Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Oh please, please, PLEASE let this work!

This would be so fucking awesome.

Linky

Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."


Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.



C'mon "activist judges!" Stick it to the fucker!

Friday, June 24, 2005

I TOLD YOU.

You see???? They sure don't waste any time, do they?

Freeport to seize 3 properties

Court's decision empowers the city to acquire the site for a new marina

FREEPORT - With Thursday's Supreme Court decision, Freeport officials instructed attorneys to begin preparing legal documents to seize three pieces of waterfront property along the Old Brazos River from two seafood companies for construction of an $8 million private boat marina.

The court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that cities may bulldoze people's homes or businesses to make way for shopping malls or other private development. The decision gives local governments broad power to seize private property to generate tax revenue.

"This is the last little piece of the puzzle to put the project together," Freeport Mayor Jim Phillips said...



Thursday, June 23, 2005

Hear that flushing sound?

That's the sound of America, going down the tubes.

No more internet boobies. (See previous post)
Free speech being crushed. (See previous post)
Now you can lose your house and property to Wal*Mart (can't even blame Bush for this one.)

NO LONGER APPLICABLE:

First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


I love my country, but I'm finding it harder and harder to tolerate and deal with not only the government, but with my fellow citizens. It's because of your apathy and bickering that this is happening. What ever happened to ONE NATION, UNITED? Politics isn't a fucking game, with winners and losers! How can we ever get this nation back on course if we can't stop fighting amongst ourselves? I really can't believe that people are just letting this shit happen to them! I've seen some REALLY stupid shit in my time, but this.... WHY WON'T YOU PEOPLE GET UP OFF THE COUCH AND WRITE TO YOUR GODDAMN SENATORS WHEN SHIT HAPPENS?!?!?! Fuck me! Holding a sign and standing outside the capitol doesn't do SHIT. You want to put up a fight? Hand-write a letter stating your greviances, and snail-mail it to your congressperson. Email won't do shit. Take the time to buy postage and send it. 1000 envelopes with angry letters can't be deleted as easily as 1000 emails. And STOP defending your political party no matter what they do. Liberal democrats, conservative Republicans, Libertarians, Greens... You're all wrong in some way, shape or form. Have the balls to admit it, and stand up to injustice, instead of convincing yourselves that a minor infraction of your rights isn't that big a deal.

BECAUSE IT IS. Just ask the people who are getting their homes bulldozed in order to make way for a health club and an office park. Ask the people whose homes are being legally raided under the USA PATRIOT ACT. Shit, just go to the local library and see if you can find a copy of Heather Has Two Mommies.


Here are your choices. Grease up your asshole, or remember that you have a spine, a brain and power in numbers.



The kittens are safe, but we're fucked.

Once again, I would like to extend my deepest thanks and praise to any and all of the incredibly ignorant and dimwitted fuckwads that voted for GWB.

YOU made this possible:

US Code 18, Section 2257
More...

Basically, as of midnight, this federal law requires website owners to keep records documenting, among other things, that "every performer portrayed in a visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct" is over the age of 18. That's not just porn, folks. We're talking webcams, adult-themed cartoons, certain parts of Rotten.com and so much more. Not just that, but under the proposed changes, some forms of ID now commonly used for age verification will no longer be accepted - among them, Selective Service cards and college IDs.

Records for every model or actor would have to be indexed alphabetically by legal name ("or numerically where appropriate"), and include all stage names used since 1992.

The updated regulation would also mandate that records be cross-referenced by title, number or alternate identifier for every publication in which they're involved - including print, broadcast, online photos, streaming video and other media. Not only that, but under 75.1 (c)(2), the term "distributor" is redefined to include posting on an internet web site. Specifically the term "secondary producer" is defined to include anyone who posts a digital image on an internet site.

That bears repeating.

THE TERM SECONDARY PRODUCER IS DEFINED TO INCLUDE ANYONE WHO POSTS A DIGITAL IMAGE ON AN INTERNET SITE!!


Example:



This is now considered to be pornography. In order to show this on a website, I must provide the following:

The full legal name of the model
John Stickfigure
Jane Stickfigure

All other names, (maden/married/stage name, aliases)
John S
John The Stick
Jane
JaneS
Jane Sticky
Jane Markwitchz

Copy of the depiction, printed on the paper record.

Copy of every associated URL the image is displayed on, and the URL of the image every place it appears.

I must also maintain indexes which find the record alphabetically, numerically, by the performer's last name (followed by first), aliases, stage names, title, and identifying marks. Yes, I have to record each and every tattoo that said actor has on his/her body.

If someone else should reuse this image on their site, but linking it from my server, I must also append my records then. If http://my-anal-retentative-government-agency.gov put my picture on their site, linked from my server, I must update my records accordingly.

If the indexing and record keeping weren't enough, there are rules for record maintenance and retention and inspection.

The record must be maintained at my place of business. I cannot have a 3rd party company maintain my records for me. I must keep these records segregated from any other records. I must keep the records intact for 7 years from creation or amendment, and finally even if my organization should fail, I'm required to keep these records on file for 5 years, which makes the following interesting.

My location must be available for inspection from 8am to 6pm, 365 days a year. I understand this has been amended to only be 20 hours per week.

While "inspecting records", the agents may seize any evidence of any felony while conducting an inspection. Basically, they're opening up a door for warrentless entry into any adult business (adult video store, book store, or Internet business)

Ahhh, and the disclosure statement. Several paragraphs in 11 point type, on the front page of the site, saying the title of the work, date of production, publication, duplication, reproduction, or reissuance, the street address where the records are kept, and the name, title, and business address of the custodian of records.



One more right taken away from you, thanks in part to BushCo. Honestly, what's next? Oh, I know. It's a constitutional amendment that bans burning the flag! Why am I opposed to this?

Because no one even displays proper flag etiquette. No one shines a light on it at night. People drive around in Ford Excursions with tattered, faded and soiled flags on the wrong side of their car (yes, there is a correct side to display it on). People write jingoistic catchphrases across the flag, and then slap the image on coffee cups, lighters, bumperstickers and even thongs and undershirts. I'm sure I could find an American flag condom if I looked hard enough. People leave them up after they've been faded to a light pink. And I'm willing to bet that most people don't dispose of the flag in the proper way (ironically, the correct way to dispose of a flag is to burn it.)

I've seen McDonald's flags flown above the US flag. I've seen Denver Broncos flags flown at the same height as the US Flag. I've seen them displayed at full mast all day on Memorial Day. I've seen them dragging on the ground, displayed during rain and hailstorms, and flown backwards. I've seen them on fucking PIZZA BOXES! You're not supposed to put them on items that are designed for discard. That in itself is disrespectful.

Even more than that, I am opposed to this because it takes away another one of my freedoms. The freedom to protest. If I burn a flag, it's a sign that I am unhappy with what the flag represents. Listen, the flag is a piece of cloth. Most likely, it was made in China or Korea. It represents different things to different people. To a Vietnam vet, it might symbolize how this nation shunned them when they returned from the war. To some, it represents everything that is right with this country. To others, it represents everything that is wrong with this country. To me, it's a symbol of how bass-ackwards we have become. We put more stock into petty shit like this (anti-flag burning bills have fizzled in the senate for about 30 years now), than we do to important issues. And the way that certain people are going about promoting this egregious Constitutional Amendment, well, it really makes me feel physically ill. I'm speaking in particular about Randy Cunningham, California asshat. He contributed this priceless gem:

"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment."

FUCK YOU. Using 9/11 victims to promote your cause is one of the most vile and unforgivable things that a person in your position could do, and I am going out to purchase a flag, JUST TO BURN IT. But first, I am going to write on it the name of every senator who voted in favor of this horseshit.

Think about this: the Iranian government prevents Iranians from burning Iran's flags. The Chinese government prevents Chinese from burning China's flags. The Cuban government prevents Cubans from burning Cuba's flag. Next in line? USA!


By the way, if you haven't contacted your senator about this yet, please do so.


"No one ever died for a flag. A flag is a piece of cloth. They might have died for freedom, which is also of course the freedom to burn the fucking flag."
-Bill Hicks





Wednesday, June 15, 2005

That's what I thought

Dear Bob and Mary Schindler, President Bush, Dr. Frist, the Religious Right, idiots in Congress and everyone else who insisted that Terry Schiavo would still be able to recover:

SUCK ON IT.


#1 - Terri's brain was 200g -less- than another patient who died in PVS, and less than half the expected weight of a woman her age.

#2 -Tthere was marked atrophy (shrinkage) of the brain globally, to the point that certain areas of the brain that are expected to be 'packed together', were, in fact, loosely floating about.

#3 - She had a thalamic stimulator installed (an electrical device designed to stimulate the brain) in an attempt to revive some of her function. This stimulator prevented the ability to do an MRI, due to overheating of the electrodes being reported in previous cases of MRI's on stimulators.

#4 - She had smaller than expected optic nerves, otherwise her cranial nerves were normal. Optic nerves are the nerves responsible for receiving optic information from the eyes and passing it to the occipital lobe, along with other lobes of the brain. The clinical implication of this is difficult to understand, but it is likely indicative of non-functioning eyesight/vision. Essentially, she was blind.


Wait... you mean that she really didn't see those balloons that were floating in front of her face? It was all a ruse, and the videos were doctored? Well, fuck me running! Should we be expecting an apology from all the hardcore fanatics, the Bush camp and the GOP? Of course not! That would mean admitting you were WRONG. And who needs scientific and factual proof when you have God on your side?

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Monday, June 06, 2005

6-3 against

Fuck.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Use of Medical Marijuana

June 6 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a setback to the medical marijuana movement, ruling that federal narcotics laws make it a crime to grow and use the drug even when it never crosses state lines and is used only to relieve pain or nausea.

The justices today said Congress's power over interstate commerce is broad enough to let it ban locally grown and used medical marijuana. The 6-3 ruling, issued in Washington, overturns a lower court decision that had let two California women use cannabis to treat pain, nausea and other symptoms.

California and nine other states exempt seriously ill people from laws banning cultivation and use of marijuana. Today's ruling means people in those states nonetheless will face the risk of federal prosecution if they use or distribute marijuana.

The case is Ashcroft v. Raich, 03-1454.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.