Tables get Turned--Rancher sues an Enviromental Groups--And Wins!!

Very interesting read.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/Issues/2005-05-26/news/feature.html

Ron Paul--A True American Patriot

Between Liberal hacks like John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and Teddy "Dripping Wet" Kennedy and Republicans such as Tom Delay and Bill Frist, it is refreshing to find one man in the halls of congress who is a true American Patriot--a freedom lover and a supporter of individual rights. That Man is Ron Paul (R-TX), a member of the house of representatives for many years, he exemplifies what a true politician should be. Technically a Republican, he is a card carrying member of the LP and ran for president on the LP ticket in the 80's . I consider Mr. Paul to be my "adopted" representative in Congress. Find out more about this amazing man:

http://www.house.gov/paul/ --his congressional page

www.ronpaul.org --his website

www.ronpaul.net --a campain page

www.house.gov/paul/openingpage.htm --Project Freedom

Write Mr. Paul and let him know that you appreciate his unique gift to our Republic, and also let him know that you would like for him to be your "adopted" representative. Also ask him to be the LP candidate for President in 2008!

-Marshall

Another Land Grab

One Man's fight against an egregious government taking has come to an end.

Check out: http://jessehardy.com/

Be prepared to feel strong emotions about this.

Without a serious change, this republic will not endure I'm afraid.

What will happen to state budget surplus? Libertarian Action Network, Inc. weighs in...

Libertarian Action Network, Inc.
News Release #9
For Immediate Release
Contact: James Bell 770.739.1543 LibActNet@yahoo.com

“Give Back Our Money!” Georgia Libertarian Group Says Fears $200 Million Revenue Surplus will be squandered

Atlanta Ga.- May 12, 2005: While Georgia Republicans and Democrats fight over what should happen to over $200 million in state revenue surplus, Libertarians say the money should be returned to the taxpayers.James Bell, director of the Libertarian Action Network, Inc. (L.A.N) said he wants the money returned to it rightful owners; the taxpayers of Georgia. “Libertarians are fed up with the tax and spend mentality of the two (political) parties”, Bell said. “The more we allow them to collect, the more they will spend; there’s no end to it!”Bell said he was pleased with Governor Sonny Purdue’s handling of the state budget when he first came into office. Revenue collections were down and the Governor did the responsible thing to order a 10% across the board cut in agency spending. But with a growing surplus Bell fears the state will simple find ways to spend the surplus then turn around and take more from the taxpayers.Bell points out that in spite of the budget cuts, the state government managed to operate with little effect on services rendered. When revenues are lower than expected, agencies are forced to tighten their belts and use the funds available to them, as most households must do. “This is the responsible thing to do”, Bell said.Libertarians have long advocated less government, lower taxes and have been responsible for helping to reducing spending across the country by billions of dollars. Kathryn Weitzel, assistant director for LAN said the Republican Party had a chance to show the voters of Georgia that they could be fiscally responsible with our tax dollars, instead they choose to grow the government by $1 billion, giving tax payers no relief.“Before (Republican leadership) our concern was the liberal spending of the Democrats, now we have to keep the Republican hands out of the cookie jar”, Weitzel said. “As the Republicans again control of the budget process, we see little difference in the way the government is operated, the citizens of Georgia need a tax break”.Libertarian Action Network, Inc. is an independent libertarian organization founded in 2004 by activists dedicated to advancing libertarian ideals through direct political action projects. LAN is not an affiliate of the Libertarian Party.

# # #

Article about one congressman's fight against illegal alien amnesty

One Reporter's Opinion – Speak Up for Tom Tancredo

George Putnam Friday, May 20, 2005

It is this reporter's opinion that it is time to rally around Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado in the battle against the illegal invasion and his efforts to preserve the sovereignty of the United States of America.
Tancredo recently blasted the amnesty legislation introduced by Senators Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and John McCain, R-Ariz. This legislation would grant LEGAL STATUS to the millions of illegal aliens currently in the country. It would require taxpayers to cough up additional money on top of the billion already earmarked by Congress to provide health care free of charge to illegal aliens.
Kennedy and McCain, sponsors of this amnesty plan, bill it as "a way to improve border security," despite the fact that it contains few if any such provisions. What it does provide is instant amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens who have broken our laws.
Tancredo says, "There might be a little more lipstick on this pig than there was before, but it's certainly the same old pig." He concludes: "Time and time again history has shown us that amnesty increases illegal immigration. There is a word for doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result, and that word is INSANITY."
This will not win Tancredo any friends at the White House. It is recalled that when he last visited Karl Rove, the Bush ayatollah, and spoke of the illegal invasion, Rove told Tancredo to leave the office and not to "darken the doorstep again." Rove, who speaks for the president, told the Republican hierarchy not to support Tancredo financially and actually suggested they find another Republican to run against him.
More recently, credible sources within the Border Patrol told Tancredo of a decision by Naco, Arizona, supervisors to keep new arrests on the border between Arizona and Mexico to a minimum in order to make the Minutemen appear less effective. Says Tancredo: "It's like telling a cop to stand by and watch burglars loot a store but don't arrest any of them. It's another example of decisions at the highest levels of the Border Patrol that are hurting morale and rotting the agency from within."
Tancredo blames the Bush administration for setting an immigration enforcement tone that suggests to those enforcing the law that he is not serious about secure borders. "We need to get the president to come to grips with the seriousness of the problem. I know he doesn't like to utter the words 'I was wrong,' but if we have another incident like 9/11 by people who come through our borders, I hope he doesn't have to say, 'I'm sorry.'"
The latest attack on Tancredo comes from fellow Republican representative Chris Cannon of Utah. His exact words: "I don't think there is a place in the Republican Party for racism or xenophobia or ideas fundamentally un-American."
Tancredo faces continuing battles with elements of his own party. He courageously defended the cause when he went up against Representatives Cannon, Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, and a room full of Hispanic business leaders at a forum hosted by the Latino Coalition. Cannon's outrageous remarks should not go unanswered.
An example of how low the attacks on Tancredo have become is when an element in Denver tried to hold Tancredo somehow responsible in the murder of Detective Donald Young and the wounding of Detective John Bishop by illegal alien Raul Garcia-Gomez, who reportedly fled to Mexico. What a stretch!
Garcia-Gomez had used false documentation to get a job at the Cherry Cricket Restaurant, owned in part by Denver, Colorado, Mayor John Hickenlooper. How about that? The mayor of the city hiring an illegal alien!
It is time to speak up for Tom Tancredo. Send a few letters to the editor of the Rocky Mountain News, Congressman Cannon's office, and the GOP. It's time to rally around the flag and let your voice be heard for this great patriot, Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado.

Communist States of America Part II

Karl Marx mentioned 10 Planks of Communism. America, to some degree or another, has all 10. The Ten Planks of Communism:
1.Abolition of Private Property
2. A Progressive Income Tax
3. Abolition of Inheritance
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels
5. A Central Bank
6. Centralization of communications and transportation
7. Extension of factories and instruments of Production into the hands of the State
8. Equal Liability of all to Labor
9. Combinations of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries
10. Free Education for all Children

Picking up where we left off:

6. Centralization of Communications and Transportation--This one is also a real no-brainer. FCC and DOT are obvious choice; however, there other regulatory agenices on the federal and state levels that add more government interference with these issues. Transportation is a big one for me--with the concept of "implied consent", the government feels that you should have ZERO rights whenever traveling on a public road. There does exist, in my mind, a constitutional right to travel that the government is infringing upon with this so-called "implied constent". So therefore, once again, constitutional rights are being trampled on by statuatory and regulatory actions.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of Production into the hands of the State--this refers to government control of agriculture and manufacturing. Think of the Department of Agriculture spending millions of dollars every year on subsidies, payments, fees, monies paid to farmers not to plant certain items, etc. Also, the Dept. of the Interior.

8. Equal Liability of all Labor--Social Security, Department of Labor, OSHA, etc.

9. Combinations of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Regional Planning
--regional planning does exist in this country with the Planning Reorganization Act of 1949 and a couple of odd executive orders.

10. Free Education for all Children--public education, Dept. of Education

Welcome to the Communist States of America

Yes!!! That is Correct--we are communists...Congratulations!

Shaking your head a little bit? Thinking I've lost my mind? Well...wrap your mind around this:

In 1848, Karl Marx wrote a little thing called the Communist Manifesto. In this document, he describes the ten steps or Ten Planks needed to destroy a free-market, capitalist state and to replace it with communist state. Here are those 10 planks:

1. Abolition of Private Property
2. A Progressive Income Tax
3. Abolition of Inheritance
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels
5. A Central Bank
6. Centralization of communications and transportation
7. Extension of factories and instruments of Production into the hands of the State
8. Equal Liability of all to Labor
9. Combinations of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries
10. Free Education for all Children

Is your head swimming around a little bit now? This is a little difficult at first for most people, but now that you are coming to terms with the fact that you live in a Communist State, let's look at each plank one by one.

1. Abolition of Private Property--There is no such thing as true private property in America right now. First of all, Zoning laws compromise your true ownership of land. Also, if you pay property taxes, you are in essence, renting your ownership. And finally, with widespread cases of eminent Domain abuse and as evidenced by the state legistlature this past session, the concept of true private property is simply a joke now.

2. A Progressive Income Tax--Enough Said

3. Abolition of all rights of Inheritance--This kind of ebbs and flows from time to time depending on who's in power. Right now things are looking good; however, at some point in the future liberals and socialist will eventually take control of our country and I believe you will see this plank come to fruition within the next 20-50 years.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels--As of right now, there are several federal agencies that can confiscate and sell your land without giving you due process of law. For most people, this pertains to drug dealers and tax evaders; however, a little known law from 1997 allows the government to do this to people who speak out against the government
i.e. me

5. A Central Bank-- The Federal Reserve is a private corporation which makes fiat money out of nothing and then lends it to the government at interest. It is a diabolical and evil cartel that should be done away with.

6-10 to come later.

M

Out-of-State Wine Sales May Become a Reality

In Georgia, along with 23 other states, it is illegal for a winery to directly ship stock to customers; however, the Supreme Court, with an unusual grouping of justices, voted 5-4 to strike down this law. But rest assured that it will be years of appeals and delays before anything happens--alcohol distibutors in Georgia are one of the richest and most powerful forces in this state. Personally, I mixed on this issue...ultimately I would have to say I'm opposed to the Supreme Court decision. I think it should be a state by state issue.
Anyway, here's an article about it:

Court Lets Wine Lovers Buy Out-Of-State
By HOPE YEN Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON — Wine lovers may buy directly from out-of-state vineyards, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, striking down laws banning a practice that has flourished because of the Internet and growing popularity of winery tours.
The 5-4 decision overturns laws in New York and Michigan, which supporters said were aimed at protecting local wineries and limiting underage drinkers from purchasing wine without showing proof of age. In all, 24 states have laws barring interstate shipments.
The court said the state bans are discriminatory and anticompetitive.
"States have broad power to regulate liquor," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. "This power, however, does not allow states to ban, or severely limit, the direct shipment of out-of-state wine while simultaneously authorizing direct shipment by in-state producers."
"If a state chooses to allow direct shipments of wine, it must do so on evenhanded terms," he wrote in an opinion joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.
The ruling means that legislatures in the 24 states barring out-of-state shipments will have to review their laws to make sure in-state and out-of-state wineries are treated equally. As a result, states could choose to allow wineries to sell to consumers directly, but could also bar all wineries from doing so.
The wine industry is booming, with an estimated $21.6 billion in sales and tourists flocking to wineries for tastings and tours. The recent hit movie "Sideways" took a lighthearted look at California's love affair with the grape.
While wineries have proliferated, there also has been consolidation. Smaller wineries say they can't compete with huge companies unless they can sell directly to customers over the Internet or by allowing visitors to their wineries to ship bottles home.
The Supreme Court case centered on the 21st Amendment, which ended Prohibition in 1933 and granted states authority to regulate alcohol sales. Nearly half the states subsequently passed laws requiring outside wineries to sell their products through licensed wholesalers within the state, allowing state governments to collect millions in alcohol taxes.
But the Constitution also prohibits states from passing laws that discriminate against out-of-state businesses. That led to a challenge to the Michigan and New York laws.
In a dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas argued the ruling needlessly overturns long-established regulations aimed partly at protecting minors. State regulators under the 21st Amendment have clear authority to regulate alcohol as they see fit, he wrote.
"The court does this nation no service by ignoring the textual commands of the Constitution and acts of Congress," Thomas wrote. He was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and John Paul Stevens.
While the ruling only involves wine sales, industry groups expect that it will soon apply to beer and other alcoholic beverages currently regulated through state-licensed wholesalers and retailers.
Wine lovers immediately cheered the ruling.
"This is the best day for wine lovers since the invention of the corkscrew," said Clint Bolick, counsel for the Institute for Justice, which represented local wineries in the dispute. "It demonstrates that in the era of the Internet, the court will vindicate the principles of free trade that made this country great."
Juanita Swedenburg, the Middleburg, Va., vintner who sued to overturn New York's laws said called the ruling "a boon for America's wine-loving consumers who like to have various wines from throughout the nation."
But Nida Samona, chairwoman of the Michigan Liquor Control Commission, said the decision was a setback for Michigan's efforts to battle underage drinking. She said her commission will urge lawmakers to bar direct shipments for both local and out-of-state wineries.
"That protects the class we are fighting for — to make sure minors cannot purchase and consumer alcohol before they are of age," she said.
In the ruling, Kennedy wrote that states do not have the authority to regulate liquor simply to protect their economic interests. He argued there is little evidence that unauthorized wine sales to minors over the Internet is a problem that justifies discriminating against out-of-state businesses.
Minors typically consume beer and wine coolers, rather than wine, and could just as easily order wine illegally from in-state wineries that sell over the Internet, Kennedy wrote. States also could take measures to deter minors by requiring adults to sign for wine packages.
"Without concrete evidence that direct shipping of wine is likely to increase alcohol consumption by minors, we are left with the states' unsupported assertions," Kennedy wrote.
The Washington-based Institute for Justice says the 24 states that ban direct shipments from out-of-state wineries are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Vermont.
The cases are Granholm v. Heald, 03-1116; Michigan Beer & Wine Wholesalers Association v. Heald, 03-1120; and Swedenburg v. Kelly, 03-1274.

SB 90 about to become REALITY

Well...Ole' Sonny signed SB 90 into law. This is truly a sad time for freedom lovers everywhere. Now that we have accepted the fact that business owners and property owners have no rights, how long will it be until they really start sticking it to us? This is absolute B.S. and the time has come for action. Go the the state legislature page at www.legis.state.ga.us and write to every S.O.B. who voted for this thing in either chamber. And write to Perdue as well! This gives the L.P. ammunition for the 2006 elections. Anyone who voted for this (which includes Doug Holt and John Douglas) has officialy declared that they are anti-freedom, anti-business, and anti-property rights. We need to start getting these words out there about these folks. We need for the folks in the East Metro Atlanta area to start equating Holt, Douglas, et al w/ socialist state, nanny govt. supporters.

from www.lpgeorgia.com
Outrage of the Week: Senate Unanimously Passes the "Real ID" Act
By Shane Cory
In a 100-0 vote, the U.S. Senate passed the 2nd largest supplemental spending bill in the history of the nation. If that were not enough reason to question the common sense of our legislators, the Republican and Democrat leaders also passed the Real ID Act which was hidden within the spending bill.

With the passing of the bill, states will have to abide by federal standards for providing driver's licenses and I.D. cards to citizens. States will also have to link their citizen databases to federal systems in order obtain funding for the program.

Driver's licenses issued by states not fulfilling federal requirements will not be accepted by any federal agency. What does that matter? Here are a few scenarios that may occur if your state were to not fulfill the new federal obligations:

Flying to see a relative in another state? Don’t forget your papers: Domestic travelers could not pass through airport security checkpoints without a passport or a "Real" I.D. card.
Want to serve your country? Apply for a passport first: Prospective military enlistees could not meet identification requirements with only state issued identification.
Want to get a job? Not without federal documentation: The INS I-9 form is a required document for all U.S. workers. Section Two of the form requires identification to be examined by the employer. As no federal agency will accept "old" driver's licenses, your I.D. would no longer be valid. Be sure to bring your passport along to your next job interview.
Aside from the authoritarian restrictions that will be implemented within the next three years (the bill is to be fully implemented by May 2008 if signed by President George W. Bush), there are many other consequences of the bill.

The forthcoming database sharing will now put U.S. citizens in the same class as criminals. While the Social Security Administration tracks names and employment data, the federal government will now have access to at least your physical description, disabilities, and your photo. In the past, this level of detail was only offered to the federal government within criminal databases.
If you are comfortable with the above, please take the time today to send a "thank you" note to your Republican or Democrat senators. Be sure to let them know that you enjoy having your personal freedom and privacy stolen. Otherwise, choose to support the Libertarian Party, which will continue to follow principle and fight for your individual liberty.