Reminder to 0bama and Holder Employees
COMPUTER TRESPASS---RCW 9A.52.110---Computer trespass in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of computer trespass in the first degree if the person, without authorization, intentionally gains access to a computer system or electronic database of another; and (a) The access is made with the intent to commit another crime; or (b) The violation involves a computer or database maintained by a government agency.
(2) Computer trespass in the first degree is a class C felony.
National Debt Counter -- Thank the Stimulus Bill
You Are Never As Anonymous As You Think!
Sign by Danasoft - For Backgrounds and Layouts
Please Be Sure to Scroll Down to See Political Videos and Permanent Comments Located At Bottom Of This Page. Thank you.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Letter To Senators . . . Feel Free To Plagiarize, I did.
If my son were to claim he was better to serve in Congress because he grew up as a poor white dude raised by a single mother and can relate better to the masses, would you be insulted?
If I were to claim that I was better to serve on the Supreme Court because I grew up as a middle class white girl and can better relate to the majority of people living in the USofA, would you be insulted?
Sonia Sotomayor, if just a private citizen, would NOT be able to serve as a Juror if she revealed during 'voir dire' that her determination of the "facts" of the case would be influenced by the litigants' race, gender and national origin! It's ironic that she can serve as a judge after publicly expressing these biases.
What are you guys thinking?
Sonia Sotomayor has already verbally stated her philosophy in public over the past years, over and over again, and you guys are standing there with your palms over your ears. Remember the way the Democrats treated Robert Bork? Well, Republicans need to use the same hard hitting questions for Sonia Sotomayor. I refer you to: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/bork-hearings-judge-bork-senate-hearing-defense-past-statements-opinions.html
Once on the Supreme Court, there will be no recourse for the litigants of her 80% incorrect/questionable decisions! Sonia Sotomayor says "fidelity to the law" but she has had 80% of her decisions over-ridden by the Supreme Court! There's usually a divorce if there's been 80% infidelity!
How can you approve Sonia Sotomayor, knowing that she is not impartial . . . just listen to her talk . . . listen to how she rolls out her words and changes her pitch. She is being deceitful by her affectation of words and the manner in which she inflects her words.
Not only should she NOT serve on the Supreme Court, she shouldn't serve on the Court of Appeals!
Supreme Court Justices are not elected officials, but Senators who drink the kool-aid and vote for someone so obviously ineligible as Sonia Sotomayor, are. You wouldn't need to consider being reelected if you'd just repeal the 17th Amendment and return to the US Constitution Article 1, Section 3 as the Founding Fathers chose for Senators to be elected.
If I were to claim that I was better to serve on the Supreme Court because I grew up as a middle class white girl and can better relate to the majority of people living in the USofA, would you be insulted?
Sonia Sotomayor, if just a private citizen, would NOT be able to serve as a Juror if she revealed during 'voir dire' that her determination of the "facts" of the case would be influenced by the litigants' race, gender and national origin! It's ironic that she can serve as a judge after publicly expressing these biases.
What are you guys thinking?
Sonia Sotomayor has already verbally stated her philosophy in public over the past years, over and over again, and you guys are standing there with your palms over your ears. Remember the way the Democrats treated Robert Bork? Well, Republicans need to use the same hard hitting questions for Sonia Sotomayor. I refer you to: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/bork-hearings-judge-bork-senate-hearing-defense-past-statements-opinions.html
Once on the Supreme Court, there will be no recourse for the litigants of her 80% incorrect/questionable decisions! Sonia Sotomayor says "fidelity to the law" but she has had 80% of her decisions over-ridden by the Supreme Court! There's usually a divorce if there's been 80% infidelity!
How can you approve Sonia Sotomayor, knowing that she is not impartial . . . just listen to her talk . . . listen to how she rolls out her words and changes her pitch. She is being deceitful by her affectation of words and the manner in which she inflects her words.
Not only should she NOT serve on the Supreme Court, she shouldn't serve on the Court of Appeals!
Supreme Court Justices are not elected officials, but Senators who drink the kool-aid and vote for someone so obviously ineligible as Sonia Sotomayor, are. You wouldn't need to consider being reelected if you'd just repeal the 17th Amendment and return to the US Constitution Article 1, Section 3 as the Founding Fathers chose for Senators to be elected.
Labels:
Congress,
Constitution,
Emails to Senators,
Founding Fathers,
Politics
Islam Coexist? Muhammed said "Never!"
"We love death. The United States loves life. That is the big difference between us." – Osama bin Laden
"I have been made victorious through terror." Muhammad, founder of Muhammadism now called Islam (Submit or Die)
Barack Obama Says He Lacks Experience To Be U.S. President
And HERE he proves it.
Obama calls it "My Muslim Faith" and This Raises More Questions
George Stephanopoulos tries to correct Obama when he says "my Muslim faith" but it wasn't a gaffe and Obama corrects Stephanopoulos. The Question is: Why say "MY Muslim faith" first? He went back to correct Stephanopoulos, but again "MY Muslim faith" was used. WHY?
No comments:
Post a Comment