Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts

Thursday, May 3, 2012

WTF???!!!!!!!!

The following would seem to indicate that Alaska has some degree of protection for the unborn.

AS 11.41.282. Assault of an Unborn Child in the Second Degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of assault of an unborn child in the second degree if
(1) with intent to cause physical injury to an unborn child or to another person, that person causes serious physical injury to an unborn child;
(2) that person recklessly causes serious physical injury to an unborn child; or
(3) that person recklessly causes serious physical injury to an unborn child by repeated assaults, even if each assault individually does not cause serious physical injury.
(b) Assault of an unborn child in the second degree is a class B felony.

AS 11.41.282. Assault of an Unborn Child in the Second Degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of assault of an unborn child in the second degree if
(1) with intent to cause physical injury to an unborn child or to another person, that person causes serious physical injury to an unborn child;
(2) that person recklessly causes serious physical injury to an unborn child; or
(3) that person recklessly causes serious physical injury to an unborn child by repeated assaults, even if each assault individually does not cause serious physical injury.
(b) Assault of an unborn child in the second degree is a class B felony.

Sounds good, doesn't it.  Protecting the unborn, right?  Our gov and the Legislature did good, right?  BS.

AS 11.41.289. Applicability of S 11.41.280 and 11.41.282.

AS 11.41.280 and 11.41.282 do not apply to acts that
(1) cause serious physical injury or physical injury to an unborn child if those acts were committed during a legal abortion to which the pregnant woman consented or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf consented, or for which consent is implied by law;
(2) are committed under usual and customary standards of medical practice during diagnostic testing, therapeutic treatment, or to assist a pregnancy; or
(3) are committed by a pregnant woman against herself and her own unborn child.

Example: 

Pregnant woman is using methamphetimines and other illegal drugs during pregnancy.  The child is later born, the damage to the unborn is life-long from the drugs, and results in an obligation upon the State to provide healthcare and mental services for the child.

According to 11.41.289, because it was the woman doing the drugs, the unborn has no say, no rights, but the rest of us have to deal with the mess if the child is born. (????!!!!!)  The mother should be held accountable.  Period.  Using drugs is illegal in the first place.  How is it that when your drug use harms another, you are not held accountable? 

I am certain every male pothead, methhead, and dope fiend in Alaska laments "Oh, to be a pregnant female."

Example:

Pregnant woman is living with an abusive spouse or boyfriend.  The child is harmed by physical abuse, resulting in the miscarriage of child.  Should the woman be held accountable under the law?  YES.  She enabled the abuser by failing to get the authorities involved. 11.41.280 needs to be expanded to cover enabling.  Letting the guy or gal beat on her is her problem up until the pregnancy, afterwhich, the issue becomes the harm to the child.  Her silence is assent to the harm to the child.  She has a greater duty to the unborn, because the child is helpless, than in protecting her abuser.  Again, society pays the price.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Where were our Republican legislators' and their respect for life in the aforementioned statutes?
So much for the Gov's pogrom on abuse.  Kind of dropped the round short, don't you think?

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Parnell's Plight

Governor Sean Parnell has dug himself a hole that is deep and wide. Parnell has enough trouble brewing that would cause any sitting governor to start looking at the Help Wanted ads in the local papers. There are four primary areas of concern.

Parnell’s first problem is AGIA.

AGIA was pronounced as DOA by Parnell himself with respect to any expected success of the Open Season. Parnell’s refusal to answer rival Bill Walker’s FOIA request for disclosure of the Open Season is proof that Parnell is playing a delaying game without any expectation of success.

Against AGIA is the reality of the shale gas developments in Canada and the U.S. The Outside gas reserves are estimated to be enough for a 150 year supply of natural gas. The fact of the lack of any permitting to show in the 3 years since the passage of AGIA belie his current assertions that AGIA is alive and well.

AGIA, like Conoco/BP’s Denali project, takes our gas and gas liquids to Canada, thereby benefitting Canada, not Alaska.

Is Parnell acting in the best interests of Alaska by pushing AGIA?

Parnell’s second problem is his contempt for the law with the growing controversy over his appointments of Nancy Dahlstrom and Gene Therriault as his Military Advisor and Oil and Gas Advisor, respectively.

This situation would not be so remarkable were it not for the fact that both Dahlstrom and Therriault were sitting legislators at the time of the creation of the positions to which they were appointed. As ‘advisors’ their appointments did not have to be approved by the Legislature. The problem for Parnell arises with the fact that both appointments were in violation of Article II of the Constitution of the State of Alaska:

“Section 2.5 - Disqualifications.
No legislator may hold any other office or position of profit under the United States or the State. During the term for which elected and for one year thereafter, no legislator may be nominated, elected, or appointed to any other office or position of profit which has been created, or the salary or emoluments of which have been increased, while he was a member. . . .”


There was little comment about former Sen. Gene Therriault’s appointment, except by yours truly and a few others. With the second appointment of Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom, the pundits and the press finally figured out that our governor was ignoring the law.

Is our Governor above the law?

Another indication of the contempt that his governor and his appointees have for the law is the conduct of Gov. Parnell’s MG Katkus in requiring a subordinate to appear in uniform to testify to the House Military and Veterans Affairs Committee in support of Katkus’ appointment as Commissioner DMVA and Adjutant General. This act was unprecedented, and constituted a blatant act of undue influence. This situation was akin to Gene Therriault filling in for the Governor at a campaign function in Fairbanks earlier this summer. Both situations constitute at the very least undue influence on the part of the Governor and by Katkus as Parnell’s appointee.

Parnell’s third problem is the contradiction to any claim that he is working to resolve the Cook Inlet gas supply crisis.

Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division refuses to timely renew expired Cook Inlet oil and gas leases to exploration and development companies. This failure by Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division is incredible in the face of the alleged purpose of the bullet line.

Is Governor Parnell playing politics with a critical gas supply issue to the detriment of Alaska’s largest population segment?

Parnell’s fourth problem that is indefensible and, perhaps, the least recognized by the media, is Gov. Parnell’s decision to virtually eliminate the Alaska State Defense Force as a viable emergency response asset under DMVA.

In 2006, many of the Army National Guard assets were called to federal active duty in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo, leaving the ASDF to perform disaster response. ASDF was called to State Active Duty three times in 2006.

How is reducing the State’s ability to respond to a disaster a showing of leadership?

Are we voters going to let Governor Sean Parnell’s open contempt for the law and his failure in leadership stand?

Monday, July 12, 2010

Racism, just another tool of the new order

What is racism?
In fact, how can there be racism?
Racism implies that there are more than one race of homosapiens sapiens.
Were there separate races, we would not belong to the same genus, meaning that interbreeding would be impossible. Can horses bread with frogs?
Therefore, "racism" should be more properly termed "color" phobia or "color" based prejudice.
This prejudice has been around since time immemorial.
Christ died to end it.
Martin Luther King died to end it.
Yet even today, some black Americans hate white Americans and vice versa.
Same for Asians, same for Hispanics.
Some just hate.
Yet, there are those who foster the lie that only white Americans are capable of prejudice.
Male bovine offal.
The rantings of the head of the New Black Panther Party put that liberal lie to rest.
What is ignored is the fact that we all share the same physiology, the same emotions, the same tendency towards prejudice of one sort or another, and all feel pain.
Whether or not we admit it, we all know what is right and wrong when we denigrate another for whatever reason. We know that we are cowards when we bully the weak, but we excuse our conduct because the object of our prejudice is obviously a lesser being, weak, or limited in some manner or another.
There is an industry built around perpetuating this color intolerance.
The race baiters like Jessee Jackson and Al Sharpton have made a lot of money extorting claims of prejudice where, in all likelihood, none existed.
Much that is called racism is couched in subjective emotionalism on the part of the individual experiencing the conduct. I state this, because there are no more lynchings, armed incursions into homes, public beatings--although black on white crime and violence is ignored by the liberal media--simply because of the dislike of one color by people of another in this country.
How much longer that state will exist depends upon how far the socialist agenda of the Obama administration manages to make inroads into compromising and reducing the Constitution to just history without meaning.
Once our rights become the whim of man rather than inalienable as granted by a creator, our rights are no longer sacrosanct. Our rights are reduced to edict.
The liberal agenda is to denigrate, reduce and remake our Constitution into their vision of social utopia. A false utopia where judges eclipse legislators and regulators make the law according to political whim.
Prejudice is something that plays into this. The alleged need to remake society in the 1960s with the Great Society was an attempt to atone for evils that should never existed. Yes, there was prejudice in the United States that has existed since before the Great Revolution. In that regard, the U.S. was not unique. Nor, is it the fault of the Northern European. Slavery has existed since one man bested another and one tribe bested another, and one city state bested another, and one nation bested another, and one empire bested another and took the losers into bondage.
How did slaves come to the U.S.? Slavery came before there was a U.S. The vanquished of whatever conflict became the fodder for the slave market. The military stronger power making a profit over the vanquished.
Prejudice came as the lie that allowed one man to "own" another. It has existed throughout history.
The same lie permeates the liberal Congress and the Marxist President to give them impetus to destroy our rights in the name of making us all the "same". In that regard, they use prejudice as a tool to create conflict and to divide.
Emotionalism is the imperative that drives.
"Feel good" is the Valium of the masses. Why if we all are the same, then we will all be happy.
Note how riots are now ignored by authorities. The rioters, usually black, are excused for their irresponsible and outrageous lawlessness on the basis of "well, they deserve to steal that TV".
No. They deserve to be shot in order to restore order.
We are a nation of law, not disorder, not color, not the whim of the despot or a Congress and President that pursue the destruction of all that made this nation great.
Prejudice will always exist as long as there is envy of another for whatever reason. There will be prejudice in the minds of those small enough to believe that one "man" is superior to another.
In the mean time, we must deal with the cancer eating at the fabric of this nation called diversity. Diversity is the attempt by the liberals and Marxists to compromise the unity that made this national great.
In order for the destruction of the United States to be accomplished, the social fabric must be destroyed. The conventions of marriage, family, culture, language, borders, and history must be destroyed or suborned in order to reach the end goal of a socialist/Marxist utopia where the dictatorship of the proletariat is the outcome.
In many regards, this has already happened.
The movements to give women equal rights has been perverted into something that now encompasses the elimination of the father figure in raising progeny, the needless, irresponsible killing of the unborn in the name of a woman controlling her own destiny and body in order to achieve the end game of accomplishing the end of the American family as we know it. The further perversion of the family by giving homosexuals parental rights and the ability to adopt have further diminished the role of the heterosexual family in our society.
Our borders and culture have been relegated to the trash heap of history. Why, the U.S. should not have borders! And, the national security and national identity issues are irrelevant. No nation in history has survived the loss of national integrity by failing to secure national boundaries.
Culture has been replaced by diversity. Why, every culture on the Earth is superior to ours.
That's why we are still a super power and the rest are third world offal holes. However, that leadership diminishes daily as our technological base is eroded by an education system that teaches diversity, the normalcy of the abnormal and deviant and "feel good" rather than hard nosed COMPETITION and how to read and write. The theft of our technology and our trade secrets, not to mention military technology and national secrets are openly sold as if they are meaningless.
How many nations have survived when the enemies of the nation have had the gates opened to them and the knowledge of their military and tactics compromised?
We have sold our national soul to the slave labor of communist China and other third world offal holes.
Our manufacturing and technology base, the envy of the world is now in the hands of the great copiers of Asia. Countries incapable of creating their own counter to our success. Done to level the playing field, to make us less threatening to the rest of the world. Our pols have sold our future down the river.
What happened to Rome, when Rome became "less threatening"?
Between the new religion of the left and the religion of climate change, the survival of western culture, much less that of the U.S. is in serious doubt. It was the liberal idiots that let the rabble from Islamic nations into western Europe . . . and the U.S. And, what have they contributed? The very real threat of revolution from and subordination to a 7th century theocracy. Yeah, Islam is sooooo tolerant and forgiving it calls for conversion . . . or death. Heck of a choice, eh?
As Dr. Michael Savage states: "Everything that is wrong is now right."
Every perversion is now to be accepted under the new order. Using children as sex toys is just another step towards social utopia.
Who determines what is right and wrong?
We do.
This election and the 2012 election will determine the fate of this nation.
In the mean time, shoot the looters in Oakland and restore order.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

First Obama, now Hillary? A Constitutional Crisis?

First came the challenges to Barak Obama's qualifications under Article II of the Constitution regarding the legitimacy of his claim to naturalized birth in Hawaii. Now, it appears that Hilliary Clinton may be in conflict with our Constitution as regards her ability to be appointed as Secretary of State: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87451

The issue with Hilliary is that she was a Senator who voted on not less than three pay raises for the very office to which she was appointed. This fact should have prohibited her from being appointed as Secretary of State.

The danger in overlooking the restrictions in our Constitution regarding qualifications to hold office or to be appointed to an executive office are profound in their impact. If these restrictions are overlooked, then it can be reasonably argued that they no longer apply by virtue of ignoring them. That's how our law works. Conduct can be as persuasive as a written article in our Constitution. Ignore an article of the Constitution, by acting in violation without obedience, and the courts will consider it moot.

How is the Constitution being subverted and minimized?

By terming provisions out of date, in need of change to reflect changing social and moral values, by ignoring them altogether as alleged in the court challenges to both Obama's citizenship and Hilliary's acts as a Senator impacting the pay in her current appointment.

Therein lies the danger to you and me. Ignore, minimize, and subvert, and our protections and rights have been usurped without our permission. After all, this is a government by the people, of the people and for the people, right? Or is it?

You willing to fight to defend the Constitution, or sit on your fat butt and watch soap operas and allow our heritage and rights to disappear?

The 2d Amendment is an amendment targeted by the Obama regime. The 2d Amendment was the only amendment not named by the new President of United States as being in an individual right. He named the 1st, the 4th, and the 9th in particular as being individual rights. He overlooked the 2d. And, I believe, given the manner in which he answered the question put to him during the debate, that he excluded the 2d Amendment purposefully. Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/ and look at his legislative priorities. Control and restrictions on firearms is a major initiative according to his agenda.

It was Obama's response in delinating which rights he believed were "personal" and "individual" that caused me to take better notice of what was being said, and not being said on his part. I now listen very closely to what this guy says.

Thus far, it is not much, just fluff and fear mongering.

What is extremely important in this discussion is that Hilliary and Obama both swore an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, both as United States Senators, and then, again upon taking the oath of their respective offices. It is unclear as to whether or not Obama is in violation regarding Art. II, but it is clear that Hilliary's appointment as Secretary of State certainly stands in contravention of the intent of the Constitution. She could not be appointed to any executive office having been a sitting Senator voting on pay raises for that very office to which she was appointed.

What is clear, is that there is an overt attempt to ignore and to circumvent the intent of the Constitution by the democrat political machine.

Our Constitution cannot become a capricious application of law, it must be held inviolate and the supreme law of the land, or it is ineffective and the tool of the oppressor. In which case, one must be that much more distrustful of the intent of the new regime with respect to our rights and upholding the intent and the law that is our Constitution.

Take away the Constitution, and the U.S. becomes like every other oligarchy in the world. The citizens of Commonwealth countries have no free speech, no right to keep and bar arms, no guarantees of any kind, except to due process under certain situations. We have these rights and they should be defended to the death.

Arlington National Cemetary is filled with those who died to uphold and protect our Constitution.

We should be wary of any leader who turns his or her back on any provision of the Constitution, and of any official who purposefully subverts the law to their purpose of attaining power.

If you want to learn more about the Constitution . . . :
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html
http://www.house.gov/house/Educate.shtml
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/
The Federalist Papers are on-line via Google. Search "Federalist Papers" or "U.S. Constitution"

Obama's Citizenship under Art. II / Eligibility Case Archive

The issue of eligibility of Barack Obama to hold the office of the presidency is still alive in several courts. A new case has been filed expanding the defendants to include Congress, V.P. Cheney and others: www.http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87622

What is at stake is whether or not the Constitution of the United States is the final law of the land, or something to be ignored. If it can be ignored in this case, then it can be ignored as to the 1st-14th Amendments as well.

Just what we need, an on again off again Constitution, the status of which is determined by the political philosophy in power.

At least be informed on the issue.

The following link gives the cases on Rightsideoflife.com that challenge Obama's citizenship.

Eligibility Case Archive

Posted using ShareThis

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Pelosi and the Dems want to . . . prosecute?

Today's Fox News gave an interview with our illustrious House Speaker. Madam Rep. Pelosi stated to the effect that the dem Congress might just not be able to overlook the issues of the war, intelligence gathering, and those other illegal activities that the Bushies used to keep us free of terrorism within our own borders the last 8 years.

She was amongst those who stood and cheered and applauded the President when he made his speech to Congress about the course of the United States in responding to 9-11. Bush hid nothing.

She was a member of the Congress that passed every act the President asked for.

Where's the beef in her alleging that there must be investigations and prosecutions for any Bush official when it comes to the prosecution of a war she voted for?

Her counterparts in the Senate have been the most flagrant. Sen. Harry Reid was widely considered to be the person whose office leaked information to the press regarding intelligence activities.

Sen. Boxer, or was it Feinstein, on the appropriations subcommittee pushed $10s of millions in contracts to a company by the name of RSR Environmental.

RSR went from about $200,000 per year in military environmental contracts to $10 million the first year the aforementioned democratic senator's husband purchased stock in the company.

I have little doubt, that given Nancy Pelosi's hardball tactics within her own party ranks in Congress, that there is undo influence and more than just one or two situations that if subjected to the scrutiny of the law that would land her posterior behind bars. She is a hardcore left ideologue who will shout the law to all who can hear to keep the proletariat from learning the truth about the democratic house of glass and her excesses.

I guess the dems actually figure that if they lie enough, and shout that Bush's people did illegal acts when they did not, that we are stupid enough to ignore the truth and take the dem tripe verbatim without recognizing the lie for what it is: a means to consolidate power and reduce the likelihood of the dem party retaining its preeminence in Congress and the Presidency.

To waste the country's time and money at a time of economic challenge is an indication that vendettas are more important than the welfare of the country.

Any prosecutions alleged by Pelosi and her ilk are not about the sanctity of the law. They are about securing and insuring power without any fair recourse to the Republicans. The intent of the dems is to deep six the ability of the Republican Party to gain and hold power in the country.

Looking at the difference in the party platforms, I take the R platform any day. I like going to caucuses where we discuss family, life, and patriotism openly. Where we take pride in our military and honor the young men and women serving. A party where language, borders and culture mean the U.S. border, the English language, and OUR culture. Where unity is the key, not divisiveness--read diversity. Where there is only 3 colors: RED, WHITE, and BLUE. Where all are Americans, not hyphenated anything.

The dems give lip service to the military and only tolerate the military for its use as a social experiment.

The dems extoll death in abortion.

The dems deny marriage is between a man and woman. Two Ms or two Fs don't make a third anything. Homosexualism is a sad "evolutionary" DEAD END.

Dems believe business is bad and that more government handing out everything and keeping those bad Christians and conservatives quiet is good.

Dems believe religion and morality is bad. That the 1st Amendment means that pornography and sexual perversion of all types is to be readily available in our public libraries at public expense, but that the Word of God is verboten in any context and an affront to them.

That feeling good is the priority in life, not having personal responsibility is a right, and that being pregnant, unmarried, and female is the way families should be.

The dems believe that courts should legislate, not the people. Judges are to be the arbiters of their socialist agenda, not elections. Voting is bad, except where the fraud benefits the dem candidate or issue.

I was a democrat. A very long time ago. I changed parties when the dem party became a party of not asking what you could do for your country, but demanding that your country owes you a living.

The last TRUE democrat in Congress was Zell Miller of Georgia. He was the last of the true conservative dems. The last of the Kennedy (as in John) dems. The last of the dems who believed in the individual, not government. Who believed in tax breaks, not more taxes.

John Kennedy was responsible for the greatest tax cuts in the history in the history of the U.S. He believed in life. What happened to that dem party?

So, you see, when Nancy Pelosi starts talking vendettas, that the law must prevail, hide. Load your weapons, and wait. The time will come when we will have refresh the tree of liberty. I fear, all too soon.

Thank you, Lord, and George Washington for the 2d Amendment. (That GW is family, btw.)

I fear not my government, but my government damn well better not step beyond the law, or my government will be held accountable by we the people.

So there.

I think Pelosi is a bully who is riding a false crest of populist support that is not there, nor was ever there in the first place. Saying that the dems had a mandate is belied by the figures. I believe that she and the other dem socialist fruitcake ideologues will be spitting nails before the first year of the Obama administration is over. The reality is, that Obama picked a largely centrist cabinet. He understood the nature of the vote, and is in for the long haul, in spite of Pelosi's stupidity and shortsightedness. He will divorce himself from her extremism, until his second term when he has nothing to lose. That is when we will see Barak Obama, the socialist.

In the mean time, let Pelosi, Reid and the other morons howl in the wind and rattle sabers. Sooner or later, after the next Congressional election, they will understand that they are too far from their president and that the people did not vote a socialist agenda, they voted against a false conservative and a false conservative Congress. That those who voted dem who would have otherwise voted R voted dem to force change in the R party by sending a strong message to the neo cons.

This election was a bell weather event for the R party. Return to conservative values, or forget it until the party returns to its core values.

Every one forgets, GW campaigned twice on conservative values, and won.

Pelosi is a fool going down the path of poltiical vendetta, all she is doing is insuring the demise of dem power . . . hmmm . . . on second thought, GO PELOSI! (Big smiley face goes here.)