpation's of the Constitution. Emboldened by our own lack of responsibility and due diligence in these matters, government has exceeded its mandate and abandoned those Founding Principles that have made our nation exceptional;
Our servant government has undertaken these unconstitutional actions in direct violation of its enumerated duties, to the detriment of the People‟s liberty and the sovereignty of our Republic;
Over many years and spanning multiple political administrations, the People who have, in good conscience, attempted to deliberate our grievances and voice our dissent against these offensive actions through both Petition and Assembly, have been maligned and ignored with contempt;
The People of the several States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming, justly alarmed at these arbitrary and unconstitutional actions, have met as Citizen-Delegates, and sat in a general Congress, in the city of St. Charles, Illinois;
Whereupon we, as these Citizen- Delegates, have gathered in defense of Divine Justice, Liberty and the principles of limited government, now stand in clear recognition of the Supreme Law of the Land – the Constitution for the United States of America;
Therefore, We demand that Government immediately re-establish Constitutional Rule of Law, lest the People be forced to do so themselves; and we hereby serve notice that in the Defense of Freedom and Liberty there shall be NO COMPROMISE to which we shall ever yield.

They are a non- profit org and here is the link for the rest of it.......http://www.cc2009.us/images/pdf/Articles-of-Freedom.12.24.2009.pdf

I thought you might like the reading and opinions that were expressed

OldHippy

America’s forgotten freedoms

A survey by the First Amendment Center in the US has reached the shocking conclusion that most American citizens don’t know the five basic freedoms enshrined in the constitution.
The study found that no more than 3% of Americans remember “petition” among the First Amendment’s five basic freedoms.
However, freedom of speech was remembered by the majority of respondents – 56%.
The others freedoms enshrined in the constitution appeared to have made little impression: freedom of religion was named by 15%; the same percentage remembered press freedom as a constitutional right while just 14% knew they had a right to assembly.
The number of respondents who remembered freedom of speech was the lowest in the history of the survey, conducted each year for the past eleven years.
What makes this year’s results more shocking is that 4 out of 10 people questioned could not name any freedom at all.
Whatever freedoms the constitution of the country may guarantee, it does not matter much since these rights are neither remembered nor needed as such.
The findings indicate that modern Americans do not think along the same lines as the Founders of the U.S.
Nowadays, it would seem, many Americans do not consider their basic rights and freedoms inalienable and are ready to delegate them to state or federal officials.
More than two centuries ago it did not take long for the Founders of the United States of America to realize the necessity of preserving individual freedoms in a system of individual states with a strong federal governmental centre.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

In 1791, just four years after the declaration in 1787 of the American Constitution, the states adopted the First Amendment together with the Bill of Rights to guarantee that the strong federal government would not trample on basic individual rights and freedoms.

Moreover, there are rights totally forgotten by the American society, meaning most Americans are not familiar with the freedoms guaranteed by the American Constitution.
Freedom of speech and religion are among the first but liberties introduced to the American Constitution by the Bill of Rights. Traditionally, most of the questioned Americans recalled them. But regarding freedom of the press, freedom to assemble and to petition – these seem to be lost in oblivion.
The annual State of the First Amendment survey, held by the First Amendment Center (www.firstamendmentcenter.org), questions adult Americans on their attitude towards the rights spelled out in the First Amendment. This year it found the following:
• 39% would extend to subscription cable and satellite television the government’s current authority to regulate content on over-the-air broadcast television.
• 54% would continue IRS regulations that bar religious leaders from openly endorsing political candidates from the pulpit without endangering the tax-exempt status of their organizations.
• 66% say the government should be able to require television broadcasters to offer an equal allotment of time to conservative and liberal broadcasters; 62% would apply that same requirement to newspapers, which never have had content regulated by the government.
• 38% would permit government to require broadcasters to report a specified amount of “positive news” in return for licenses to operate.
• 31% would not permit musicians to sing songs with lyrics that others might find offensive.
• 68% favor government restrictions on campaign contributions by private companies, and 55% favor such limits on amounts individuals can contribute to someone else’s campaign.

Thus, a large number of Americans concede that in specific cases the federal government can be involved or even control individual freedoms.
The most shocking conclusion of the survey was that most of Americans could not name the five basic freedoms enshrined in the constitution.

Lee Iacocca. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!

Excerpts from his new book, Where Have All the Leaders Gone?
Lee Iacocca Says:

'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage?

We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car.

But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'Stay the course'. Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the bums out!'

You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore.

The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling in Iraq , the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the 'America' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have.

The Biggest 'C' is Crisis ! ( see the ten C's in his book )

Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with your feet up on the desk and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a attlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.

On September 11, 2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A Hell of a Mess, so here's where we stand. We're immersed in a bloody war with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the country. We're losing the manufacturing edge to Asia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs. Gas prices are skyrocketing, and nobody in power has a coherent energy policy. Our schools are in trouble. Our borders are like sieves. The middle class is being squeezed every which way. These are times that cry out for leadership.

But when you look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders gone?' Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence and common sense?

I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.

Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo?

We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.

Name me one leader who emerged from the crisis of Hurricane Katrina. Congress has yet to spend a single day evaluating the response to the hurricane, or demanding accountability for the decisions that were made in the crucial hours after the storm.

Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping it doesn't happen again. Now, that's just crazy. Storms happen. Deal with it. Make a plan. Figure out what you're going to do the next time.

Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, what are we going to do about it?

Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debit, or solving the energy crisis or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.

I have news for the gang in Congress. We didn't elect you to sit on your asses and do nothing and remain silent while our democracy is being hijacked and our greatness is being replaced with mediocrity. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on Fox News will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?

Had Enough?

Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope. I believe in America. In my lifetime I've had the privilege of living through some of America's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: the 'Great Depression', 'World War II', the 'Korean War', the 'Kennedy Assassination', the 'Vietnam War', the 1970s oil crisis and the struggles of recent years culminating with 9/11. If I've learned one thing, it's this:

'You don't get anywhere by standing on the sidelines waiting for somebody else to take action. Whether it's building a better car or building a better future for our children, we all have a role to play. That's the challenge I'm raising in this book. It's a call to 'Action' for people who, like me, believe in America. It's not too late, but it's getting pretty close. So let's shake off the crap and go to work. Let's tell 'em all we've had 'enough.'

Well said ......OldHippy

Bikers v. City of Myrtle Beach, February 3, 2010 If City wins we all lose

Bikers v. City of Myrtle Beach, February 3, 2010
The 10am case is brought by business owners impacted by the City of Myrtle Beach ordinances to discourage and criminalize motorcycle events, including Myrtle Beach Bike Week, within city limits.
The 10:30 case is bikers with helmet tickets versus the City of Myrtle Beach.
http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/calendar/dspSupEvents.cfm?Day=2010-02-03
SUPREME COURT
Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m.Case Title: BOOST, a/k/a Business Owners Organized to Save Tourism, and Bart Viers, Petitioners, v. City of Myrtle Beach, Respondent.Attorneys: Thaddaeus Viers, of Coastal Law, LLC, of Myrtle Beach, and J. Todd Kincannon, of Barnes Alford Stork & Johnson, of Columbia, for Petitioners. Michael W. Battle, of Battle, Vaught & Howe, of Conway, and Thomas Ellenburg, of Myrtle Beach, for Respondent.
Hearing Time: 10:30 a.m.Case Title: George Jensen Aakjer, III, Leigh Andersen, Bobby Wayne Archer, Donald Lee Ard, Gary Philip Balcom, Thurman Odell Barnes, Ralph Hillary Bell, Jr., Marvin Simon Beverly, Steven M. Brinsfield, Laurie Ann Czerwieniec, Jeffery Jay Galbrath, Ronald Dewayne Gause, Gwendolyn Marie Harvey, Jessica Jane Hayes, Anthony Odell Hyman, Molly Infield, Mark Dale Infield, Bonnie Roberts Johnson, Emmett Earl Jones, Dawn Michell Kelly, Richard Allen Lester, Rodney Alan Louhoff, Rodney Alan Louhoff, Gary Edward Matson, Carla Williams Mercer, Richard O'Neil Mercer, Edward Dee Mitchum, Kathy Mitchum, Carol Justice North, Carol O'Day, William O'Day, III, Paul David Pinette, Steve Pinnell, Robert George Pinto, Debra A. Purcell, Rhonda Delette Robinson, Scott Allen Robinson, Rebecca Ann Rowan, Scott Rowan, Joseph Fred Ruddock, Jr, David Francis Speck, Anita Lynn Teachey, Robert Larry Thompson, Waddell H. Thompson, Michael James Timm, Debbie Timm, Rebel JM Tyler, Janice Waites, Susan Wall, and Edward Lucas Williams, Petitioners, v. City of Myrtle Beach and City of Myrtle Beach Municipal Court, Respondents.Attorneys: Desa Ballard, of West Columbia, and James Thomas McGrath, of Richmond, VA, for Petitioners. Michael W. Battle, of Battle, Vaught & Howe, of Conway, for Respondents.

Vampire's

NHTSA (my pronounciation: Naht zee) wants the heavily armed thugs who patrol America to hold people down, force a needle into their vein, and draw blood. You read this correctly. The National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration, which is a branch of the Department of Transportation is using tax money to train the thugs who patrol our streets to hold people down and stick a needle into their vein.

HERE’S PROOF THAT THE NHTSA, COPS, AND SAFETY NAZIS SUCK
You can verify this, by searching the internet for the following term - NHTSA “draw blood” force.

UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE
In the past, when cops wanted to obtain blood or urine evidence to support their accusations of alcohol or drug use, the police would take a suspect to a medical facility where they would hold people down while trained medical staff would draw blood. Sometimes they even forced a catheter into a persons urethra in order to obtain a urine sample.

Now, cops are going to hold people down and extract bodily evidence by force, at gunpoint or with threat of taser or beatings. These bloodsuckers might do this at the hood or back seat of a police car where the last person may have vomited.

The sick and twisted safety nazis from MADD are so excited they want to take rides in the police cruisers just so they can be there to witness the vampire cops in action.

If a cop suspects a person of driving while intoxicated, they often ask a person to SUBMIT to a breathalyzer test. Now, if the person refuses, one or two cops might hold they person down while the other one takes a needle and jabs it into the persons vein.

This activity does not require a doctors orders, or even the supervision of a medical professional.

The Bill of Rights is supposed to protect us from these violent invasions of our bodies, but the government, including the judicial system, is allowing this. This is as unreasonable as it gets. Since the government wants to violate people in this manner, they are not going to stop it until the people, YOU and I, should DEMAND it is stopped!

OldHippy

For the New Year

Proclamation of Individual Sovereignty

I hereby resolve that, in the coming year and every year to follow, I will continue to strive to be free as the wind; as free as anyone naturally endowed with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can possibly be.
I reaffirm my sovereign rights as a free individual, equal to all, and in forced servitude to none. I renounce all claims by those who might endeavor to unnaturally govern over me. All attempts to force my adoption of unwanted beliefs will be met with fierce resistance. I renounce all claims of those who feign to speak in my stead. As a free person with a mind of my own, I pledge no allegiance to representatives selected by a majority of misinformed neighbors, and shall not willingly abide by their decisions and dictates. All attempts by those who might attempt to impose restrictions on my personal beliefs, in violation of my sovereignty as a free individual, will be challenged. Let it be known that all forces opposed to liberty and sovereign rights of individuals shall be met with resistance, to the best of my ability.
Affirmed,

OldHippy