are you bored?

[jim c]

WOULDN'T  IT  BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?

My Fellow Americans:
 As you all know, the defeat of Iraq  regime has been completed.
 Since  congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in  Iraq  is now complete.This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of  all American forces from Iraq.  This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now time to begin the  reckoning.

   Before me, I  have two lists. One list contains the names of  countries which have stood by  our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short. The United  Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria,  Australia, and  Poland  are some of the countries listed there.

    The other list contains everyone not on the first  list. Most of the world's  nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of  both lists later this evening.

 Let me start by saying that effective immediately,  foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely.  The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.

The  American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hell-holes  and watch those government leaders grow fat on  corruption.

   Need help  with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.

In  the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward  solving the vexing social problems we still have at home.

On that note, a word  to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you down and  eliminate you and all your friends from the face
of the earth.  

Thirsting  for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France,  or maybe China.

 To  Israel  and the Palestinian Authority. Yo, boys. Work out a peace deal now. Just note  that Camp David is closed. Maybe all of you can go
to  Russia  for negotiations. They have some great palaces there. Big tables, too.

I am  ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with  France,  Germany, and  Russia.  Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes
amis.

I have  instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the  many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more  than two unpaid
parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be  stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets  tomorrow or watch your precious
Benzes, Beamers, and limos be turned over to some of  the finest chop shops in the world. I love New  York

   A special note  to our neighbors. Canada  is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you  folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.  

  Mexico is  also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an  attitude adjustment. I will have a couple
extra tank and infantry divisions  sitting around. Guess where I am going to put em? Yep, border security. So  start doing something with
your oil.

Oh, by  the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty - starting now. We are tired of the one-way  highway.

It is time for  America  to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of  isolationism. I answer them by saying, "darn  tootin."

Nearly a century  of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just  about everyone on
the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in  America.  It is time to eliminate homelessness in America.  It is time to eliminate World Cup Soccer from America.  

To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thanks guys. We owe you and we  won't forget.

To the  nations on List 2, a final thought. Drop dead.

God bless America.
Thank  you and good night.

If  you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in
English,
thank a  soldier.

Please forward this to at least ten friends and see  what happens! Let's
get this  to every USA  computer

Frank J. Indovino
488 Mowery Road NW
Cleveland, TN 37312

 

Home Phone: (423)780-9682
Cell:                (423)650-0279

[WS244]

... in response to are you bored?, posted by jim c on Jun 28, 2005

Since you mentioned other countries, thought i would add one more to your list, our own country's crooked politicians more able to condemn private property through new interpetations of imminent domain.

[Cali James]

... in response to Re: are you bored?, posted by WS244 on Jun 28, 2005

[This message has been edited by Cali James]

This is perhaps the worst decision to come from court in my lifetime!!  Under the 5th ammendment, the government can only take private property from individuals if it's to be used for "public use" (i.e. highway, park, bridge) and even then the private party must be compensated fairly for his/her property.  With this ruling, the understanding of "public use" has been stood on it's head. The government can now seize private property that will be used for a private development project, if the government entity thinks there will be some public benefit to having the project.  That means the government can seize your 20 acre lot and give it to a mall developer because the mall will provide jobs or increase taxes.  

You've heard liberals talk about the constitution as a "living document".  This is an example of what living means, it means change the historical and clear understanding of the text and make it into whatever the court feels in the moment.  That's why they like to refer to the document as living, almost as if it has a life of it's own, growing, changing and becoming something it wasn't.  Those of you who think this is fine because you could care less about property rights, if they can change the clear meaning of the 5th ammendment, they can do it to other ammendments too.  A living document is a dangerous thing indeed.  

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/06/26/eminent_injustice_in_new_london/

[Heat]

... in response to Attack on 5th ammendment takings clause, posted by Cali James on Jun 28, 2005

Outstanding post!!

[AmBrazilian]

... in response to Attack on 5th ammendment takings clause, posted by Cali James on Jun 28, 2005

[This message has been edited by AmBrazilian]

Government CROOKS payback time. http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/4665121/detail.html

[AmBrazilian]

... in response to Re: Attack on 5th ammendment takings cla..., posted by AmBrazilian on Jun 29, 2005

http://www.theagitator.com/archives/022207.php#022207

[AmBrazilian]

... in response to More crooks where will it end?, posted by AmBrazilian on Jun 29, 2005

"# Dania, Fla. -- The South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports that Dania Beach City Manager Ivan Pato "expressed joy" over the ruling in Kelo. Dania plans to buy a block of properties for a private development project, and Pato said the city will use eminent domain to oust unwilling sellers. "Unless we expand the city's tax base . . .our residents are facing rising taxes on their property," Pato said. "Redevelopment is the only way we will be able to make ends meet."

I like this one. The only way to make ends meet is to steal land from others. Has government ever heard of a budget like the average American has to do to survive? Freeloading F'n government.

[pablo]

... in response to Attack on 5th ammendment takings clause, posted by Cali James on Jun 28, 2005


Hello James,

Thanks for pointing out this article.  I am amazed that this new ruling passed which allows the government to seize private property to turn it over to private developers under the guise of "public use or benefit", but I am not surprised that the court went this direction. It is a progression and justification of our government’s previous misuse of eminent domain and their ability to take private property.

Ten years ago I had some commercial property taken from me whereby I was forced to sell to the city.  I remember too well when the city attorney coming to my business and asked me if I would be interested in selling some property I recently acquired that I wanted to develop.  When I declined, he told me that they would merely use their power of eminent domain and take it from me (of course being "fairly compensated", what a joke that was).  I asked him what they intended to use my property for and he had the gall to say, "we don't know yet, we might use it for parking, maybe a future building site, but we want your property and we are going to get it, so there's no sense in your fighting this.  You will lose".

As he predicted, one year later I was forced to sell my property to the city after having put up a valiant fight but it was like pissing in the wind with an overactive bladder.  To add insult to injury, I went from property owner to having the city become my landlord!  The city council “magnanimously” decided that since they really did not need to use my property until sometime in the distant future they would lease my former property back to me.  Last year the rent substantially rose in price as they wanted to get a "better return on their investment".  The dirty little SOB's.

It's all about money, power and influences as O’Conner pointed out in the article you referred us to and guess whose pockets are getting lined.  The private citizen has very little chance of competing against such a system.

As far as this being the worse decision in our lifetime I would choose another Supreme Court's debacle of Roe v. Wade which has resulted in the loss of millions of innocent lives being taken through our country's unashamed stance on abortion.  What a legacy.

[Jamie]

... in response to Re: are you bored?, posted by WS244 on Jun 28, 2005

nt

[Keith NC]

... in response to And that ruling is supposedly coming fro..., posted by Jamie on Jun 28, 2005

Kennedy and Souter are not conservatives.  The liberal court decided this not the conservatives.  Liberals believe that everything begins and ends with Government.  

This decision is the very reason we need more conservatives on the Supreme Court.  Liberals lost the Presidency, Senate and the House.  The only power they really have now is thru the Judiciary.  The are working very hard to keep that power.

[thundernco]

... in response to Re: And that ruling is supposedly coming..., posted by Keith NC on Jun 29, 2005

appointed Kennedy, Stevens and Souter respectively, so I can't quite accept that they are hard core liberals or that this was a liberal decision.  Sorry, I just don't buy that.

All partisan BS aside though, this decision was clearly flat-out wrong. -TNC

[Keith NC]

... in response to Pres. Reagan, Ford and Bush 1,, posted by thundernco on Jun 29, 2005

These judges are conservative in name only and yes this was an awful decision by the Supreme Court.  It is a real shame for the average man and woman out there knowing that there property can be taken whenever and however the Government sees fit.

Bad Decision!

Keith

[Cali James]

... in response to Pres. Reagan, Ford and Bush 1,, posted by thundernco on Jun 29, 2005

The fact that Republicans appointed them, just goes to show you that Republicans appoint justices who don't always follow party ideology.  Anyway, Stevens is the leading intellectual on the liberal side of the court, he's liberal through and through.  Souter was a known quantity when he was appointed, he came out of New Hampshire and was recommended by the New Hampshire republican governer.  I knew he was a mistake but Bush 1 appointed him and the democrats didn't put up a fight, why should they, he was their kind of guy.  The surprise in the court is Kennedy, he was thought of as a Scalia clone and he started out in the court that way, but over time he's moved more to the left, as democrats would say, he's "grown" in the position.

[thundernco]

... in response to Pres. Reagan, Ford and Bush 1,, posted by Cali James on Jun 29, 2005

Cali J,

Thanks for the info.; still can't believe they got this one so wrong. -TNC

[Cali James]

... in response to And that ruling is supposedly coming fro..., posted by Jamie on Jun 28, 2005

[This message has been edited by Cali James]


Souter and Kennedy voted with the liberals, actually they themselves have proven to be liberals.  Thomas had the most forceful arguments against.  I say make Thomas cheif justice.