APRIL-MAY2008

DOREMUS OBSERVES : MATTERS OF INTEREST

Doremus Jessup, editor of the Fort Beulah The Daily Informer, in Sinclair Lewis' famous book "It Can't Happen Here", at its conclusion, after imprisonment and torture escaped and "drove out, saluted by the meadow larks, and onward all day, to a hidden cabin in the Northern Woods where quiet men awaited news of freedom.....still Doremus goes on, into the sunrise, for a Doremus Jessup can never die......

good news atlast!!!

  Wyoming sheriffs put Feds in their place.


  From: James W. von Brunn
  Here's one the mainstream media isn't going to tell you: County
sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents actually abide  by
the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a U.S. District  Court
agreed according to the Keene Free Press:

   The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF  and
the IRS by Mattis and other members of the WyomingSheriff's
Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought
restoration of the protections Constitution and the Wyoming
Constitution.

   Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In
fact, they stated,Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected
sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a
county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other
state or federal official." Go back and re-read this quote. The court
confirms and asserts that "the duly elected sheriff of a  county is the
highest law enforcement official within a county and  has law
enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR  federal
official." And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and  buried -
not in Wyoming, not yet.Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis  comments:

   "If a sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county he has the
constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to  leave,
or retain them in custody." "I am reacting in response to the actions
of federal employees who  have attempted to deprive citizens of my
county of their privacy,  their liberty, and their property without
regard to constitutional  safeguards. I hope that more sheriffs all
across America will join  us in protecting their citizens from the
illegal activities of the  IRS, EPA, BATF,FBI, or any other federal
agency that is operating  outside the confines of constitutional law.
Employees of the IRS and  the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn
County unless they intend  to operate in conformance to constitutional
law."The implications  are huge:

   But it gets even better. Since the judge stated that the sheriff  "has
law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR  federal
official," the Wyoming sheriffs are flexing their muscles.  They are
demanding access to all BATF files.
  Why? So as to verify  that the agency is not violating provisions of
Wyoming law that  prohibits the registration of firearms or the keeping
of a registry  of firearm owners. This would be wrong.

   The sheriffs are also demanding that federal agencies immediately
cease the seizure of private property and the impoundment of private
bank accounts without regard to due process in Wyoming state courts.

   This case is not just some amusing mountain melodrama. This is a BIG
deal. This case is yet further evidence that the 10th Amendment is  not
yet totally dead, or in a complete decay in the United States.

   It is also significant in that it can, may, and hopefully will be
interpreted to mean that "political subdivisions of a State are
included within the meaning of the amendment, or that the powers
exercised by a sheriff are an extension of those common law powers
which the 10th Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they
are not granted to the federal government or specifically prohibited
to the States."

HILARY CLINTON'S PEOPLE

Bill gave the job of health care reform to Hillary, who studiously interviewed all the players, at one point asking Dr. David Himmelstein, a major exponent of a Canadian-style system "where's the power?" behind such a reform. "Seventy-five percent of the American people," he answered, to which she replied, "Tell me something interesting."

The people never have been interesting to the Clintons, not in organized, confident form. They have been interesting as election props and poll numbers, and interesting as victims, atomized, whose pain could be felt, causes championed, and misery exploited. They are interesting to Bill on rope lines, as exemplars of popular adulation and individuals to be charmed or lectured. Hillary used to hate the rope lines, hate being touched, and in the 1992 campaign she used to make sure that big men were around her to keep the plebs at bay. That changed as her ambition grew and she discovered Purell instant hand santizer. Having purelled universal health care as a live issue for a generation, she's back at it, just where she wants to be, as an answer to a murmured prayer, among a populace mobilized for nothing but elections. ............The prison population and prison labor (engaged in everything from taking reservations to sewing jeans to building furniture and transmissions for pennies an hour) mushroomed under Clinton's three-strikes-you're-out and kindred crime policies, and organized labor didn't fight. Prisons expanded, and organized labor didn't fight. (To the extent that more cops and more prison guards and more construction crews were real or potential union members, this development was sometimes even welcomed.) Privatization moved apace here as in so many other sectors, and organized labor didn't fight. The prisons filled with young black and Latino men, and black leadership didn't fight, Latino leadership didn't fight, the civil rights movements didn't fight -- not in any robust, sustained and visible fashion, just like the unions with job loss, NAFTA and the decline in real wages. Now one in less than 100 adult Americans is locked up. That was a blip in the news during the campaigns in Ohio and Texas. Hillary Clinton called for even more cops on the streets, more community policing and only lastly a review of sentencing. ...........Every small, personal complaint looks petty or desperate or sexist, and only allows Hillary to play the part she likes best, after mud slinger and policy wonk, which is survivor. She played that part in New Hampshire and in Ohio, and she'll play it again any time she wants to put on the show that "for anyone who's ever been counted out", for anyone who's ever had to struggle against the odds, for anyone who's ever been treated unfairly, she's their gal. JOANN WYPIJEWSKI

1 in 100 U.S. Adults Behind Bars, New Study Says

By ADAM LIPTAK Published: February 28, 2008

For the first time in the nation’s history, more than one in 100 American adults is behind bars, according to a new report.

(pewcenteronthestates.org)

Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million. Another 723,000 people are in local jails. The number of American adults is about 230 million, meaning that one in every 99.1 adults is behind bars.

Incarceration rates are even higher for some groups. One in 36 Hispanic adults is behind bars, based on Justice Department figures for 2006. One in 15 black adults is, too, as is one in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34.

The report, from the Pew Center on the States, also found that only one in 355 white women between the ages of 35 and 39 are behind bars but that one in 100 black women are.


America should stop using its might to bully weaker nations
PORT HURON TIMES-HERALD (USA)
LETTERS

Have we come to a point where the conduct of American foreign policy is based upon the law of the jungle? The dismemberment of Serbia is a troubling example. Do not small nations have the right of sovereignty over their own legally recognized territory? Is America making an unnecessary enemy of the Serbs, who historically have been allied with us?

Stripping Kosovo from Serbia would be the equivalent of ripping the Alamo out of Texas. Kosovo's independence is that inflammatory to the Serbian people. The Civil War, the bloodiest war in American history, was waged to preserve the Union. The South attempted to assert it independence with support from the overwhelming majority of its citizens. Where did the U.S.
government come down on the issue of self-determination when it affected America?

Why is the U.S government antagonistic toward a noncommunist Russia? Are we squandering a real opportunity for future friendship with another people, which historically has been friendly to us?
Could it be that the U.S. State Department views a prosperous and powerful Russia as an unwelcome check on some kind of American world hegemony? When did the principled foreign policy of the United States change into this "might makes right" mentality, in which the strong bullies the weak?

What is happening to our beloved America?
DUSAN KOVAC Lexington, Feb. 27