Monday, August 31, 2015

Obituary Campaign Ads

People Are Literally Dying to Keep Their Relatives From Voting for Hillary: The Obituary Craze, 8/30/15
An Arkansas man has requested in his obituary that loved ones do not vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, making him at least the third individual to do so since Clinton launched her campaign in April.
The obituary for Richard Buckman of Beebe, Ark., reads, “In lieu of flowers, please do not vote for Hillary,” mirroring text that was included in a recent obituary for a deceased New Jersey woman.
Buckman died on Aug. 22 at the age of 75, three days after news broke that the obituary for 63-year-old Elaine Fyrdrych of Gloucester Township, N.J., advised funeral goers, “Elaine requests, ‘In lieu of flowers, please do not vote for Hillary Clinton.’”
Indeed, such requests have become something of a trend. The obituary for a 81-year-old North Carolina man who died the day after Clinton launched her presidential campaign also asked loved ones to refrain from voting for the Democratic presidential candidate.

US Blinks, Russia takes North Pole Oil

U.S. lags behind Russia, other nations in Arctic
Obama is about to be the first sitting U.S. president to visit the Alaskan Arctic U.S. lacks icebreakers and Arctic deep-water ports Russia is making moves to claim the Arctic for its needs, by Sean Cockerham, 8/30/15
As Barack Obama becomes the first sitting president to visit the Arctic next week, the U.S. is falling behind other nations in the critical region.
The U.S. is sitting on the sidelines while Russia claims a huge swath of the Arctic, with its vast energy and mineral resources, and China builds icebreakers to get in on the race for influence in the north.
The U.S. hasn’t built a new heavy-class icebreaker in 40 years, and even as oil drilling and vessel traffic increases off Alaska’s northern coast, the nation hasn’t developed a deep-water port within 900 miles.
There’s a lot at stake: Some 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30 percent of its natural gas are thought to be in the Arctic, along with a trillion dollars in minerals. Sea lanes are opening as ice melts because of global warming and shipping is on the rise, bringing opportunities but also the need for ports and emergency response vessels for rescues.
The Obama administration created an Arctic strategy and is working to put it in place, said Fran Ulmer, chairman of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission. But Arctic projects cost money, she said.
“As other countries in the Arctic move forward with their plans to be better prepared for what is coming in the Arctic – which is more human activity – hopefully Congress will step up and fund some of the necessary infrastructure,” Ulmer said.
Ulmer said she hopes Obama’s visit next week will “communicate to the rest of the United States how important the Arctic is.” Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry will be in Alaska talking about the impact of climate change, and Obama will visit the Arctic village of Kotzebue.
Russia is wasting no time making its moves in the Arctic. This month, Russia staked a claim to a massive swath of Arctic territory, including the North Pole.
“That is a concern for us,” said Adm. Paul Zukunft, the commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, citing the rise of nationalism within Russia.
Zukunft said in an interview that international cooperation – not a “land grab” – is what’s needed in the Arctic.
“As you start getting into these sovereign conquests it erodes the ability to work collaboratively on safety of life at sea, environmental protection, and the movement of fish stocks in the high north latitudes,” he said.
Russia is claiming control over 460,000 square miles of Arctic territory and the rights to its energy and minerals.
The area is estimated to hold billions of tons of oil and natural gas reserves, as well as an abundance of minerals and gems. Russia is also asserting authority over the northern sea route from Europe to Asian markets, which it hopes will become a major shipping hub as the ice melts.
The 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea allows nations to claim exclusive economic rights over areas of the undersea continental shelf extending from their shores. Russia is trying to prove to a U.N. scientific commission that its continental shelf extends far to the north.
Denmark also has submitted a claim based on its control over Greenland, and the commission cannot make a binding decision on boundary disputes between nations. But Russia would get a boost in international talks if its claim is upheld by the U.N. commission.
“It would give them the credibility of an international tribunal of scientists saying, ‘This is good science.’ And they would take that to the bargaining table,” said Betsy Baker, an Arctic law expert.
Sean Cockerham: @seancockerham
We should ignore the UN, then quit the UN. We should stake our claim now and take our slice of the North Pole.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

Feds’ Illegal Seizures

Feds fighting to keep cash seized from person never charged with crime, by Joseph Weber, 8/29/15, FoxNews

Straughn Gorman Case

Federal prosecutors are battling in court to keep $167,000 in cash seized in a 2013 traffic stop, despite the motorist never being charged in the incident and the Obama administration clamped down this spring on such asset seizures and forfeitures.

The case -- which highlights the ongoing concerns about the government unjustly seizing money and property -- began when a Nevada state trooper pulled over the motorist on a cross-country trip to California.

The trooper stopped Hawaii resident Straughn Gorman’s motor-home in January 2013 for allegedly going too slow along Interstate 80.  

According to court documents, Gorman was allowed to proceed without a citation despite the trooper suspecting he was hiding cash.

The trooper said he couldn’t inspect the vehicle because he would have needed a canine unit and for the dog to detect drugs, which would have created enough probable cause to get a search warrant.

However, no canine unit was available so the trooper released Gorman but not before requesting the county sheriff’s office stop him again -- about 50 minutes later and this time with a drug-sniffing dog.

No drugs were found during the second stop, in which Gorman was pulled over for two alleged traffic violation. But his vehicle, computer, cellphone and the cash, stashed throughout the vehicle, were seized.

In June, a federal judge in Nevada ordered Gorman’s cash be returned.

In his ruling, District Judge Larry Hicks cited Gorman’s “prolonged detention” for the alleged traffic violations and criticized federal authorities for failing to disclose that the first officer requested the second stop.

“The second stop was not based on independent, reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify the prolonged investigation,” wrote Hicks, a Bush administration appointee. “The two stops were for minor traffic violations, and they both were extended beyond the legitimate purposes for such traffic stops.”

Hicks also said in his ruling the second stop never would have happened if the first officer had not relayed information about the first stop, which included a vehicle description, suspicion about concealed cash and that a “canine sniff” would likely be needed to get probable cause for a search.

The federal government earlier this month appealed Hicks' ruling in the 9th Circuit Court, in San Francisco, considered among the most liberal in the country.

Federal attorneys did not submit a reason for the appeal in their one-paragraph request, according to The Daily Signal, which first reported the request.

The court is expected to also decide whether Gorman should be reimbursed $153,000 in legal fees, which federal lawyers don’t want to pay.

The first court proceeding is scheduled for November 19.

Justice Department Directives

The Justice Department earlier this year issued a series of directives to reform and restrict its policies on asset seizures and forfeitures, amid the complaints about government abuse and overreach.

“We are keenly aware of concerns raised about certain seizures and forfeiture practices,” the agency told the Senate Judiciary Committee in April. “The department takes seriously any and all allegations of perceived or actual abuse.”

The first of the changes were announced in January by then-Attorney General Eric Holder, starting with forfeitures.

Holder said federal agencies could no longer take assets seized by state and local law enforcement agencies, except for those “directly related to public safety concerns” including firearms, ammunition, explosives and property associated with child pornography.

Among the valuables the agencies can no longer take are cash and vehicles.

In March, Holder announced changes to banking laws that allow money to be seized from people who make deposits below specific amounts to intentionally keep the transaction from being reported to federal authorities -- a scheme known as “structuring.”

Holder said authorities would now focus on “the most serious offenses” and essentially that money could be seized only after the defendant is charge with a crime or found to have been engaged in a crime beyond structuring, according to document the Justice Department gave this week.

The minimum-deposit laws were enacted to detect and nab drug dealers, terrorists and other money-launders and criminals trying to conceal their enterprise and cash. And they were enacted to create a money stream to provide financial compensation to crime victims.

The IRS seized more than $242 million in roughly 2,500 alleged structuring violations, from 2005 to 2012. However, no other criminal activity was alleged in roughly 33 percent of the cases, according to the Institute of Justice, which worked on a more recent case in North Carolina.

Lyndon McLellan Case

Last year, the IRS took $107,000 from Carolina small-business owner Lyndon McLellan after he made a series of deposits under $10,000.

McLellan owns a convenience store-restaurant-gas station. And many of his transactions are in cash.

The federal government offered to return half of McLellan’s cash, a standard move by federal officials who know many people cannot afford a lengthy court battle and would rather settle.

McLellan got back all of the money but wasn’t reimbursed roughly $22,000 in legal and accounting fees, Institute attorney Robert Everett Johnson said Tuesday.

“We’re pleased that Lyndon’s money has been returned,” Johnson said. “That the federal government returned the money validates he didn’t do anything wrong.”

However, Johnson expresses dismay that his client is still battling to recoup his costs and interest on the seized money, to which he appear entitled under the 2000 Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act.

“We thing the federal government should make him whole,” he said. “It simply cannot pretend that nothing happened.”


Mexico defends Anchor Babies

Mexico Warns TX Not to Refuse Immigrants’ Babies Birth Certificates
(Fox News) – The Mexican government is warning that Texas’ denial of birth certificates for U.S. children born here to undocumented immigrants stands to imperil the relationship between Mexico and the Lone Star State.
The concern was raised in an amicus brief filed Monday evening to lend support to immigrants parents who sued Texas after being denied birth certificates for their U.S.-born children, even after showing their “matrículas,” the ID cards issued by the Mexican Consulate to undocumented immigrants.
Mexico says the practice stands in stark contrast to the historical practice among countries to accept passports or other forms of ID to issue birth certificates.
“[It] not only jeopardizes their dignity and well-being, but could threaten the unique relationship between Mexico and Texas,” the Mexican government said in a brief tied to a lawsuit filed against the state by Texas Civil Rights Project and Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid.
The lawsuit, the Texas Tribune reported, was filed on behalf of six U.S. citizen children and their undocumented parents, who came from Mexico, Honduras and Guatemala. Other groups since have joined the suit.
A main point of contention is the all-out refusal at some county registrars offices to accept as a valid form of ID anything short of a U.S. visa or consulate ID card, the Tribune said.
The families who are suing say that Texas is violating the 14th amendment and that the state is superseding federal immigration laws.
Texas officials are claiming sovereignty issues and argue that the United States cannot fight them.
They long have said that consulate-issued identification cards are not considered reliable forms of ID.
The Mexican government is requesting that Texas be clear about what two forms of ID it will accept in order to give the children U.S. birth certificate.
“Our argument isn’t ‘yes matrícula, no matrícula,’” said attorney Jennifer Harbury, who represents the families, to the Tribune. “The argument is ‘what will you take that people can actually get?’ They have to take something. [The children] were born here. They are U.S. citizens.”
The amicus brief also claims that denying the children U.S. birth certificates blocks their claims to Mexican citizenship. A child born to Mexican parents has that right but must show proof of identity. Infringing on that is a violation of international law, the brief states.
Mexican Consulate officials argue that the matrícula is, in many ways, more secure because it includes biometric technology, unlike the driver’s licenses in some states.
They say a parent’s undocumented status should not affect a child’s ability to obtain a birth certificate.
“We think that they are not immigration authorities,” he said. “The passport is the official way to identify oneself.”

Trump Cruz Rally

Trump and Cruz plan rally against Iran Nuclear agreement in D.C. by Joe A. Gilbertson, 8/30/15
Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz have scheduled a joint rally to protest the agreement with Iran.  This rally is being put together by Tea Party Patriots, the Center for Security Policy and the Zionist Organization of America, and will be staged n Washington D.C on the West Lawn of the Capitol on September 9.  It will feature both candidates, with Cruz as the keynote speaker and Trump as his invited guest.
Both Trump and Cruz have decried the Iran agreement, painstakingly negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry, but which appears to cater to religious extremists in Iran.  As Trump said, Iran will become “so rich and powerful” once the deal goes into effect.
Author's Note:  With Trump's drawing power, the rally could draw many thousands of people and become a spectacle that could push additional Democrats in Congress to vote against the deal. This is a powerful strategy that, if successful in defeating the Iran deal, could greatly increase the stature of Trump and Cruz.
This rally also underlines the current alliance between Trump and Cruz, who appear to complement each other in political style.  This may be a strategy that carries through the rest of the campaign, possibly resulting in Presidential/Vice Presidential ticket in the general election.
Currently the Republican majority is not sufficient to overcome a presidential veto.  Obama does not want to have to use his veto power on this measure and Congressional Democrats are planning a filibuster to attempt to foil the defeat of the measure.

Iran bribes Democrats

Traitor Senators Took Money from Iran Lobby, Backed Iran Deal by Dan Greenfield, 8/26/15, Jewish Press  {Originally posted to Frontpage Mag website}

Senator Markey has announced his support for the Iran deal that will let the terrorist regime inspect its own Parchin nuclear weapons research site, conduct uranium enrichment, build advanced centrifuges, buy ballistic missiles, fund terrorism and have a near zero breakout time to a nuclear bomb.

There was no surprise there. Markey had topped the list of candidates supported by the Iran Lobby. And the Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC) had maxed out its contributions to his campaign.

After more fake suspense, Al Franken, another IAPAC backed politician who also benefited from Iran Lobby money, came out for the nuke sellout.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the Iran Lobby’s third Dem senator, didn’t bother playing coy like her colleagues. She came out for the deal a while back even though she only got half the IAPAC cash that Franken and Markey received.

As did Senator Gillibrand, who had benefited from IAPAC money back when she first ran for senator and whose position on the deal should have come as no surprise.

The Iran Lobby had even tried, and failed, to turn Arizona Republican Jeff Flake. Iran Lobby cash had made the White House count on him as the Republican who would flip, but Flake came out against the deal. The Iran Lobby invested a good deal of time and money into Schumer, but that effort also failed.

Still these donations were only the tip of the Iran Lobby iceberg. Gillibrand had also picked up money from the Iran Lobby’s Hassan Nemazee. Namazee was Hillary’s national campaign finance director who had raised a fortune for both her and Kerry before pleading guilty to a fraud scheme encompassing hundreds of millions of dollars. Nemazee had been an IAPAC trustee and had helped set up the organization.

Bill Clinton had nominated Hassan Nemazee as the US ambassador to Argentina when he had only been a citizen for two years. A spoilsport Senate didn’t allow Clinton to make a member of the Iran Lobby into a US ambassador, but Nemazee remained a steady presence on the Dem fundraising circuit.

Nemazee had donated to Gillibrand and had also kicked in money to help the Franken Recount Fund scour all the cemeteries for freshly dead votes, as well as to Barbara Boxer, who also came out for the Iran nuke deal. Boxer had also received money more directly from IAPAC.

In the House, the Democratic recipients of IAPAC money came out for the deal. Mike Honda, one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Iran Lobby backed the nuke sellout. As did Andre Carson, Gerry Connolly, Donna Edwards and Jackie Speier. The Iran Lobby was certainly getting its money’s worth.

But the Iran Lobby’s biggest wins weren’t Markey or Shaheen. The real victory had come long before when two of their biggest politicians, Joe Biden and John Kerry, had moved into prime positions in the administration. Not only IAPAC, but key Iran Lobby figures had been major donors to both men.

That list includes Housang Amirahmadi, the founder of the American Iranian Council, who had spoken of a campaign to “conquer Obama’s heart and mind” and had described himself as “the Iranian lobby in the United States.” It includes the Iranian Muslim Association of North America (IMAN) board members who had fundraised for Biden. And it includes the aforementioned Hassan Nemazee.

A member of Iran’s opposition had accused Biden’s campaigns of being “financed by Islamic charities of the Iranian regime based in California and by the Silicon Iran network.” Biden’s affinity for the terrorist regime in Tehran was so extreme that after 9/11 he had suggested, “Seems to me this would be a good time to send, no strings attached, a check for $200 million to Iran”.

Appeasement inflation has since raised that $200 million to at least $50 billion. But there are still no strings worth mentioning attached to the big check.

Questions about donations from the Iran Lobby had haunted Kerry’s campaign. Back then Kerry had been accused of supporting an agreement favorable to Iran. The parameters of that controversial proposal however were less generous than the one that Obama and Kerry are trying to sell now.

The hypothetical debates over the influence of the Iran Lobby have come to a very real conclusion. Both of Obama’s secretaries of state were involved in Iran Lobby cash controversies, as was his vice president and his former secretary of defense. Obama was also the beneficiary of sizable donations from the Iran Lobby. Akbar Ghahary, the former co-founder of IAPAC, had donated and raised some $50,000 for Obama.

It’s an unprecedented track record that has received very little notice. While the so-called “Israel Lobby” is constantly scrutinized, the fact that key foreign policy positions under Obama are controlled by political figures with troubling ties to an enemy of this country has gone mostly unreported by the mainstream media.

This culture of silence allowed the Iran Lobby to get away with taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times before the Netanyahu speech asking, “Will Congress side with our President or a Foreign Leader?”

Iran’s stooges had taken a break from lobbying for ballistic missiles to play American patriots.

Obama and his allies, Iranian and domestic, have accused opponents of his dirty Iran deal of making “common cause” with that same terror regime and of treason. The ugly truth is that he and his political accomplices were the traitors all along.

Democrats in favor of a deal that will let a terrorist regime go nuclear have taken money from lobbies for that regime. They have broken their oath by taking bribes from a regime whose leaders chant, “Death to America”. Their pretense of examining the deal is nothing more than a hollow charade.

This deal has come down from Iran Lobby influenced politicians like Kerry and is being waved through by members of Congress who have taken money from the Iran Lobby. That is treason plain and simple.

Despite what we are told about its “moderate” leaders, Iran considers itself to be in a state of war with us. Iran and its agents have repeatedly carried out attacks against American soldiers, abducted and tortured to death American officials and have even engaged in attacks on American naval vessels.

Aiding an enemy state in developing nuclear weapons is the worst form of treason imaginable. Helping put weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists is the gravest of crimes.

The Democrats who have approved this deal are turning their party into a party of atom bomb spies.

Those politicians who have taken money from the Iran Lobby and are signing off on a deal that will let Iran go nuclear have engaged in the worst form of treason and committed the gravest of crimes. They must know that they will be held accountable. That when Iran detonates its first bomb, their names will be on it.

About the Author: Daniel Greenfield is an Israeli born blogger and columnist, and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. His work covers American, European and Israeli politics as well as the War on Terror. His writing can be found at These opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Jewish Press.

Sunday, August 30, 2015

Lean State Government

Water supplies must be maintained through a series of reservoirs, rivers and pipelines. The number of gallons of water in these reservoirs should be sufficient to supply water to residents and agriculture through all periods of drought.
Interstate highways, state roads, freight rail lines, pipelines and harbors need to be provided and maintained to support commerce. All gasoline taxes collected from automobile drivers and trucking operations should be used to ensure robust interstate highways and state roads. Federal gas taxes should be retained by the state. The top of I-285 needs to double in size to handle the traffic. Atlanta needs an Interstate Bypass to decongest I-285.
Low utility rates are needed to provide electricity and natural gas to residents and businesses.  Coal and nuclear should not be abandoned.  Expensive solar and wind should not be subsidized by federal or state taxes.
Federal laws and regulations that damage the Georgia economy should be nullified by the Georgia Legislature. The unnecessary EPA air and water regulations should be nullified.  Obamacare should be nullified.  Federal occupation of Georgia land should be ended; all land in Georgia should be private or deeded to the State or Municipalities.
There is absolutely no reason for the State to own any wildlife preserves.  Let the Sierra Club buy their own land.
Education and healthcare consume too many federal and state tax dollars. These subsidies over the years has resulted in total unaffordability.  The costs of education and healthcare are 4 times higher than they should be. These industries need to be repaired by the free market.
Public transit should not receive any federal or state tax subsidies.  This is a local expense and in most cases is unnecessary. Passenger trains should be private.
Local roads, storm drains, sidewalks, bike lanes and multi-purpose trails should be funded by local taxes only. Road maintenance should be good before recreational modes are created.
Government agencies should not engage in “nanny-state” activities.  Families are responsible for their members, not the government.  Medical kidnapping should not be allowed. Children’s Protective Services should be closed. Crimes can be reported and investigated by the Police. Children do not belong to the state. Community Supervision should be repealed. Parents should be able to keep their children from bureaucrats seeking adoption bounties.
Government should never be viewed as a “jobs program”.  The cost of government at all levels has long past the price/demand curve.  Labor costs for government and functions dealt with by government need to be cut in half. 
Citizen Abuse
Traffic fines are too high. Poorly designed road systems confuse drivers and most stop signs do not really require a full stop. High density results in insufficient road-width. Traffic fines are predatory.
Property seizure is abused. Banks should not allow the seizure of business or personal accounts. Police should not be able to seize any person’s property.  Property seizure is predatory.
No-Knock Warrants contributed to the Revolutionary War. Police should not take tips from criminals or raid an alleged drug house with a Swat Team without documented probable cause and a Warrant issued by a Judge. 
Voter abuse in Georgia
The Georgia Legislature spends most of its time expanding Municipal powers over voters.
The fact that Cobb County voters were not able to vote on the Brave’s Stadium deal is a travesty. They should not be charged $1billion to further congest I-75 North.
Regionalism and UN Agenda 21 implementation caused flawed zoning ordinances pushed by consultants to be created in Dunwoody. Shrinking lot minimums to 15,000 square feet created a split-lot in-fill dispute in Dunwoody Club Forest and the addition of “care homes” in R-100 residential zoning resulted in a medical treatment facility being plopped in the middle of Manget Way subdivision.  Homeowners had to hire attorneys to plead their cases.
Easements in Dunwoody are excessive. The addition of bike lanes and sidewalks on Mt. Vernon Road resulted in an initial “taking” of easements that were 50 feet from the centerline each way, for a widening that would only result in a 12 foot widening. This would remove 1/3rd of some homeowner’s yards.  The additional suicide lane that was planned was removed from the plan by the city council, but the easement remains as a threat and a property value loss for resales.
Separation of Public & Private
Easements present a problem for Homeowners. If the easements are actually government property and they are considered public property, homeowners should only be taxed on what they actually own as private property.
Dunwoody Bait & Switch
Dunwoody voters approved their city charter in 2009 based on the 3.04 millage cap. In 2011, the Dunwoody City Council quietly slid redevelopment authority on the ballot.  In 2014, the new charter added Taxing Districts to ensure that voters would not be able to vote to raise their Dunwoody taxes.
Hall County Property Tax
In 2015, Hall County hired an out-of-town consulting firm to appraise property.  They increased Lake Lanier property by 300+%.  Homeowners had to appeal all of these assessments.
Property Rights Abuse
All cities and counties in Georgia have Land Use Plans and beg the question whether Land Owners have any rights to use their land as they wish. This is government of the government by the government and for the government and tramples individual rights.
The free market system used to allow property owners the freedom to do what they wanted to do.  Now property owners are strapped with federal, state, county and city rules that will result in their failure to manage their property to pay for itself.  If a farmer needs to switch crops or livestock to stay afloat, they should be able to do this easily.  Rural areas need to continue to be able to use septic tank systems, bottled LP gas, well water and their own equipment and farming techniques.  They should be able to sell their land for residential development.
Valdosta Georgia, Lowndes County has banned subdivision development outside their designated area. That’s too much free market interference. The only check on high in-town property prices is the freedom to move out.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

US Constitutional Compliance

Many of us believe that our sovereign debt problems could have been avoided if we had ensured that our federal government remained in compliance with the US Constitution and the limits placed on the federal by the enumerated powers and 10th Amendment.
If we had resisted the federal government’s unconstitutional expansion of powers, 1/3rd of our landmass would be owned by the states, the federal courts would only be able to “opine” over federal issues and states would have had to deal with these issues with a balanced budget.
Resetting Constitutional powers will require some time to transition functions from the federal to the states. The federal government will need to continue to fund Social Security transition costs and pay down its debts.
If we are able to wrest the unconstitutional functions from the federal government, there would be no departments, agencies, programs, congressional committees or funds for Foreign Aid, Grants to States, Homeland Security, Agriculture, Health & Human Services, Education, Transportation, Energy, Labor, Interior or Commerce. There would be no HUD, EPA, USDA, TSA, FEMA, FDA, Federal Reserve, etc.
Loans held by Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac and Sallie Mae would be sold to the private sector. Education and Healthcare care should be repaired in the free market.
The Federal government would cede all federal lands to the states and transfer unconstitutional functions “to the States and the People” States and the People would have responsibility for education, labor, food inspection, environmental regulations, etc.
The Federal government would maintain military forces for defense, police the oceans, secure the borders, administer immigration policy, deal with other nations and operate the US mint and Patent Office.  They would maintain a federal court, a legislature consisting of a House and Senate and maintain the Executive branch.
The Federal government would need to pay down the national debt and begin to transition Social Security for the next generation to private accounts.
Interest rates would be set by the free market. Churches, charities and individuals would need to reassume their previous responsibility for the poor. This would require the repeal of many laws and regulations. Malpractice would be handled by local Medical Associations. The Civil Rights Act should be repealed. The US should return to being a free market meritocracy. We should quit the UN and IMF. Congress should take control of trade agreements and immigration and should read all bills and write their own regulations. Bills should not be bundled to allow bad law to ride on critical Bills.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

Regional Commissions Special District Tax

The T-SPLOST vote of 2012 rejected the 1% sales tax in 9 of 12 Regions.  The Laws authorizing Regional unelected governance were HB 1216 passed 2008, HB 277 passed 2010.
2010 Georgia Code
§ 48-8-241 - Creation of special districts; tax rate
O.C.G.A. 48-8-241 (2010)
48-8-241. Creation of special districts; tax rate

(a) There are created within this state 12 special districts. The geographical boundary of each special district shall correspond with and shall be coterminous with the geographical boundary of the applicable region of the 12 regional commissions provided for in subsection (f) of Code Section 50-8-4.

(b) When the imposition of a special district sales and use tax is authorized according to the procedures provided in this article within a special district, subject to the requirement of referendum approval and the other requirements of this article, a special sales and use tax shall be imposed within the special district for a period of ten years which tax shall be known as the special district transportation sales and use tax.

(c) Nothing in this article shall be construed as limiting the establishment of a fund or funds which would provide at least 20 years of maintenance and operation costs from proceeds of the special district transportation sales and use tax used to construct, finance, or otherwise develop transit capital projects; provided, however, that the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, created by an Act approved March 10, 1965 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 2243), as amended, shall not be authorized to use any proceeds from the special district transportation sales and use tax for expenses of maintenance and operation of such portions of the transportation system of such authority in existence on January 1, 2011.

(d) Any tax imposed under this article shall be at the rate of 1 percent. Except as to rate, a tax imposed under this article shall correspond to the tax imposed by Article 1 of this chapter. No item or transaction which is not subject to taxation under Article 1 of this chapter shall be subject to a tax imposed under this article, except that a tax imposed under this article shall not apply to:

(1) The sale or use of any type of fuel used for off-road heavy-duty equipment, off-road farm or agricultural equipment, or locomotives;

(2) The sale or use of jet fuel to or by a qualifying airline at a qualifying airport;

(3) The sale or use of fuel that is used for propulsion of motor vehicles on the public highways. For purposes of this paragraph, a motor vehicle means a self-propelled vehicle designed for operation or required to be licensed for operation upon the public highways;

(4) The sale or use of energy used in the manufacturing or processing of tangible goods primarily for resale; or

(5) For motor fuel as defined under paragraph (9) of Code Section 48-9-2 for public mass transit.

The tax imposed pursuant to this article shall only be levied on the first $5,000.00 of any transaction involving the sale or lease of a motor vehicle. The tax imposed pursuant to this article shall be subject to any sales and use tax exemption which is otherwise imposed by law; provided, however, that the tax levied by this article shall be applicable to the sale of food and food ingredients as provided for in paragraph (57) of Code Section 48-8-3.
Taxpayers are accustomed to having the taxes they pay, spent on necessary infrastructure within their own cities or counties. Regional tax schemes by unelected appointed boards violate “home rule”, will continue to be rejected and should be repealed.  No transportation tax should be used for anything but roads and bridges. To private firms should ever own or control roads or bridges. Bike lanes and multi-use trails should not be funded by transportation taxes. If built at all, they should come out of the Parks budgets of cities and counties. “Economic development” should not receive any tax subsidies or assistance.  
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader

Property Seizure 6th Amendment Violation

Now Feds trying to deny 2 more constitutional rights, Fight on to stop government grab of money needed for legal defense, by Bob Unruh, 8/29/15
It’s no secret that President Obama and his Democratic Party want to restrict the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
In addition, First Amendment religious-freedoms protections have been challenged by Obamacare. And freedom of speech? That’s just fine as long as it lines up with the “same-sex marriage” social agenda.
Now, a case is posing a challenge to the Fifth Amendment’s property rights and due process protections along with the Sixth Amendment’s assurance of counsel for those accused of crimes.
The U.S. Supreme Court now is posed with the question: Does the government have the right to charge you with a crime and then seize your bank accounts, checkbook, savings and other assets so that you cannot afford to hire a lawyer to defend yourself?
The Rutherford Institute has filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that the nation’s Founders – who wrote the Fifth and Sixth Amendments – would be horrified by the idea.
“If the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute.
 “Protecting their property from governmental abuse was just as vital to the Founding Fathers as preserving their lives and liberties, hence the Fifth Amendment.”
Whitehead said that what makes the current case so critical is “that if the government is allowed to freeze a person’s untainted – i.e., legitimate – assets, the government can essentially render them penniless and unable to hire an attorney of their choosing in order to preserve their life and liberty, which renders the Sixth Amendment utterly useless.”
The government routinely confiscates the proceeds of proven illegal activity, such as drug money.
But the new case challenges the government’s decision to take away funds that were not alleged to be part of any criminal activity. Not as a fine; just confiscation.
A second friend-of-the-court brief, filed by Michael Connelly of the United States Justice Foundation and William J. Olson, Herbert W. Titus and others of William J. Olson, P.C., frames the dispute.
“In violation of the Fifth Amendment, the district court improperly seized assets of the petitioner over which the government has no valid, current property interest, denying her the right to retain counsel of choice to fight for her rights in violation of the Sixth Amendment.”
The filing continues: “As Congress and the courts have cooperated in the vast expansion of federal asset forfeiture powers, federal prosecutors have been given tools that no one in government should have – powers which put the American people in fear not of punishment for crime, but in fear of the exercise of arbitrary power by their own government.”
The case arose during a suspected Medicare fraud case in which the government froze $45 million in assets belonging to Sila Luis, who runs health-care businesses in Florida.
She was indicted three years ago for alleged schemes to pay illegal kickbacks for patient referrals and to bill Medicare for unnecessary services.
The government claimed the businesses received about $45 million in Medicare reimbursements and sought to recover the full amount in the criminal prosecution.
But Rutherford said the businesses also earned at least $15 million in untainted funds from sources other than Medicare – and the government moved to take those funds as well.
Attorneys for Luis objected, saying the government’s decision to deprive her of her own funds too violated the Sixth Amendment. Her right to due process, they contend, would be violated by such a move.
The case is pending before the Supreme Court.
The Rutherford Institute argued in its brief that the Constitution’s Sixth Amendment provides the accused the right “to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
“When Congress ratified the Sixth Amendment, they understood the constitutional right to counsel as the right to counsel a defendant could afford to retain. This was evidence because the right to appointed counsel had not yet been recognized as fundamental in all criminal cases,” the brief explains.
The brief says the “forfeiture at issue here is fundamentally inconsistent with the Founding Fathers’ understanding that criminal defendants had a right to choose any counsel they could afford.”
“By depriving petitioner of legitimate and untainted funds, the forfeiture prevents her from securing chosen counsel by making it impossible for her to pay that counsel.”
The Sixth Amendment “has always encompassed the core right of securing one’s counsel of choice at one’s own expense,” the brief says.
“If fact, it was the only understanding at the time it was ratified. The idea that the government could trample on this fundamental right with a tool that was despised by the Founders is inconceivable,” Rutherford said.
One year ago, the Supreme Court affirmed that defendants do not have a right to a hearing where they can plead for permission to use the money that the government alleges is tainted. In the case, the government said it was targeting the unconnected funds because the defendant “already has spent the ill-gotten gains on luxury items and travel.”
Rutherford argued that if the case is not reversed, the Sixth Amendment requirement for due process, specifically the right to counsel, will be blown apart.
“The government asks this court to endorse an abusive practice the Founders explicitly rejected and which contradicts their understanding of the limited seizures the government could undertake prior to a finding of guilt,” the brief contends. “In so doing, the forfeiture improperly undermines petitioners’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel of her choosing.”
The filing by USJF and Olson contends the government’s claims are based “exclusively on hearsay and a finding of mere ‘probable cause.’”
“Demonstrating no reluctance to assert highly aggressive statutory interpretations, as well as positions that impair petitioner’s rights protected by the U.S. Constitution at each turn, the government seeks every possible advantage over petitioner,” the brief states.
“The government claims that its only objective is to protect the government’s financial interests, but those interests are at best speculative future interests. The only certain effect of the government’s strategy is to facilitate the prosecutor’s quest for conviction through the crippling of petitioner in her ability to defend herself from federal criminal charges.”
Such a strategy, the brief explains, “should send shivers down the backs of the justices on this court, who are tasked with guarding the rights of the people against this government’s headline pursuit of powers typifying those of a totalitarian police state.”
The inequities are obvious, the brief says.
“Under the government’s theory, the prosecution would continue to be free to employ all the assets it needs to build a case against petitioner, while petitioner would be denied full use of her untainted assets for her defense. … If the prosecution, with the assistance of the court, is allowed to exercise the type of broad authority to tie up a criminal defendant’s untainted assets, [the law] will present an open invitation to an ever more powerful federal government to deprive defendants in criminal cases of counsel of their choice, in violation of the Sixth Amendment.”

SC Welcomes Muslim Refugees

Nikki Haley welcomes Muslim refugees, by Leo Hohmann, 8/28/15, WND
Gitmo-shunning governor's statements called 'the height of hypocrisy' Some are calling it the “height of hypocrisy,” bordering on demagoguery.
Nikki Haley, South Carolina’s Republican governor, came out last Thursday and blasted possible White House plans to bring Guantanamo Bay prisoners to her state.
The governor called a news conference and didn’t mince words.
“We are absolutely drawing a line that we are not going to allow any terrorist to come into South Carolina,” Haley said. “We are not going to allow that kind of threat, we are not going to allow that kind of character to come in.
“My job is to protect the people of this state, and I take that very personally,” she continued. “I will take that personally the entire way through, so that the president, the Congress and anyone involved in this decision understands they are not wanted, they are not needed, and we will not accept them in South Carolina.”
Yet, at the same time she was drawing a red line against Gitmo terrorists who would stay locked in a brig off the coast of Charleston, Haley was opening her arms wide to welcome “refugees” from jihadist strongholds in the Middle East and Africa.
World Relief, an evangelical aid agency that gets paid by the federal government to resettle refugees in the U.S. from places like Somalia and Syria, hatched plans more than a year ago to add Spartanburg, South Carolina, to the list of more than 190 U.S. cities receiving foreign refugees.
As WND has reported in a series of more than 35 articles over the past year, the refugee program has been fraught with problems. Chief among them has been young men entering the U.S. as refugees and turning out to be terrorists. Some, such as the two Iraqis in Bowling Green, Kentucky, or the Uzbek man resettled in Boise, Idaho, harbored ill intent against America from day one. But others, such as the six Somalis from Minnesota who were arrested after repeatedly trying to join ISIS, or the two brothers who bombed the Boston Marathon, were radicalized after they came to the U.S. as young boys.
According to information supplied recently by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., at least 72 cases have been documented in just the past year of Muslim immigrants becoming involved in terrorist activity.
So when World Relief’s plans were finally made public in March, it set off a wave of grassroots opposition in Spartanburg. Residents were angry they had not been consulted about the new arrivals, nor were they given information on the impact refugees will have on schools, housing and labor markets. Not to mention the national security risks that almost nobody wanted to talk about.
The resistance movement spreads
Spartanburg’s resistance to the secret planting of refugees into their community has since spread to St. Cloud, Minnesota, Twin Falls, Idaho, and Fargo, North Dakota, with uprisings brewing in Ohio and Michigan as well, WND reported earlier this month.
Every state except Wyoming has agreed to participate in the federal government’s refugee resettlement program, which gets its authority from the Refugee Act of 1980, signed by President Jimmy Carter.
The State Department works in concert with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres to permanently settle refugees in the U.S. The U.N. assigns refugees to various countries and it is the duty of the host country to screen them for criminal activity and ties to terrorist organizations.
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., whose district includes Spartanburg, pressured Secretary of State John Kerry for answers to citizens’ questions, but wasn’t satisfied with the answers he received. If anyone in Congress should be familiar with the program it should be Gowdy, who chairs the House subcommittee in charge of overseeing immigration and refugees.
Kerry dispatches top deputy to South Carolina
Kerry sent one of his top lieutenants to Spartanburg earlier this week to try to quell the uprising.
Assistant Secretary of State Ann Richard arrived Monday for what was designed to be a private meeting with stakeholders, including the mayor, police, housing and school officials. Protesters outside the meeting were allowed in, turning a private meeting semi-public at the last minute, one protester told WND.
“I wanted a public hearing. Trey Gowdy wanted a public meeting. World Relief would not hold a public hearing,” the protester said. “So Ann Richard had to come down here to clean up their mess.”
Haley has come down on the side of the State Department and the refugees, saying she trusts the vetting process, despite hundreds of arrests and active investigations involving refugees or children of refugees across the U.S. She has chosen to believe the State Department over the FBI, which is responsible for screening the refugees and warned that in some cases it’s an impossible task.
‘Jihadist pipeline’ remains wide open
One of the FBI’s top counter-terrorism experts testified to Congress in February that the U.S. lacks the capability to vet refugees from “failed states” like Syria.
The U.S. has no “boots on the ground,” in Syria, like it did in Iraq, and therefore has no access to reliable law enforcement data, said Michael Steinbach, deputy director of the FBI’s counter-terrorism unit.
Haley also seems content to ignore the warnings of Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee. McCaul has expressed serious concerns about the Syrian refugees, calling the program a possible “jihadist pipeline” to the U.S.
McCaul has written two letters to President Obama urging him not to proceed with plans to import thousands of Syrian refugees over the next year and a half. Of the more than 1,200 Syrians who have already entered the U.S. as refugees, 95 percent have been Muslim compared to 3.8 percent Christian. Those skewed numbers belie the situation on the ground in Syria, where more than 350,000 Christians have been run out of their homes, fleeing the bloodlust of ISIS radicals.
While Haley has thrown out the welcome mat for potentially thousands of Muslim refugees who will walk the streets of South Carolina cities, she has condemned in the strongest words any plan to allow Gitmo prisoners.
The Pentagon is considering the Charleston Naval brig as a possible destination for the terrorists if Gitmo is ultimately closed down. Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, is also being considered, and Kansas’ Republican Gov. Sam Brownback has similarly sounded off against the idea while also welcoming Muslim refugees to his state.
Watch Gov. Nikki Haley’s stern denouncement of possible federal plans to bring Gitmo prisoners to Charleston, S.C.
South Carolina activists say they wish Haley would be as willing to go to the mat for citizens' safety when it comes to U.N.-selected refugees as she is with regard to Gitmo prisoners.
"Gov. Haley made a big deal out of saying no to Gitmo. It was an angry Haley on the air, every TV station, angry about the possibility of Gitmo prisoners coming here," said Christina Jeffrey, co-founder of Spartans for Biblical Immigration who has helped lead the grassroots effort against the refugee program in Spartanburg.
"Those Gitmo prisoners, they're going to be locked up, not living next door to anyone, not going to our schools, our stores or anywhere they can do us any harm; they're going to be locked up," Jeffrey said. "The refugees are a much bigger threat to the community and she says she supports that program and trusts the vetting process."
Jeffrey gives Haley credit for supporting a proviso added to the state budget this year that allows local councils to reject refugee funding from flowing into their counties. She said she "remains hopeful" that Haley will cancel the agreement with World Relief.
Haley's press secretary did not respond to requests for comment from WND.
49 states receive refugees, but some more than others
South Carolina has historically not been a major destination for foreign refugees.
Since 2002, the federal government has sent only 1,730 refugees to the state. By contrast, Texas, California, New York, Florida, Michigan and Minnesota have each received more than 30,000 refugees since 2002. California has received the most refugees over that period, at 91,050, according to State Department data, followed by Texas at 70,057. North Carolina has also received many more refugees than its neighbor to the south, taking in 25,276 since 2002.
So it's unclear why Haley is agreeing to ramp up the number of refugees coming into her state. Some speculate that she may be angling for a cabinet post in the next administration and wants to prove her commitment to a cause that is near and dear to the GOP establishment's heart.
The refugee program sends hundreds of cheap foreign workers into corporate-owned food processing plants every year. Meatpacking plants in Willmar, Minnesota, Amarillo, Texas, Bowling Green, Kentucky, and a new plant being built near Boise, Idaho, all benefit from large infusions of refugees into nearby cities and towns.
Where is Trey Gowdy on refugees?
Gowdy's role in the refugee uprising remains murky.
He has the power to call a congressional hearing on the program and have it fully investigated but he has settled for writing letters and holding private meetings with State Department officials.
He asked for a public hearing but never got one.
"Is Trey Gowdy a principled man? Yes. But somehow, this issue is tougher for him than Benghazi or Hillary," said Jeffrey, the former historian for the U.S. House of Representatives. "Why? Because the Club for Growth and the Chamber of Commerce are on board (with the refugee program). But they are wrong! Culture matters; security matters. Our lives and the lives of our children matter."
Also working to support the refugee program are a handful churches in Spartanburg.
World Relief first made contact with a group of local pastors in 2013, and plans were secretly laid to add Spartanburg to the list of 190 U.S. cities taking in refugees. Word did not leak out to the public until March 2015, shortly before the first refugees were to arrive.
"The questions Trey Gowdy asked of Secretary Kerry in April still haven't been answered," said Jeffrey. "And he asked for a moratorium. I brought that up in the meeting with Ann Richard this week. We need a moratorium. World Relief hasn't told anybody anything. Apparently the pastors did not consult their congregations. Few who should have been informed have actually been informed. Our mayor wasn't; our police chief wasn't. I know this first hand because I asked them."
Jeffrey said Richard admitted in Monday's meeting that once a state agrees to participate in the federal refugee program, there is little local residents can do to stop it.
Another Spartanburg resident, Lynn Kisler, confronted Richard on the issue of national security.
"Ms. Richard said she experiences terrorist threats whenever she travel overseas, and it was almost like they were already trying to condition us for that, kinda like a terrorist threat is an accepted way of life now, no big deal, and I could not believe my ears," said Kisler. "I told her my house doesn’t have armed guards, it doesn't have an 8-foot wall all around it, so for her to compare an embassy abroad to me being in my home among that population, when they want to bring that population here, it made me angry. I interrupted her and I said 'you have armed guards, I don't have armed guards.'"
Refugees just like American pilgrims?
Richard also began "pontificating" about how successful the refugee program has been everywhere it has been put in place, Kisler said.  The assistant secretary even compared today's refugees to the early pilgrims who settled America.
"I asked her how do you define success?" Kisler said. "Ask the people of St. Cloud, Minnesota, how successful it's been there. It has destroyed that area."
So many Somalis in Minnesota have been caught engaging in terrorist activity and sending money to overseas terrorists that the U.S. Attorney there, Andrew Luger, admitted in April that, "We have a terror recruitment problem in Minnesota."
But where does that leave Spartanburg, which was in line for an initial batch of 60 refugees this year and potentially hundreds more in succeeding years?
"I think World Relief is going to send as many as they can find jobs for and wait till next year and try to get rid of the state proviso allowing local councils to veto," Jeffrey said. "And you saw the response to the Confederate Flag issue earlier this year (after the Charleston church shooting) so these are not profiles in courage we're talking about (at the state Capitol)."
At least half of the 70,000 refugees resettled in the U.S. annually come from Muslim-dominated, shariah-compliant countries such as Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, and now Syria. Even Buddhist Burma, which wants to get rid of its Muslim minority, has started sending its unwanted Muslims to U.N. refugee camps where they will be destined for the U.S. and other Western countries.
"For the sake of the rest of the country, we need Trey Gowdy, chairman of the subcommittee with oversight in this area to hold hearings on this under-supervised program that has been around since Jimmy Carter created it," Jeffrey said.