The Obama-Holder Over-Reach In Ferguson Missouri

by Norman E. Hooben

Over at The Hill the headline read, “Obama sends Holder to Ferguson” and my first reaction was, “Why?”  According to the article by Amie Parnes, we have to go no further than the first sentence, “Attorney General Eric Holder will travel to Ferguson, Mo., on Wednesday as part of the Justice Department’s investigation of the shooting by police of an unarmed black teenager…”  Again, I ask, “Why?”  The federal government has no jurisdiction in Ferguson, Missouri… None whatsoever!  Now how do I know that?  I’m no lawyer. 

Years ago I was a military instructor in the United States Air Force and during one of the breaks between classes a young student from somewhere in Appalachia approached me and asked, “How do you get to know all that stuff?”  I replied that I really don’t know all that “stuff”, I just know where to look it up…then I would add it to my lesson plan before my scheduled classes.

Not a lawyer but I believe that I’m well-read enough to make the claim that the federal government is overstepping its authority in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting incident (not to mention the obvious 10^th Amendment implications).  Obviously I must have read something along those lines that would make me so brazen.  In other words, I really don’t know all that “stuff”, I just know where to look it up.  So let’s see what I looked up.

In November of 2011, Sheriff Gil Gilbertson of Josephine County, Oregon wrote a 13 page dissertation titled, “Unraveling Federal Jurisdiction Within a State” and rather than having you read the entire document I extracted enough for my lesson plan that hopefully brings you, the student, to the same conclusion…The federal government has no jurisdiction in Ferguson, Missouri!  Here’s Sheriff Gilbertson:

“…In the United States of America, there are two separate and distinct jurisdictions, such being the jurisdiction of the states within their own state boundaries, and the other being federal jurisdiction (central government), which is limited to the District of Columbia, the U.S. territories, and federal enclaves within the states, under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17.” “The article which describes the judicial power of the United States is not intended for the cession of territory or of general jurisdiction… Congress has power to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over this district, and over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.”
“Special provision is made in the Constitution for the cession of jurisdiction from the States over places where the federal government shall establish forts or other military works. And it is only in these places, or in the territories of the United States, where it can exercise a general jurisdiction.”
Reflected in United States v Alphonzo Lopez, April 26, 1991 Case #93-1265: “Under our federal system, the “States possess primary authority for defining and enforcing the criminal law” Brecht v Abrahamson , 507 U.S., 1993 (Slip op., at 14) quoting Engle v Isaac , 456 U.s. 107, 128 (1982); see also Screws v United States , 325 U.S. 91, 109 (1945): “Our National government is one of delegated powers alone. Under our federal system the administration of criminal justice rests with the States except as Congress, acting within the scope of those delegated powers, has created offenses against the United States. …

… In summation, the Supreme Court has declared the federal government has no authority or jurisdiction over individuals or issues not involving interstate commerce or issues not involving federal territory. Neither Congress, nor the President, can pass laws that govern life or activities within the boundaries of the several States. “Police” powers are not explicitly granted to the central (federal) government and thereby fall within the purview of the 10^th Amendment Clause of the Bill of Rights. …

… It is my hope; this letter will serve as an awakening to the public and for elected officials to exercise the proper conduct to stop this runaway government. It is also my hope that Sheriffs throughout the United States will join to bring our Republic form of government back to the people. Currently there is a memorandum of understanding (MOU) in the developmental stage by several Western State Sheriffs for consideration.

Respectfully, Sheriff Gil Gilbertson Josephine County, Oregon ”

 

This is not for you to read.*

Wake up Democrats... The Democratic Party is so politically corrupt and devoid of moral standards... continued below

What is the Difference Between the DNC and the CPUSA?

By Alan Caruba

On the home page of the Communist Party USA it says “A better and peaceful world is possible—a world where people and nature come before profits. That’s socialism. That’s our vision. We are the Communist Party USA.”

No, it’s not Socialism which is a watered down version of Communism. Real Communism is the kind that was practiced in the former Soviet Union. It can be found in Cuba and North Korea where the state controls all power and property,and the people have none.
Modified versions exist in China, Russia, Venezuela, and other nations where some aspects of Capitalism are maintained for the sake of their economies. In the West Socialism was incorporated by both the U.S. and Great Britain, and other nations via various social welfare programs.

Capitalism is about profits, innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment. It is about the freedom to acquire wealth. It emphasizes work, not welfare. It is the reason America has a dynamic economic system---when it is permitted to prosper, free from federal interference.

In America, conservatives have always been acutely aware of Communism, but the 47% who still approve of Barack Obama and those who are members of the Democratic Party are the dupes of those whose quest for tyrannical power permits them to tell the most appalling lies, particularly about Republicans.

The Democratic Party is so politically corrupt and devoid of moral standards that it is currently engaged in seeking to harm potential Republican presidential candidates with an utterly bogus indictment of Texas Governor Perry and the slanders leveled against New Jersey Governor Christie. It is a tactic of those who fear a loss at the ballot box.

It is the Democratic Party and its elected officials that have advanced the global warming hoax, now called climate change and the CPUSA website refers to the “Accumulation of greenhouse gases (as) a ‘planetary emergency’” This is what both the President and the Secretary of State are saying, but there has been no warming on a planet that is now 17 years into a cooling cycle.

As for those "greenhouse" gases, nitrogen and oxygen are the most abundant in the atmosphere, followed by nothing more dangerous than water vapor! Carbon dioxide is a very minor gas at 0.04%. And most importantly, the Earth is not a greenhouse. When the Sun's radiation is reduced due to its own natural cycles, it gets colder.

Tied to the climate change message is an agenda that includes Obama’s “war on coal” and his refusal to permit the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from our neighbor Canada, among other measures to restrict access and use of America’s vast energy reserves. This is an attack on the nation’s economy in the name of “nature” or the “environment.”

The CPUSA wants “No new sanctions on Iran” and the administration’s negotiations with Iran to slow or end its nuclear weapons program have dropped some sanctions to get them to the table, but no one believes that Iran will stop because they are openly avowed enemies of America and Israel.

If you wanted to harm America, you would undermine its southern border so that thousands of illegal aliens could join the estimated eleven million already here. That is what President Obama has done and he is joined by former Democratic Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi who said of the illegals, “We are all Americans.” No, they are not.

The chair of the Democratic National Committee, Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, continues to push for amnesty for illegal aliens saying “It isn’t about politics at all. They (illegal aliens) essentially have become the backbone of the economy.” The Center for Immigration Studies has documented the many jobs that have gone to illegal aliens, leaving native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens with fewer employment opportunities.

In July Gallup reported that “With thousands of undocumented immigrant minors crossing the nation’s southern border in recent months, the percentage of Americans citing immigration as the top problem has surged to 17% this month, up from 5% in June, and the highest seen since 2006. As a result, immigration now virtually ties ‘dissatisfaction with government’ at 16%, as the primary issue Americans think of when asked to name the country’s top problems.”

The Affordable Patient Care Act—Obamacare—is the perfect example of Socialism in its government control of what once was the world’s finest healthcare system and is being destroyed by a law for which only Democrats in Congress voted.

President Obama has illegally asserted more power than the Constitution grants the executive branch, unilaterally altering Obamacare. It is the reason the House of Representatives is suing him.

For several generations since the last century, Americans have been indoctrinated to accept an ever-growing central government, but even so an August Reason-Rupe survey poll found that fully 54% favored a smaller government providing fewer services. Just 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 75% disapprove.

Though education is never mentioned in the Constitution, we have a Department of Education and the same applies to the Department of Energy, both created by Jimmy Carter. A Nixon executive order brought about the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency that is masterminding an attack on private property along with the manufacturing, agricultural and energy sectors of the economy.

If one looks at the Democratic Party today, there is often scant difference between it and the self-professed Communist Party USA which twice endorsed the election of Barack Obama, a man whose father was a Communist, whose grandparents who helped raise him were Socialists, and who was mentored in his youth by a card-carrying member of the CPUSA.

We have a President who believes that the problems throughout the world have been caused by America. His disdain for the nation and the military that serves to protect it is on full display. And the Democratic Party twice chose him as its candidate.

 

If you want to see what Communism looks like, acts and says, watch and listen to the Democratic Party.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Note 1: To see a list of Communist Party members within our government click the following link: “Give us your children and we will destroy the United States of America...Forever!”

Note 2: You can find more about Communists in the Democratic Party here (at some point you'll wonder why some people still call themselves Democrats)
 

*This is not for you to read.*

As the Democratic Party has become closely associated with Saul Alinsky (Thanks to Hillary Clinton et. al.) the title was intentionally meant to do the opposite.  For those not familiar with Alinsky here's a couple of links to bring you up to date:

1.  Who Is Saul Alinsky? ...here's a little run down

2.  What is an Alinskyism?

Norman E. Hooben

________________________________

Summerville, South Carolina Police Encourage Disruptive Unreasonable Teachers

I don't see it written anywhere in the United States Constitution that a 16 year old does not have the right to get upset...fight back, if you will, for an injustice committed by a school system that is one step away from insanity.  That's right, INSANITY !!!  C'mon, since when is it wrong to use the word 'gun' in a sentence...  Gun, gun, gun,...  There, I used it!  What are you going to do about it?  And once the gun no longer becomes the weapon of choice, what will it be?  Will we no longer be able to use the word 'slingshot' in a sentence?  And after the slingshot is banned, what next?  Cotton balls?  Gimme a break! 
Yes, the police are on the wrong side of the law in the following scenario.  It's the teacher(s) who should have been arrested...for being dumb!  ~ Norman E. Hooben

South Carolina high school freshman arrested, suspended for using word ‘gun’ in class assignment
Published by Fox News

A South Carolina high school student was arrested and suspended after handing in a class assignment in which he wrote about killing his neighbor’s pet dinosaur with a gun he purchased to “take care of the business.”

Freshman Alex Stone said it was only a joke. His mother, Karen Gray, was irate he got busted. Gray said Summerville High School administrators acted rashly when they reported her son to cops last Tuesday on the second day of school.

“I could understand if they made him rewrite it because he did have ‘gun’ in it.  But a pet dinosaur?”  Gray told CBS affiliate WCSC. “I mean first of all, we don’t have dinosaurs anymore. Second of all, he’s not even old enough to buy a gun.”

Alex, 16, got in trouble after he and his classmates were told to write a Facebook-like update about themselves in a few sentences.

“I regret it because they put it on my record, but I don’t see the harm in it,” Alex told the station. “I think there might have been a better way of putting it, but I think me writing like that, it shouldn’t matter unless I put it out toward a person.”

His lawyer, David Aylor, said in a statement Thursday that Alex’s arrest “is a perfect example of ‘political correctness’ that has exceeded the boundaries of common sense.”

After cops were called they searched Alex's locker and book bag. The school suspended Alex for three days. He returns to school Monday.

The Summerville Police Department defended the arrest. They said Alex was charged with disorderly conduct when he became disruptive after school officials confronted him about what he wrote.

“The charges do not stem from anything involving a dinosaur or writing assignment, but the student’s conduct,” Capt. Jon Rogers said in a statement Thursday, according to WCSC.

 

They're Coming For You... Don't know who "You" is? Look in the mirror!

Post by CBN News.

Obamacare... First he lied, now you're going to get fried!

"Businesses that have new and massive costs imposed on them by regulatory changes no longer can use that capital for investment, risk-taking, and expansion. That means fewer new jobs for Americans, and fewer opportunities to move up the economic ladder as well."

The Coming Obamacare Shock for 170 Million Americans

By Edward Morrissey, The Fiscal Times April 2014

Barack Obama declared victory this week as the deadline to avoid the penalty for the individual mandate to carry health insurance passed on Monday. “The Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” the president insisted as he announced that 7.1 million people had enrolled in private insurance through Obamacare. “The debate over repealing this law is over.”
Consider that presidential wish casting in a midterm cycle in which Democrats will have to constantly defend their support for the unpopular law. As Jimmy Fallon pointed out later the same evening, the numbers were neither impressive nor reliable. “It’s amazing what you can achieve when you make something mandatory,” Fallon told his laughing audience. “Fine people if they don’t do it — and keep extending the deadline for months.”
Related: Obamacare is a “Haves and Have Nots’ Health System
The public has hardly been in a celebratory or a laughing mood. Polls show that the American public remains as opposed to the ACA as ever, with 55 percent of Quinnipiac respondents disapproving of the law. Only 39 percent approve of Obama’s handling of health care policy, which has until recently been a Democratic Party strength. For that matter, Obama only gets a 40 percent approval rating on the economy and jobs, to which House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the debate to turn now that the Obamacare debate “is over.”
Pelosi and Obama may want to be careful with that wish casting, because the two debates are now closely related. A new study from the American Health Policy Institute – recently launched by former Bush administration Deputy Secretary of HHS Tevi Troy – shows that large employers expect to face steep compliance costs, starting in the fall. Their cost estimates range between $4,800 and $5,900 per employee over the next decade. The total cost to large employers over the next decade will run between $151 billion and $186 billion, according to the 100 companies surveyed by AHPI that employ 10,000 or more people.
That doesn’t include additional price increases from insurers attempting to cover bad bets in their 2014 premium rates after the first round of Obamacare. "I do think that it's likely premium rate shocks are coming,” CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield CEO Chet Burrell told Reuters. “I think they begin to make themselves at least partially known in 2015 and fully known in 2016.” The consensus is that premiums will rise by double-digit percentages next year from their already-inflated levels for 2014 coverage.
The Obama administration unilaterally delayed a portion of the employer mandate, but it still takes effect for those employing more than 200 workers at the beginning of January 2015. Large employers have to budget as soon as this summer to deal with those costs. Most of them will start scaling down their so-called “Cadillac” health care plans to avoid the taxes those will accrue by 2016, getting ahead of the curve.
Related: Obamacare - Taxpayers in the Hole for $1.5 Trillion
Many may choose to give up on offering health insurance at all. The data from HHS after the passage of Obamacare showed that the Obama administration expected as many as 93 million Americans to be thrown out of their existing coverage, with employers opting to either scale down or get out, paying the fine instead.
Either way, the ACA imposes massive costs on employers, whether those come in the form of fines, higher premiums, red tape, or a combination of all three. Businesses that have new and massive costs imposed on them by regulatory changes no longer can use that capital for investment, risk-taking, and expansion. That means fewer new jobs for Americans, and fewer opportunities to move up the economic ladder as well.
Now, perhaps this would make sense if the program that plans to impose all these costs actually did what Democrats promised it would do – insure the uninsured. However, the numbers offered up by Obama on Tuesday fall very far short of the numbers his administration used to argue that a systemic overhaul was needed to address “the fierce urgency of now” with the uninsured, which the LA Times recalls as between 45-48 million.
In fact, it’s not clear at all that the so-called enrollments hailed on April Fools Day offer a break-even point with the uninsured the ACA created. Those numbers are estimated at five to six million Americans in the individual market, many of whom now pay higher premiums and have to clear higher deductibles as the cost of buying more insurance coverage than they believed they needed in the first place.
Related: Obamacare Spells the End of Employer-Based Coverage
So how many of these seven-million-plus claimed by Obama actually started off without any insurance at all? The Times reported that from an unpublished Rand Corporation study that of the six million who signed up through Obamacare exchanges for private insurance, a third of those had no insurance previous to the rollout. That would come to 4.4 percent of the low end of the LA Times estimate, if that number represented actual enrollments – but it doesn’t.
The Daily Mail’s David Martosko reports that the same Rand study shows that only 53 percent of those previously uninsured have actually paid premiums for their selection. The Rand estimate of the newly covered comes just short of 859,000 – or just 1.9 percent of the total number of uninsured that Democrats insisted had to be helped through a costly and disruptive overhaul of the health-insurance industry. Even adding in the estimated six million added to Medicaid – most of whom would have qualified without Obamacare – the first pass only accounts for 15 percent of the problem, as defined by Obama and his fellow Democrats in 2009-10.
The debate is far from over on Obamacare, no matter what the president declares from the White House, although it’s easy to understand why Obama wishes that were true. His signature initiative will be a huge “stinkburger” to the 170 million Americans dependent on employer-sponsored insurance. The businesses that provide this benefit and their employees will have to deal with the “meanwich” Obamacare delivers in higher costs when its mandate forces those employers to react – just weeks ahead of the midterms.
Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:

• Hospitals Plot the End of Insurance Companies
• High Tax States Are Losing Billions
• Top Dem Hints at Forbidden Entitlement Cuts