Free Republic

They neednt move. They are freemen whose rights were purchased for them by Ethan Allen and God. The Constitution memorializes and sanctifies their freedoms.

No state no government no collective of any kind has any right to force freemen into a “system” that controls how citizens obtain medical care nor regluate how legitimate physicians practce.

Mr. Shumlin, former Governor and political freak Howard Dean and the rest of the invasive political locusts that have recently taken over Vermont, will be reckoned with soon by financial and moral reality. The components of civilisation are not free. Government lacks the power as well as the authority to steal and redistribute wealthy they have already destroyed or driven away. Vermont is a hard place when there is no money left, ask anyone who had to live there in the 1930’s. There are a few left. No happy ski trails, just cold and hungry. If you like getting medical treatments from mail order doctors, you’ll love single payer medicine.

This appears to be a very rare, well conceived article assessing the elitist dogma about Rand as compared with the reality of her brilliant insightful and incredibly timely works, in light of the issues facing America today.

We came to the present corrupt and delusional idiocy precisely and expressly under the banner of government coerced altruism. $16 Trillion in on the books debt; new debt as far as the eye can see at over $1Trillion per year; and unfunded liabilities in excess of 100 Trillion; GDP diving southward; and employment stalled, but the dollar plummeting. American power compromised by budget cuts and whats left squandered in hopeless tactics that omit consideration of victory.

We have second rate leaders with third rate minds, devoted to either corruption or psychic payoffs associated with raw power. One senator is famous for wearing tennis shoes, another for being homosexual, one former senator also a former governor most certainly should be in jail for his massive fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, though political connections keep him in freedom months after the cookies were found missing. Harry Reid is a corrupt Las Vegas licensing board hack who played footsie with mobsters, yet some people declare Rand’s characters to be unrealistically drafted, too ‘one dimensional’. The solution to every problem is more collectivism with threat of government force behind it according to our leaders.

Even Mr. Romney, clearly more qualified to hold office than Obama, is mealy mouthed and talks about “reforming” Obamacare...as if Hell might be improved by new street lights and some air conditioning.

Rand has a great deal to teach the world, but many spend tireless hours trying to smear and mischaracterize her work, and to discourage the curious from considering her ideas.

Jeffrey Sachs is a moron with a Doctorate. A closet communist. and a big time government interventionist apologist. An intellectual descendant of Marx and Keynes “magic money” and social reform ideologies. The kind that kill people in bulk. Listen to him when disaster strikes and you will be in the vangard of those crushed burned shot or starved before the end of the first reel.

What Rand teaches among other things is the moral meaning of the marketplace. You can ignore her works, but the moral judgment of the market place will catch up with you inevitably. When it does the spokesmen for the moochers will again in chorus claim it was because you would not agree to tax the rich enough. Ignoring as always that raising tax rates does not increase tax revenues per se and that a government that occupies 25 to 40% or more of the economy is crowding out the ability to produce wealth and pissing away what wealth remains at appalling rates through political payoffs and crony corruption.

This nation and our civilisation are rapidly falling away. If you want to know the cause start reading or re - read Ayn Rand. Short term financial gimmicks might stave off flagrant catastrophe for a bit. The parasites are consuming the host and the scavangers are already feeding on Europe, and little is left in the world that looks like enduring civilisation. We are Rome before the vandals. It is night in America and the hyenas are in charge. Be smug as long as you can, eletists, enjoy your privileges and speak dismissively of a genius who called you what you really are. Scoff at her personal failings in order to distract from her ideas, of free men, of a free society, of the nature of value of human acheivement. Raise your flags and make great speeches in honor of everything pointless and continue your headlong rush toward the politically correct society where sodomites, union thugs and the John Edwards of the world are just as or more important than Ford Carnegie and Edison, more important because Jersey Shore and Oprah have become the heart of America’s culture and Jeffrey Sachs an economic guiding light to those in power.

There is no “state’s rights” issue.

Individual citizens in a free state can not be told who to treat, how to practice, from whom they may receive medical care, nor the prices to be paid. Free people make these decisions for themselves and use their own funds to pay. The extent of the state’s role if at all might be reasonable licensing standards. Government involvement in medical practice violates the fundamental rights of every citizen. There is no rational ground for single payer, for any Government mandated or funded medical care laws or regulations. The reason health insurance costs $15,000 per year per family is because of government and other third party intrusion into medical practice. Government involvement always increases costs and if Vermont has to pay its own way it will face bankruptcy quickly with their delusional plans. Citizens who think it is or should be within the power of the state to coerce citizen behavior as to non criminal matters as important as medicine, need psychiatric help, which they should obtain and pay for themselves. Shop wisely.

What about the Constitutional and natural right of non-collectivist Vermont citizens to freely associate, to private property, to the sanctity of contract and as to any Medical Doctors who might be left in Vermont. Must they be made to live in and pay for the compulsory idiocy of single payer and not be able to choose physicians, patients and treatment decisions, a completely private system that provided the best quality care and the lowest costs up until the Feds intervened in the 1960s

What about the Constitutional and natural right of non-collectivist Vermont citizens to freely associate, to private property, to the sanctity of contract and as to any Medical Doctors who might be left in Vermont. Must they be made to live in and pay for the compulsory idiocy of single payer and not be able to choose physicians, patients and treatment decisions, a completely private system that provided the best quality care and the lowest costs up until the Feds intervened in the 1960s

Interesting article. Appears over-generalized. Rand was not against individuals making choices, only against others presuming to have a veto on the choices you make.

Its always interesting to see how those who deem to comment on Rand, almost always, cant resist inserting generalizations, conclusions and characterizations of Rand as if they are qualified to make such judgments and or implied smears...e.g., “self styled philosopher” ... One may not like Rand’s Objectivism but I defy the author to produce a proposed superior philosophy as comprehensive and deeply rational. Rand is a giant of several fields and her book sales alone raise the importance of her work to towering heights. The last four years have emphasized to any thinking person the continuing relevance of her work.

I would recommend that Rand critics to be taken seriously first demonstrate they actually understand the full scope of what she has to say and its implications for our civilisation and for the life of a free individual. It is clear to me, that most of her critics have only skimmed her work and are left feeling stung, having found in Rand, valid critiscms of long held but poorly thought out assumptions that control their lives and actions. Attacking Rand may restore their self esteem, but it does not make them right nor competent to hold the opinions they express.

WHY ROBERTS WAS WRONG (Part 1)

A (one of more than one) material defect in the opinion of the court (Roberts, opinion for the court) in the “Obamacare” Supreme court decision on Constitutionality, lies with his inconsistent reasoning that a) Congress lacks constitutional authority under the commerce clause to impose a requirement that citizens do something to engage in interstate commerce, notwithstanding Congress’s emphatic recitation of generalized future ‘effects on commerce’ arising from the citizens inactivity; BUT, however, according to Roberts (on behalf of the court) b) The applicable section of the law (mandate) may fairly be read as an exercise of valid Congressional authority under the Constitutional power of taxation.

Below are the essential portions of the applicable provision of the “Affordable Healthcare Act” which under Sec 1501 of the law, imposes the mandate and directs amendment of the Internal Revenue Code (Sec 5000A) to provide for the penalty provision for non-compliance with the mandate. The amended law provides that upon a failure of the taxpayer to comply with the unlawful mandate (summarized in 5000A(a)) then under 5000A(b) “Shared Responsiblity Payment” the non-complying citizen is made liable for the “penalty” to be administered and collected by the IRS.

That is, according to the Court, a nominal “penalty” (of up to 8% of tax payers income and estimated to be as much as $40B annually throughout the US), explicitly based upon a mandate which Roberts found Congress has no power to make (implicity he is saying they had to power to simply say all persons not having min req. coverage are free to do so, however, such persons are by act of Congress made liable for the following tax liability) may be Constitutionally imposed because of and under the authority of Congress’s enumerated power to lay and collect taxes.

But Congress could not have been more explicit about establishing the mandate under its REGULATORY powers nor about basing its PENALTY upon the condition of NON-COMPLIANCE with its unconstitutionaly established mandate to buy health insurance. It is in this context that Roberts may have been said to have re-written the law, rather than passed judgment upon it. In other words, even if one rationally believed exactly as Roberts did about the Constitution, would not the more approproiate action given the statutory language to have been to send the law back to Congress to let them decide if they wanted to revise the offending provisions to be explicity modified so as to comply with existing Congressional powers to authority a true tax, not based upon non-compliance with an unconstitutionaly imposed mandate. In effect Roberts gave deference to a Congress that had already been rejected by a majority of the American people (the 2008 Congress) and disdained the current Congress’s authority (as well as the people who elected them) by not allowing the current CONGRESS to solve the defect in the law, and by reserving to himself the authority to decide how to save a discredited act of a discredited Congress

Subtitle F.Shared Responsibility for Health Care
PART I.INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
SEC. 1501. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.
(a) FINDINGS..Congress makes the following findings:
(1) IN GENERAL..The individual responsibility requirement
provided for in this section (in this subsection referred to as
the eerequirementff) is commercial and economic in nature, and
substantially affects interstate commerce, as a result of the
effects described in paragraph (2)....

5000A. Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage.
SEC. 5000A. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.
(a) REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE..

An applicable individual shall for each month beginning
after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the
individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum
essential coverage for such month.

(b) SHARED RESPONSIBILITY PAYMENT..
(1) IN GENERAL..If an applicable individual fails to meet
the requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during
any calendar year beginning after 2013, then, except as provided
in subsection (d), there is hereby imposed a penalty
with respect to the individual in the amount determined under
subsection (c).
(2) INCLUSION WITH RETURN..Any penalty imposed by
this section with respect to any month shall be included with
a taxpayerfs return under chapter 1 for the taxable year which
includes such month.
(3) PAYMENT OF PENALTY..If an individual with respect
to whom a penalty is imposed by this section for any month.
ee(A) is a dependent (as defined in section 152) of
another taxpayer for the other taxpayerfs taxable year
including such month, such other taxpayer shall be liable
for such penalty,...

Without the second amendment, the first amendment would be a meaningless, empty promise. The second amendment at its core enshrines as fundamental, the American citizen’s right to SELF DEFENSE, from tyranny and from criminals. In our society police are largely agents for insurance companies and courts, making records of what happened, sometimes eventually arresting the guilty. They do not and can not protect citizens whose lives liberty or property are threatened. Leftists have tried and continue to try to demean dismiss devalue and diminish the importance and true meaning of the second amendment. They are anti-liberty and delusional. They are threatened by freedom because the implications of freedom are that they need to be responsible for their own lives and are not entitled to assume power over others who are more capable than themselves.

Gloria Allred, Professional Slut Spokesperson, hit from the past:

Gloria Allred, CNN Dec 06 Panel Re announcement that Rape Charges vs Duke LaCrosse players would be dropped, when DNA test results finally revealed and “victim” changes her story:

[Subsequenty, all charges dropped, and DA(Nifong) disbarred for intentional prosecutorial misconduct in the case]
Excerpts from AllRED Panel Interview:

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY FOR VICTIMS` RIGHTS: Well, I think, Jane, that it certainly hurts rape victims when the handling of the case — when it is done in the way that this particular district attorney has done it.

In other words, if in fact it`s true that he withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense; if in fact it`s true that he didn`t interview the alleged rape victim earlier on in the process; if in fact it`s true that he only had lacrosse players at the lineup and not anyone else, thereby allowing the defense to challenge the lineup and the identification, then, you know — then that hurts his case.

And hurting a high profile rape case or what was alleged to be a rape case is certainly not good for rape victims.

And I`m not ready to conclude, by the way, that this alleged victim lied. It may be that she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both at the time of the alleged incident. It may be that she`s emotionally shell-shocked since then by all of the attacks on her.

We don`t know why she`s saying now what she is alleged to have said, that is, that she can`t testify with certainty that, in fact, there was a penis that — that penetrated her vagina on that day.

.....

Just days after that stunning announcement, the key exculpatory evidence was withheld by the D.A. Word now prosecutors have re-interviewed the woman, and she has changed her story again. Now she says she`s not sure that she was vaginally penetrated by a penis, so the rape charges have been dropped.

I want to go to victims` rights advocate Gloria Allred, because what disturbs me also is the finding of unidentified male DNA that is not from the lacrosse players in this woman`s body. And, you know, of course, it`s so disturbing to even discuss this. It feels so violating to get that graphic, but this is what this case has become.

It would imply that she wasn`t honest with the prosecutors from the get-go, because you would think that she didn`t say, “Hey, I have several other men that I`ve been intimate with in the last couple of hours”?

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Well, we don`t know how long that other DNA was in her body. So we don`t know whether it was just a few hours or substantially longer period of time.

But, you know, for people who want to call her a liar, you know, if she wanted to lie, she could say she was absolutely certain that there was a penis inside of her vagina and then proceed with the rape charge. Yes, I know there`s no DNA, but, I mean, she could have said that and she didn`t.

So maybe people should give her more credit than they`re giving her for her honesty, even though her story may be a little different now. You know, maybe her recollection is different or maybe she`s not certain now.

By the way, she`s not just a stripper. She`s also a college student. But, unfortunately, the press often doesn`t describe her as the college student that she also is.

....

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I see what you`re saying. And I want to go back to Gloria, because this is really point-counterpoint. And he also makes a valid point that perhaps she`s been victimized as well, because this is obviously going to tarnish and affect her life for the rest of her life. And you remember the Tawana Brawley case. This kind of thing really goes into the history books.

And she`s got to live with this for the rest of her life. He could have circumvented it, if he really felt that it was a very weak case, and said, “Hey, you don`t really necessarily want to proceed with this unless you`re absolutely sure.”

ALLRED: Well, absolutely. I think that she may very well have been a victim of District Attorney Nifong, because I think a district attorney really has a duty to vet the case.

I have seen cases, Jane, where rape victims have gone in, there`s a whole lot more proof than appears to exist in this case, and still district attorneys don`t prosecute. And especially in a high-profile case where they seem to require so much more than even the law requires, in order for them to stick their neck out as a D.A. and prosecute.

So I think that perhaps there has been mishandling of this case by the district attorney. Whether or not it`s too late to save it, it`s hard to tell at this point. But I do feel very sorry for the alleged victim, and just the fact that her story may be a little different doesn`t mean, again, that she lied.

I see that your other guests are not seeming to give any weight whatsoever to the fact that she might have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the incident, and also her emotional state may have been such that it did have an impact on her memory.

...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Gloria Allred, victims` rights attorney, jump in here, because I think that you really show the other side, in terms of the fact that we have to prosecute difficult cases, messy cases in this country, because that`s also part of achieving justice?

ALLRED: Well, of course. And whatever Nifong does, he`s going to be criticized.

He drops his rape charge because he doesn`t think it`s in the interest of justice to pursue it and because he doesn`t think he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and he gets criticism for dropping it, and then he gets criticism if he doesn`t drop it.

In that way, I feel a little sympathetic towards him, although I wish he had never called them rapists in the first place. And he has hurt himself by some of his initial press statements.

You know, having said that, this case is not over yet. And we don`t know how it`s going to end. So, you know, for those people who just kind of want to hang him from the nearest tree, I think we still need to be cautious. We still need to wait and see. There may or may not be a trial.

He seems to be headed that way. But maybe in the end he`ll drop it. I don`t know.

And I am concerned, too, Jane, about what kind of support this alleged victim is getting. You mentioned that she`s estranged from her family. Has she been isolated? Has she had the advice of a private attorney? Has she had the support of advocates that an alleged victim in a high-profile case especially needs?

We don`t know the answers to that. And I`m concerned that she might be feeling fearful at this point, feeling anxious, and maybe feeling very much alone.

John Kennedy, Sept 1962 Rice University (excerpts)

No man can fully grasp how far and how fast we have come, but condense, if you will, the 50,000 years of man¹s recorded history in a time span of but a half-century. Stated in these terms, we know very little about the first 40 years, except at the end of them advanced man had learned to use the skins of animals to cover them. Then about 10 years ago, under this standard, man emerged from his caves to construct other kinds of shelter. Only five years ago man learned to write and use a cart with wheels. Christianity began less than two years ago. The printing press came this year, and then less than two months ago, during this whole 50-year span of human history, the steam engine provided a new source of power.

Newton explored the meaning of gravity. Last month electric lights and telephones and automobiles and airplanes became available. Only last week did we develop penicillin and television and nuclear power, and now if America’s new spacecraft succeeds in reaching Venus, we will have literally reached the stars before midnight tonight.

This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers. Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward.
So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this State of Texas, this country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward—and so will space.

William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.

If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.
....
In the last 24 hours we have seen facilities now being created for the greatest and most complex exploration in man’s history. We have felt the ground shake and the air shattered by the testing of a Saturn C-1 booster rocket, many times as powerful as the Atlas which launched John Glenn, generating power equivalent to 10,000 automobiles with their accelerators on the floor. We have seen the site where the F-1 rocket engines, each one as powerful as all eight engines of the Saturn combined, will be clustered together to make the advanced Saturn missile, assembled in a new building to be built at Cape Canaveral as tall as a 48 story structure, as wide as a city block, and as long as two lengths of this field.

Within these last 19 months at least 45 satellites have circled the earth. Some 40 of them were “made in the United States of America” and they were far more sophisticated and supplied far more knowledge to the people of the world than those of the Soviet Union.
The Mariner spacecraft now on its way to Venus is the most intricate instrument in the history of space science. The accuracy of that shot is comparable to firing a missile from Cape Canaveral and dropping it in this stadium between the the 40-yard lines.
Transit satellites are helping our ships at sea to steer a safer course. Tiros satellites have given us unprecedented warnings of hurricanes and storms, and will do the same for forest fires and icebergs.

We have had our failures, but so have others, even if they do not admit them. And they may be less public.
To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead.

The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions, such as Rice, will reap the harvest of these gains.

And finally, the space effort itself, while still in its infancy, has already created a great number of new companies, and tens of thousands of new jobs. Space and related industries are generating new demands in investment and skilled personnel, and this city and this State, and this region, will share greatly in this growth. What was once the furthest outpost on the old frontier of the West will be the furthest outpost on the new frontier of science and space. Houston, your City of Houston, with its Manned Spacecraft Center, will become the heart of a large scientific and engineering community. During the next 5 years the National Aeronautics and Space Administration expects to double the number of scientists and engineers in this area, to increase its outlays for salaries and expenses to $60 million a year; to invest some $200 million in plant and laboratory facilities; and to direct or contract for new space efforts over $1 billion from this Center in this City.

But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun—almost as hot as it is here today—and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out—then we must be bold.
_____________________________________

Barack Obama, February 2012 ( a fundraiser somewhere in America):

” My vision of the way forward for America from the present crisis is, in a word, “Pond Scum”. Trust me and dont believe those shifty republicans that want to deny you contraception and for us to drill in Anwar or build a pipeline from British Columbia or would have us resume drilling in the Gulf if anybody could get the global oil companies to bring their rigs back. Pond Scum... I grow it in my house, you can grow it in yours. I am going to propose a government program to pay you $10 an hour to group pond scum in your house and thereby bring the unemployment rate in America down to 8.1% and it will only push the deficit up another trillion or so. To help pay for this sustainable technology program I intend to mothball the Pacific 7th Fleet and Med 6th Fleet. This will also let the the Russians and Chinese know we are peace loving, unless you are a tent dwelling dictator I can bomb for weeks without fear of retribution. Now if we can only find a way to turn old clunker automobiles into energy. Dream Big America!”

Apple’s Pattern Of Willful Trademark Infringement

26. Although Apple aggressively protects its trademark rights, Apple has a longand well known history of knowingly and willfully treading on the trademark rights of others—a history which began as early as the 1970s when Apple was first sued fortrademark infringement by the Beatles record label, Apple Corp. Although the case wassettled on the condition that Apple not enter into the music business,
Apple entered intothe music business in the 1990s and was sued again.

27. Apple’s early flagship product—the Macintosh computer—also ran afoul of the trademark rights of both McIntosh Labs, a high-end stereo equipment maker, and asoftware company named Management and Computer Services, Inc. (MACS). Apple’sformer CEO John Sculley reported that
Apple paid nearly $2 million (nearly 3 decadesago) to extricate itself from the legal mess it created by its adoption of the Macintoshlabel.

28. Apple was sued another time for trademark infringement due to its adoptionof the name “Mighty Mouse” for computer devices despite Terrytoon’s famous trademark for the cartoon character of the same name.

29. In more recent times, Apple has been sued for its use of various marksemploying the “i” prefix in connection with various wireless technology goods andservices. For example, Apple was sued by Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) in 2007 fortrademark infringement arising from Apple’s introduction
of the iPhone. Cisco, whichowned the mark “iPhone,” and Apple had been in licensing discussions for two years prior to the launch of the iPhone. Nonetheless, Apple ignored Cisco’s trademark rights and announced the iPhone without first reaching any agreement with Cisco.

30. Upon information and belief, Apple also began using “iPad” withoutseeking a license from Fujitsu Frontech North America, which had previously used and had pending before the United States Patent and Trademark Office an application for theiPad mark.

31. Most recently, in May 2010, Apple was sued by Innovative Media Group,LLC (“IMG”) for infringement of IMG’s federally registered “iAds” trademark afterApple launched its “iAd” mobile advertising program.

32. Apple’s announcement and launch of its “iCloud” cloud computing serviceappears to be just one more example of Apple’s “act first and worry about theconsequences later” approach to trademark use as even the most cursory Internetsearch—which could have easily been conducted by any of the legion of Apple’s in-house marketing or legal staff—would have revealed the prior, long term usage of
the iCloud Marks by iCloud Communications

33. Moreover, as was the case of the “iPhone” and “iAd” marks, Applediscreetly applied for a foreign trademark registration for ICLOUD months prior to the launch announcement on June 6, 2011 (Apple applied initially in Australia for iPhone,Canada for iAd and Jamaica for iCloud). That foreign ICLOUD application appears tonow form the basis for the various iCloud applications for which Apple filed in theUnited States on June 1, 2011. Apparently, Apple is attempting to use a foreign jurisdiction’s laws to gain priority for its U.S. registrations while circumventing thenotice and publication
requirements for trademark applications filed here in the UnitedStates with respect to “intent-to-use”
applications.

icloud v apple Complaint June 9, 2011, pp 5 - 9
http://www.scribd.com/doc/57544701/iCloud-Complaint

Gloria Allred, CNN Dec 06 Panel Re announcement that Rape Charges vs Duke LaCrosse players would be dropped, when DNA test results finally revealed and “victim” changes her story:

[Subsequenty, all charges dropped, and DA(Nifong) disbarred for intentional prosecutorial misconduct in the case]
Excerpts from AllRED Panel Interview:

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY FOR VICTIMS` RIGHTS: Well, I think, Jane, that it certainly hurts rape victims when the handling of the case — when it is done in the way that this particular district attorney has done it.

In other words, if in fact it`s true that he withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense; if in fact it`s true that he didn`t interview the alleged rape victim earlier on in the process; if in fact it`s true that he only had lacrosse players at the lineup and not anyone else, thereby allowing the defense to challenge the lineup and the identification, then, you know — then that hurts his case.

And hurting a high profile rape case or what was alleged to be a rape case is certainly not good for rape victims.

And I`m not ready to conclude, by the way, that this alleged victim lied. It may be that she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both at the time of the alleged incident. It may be that she`s emotionally shell-shocked since then by all of the attacks on her.

We don`t know why she`s saying now what she is alleged to have said, that is, that she can`t testify with certainty that, in fact, there was a penis that — that penetrated her vagina on that day.

.....

Just days after that stunning announcement, the key exculpatory evidence was withheld by the D.A. Word now prosecutors have re-interviewed the woman, and she has changed her story again. Now she says she`s not sure that she was vaginally penetrated by a penis, so the rape charges have been dropped.

I want to go to victims` rights advocate Gloria Allred, because what disturbs me also is the finding of unidentified male DNA that is not from the lacrosse players in this woman`s body. And, you know, of course, it`s so disturbing to even discuss this. It feels so violating to get that graphic, but this is what this case has become.

It would imply that she wasn`t honest with the prosecutors from the get-go, because you would think that she didn`t say, “Hey, I have several other men that I`ve been intimate with in the last couple of hours”?

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Well, we don`t know how long that other DNA was in her body. So we don`t know whether it was just a few hours or substantially longer period of time.

But, you know, for people who want to call her a liar, you know, if she wanted to lie, she could say she was absolutely certain that there was a penis inside of her vagina and then proceed with the rape charge. Yes, I know there`s no DNA, but, I mean, she could have said that and she didn`t.

So maybe people should give her more credit than they`re giving her for her honesty, even though her story may be a little different now. You know, maybe her recollection is different or maybe she`s not certain now.

By the way, she`s not just a stripper. She`s also a college student. But, unfortunately, the press often doesn`t describe her as the college student that she also is.

....

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I see what you`re saying. And I want to go back to Gloria, because this is really point-counterpoint. And he also makes a valid point that perhaps she`s been victimized as well, because this is obviously going to tarnish and affect her life for the rest of her life. And you remember the Tawana Brawley case. This kind of thing really goes into the history books.

And she`s got to live with this for the rest of her life. He could have circumvented it, if he really felt that it was a very weak case, and said, “Hey, you don`t really necessarily want to proceed with this unless you`re absolutely sure.”

ALLRED: Well, absolutely. I think that she may very well have been a victim of District Attorney Nifong, because I think a district attorney really has a duty to vet the case.

I have seen cases, Jane, where rape victims have gone in, there`s a whole lot more proof than appears to exist in this case, and still district attorneys don`t prosecute. And especially in a high-profile case where they seem to require so much more than even the law requires, in order for them to stick their neck out as a D.A. and prosecute.

So I think that perhaps there has been mishandling of this case by the district attorney. Whether or not it`s too late to save it, it`s hard to tell at this point. But I do feel very sorry for the alleged victim, and just the fact that her story may be a little different doesn`t mean, again, that she lied.

I see that your other guests are not seeming to give any weight whatsoever to the fact that she might have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the incident, and also her emotional state may have been such that it did have an impact on her memory.

...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Gloria Allred, victims` rights attorney, jump in here, because I think that you really show the other side, in terms of the fact that we have to prosecute difficult cases, messy cases in this country, because that`s also part of achieving justice?

ALLRED: Well, of course. And whatever Nifong does, he`s going to be criticized.

He drops his rape charge because he doesn`t think it`s in the interest of justice to pursue it and because he doesn`t think he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and he gets criticism for dropping it, and then he gets criticism if he doesn`t drop it.

In that way, I feel a little sympathetic towards him, although I wish he had never called them rapists in the first place. And he has hurt himself by some of his initial press statements.

You know, having said that, this case is not over yet. And we don`t know how it`s going to end. So, you know, for those people who just kind of want to hang him from the nearest tree, I think we still need to be cautious. We still need to wait and see. There may or may not be a trial.

He seems to be headed that way. But maybe in the end he`ll drop it. I don`t know.

And I am concerned, too, Jane, about what kind of support this alleged victim is getting. You mentioned that she`s estranged from her family. Has she been isolated? Has she had the advice of a private attorney? Has she had the support of advocates that an alleged victim in a high-profile case especially needs?

We don`t know the answers to that. And I`m concerned that she might be feeling fearful at this point, feeling anxious, and maybe feeling very much alone.

Excellent. Right on.

Gloria Allred, CNN Dec 06 Panel Re announcement that Rape Charges vs Duke LaCrosse players would be dropped, when DNA test results finally revealed and “victim” changes her story:

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY FOR VICTIMS` RIGHTS: Well, I think, Jane, that it certainly hurts rape victims when the handling of the case — when it is done in the way that this particular district attorney has done it.

In other words, if in fact it`s true that he withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense; if in fact it`s true that he didn`t interview the alleged rape victim earlier on in the process; if in fact it`s true that he only had lacrosse players at the lineup and not anyone else, thereby allowing the defense to challenge the lineup and the identification, then, you know — then that hurts his case.

And hurting a high profile rape case or what was alleged to be a rape case is certainly not good for rape victims.

And I`m not ready to conclude, by the way, that this alleged victim lied. It may be that she was under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both at the time of the alleged incident. It may be that she`s emotionally shell-shocked since then by all of the attacks on her.

We don`t know why she`s saying now what she is alleged to have said, that is, that she can`t testify with certainty that, in fact, there was a penis that — that penetrated her vagina on that day.

.....

Just days after that stunning announcement, the key exculpatory evidence was withheld by the D.A. Word now prosecutors have re-interviewed the woman, and she has changed her story again. Now she says she`s not sure that she was vaginally penetrated by a penis, so the rape charges have been dropped.

I want to go to victims` rights advocate Gloria Allred, because what disturbs me also is the finding of unidentified male DNA that is not from the lacrosse players in this woman`s body. And, you know, of course, it`s so disturbing to even discuss this. It feels so violating to get that graphic, but this is what this case has become.

It would imply that she wasn`t honest with the prosecutors from the get-go, because you would think that she didn`t say, “Hey, I have several other men that I`ve been intimate with in the last couple of hours”?

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Well, we don`t know how long that other DNA was in her body. So we don`t know whether it was just a few hours or substantially longer period of time.

But, you know, for people who want to call her a liar, you know, if she wanted to lie, she could say she was absolutely certain that there was a penis inside of her vagina and then proceed with the rape charge. Yes, I know there`s no DNA, but, I mean, she could have said that and she didn`t.

So maybe people should give her more credit than they`re giving her for her honesty, even though her story may be a little different now. You know, maybe her recollection is different or maybe she`s not certain now.

By the way, she`s not just a stripper. She`s also a college student. But, unfortunately, the press often doesn`t describe her as the college student that she also is.

....

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I see what you`re saying. And I want to go back to Gloria, because this is really point-counterpoint. And he also makes a valid point that perhaps she`s been victimized as well, because this is obviously going to tarnish and affect her life for the rest of her life. And you remember the Tawana Brawley case. This kind of thing really goes into the history books.

And she`s got to live with this for the rest of her life. He could have circumvented it, if he really felt that it was a very weak case, and said, “Hey, you don`t really necessarily want to proceed with this unless you`re absolutely sure.”

ALLRED: Well, absolutely. I think that she may very well have been a victim of District Attorney Nifong, because I think a district attorney really has a duty to vet the case.

I have seen cases, Jane, where rape victims have gone in, there`s a whole lot more proof than appears to exist in this case, and still district attorneys don`t prosecute. And especially in a high-profile case where they seem to require so much more than even the law requires, in order for them to stick their neck out as a D.A. and prosecute.

So I think that perhaps there has been mishandling of this case by the district attorney. Whether or not it`s too late to save it, it`s hard to tell at this point. But I do feel very sorry for the alleged victim, and just the fact that her story may be a little different doesn`t mean, again, that she lied.

I see that your other guests are not seeming to give any weight whatsoever to the fact that she might have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the incident, and also her emotional state may have been such that it did have an impact on her memory.

...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Gloria Allred, victims` rights attorney, jump in here, because I think that you really show the other side, in terms of the fact that we have to prosecute difficult cases, messy cases in this country, because that`s also part of achieving justice?

ALLRED: Well, of course. And whatever Nifong does, he`s going to be criticized.

He drops his rape charge because he doesn`t think it`s in the interest of justice to pursue it and because he doesn`t think he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and he gets criticism for dropping it, and then he gets criticism if he doesn`t drop it.

In that way, I feel a little sympathetic towards him, although I wish he had never called them rapists in the first place. And he has hurt himself by some of his initial press statements.

You know, having said that, this case is not over yet. And we don`t know how it`s going to end. So, you know, for those people who just kind of want to hang him from the nearest tree, I think we still need to be cautious. We still need to wait and see. There may or may not be a trial.

He seems to be headed that way. But maybe in the end he`ll drop it. I don`t know.

And I am concerned, too, Jane, about what kind of support this alleged victim is getting. You mentioned that she`s estranged from her family. Has she been isolated? Has she had the advice of a private attorney? Has she had the support of advocates that an alleged victim in a high-profile case especially needs?

We don`t know the answers to that. And I`m concerned that she might be feeling fearful at this point, feeling anxious, and maybe feeling very much alone.

Thanks for the bump.

And, we must be wary of new tax proposals that are targeted to “affect” only a selection few. The 1969 Alternative minimum tax is one typical example....Although the AMT was originally enacted to target 155 high-income households, it now affects millions of middle-income families each year. The number of households that pay the tax has increased significantly in the last decade: In 1997, for example, 605,000 taxpayers paid the AMT;[49] by 2008, the number of affected taxpayers jumped to 3.9 million, or about 4% of individual taxpayers.[50] A total of 27% of households that paid the AMT in 2008 had adjusted gross income of $200,000 or less. (Source;Wikipedia).

Galbraith was a commie flunky with a good PR agent.

This article recites utter nonsense as has already been pointed out by a previous poster.

My focus is on the non-sensical idea that economic growth depends primarily on consumer demand. Consider the highly successful and growing Apple Corp product line of iphones and ipads. What came first? Consumer purchases or Apples investment in research, engineering, production, distribution and marketing? All before the first sale to a consumer.

What is killing America’s economy is a Government bent on doing all it can to disincentivize private investment. High Taxes, eroding dollar values, extreme anti-business overregulation, and manifest uncertainty that makes investment planning and analysis impossible (e.g. how much will Obamacare actually cost employers?)

America needs low tax RATES, minimal regulation, maximum market freedom, and reasonable predictability for their planning and decision making. Repeal Obamacare, cut corporate estate social security and individual tax rates, eliminate the NLRB FTC Dodd Frank and all of the other top down economic constrictors, stop bailing out failed institutions and stop funding corrupt ones (Fannie Mae etc). Stop regulating wages and benefits of projects and institutions that receive some federal funds. Stop deficit spending. Get out of the healthcare business; out of education and out of energy policy. Our economic nightmare could be over within 18 months of sensible policy changes that recognize the importance and need for enhancing private investment return opportunities. Cut Federal employment by 50% and Federal wages and benefits by 30%.

Galbraith’s “intellectual” heirs have tried and failed with their stupid schemes of phoney artificial demand stimulus. In the real world is plainly known as WASTE, and it has failed miserably.

Leftist pointy headed elitist psuedo intellectualism mostly.

In 1984 36 task forces and their sub groups lead by 161 of the nations best CEO’s studied the Federal Government for months and concluded that as much as one -third of the Federal Budget consisted of waste, fraud and abuse. Congress of course took no action on the Grace Commission report and its predictions of more than $13Trillion in national debt have now come true

The elimination of waste is never bad economic policy. A government that lives within its means and intrudes on private sector actions as little as possible would be nourishing to enterprise not destructive of it.

Low taxes and low regulation stimulate productive economic activity (and “jobs”) by increasing private investment. (Investment not “consumer demand” creates growth; e.g. Apple Ipad and Iphone had to be created before anyone bought one)

Government debt is nothing more than a hidden tax, another parasitic burden on the national economy.

Bleating hearts of desparate leftists are inventing focus group tested “scenarios” to try and justify their failed status quo. The nation knows they are frauds, only our failed institutions, leftist dominated government and a corrupt and ignorant media establishment continue to manuever to retain power behind stupid theories and empty rhetoric.

BHO’s mom worked for Timmy’s father. Why do you think BHO worked so hard to save Timmy’s nominatin in the face of tax cheating? Unlike, Clinton who dropped nominees mired in mud, BHO needed this guy to implement the PROGRAM. Timmy is virtually the only member of the original BHO economic team to remain standing. And people worry about the freemasons? BHO and Timmy share the same secret handshake as Mao, Uncle Joe and Hugo. Like all hardcore commies everywhere they will do anything and say anything to acquire and use absolute power to set up the commie caliphate.

Not detail, oriented?

He was an attorney designated by his mother has representing him in that particlar matter. Not just any attorney, but the former Editor of the Harvard Law Review.

When debating McCain in 2008 and repeatedly, he claimed the insurance company was denying payment FOR TREATMENT.

She acquired her disability policy AFTER she saw a doctor who surmised that she may have uterine cancer. The policy provided that if treated for a condition during that period, there would be no disability coverage FOR LOST INCOME. So, guess what a coverage dispute arose.

For Obama to have misrepresented as he clearly did the circumstances of an insurance dispute involving his own mother’s death but not involving the coverage issues in Obamacare, is more than adequate distortion and conscious misleading that under other factual circumstances would be grounds for a criminal fraud conviction.

Why should voters give him a pass and repress the logical conclusion that he is an habitual liar, e.g. 80% of Americans support his deficit limit tax raising plans?