JOIN the Freedomist Shadow Government and help to “Shadow Them!”

7. November 2008 by admin.

The idea is simple, we will SHADOW Federal officials, revealing their actions to the world, describing what WE would do in their place, and communicating our concerns and issues to them.

NOTE: If you are a member already of the Conservatives In Exile Shadow Government this is the main Freedomist group, you can join BOTH groups.

Here’s the way it works…..

1. You decide to JOIN the Shadow Government by taking the following PLEDGE and registering at www.vusalive.com  (See the pledge in the terms of use or at the bottom of this email)

2. You go to THE MALL..Come here to find out what a Freedomist is and to apply for membership in our Virtual Government as a “Shadow” of a Governor, a Senator, a Representative, a Supreme Court Justice, a Judge in any US Circuit Court, a member of the Executive Branch, and etc. URL: http://vusalive.com/gov/viewforum.php?f=1

3. You go to NEW MEMBER Indoctrination and Application: ALL Freedomists who wish to serve as a Shadow to any official MUST Caucus with a Political Group. Come here to read about the different Political Caucuses, what they stand for, to ask questions, and to apply for membership.  URL: http://vusalive.com/gov/viewforum.php?f=15

POST your request and questions. This is BEING BUILT NOW, so check back as new updates are completed!

Political Caucuses Include: Bull Moose GOP (for conservative Freedomists who are Republicans), Kennedy Democrats (for Blue Dog Democrats and PUMAs) and groups for Libertarians, Constitutionalists and Independents)

4. Once you have JOINED a Caucus you will make application for a SEAT or POSITION within the Shadow Government

If you obtain a SEAT or a POSITION then here’s what you do, and it is very easy…

1. Every weekday go to the websites associated with your counterpart, do a Google search for new news, and copy and past anything of note in the forum that applies.

2. Write about what YOU would do if YOU were in their position and post that in the forum that applies to them.

3. Participate in debates and votes, as applicable, to make decisions and to make resolutions which detail why that decision was taken

A few “rules of the road”:

1. This is for Freedomists, see the PLEDGE (at bottom of email)

2. Inactive “Shadow” officials will be removed when anyone requests their position

3. You cannot seek to Shadow any official unless you are their constituent and live in the area they represent or have jurisdiction over

You decide WHO you want to shadow in the Federal Government.

This includes Senators, House Members, Judges, members of the Executive Branch, and Governors.

You can choose up to TWO positions to fill, at least for now, but not within the SAME branch of government and, again for now, all Governors have the option of also being the Senior Senator for their state.

The following positions cannot be filled until at least 100 Shadow Government members vote on them:

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
President
Vice President
Speaker of the House
Senate Majority Leader

Active members will ALSO receive their own BLOG on afn50.com which relates to their office and is set up as a NewsBlog.

SIGN UP HERE: http://www.vusalive.com

Here is the pledge:
“I pledge to uphold the Constitution of these United States of America as well as the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Freedomist Principles of limited government with maximum local control, and of a free market, while standing strong for the sovereignty of every Elector in my community, the right of free association for every private group, club, church, or business, and the absolute local autonomy of my community as a Free Society in which almost ALL decisions that affect local people are made by local people for local people.”

 

Posted in Freedom News | Print | No Comments »

Kelo v New London….June 23, 2005- The day we lost our lands

7. November 2008 by admin.

Read this decision, and tell me if you believe that the Supreme Court is illegal, and that the other branches of government are derelect in their constitutional duties to restore our Constitutional Right to Property.

 

KELO V. NEW LONDON (04-108) 545 U.S. 469 (2005) 268 Conn. 1, 843 A. 2d 500, affirmed.

---

Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al.

CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT

---

No. 04—108.Argued February 22, 2005–Decided June 23, 2005

---

After approving an integrated development plan designed to revitalize its ailing economy, respondent city, through its development agent, purchased most of the property earmarked for the project from willing sellers, but initiated condemnation proceedings when petitioners, the owners of the rest of the property, refused to sell. Petitioners brought this state-court action claiming, inter alia, that the taking of their properties would violate the “public use” restriction in the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause. The trial court granted a permanent restraining order prohibiting the taking of the some of the properties, but denying relief as to others. Relying on cases such as Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229, and Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26, the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, upholding all of the proposed takings.

Held: The city’s proposed disposition of petitioners’ property qualifies as a “public use” within the meaning of the Takings Clause. Pp. 6—20.

    (a) Though the city could not take petitioners’ land simply to confer a private benefit on a particular private party, see, e.g., Midkiff, 467 U.S., at 245, the takings at issue here would be executed pursuant to a carefully considered development plan, which was not adopted “to benefit a particular class of identifiable individuals,” ibid. Moreover, while the city is not planning to open the condemned land–at least not in its entirety–to use by the general public, this “Court long ago rejected any literal requirement that condemned property be put into use for the … public.” Id., at 244. Rather, it has embraced the broader and more natural interpretation of public use as “public purpose.” See, e.g., Fallbrook Irrigation Dist. v. Bradley, 164 U.S. 112, 158—164. Without exception, the Court has defined that concept broadly, reflecting its longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments as to what public needs justify the use of the takings power. Berman, 348 U.S. 26; Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229; Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986. Pp. 6—13.

    (b) The city’s determination that the area at issue was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to deference. The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue. As with other exercises in urban planning and development, the city is trying to coordinate a variety of commercial, residential, and recreational land uses, with the hope that they will form a whole greater than the sum of its parts. To effectuate this plan, the city has invoked a state statute that specifically authorizes the use of eminent domain to promote economic development. Given the plan’s comprehensive character, the thorough deliberation that preceded its adoption, and the limited scope of this Court’s review in such cases, it is appropriate here, as it was in Berman, to resolve the challenges of the individual owners, not on a piecemeal basis, but rather in light of the entire plan. Because that plan unquestionably serves a public purpose, the takings challenged here satisfy the Fifth Amendment. P. 13.

    (c) Petitioners’ proposal that the Court adopt a new bright-line rule that economic development does not qualify as a public use is supported by neither precedent nor logic. Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted governmental function, and there is no principled way of distinguishing it from the other public purposes the Court has recognized. See, e.g., Berman, 348 U.S., at 24. Also rejected is petitioners’ argument that for takings of this kind the Court should require a “reasonable certainty” that the expected public benefits will actually accrue. Such a rule would represent an even greater departure from the Court’s precedent. E.g., Midkiff, 467 U.S., at 242. The disadvantages of a heightened form of review are especially pronounced in this type of case, where orderly implementation of a comprehensive plan requires all interested parties’ legal rights to be established before new construction can commence. The Court declines to second-guess the wisdom of the means the city has selected to effectuate its plan. Berman, 348 U.S., at 26. Pp. 13—20.

268 Conn. 1, 843 A. 2d 500, affirmed.

    Stevens, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion. O’Connor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and Scalia and Thomas, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

• about us
• help
• © copyright

Americanfreedomistnetwork.com

Posted in Freedom News | Print | No Comments »

Candidate Obama’s Meddling in Iraq Confirmed

7. November 2008 by CassandraTroy.

In an often quoted post of September 17, “The Hidden Sinisterisms of the O Campaign” we reported as follows:

First the explosives. The media are nowhere in evidence in the matter, but the initial charges were laid out nevertheless in a NY Post article titled “Obama Tried to Stall GIs’ Iraq Withdrawal” (…)

Amir Tehari alleges that Obama on his recent fact-finding mission in Iraq a few months ago, against official policy … “(…) has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence. According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July. (…)

- Caption: Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and Foreign Secr. Condoleezza Rice -

Video material is available here. The McCain camp has responded that “(…) If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas. Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq’s Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. (…)” >>>

During the same trip Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined. (…)”. Bob Owens in a PJs article “Obama’s Questionable Diplomacy in Iraq” had a reaction to the allegations from the Multi-National Force Iraq Press Desk.

Fast forward to breaking news this morning by The Right Perspective, mentioning the comments made by an Iraqi MP in newspaper Aswat al Iraq. The article “Lawmakers call on Obama to pull out troops from Iraq” quotes legislature Mohammed al-Mehmedawi of al-Fadila bloc saying …

“Obama advised Iraqi politicians not to sign the pact.” “He did so because he believed that if the pact would not be signed, it would be a landmark for republicans’ policy failure in Iraq,” he noted.

The keen observer may have noticed nothing was spared in the Obama campaign to win the Presidency. A number of efforts crossed the line of generally accepted standards of proper conduct. The above was clearly one of them.

One cannot help wondering, will the unraveling continue?

- Filed in Articles in “The Pomo Presidency” -

Posted in Freedom News | Print | No Comments »

Fight for your Personal Territory at a time of WAR?

7. November 2008 by admin.

As movements grow, human interaction becomes more compressed, heightened, and led by the rationale of emotion as opposed to the practical concerns we are all endeavoring to overcome.

 

On right-leaning groups, there is a tendency for individuals to develop territorial defensive tactics, to ‘finish off’ a perceived threat by severing all ties with this entity and further attempting to sabotage this entity’s continued credibility, a ‘credibility’ which is so vital to operating within the machinations of ‘activism’ in America today, as experienced on the right.

 

We are so anti-hierarchical that in our constant insistence to ‘be the ones in charge’, we willingly stomp on, degrade, and set to proverbial fire the very people who share our most vital core principles, beliefs, and callings.

 

We have been looking for something, something which captures the full expression of underlying political, economic, and spiritual rage that exists in this nation, something that seeks to get to the core needs of these equally unhappy parties.  Groups like Puma, Conservatism in Exile, Kennedy Democrats, etc are emerging on both sides of the political spectrum (and all points in between).

 

These are de facto, and unwilling, separatist movements.  The Puma name expresses it the best- Party Unity, My Ass.  But both the elephant and the donkey are riddled with their own flavors of PUMAs, a core group of individuals who feel that the Obamarx is a direct threat to their very basic freedoms.

 

But are any of these groups talking to one another?  Hell, are any of these groups within the same political band talking?  No.  The disunity is wide and embarrassing.  Success in this world is measured by how many members of an email list you have, as opposed to the amount of folks you have in your group, team, etc, that is, quite simply, DOING!

 

We at the AFN have put forth our ideas.  We have given you a fair snapshot of the types of teams that we want to build across this nation.  We, from the very start, stated that if you could find an organization that was already building a nationwide network of local newsblogs that become virtual community centers that become brick and mortal (or straw bale or adobe) which shine spotlights on those who assume to control our money and our resources, which brings self-reliance, autonomy to each community through victory gardens, buying clubs, shared babysitting, help with home schooling, security issues, etc.

 

If that organization does not exist, then folks, come ye forward and help us BUILD IT NOW!  If that organization already exists, then let’s everyone meet over there and help them BUILD IT NOW!!!

 

As our group grows, as human interaction begins to become heightened, the tendency is for this group to suffer the fate of many other groups in the past, the fate of fratricide.  As we go forward, we will all of us find situations in which we have crashed into someone’s personal territory or have had our territory encroached upon.  It is a measure of the Freedomist Movement as to how we allow our sovereignty-guided instincts to prevent us from remembering that we are

 

AT WAR!

 

You don’t have time for personal territory when you are at war.  You don’t act like a businessman when you are at war.  The tendency of business is to guard, to keep secrets, even at the detriment of society, especially if those business principles are carried out in a time of war.

 

You share in times of war.  So, for instance, for the members of AFN that DO, members such as Tricia Cuningham, Cassandra Troy, myself, my brother Bill Collier, Mike Carrl, and more, I am willing to share my personal territory with them in ways that, in a business environment (and I hope someday we have the luxury of that environment in the future) I would never do.

 

This is not to say that we want all your stuff, but rather, if and when those inevitable territory clashes occur, it is imperative that, as quickly as possible, we define our territorial boundaries, accept the invasions we feel we must accept in the name of war, and get back to freaking work.

 

I am writing this, and I will read it, possibly, on Monday’s 57^th State, because our group is experiencing very real growth.  We are about to engage with one another in an intense crucible.  We will invariably piss one another off for something.  Outbursts of anger are probably going to occur, most of which will be triggered by events that had nothing to do with the outburst in the first place.

 

When we swim in flames, as we are all doing in these times, our internal fires get to the surface a whole lot easier.  What we must say to ourselves as we embark on building our network is that we have only 10 weeks, 10 weeks to have the lights turned on in Washington, to track every move they make in their attempt to use legislation to finish us off, legislation like the Fairness Doctrine, Global UN Taxation, further illegal seizure of private property by the government, the funding of leftist youth thug groups.

 

If these are not enough to keep your eye forward, instead of averting it to protect your personal territory, then you cannot build an army, you can only build a wee citadel in the middle of the Obamarx Empire.  Good luck with that.

 

We are freedomists, we are Americans.  We are at war against an illegal government, an interloper, who must be watched, even as we build real freedom, the freedom to take care of your own and your neighbors with your OWN ingenuity, resources, and NETWORKS!

 

So decide whether you want little citadels, easily crunched by that big, fat glimmering boot dripping with oil’s crude black, the big boot Obamarx, King Obama. 

 

As for me, the work I do here does not enrich me in an monetary way, nor does it satisfy my vanity, my personal pleasures in any way, save for the opportunity I have to engage in dialogue with intelligent people who speak very well, and who, quite frankly,. are simply fun to dialogue with.

 

But, despite that one source of selfish bliss (I am a talk slut), I am not here for that reason.  I am here to build, build, build.  If I must be a citadel, then I will tackle that reality as I can.

 

I have started my own virtual community center, the Lincoln Park Virtual Community Center (LPVCC), am going to start digitally documenting my city council meetings, school board meetings, etc.  So I am already beginning to build for my neighborhood.  Who is building for your neighborhood?

 

This Novemebr 15^th, two Saturdays from now, the AFN is holding a Citizen Blog Meeting, where we will show folks how to start a newsblog or a virtual community center (I’ve chosen to start the VCC first, where I live).  We have all we need to start building.  We just need you folks to join us.

 

Joey Daubin has a network in Ellis County, Texas.  My brother Bill is starting a newsblog for Marysville, Pa.  We have many folks interested.  We are waiting for you to start building.

 

Folks, we have 10 weeks, just 10 weeks to get ready for Obamarx.  Do you think that the Obamarx is getting ready for war?  Of course they are.  Are you?  Are we?  Will you defend your personal territory if it means losing your entire nation?

 

Write me, Paul Collier, at pc@writepaulonline.com.  Let me know what you can do NOW!  Then we’ll talk on the phone, and we will find a place for you in the network that we will ALL own.

Posted in Freedom News | Print | No Comments »