To Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

Posted today on many media sites due to the highly controversial intent of Barack Obama to initiate what can only be called a FDR "fireside chat" with America's youth through a televised "back to school" speech throughout the nation, my initial reaction to it as a 60's era Conserve-ative Constitution believing American was that it smacks of FDR's programs and agendas during a similar government initiated economic crisis in this nation - shifting the blame off those responsible (Washington) to asking the people to suck it up and endure.

Or silence and control the masses through using television instead of the radio for his message, since the message of hope and change Mr. Obama presented during his campaign rhetoric has clearly lost its glow for the parents of most of those children he is addressing.

His homey style of communication while wheeling and dealing with global corporate and foreign nationals to undermine both American labor and production that has been the focus of all his efforts since the inaugural appears he hopes such personal appeals can whitewash.

Last month saw the most casualties in the Iraq war almost since its inception. While Mr. Obama speaks of Twitter, Facebook and Google - an industry that is profiting the most actually from both the War in Iraq and the now domestic spying program.

And in using America's children for such a message, does seem to be the ultimate example of the hypocricy and self-aggrandizement that most on the Hill appear to be suffering. A social disease that is self-perpetuating, it seems, the longer thoy remain in Washington and out of touch with those to whom they are charged to serve. The Detroit GM workers I feel would have a clearly different reaction to Mr. Obama's youth message of working hard to reach your dreams.

Many of them, I'm sure, felt they had achieved given their circumstances a pinnacle of success in being involved in one of America's most vital and important inventions and achievements throughout the world.

It is clear that although Mr. Obama as one who graduated from one of America's most expensive and foremost Eastern univerisity's yet still has a basic lack of understanding of our Constitution and framework of government, that his ideas of the importance now in this country of a formal U.S. dictated education has lost its sheen due to the fact that the federal government has injected itself unconstitutionally into the education of America's youth.

Since that truly is something that the American people should decide for their own family's welfare. And also any such public educations would be better served with less federal involvement, and left to the states themselves to determine as was the founders also intention in Jefferson's establishment of the public school system, and the University of Virginia.

Nothing was said of the fact that there were quite a few of our U.S. president's themselves that had little formal education. One of the greatest, Lincoln, is a prime example. Our educational institutions "progressively" have gotten more and more liberal in their goals and agendas, and many American citizens are reacting also accordingly and pulling them out of public schooling in order to home school.

More and more each and every year. Too much of the wrong education can be more detrimental than studying quantum physics.

Or clearly the law and our jurisprudence system at this point in time.

Marxism and communist theories abounded in the Obama message, wrapped in an FDR media ploy and public relations move intended to sterilize Mr. Obama's image with America's youth given that his approval ratings are continuing to decline, as the parent's of those children Mr. Obama is addressing have watched their jobs and savings accounts dwindle due to Washington's global economic agendas and the world government agendas both parties on the Hill at the present time, the Global Socialist Party, now engender.

Creating new jobs is not Mr. Obama's primary function. Protecting the United States and its citizens from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, actually is. Protecting and preserving the civil rights also of those first ten amendments for all Americans in even choosing how much or how long to formally school their own kids is fundamentally one of the most foremost individual rights and liberties there is. Not promoting the U.S. school system or public education in general which has progressively resulted in a losing of the basics in pursuit of the agendas of both Washington and the politicos in the educational system in this country in general.

Protecting America's and American's sovereignty, in other words, both individually and as a nation, as a sovereign nation whose interests are best served by breaking the ties that bind with other nations and agendas that are clearly at cross-purposes to protecting our own vital economic bases and industries and American jobs here in this country. And the future of America's children actually lies in their parent's also more primary input and goals as their primary caregivers - not the government.

And better served protecting those children and the American people in doing their actual jobs, protecting their very lives and livelihoods from any foreign threat compromising either.

Not abroad, or the global expansion of our industrial base to other countries, thus then compromising our own national security also in the process.

Or aligning ourselves for literally decades after World War II with Israel, Britain and other nations whose agendas and intererests are at this point clearly different than our own.

And costing us now American lives in the thousands progressively in the process by not simply facilitating trade agreements which are economically beneficial in the present and short term yet still honoring their countries own sovereignty and our own in the process.

Obama's message was clear. Even going so far as to use his own personal story of his rather unusual upbringing in Indonesia and cross-nationalism in the process in order to garner both support and sympathy from an emerging generation of Americans for his global cause, again, painted in FDR style socialism and "the greater good," that this communique was clearly meant to transmit in its origins and mouthpiece.

The teacher's union must be thrilled as it appears that is the audience that just might have been behind this particular fireside chat. And maybe also those "struggling" banks whose profit margins Obama and Congress have been inordinately interested in protecting and enlarging at the general public's now loss and benefit such as the bank bailouts and "foreclosure rescue" aimed at priimarily satisfying those foreign investors at the American people's yet again expense.

And don't forget also America. Many of our greatest investors and achievers had little "formal" education at all. And many were schooled in their professions and trades outside the classroom, but instead by parents or other caring adults in their lives. Even in my generation, the federal government had far less involvement in local state or community education and really the days of phonics and the basic three Rs turned out some of our greatest inventors and free thinkers whose basic skills and language development were stressed, but who gained far more from then their own initiatives to follow their strengths to wherever they might lead. Using the public libraries more for their further study, and goal directed individual class study in their selected fields. Not "proscribed" agendas formulated by politicians at all.

Forced attendance through the public schools for such a message to our nation's children does speak of desperation at this point, and also clearly an agenda that appears to be at cross purposes with the majority of those children's true authority figures whose knowledge of their child's true gifts and talents and choice in how to develop those gifts is also being undermined in the process through "progeressive" world socialists such as Mr. Obama represents.

For some parents, this might be a good day to let your kids take a "wellness" day.

Since Mr. Obama mentioned washing your hands and staying home from school in order to avoid catching any of those health compromising "bugs."

CNN reported another incidence of corporate/governmental overkill now going on in our nation with respect to the recording industry's pursuit of any and all Americans that download songs or sounds without paying for them from the internet.

Now I admit there is quite a problem with this for writers and other artists, especially due to the fact that there is a clear lack of regulation over the commercial websites that market to the public for writers and artists in order to make the ad revenues and also for other nefarious purposes. 

And there are citizens who abuse the Internet also as a free source of material which is, under U.S. laws and those of most countries which are under "common law" civil provisions (including Canada, Britain and most of the European nations in the EU) with respect to copyright protection for artistic works. 

Many citizens also have been misled to believe that since the Internet is a public communications tool, that any and all material on it are covered under public domain provisions. 

That is not the case anymore than you can copy text out of a library book simply because it is in the library.

The problem with this particular case was not so much the infraction, but the costs of the trial and the award involved for going after a woman who illegally downloaded five songs, which due to judicial error and technicalities with respect to jury instructions given ended up resulting in two different jury trials in a federal court.   It didn't even meet the CIVIL threshhold for an afforded trial by jury, since those limits are $20.00 under the Constitution.

And while U.S. citizens throughout the nation now under the new criminal DUI "social drinking" levels and laws are denied jury trials in many states throughout the nation due to another redefinition and unconstitutional Supreme Court ruling in effect attempting to eliminate the right to trial by jury for "ALL criminal matters," by inserting the words "unless the term of incarceration is six months or more," this trial was initiated over a civil infraction actually due to the financial "loss" involved for five downloaded single songs.  

There is an has been a move to criminalize such activities which has been in the works for years and this may be the case, but if so would appear the criminal fines and penalties are still out of whack for the actual infraction and loss involved here, in my and most rational citizens opinion.  This would clearly have been a criminal misdemeanor, since the amounts involved don't even meet the civil jury trial minimum of $20 under the Constitution.

Apparently, the jury found her guilty, and the amount of the "fine" imposed was 1.9 million, over the amount of the original award in the first trial of $220,000.  "Cruel and unusual punishment" doesn't even begin to describe how ludicrous the actual award was, and also the lengths that the federal courts went to in order to prosecute this woman and mother of four.

There was absolutely no report or evidence, apparently, that she had redistributed the works, or made any profit off of her illicit activity.   So the loss involved to the recording company as the "injured" party under both civil and criminal common law according to the "proof" of damages required in such a case as this would have simply been the amount of the cost of the retail price for the music, which was less than $5.00.

Of course, now there will be another appeal, and the legal fees at this point must also be off the charts, and wonder just exactly why the judge didn't simply throw this case out the window due to the amount of the proveable damages involved as less than even the provisions for civil minimums for jury trials.

It did not state also whether or not the jury actually did determine the award, or whether these "fines" were determined under federal statute and levied by the federal judge which has become the case with many a "political" case meant to set a precedent or as a tyrannical power move by the federal government, and if that was the case, we do have a bunch of governmental officials that are off their rockers in again their lack of even giving any cursory value to the Constitution.  Fines in that amount are beyond what any "average" American could pay and nothing more than again tyrannizing the public for the record executives, apparently. 

I wonder if the jury instruction was given that the jury had the power to actually also examine the law and the penalties for applicability in this case based upon the actual facts and losses involved.

True bootleggers would have redistributed the work, and then there would have been certainly more to gain in going after those that are profiting off of pirated works, not simply for their own enjoyment. 

You can make a tape off a radio station, for heaven's sakes, or a CD from your friends purchase which carries no penalties at all unless it is also "resold" for commercial purposes and meets the damage threshhold.

If this was a jury determined award, I wonder if the lawyers voir dire in the jury selection determined whether or not any of these jurors were record executives, or federal employees.

And with awards such as these, it would appear our federal government is flush with cash due to their tyranny and are truly bankrupting the citizenry with such abusive practices, so perhaps had more than enough in the kitty rather than borrowing from the Fed at the public's expense, in order to bail out at least one of those automakers without also placing the debt on the public - since this poor woman is going to be paying this off for the rest of her life, in addition to funding the Big Three.

More importantly, it appears due to the publishing by CNN of this case it is simply another example of governmental tyranny on the public more than anything. 

This mother was simply made an example, so I truly wonder how "impartial" that jury was, or whether it actually was one of her "peers," or a loaded jury with public federal or state employee "professional" jurors which is becoming more and more the case when there is a governmental agenda involved, or when there is federal grant monies tied in with some of the convictions (as in the low level DUI laws now), since there are strings attached to most of those pork sums sent "back home" by the feds in order to keep the states in line with the federal agendas, and the funding rolling in.

Unbelievable. 

Maybe going after the Chinese and Taiwanese designer rip-off artists who import to their buddies living in the U.S. through the mail and ports of entry would be a much better use of our courts, and those internet scam artists now luring writers and artists making ad revenues of their designs and work for advertising purposes, and then attempting to shelter themselves from any and all liability if such work is redistributed either intentionally or accidentally within their non-negotiable "terms of service" agreements written also by their "corporate" lawyer scam artists.

We don't need free speech regulation of the internet unless harassment and stalking websites and engaging in repeated and profane personal attacks are involved, we need "corporate commercial" regulation of the scammers preying on the public, and paid governmental "grant money" bloggers promoting their propaganda for governmental purposes, both political and for their "corporate" personal gain, such as the Republican, Democratic and other mainstream extra-Constitutional fringe "party" members, marketers and spin doctors spewing party platforms and their agendas as "Constitutional" positions.

That, too, is civil fraud, and actually worse, criminal treason ala Benedict Arnold, the highest criminal "public" offense "against the state" and people in this country under the governing law, the U.S. Constitution and intent of the founders.  And neither private citizens, nor especially public servants or   individuals have any inherent immunity in that respect, especially for intentional negligence or intent in their public servant positions, since their oath is to the Constitution and not "public opinion" or "state or personal interests."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/18/minnesota.music.download.fine/index.html?eref=rss_topstories