Read the latest issue FREE online
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Friday, May 6, 2011
Holey mother of God
Aren't the LEDs sposed to point down?
LED license plate install going horribly wrong!
Looks like I picked a good time to quit doing meth in Monroe County!
Last week I visited MC, trying to get my high school transcripts. My school no longer exists, and TN Dept of Ed has no transcripts for any of the students from TN Military Institute nor it's post-Vietnam TMI Academy. Burt Reynolds later bought it, then the Japs, now it's abandoned.
Hiwassee College has destroyed my HS transcripts after 25 years, along with destroying its "Christian" college -- only 19 students graduated last year.
MC Dept of Ed has commandeered the "old" tech school, looking like a run down POS. No transcripts, of course. Does MC even have a tech school any more? Nearly lost my head there once, when a fan blade exploded, embedding itself in the ceiling 100 feet away.
Thank God I escaped from MC! Scary thing is, these folks went to the same school I did, and I was put in charge of nuclear weapons on supersonic aircraft...
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Obama Bin Taxen by the mile
Obama administration floats draft plan to tax cars by the mile
By Pete Kasperowicz
The Hill
05/05/11
WASHINGTON D.C. -- The Obama administration has floated a transportation authorization bill that would require the study and implementation of a plan to tax automobile drivers based on how many miles they drive.
The plan is a part of the administration's Transportation Opportunities Act, an undated draft of which was obtained this week by Transportation Weekly.
The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration.
“This is not an administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”
News of the draft follows a March Congressional Budget Office report that supported the idea of taxing drivers based on miles driven.
Among other things, CBO suggested that a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax could be tracked by installing electronic equipment on each car to determine how many miles were driven; payment could take place electronically at filling stations.
The CBO report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who has proposed taxing cars by the mile as a way to increase federal highway revenues.
The proposal seems to follow up on that idea in section 2218 of the draft bill. That section would create, within the Federal Highway Administration, a Surface Transportation Revenue Alternatives Office. It would be tasked with creating a "study framework that defines the functionality of a mileage-based user fee system and other systems."
The department seemed to be aware of the need to prepare the public for what would likely be a controversial change to the way highway funds are collected. For example, the office is called on to serve a public-relations function, as the draft says it should "increase public awareness regarding the need for an alternative funding source for surface transportation programs and provide information on possible approaches."
The draft bill says the "study framework" for the project and a public awareness communications plan should be established within two years of creating the office, and that field tests should begin within four years.
The office would be required to consider four factors in field trials: the capability of states to enforce payment, the reliability of technology, administrative costs and "user acceptance." The draft does not specify where field trials should begin.
The new office would be funded a total of $300 million through fiscal 2017 for the project.
Irate Comments 2653+
Uh, forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the federal gas tax already hit those that drive more the hardest? Didn't Obama promise that no American families making less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes increased by one dime? This ridiculous idea will hurt the poorest the hardest—but then again, this administration couldn't care less.
I live 130 miles from the nearest city where i can use a hospial. My parents are old i i drive them at least twice a week to the Dr's. that is a total of 520 miles a week. Tthis does not take into consideration that i take my family to the city to shop for food clothing and the needs for my family. This would kill me at the pump. There already is a tax at the pump, try and raise it. I will not tolerate a tracking device from Big Brother.
Evidently we are not paying enough at the pump in their eyes, guess we'd be easier to control if we can't afford to drive and had to stay home. Guess they want us to go back to the stone age and use of horses and oxen that will crap all over the streets, releasing more methane into the atmosphere worsening "global warming."
Good luck getting them to put any device in my car that will keep track of my driving. Ain't gonna happen.
GOPers tweet opposition to car mileage tax
By Daniel Strauss
The Hill
05/05/11
Republicans voiced their opposition to a proposal to tax drivers by miles driven over Twitter on Thursday.
"Obama admin idea: tax cars by-the-mile? Now that's ridiculous," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) tweeted.
Soon after, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) tweeted that Americans didn't need another tax.
"Report frm @thehill says #POTUS floats plan to tax cars by the mile. #WeThePeople have been taxed enough already. #GOP http://bit.ly/kIiRwl," Paul tweeted Thursday afternoon.
Similarly, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said the proposed tax would "hurt constituents & millions more."
"Taxing drivers per mile driven, a plan floated by President Obama, will hurt my constituents & millions more: http://tiny.cc/hh2fm #tcot" Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) tweeted.
The Republicans' tweets came after the White House disowned a part of an early draft of the Transportation Opportunities Act which proposed a tax based on miles driven.
"This is not a bill supported by the administration," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not take into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”
The draft of the act proposed establishing a "study framework that defines the functionality of a mileage-based user fee system and other systems."
Ron Paul throws hat in ring for 2012
Dictator Obama's Secretary of War Vinnie Da Chin Panetta and the Pentagram Joints Chief Of Operation Northwoods testified to Congress yesterday that Obama takes his orders to invade from United Nations and NATO, not Congress.
This is the equivalent ot Caesar crossing the Rubicon with his military to invade Rome under martial law, resulting in civil war, and 5 years later every member of the Roman Senate stabbing Caesar in the back...literally on the Ides Of March (next week...).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_rubicon
ATICLES OF IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION 2012
H.CON.RES.107 -- Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high... (Introduced in House - IH)
HCON 107 IH
112th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. CON. RES. 107
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 7, 2012
Mr. JONES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Coup D’etat: Pentagon & Obama Declare Congress Ceremonial
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.
During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
In an effort to re-affirm the fact that “the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” Republican Congressman Walter Jones has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives.
Pentagon Launches Desperate Damage Control Over Shocking Panetta Testimony
The Pentagon is engaging in damage control after shocking testimony yesterday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing during which it was confirmed that the U.S. government is now completely beholden to international power structures and that the legislative branch is a worthless relic.
During the hearing yesterday Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
Panetta’s assertion that he would seek “international permission” before ‘informing’ Congress about the actions of the US military provoked a firestorm of controversy, prompting the Pentagon to engage in damage control by claiming Panetta’s comments were misinterpreted.
“He was re-emphasizing the need for an international mandate. We are not ceding U.S. decision-making authority to some foreign body,” a defense official told CNN.
However, this is not the first time that the authority of international bodies has been framed as being superior to the US Congress and the Constitution.
In June last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”
Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”
Panetta’s testimony that the US looks to obtain “international permission” before it acts, allied with Obama citing the UN as the supreme authority while trashing the power of Congress, prove that the United States has ceded control over its own affairs to unelected international bureaucrats, just as the countries of the European Union have done likewise.
Attorney General Eric Holder, the top “legal” voice of the US regime, argued to Northwestern University law students that the US Constitution is no limit to the regime dictatorially assassinating Americans. This follows regime arguments to seize and “disappear” any person in opposition to regime dictates as “terrorist supporters,” and extracting their confessions with controlled drowning (euphemistically “waterboarding”), found by all US and international courts as torture. The regime’s followers in Congress voted for legislation (2006 Military Commissions Act, 2012 NDAA) that these dictates are consistent with the US Constitution.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/03/attorney-general-holder-degrades-us-to-fascist-assassination-nation-99-response.html
Protect yourself from liars
Protect Yourself from Lawyers ... Part One
by Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD, attorney at law
Jurisdictionary.com
If you don't yet know how to stop lawyers from testifying, you may as well give up trying to win!
Lawyers will try to get evidence into the record by any sneaky trick they can use to influence the court, and if YOU don't know how to stop them, you might as well concede the case!
They will "testify" when they cannot find a competent witness or document to get the evidence in the proper way.
If you let them testify, you are giving your case away!
Lawyers lack "competence" to testify to the facts in a case, because they do not have first-hand knowledge of the facts.
All lawyers know is what they learn from others. They weren't "there" when things were done or said. All they know is what someone told them or showed them after the fact.
Preventing the lawyer on the other side from testifying to facts about which the lawyer has no first-hand knowledge will go a long way toward helping your case!
Do you know how to use the Rules to stop lawyers from testifying?
Do you know what Jurisdictionary teaches about how to object in court?
"Objection, your Honor! Counsel is testifying!"
And, when the lawyer on the other side responds with a barage of legal terminology, are YOU prepared to shut his mouth?
It's hard enough for good people to win when the court controls the evidence properly, but far too often people let the other side get away with crooked tactics all because they don't know how to stop it.
Courtroom objections are critical to winning!
You seen them on TV, but I can tell you after 25 years as a licensed attorney that what you see on TV is nothing like what happens in court when lawyers start flapping their gums!
Judges go to sleep with their eyes open or read the news or play video games on their laptop right up there on the bench where too many boys and girls gave their lives on the field of battle so we could have Justice in the land!
If you are not prepared for this, you lose!
Objections come in many forms:
hearsay
asked and answered
badgering
outside the pleadings
relevance
facts not in evidence
and many more explained in detail in my 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit self-help course.
Let Jurisdictionary show you how to stop the games!
Let Jurisdictionary give you power to enforce your rights!
Let Jurisdictionary enlighten you to the tools and weapons every one of you possess to force our courts to impose the rules on your opponents!
There once was a time when the public could only learn about court practice from TV or movies, so good people lost while crooked lawyers raked in their clients' money!
Buy Jurisdictionary today!
Or just punch those liars in the face.
Father cures son's brain cancer with marijuana, cops raid lifesaving medical centers
Boy, two, with brain cancer is 'cured' after secretly being fed medical marijuana by his father
"Shit's gettin way too complicated for me. There are white folks, and then there are ignorant mutherfuckers like you! You can put lipstick on a pig. Sorry ass mutherfucker's got nuttin on me. I inhaled frequently - that was the point. Pot helped, and booze. A little blow when you could afford it. Junkie, pothead. That's where I'd been headed. You ain't my bitch nigger, git your own damn fries!"
-Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro, Dreams From My Father MP3
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Cops beg citizens to shoot them
Horse thief gets hangman's noose in Oregon circa 1900
Advertisement by Redflex Corp in Australia:
Unpaid tickets from traffic cameras could cost drivers their ride
By Ashley Meeks
Las Cruces Sun News
05/04/2011
LAS CRUCES, TX. -- If you've got one of the 15,000 traffic camera tickets the city says remain unpaid, you might want to keep an eye on your car.
Police will begin seizing or putting boots on vehicles whose owners have unpaid tickets from the five Redflex Traffic Systems cameras around town, the Las Cruces Police Department announced Tuesday.
LCPD Police Chief Richard Williams wasn't available to comment on the new enforcement action, but LCPD spokesman Dan Trujillo pointed out that nothing about the ordinance itself was new.
"The Las Cruces Police Department doesn't set or make the rules," Trujillo said. "We're only enforcing the rules and this ordinance was passed more than two years ago and it's been enforced for two years and the people who have accumulated citations have been afforded every opportunity to either pay them, nominate the driver who may have been driving the vehicle at the time or they could have requested a hearing to appeal the violation. And if one of those three options has not been exercised by the person who received the citation, this is the next step."
While the city has collected $2.9 million in fines since April 2009, keeping $741,000 for projects like purchasing about 16 new police vehicles, 34 percent of the tickets haven't been paid, adding up to $1.5 million owed, according to city comptroller Pat Degman.
"The purpose of the program is not to generate funds," Degman said. "The benefit is really the behavior change."
In addition to getting drivers to slow down and watch out for yellow lights, the city also wants drivers to be responsible about paying their fines.
After getting fined, vehicle owners have 35 days to pay, request an appeal hearing or identify the driver who was at fault. If that doesn't happen, under city ordinance, vehicles can be seized for 90 days - potentially racking up three months of impound and storage fees - and if the debt still isn't paid after that, the city can take the car for good.
One ticketed driver, NMSU assistant education professor Cristobal Rodriguez, said Tuesday's announcement about enforcement "definitely will be part of the discussion" as his challenge to the constitutionality of the ordinance goes forward in court.
Rodriguez's car was snapped going 48 mph in a 35 mph zone in October 2009. He disputed the ticket, but paid the ticket when it was sent to a collection agency. His case was recently sent to the New Mexico Court of Appeals by 3rd Judicial District Judge Manuel Arrieta.
The city has argued that its ordinance is constitutional.
"This is adding more evidence now, on how punitive (the current system is) and, at the same time, the concern of whether there is due process laid out for registered owners," Rodriguez said, reacting to the city's announcement Tuesday.
If the cameras are really just about safety, Rodriguez says there are better ways to accomplish that goal - like adding seconds onto yellow lights.
"I support the idea that we should look at how we can make our streets safer - there are definitely multiple ways to do that, as well as more ethical ways and legal ways as opposed to just taking pictures of vehicles and assuming a number of things ... I'm in support of making our intersections safer," he said. "I'm in support of means that get us there that are not necessarily punitive."
Three intersections are monitored by camera traffic for speeding and red light violations: Lohman Avenue at Telshor Boulevard, Lohman Avenue at Walnut Street, and Valley Drive at Avenida de Mesilla.
A total of 4,636 tickets have been issued just this year, according to LCPD.
Photo enforcement fines are $100 each, but 24 vehicle owners have nine or more unpaid citations for speeding or running a light, according to LCPD. Those 24 violators owe the city $25,514 in fines, with the worst violator owing the city $1,875 in fines and fees, for 15 unpaid citations.
Ashley Meeks can be reached at (575) 541-5462.
Comments
Wait for a mistake of picking up a car that HAS paid but picked up anyway by mistake. I paid my ticket for running a red light at 2:30 in the morning. No one was around and the light would not change. I sat there 3 minutes and decided enough was enough. Ran it not knowing about the camera. Oh well I paid it anyway. They come for my car by mistake and it'll be a big lawsuit. They will make a mistake. What government agency doesn't?
I recieved a collection notice from a company in PA stating that I owed them money for an unpaid camera ticket from valley dr. I never recieved anything prior to the collection notice. As directed by the letter, I sent a certified response asking for a copy of the citation and photo verification of the vehicle. That was 7 months ago and I have recieved nothing from them. If the Mayor wants my 100 bucks so badly then I wish he would have the b a l l s to come knock on my door with some kind of proof and ask me for it instead of having his rediflex puppeteers send me unsubstantiated collection notices or threating to send the cops to impound my vehicle.
85% of TX drivers refuse to appear in court or pay traffic scamera tickets to foreign corporations in Australia and Communist China.
"It is extremely easy to beat this type of ticket in court. Your easiest defense is to simply throw the ticket away. If it does not come with a return receipt that requires a signature, there is no proof that you actually got the ticket and they cannot prosecute you on that."
-Norman G. Fernandez, attorney at law, free ebook How to Beat a Speeding Ticket - Photo RADAR
"The city judge shall issue process on the complaint. He shall try no case until process has been regularly sued out, served and returned.
-Knoxville TN Code, Section 8-1, Issuance of process
No court has jurisdiction unless personal service of process is served upon the defendant. Wheel clamps are illegal without a court order, so wheel clamps are "abandoned property" and a donation to the vehicle owner who may cut them off at will. Towing and impounding a car without a valid court order is felony car theft. Deadly force may be used to make a citizen's arrest for any felony. Cops are arrested and sent to prison every day.
Google the Battle of Athens TN to see when you are legally allowed to shoot all cops and city council members, dynomite a police dept, make citizens arrests of every cop and city councilor in town and take them into custody, make yourself the new police chief, then get rewarded by US Congress and the White House.
Or just sue a class action and put the city and cops into bankruptcy court, and forclose on its govt and private a$$ets. Happens every day. That's what US Code Section 1983 Ku Klux Klan Act is for.
Or just shoot the traffic scameras, as cops confessed to doing in Knoxville TN. Google Clifford Clark, who got all charges dismissed for shooting a traffic scamera, 1 week afte subpoena of a Knox County deputy sheriff to testify that a Knox Co deputy confessed to shooting a redlight camera. All charges were dismissed against Clark for pointing a shotgun at an undercover deputy who broke into his house on a bogus warrant, and got all his guns returned last week.
"Those who give up liberty for security will receive neither."
-US Ambassador Ben Franklin, in charge of killing British traffic cops
TN whores pass law to deny insurance claims
Politics.
(poly ticks) n from the Medieval English polytyk, French politique, Latin politicus and Greek politikos for "many" and "blood-sucking creatures" (polites: see POLICE) 1 POLITICAL: archaic. 2 diplomatic. 3 crafty, unscrupulous. 4 artfully contrived; expedient. -ticked to engage in political campaigning, vote-getting, etc. -ticked off to be a voter. -SYN. SUAVE; SIN.
—Webster's New World Dictionary on American English
New Law Impacts Tennessee Bad Faith Insurance Actions
We have handled many cases over the years where insurance companies have wrongfully denied insurance claims. Common cases include denials of life insurance benefits, home fires, sink hole damage and disability benefits. Jon Street of our office leads the litigation team on these case and he has gained a reputation as a leader in this field in Tennessee.
Unfortunately, the current legislature is attempting to make it more difficult to take your insurance company to Court if they deny your claim. Jim Higgins was recently interviewed regarding these changes. You can watch the interview below:
Former insurance salesman George Gordon says only 5% of insurance comapny revenue is paid in claims.
Presidential candidate Ralph Nader says insurance executives pay themselves $200,000 salary PER WEEK PER PERSON. Not counting Warren Buffet, owner of GEICO Govt Employees Insurance Co, who paid himself $35-BILLION personal salary in ONE year, TAX FREE. The Dragonater was Ralph Nader's chauffeur in Knoxville and San Francisco.
There is no law requiring purchase of private insurance contract, according to dozens of states' attorney generals and the US Constitution. The only time car insurance is "required" under TN Code is when a driver CAUSES a crash, AND the crash damages ANOTHER person, AND refuses to pay for damages WHEN THEY ARE RICH ENOUGH TO AFFORD IT, AND the driver fails to get a signed letter from the other driver excusing them for damages. Constitutional Equal Protection doctrine means that NOBODY is required to buy a private insurance contract under ANY circumstances.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)