http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LABOR RELATIONS RESEARCH
5211 Port Royal Road  Suite 510  Springfield, Virginia  22151
 VIOLENCE: ORGANIZED LABOR'S UNIQUE PRIVILEGE, AMERICAN TERRORISM
 By David Kendrick, Program Director
Copyright 1996, The National Institute for Labor Relations Research
 http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sixty years after the rise of organized labor's political machine  during the  New Deal  (ROOSEVELTS SOCIALISM) union officials remain the only class of citizens allowed, under federal law, to commit violence against their fellow citizens
Under the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous  Enmons decision, union officials may destroy property, assault employees, and even murder them, and escape prosecution under federal extortion laws, so long as such violence is undertaken to secure what the Supreme Court called "legitimate" objectives, such as wage increases.
Our investigation of  labor violence  has revealed  thousands  of incidents of vandalism, arson, assaults, threats and murder perpetrated by union officials  and their agents compiled  from newspaper reports  over the past two decades.  As discovered from an in-depth investigation of the  New York Daily News strike of 1990 , such violence is often planned by union officials who seek out an employer's vulnerable points, and move on to other points when they fail to exact enough punishment
The scope of this crisis is underscored by the fact that while the Institute has compiled about 500 reports of union violence since 1975 in New York state, the "b New York City Police Department recorded more than 500 violent incidents in the 1990 Daily News strike alone.

The failure of law enforcement to curb strike violence  is particularly troubling.  While the Institute has recorded over  8,500 incidents  of union violence since 1975, only  220 reports of convictions  have been found.  In the Daily News strike, then-governor  Mario Cuomo down-played the violence  and refused to acknowledge any conspiracy on the part of the Newspaper and Magazine Drivers hierarchy to  firebomb newsstands  whose owners sold the Daily News.   Even the F.B.I. declined to investigate the violence, citing the Enmons decision as their chief constraint.
http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm

CUOMOS (DEMOCRAT LIBERAL) WRITE YOUR SENATOR TO OVERTURN THE ENMONS DECISION BEFORE MORE ARE KILLED BY AMERICAN TERRORISTS, UNIONS
When truck driver Eddie York was murdered in 1993  for crossing a United Mine Workers (UMW) picket line , federal authorities could charge his killer with nothing more serious than "incapacitating" a driver on a federal road.  Given the UMW's enormous political influence in West Virginia, no state charges have ever been brought against the UMW militant who made  York's wife a widow and left his children fatherless.

 It is highly impractical to prosecute union militants for violent activities under federal laws targeting organized crime.  It isn't enough to substantiate a criminal act.  Federal law requires proof of at least two commissions of the same crime  to invoke its racketeering law.
 SO, KILL ONE, LET ONE GO?
Meanwhile, with an increasing number of states enacting extortion laws exempting union officials from prosecution  for the so-called "legitimate" objectives cited in Enmons, the federal government's intervention is required to end a regime in which, according to Nobel laureate Friedrich A. Hayek, "They  [unions] have become the only important instance in which governments singly  fail in their prime function -- the prevention of coercion and violence."

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LABOR RELATIONS RESEARCH
5211 Port Royal Road  Suite 510  Springfield, Virginia  22151  
http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm

VIOLENCE: ORGANIZED LABOR'S UNIQUE PRIVILEGE
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
History of Judicial Involvement

After conducting a series of field hearings in 1933, the Copeland subcommittee of the Senate committee on Interstate Commerce introduced 13 bills intended to prevent the spread of organized crime, including the Anti-Racketeering Act of 1934. (1)  As finally enacted by the House and Senate, the Act made it a felony to obtain money or other "valuable consideration" by the use or threat of force, violence or coercion, so long as the act or threat had a connection to interstate commerce, and that the consideration did not include "the payment of wages by a bonafide employer to a bonafide employee." (2)  How this applied to union violence, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in 1942.  

After passage of the Anti-Racketeering Act, Local 807 of the Teamsters decided to expand their territory outside of New York City.  In order to persuade truckers from outside New York City to use the local's services, members would greet the truckers with guns and charge a toll equal to one day's union wage.  In some cases, the members of local 807 would drive the trucks into the city.  In other cases, the members took the money and departed.  In no case were the members of local 807 employed by the out-of-town trucking companies.  

Since these tactics at least doubled the cost of transporting goods into New York, most if not all of the local trucking companies signed contracts with Local 807.  However, federal charges were filed against Local 807 and some of its members under the anti-racketeering law.  

In 1942, the Supreme Court ruled, to the considerable consternation of Congress, that "bonafide employees" could include individuals who had never applied for a job with the employer.  Additionally the "wage" exception could include other labor representation issues. (3)

In reaction to the Local 807 decision, several attempts were made to amend the Anti-Racketeering Act.  Finally, Congress enacted the Hobbs Act in 1951. (4)  This time, Congress completely eliminated the "wage" exception, under which union officials could extort wage increases, as well as a clause exempting union violence from prosecution if such action would impair the "rights of legitimate labor organizations in lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof...." (5)

But in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling that still stands today, disemboweled the Hobbs Act of its central purpose to criminalize extortion by union officials and their agents.

In the Enmons (6) case, three members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) were indicted for firing high-powered rifles at three utility company transformers, draining the oil from a transformer, and blowing up a transformer substation during a strike.
However, HERE COME DA JUDGE, HERE COME DA JUDGE
 However, the U.S. District Court in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, dismissed the charges on the grounds that, in the context of a strike, the militants' actions were not illegal since they were in pursuit of "legitimate" union objectives.

Although the Hobbs Act had eliminated any mention of "legitimate" objectives which might justify union officials' extortion, a plurality of the Supreme Court decided that Congress had retained an ambiguity.

That ambiguity concerned a requirement for the "wrongful" use of force, violence or fear, as an element of the crime. (7)  The majority opinion agonizes over whether "wrongful" becomes superfluous, unless it is limited to cases in which the ends, as well as the means, are unlawful.  

"[W]rongful" [violence] has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property. (8)  (emphasis added)
In short, the plurality held that the Hobbs Act did not reach "the use of violence to achieve legitimate union objectives...." (9)  The Court defined legitimate union objectives to include higher wages in return for genuine services. Legitimate objectives would exclude the extraction of wages for "imposed, unwanted, superfluous and fictitious services" or personal payoffs.  
Either forgetting or ignoring the fact that Congress passed the Hobbs Act in outraged response to the High Court's Local 807 decision 31 years earlier, the Court interpreted the Hobbs Act to punish only those acts punishable under that 1942 ruling

It was this distortion of congressional intent, so blatant that one wonders whether it was deliberate, that Justice William Douglas blistered in his dissent:
 

At times, the legislative history of a measure is so clouded or obscure that we must perforce give some meaning to vague words.  But where, as here, the consensus of the House is so clear, we should carry out its purpose ... [namely that] the regime of violence, whatever its precise objective, is a common device of extortion and is condemned by the Act. (10)
   History of Congressional Oversight
Congress last held hearings specifically on the Hobbs Act in 1984. (11)   Those hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee identified the ineffectiveness of the Hobbs Act as interpreted by Enmons, demonstrating that labor violence was coordinated by union officials. In some cases, union officials facilitated the violence by busing union members to the site of violence.  

As a result of the hearings, several amendments (12) to the Hobbs Act were proposed. The amendments would have dramatically limited the conduct required to be "wrongful", and explicitly extended the Hobbs Act to punish violence used to achieve legitimate union objectives.  The amendments were not enacted.  

In 1985, the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee also held hearings on the need for changes to the Hobbs Act. (13)  In particular, the hearings targeted the violence related to a strike by the Cement Workers Union against the Missouri Portland Cement Company.  

The testimony revealed a pattern of escalating violence which ultimately jeopardized innocent third parties.  Those third parties included firemen called after strikers cut down power lines.  The manager of a trucking terminal and his wife were repeatedly fired on by high powered rifles.  Their sin was allowing some of Portland Cement's truckers to use the terminal. Throughout the strike, the local's president and vice president encouraged the pickets and personally blocked entrance to the plant.  

More importantly, Illinois State Policemen watched repeated instances of criminal conduct without responding.
 

http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LABOR RELATIONS RESEARCH
5211 Port Royal Road  Suite 510  Springfield, Virginia  22151
 VIOLENCE: ORGANIZED LABOR'S UNIQUE PRIVILEGE, AMERICAN TERRORISM
 By David Kendrick, Program Director
Copyright 1996, The National Institute for Labor Relations Research
 http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sixty years after the rise of organized labor's political machine  during the  New Deal  (ROOSEVELTS SOCIALISM) union officials remain the only class of citizens allowed, under federal law, to commit violence against their fellow citizens
Under the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous  Enmons decision, union officials may destroy property, assault employees, and even murder them, and escape prosecution under federal extortion laws, so long as such violence is undertaken to secure what the Supreme Court called "legitimate" objectives, such as wage increases.
Our investigation of  labor violence  has revealed  thousands  of incidents of vandalism, arson, assaults, threats and murder perpetrated by union officials  and their agents compiled  from newspaper reports  over the past two decades.  As discovered from an in-depth investigation of the  New York Daily News strike of 1990 , such violence is often planned by union officials who seek out an employer's vulnerable points, and move on to other points when they fail to exact enough punishment
The scope of this crisis is underscored by the fact that while the Institute has compiled about 500 reports of union violence since 1975 in New York state, the "b New York City Police Department recorded more than 500 violent incidents in the 1990 Daily News strike alone.

The failure of law enforcement to curb strike violence  is particularly troubling.  While the Institute has recorded over  8,500 incidents  of union violence since 1975, only  220 reports of convictions  have been found.  In the Daily News strike, then-governor  Mario Cuomo down-played the violence  and refused to acknowledge any conspiracy on the part of the Newspaper and Magazine Drivers hierarchy to  firebomb newsstands  whose owners sold the Daily News.   Even the F.B.I. declined to investigate the violence, citing the Enmons decision as their chief constraint.
http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm

CUOMOS (DEMOCRAT LIBERAL) WRITE YOUR SENATOR TO OVERTURN THE ENMONS DECISION BEFORE MORE ARE KILLED BY AMERICAN TERRORISTS, UNIONS
When truck driver Eddie York was murdered in 1993  for crossing a United Mine Workers (UMW) picket line , federal authorities could charge his killer with nothing more serious than "incapacitating" a driver on a federal road.  Given the UMW's enormous political influence in West Virginia, no state charges have ever been brought against the UMW militant who made  York's wife a widow and left his children fatherless.

 It is highly impractical to prosecute union militants for violent activities under federal laws targeting organized crime.  It isn't enough to substantiate a criminal act.  Federal law requires proof of at least two commissions of the same crime  to invoke its racketeering law.
 SO, KILL ONE, LET ONE GO?
Meanwhile, with an increasing number of states enacting extortion laws exempting union officials from prosecution  for the so-called "legitimate" objectives cited in Enmons, the federal government's intervention is required to end a regime in which, according to Nobel laureate Friedrich A. Hayek, "They  [unions] have become the only important instance in which governments singly  fail in their prime function -- the prevention of coercion and violence."

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LABOR RELATIONS RESEARCH
5211 Port Royal Road  Suite 510  Springfield, Virginia  22151  
http://www.nilrr.org/hobbs.htm

VIOLENCE: ORGANIZED LABOR'S UNIQUE PRIVILEGE
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
History of Judicial Involvement

After conducting a series of field hearings in 1933, the Copeland subcommittee of the Senate committee on Interstate Commerce introduced 13 bills intended to prevent the spread of organized crime, including the Anti-Racketeering Act of 1934. (1)  As finally enacted by the House and Senate, the Act made it a felony to obtain money or other "valuable consideration" by the use or threat of force, violence or coercion, so long as the act or threat had a connection to interstate commerce, and that the consideration did not include "the payment of wages by a bonafide employer to a bonafide employee." (2)  How this applied to union violence, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in 1942.  

After passage of the Anti-Racketeering Act, Local 807 of the Teamsters decided to expand their territory outside of New York City.  In order to persuade truckers from outside New York City to use the local's services, members would greet the truckers with guns and charge a toll equal to one day's union wage.  In some cases, the members of local 807 would drive the trucks into the city.  In other cases, the members took the money and departed.  In no case were the members of local 807 employed by the out-of-town trucking companies.  

Since these tactics at least doubled the cost of transporting goods into New York, most if not all of the local trucking companies signed contracts with Local 807.  However, federal charges were filed against Local 807 and some of its members under the anti-racketeering law.  

In 1942, the Supreme Court ruled, to the considerable consternation of Congress, that "bonafide employees" could include individuals who had never applied for a job with the employer.  Additionally the "wage" exception could include other labor representation issues. (3)

In reaction to the Local 807 decision, several attempts were made to amend the Anti-Racketeering Act.  Finally, Congress enacted the Hobbs Act in 1951. (4)  This time, Congress completely eliminated the "wage" exception, under which union officials could extort wage increases, as well as a clause exempting union violence from prosecution if such action would impair the "rights of legitimate labor organizations in lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof...." (5)

But in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a ruling that still stands today, disemboweled the Hobbs Act of its central purpose to criminalize extortion by union officials and their agents.

In the Enmons (6) case, three members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) were indicted for firing high-powered rifles at three utility company transformers, draining the oil from a transformer, and blowing up a transformer substation during a strike.
However, HERE COME DA JUDGE, HERE COME DA JUDGE
 However, the U.S. District Court in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, dismissed the charges on the grounds that, in the context of a strike, the militants' actions were not illegal since they were in pursuit of "legitimate" union objectives.

Although the Hobbs Act had eliminated any mention of "legitimate" objectives which might justify union officials' extortion, a plurality of the Supreme Court decided that Congress had retained an ambiguity.

That ambiguity concerned a requirement for the "wrongful" use of force, violence or fear, as an element of the crime. (7)  The majority opinion agonizes over whether "wrongful" becomes superfluous, unless it is limited to cases in which the ends, as well as the means, are unlawful.  

"[W]rongful" [violence] has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property. (8)  (emphasis added)
In short, the plurality held that the Hobbs Act did not reach "the use of violence to achieve legitimate union objectives...." (9)  The Court defined legitimate union objectives to include higher wages in return for genuine services. Legitimate objectives would exclude the extraction of wages for "imposed, unwanted, superfluous and fictitious services" or personal payoffs.  
Either forgetting or ignoring the fact that Congress passed the Hobbs Act in outraged response to the High Court's Local 807 decision 31 years earlier, the Court interpreted the Hobbs Act to punish only those acts punishable under that 1942 ruling

It was this distortion of congressional intent, so blatant that one wonders whether it was deliberate, that Justice William Douglas blistered in his dissent:
 

At times, the legislative history of a measure is so clouded or obscure that we must perforce give some meaning to vague words.  But where, as here, the consensus of the House is so clear, we should carry out its purpose ... [namely that] the regime of violence, whatever its precise objective, is a common device of extortion and is condemned by the Act. (10)
   History of Congressional Oversight
Congress last held hearings specifically on the Hobbs Act in 1984. (11)   Those hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee identified the ineffectiveness of the Hobbs Act as interpreted by Enmons, demonstrating that labor violence was coordinated by union officials. In some cases, union officials facilitated the violence by busing union members to the site of violence.  

As a result of the hearings, several amendments (12) to the Hobbs Act were proposed. The amendments would have dramatically limited the conduct required to be "wrongful", and explicitly extended the Hobbs Act to punish violence used to achieve legitimate union objectives.  The amendments were not enacted.  

In 1985, the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee also held hearings on the need for changes to the Hobbs Act. (13)  In particular, the hearings targeted the violence related to a strike by the Cement Workers Union against the Missouri Portland Cement Company.  

The testimony revealed a pattern of escalating violence which ultimately jeopardized innocent third parties.  Those third parties included firemen called after strikers cut down power lines.  The manager of a trucking terminal and his wife were repeatedly fired on by high powered rifles.  Their sin was allowing some of Portland Cement's truckers to use the terminal. Throughout the strike, the local's president and vice president encouraged the pickets and personally blocked entrance to the plant.  

More importantly, Illinois State Policemen watched repeated instances of criminal conduct without responding.
 

ACLU CASES, GAGGING OWN MEMBERS
---------
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41751
ACLU fulfilling communist agenda
Posted: December 03, 2004
1:00 am Eastern

By Devvy Kidd
© 2009 WorldNetDaily.com

Every day, the headlines scream with some new threat from the American

Civil Liberties Union. I believe it's important to look behind the curtain and

discover the origins of groups and organizations to better understand their

activities.

The ACLU was founded in the 1920s by Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman,

described as a "progressive" and "the perfect feminist."

Earl Browder was general secretary of the Communist Party of the United

States from 1930 through its dissolution in 1944. When the party was

reconstituted as the Communist Political Association later that year,

Browder was chosen as its president. Browder proudly proclaimed that the

ACLU functioned as "a transmission belt" for the party. To deny the

ACLU's founding was attached at the hip to communist organizations is to

deny what can easily be proven as truth.

For the past few decades, the ACLU has been on a major crusade to

destroy Christianity in America, promote filth under "freedom of speech

and expression," and of course, vigorously defend the homosexual culture of

death. On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr., D-Fla., read

a list of 45 communist goals into the Congressional Record. Below are the

communist goals being implemented by the ACLU in their quest to destroy

America's culture and traditions:

    * Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American

institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

    * Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for

socialism and current communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get

control of teachers associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

    * Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic

expression. An American communist cell was told to "eliminate all good

sculpture from parks and buildings," substituting shapeless, awkward and

meaningless forms.

    * Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to

promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

    * Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and

a violation of free speech and free press.

    * Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography

and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and television.

    * Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural

and healthy."

    * Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social"

religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual

maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

    * Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on

the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and

state."

    * Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of

American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big

picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the communists took

over. Obliterating the American past, with its antecedents in principles of

freedom, liberty and private ownership is a major goal of the communists

then and now.

    * Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any

part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental

health clinics, etc.

    * Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy

divorce.

Anyone who has been following the destructive path of the ACLU can easily

see how effective these communist goals have been implemented to "promote

democracy" and protect your "civil rights." Lenin stated: "Communism alone

is capable of providing really complete democracy." (See Tucker, "The Lenin

Anthology"). James Madison, known as the "Father of the Constitution" had

something different to say about a democracy:

    Democracy is the most vile form of government ... democracies have

ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention, have ever been found

incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, and have in

general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their

deaths.

Perhaps it's time to recognize the ACLU as the American Communist

Lawyers Union instead of their disingenuous "civil rights" stage name.

No organization can exist without memberships and funding. It is

inconceivable to me how anyone who claims to be a Christian, lawyer or

layman, could belong to such an anti-American organization as the ACLU.

Burn your card and get out. Organizations like Working Assets, tobacco

companies and big corporations all donate to the ACLU, which in turn uses

that money to buy the favors of those who serve in Congress – who vote to

unconstitutionally fund the activities of the ACLU under the Civil Rights

Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976.

If Americans really want to put the ACLU out of business, remove yourself

as a member of their organization, boycott companies that donate to them

and demand these public servants in Congress repeal the unconstitutional

funding of this subversive organization.

There is no justification under Art. 1, Sec. 8, to steal from the people's

treasury to give money to the ACLU or any other organization for "civil

rights" lawsuits. Your Congress critter will be in your district during the

month of December – make the most of it.
DEVVY'S IN TEXAS NOW, GO GIRL, BUT MARRIED, SIGH
Devvy Kidd authored the booklet, "Why A Bankrupt America and Blind

Loyalty," which has over 2 million copies in distribution. She has been a

guest more than 1,600 times on radio shows, run for Congress twice and is

a highly sought after public speaker. To learn more about Devvy, please

visit her website.
---------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union
Founded in 1920 by Crystal Eastman, Roger Baldwin and Walter Nelles,[4]

the ACLU was the successor organization to the earlier National Civil

Liberties Bureau founded during World War I.[5] The ACLU reported over

500,000 members at the end of 2005.

Lawsuits brought by the ACLU have been influential in the evolution of

Constitutional law.[6] The ACLU provides legal assistance in cases in which it

considers civil liberties to be at risk. Even when the ACLU does not provide

direct legal representation, it often submits amicus curiae briefs.

Outside of its legal work, the organization has also engaged in lobbying of

elected officials and political activism.[7] The ACLU has been critical of

elected officials and policies of both Democrats and Republicans.
History

Roger Nash Baldwin became head of the National Civil Liberties Bureau

(NCLB) in 1917, AKA AMERICAN COMMUNIST PARTY. An independent

outgrowth of the American Union Against Militarism, the Bureau opposed

American intervention in World War I. The NCLB provided legal advice and

aid for conscientious objectors and those being prosecuted under the

Espionage Act of 1917 or the Sedition Act of 1918. In 1920, the NCLB

changed its name to the American Civil Liberties Union, with Baldwin

continuing as its director and Walter Nelles as chief counsel. Jeannette

Rankin, Jane Addams, Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver, Helen Keller, along

with other former members of the NCLB, assisted Baldwin with the

founding of the ACLU.[1] Among the founding members was Felix

Frankfurter, who later became an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

of the United States.[8] DeSilver and Nelles were Baldwin's closest

associates.[9][10]

The ACLU was formed to protect aliens threatened with deportation, along

with U.S. nationals threatened with criminal charges by U.S. Attorney

General Alexander Mitchell Palmer for their communist or socialist activities

and agendas[11] (see Palmer Raids). It also opposed attacks on the rights

of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) and other labor unions to

meet and organize.

In 1940, the ACLU formally barred communists from leadership or staff

positions, and would take the position that it did not want communists as

members either. The board declared that it was "inappropriate for any

person to serve on the governing committees of the Union or its staff, who

is a member of any political organization which supports totalitarianism in

any country, or who by his public declarations indicates his support of such

a principle."[12] The purge, which was led by Baldwin, himself a former

supporter of communism, began with the ouster of Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a

member of both the Communist Party USA and the Industrial Workers of

the World.[13]

Conservatives and Republicans have frequently criticized the ACLU. One

well-known example occurred during the 1988 presidential election: then-

Vice President George H. W. Bush noted that his opponent Michael Dukakis

had described himself as a "card-carrying member of the ACLU" and used

that as evidence that Dukakis was "a strong, passionate liberal" and "out of

the mainstream."[14] The phrase subsequently was used by the organization

in an advertising campaign.[15]

After the September 11, 2001 attacks and the ensuing debate regarding

the proper balance of civil liberties and security, including the passage of

the USA PATRIOT Act, the membership of the ACLU increased by 20%,

bringing the group's total enrollment to 330,000.[16] The growth continued,

and by August 2008 ACLU membership was greater than 500,000.[17]

Leadership, funding and organizational structure

Leadership
Nadine Strossen, Former President (1991-2008)

Currently, the leadership of the ACLU includes Executive Director Anthony

Romero[18] and President Susan Herman.[19] The national board of

directors consists of representatives elected by each state affiliate as well

as at-large delegates elected by boards of each affiliate. Each state

affiliate has an Executive Director and Board of Directors.

Notably, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a current Justice of the Supreme Court, was

the first director of the ACLU's Women's Rights Project.[20] And Judith

Krug, Director of the American Library Association Office for Intellectual

Freedom[21] since 1967,[22] was for three years concurrently on the Board

of Directors of the Illinois Division of the ACLU. "She has been very

successful in promulgating the ACLU's views within the country's libraries,

and the ACLU has honored her with awards."[23]

In 2005, in response to increasing internal strife, the ACLU national board

attempted to impose what many critics labeled a "gag rule" on its

employees. The proposal included the rule that "a board member may

publicly disagree with an ACLU policy position, but may not criticize the

ACLU Board or staff." The measures proved highly unpopular with free

speech advocates within the ACLU, and were eventually shelved.[24]

Funding

The ACLU receives funding from a large number of sources. For example, in

2004, the ACLU and its affiliate, the American Civil Liberties Union

Foundation reported revenues totaling $85,559,887. Of that total, 87% was

from donations and dues from the public, 1.8% from program services,

including awards of legal fees, royalty income, and literature sales, and the

remainder from investment income and income from sale of assets. The

distribution and amount of funding for state affiliates varies from state to

state. For example, the ACLU of New Jersey reported $1.2 million in

income to both the ACLU-NJ and its affiliated tax-exempt foundation in

the 2005 fiscal year. Of that income, 46% came from contributions, 19%

came from membership dues, 18% came from court awarded attorney fees,

12% came from grants, 4% came from investment income and the remainder

from other sources. Its expenses in the same period were $800,000, of

which 12% went to administration and management. Smaller affiliates with

fewer resources, such as that in Nebraska, receive subsidies from the

national ACLU.[25]

Foundations

In October 2004, the ACLU rejected $1.5 million from both the Ford and

Rockefeller Foundations. The Foundations had adopted language from the

USA PATRIOT Act into their donation agreements, including a clause

stipulating that none of the money would go to "underwriting terrorism or

other unacceptable activities." The ACLU views this clause, both in Federal

law and in the donors' agreements, as a threat to civil liberties, saying it is

overly broad and ambiguous.[26]

Court awarded damages and attorney's fees

In 2004, court-awarded damages and attorney fees composed a 3% (net) of

ACLU Foundation funding; state affiliates also receive money from such

fees, although the national headquarters does not.[27]

Recovery of attorney's' fees by non-profit legal advocacy organizations is

common practice. The pro-life Thomas More Law Center, for example,

generally seeks, and is successful in, recovery of attorney's fees in the

same manner as the ACLU.[28][29] In 2005, the Thomas More law center

derived 4.8% of its funding from court-awarded legal fees in this manner.

[30]

Due to the nature of its legal work, the ACLU is often involved in litigation

against governmental bodies, which are generally protected from adverse

monetary judgments: a town, state or federal agency may be required to

change its laws or behave differently, but not to pay monetary damages

except by an explicit statutory waiver.[31][32]

In some cases, the law permits plaintiffs who successfully sue government

agencies to collect money damages or other monetary relief. In particular,

the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award Act of 1976 leaves the government

liable in some civil rights cases. Fee awards under this civil rights statute

are considered "equitable relief" rather than damages, and government

entities are not immune from equitable relief.[33] Under laws such as this,

the ACLU and its state affiliates sometimes share in monetary judgments

against government agencies.[34]

The ACLU has received court awarded fees in numerous church-state cases.

The Georgia affiliate was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county

demanding the removal of a Ten Commandments display from its

courthouse;[35] a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a

different county, led to a $74,462 judgment.[36] Meanwhile, the State of

Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000,

and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases.

[37][38] The Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005, introduced by

Representative John Hostettler, sought to alter the rules put in place by

the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award Act of 1976 to prevent monetary

judgments in the particular case of violations of church-state separation.

[39] Also, groups such as the American Legion have taken stances opposing

the ACLU's right to collect fees under such legislation.[40]

Organizational structure
Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida chapter, joins in a protest

of the Guantanamo Bay detentions with Amnesty International.

The national headquarters of the ACLU is located in New York City.

Positions

While the bulk of the ACLU's cases involve the First Amendment (FOR

COMMUNISTS ONLY), Equal Protection, due process, and the right to

privacy,[41] the organization has taken positions on a wide range of issues.

According to the ACLU, it supports:
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa speaking at an ACLU event.

Villaraigosa is a former board member and president of the ACLU Southern

California affiliate.

    * Religious liberty: Defends the individual rights of Americans of all

religions to practice and/or display affirmations of their faith in public, but

not on public property with government sponsorship or endorsement.[42][43]
    * The decriminalization of drugs such as heroin, cocaine and marijuana.

[44]
    * Separation of church and state; under this mandate, the ACLU:
          o Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols

on public property.
          o Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of

"moments of silence"[45] in public schools or schools funded with public

money.
    * Full freedom of speech and of the press, including school newspapers.
    * Abolition of capital punishment.[46]
    * Reproductive rights, including access to contraception and abortion.
    * Full civil rights for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender)

people, including government benefits for same-sex couples equal to those

provided for heterosexual ones.
    * Affirmative action as a means of redressing past discrimination and

achieving a racially diverse student body.[47]
    * The rights of defendants and suspects against unconstitutional police

practices.
    * Privacy as it "works to preserve the American tradition that the

government not track individuals or violate privacy unless it has evidence of

wrongdoing."[48]
    * Immigrants' rights by "challenging unconstitutional laws and practices,

countering the myths upon which many of these laws are based."[49]
    * Concerning the Second Amendment, specifically gun control, the ACLU

embraces the States' Right Model interpretation of the Second Amendment,

which only recognizes a state's right to possess firearms, the organization

officially declares itself "neutral" on the issue of gun control, pointing to

previous Supreme Court decisions such as United States v. Miller to argue

that the Second Amendment applies to the preservation or efficiency of a

well-regulated militia, and that "except for lawful police and military

purposes, the possession of firearms by individuals is not constitutionally

protected."[50]

The ACLU has opposed some campaign finance reform laws such as the

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which it considers an inappropriate

restriction upon freedom of expression. It does not have a policy of blanket

opposition to all laws on campaign finance.[51]

While the ACLU does oppose the use of crosses in public monuments,[52]

[53] there have been false allegations that the ACLU has urged the removal

of cross-shaped headstones from federal cemeteries and has opposed

prayer by soldiers; such charges have been deemed to be urban legends.

[54]

Controversial stances
Sister project     Wikinews has related news: ACLU President Strossen on

religion, drugs, guns and impeaching George Bush

The ACLU has for years been a controversial organization by nature,[55]

with most of their support coming from the left and opposition from the

right. The reasons for opposition are varied, although conservatives often

view the ACLU stance of separation of church and state as anti-religious,

[56] and their defense of both accused and convicted criminals as

undermining law and order. Furthermore, the nature of the ACLU is that

they defend even the most unpopular forms of speech and expression,

notably those with which most other organizations would not wish to

associate themselves. Often, its clients are notoriously unpopular such as

Neo-Nazi organizations and the North American Man/Boy Love Association

(NAMBLA), a group which supports lifting all age restrictions on pederasty.

In the case of NAMBLA, the ACLU's Massachusetts affiliate represented

the organization, on first amendment grounds, in a wrongful death civil suit

that was based solely on the fact that a man who raped and murdered a

child had visited the NAMBLA website.[57] Although the ACLU does not

endorse NAMBLA's message, its defense of the group has been widely

criticized. Additionally, the ACLU has initiated several court cases involving

government funding of organizations that discriminate against homosexuals

and atheists, prominently including the Boy Scouts of America.[58]

Among the most notable controversial cases which involved the ACLU are

the following:

    * The ACLU currently opposes, under the ex post facto clause of the

Constitution, the retroactive application of Megan’s Law (which requires law

enforcement authorities to identify convicted sex offenders to the public at

large through various media outlets) to persons convicted before the law

was passed.[59][60] The ACLU initially opposed the bill in its entirety,

considering it "misguided political posturing that [would] do nothing to

reduce sex crimes,"[61] but has not advocated that position recently.

[citation needed]
    * The ACLU also defended Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North,[57] whose

conviction was tainted by coerced testimony — a violation of his fifth

amendment rights.[62]
    * The ACLU fought for the Westboro Baptist Church and Shirley

Phelps-Roper after legislation prevented the group from picketing outside of

veterans' funerals.[63] The Westboro Baptist Church is infamous for their

picket signs that contain messages such as, "God Hates Fags," "Thank God

for Dead Soldiers" and "Thank God for 9/11." The ACLU issued a

statement calling the legislation a "law that infringes on Shirley Phelps-

Roper's rights to religious liberty and free speech."[64] The suit was

successful.[65]
    * The ACLU has filed 6 lawsuits against the Tangipahoa Parish,

Louisiana school board over what the group sees as teacher-led prayer in

school activities.[66]
    * The ACLU defended Frank Snepp, formerly of the Central Intelligence

Agency, from an attempt by the government agency to enforce a gag order

against him.[67]
    * The ACLU has aided the Florida Justice Institute and

WriteAPrisoner.com in supporting prisoner's rights, especially what the

ACLU sees as the First Amendment right to post online profiles seeking pen

pals during their incarceration and jobs upon their release.
    * In 2006, the ACLU of Washington state and the Second Amendment

Foundation jointly filed a lawsuit[68] against the North Central Regional

Library District (NCRL) in Washington State for its policy of refusing to

disable restrictions upon an adult patron's request. Library patrons

attempting to access pro-gun web sites were blocked, and the library

refused to remove the blocks.

Much ACLU work is done in the political arena where it faces frequent

controversy as well.

    * The ACLU has been a vocal opponent of the USA PATRIOT Act of

2001, the PATRIOT 2 Act of 2003, and associated legislation made in

response to the threat of domestic terrorism. The ACLU believes such

legislation violates either the letter or the spirit of the U.S. Bill of Rights.

In response to a requirement of the USA PATRIOT Act, the ACLU

withdrew from the Combined Federal Campaign.[69] The requirement was

that ACLU employees must be checked against a federal anti-terrorism

watch list. The ACLU has stated that it would "reject $500,000 in

contributions from private individuals rather than submit to a government

'blacklist' policy."[69]

See also: American Civil Liberties Union v. Ashcroft (2004)

    * The ACLU opposes the use of capital punishment, calling it "the

ultimate denial of civil liberties."[70] The ACLU claims that the death

penalty is unfairly applied to racial minorities and the poor, and considers it

"cruel and unusual" punishment.[71] The organization often opposes

executions on the grounds that the present method of lethal injection

sometimes goes awry.[72]

    * The ACLU's position on spam is considered controversial by a broad

cross-section of political points of view. In 2000, Marvin Johnson, a

legislative counsel for the ACLU, stated that proposed anti-spam legislation

infringed on free speech by denying anonymity and by forcing spam to be

labeled as such: "Standardized labeling is compelled speech." He also

stated, "It's relatively simple to click and delete."[73] The debate found

the ACLU joining with the Direct Marketing Association and the Center for

Democracy and Technology in criticizing a bipartisan bill in the House of

Representatives in 2000. As early as 1997 the ACLU had taken a strong

position that nearly all spam legislation was improper,[74] although it has

supported "opt-out" requirements in some cases. The ACLU opposed the

2003 CAN-SPAM act[75] suggesting that it could have a chilling effect on

speech in cyberspace.

Notable historical cases
Main article: List of court cases involving the American Civil Liberties Union

Since its founding, the ACLU has been involved in many cases. A few of the

most significant are discussed here.

1920–1960

In 1925, the ACLU persuaded John T. Scopes to defy Tennessee's anti-

evolution law in a court test. Clarence Darrow, a member of the ACLU

National Committee, headed Scopes' legal team. The prosecution, led by

William Jennings Bryan, contended that the Bible should be interpreted

literally in teaching creationism in school. The ACLU lost the case and

Scopes was fined $100. The Tennessee Supreme Court later upheld the law

but overturned the conviction on a technicality.[76][77]

In 1954, the ACLU filed an amicus brief in the case of Brown v. Board of

Education, which led to the ban on racial segregation in U.S. public

schools.[78]

1960–2000

In 1967, the ACLU successfully argued against state bans on interracial

marriage, in the case of Loving v. Virginia.[79]

In 1973, the ACLU was the first major national organization to call for the

impeachment of President Richard Nixon, giving as reasons the Nixon

administration's violations of civil liberties.[11] That same year, the ACLU

was involved in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, in which the

Supreme Court held that the constitutional right of privacy extended to

women seeking abortions.

In 1977, the ACLU filed suit against the Village of Skokie, Illinois, seeking

an injunction against the enforcement of three town ordinances outlawing

Neo-Nazi parades and demonstrations. Skokie, Illinois at the time had a

majority population of Jews, totaling 40,000 of 70,000 citizens. A federal

district court struck down the ordinances in a decision eventually affirmed

by the Supreme Court. The ACLU's action in this case led to a rift between

the Jewish Defense League and the ACLU. According to David Hamlin,

executive director of the Illinois ACLU, "...the Chicago office which chose

to provide legal counsel to neo-Nazis who have been planning to march in

Skokie, has lost about 25% of its membership and nearly one-third of its

budget." 30,000 ACLU members resigned in protest.[80][81][82] In his

February 23, 1978 decision overturning the town ordinances, US District

Court Judge Bernard M. Decker described the principle involved in the case

as follows: "It is better to allow those who preach racial hatred to expend

their venom in rhetoric rather than to be panicked into embarking on the

dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens

may say and hear ... The ability of American society to tolerate the

advocacy of even hateful doctrines ... is perhaps the best protection we

have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this

country."[83]

In the 1980s, the ACLU filed suit to challenge the Arkansas 1981

creationism statute, which required the teaching in public schools of the

biblical account of creation as a scientific alternative to evolution. The law

was declared unconstitutional by a Federal District Court.[84]

In 1982, the ACLU became involved in a case involving the distribution of

child pornography (New York v. Ferber).[85] In an amicus brief, the ACLU

argued that the law in question "has criminalized the dissemination, sale or

display of constitutionally protected non-obscene materials which portray

juveniles in sexually related roles," while arguing that child pornography

deemed obscene under the Miller test deserved no constitutional protection

and could be banned.[86]

2000–present

In a 2002 letter, the ACLU stated that it "opposes child pornography that

uses real children in its depictions," but that material "which is produced

without using real children, and is not otherwise obscene, is protected under

the First Amendment."[87]

During the 2004 trial regarding allegations of Rush Limbaugh's drug abuse,

the ACLU argued that his privacy should not have been compromised by

allowing law enforcement examination of his medical records.[88]

In June 2004, the ACLU received numerous phone calls from angry parents

after the Dover Area School District in Dover, Pennsylvania passed a

curriculum change requiring that its high school biology students be read a

one-minute statement saying that the theory of evolution is not fact and

mentioning intelligent design as an alternative theory. Believing that the

school was promoting a religious idea in the classroom and violating the

Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, several Dover parents called

the ACLU to discuss a possible lawsuit against the school. The ACLU, along

with Americans United for Separation of Church and State and Pepper

Hamilton, LLP, went on to represent the parents, the plaintiffs, in Kitzmiller

v. Dover Area School District. After a more than 40-day trial, Judge John

E. Jones III ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that intelligent design

is not science and permanently forbidding the Dover school system from

teaching intelligent design in science classes.[89]

In January 2006, the ACLU filed a lawsuit, ACLU v. NSA, in a federal

district court in Michigan, challenging government spying in the NSA

warrantless surveillance controversy.[90] On August 17, 2006, that court

ruled that the warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and

ordered it ended immediately.[91] However, the order is stayed pending an

appeal. The Bush administration did suspend the program while the appeal

was being heard.[92] In February 2008, the US Supreme Court "turned

down an appeal from the [ACLU] to let it pursue a lawsuit against the

program that began shortly after the Sept. 11 terror attacks."[93]

The ACLU and other organizations also filed separate lawsuits around the

country against telecommunications companies. The ACLU filed a lawsuit in

Illinois (Terkel v. AT&T) which was dismissed because of the State Secrets

Privilege[94] and two others in California requesting injunctions against

AT&T and Verizon.[95] On August 10, 2006, the lawsuits against the

telecommunications companies were transferred to a federal judge in San

Francisco.[96]

After the town of Hazleton, Pennsylvania passed an ordinance to punish

landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and businesses who hired illegal

immigrants, the ACLU and Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund

sued Hazleton, saying the ordinance was unconstitutional.[97][98] On July

26, 2007, a federal court agreed and struck down the Hazleton ordinance;

Hazleton's mayor promised to appeal the decision.[99]

In 2008, the ACLU stated that it would represent defendants arrested in

Flint, Michigan for disorderly conduct when sagging (wearing pants low

enough to show underwear), partly on the basis of unconstitutional racial

profiling.[100]

After the City of Indianapolis, Indiana began cracking down on when, where

and how homeless persons can solicit donations, the ACLU sued Indianapolis,

claiming the city's police unconstitutionally forced homeless persons to

produce identification without probable cause.[101]

Bibliography, SEE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union
--------------
ACLU Gags Its Own Members

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2006/05/aclu_bids_to_ga.html
Since its inception, the American Civil Liberties Union has been about

contributing to the corrosion of American civilization, with the ultimate

objective of bringing about its demise. Or maybe you thought it had

something to do with liberties? Certainly not for Christians. Not even for

ACLU members themselves.

True to its communist roots, the ACLU is considering new measures to stifle

internal dissent. Proposed new standards include the following language:

Where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of

civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting

the fact of such disagreement. ... Directors should remember that there is

always a material prospect that public airing of the disagreement will affect

the ACLU adversely in terms of public support and fund-raising. ... A

director... may not criticize the ACLU board or staff.
Naive liberals and libertarians who have been drawn to the ACLU by its

free speech rhetoric are showing early signs of waking up to smell the

coffee. Clearly misjudging the purpose of the organization, former board

member Nat Hentoff gasped:

For the national board to consider promulgating a gag order on its members

— I can't think of anything more contrary to the reason the ACLU exists.
But executive director Anthony Romero points out that it's hardly novel that

the ACLU would attempt to suppress speech it doesn't care to hear:

Take hate speech. While believing in free speech, we do not believe in or

condone speech that attacks minorities.
Of course, this depends on the minority. White Baptists who live in the

South are a minority. But we can rest easy in the knowledge that the ACLU

will go to any length to defend our right to make fun of them.

Behind the scenes, things are getting ugly, as some board members begin to

realize the nature of their own organization. They don't like the

sophisticated data-mining techniques used to recruit members, or the

tactics employed to silence abortion opponents.

Those in favor of the gag order are right to worry that if the public knew

more, fundraising would suffer. As too few people are aware, the ACLU

was founded by a radical named Roger Baldwin, who summed up his motives

and objectives like this:

I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied

class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the

goal.
Now that communists are no longer the primary threat to this country, the

ACLU has found a new ally in radical Islam. The organization has impeded

the war on terror every step of the way, actively encouraging municipalities

not to comply with the Patriot Act and even working with the likes of

Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist Sami Al-Arian and the Hamas front group

CAIR.

Communism and Islamic extremism would have limited appeal to a group truly

devoted to civil liberties. But the ACLU is not on the side of the angels —

as they would like to prevent disillusioned members from letting the world

find out.

With thanks to V the K.


ACLU head Anthony Romero.
Posted by Van Helsing at May 24, 2006 9:41 PM

Comments
I don't know why this strikes me as funny, but perhaps you should crop the

picture so it only shows him from the neck up, then title it, "The head of

the ACLU, Anthony Romero."

Posted by: Steve at May 24, 2006 10:04 PM

He looks like an illegal alien,anybody check him out?


Posted by: mickey at May 25, 2006 12:00 AM

VtK Tip o' The Day presents the Number One Reason to Oppose Bush's

Amnesty Plan: Carter praises Bush's immigration stance

Posted by: V the K at May 25, 2006 11:09 AM

Well, it seems only fair. They've been making the rest of us gag for

years...

UNIONS VS. THE ECONOMY
http://www.awb.org/news/newsletter/1102/p4doncolumn1102.htm
   High Energy Costs No Longer Offset High Labor Costs
(Washington Business - November 2002)
UNIONS, AMERICAS' TOP EXPORTER, OF JOBS

The Puget Sound region has lost more than 97,000 jobs over the last 20 months, and Washington’s unemployment rate is 7.4 percent – 32 percent higher than the national average.

One reason is labor costs. Washington’s labor costs are high and, as difficult as it will be, the Governor and Legislature must take a hard look at that before it’s too late.

We’re not talking about doing away with family-wage jobs. Good-paying jobs are a vital part of a prosperous state. But labor costs include more than just salaries. Unemployment taxes, insurance costs, and workers’ compensation premiums add another 30-percent to the cost of each employee. Bringing those costs under control would go a long way toward restoring our state’s economy while protecting good wages.

Labor unions might argue that Washington’s high wages haven’t prevented the state from enjoying economic prosperity in the past. True. But those high wages were offset by cheap electricity. In the wake of last year’s drought, those days are gone.

Just take a look at Washington’s aluminum industry. Historically, one of our state’s best source of high-paying union jobs, the state’s aluminum industry has been virtually wiped out by expensive electricity and high wages.
UNIONS, AMERICAS' TOP EXPORTER, OF JOBS

One of the few plants still operating is Goldendale Aluminum, along the Columbia River. But Goldendale needed concessions on power rates and labor costs to restart. Of course, companies can negotiate such concessions on a case-by-case basis, but the problem is much deeper. Unless it is tackled in the 2003 Legislature, we can watch our competitiveness slip away.

Here is what needs to be done in the 2003 Legislature:

1. Overhaul the state’s unemployment system. Unemployment insurance taxes will go up an average of 15 percent in January. Regardless of the outcome of Referendum 53 on Nov. 5, the system is broken and needs to be fixed.

 People who voluntarily quit, no matter what the reason, should not receive unemployment benefits.  
 Unemployment funds should not be diverted to programs which do not relate to paying benefits for those who lost their job through no fault of their own.  
 Legislators need to abandon ideas of adding more costs by paying family-leave benefits from unemployment insurance taxes.

2. Reform the Workers Compensation system. The Department of Labor and Industries (L&I) proposes an average 40 percent increase in workers comp taxes in January. Part of the problem can be traced to an under performing stock market – but only part. Vague court decisions have overturned decades of practice, expanded eligibility, and caused endless rounds of lawsuits seeking to clarify the rulings.

 The Governor and Legislature need to clarify how workers’ comp benefits should be calculated.  

3. Overturn our state’s minimum wage initiative. Automatic annual hikes in the minimum wage are making our state uncompetitive in rural border communities and drying up entry-level and secondary jobs. A minimum wage in Seattle may be absorbed, but in Clarkston, it eliminates jobs and employers.

 Legislators should pass a differential minimum wage (similar to the existing prevailing wage statute) for vulnerable employers in marginal communities.

These suggestions are not new. In fact, many of them are included in the Governor’s own competitiveness report and have been identified by the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy (WashACE), the coalition AWB co-founded with the Washington Research Council and the Washington Roundtable.

These suggestions will not sit well with labor unions, but labor leaders need to make a choice. Do they want to keep the status quo, including record jobs losses and unemployment? Or will they work with the Governor, legislators, and employers to retain high-paying family-wage jobs?

We’ll have their answer when the Legislature reconvenes in January.

Union Leader Fraud & Corruption
http://www.unionfacts.com/articles/crimeFraud.cfm

Union Leader Fraud & Corruption

  OLMS Enforcement Statistics Financial Integrity
  FY 2001  FY 2002  FY 2003  FY 2004  FY 2005  
Indictments  98 166 132 109 114
Convictions 102 90 152 111 97
Embezzlement, False Reports, Violence, And More …

Most people don't know just how many crimes are committed every year

through which union officials hurt their own members.

 The number of reputed and verified crimes is staggering. Nothing

illustrates this more clearly than the hundreds of indictments of union

officials for violations of the Labor Management and Reporting Disclosure

Act. According to the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS),

those crimes include “embezzlement, filing false reports, keeping false

records, destruction of records, extortionate picketing and deprivation of

rights by violence.” The OLMS notes:

In fiscal year 2005, OLMS completed 325 criminal cases. Indictments

increased to 114, a 16 percent increase from FY 2001. The number of

convictions dropped to 97. In addition, in FY 2005 court-ordered restitution

amounted to $23,244,979.

That's $23 million in restitution ordered for victimizing union members and

others.

  Labor Racketeering Investigations
   FY 2001   FY 2002   FY 2003   FY 2004   FY 2005  
 Cases Opened 105  125  124  135  103  
 Cases Closed 109  130  144  115  107  
 Cases referred
 for prosecution  57  74  66  87  88  
 Indictments 161  218  181  260  322  
 Convictions 92  154  120  143  196  
 Fines, restitutions,
 forfeitures,  & civil
 monetary actions
$ 42.5 million
$ 105.9 million
$ 27.9 million  
$ 36.5 million
 $ 187.9 million  

Source: Department of Labor Office of Inspector General  

Labor
Racketeering
The Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General oversees, among

other things, cases of labor racketeering -- and it stays busy. Union

officials have continued to earn their reputation for greed, corruption, and

mismanagement of union dues.

In 2005, criminal charges and fines resulting from racketeering

investigations hit five-year highs. During that time, more than 1,100

indictments have been issued, and more than $400 million in fines and

restitution has been awarded. Many of these cases involve union officials

failing to protect their members from unethical pension scams, but the OIG

also reports that it saw a three-fold increase in the number of convictions

in internal union racketeering cases between 1998 and 2004.

According to a 2004 Zogby International poll, 71% of union members said

the government ought to do more to protect union members from corrupt

union officials, and that unions should be required to give detailed reporting

of union finances to discourage abuse.

According to the FBI, four of the last eight Teamsters presidents have

been criminally indicted.

   Nearly 50% of the U.S. Department of Labor Inspector General's labor

racketeering investigations involve pensions and employee welfare benefit

plans.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General,

"Schemes involving bribery, extortion, deprivation of union rights by

violence, and embezzlement used by early racketeers are still employed to

abuse the power of unions."

islam, female genital mutilation
http://www.lifesteps.com/gm/Atoz/ency/female_genital_mutilation.jsp
Female genital mutilation
http://www.lifesteps.com/gm/Atoz/ency/female_genital_mutilation.jsp

Definition

Female genital mutilation (FGM) , MUSLIMS, is the cutting, or partial or total removal,

of the external female genitalia for cultural, religious, or other non-medical

reasons. It is usually performed on girls between the ages of four and 10.

It is also called female circumcision.

Purpose

FGM results in the cutting or removal of the tissues around the vagina that

give women pleasurable sexual feelings. This procedure is used for social

and cultural control of women's sexuality. In its most extreme form,

infibulation, where the girl's vagina is sewn shut, the procedure ensures

virginity. In some cultures where female circumcision has been a tradition

for hundreds of years, this procedure is considered a rite of passage for

young girls. Families fear that if their daughters are left uncircumcised,

they may not be marriageable. As in most cultures, there is also the fear

that the girl might bring shame to the family by being sexually active and

becoming pregnant before marriage.

Precautions

It is illegal to perform FGM in many countries, including the United States,

Canada, France, Great Britain, Sweden, Switzerland, Egypt, Kenya, and

Senegal. This procedure is usually done in the home or somewhere other

than a medical setting. Often, it is performed by a family member or by a

local "circumciser," using knives, razor blades, or other tools that may not

be sterilized before use.

Description

Female circumcision includes a wide range of procedures. The simplest form

involves a small cut to the clitoris or labial tissue. A Sunna circumcision

removes the prepuce (a fold of skin that covers the clitoris) and/or the tip

of the clitoris. A clitoridectomy removes the entire clitoris and some or all

of the surrounding tissue; this procedure occurs in approximately 80% of

cases. The most extreme form of genital mutilation is excision and

infibulation, in which the clitoris and all of the surround tissue are cut away

and the remaining skin is sewn together. Only a small opening is left for the

passage of urine and menstrual blood. Infibulation accounts for

approximately 15% of FGM procedures.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that between 100 million

and 140 million girls and women have undergone some form of FGM. As a

very deeply rooted cultural and religious tradition still practiced in over 28

African and Asian countries, up to two million girls per year are at risk.

The following countries have the highest number of occurrences of FGM:

Djibouti (98%), Egypt (97%), Eritrea (95%), Guinea (99%), Mali (94%),

Sierra Leone (90%), and Somalia (98-100%). As more people move to

Western countries from countries where female circumcision is performed,

the practice has come to the attention of health professionals in the United

States, Canada, Europe, and Australia.

In an effort to integrate old customs with modern medical care, some

immigrant families have requested that physicians perform the procedure.

While trying to be sensitive to cultural traditions, health care providers are

sometimes put in the difficult position of choosing to perform this

procedure in a medical facility under sanitary conditions, or refusing the

request, knowing that it may be done anyway with no medical supervision.

Some families who are intent on having this procedure done will take their

daughters back to the country they immigrated from in order to have the

girls circumcised.

Many national and international medical organizations including the American

Medical Association (AMA), Canadian medical organizations, and WHO

oppose the practice of female genital mutilation. The United Nations (UN)

considers female genital mutilation a violation of human rights. WHO has

undertaken a number of projects aimed at decreasing the incidence of FGM.

These include the following activities:
see page:

http://www.lifesteps.com/gm/Atoz/ency/female_genital_mutilation.jsp

Aftercare

A girl or young woman who has recently had the procedure performed may

require supportive care to control bleeding and antibiotics to prevent

infection. Women who were circumcised as children may require medical care

to treat complications. Pregnant women who have been infibulated may have

to have the labial tissue cut open to allow the baby to be delivered.

Aftercare should be provided with a supportive and nonjudgmental approach

towards the girls and women who have undergone this procedure.

Risks

The immediate risks after the procedure are hemorrhage (excessive

bleeding), severe pain, and infection (including abscesses, tetanus, and

gangrene). The most severe consequence is death due to excessive blood

loss. Long term complications include scarring, interference with the

drainage of urine and menstrual blood, chronic urinary tract infections,

pelvic and back pain, and infertility. Sexual intercourse can be painful.

Complications of childbirth are also a risk. It is unclear whether it is

related to the procedure itself, or related to the general condition of

medical practice, but infant and maternal death rates are generally higher in

those communities where female circumcision is practiced.

Key Terms

Circumcision
    A procedure, usually with religious or cultural significance, where the

prepuce or skin covering the tip of the thing on a boy, or the clitoris on a

girl, is cut away.

Clitoridectomy
    A procedure where the clitoris and possibly some of the surrounding

labial tissue at the opening of the vagina is cut away.

Infibulation
    A procedure where the tissue around the vagina is sewn shut, leaving

only a small opening for the passage of urine and menstrual blood.

For Your Information

Periodicals

    * Eyega, Z., and E. Conneely. "Facts and Fiction Regarding Female

Circumcision/Female Genital Mutilation: A Pilot Study in New York City."

Journal of American Medical Women's Association, 52 no. 4 (Fall 1997)

174-178, 187.

    * "Female Genital Mutilation: At the Crossroads of Women's Health &

Human Rights." Public Health Magazine 5 no. 1 (Winter 1995),

    * Jones, W.K., et al. "Female Genital Mutilation. Female Circumcision.

Who Is At Risk In the U.S.?" Public Health Report 112 no. 5 (Sept./Oct.

1997) 112 (5): 368-377.

    * Ortiz, E.T. "Female Genital Mutilation and Public Health: Lessons From

the British Experience." Health Care Women International 119 no. 2

(Mar./Apr. 1998) 19 (2): 119-129.

    * Winkel, E. "A Muslim Perspective on Female Circumcision." Women &

Health 23 no.1 (1995), 1-7.

Other

    * The Female Genital Mutilation Research Homepage.

http://www.hollyfeld.org/fgm.

    * "Female Genital Mutilation." The World Health Organization.

http://www.who.int/frh-whd/FGM/index.htm.
Copyright ? 1999-2005 Medical Network Inc. All rights reserved. No part

of the contents of this web site may be reproduced or transmitted in any

form or by any means, without the written permission of the publisher.

"HealthAtoZ.com" should be prominently displayed on any material

reproduced with the publisher's consent.

REAL AMERICANS 4, THE FOUNDING FATHERS 2
http://www.foundingfathers.com/individual.htm
 WHAT CAN AN INDIVIDUAL DO?

flagbanr  
The problem of big government is immense.

But no more so today than it was in 1775!

Americans must educate themselves and all that will listen.  This was once

called the land of the free and home of the brave.  It definitely takes

brave souls to win freedom and remain free.

I have put my 35+ years of experience and 3 1/2 years of deep research

into 208 pages of a book titled -
 
HOW GOVERNMENTS DISARM CITIZENS : WHEN LAWS REPLACE

RIGHTS

It is "THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE

TRUTH, SO HELP ME GOD."

GET A COPY -- STUDY IT  --  TEACH IT  --  SHARE IT  -  with many

as you can. Time is very, very short. The "chains of the Constitution" that

Thomas Jefferson referred to as binding down the government - are about

to be chained to the people of America - and bondage and slavery to BIG

GOVERNMENT will be chained in place.
--------------
 WHAT CAN A GROUP DO?

flagbanr      
The problem of big government is immense.

But no more so today than it was in 1775!

Americans must educate themselves and all that will listen.  This was once

called the land of the free and home of the brave.  It definitely takes

brave souls to win freedom and remain free.

I have put my 35+ years of experience and years of deep research into 208

pages of a book titled -

HOW GOVERNMENTS DISARM CITIZENS : WHEN LAWS REPLACE

RIGHTS

It is "THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE

TRUTH, SO HELP ME GOD."

Gun clubs, hunting clubs, shooting ranges and political organizations

concerned about the loss of RIGHTS must learn -

HOW GOVERNMENTS DISARM CITIZENS - WHEN LAWS REPLACE

RIGHTS

GET A COPY -- STUDY IT  --  TEACH IT  --  SHARE IT  -  with many

as you can. Time is very, very short. The "chains of the Constitution" that

Thomas Jefferson referred to as binding down the government - are about

to be chained to the people of America - and bondage and slavery to BIG

GOVERNMENT will be chained in place.

Volume discounts are available - and I am available for speaking and

teaching sessions.
-------------------
 The "UNITED STATES"

flagbanr      
The most misunderstood phrase in the English language is the "United

States."  The misunderstanding comes from the fact that there are actually

3 different and legally separate entities referred to as the "United States."

Many people in this country today are proud to be citizen's of the United

States, but that is not what our Founding Fathers intended for us.  They

intended us to be citizens of our state, and the it was the states that

formed the united States of America. (the States of America that united).

The Bill of Rights was written to protect the state citizens from the

centralized government, but it does not protect the citizens of the United

States from the laws of the U.S. Congress.  Only "citizens of the several

states" enjoy the protection of the Bill of Rights.

To enjoy the intended private and personal rights that create the freedoms

and liberty of America, one must understand the legal scheme that

government is and how it relys on the citizens misunderstanding of the term

"United States."

REAL AMERICANS 4, THE FOUNDING FATHERS
http://www.foundingfathers.com/brain.htm
 BRAIN WASHING

flagbanr

America has been brainwashed. The methods used are easily identified, and the success is obvious.  Hitler's mass appeal techniques have been studied and are used by government and the media.  Our schools, movies, and media have dumbed-down the populace to the point that real Americans who support limited government, limited taxation, gun ownership, etc. are considered the oddballs in America today.

During the American Revolution, the pro-big-government citizen was called as a Tory. In 1777, George Washington was told that several Tories had hanged themselves, and he replied,   "One or two have done what a great number ought to have done long ago - committed suicide. By all accounts there never existed a more miserable set of beings than these wretched creatures now are."  When the Patriotic Americans won the Revolutionary war, many thousands of Tories (liberals) were stripped of their property, and many tens-of-thousands fled the country.

American now has the biggest central government the world has ever seen.  Our military has over 700 bases in more than 100 countries.

Our national government has become the very same bloated bureaucratic democracy that once controlled us from England.
----------------
 NATURAL RIGHTS
ALL FROM FOUNDINGFATHERS.COM
flagbanr      
The Declaration of Independence declares that "the laws of Nature and Nature's God" are the source of man's rights - not government. The natural rights listed and protected by the Bill of Rights existed before government, and in no way depend on government for their existence. The U.S. Supreme Court has declared this fact.

America was founded as a republic - a "nation of laws." In a republic the government is formed by - and constrained by - laws.  But America has decayed into a democracy.  In a democracy voters can pass any law they please, and government is virtually unlimited in its ability to make laws, interpret the laws as it sees fit, and apply the laws with increasing force - to control the citizens.

An individual must know his RIGHTS, and claim them, or they simply cease to exist.
--------------
 RIGHTS VS LAWS

flagbanr      
The Declaration of Independence declares that each man has natural rights that emanate from God.  Natural rights are declared in the Declaration of Independence to be "unalienable," meaning these rights cannot be separated from the individual.  By establishing a republic, our Founding Fathers declared "unalienable" rights for each individual that cannot be altered by civil laws.

The government of the United States was created by the Constitution, which transferred 17 limited powers to the national government of the new "Republic." The Founding Fathers added a common law attachment to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, which further clarified and limited the intended powers of government.

Man's laws are known as civil law, from the Latin root word civilus, meaning citizen. Bouvier's Law Dictionary states, "the civil law is what a people establishes for itself."  In a democracy there is no such thing as a natural right also know as God-given right, since laws can be passed to control, limit or eliminate anything.  In a democracy there are "civil rights" established by civil law which are, legally speaking, civil privileges granted by man's government.

Yet today government can and does pass laws as it pleases without limitation and control. The laws of government now clearly override the natural rights of American individuals.  America is no longer a republic - it is a democracy.
-------------
 THE MILITIA

flagbanr

America's freedom and liberty was established by anti-big government gun owners  with "unregistered assault rifles," the individual men of the local militias of the several states.

The Greek philosopher Aristotle proclaimed 2,300 years ago that the prevalence of privately owned weapons was the best indicator of whether a nation was free. It is still a true measure of freedom today.  Free men own guns, slaves do not.

The United States Code (the laws of Congress) states in 10 USC 311(a) that, "The Militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age..." The US Supreme Court ruled in US v. Miller that when called into action the militia was to show up "bearing arms supplied by themselves..." Black's Law Dictionary defines militia as, "The body of citizens in a state" and not the "regular troops of a standing army." The militia is distinctly different from the National Guard or the US military forces.    

Our Founding Fathers warned that the militia must never be replaced by a standing army.  Today, our nation has the world's most powerful military; 57 government agencies carry guns and most have their own SWAT teams; and local police are trained in para-military operations.

As our Founding Fathers warned - the demise of the militia and rise of a standing army would spell the end of freedom and liberty.
-----------------
 INTENT of the FOUNDING DOCUMENTS

flagbanr      
America's founding concepts written down on paper are referred to as the founding documents.  Four of these documents are:

The Declaration of the Causes & Necessity of Taking Up Arms

The Continental Congress wrote the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms on June 6, 1775. It explains why Americans were at war with the legal, constitutional government of the American colonies. This occurred 13 months prior to the Declaration of Independence, a document possible only because the colonists did not submit their "unregistered assault weapons" to government control at Lexington and Concord.

In order to retain their natural rights, Americans were forced to take up arms.  25,000 American died carrying "unregistered assault rifles" in the 8 years of war that established American independence. The document states -   "The arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume…We will…employ for the preservation of our liberties, being with one mind resolved to die freemen, rather than to live as slaves."

The Declaration of Independence

The war for independence was 13 months old when the Declaration of Independence was written. Independence was not the reason that the minutemen had fired on government troops at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. The minutemen were defending their God-given right to have firearms, being fully aware that a heavily armed citizenry was the only source of freedom.  It had became clear to the Continental Congress that the British government would not stop its assault on the rights of the colonists - independence was the only option.

The 56 members of the Continental Congress that signed the Declaration of Independence could be hung for this treasonous anti-government act. These men pledged "our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor" in support of the Declaration. Some paid with their "Lives" and their "Fortunes," but none gave up their Sacred Honor.  The Declaration of Independence established "God" as the source of natural rights, and declared a "Duty" and "Right" of the people "to throw off such government" that abuses and usurps natural, God-given rights.

The Constitution for the United States of America

The Articles of Confederation were replaced by the Constitution for the United States of America, primarily to give the federal government more power over taxation and commerce.   The "united STATES of AMERICA" (as it appears on the Declaration of Independence) authored both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America. Note that the STATES were "united," and the Constitution was written to establish a government for the union of the states, to be called the United States of America.

Only 39 of the 55 Founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention signed the Constitution.  Sixteen refused and warned that the powers being transferred to the new government could be used to take away the freedoms just established.  They were right - the power to tax and the power to control "commerce" are being used to override the Bill of Rights - to control Americans, their rights, and soon, their guns.  

The Constitution only limits government if citizens actively enforce government limitations.

The Bill of Rights

Since the Constitution only assigned 17 limited powers to the new government many of the Founding Fathers considered a bill of rights unnecessary. But the anti-Federalists feared the power being transferred by the Constitution and wanted no misunderstanding - government was severely limited, and natural rights were not to be "infringed.".

The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to clarify that "unalienable rights," which existed before government was formed, could not and would not be "infringed" by the federal government in any way - PERIOD!  But, as many of the Founding Fathers warned, the Bill of Rights has been trampled by the unchallenged power of the government of the United States.

The 2nd Amendment "right to keep and bear arms," the true source of America's freedom and liberty, is about to disappear at the hands of the once limited government formed to protect and defend the rights of all Americans. The Bill of Rights only limits government if Americans understand and claim their rights.

To The current generation of Americans From The Founding Fathers
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/donfeder/df20010704.shtml
Don Feder (archive)

July 4, 2001

A Letter From The Founding Fathers

From: The Founding Fathers
To: The current generation of Americans

On this the 225th anniversary of our independence, those of us you call the Founding Fathers have assembled in Continental heaven to assess the condition of the republic we bequeathed to you.

It's true America has become the wealthiest, most powerful nation on earth. But so was the British Empire in 1776.

Before we get specific, we must confess that we are annoyed by your habit of misinterpreting our words. Take the First Amendment, where we said Congress shall make no law "respecting an establishment of religion." You usually neglect the other half of the injunction, "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

As anyone in the first Congress, which passed the amendment, could have told you, "establishment of religion" means an established church, which all are forced to support. We never intended to create a virtue-less republic, by prohibiting public expressions of faith.

In the Declaration of Independence, we acknowledged that rights are endowed by our Creator. Absent a Creator, there are no inalienable rights.

In the Second Amendment, we said the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. In our day, if private citizens hadn't owned guns there would have been no Lexington and Concord.

Why would we bother guaranteeing a collective right to arm state militias? The rights enumerated in the first 10 amendments are restraints on government, not grants of power to it.

If you ever wake up to what's going on, your leaders will have cause to fear an armed citizenry. We viewed elective office as a sacrifice. For your politicians, it's an opportunityr. We rid America of a monarchy. You've established an elected aristocracy. We were farmers, merchants and professionals who resumed our careers after a brief term of service and never lost touch with our constituents.

You are governed by an elite so different from you as to almost constitute a separate species. Your elected rulers hold office for 20 or 30 years, becoming increasingly detached from their roots, while rewarding themselves lavish emoluments and pensions.

We revolted over a modest tax on tea. Your tax burden is staggering. Despite the enormous expenditures of your prodigal politicians, even they can't spend it all. And still, many resist returning the federal surplus to its rightful owners. We rejected taxation without representation. You condone your own serfdom.

In the Declaration, we complained that King George III had "sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance." You complacently tolerate a bureaucracy that resembles all Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

Eat out their substance? Today, almost one in 13 Americans works for a branch of government. Harass our people? There are bureaucrats to tell you how to run your business, build on your property and raise your children. Government makes decisions for you regarding your health, safety and welfare.

We envisioned the judiciary as a coequal branch of government that interprets laws based on the clear meaning of language. Your courts have become a law unto themselves -- raising taxes, deciding elections, ordering private relationships and substituting their will for that of legislators.

We warned you against entangling alliances. You are eager to form defensive pacts with postage-stamp countries whose security couldn't conceivably be related to your own. This will only serve to drag you into their petty quarrels, sapping your strength.

We recognized that government and society must rest on divine wisdom. George Washington observed, "Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

You cultivate national immorality, in the apparent belief that abortion, adolescent access to pornography, cohabitation, public distribution of prophylactics and compulsory acceptance of perversion will somehow lead to a society whose citizens have the self-discipline to sacrifice for the common good.

Benjamin Franklin said we gave you a republic "if you can keep it." From our vantage point, it does not look promising. Were we alive today, we'd raise another rebellion.

©2001 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

ISLAMBERG 2
sent to DOD

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016411.php
Islamberg, New York: "You can hear gunfire up there. I can't understand why the FBI won't shut it down"

Paul Williams at Islamberg

The intrepid Paul Williams has a report in Canada Free Press (thanks to all who sent this in) about his visit to Islamberg, New York, a camp run by the jihadist Jamaat ul-Fuqra group. The inhabitants wouldn't let him into the compound, but he talked to some of the locals, and found out a good deal:

Islamberg is not as benign as a Buddhist monastery or a Carmelite convent. Nearly every weekend, neighbors hear sounds of gunfire. Some, including a combat veteran of the Vietnam War, have heard the bang of small explosives. None of the neighbors wished to be identified for fear of "retaliation." "We don't even dare to slow down when we drive by," one resident said. "They own the mountain and they know it and there is nothing we can do about it but move, and we can't even do that. Who wants to buy a property near that?"
The complex serves to scare the bejeesus out of the local residents. "If you go there, you better wear body armor," a customer at the Circle E Diner in Hancock said. "They have armed guards and if they shoot you, nobody will find your body."

At Cousins, a watering hole in nearby Deposit, a barfly, who didn't wish to be identified, said: "The place is dangerous. You can hear gunfire up there. I can't understand why the FBI won't shut it down."

Islamberg is a branch of Muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, who refers to himself as "the sixth Sultan Ul Faqr," Gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to Jamaat ul-Fuqra or "community of the impoverished," an organization that seeks to "purify" Islam through violence.

Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as Islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulane Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania

List of Jewish inventors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jewish_inventors
 
Robert Adler remote control
Zora Arkus-Duntov co-designer of Corvette sports car
Herman Aron [5] invented the electric meter
Ralph Baer video games console "Simon"
Lodewyk van Berken scaif 1456 diamond polishing wheel
Emile Berliner inventor of gramophone
Samuel Blum co-inventor of laser eye surgery LASIK
Baruch Blumberg and Irving Millman vaccine for Hepatitis B
Gustav Bucky radiologist bucky grid x-ray
Joel Davidson 100% solar powered vehicle = co-inventor 1954
Carl Djerassi[1], Gregory Pincus[2], and Frank Colton[3] oral contraceptive, antihistamines
Paul Eisler inventor of printed circuit board

List of Jewish inventors
Gertrude Elion anti-leukemia drugs Nobel Prize (1988) in medicine zovirax
Sam Fedida inventor of Viewdata 1971
Joel Engel co-inventor of cellular technology
Joseph Friedman inventor of flexistraw
Dennis Gabor holography Nobel Prize (1971) in physics
Uziel Gal "Uzi" sub-machine gun, ARABS INVADED ISRAEL A YEAR AFTER FOUNDING, RAN INTO UZIS, RAN LIKE HELL
Joseph Gerber phottoplotter phottocatter Gerber variable scale
Charles Ginsburg video tape machine
Donald Glaser bubble chamber Noble Prize (1960) in physics
Leopold Godowsky, Jr. and Leopold Mannes Kodachrome[6] [7]
Emanuel Goldberg contact camera Zeiss
Sylvan Goldman shopping cart
Peter Carl Goldmark vinyl record (became cd's, dvd's)
Bernard Gordon[citation needed] founder of Analogic Corporation
Ruth Handler Barbie doll
Julius Hess incubator for premature babies the world's first nursery 1922
Basil Hirschowitz flexible endoscope
Gabriel Iddan video-camera-in-a-capsule (swallowable)
Theodore von Karman father of supersonic flight
Charles Kelman cataract surgery
Rudolf Kompfner inventor of traveling wave tube
Arthur Korn[4] forerunner of the fax machine
Harold Kosoff free piston engine & battery powered baby swing
Raymond Kurzweil Reading Machine
Melvyn Jérémie Lafitte inventor of non-invasive ANS monitoring
Hedy Lamarr spread-spectrum radio technology
Edwin Land Polaroid camera
Robert Langer transdermal delivery systems
Jerome Lemelson inventor 500 patents
Levi ben Gershon inventor of Jacob's staff
Julius Lilienfeld inventor of transistor 1920
Theodore Maiman co-inventor of LASER
Siegfried Marcus mobile gasoline combustion engine 1870
Hinda Miller co-inventor of the first sports bra Jogbra
Michel Mirowski and Morton Mower implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, or ICD
----------------------
Georges Montefiore-Levi the inventor of phosphorus bronze
Pedro Nunes mathematician inventor of the Nonius
Egon Orowan several inventions
Stanford Ovshinsky amorphous solar cells
Cyril Pullin inventor, engineer and motorcycle race driver
Jacob Rodrigues Pereira deaf-mute language
Ron Popeil owner of Ronco; father of infomercials (Jewish father)
Jacob Rabinow inventor Vice President of CDC scanning and sorting machines
Johann Philipp Reis inventor of telephone (a word that Reis coined)
Robert Rines invention of sonogram sonar
Harold Rosen geosynchronous satellite
Samuel Ruben inventor of Duracell mercury batteries
Benjamin Rubin vaccination needle
Reinhold Rudenberg [8] electron microscope
Jonas Salk Developed polio (poliomyelitis) vaccine, wiping out polio in the civilized world. [9]
Nahum Salomon manufacturer of bicycles; saccharin industry; introduced sewing machine in England
George D. Sax invented drive-through banking and instant loans
Arthur Schawlow co-inventor of LASER MASER Nobel Prize (1981) in physics (Jewish father)
Abraham Schreiner cracked petroleum kerosene Boryslaw Galicia
David Schwartz inventor of Dirigible Zeppelin
Raymond Scott sequencer portable synthesizer
Joseph Slepian Westinghouse Electric Corporation = ADR
Joel Spira solid-state electronic dimmer
Leo Sternbach invention of Valium and Librium Hoffmann-La Roche
Levi Strauss and Jacob Davis blue jeans
Leo Szilard co-invented nuclear fission reactor 1955),First nuclear reactor 1942,
with (Enrico Fermi),Patent Electron Microscope (1931)
 
Max Tishler poultry disease antibiotic synthesizing of B2
Selman Waksman streptomycin Nobel Prize (1952) in medicine
Joseph Weber ammonia microwave amplifier,
Paul Zoll co-inventor of external pacemaker and monitor

THE INFLUENCE GAME, give us our PORK,  Lawmakers in stimulus dilemma
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090211/ap_on_go_co/stimulus_pressures_3
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld

Davis, Associated Press Writer – Tue Feb 10, 11:48 pm ET
Featured Topics:
SERVING THE PUBLIC, OR THE PUBE?
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., talks about the Senate's work to pass the

economic AP – Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., talks about the Senate's work to

pass the economic stimulus bill as Sen. Joe …
WASHINGTON – Vote for the $800 billion-plus economic stimulus bill and

you might buy yourself a nasty re-election contest against a conservative

opponent next year.

Say no and risk the wrath of powerful interest groups across the political

spectrum that help voters decide who to support, from the business lobby

to big labor.

What's a member of Congress to do?

Political activists and lobbying groups are applying competing pressures on

lawmakers as Congress prepares for final votes on President Barack

Obama's massive recovery bill. They are leaning particularly hard on

Republicans who have backed the measure — or might be toying with the

idea of doing so.

"If they support the stimulus package, we will make sure every voter in

their state knows how they tried to further bankrupt voters in an already

bad economy," said Scott Wheeler, the executive director of the National

Republican Trust PAC.

His group promised to spend millions over the next two years to back GOP

primary challenges to any House or Senate Republican who supports the

legislation. That includes the three Republicans who voted "yes" when the

package passed the Senate on Tuesday, including one, Sen. Arlen Specter of

Pennsylvania, who faces re-election in 2010.

The other GOP supporters, Maine Sens. Susan M. Collins and Olympia J.

Snowe, don't face voters again until 2012 and 2014.

"We just want to send a message that we're going to have a long

institutional memory, and we're going to remind your constituents of what

you did," Wheeler said.

That's a similar vow to the one the House Democrats' campaign arm made

earlier this week. It targeted seven newly elected Republicans with robo-

calls tattling to constituents about their congressman's "no" votes on the

measure. The automated messages noted how many jobs the bill could

create for each state.

Republicans have been remarkably united against the measure — not a single

one in the House backed an $819 billion version last week, while just three

in the Senate voted for the $838 billion bill that passed Tuesday. But an

array of outside groups are leaning on them to change their minds.

The labor-backed coalition Americans United for Change announced Tuesday

night it would single out 21 Republican lawmakers with a national TV and

radio ad campaign urging them to switch their "no" votes to "yes." Those

targeted include 18 House members in moderate districts and three

senators regarded as possible backers, including Sen. Lisa Murkowski of

Alaska, who is to face voters in 2010.

Business groups, traditionally the GOP's strongest supporters, also are

pressuring them to break ranks.

The National Association of Manufacturers wrote senators threatening to

designate votes on the stimulus bill as "key votes" — used to score members

of Congress each year on their records. Lawmakers who vote with the

association more than 70 percent of the time win an award from the group.

"It can count a lot in elections," said Laura Narvaiz, an NAM spokeswoman.

Trolling for converts to the measure this week, Collins circulated a letter

from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, another big business lobbying group,

urging support for a key modification that shrank the overall price tag by

about $100 billion. She said she was putting a copy of the missive on all

her colleagues' desks.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., on Tuesday circulated praise for the

bill from an array of business groups.

Still, budget watchdog groups like the Council of Citizens Against

Government Waste have been just as vocal in their lobbying efforts against

the measure. They urged supporters to contact Congress and urge

representatives to vote "no," generating more than 70,000 such e-mails to

lawmakers.

"There will be a second wave of e-mails and expressions of outrage,"

promised Tom Schatz, the group's president, particularly if the price tag

grows during final negotiations between the House and Senate. "Taxpayers

are angry."

Lawmakers pay attention to these outside groups, which often spend freely

to shape voters' perceptions of members of Congress. Some groups have

control over large amounts of campaign cash, either through political action

committees or simply by telling their members which members of Congress

are "friendly" to their interests — and which aren't.

"I don't make my decisions on who key-votes what and I don't expect that

many of my colleagues do either," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. But he

said political groups that are threatening Republicans who back the stimulus

measure "certainly don't make it easier" to strike a bipartisan deal.

"It's unfortunate and it's had an effect," Nelson said.

Beyond pressuring lawmakers to vote yes or no, a wide array of lobbying

groups are leaning on lawmakers to add their pet items to the final package,

which will be the product of an intense round of behind-the-scenes

negotiations.

For the Chamber, it's a tax break for businesses that buy their own debt

at a discount.

Education groups are clamoring for the restoration of school construction

funds included in the House bill but slashed in the Senate at the behest of

GOP moderates. It's a position also supported by the lobbyist-in-chief,

President Barack Obama, as part of a two-day sales blitz that's taken him

to Indiana and Florida, and before a prime-time audience in a televised

news conference. AKA, UNIONS, NUMBER TWO DONOR TO DEMOCRATS
UNIONS ALSO THE NUMBER ONE WAY COMMUNISM HAS SPREAD

AROUND THE WORLD....
    * Treasury Chief Aims to Restore ‘Lost Faith’ in Bailout New York Times
    * Obama presser: Does Obama pay attention? Hot Air TV
    * Senate Approves Stimulus Plan New York Times – Tue Feb 10, 9:57

am EDT
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., talks with

reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2009, following

the Senate's passage of the stimulus bill. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
$3 trillion! — Senate, Fed, Treasury attack crisis
2 hrs 45 mins ago

    * Senate approves stimulus; urgent final talks
    * Clinton holds out hope for useful talks with Iran
    * THE INFLUENCE GAME: Lawmakers in stimulus dilemma
    * Geithner's big moment: a tough sell
SOMEONE GET A LIST OF THESE PAC'S AND BOYCOTT, GIVE ALL OF

EM ****
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

DEMOCRATS PUSHING US TO ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT
http://www.redstate.com/warner_todd_huston/2009/02/07/boxer-urges-quick-handover-of-us-power-to-un/
Boxer Urges Quick Handover of U.S. Power to UN

Posted by Warner Todd Huston (Profile)

Saturday, February 7th at 5:40AM EST
4 Comments

Senator Barbara Boxer (D, CA) wants to speed the process of handing power over U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations as soon as possible by urging the State Department to come out in support of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

The UNCRC imposes on all treaty signatories power over laws concerning children and, by extension, families. The largest portion of laws concerning children and families in the U.S. are state statutes so this treaty would, in actual fact, eliminate all family laws in the various states and hand the power over this area of law to the U.N. as per the Supremacy Clause to the U.S. Constitution (Article V1) that states that treaties preempt state laws.

Boxer is eager to destroy the entire lot of family laws throughout the country supposedly to protect “the most vulnerable people of society.”

But even the new left-wing U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, is aware of how difficult this process could be. Calling it a “complicated treaty” and worried over the “challenges of domestic implementation,” Rice would not commit to any time table to proceeding with consideration of the UNCRC. Senator Boxer, however, demanded a 60-day timeframe for the State Department to complete its review so that ratification can move forward.

Naturally, Boxer is in favor of destroying U.S. sovereignty by implementing this unAmerican treaty.

Sphere: Related Content
Category: Barbara Boxer, UN

BIG BROTHER COMMUNISM, SPYCHIPS IN CLOTHES
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2008/08/14/spy-shoes-rfid-to-be-embedded-directly-into-clothing/
goodhumored
Homeland stupidity threat:
HIGH
Potential Threat To The Nation
Homeland Stupidity
EDITED OUT COMMENTS, SEE PAGE
Spy shoes: RFID to be embedded directly into clothing
Homeland Stupidity Exclusive
By Michael Hampton
Posted: August 14, 2008 7:05 pm

Protesters gathered Wednesday afternoon at the opening of the RFID in Fashion conference in New
York City to urge clothing manufacturers and retailers not to embed tracking chips into articles of
clothing.

The industry conference, one of several hosted by RFID Journal magazine, allows clothing
manufacturers to learn the state of the RFID industry and meet with RFID suppliers and industry
executives. RFID, or radio frequency identification, is a small chip with a unique identifying number
which can be read from as far away as 30 feet. The RFID in Fashion conference is being held
Wednesday and Thursday at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York.

But at this conference, the industry is urging clothing manufacturers to embed RFID chips directly
into their clothing for purposes of inventory control and loss prevention, known in the industry as
item-level tagging, according to consumer privacy expert Katherine Albrecht, who co-authored the
book on RFID, Spychips. And that raises what she calls a “privacy nightmare.”

“We’re here to let the industry know that consumers don’t want tracking devices in their clothing,”

Albrecht said. “When they embed [RFID] into clothing, or shoes, or other items people wear or

carry, they can also put the readers to pick up those signals into floors, doorways, ceiling tiles,

anywhere people go, and use them to track and identify people.”

Retailers would create databases linking individual RFID chips to consumers at the point of purchase,

creating a database of what each person bought which would allow businesses or governments to

keep tabs on every individual passing through a given area. The technology to accomplish this

tracking, Albrecht says, has already been developed.

A conference attendee who could not be identified because he is not authorized to speak for his

company said that such tags would be decommissioned before the customer left the store. But

Albrecht responded that the tags would merely be placed in a dormant state and could be

reawakened at any time, as it would be too expensive to use tags which could be deactivated

permanently.

“You can’t put your clothing in the microwave to kill these chips, because it could catch fire,” she

said.

Some attendees actually stopped to talk with the 14 protesters and present their case. An

attendee who could not be identified because he is not authorized to speak for his employer spent

nearly an hour talking to protesters and pointing out that RFID has good uses as well. “There’s

potential for abuse in everything,” he said. “All of those retailers, all they care about is making

sure they have the right products at the right time, and actually saving money.”

Police did not interfere with the protest at all. One off-duty NYPD officer who could not appear on

camera for personal safety reasons showed his police ID and pointed out that it contains a tracking

device which allows the officer to be located in the event of an emergency. Security staff spoke to

Albrecht and told her that they agreed with the protest, she said.

The trouble with databases is that despite every possible precaution, they can fall into the wrong

hands. These databases will be an inviting target for today’s criminals, for whom obtaining data is

the first step to committing a crime. In addition, once such a database is created, the tracking will

inevitably follow. Government will be unable to resist having yet another way to track, monitor and

control people, built by hapless companies who are just trying to save a few bucks.

Video of some of the protest follows:

Raw video of Albrecht interview by Chinese-language broadcaster NTDTV:

2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

   1.
      RFID Technology and Targeted Individuals. « Gang Stalking World
      August 24, 2008 7:56 pm
   2.
      Advanced Services are Never Really Free - We Trade Our Freedom For Them |

GROWMAP.COM
      September 11, 2008 8:04 am

HowTo:Be a liberal
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.

HOW TO BE A LIBERAL
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/HowTo:Be_a_liberal

WARNING at least 10-12 % of what is written in this article is considered

to be false. If you're allergic to the truth (if you’re a liberal in other

words) and are also allergic to Wikipedia-style citations and references with

links to the awful truth, DO NOT READ THIS ARTICLE! Uncyclopedia and

the authors of this article cannot be held responsible for any damage,

injury or liberal sissy fits and anal bleeding this article may cause.

This is an ever changing guide to how to be a liberal. It is often deleted by

liberals and recreated at least twice a month, please see censorship for the

reason why. Never the same page twice. Many have asked the question of

just how does one become a liberal? This howto guide will show you how.

Contents
HOW TO BE A LIBERAL:
2 Together We Can: Raise Taxes
3 Blame Bush, WORSHIP OBAMA LIKE THE ANTI-CHRIST
4 Kill Babies
5 Reverse Discriminate with abortion, gay marriage and desegragation
6 Legalize all kinds of disgusting behavior
HOW TO BE A LIBERAL:
7 Lose Wars
8 Take Away Your Guns
9 Let Murderers Run Free
9.1 Let Poor People Be Lazy
HOW TO BE A LIBERAL:
9.2 Be Chicken-Wuzzes

HOW TO BE A LIBERAL
10 Love Terrorists
11 Let Mexicans Do Whatever They Want
12 Force Children into Failing Schools
13 Cure All Problems With Socialism
14 Let faggots get hitched
15 Let Wolves Eat Babies
16 Favor the Tort Tax
17 Persecute Christians (GENOCIDE AHEAD)
18 Let Child Molesters Be Coddled

[edit] History
How does one become a liberal, or rather how did liberalism come about?

Around 3120 BC Liberalism was invented by Alfred Dinklelberry who had

decided to use his whining and crying skills for monetary gain. He found

that if he challenged governments by hating them, calling their leaders

names, and protesting, and he wrote books, people would buy them. He

later found that he could lead others in protests where they simply chant

the same slogan over and over again until they get their way. He also found

that by playing the blame game that he could blame others for his failures

and get himself elected to government. The motto is Blame somebody else,

which always works for liberals. Then if he just took up causes he did not

believe in like environmentalism, peace, socialism, and so on, he could trick

people into supporting him.

[edit] Together We Can: Raise Taxes
 
Multi-racial child for Sale!It is widely reported that the best part about

being a liberal is that one gets to do whatever one wants in the name of

equality. Since conservatives often claim that liberals hate freedom, liberals

have to come with different excuses sometimes. To properly do this, one

must write truckloads of snail mail letters on colored parchments and send

them to important and not-so-important people. Fortunately, one will not be

alone. One can join the ongoing letter writing campaign to Save the Forests

for Lynching, which has been supported by the liberal parties across the

globe for over two (2) months.

Furthermore, the stalwarts of network TV, newspapers, cable TV,

magazines, and schools assist in this War for Peace. It is their solemn duty

to advocate their personal views no matter what may come. For those sheep

following along at home, an absolute must is yelling loud enough to drown out

the annoying cries of help from Third World countries. Together liberals

can and do make a difference. If enough people yell lies about most of the

world living in poverty and despair and that so-called comedy on the BBC is

funny (just to give two examples of liberal lies), those lies will become the

truth according to liberal thinking. The same is true of blogs, if enough

people blog the same lies over and over again, they automatically become

true. So liberals like to yell and post their arguments all over the Internet

and Public, even if they are full of fallacies and are mostly fiction.

Remember to keep repeating yourself, if you want to become a good liberal.

Maybe they didn't hear you the first thousand times, so yell louder and

post it more on the Internet.

Yet another requirement for liberals is the concept of "equal-time". Liberals

want equal time, equal meaning more time than right-wingers get. In fact,

equal time to liberals means that right-wingers should be silenced and

impeached and all of the time given to liberals instead. The Psychology of

liberals and other leftists cannot be ignored, they are violent and bring

down progress.[1]

Cindy Sheehan demonstrated this technique by demanding "equal-time" for

the universally held view that this country needs to keep its troops safe (by

withdrawing them from the middle-east and keeping them home instead),

and that too much time was being spent on some storm and not enough on

her. Liberals never will have enough "equal-time," so one should organize

more marches demanding it. Nevermind the fact that Cindy Sheehan was

accused by her husband of not sharing the insurance money from their son

Casey's death [2] and that Mrs. Sheehan used the money instead to protest

the war in Iraq. All the more to get equal time, and exploit her own son's

corpse for political gain.

Lest one thinks being a liberal is all about requirements, do not be

dismayed. Liberals know that rules, regulations and requirements do not

apply to them! So, when laying down the law, rest assured everything is the

fault of the "government" who must pay. The government, after all, is evil

according to liberals. Always sending in the Police when Liberals throw riots

and break things [3], set things on fire, blow up federal buildings, kill

doctors and blow up abortion clinics. Oh those Police officers, biased

against Liberals because they broke a few laws. Those were fascist laws

anyway, and as a Liberal you have the right to ignore them. Luckily if

you're a liberal, like Paul Hill and you blow up an abortion clinic or a liberal

like Timothy McVeigh and you blow up a government daycare center with

infants and children in them or a back to Earth liberal hippie like the

Unabomber and you blow up computer stores you're labeled as an "American

hero".

Liberals are always against capital punishment (even for terrorists, it has

been reported that Bin Laden is registered Democrat), especially when the

person being killed wants to be killed, and will be labeled a "martyr" by the

religious left for dying (think Paul Hill, Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber -

you know, the liberal terrorists), and are always looking to reduce the

sentences of criminals and let them out of jail early, because most criminals

are liberals anyway. You are not a very good Liberal unless you have been

arrested at least a dozen times. Illicit Drug laws are to be ignored anyway,

because Liberals are always trying to legalize illicit drugs like LSD and

Barney the Dinosaur. That is one way that they raise money for political

needs, selling weed, crack, Meth, cocaine, and Kittens. Although they keep

most of the money for themselves they sometimes give part of the

proceeds from their drug deals to murderous South American terrorists.

Luckily the liberal media never pays too much attention to actions like this.

Incidentally, due to past yelling(at Ann Coulter) and equal-time marches,

liberals have never heard of certain historical figures that no one really

wants to consort with including: Augusto Pinochet, Moammar Kadhafi,

Slobodan Miloševic, Saddam Hussein (except when the Democratic president

Bill Clinton dealt with him of course), Josef Stalin (except during WWII),

Kim Jong Il, and Porky the Pig. People liberals keep pictures of in their

wallets include: Hugh Hefner, Paris Hilton, and Jose Canseco.

[edit] Blame Bush
How could you be a liberal without blaming Bush? Did an insurgent kill an

American soldier? Blame Bush. Did the earth warm up .75 degrees Celsius?

Blame Bush. Did some other liberal do something wrong? Blame Bush. Is

your coffee too hot? Blame Bush. Did you waste your life and not go to

college or instead decided to earn a liberal arts degree and kept making bad

career choices your whole life and ended up working in a fast food store or

as a clerk in a discount store? Blame Bush! Are you blamed for blaming

Bush? Blame Bush.

You can have a lot of creativity with this. You can blame Bush for anything,

even things that didn't happen. You can blame Bush for murdering Clinton,

for example. You can even blame Bush for everything that Clinton did when

he was in the White House like ruin the economy and cause large

unemployment rates before Bush even took office. And make sure you have

two articles in two different newspapers/internet news sites. This way, the

newspapers can cite each other. This is called a liberal circle jerk when the

liberal media cites another liberal media as a source. Make sure you use it

often.

Headlines and articles blaming Bush should be VERY frequent. Like the

headline: "THIS JUST IN: WE HATE BUSH!!!!!" or "BUSH HAS KILLED

ABOUT 400,000,000,000,000,000 PEOPLE IN IRAQ!!!" or "IMPEACH BUSH

FOR RAPING MY DOG" or "BUSH PERSONALLY CAUSED HURRICANE

KATRINA WITH A WEATHER CONTROL DEVICE FROM THE CIA!" or

something along those lines. As said before, it doesn't need to be true.

Remember you are a liberal, as long as it feels good for you to say, it does

not have to be true. If other liberals agree with you, then it must be true!

Why let facts and evidence stand in your way when the public will believe

opinions and viewpoints over them that you post in your countless blogs, and

Smear websites.

[edit] Kill Babies
 
Cut Logic Out From quadrant 30Oscar Wilde once said, "Liberals not only

avoid logic, they detest it". Bob the Builder replied, "The very act of

liberalism defies logic!"

A key talking point is with gun control. Liberals must argue to the death

that no one--even the military--should have guns because, guns kill little

children. "Only police officers can be trusted to have guns, but not Tasers" hind you, so the police know how to find you

should you forget how to contact them from fear paralysis.

Fortunately, Dr. Howard Dean is anticipated to unveil his latest

"Hhaaarumph!" discovery within his primary field of Phrenology, the study

of avoidance of logic. A high ranking Democratic official who requested not

to be identified more specifically than as an informant within the Great

High Circle of Democrats stated with authority that, "Dr. Dean will unveil

his latest "Hhaaarumph!" discovery on the four (4) year anniversary of his

notorious Squeal speech, and during his next presidential campaign." The

discovery may identify which sector one should cut the logic out of--

rumored to be quadrant 30 or 35 (see diagram for reference). Dr. Dean's

test subjects include Rev. Jesse Jackson, former President Bill Clinton,

staunch steriod-conspiracist ex-Cuban Rafael Palmeiro and Lindsay Lohan.

[edit] Reverse Discriminate with abortion, gay marriage and desegragation
 
White Skin, Black HeartThe best liberal to be is the one that is in the

United States and white skinned. Over-reporting by the conservative

shadow elements concludes that slaves were freed by Lincoln, a conservative

Republican. What those shadowy reports fail to mention is that liberal

Democrats opposed Lincoln's measure overwhelmingly. In fact, 100% of

white-skinned US registered Democrats and 3/4 of black-skinned US non-

convicted felons (due to the Missouri Compromise) still oppose that dirty

conservative tactic. Yet, the old Democratic Party represented the south

and the Republicans represented the north. 87% of Analysts agree it is the

same now. The Bush Administration employs more minorities than The

Clinton Administration did and even promotes minorities to top level positions

in government. This proves that Democrats are more racist than

Republicans.

Since World War II, the liberal party in the United States has diligently

enlightened the poverty-stricken class to think that a higher minimum wage

will result in an increased standard of living. This is nothing like use of a

carrot to ensure a mule will plow a field. John Keynes (tall, old, economist)

when asked to comment and prove his theory said, "I'll show you a plow!"

This author then chose to flee.

No reputable economists could possibly agree with the conservative (read:

Anti-Liberal) position that a higher minimum wage, decreases the standard

of living for those earning the minimum wage by increasing the cost of basic

goods and services. Like anyone would believe that increasing the salary of

employees will increase expenses of a corporation, forcing them to raise the

costs of goods and services to compensate? Liberal accounting uses new

math and states that raising expenses does not cut into profits if you found

a few dummy corporations and list the expenses as investments and assets

in the dummy corporations. The liberal view is that the person earning

minimum wage should be put on a socialist program and live off of the

government at a rate of $50,000USD a year in welfare funded by taxing

people who make under $50,000USD a year at real jobs. Should any

reputable economist attempt to disagree with this liberal economic theory,

liberals worldwide are instructed to discredit him/her with photos of him or

her having sex with someone or something. That is how demand-side

economics ie socialism really works.

 Legalize all kinds of disgusting behavior
 
Caught You!
Democratic corruption does not count. Only Republican corruption counts.The

rule here is simple: "What liberals do on their time is fine, times nine."

Quote taken courtesy of Liberal Tax Deduction Schemes: Chapter 14:

Multiply deduction by nine".

Remember that the public has a short-memory, so if you accuse

Conservatives of doing something, the public will forget that your party did

it last year, or a decade ago, or up to fifty years ago. You are not a

hypocrite if the public forgets your misdeeds and your accuse Conservatives

of the same misdeeds. Remember that Liberal corruption does not count,

but Conservative or Neocon corruption counts plus eleven billion times.

Bill Clinton says Iraq has WMDs [4] in 1998 and attacks, George W. Bush

says Iraq has WMD in 2003 and attacks.

Bill Clinton takes money [5] from oil companies and the price of oil goes up

[6], George W. Bush takes money from oil companies and the price of oil

goes up.

Ted Kennedy gets drunk, takes drugs and runs over people with his car

afterward. Rush Limbaugh gets drunk, takes drugs and smuggles viagra into

international airports.

Bill Clinton has warrantless wiretaps [7] in 2000, and George W. Bush has

them after 911.

Lose Wars
 
Liberal Leader thinking about teaching constituent (pictured: foreground) to

readWhen Conservatives attempted to gasp teach inner city children and

adults to read, Liberals went berserk. This was obviously a racist attempt

to say those people didn't know how to read. To add insult to injury, how

will the mindless masses keep voting liberal wink-wink if they can read about

what we's done?

Hmm.

It is better if Liberal teachers do not teach children how to read, but

rather teach them how to be Liberals instead. That way they can listen to

Liberal leaders and agree with them and vote for them because they

wouldn't know any better, never learning how the real world works and how

to read to figure things out. In fact, when teaching history, let us blame all

of the world's problems on anyone of European descent who isn't a liberal

(Example: Christopher Columbus, the American pioneers and the Founding

Fathers) and ignore the bad things that liberals have done as well. We need

ignorant voters who believe anything we tell them to believe, and that way

we can win election after election.

Take Away Your Guns
Tip
Find ways around the laws. Always claim to be innocent when caught.
Ted Kennedy had a problem. He had a pregnant girlfriend. She did not want

an abortion and wanted to marry him. It was quite simple using the liberal

method of thinking. Abortion was against the law back then, and murder is

against the law as well. Ted Kennedy claimed to have had an accident near a

creek in Chappaquiddick [8] and then jumped out of the car before it sank

into the bottom of the creek. Wink wink, we know better, don't we? He

committed a trifecta: aborted the baby; murdered his girlfriend; and got

money for it from his car insurance company. His liberal supporters then

rewarded him by making him a US Senator for life. He got a reduced

sentence from a liberal judge, and despite being an ex-con, is now

considered to be very moral and ethical and justified his actions in

Chappaquiddick with a speech. If a Conservative did the same thing, they

would have gotten the death sentence or 30 to life. But Liberals have a

smooth way of talking and giving speeches to get away with things. Just

make up a story like Ted Kennedy did, you weren't drunk despite driving

home from a party where other people could have swore you won a drinking

contest, it was an accident despite you having no memory of how it

happened, and that you nearly died in the process. See how easy it is to

tell a creative story, than admit to the truth?

Let Murderers Run Free
 
Hillary Clinton is the mastermind behind Soylent Green.This is a very easy

and commonly used tactic by liberal senator John Kerry. Heck, he wrote the

book on waffling. He would flip on this issue and then on that issue. The

only problem is that you HAVE to marry a crazed, rich, ketchup-monkey

for all her dough and use it to gain access to the US Senate. Good, That

should have been easy. Well, the brilliant minds at Jibjab.com [9] have the

right idea in their short called "This Land". All there is to it is to stand up

and, using three signs, each entitled "Yes","No" and "Maybe", and pull up

any card, even at random. Good! This can and will work. You have my

blessings to do this with every senator who asks you a question. Oh, and

support the troops by voting for giving soldiers body armor, tank armor,

humvee armor, heck, any armor, then flip and vote against it. Oh and to

top it all off, blame it on Bush. Of course it is Bush's fault because of

your decision.

Tip
Pandering or flip-flopping is a good idea. Go with the polls.
Hillary Clinton often cannot make up her mind. Sometimes she acts like a

Conservative and other times as a Liberal. She gets that from her husband

Bill who is known as a Liberal and a Conservative because he is two-faced.

First she was a Cubs fan, and then a Yankees fan. First she was a woman

and then she was a man. She wrote a book on healthcare, and then voted

down the bills based on her book's suggestions.

The fact is that liberals blame conservatives and Bush for everything,

including oil prices, and keep the well-unknown secret that the Saudis own

1/4 of the oil, and have us at their fingertips. It happened in the 1970's,

1980's and is currently happening again. Don't point that out, but do point

out that Bush shakes each kings' hands. Thank you Michael Moore for

making this possible. The guns at Columbine weren't illegal. Of course not.

Impossible. The man is beautiful, treats his body as a temple and writes

amazing Golden Globe speeches. Alex Jones made a lot of movies and songs

on the liberal viewpoints that avoid logic and appeal to emotions, trust him,

over other journalists and entertainers who actually have credibility. I would

also like to thank the commies including Che, who, men just like him tried to

starve people into becoming commies too. Killing innocent men, women and

children. Blame it on Pinochet. (This happened in Chile.) Pay no attention to

that man behind the curtain! Saddam Hussein was a fine upstanding secular

humanist who ran one of the world's most perfect Democracies, until

George W. Bush and the Republicans came along and ruined things by

invading Iraq and toppling the Government and forcing Saddam to face trials

for his crimes against humanity. That is not as important as US Troops

being killed by terrorists freedom fighters. Osama bin Laden is in tourism

not terrorism so let us just appease him, and cut and run, and give him

some land in the middle-east and leave him alone.

[edit] Let Poor People Be Lazy
35 years ago, Liberals ran the street screaming "global cooling! global

cooling!" Today they scream global warming. This is a classic example of the

flip-flop mind of a liberal. It used to be aerosol cans that were evil, now it

is the oil companies that are evil.

Gay marriage, John Kerry is a classic example of this, during the 2004

Presidential campaign John Kerry said he was for gay marriage in

Massachusetts and then when he campaigned in Missouri he said he was

against gay marriage.

Many liberals voted for the Iraqi war, and now they vote against it. Voting

down bills for body armor and funding to train Iraqis to take over for US

Troops. Now they just have a plan of "cut and run".

As a liberal, you can always blame your decisions on conservatives because

they lied to you or forced you to vote for something you didn't want to

vote for in the first place.

[edit] Be Chicken-Wuzzes
Learn the dialectic [10] and become a Liberal, thru liberal-speak!

Think Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, or anyone else that tends to use words

with excess syllables. Practice aloud--I say, "How are you?"--you say,

"Extra-orda-nin-tat-ious!" Or, I say, "How do you feel about mandatory

affirmative action minority interviewing requirements?"--you say, "Abso-

ma-lutely, affirmable, as an accidental alibi fortituously found by the

hooker behind the crackpipe!"

Presentation and panache is what you are seeking my liberal sheep of many

colors.

Furthermore, you must take all efforts to avoid being tied down to a

singular position. Life is multi-faceted, so every issue may have new

considerations, so you must be able to explain why, for example, it is

permissible to cheat on one's wife, but then run a negative campaign (the

next term) exposing one's opponent for marital infidelity.

When perfected, you can be constantly inconsistent like the Democratic

Party, not inconsistently inconsistent like John Kerry. This constant

inconsistency, called "liberal flip-flopping", may allow your party to win the

Presidential election! (Listen to this one, liberals, and win in 2008!)

[edit] Love Terrorists
Tip
When protesting always bring friends with you to help out.
Protesting is easy, just chant the same slogans over and over again until you

get what you want. Make sure that you burn your nation's flag, and burn a

straw dummy of your nation's leader in his/her place. If you do not still get

your way, convince others to riot. Say that doing these things makes you a

patriot.

If it makes you a celebrity and you no longer have to sweat it out at the

protests, so much the better. (See Cindy Sheehan).

If you attend a private school and some Neocon of a Dean says you must

say the pledge of allegiance [11], please use the Uncyclopedia Village Dump

to seek legal advice and sue the Dean and the School for being Neocons.

That way you can bring the protest to Liberal Wiki sites like Uncyclopedia

and express your freedom of speech. After all, Uncyclopedia is here for

you, just like Dear Abby and Oprah are to listen to your whiny complaints

and solve your problems for you. Together we, as Liberals, can protest

private high schools that you signed a contract with to take away your

rights and freedoms, and we can protest that on the Internet.

Try big fires, it gets even more attention.

[edit] Let Mexicans Do Whatever They Want
Tip
Always blame conservatives, always.
Use the filibuster as much as you can when the other party has a majority

[12]. If they try to pass a bill you agree with like alternative energy,

filibuster it and vote against it. Then when election comes up later, claim

the other party did nothing to help the people. When the other party

claims that you voted against every bill on the table, say that you could not

compromise the environment, freedoms, liberty, ect. and ignore that

lobbyists were putting money in your pockets to kill the bill. Always blame

the Republicans for your own misdeeds. After all, one liberal made the claim

"And so when I filibustered 14 hours and 13 minutes in 1964 I never got

off the germaneness of the subject.", since the US Taxpayers are paying

your salary, might as well waste their time and hold up progress. Read

from a phone book, quote the complete works of Shakespeare, talk about

pot or liquor, anything not relating to the bill in question that you are trying

to filibuster.

Popular bills that liberals have voted down:

Social Security reform
Health care reform
Removal of eminent domains laws
Tax breaks
Bills to cut spending and create a budget surplus
Pork Projects liberals have added to bills:

Paving highways in wealthy cities
Studies of cow farts
Study of the study of the study of political polls conducted by third parties

they have paid off
Federal contracts they get kickbacks from
Funding for sports stadiums
Or you can vote Republican, hope they screw it up, and win all the popular

vote for the 2008 election.

[edit] Force Children into Failing Schools
 
Read this book to learn how to create political blogs, newspaper articles and

news stories.
Let the whole world know that you are right, and everyone else is

wrong.Always appear on talk shows and news programs and constantly attack

the other party. Try to justify your position and ignore the fact that

you've done the same things you accuse the other person of doing. Say that

you are telling the truth, and that the righties are lying again and trying to

cover up their crimes. Tip
Write with your emotions, do not use logic.
Create a blog, link to news media articles of other liberals slamming the

other party as proof of your points of view and opinions. The right-wingers

don't bother to blog because they are too busy trying to come up with new

ideas for laws and bills. Don't waste your time on new laws and bills, just

shoot them down and whine and complain about them. Encourage other

liberals to blog as well. Create more blogs, and even write newspaper

articles, and news stories. Submit them to the media, and threaten to

boycott them if they don't publish them.




[edit] Cure All Problems With Socialism
Tip
Teachers, never teach the subject you are paid to teach, always teach

liberalism instead.
 
The virtues of the loving and ancient, eastern Communists are good fodder

for young brainwashing subjects.Liberal teachers must never teach the

subject they are hired to teach. Instead, they must indoctrinate the youth

into the liberal point of view [13]. Proper liberal teaching subjects (all

ages):

It's not your fault.....blame the government, it is all their fault anyway.

Criticise conservatives in every level of government at every chance you get.

If nothing has happened lately, make up a story about the highest ranking

Republican by saying he/she *lied* to the public recently.
Oppose your country's refusal to change its economic system...If your

nation uses capitalism, support communism. If your nation uses communism,

support capitalism. Brainwashing the youth that constant change is

necessary will give liberals more control.
It's still not your fault.....blame 'the system.' Teach the youth to never

take responsibility for their actions, hold the other party responsible, but

never yourselves. Teach them to drop out of school, take drugs, and listen

to music and watch movies instead. The more ignorant you make them, the

easier they are to control. No one likes someone who holds them

accountable.
[edit] Let faggots get hitched
 
Sensing a threat, Clinton becomes aggressive. Wallace, frozen with terror,

can only watch helplessly as Clinton's fangs carve into his hide.If you are

ever asked to do an interview on TV, attack the interviewer and his news

network [14] and accuse conservatives of putting up a "hit" on you. The

more upset you get, the more publicity you can get for your global summit

or other pollitical rally. Remember as a liberal you are supposed to think

with your emotions like anger. It is OK to attack someone else who is not a

liberal, but anyone who attacks you is being unethical, esp if they are not a

liberal or don't agree with your views. Remember to hold non-liberals to a

set of ethics and morals that you yourself do not hold or follow. As a

liberal, you have the right and freedoms to not follow any set of ethics or

morals. Basically you can do whatever you want to do, and get away with it.

Including attacking a news reporter and their news network. If the non-

liberals point out your attack, claim that you were provoked and that

conservatives set the whole thing up. That news companies are being unfair

because they reported your "attack" but not the information you gave them.

Remember, you sold your soul to have a set of fangs as a liberal, so use

them to your best advantage. As a card-carring worshipper of Moloch you

have the right to eat any reporter who asks a question that you do not like.

Opposed to the Neocons waging war in a nation like Iraq? Well get angry

and blame the US troops [15] and be sure to belittle them. Nothing makes

you a real Liberal more than doing personal attacks on the US military who

are trying to serve their nation. Justify it by saying it is an unjust war,

and that the US Troops are terrorists and war criminals. Especially if you

won three purple hearts like John Kerry and admitted to being stuck in

Vietnam and doing stupid things like killing civilians [16] and committing war

crimes himself. Yet since Kerry is a liberal, we let him off the hook, but

keep the Neocons guilty of the same charges.

[edit] Let Wolves Eat Babies
Tip
Anything you don't agree with, you have a right to censor it.
Always support articles that show the liberal or left-wing point of view. If

any articles are showing a right-wing point of view, vandalize them, or vote

for them to be deleted. Vote for quick deletion is best, but NRV if you can

as well. In fact, vote for this page to be deleted, so nobody ever learns

the truth of how to be a liberal. That way we can all keep a secret. When

you find an article on Uncyclopedia making fun of liberals be sure to say

that it is all lies or something, vandalize it so it is not funny and gets

deleted.

In fact, find articles on Uncyclopedia that mock liberals and edit them to

mock conservatives. Like this very article itself. Don't even let the other

side get a chance to mock liberals, when you can get into an edit war and

change the articles to mock conservatives instead.

[edit] Favor the Tort Tax
Tip
Never admit the truth, be creative in your lies.
Remember that telling the truth can hurt the liberal cause. Always put a

spin on things, be creative. Compare right-wing leaders to Hitler (by

pointing out the he was a devout Christian for example like FDR and Harry

S. Truman were), invoke Godwin if you must. Be sure to believe your own

lies and make others believe them as well. If you write a ton of blogs under

false names, everyone will see that hundreds of bloggers agree on the same

subject. If it is on the Internet it must be true and indeed it often is true!

If you must cite something, please cite some of the countless liberal biased

smear web sites out there designed for just that sort of thing, because if

it is on the Internet it must be true especially if it was written by and peer

reviewed by Liberals like you and me! This is also the way that science

works, by having other scientists that share the same biases as you peer

reviewing your crackpot theory, it automatically becomes true. It pays to

keep a list of contacts from your college and liberal meeting places to call in

a favor and peer review your work for you. Together we can help combat

the Conservative Neocon menance using liberal truths in this fashion,

because only liberal truths matter and nothing else does.

[edit] Persecute Christians
Tip
Don't support religion, oppose it.
 
Jesus supports George W. Bush but not you.You are better off without it.

The right-wingers have religion that they use for their side, you are better

off opposing religion. Call it seperation of church and state. Attack religion,

except for the Holy Bible: Revised Liberal Edition which you should always

read. Be sure to call the righties as religious zealots, and campaign against

judges they try to appoint for holding religous views. Remove all symbols of

religion from public view. Discriminate against religous people in the name of

seperation of church and state. You are sure to be a liberal if you do these

things and you feel superior to most every conservative.

[edit] Let Child Molesters Be Coddled
Tip
Always revise history to show your side as innocent and the conservatives

as guilty.
Why should Conservatives have all the fun when it comes to war? Liberals

have wars too, but deny starting wars, or blame it all on Conservatives.

Remember to criticize the Conservatives for Gitmo and ignore that Liberal

Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt[17] issued Executive Order 9066 during

World War II that put Japanese-Americans into concentration camps and

many died as a result. Blame the Republicans for Gitmo, but deny that

Executive Order 9066 ever happened. Nope, the USA never had

concentration camps under the Democrats, it never happened. If someone

calls you on it, be sure to blame Conservatives for something to distract

them. Ignore that no Japanese-American had any evidence on them that

they were doing domestic spying and sabotage and other charges that FDR

and the Democrats accused them of to justify putting them in concentration

camps. True to form, the Nazi Germans were murdering millions of Jewish

people in concentration camps, and Franklin D. Roosevelt being the kind and

just liberal that he was, decided not to get involved. Not until Pearl Harbor

was attacked by the Japanese, and then FDR decided to put Japanese-

Americans in concentration camps because it was the liberal thing to do at

the time. Apparently liberals at the time did not care about people being

put into concentration camps, any more than they did when Saddam was

murdering Kurds in concentration camps in Iraq in modern times. FDR gave

us the New Deal and did none of these things.

Harry S. Truman took over and lead the Liberals to another Presidency

after FDR died. He helped end World War II by dropping Hydrogen bombs

on Japan, but blame Conservatives for that anyway. Truman lead the USA

to war with Korea and had a policy of Kill them all [18] because the only

good Korean was a dead Korean because even refugees are Commies that

deserve to die. As a Liberal make sure to blame this on Conservatives as

well, and change the subject to Iraq or Afghanistan where people were

captured and put into Gitmo instead of killed, but say that they were all

killed instead.

After JFK was assassinated, LBJ took over as President. He claimed that

the Commies were at it again and there was a Domino theory that if

Vietnam was taken over by Commies that it would spread to Laos, Thailand,

Burma, and other nations. He made a lot of mistakes in Vietnam that we

need to learn from [19] Make sure to blame the Conservatives for the My

Lai Massacre and not the modern Liberal Democrat LBJ. Ignore that LBJ

lied about the reasons to go to war, but please do tell that Conservative

George W. Bush lied to go to war with Iraq. Nope, no Liberal would ever

lie about the reasons to go to war. Be sure to tell that the nude torture in

the Abu Ghraib jail is a lot worse than the My Lai Massacre, which wasn't

LBJ's fault either even if the troops were acting on his orders as

Commander in Chief. LBJ created the Great Society, and did none of these

things.

After trying to recover from a failed Impeachment attempt, Bill Clinton

starts his own war on terror to take out Osama bin Laden. Only Clinton

seems to think that Osama is in the pharmaceutical business [20] and bombs

an aspirin factory[21]. Well at least those terrorists won't have a cure for

headaches for a while. Clinton claimed that the plant and other targets he

attacked had WMDs in them, despite no evidence found that they did have

WMDs or any connection of the factory owner to bin Laden or any terrorist

network. Remember that there are two versions of Bill Clinton because he is

two-faced, the one that bombed the aspirin factory and other places that

had no WMDs, and failed to kill or capture Osama bin Laden is a

Conservative Neocon Republican, the one that is peaceful and wants to bring

about world peace is a Liberal Democrat. Neocon Bill Clinton, keeping the

world safe from terrorist aspirin factories.

In fact, never admit that Liberals lead the nation to war, or did any of

these things, and be sure to blame conservatives for them anyway. Liberals

are peaceful people and do not act this way at all. ASK WHITE HOUSE

STAFF ABOUT HILLARY!

References
Truthful facts from liberal news web sites used in this Howto article:

? The Psychology of leftists
? Cindy Sheehan was accused by her husband of not sharing the insurance

money from their son Casey's death
? Liberals throw riots and break things
? Clinton says Iraq has WMDs
? Clinton takes money from oil company and agrees to let them do business

after making deals with Iran illegally
? The price of oil goes up under Clinton
? Clinton supports warrantless wiretaps
? Ted Kennedy claimed to have had an accident near a creek in

Chappaquiddick
? Our Land Jibjab.com
? Marxian dialectics used by Liberals
? Liberal teenager complains about a private High School Dean disciplining

him for not saying the pledge of allegiance
? Liberals abuse the filibuster as much as they can when the other party

has a majority
? the youth into the liberal point of view
? President Clinton Eats Fox News's Chris Wallace Alive, Spits Out The

Bones
? Kerry belittles US Troops, calls them stupid and stuck in Iraq
? John Kerry admits to Vietnam war crimes he and his men committed
? Liberal Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt orders Japanese-Americans into

concentration camps to die
? Harry S. Truman say Kill all Koreans
? LBJ made a lot of mistakes in Vietnam that we need to learn from
? Clinton thinks Osama is in the pharmaceutical business
? Clinton bombs an aspirin factory

 This article is an embarrassing and pathetic attempt at Conservative

humor. Unlike the How to be a Conservative article, which is full of lies and

links to smear web sites (like Wikipedia which is proven to be edited and

proofread by Conservatives and is often inaccurate), this article is truthful

and contains references to mostly liberal citations like the BBC, and PBS.

That is not acceptable and not funny, because they are true facts.  
 
 This article is likely to be pwnt by American liberals. I suggest you run like

hell or play some Civilization IV before it pwns you too.  

Retrieved from "http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/HowTo:Be_a_liberal"
 
 This page was last modified 19:55, 25 October 2007. Content is available

under a Creative Commons License. About Uncyclopedia Disclaimers   
Wikia® is a registered service mark of Wikia, Inc. All rights reserved.