Wisconsin Judge: No Right to Decide What to Eat Without Permission from State

Demonstrating his ignorance of core values enshrined in common law and what Judge Cooley defined as the “right to be left alone” from overly pernicious government interference, a Circuit Court judge in Wisconsin has ruled that people who consume raw milk have no right to do so.
In response to a request from the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund for clarification in a court case on the issue, Judge Patrick J. Fielder wrote that the “court is unwilling to declare that there is a fundamental right to consume the food of one’s choice without first being presented with significantly more developed arguments on both sides of the issue.”
According to Fielder, citizens must get permission from the state before deciding what they can or cannot eat or drink.
“Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow,” he decided, and added that “Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice,” not without permission from government.
Fielder underscored his belief – and the belief of the state – that an individual must gain permission from government to consume food. He wrote that only “a license holder” can sell milk and the license holder “must do so in a way that complies with the laws of Wisconsin.”

Mike Adams of Natural News talks about the war against raw milk and cheese.

The nanny state in Wisconsin mandated that an individual does not have a right to consume raw milk after the Wisconsin Department of Health Services and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection said individuals in the state tested positive for campylobacter jejuni, a bacterial infection, they claimed was linked to consumption of unpasteurized milk.
In response, Senate Bill 108 was introduced. It would “legalize the sale of raw milk, decriminalize innocent farmers, and allow consumers to buy the milk they choose,” explains Wisconsin Campaign for Liberty.
Fielder’s response to the argument that food consumption is a personal choice outside the purview of government represents the troubling and growing mindset of bureaucrats and politicians who believe the state has an overriding interest in individual decisions, no matter how mundane.
Recent legal action by local government around the country highlight this. In Michigan, a woman faced 93 days in jail for the crime of growing a vegetable garden on her property. After a court threw the absurd charges out, vindictive local officials came back and attempted to renew an earlier charge against the woman for having unlicensed dogs.
City bureaucrats have gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure residents – more akin these days to subjects and vassals – are not allowed to grow their own food.
In Oklahoma in 2009, a city councilman said during debate on outlawing community gardens: “How do we know what people are going to be growing? Vegetables? Maybe. Or, maybe something else,” he said. “Is there going to be someone that inspects what is growing?” Tulsa city council bureaucrat Jack Henderson alluded to residents growing marijuana in order to make his argument that the city should inspect gardens.
Running afoul of state and its wilderness of rules and regulations is now drearily common, if not outrageous. In August, police shut down a lemonade stand operated by a 4-year old in Coralville, Iowa, because the girl did not apply for a health inspection and pay for a permit.
Massachusetts followed suit when state police closed down a green-tea stand operated by a 12-year old.

Woman fined $500 for allowing her kids to run a lemonade stand.
The inexplicable and growing effort by cities and states to close down lemonade stands is a growing phenomenon that demonstrates the determination of over-bearing government to regulate – and license and revenue-generate – all aspects of daily life, even the most mundane and harmless.
Fielder’s assertion that citizen-vassals do not have a fundamental right to decide what they consume without first gaining permission from an over-bearing government is a strike against the core values of liberty and self-reliance enshrined in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

Armed citizens descend on gun banning, New Mexico Mayor

What is it about the second amendment that Liberal Politicians don't understand?

When Ruidoso, New Mexico Mayor Ray Alborn issued an order banning the carrying of firearms in city-owned buildings last month, he couldn’t have imagined he would be faced with nearly 100 armed,
irate gun owners at the next meeting of the city council However, 2nd amendment supporters from all over
the nation came to the little town to express their outrage at Mayor. Alborn’s ham-handed affront to law abiding American citizens.And express themselves, they did as speakers went to one by one to the microphone, “…most of them with their guns holstered by their sides.”
“You are just as much a tyrant for requiring someone to surrender their civil rights to carry a firearm in order to participate in their government as you are in asking them to surrender their right to vote or anything else,” said one of the meeting attendees.

      Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, Larry Pratt made the trip to Ruidoso to inform alborn that “almost all the mass murders in our country have occurred in areas just like you’re fixing to set up, in gun-free zones…” Like so many liberal political hacks,
Al born is convinced that guns belong only is the hands of the police, as officers are exempt from his edict. Furthermore, typical of his breed is Alborn’s whining lament threatening resignation if his wishes are not followed. “My responsibility is the health, safety and welfare of our [city] employees so if we’re not going to be able to do these kinds of things I’m not sure I want to be sitting in this seat,” he said upon being confronted with the actual will of the people he was elected to represent.

Frankly, someone should inform Mayor Alborn that his real “responsibility” is upholding the Constitution of the state of New Mexico and securing the rights guaranteed by that document to the people of his city. Although the Ruidoso city council chose to table the vote on Mayor Alborn’s gun-banning measure, two things were made clear at the recent meeting: the right to keep and bear arms might have surpassed Social Security as the dangerous third rail of.

American politics; and when faced with overwhelming odds, a smart police officer will not opt for enforcing an unpopular, unconstitutional rule. For though the “No Guns Allowed” signs were
clearly posted on meeting room doors. No one paid them any notice and not one of the attending officers said a single word about it.

Can a Facebook App Help College Students Study?

It started out as a way for college students to socially connect with each other. Then, it became a legitimate source for distraction or some well-deserved "time off" from all those intense study session. And now, Facebook is trying to actually become a study aide! Well, sort of.

A new Facebook app called Hoot.Me -- cleverly named after all those night owls still studying -- is trying to help you with your work by taking away all of Facebook's distractions. When you log onto Facebook with the app, it filters out all the silly status updates and uploaded pictures from the night before and just leaves you with useful information like what other students at your school are working on in real time. And if there are no appropriate updates of the sort, the student can join online study sessions that are happening outside of their school (even if he or she isn't Facebook friends with any of those students.)

Study sessions include group video conferencing, "smart chats," and a "my history" feature, which allows students to revisit concepts already outlined in past study sessions. Oh, and professors can use Hoot.Me too, utilizing the app for virtual office hours and video conferences for student projects.

To be honest, it all seems too good to be true -- and nothing like the way Facebook is currently used right now -- but we'll give this new app the benefit of the doubt. After all, it is free, so you might as well try it.

Do you think Facebook can actually be used as a study aide instead of a massive distraction?

Would You Be Worried About the 20,000 Missing Libyan Surface-to-Air-Missiles?

The White House announced today it planned to expand a program to secure and destroy Libya's huge stockpile of dangerous surface-to-air missiles, following an ABC News report that large numbers of them continue to be stolen from unguarded military warehouses.
Currently the U.S. State Department has one official on the ground in Libya, as well as five contractors who specialize in "explosive ordinance disposal", all working with the rebel Transitional National Council to find the looted missiles, White House spokesperson Jay Carney told reporters.
"We expect to deploy additional personnel to assist the TNC as they expand efforts to secure conventional arms storage sites," Carney said. "We're obviously at a governmental level -- both State Department and at the U.N. and elsewhere -- working with the TNC on this."ABC News reported today U.S. officials and security experts were concerned some of the thousands of heat-seeking missiles could easily end up in the hands of al Qaeda or other terrorists groups, creating a threat to commercial airliners.
"Matching up a terrorist with a shoulder-fired missile, that's our worst nightmare," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D.-California, a member of the Senate's Commerce, Energy and Transportation Committee.Though Libya had an estimated 20,000 man-portable surface-to-air missiles before the popular uprising began in February, Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro told ABC News today the government does not have a clear picture of how many missiles they're trying to track down.
"We're making great progress and we expect in the coming days and weeks we will have a much greater picture of how many are missing," Shapiro said.
The missiles, four to six-feet long and Russian-made, can weigh just 55 pounds with launcher. They lock on to the heat generated by the engines of aircraft, can be fired from a vehicle or from a combatant's shoulder, and are accurate and deadly at a range of more than two miles.
Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch first warned about the problem after a trip to Libya six months ago. He took pictures of pickup truckloads of the missiles being carted off during another trip just a few weeks ago.
"I myself could have removed several hundred if I wanted to, and people can literally drive up with pickup trucks or even 18 wheelers and take away whatever they want," said Bouckaert, HRW's emergencies director. "Every time I arrive at one of these weapons facilities, the first thing we notice going missing is the surface-to-air missiles."
The ease with which rebels and other unknown parties have snatched thousands of the missiles has raised alarms that the weapons could end up in the hands of al Qaeda, which is active in Libya.
"There certainly are dangerous groups operating in the region, and we're very concerned that some of these weapons could end up in the wrong hands," said Bouckaert.
"I think the probability of al Qaeda being able to smuggle some of the stinger-like missiles out of Libya is probably pretty high," said Richard Clarke, former White House counterterrorism advisor and now a consultant to ABC News.


Source

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/nightmare-libya-20000-surface-a...

Obama owes us money!

We all know about Solyndra going belly up. We all know about the $540 Million loan guarantee signed by our president. But did you know that The GAO and Price Waterhouse both told the president that this was not an investment grade company? He was urged over many months to back off and reconsider, but Obama was adamant and chose to spend our money against the best advice available.

Obama may be the President but he works for us and he has a fiduciary duty to manage our money well. This situation clearly demonstrates his complete lack of responsibility towards us and his inability to make good financial decisions.

Like anyone who is negligent when handling others money, Obama is culpable and owes us more than just a duty, he owes us our money back.

I propose we seize all his assets, his home, his Nobel prize, the revenue from his books, all the money in his campaign fund and whatever else it takes to reimburse the taxpayers for his fraudelent mishandling of our money.

Are Americans finally realizing the evil behind the Democrat

the historic victory of a Republican winning a New York seat that has been dominated by Democrats since 1922, it would appear they have. This is no way a small victory, the repercussions of this are going to be far-reaching and reverberating across America as a win against obama's Communist anti-American agenda and the taking back of America by we the people.

The dominos are starting to fall faster each day for obama and the Democrats are well aware of this, how could they not be?

obama's last ditch effort to try and convince Americans his "Jobs Plan" is the saving grace is anything but, and Congress is NOT going to give obama free reign on spending us further into oblivion with "promises" anymore.

obama and the Democrats are burnt toast and they know it. ALL of them up for re-election are trying to distance themselves from obama as fast as they can but their stench cannot be wiped away. They ALL have the obama Albatross around their necks and cannot shake it off.

CIA’s and Facebook

Remember when Mark Zuckerberg said you need to get over the fact that there is no privacy on the internet?



Many of you have likely viewed the video below. It documents Facebook’s connection to the CIA.

Many people, however, think the fun of posting on and the interaction of Facebook overshadows the downside, or they merely ignore the negative aspects.

Well, it turns out it is worse than we previously thought.

Hacker and writer Nik Cubrilovic has a post on his blog today revealing some really scary and downright police state Stasi-like aspects of the popular “service” that doubles as a data-mining operation for the CIA.

Cubrilovic writes that Facebook keeps track of every website destination you visit, even if YOU ARE LOGGED OUT OF FACEBOOK. It does this through the cookies it routinely plants on your computer.

This is somewhat of an overstatement. In fact, Facebook is only able to do this on pages that have its “Like” button on it, which is to say a lot of webpages, although hardly all.

The only solution to this is to delete Facebook’s cookies after every session, or use a separate browser for Facebook usage.

Cubrilovic explains: “With my browser logged out of Facebook, whenever I visit any page with a Facebook like button, or share button, or any other widget, the information, including my account ID, is still being sent to Facebook. The only solution to Facebook not knowing who you are is to delete all Facebook cookies… It is all hidden in plain sight.”

Cubrilovic tried to email Facebook about his concerns on several occasions, but they ignored him.

For most people, this is probably not much of a concern, but for people who are political “radicals” – and anybody who holds political views outside those deemed acceptable by the establishment are indeed considered radicals – this is a serious issue.

Again, Facebook is connected to the CIA and the DIA. It is common knowledge, so much so it is now the subject of satire.

Facebook’s op compliments the NSA effort to “vaccum” up countless petabytes of personal data of citizens, described as “the largest database ever assembled in the world.” It is an integral part of what we call the “surveillance grid” here on Infowars.com.

If you want to minimize your exposure to the grid, it may be time to say good-bye to Facebook, especially if you are politically active.

Start by deactivating your Facebook account and deleting the cookies on your computer.

White House’s Testimony ‘Prep Guidance’

A second government official has come forward saying the White House tried to influence his testimony concerning a wireless broadband project backed by a Democratic donor that military officials fear might impair sensitive satellite navigation systems.

Anthony Russo, director of the National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing, told The Daily Beast he rejected “guidance” from the White House’s Office of Budget and Management suggesting he tell Congress that the government’s concerns about the project by the firm LightSquared could be resolved in 90 days, a timetable favorable to the company’s plans.

“They gave that to me and presumably the other witnesses,” Russo said. “There is one sentence I disagreed with, which said that I thought the testing could be resolved in 90 days. So I took it out.”

Russo said he objected to that language because “I have low confidence that we can complete all of the testing in 90 days.” He estimated that such testing would take at least six months. Russo called the White House efforts to alter his testimony “guidance rather than pressure.”

Russo’s comments come just days after four-star Air Force Gen. William Shelton, who heads U.S. Space Command, told Congress in a classified briefing that he felt pressured by the White House to change his testimony about the same project to make it more favorable to the company.
Shelton also rejected the suggested edits and testified he has concerns LightSquared’s project could interfere with Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) signals key to military navigation and targeting systems.
Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman, said the OMB review of the witness testimony was routine and not designed to curry political favor, and that all the witnesses who testified to Congress were allowed to state their concerns about the LightSquared project and its potential ramifications for conflicting with GPS signals.

“Every administration witness testifying at every hearing on LightSquared has been explicit in identifying the problems it would cause for GPS, and that LightSquared should not be allowed to move forward unless those interference issues are resolved,” he said. “If OMB professionals were making sure that testimony before Congress was consistent with administration policy, that means they were doing their jobs because OMB reviews and clears all agency communications with Congress, including testimony, to ensure consistency in the administration’s policy positions.”

“We did not ask for any special favors and we have not asked for any special handouts, and consequently did not receive any special favors or handouts,” Falcone said.

House Republicans now want to know whether the White House’s suggested edits to the testimony amounted to an effort to help the company.

Falcone  who owns a majority stake in LightSquared, told the Beast that while he met with White House officials and a federal regulator he “did not ask for any special favors and we have not asked for any special handouts, and consequently did not receive any special favors or handouts.”

Falcone acknowledged, however, he told anyone in the federal government willing to listen that testing his company’s signal for GPS interference on commercial and military equipment “should not take that long.”

“Everything is already set up, the labs are set up. All we need are the list of devices that need to be tested. We have been telling the people who are asking for the testing of this for months now,” he said in an interview MondayThe Beast obtained the paragraph the OMB asked government witnesses to insert into their recent congressional testimony, which says in part, “We hope that testing can be complete within 90 days.”

LightSquared has told Congress and regulators that the strength of its signal was approved in the mid 2000s by a Republican-led Federal Communications Commission and that its proposal to convert its satellite license to one for terrestrial mobile wireless devices would not change these interference issues.

Nonetheless, the issue of the timeline for testing is crucial to LightSquared, which wants to build a wireless broadband service on a spectrum close to GPS signals as part of President Obama’s mandate to expand wireless access for Americans.
“The FCC mandated the most aggressive build-out in the history of telecommunications,” Falcone said. “We expect that we will have consumers on this network by the second half of 2012.”

Harold Furchtgott-Roth, a former Republican-appointed FCC commissioner, said it was highly unusual to put a timeline on the kinds of technical tests discussed in the OMB paragraph.

“Primarily these types of tests sometimes have a finite end and sometimes they don’t,” he said. “Sometimes they go on for long periods of time. To pick a number and say the tests have to end by a certain date is not consistent with commission precedent. Secondly, you don’t know what you will find when you do the test; you can’t predetermine that you will absolutely be finished after 90 days.”
Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), the chairman of the House Science Committee’s Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, said he was troubled that four out of the five government witnesses before his Sept. 8 hearing had “identical language in their written testimony reflecting the administration’s view of the LightSquared project. The language diminished the otherwise blunt assessments the witnesses articulated during the hearing when pressed by committee members.”

Last week, the Center for Public Integrity first reported a batch of emails between LightSquared executives and staffers of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The nonprofit investigative journalism organization reported that LightSquared CEO Sanjiv Ahuja met with the chief of staff for OSTP just eight days before Falcone and his wife gave $30,400 each to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC). Ahuja also contributed $30,400 to the Democratic Party, though he made the same contribution to the Republican Party in 2009.
Falcone told The Daily Beast he made the donations to the DSCC because his wife was hosting a fundraiser for women in politics. “She asked me to contribute,” he said. “If I had said no, all hell would have broken loose.” He also said in a separate interview with Fox News that he was a registered Republican.

Falcone had one meeting with an official from the OSTP, he told The Daily Beast. He also said he met with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in September 2009. “I did not want the FCC to be surprised,” he said. “It was a kind of in and out thing.”
Falcone said he does not believe he has received any favors from the White House. “I met in September of 2009 with somebody from the Office of Science and Technology. I never met Obama and I never met his advisers,” he said. “The discussion was around wireless in the marketplace and some of the things we were thinking and some of the different things we were doing.”

Furchtgott-Roth questioned the process by which the FCC granted a waiver to LightSquared so that it may use its initial license for satellite bandwidth to service terrestrial mobile devices.

RICK PERRY IS A SEX ADDICT

I don't know how these rumors start, but it seems like there is a new one just about every week. I like to publicize them so we can get them out there and debunked before they go viral on the internet.

This is one of the most ridiculous rumors about Rick Perry that I have seen. The others weren't too believable, either, and for those of you who did not hear about them, they are, "RICK PERRY IS A HERMAPHRODITE," and, "RICK PERRY BEATS HIS WIFE."

I think the best way to fight these scurrilous rumors is to inform the public and tell as many people that we can, that the rumor, "RICK PERRY IS A SEX ADDICT," is just a rumor. There is absolutely no evidence, which I have seen, that proves, "RICK PERRY IS A SEX ADDICT."

Please, tell all your friends that all three rumors, "RICK PERRY IS A SEX ADDICT," "RICK PERRY IS A HERMAPHRODITE," and, "RICK PERRY BEATS HIS WIFE," are not TRUE. If you have heard any other rumors, please post them so we can get them out to the public and prove they have no merit.

President is obviously deceptive

The first black President born outside the continental USA, to a white mother and a Kenyan father, the media portraying Obama as the first Nigro President is obviously deceptive, especially when you consider his formative years were shaped by Muslim and Commun influence. Also its been said an asset of the CIA.  A large majority of our black citizens are born and raised in poverty and very few are able to enjoy a prestigious collage education as Obama has. In return for their wholehearted support for him, he has reciprocated by giving them a staggering unemployment rate, as well as enslaving them along with all Americans with a mountain of debt.

New cracks have begun to show in President Obama’s support amongst. Blacks , who have been his strongest supporters. Five months ago, 83 percent of African Americans held “strongly favorable” views of.
Obama, but in a new Washington Post-ABC news poll that number has dropped to 58 percent. That drop is similar to slipping support for Obama among all groups.

“There is a certain amount of racial loyalty and party loyalty, but eventually that was going to have to weaken,” said Andra Gillespie, a political scientist at Emory University, who studies African Americans.
“It’s understandable given the economy.”

Waters, who head the CBC’s jobs initiative, said she saw the frustration that is registering in the president’s polls at the job's fairs she attended. “I saw the kind of hopelessness  that is setting in.People were not only discouraged. They came to try to get a job, but they didn’t really believe that something substantive was going to happen,” she said.“The president cannot rest on his laurels with respect to blacvoter representation. Given the fact that people don’t necessarily strongly approve of President Obama, that could translate to less enthusiasm for his candidacy,” she said. “That doesn’t mean they will vote for th Republican candidate. It means they will not turn out.”

“There are two ways to conquer and enslave a

country. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.”
               ― John Adams

Source http://www.washingtonpost.com/

The Social Networking Buzz

I think all the social networking and internet communication has pros and cons just like anything else in life. It certainly has made business communication easier but definitely more impersonal. I spend most of my day and night emailing and facebooking with family, friends and business associates. One of the biggest drawbacks that I can see is tone that can be inferred in an email. Sometimes the reader may sense that you are angry or dissatisfied with something and you really aren’t; just the implied tone in the email suggests that to your reader. If you were talking on the phone, there would be no mistake if you were angry with the other person.
From a business perspective I believe it has made us somewhat more efficient workers. We no longer have to wait for “snail mail” to get a message to someone. I can send a quick email to technical support and within a relatively short period of time, I have a resolution to my problem.
I also think it has affected our children in a not so great way. I think they are at a distinct disadvantage in that they do not know how to have a conversation with people unless there is a keyboard in front of them. Everything they do is by internet, text, facebook, twitter, etc. I don’t believe that our children know how to socialize and just make conversation. I think those are vital skills that they are missing out on.

Should the unemployed be denied the right to vote? Should the unemployed be denied the right to vote?

I just saw a poll, one I'm blocked from replying to, that asked if people who are able bodied and unemployed should be allowed the privilege of voting. ( some can't handle the out spoken)

Our Constitution of course, says that voting is a right, not a privilege. It can be denied to convicted felons, but other than that it's the most fundamental of our rights. Our revolution was about taxation without representation, and it wasn't the taxes they were bitching about. It was being denied a voice in governance. It's incoherently foolish to think any government could stand for even a day without taxation of some sort.

I suppose I could speculate on what purpose stripping citizens of their rights based on their employment status would serve, but that's pretty blatantly obvious. I could ask where such a "slippery slope" could lead, but again the conclusion that it leads us towards political rights only for the wealthy is too obvious to merit discussion.

So instead I'll ask what does it tell you about people who would make such a heinous attack on our constitution and our citizenry? What is the character of someone who would apportion fundamental rights on the basis of temporary employment situations? Especially at a time when unemployment is high and, due to no fault of their own, there are over 15 million of our citizens who could be stripped of their rights under any such proposal.

Who would pass judgment on our right to vote? Perhaps we could have an interrogation panel outside the polling stations who would review the work history of every voter as they arrived? Of course corporations could filter the vote at will with their hiring and firing practices, they could fire all the democrats October 15th and rehire them the second Wednesday of November or whatever variation of that complies with the wording of the law. Maybe it would be more covert than that, maybe we could rat out our neighbors for being lazy and have their rights stripped quietly by the local neighborhood watch groups.

This is either the most poorly thought out idea I've ever heard, or it's the most vicious attack on representative government to ever rear it's head in American politics. I would prefer that it were the first, but the reality of today's political climate is good evidence for the latter.

The American Police State

Do you feel comfortable having government authorizing police to walk around with Machine guns? At the same time, do you feel comfortable with disarming peaceful citizens?
New York City is frequently viewed as a test bed for liberal government policies. But I fear that the very real threat of Islamist terrorism is being used as an excuse for stripping Americans of their individual liberty.
For example, we have as many armed and uniformed police in NYC as we have troops in all of Iraq. Over 1,000 of them are authorized to carry machine guns which they do from time to time.
Machine guns in New York City? Can you imagine the civilian carnage when machine guns are fired on crowded streets? And no passerby’s can't say anything about being shot because it falls within police guidelines.
Whatever happened to marksmanship, where you aim at what you want to shoot? That seems to be out the window in NYPD philosophy. If there are two terrorists in a crowd of 50,000 in Times Square, doesn’t aiming at a target matter anymore?
I’m a big believer in the 2^nd Amendment and have been a firearms owner for decades. In New York City, you can only carry a pistol if you are a retired police officer, politically connected, or wealthy and carrying large sums of money. The rest of us are severely restricted to even possess a rifle or shotgun and rules can be changed any time by the Chief of Police to the point of total restriction of anything.
The New York Police Department has military armored vehicles, streets are filled with surveillance cameras and you can be stopped and searched at whim. Of course, all of this must be done with political correctness. You can’t for example, do this to a suspicious looking Muslim for fear of violating rules against profiling.
Every American must be viewed as a potential terrorist, which means that if you mindlessly suspect everyone, the true terrorists slip through.
I suspect that Barack Obama and his vastly expanded Homeland Security are watching New York City. How far can government go in controlling the American people? When will Homeland Security’s Janet Napolitano, spring her announced plan for bringing airport nudie scanners and government sanctioned sexual molestation to the street corners of America?
Welcome to the impending American police state, or Iran west. The Obama motto of "Never let a crisis go to waste,” is becoming a reality when it comes to individual liberty and I fear the Presidential election of 2012 or even before, will determine the fate of our constitution and personal freedom.



What do you think?

Related Story ,New York City post 911 security 

FREE KITTENS (This Just for Fun)

A pretty little girl named Suzy was standing on the sidewalk

in front of her home. Next to her was a basket containing a number of tiny creatures; in her hand was a sign announcing FREE KITTENS. 

 

Suddenly a line of big black cars pulled up beside her.

Out of the lead car stepped a tall, grinning man.

"Hi there little girl, I'm President Obama.

What do you have in the basket?" he asked.

"Kittens," little Suzy said.

"How old are they?" asked Obama.

Suzy replied, "They're so young,

their eyes aren't even open yet."

"And what kind of kittens are they?"

"Democrats," answered Suzy with a smile.

Obama was delighted. As soon as he returned to his car,

he called his PR chief and told him about the

little girl and the kittens.

Recognizing the perfect photo op, the two men agreed that the president should return the next day; and in front of the assembled media, have the girl talk about her discerning kittens.

So the next day, Suzy was again standing on the sidewalk

with her basket of "FREE KITTENS," when another motorcade pulled up, this time followed by vans from

ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN.

Cameras and audio equipment were quickly set up,

then Obama got out of his limo and walked over to little Suzy.

"Hello, again," he said, "I'd love it if you would tell all my friends out there what kind of kittens you're giving away."

"Yes sir," Suzy said. "They're Republicans."

Taken by surprise, the president stammered,

"But..but...yesterday, you told me they were DEMOCRATS."

   Little Suzy smiled and said, "I know.

        But today, they have their eyes open."