- Article Search
- View More Photos
- School Links
- About Us
- Helpful Links
- Place A Classified Ad Now!
Letters to the Editor - January 14, 2014
Submitted by West Valley View on Mon, 01/13/2014 - 10:00pm
President given illegal power
First we had NDAA 2012 and then NDAA 13 (National Defense Authorization Act) and now NDAA 14 which was signed by the President on December 27, 2013. It authorized the military (the President) to detain individuals indefinitely without trial (Habeas Corpus) It also strengthened the national security surveillance state. Congress supported and gave the President that illegal power. Only 15 Senators voted to oppose such a dictatorial action. One, Jeff Flake, was from Arizona. The military budget has now grown to $625 billion yearly. Logically, we must ask — for what purposes is it to be used?
Say what you want — the system is in place.
From the viewpoint of those who presently are wielding unconstitutional power, those who oppose the coming tyranny are the future enemies (terrorists) of the state. The evidence from surveillance emails, phone conversations, etc. will be used against them. That evidence consists of one’s First Amendment right to speak freely among themselves, to discuss the political situation or defend liberty. The violation of a basic right leads to the destruction of other rights.
The Commander-in Chief, the President, can illegally use the military against Americans on American soil to apprehend, arrest and detain those deemed a threat to the government. Patriotic Americans are a threat, especially military veterans.
The national media has not, and is not reporting what you need to know to remain free. Their silence eases the way for more unconstitutional inroads to be made and more actions to go unreported.
Americans need to know and basically they don’t! This is serious stuff and will not go away after the next election. The internal, in-charge, enemies of freedom will proceed as slowly as possible to better consolidate their position — or as fast as necessary in the face of visible opposition and increasing public awareness.
Karl L. Nelson
Be thankful it’s not a pig farm
Could there be a bunch of vegetarians moving into the Buckeye and Tonopah areas? Why else would they complain about the smell of cows and chickens. If you are a meat eater as am I, you put up with a lot of odors knowing food is near. From west of Goodyear all the way to Arlington was all agricultural including cows, chickens, sheep, goats, horses and a few places pigs!
OK, Tonopah and Wintersburg have only joined this agricultural effort within the last 50 years, but the Harquahala Valley was already agricultural before Tonopah or Wintersburg got started. As a teenager I lived in the White Tanks subdivision. We had horses, chickens and goats. When you have too many horses for a small amount of land, the smell can get as bad as cows or chickens. And in the U.S. we don’t eat horses.
I guess the best I can “say” to those complaining about the smells is to be happy that you aren’t within a mile of a pig farm! There used to be a pig farm over 5 miles north of Snowflake and you could smell if from 5 miles away!
Snowbirds should pay for stay
I have been living here in GoodYear for the last 4 years. And I have been wondering myself, Snowbirds come approx 5 months of the year. Granted that they don’t change out License plates each time the arrive to take advantage of the Weather and take to the roads.
I believe that if they were charge a fee let’s say $150 dollars for there stay in Arizona. You can only use that” just come to visit routine” and now we have to pay for the Potholes and other damaged they cause. As a homeowner I am the one who has to pay to fix Roads in the long run. Snowbirds use our roads and we are stuck With the bill, What’s wrong with this picture?
With Pot Stores paying taxes of which a portion pays for the roads and that $150 dollars we could have the best roads in the Unite States. Maybe I overstated just a tad, but it could work.
Kudos to Villa de Paz residents
Christmas, Hanukah and Kwanzaa all encourage and contribute to the cooperative attitudes and spirits that seem to grow profusely during the holiday season.
The residents of the Villa de Paz neighborhood [one square mile defined as the area Between Camelback Ave. & Indian School Road and 99th and 107th Avenues] have reacted in clearly defined examples of cooperation and generosity during the recent holiday period.
They have in large numbers scheduled time to present their opinions and feelings at meetings with decision-making city officials, have carefully researched the neighborhood’s history, have independently designed protest signs, and have worked together as activists to demonstrate their position to the public, and shared their creative talents under local leadership.
What has generated this positive cooperation? It is an effort to save the location of their homes in the now quiet, peaceful center of their community: the Villa de Paz Golf Course.
The current owners seem determined to convert the busy, well-liked, popular golf course (40,000 users last year) into a big, money-raising scheme by building and selling 350 homes and 200 condominiums on the present play areas.
Diligent research has calculated that the change, if effected, beside the new houses, will introduce to the area, 1,100 more automobiles, 550 students to be crowded into the schools, the move out of numerous species of birds and animals seeking new habitats, and the prospect of several years of exposure to allergy dust and desert fever germs as trees and landscape plants are removed by the developers.
Villa de Paz residents are fortunate not only to be concerned, creative individuals, but also to be able to face their challenge during the time of the holidays with their stimulating motivation.
Obamacare is unconstitutional
Eric Nelson of Goodyear asked how I figured Obamacare is unconstitutional. I rely upon my college education and thirty years of extensively studying the U.S. and Arizona and Colorado Constitutions, Federal and State statutes and court rulings, and involvement in various litigations. Also, Chief Justice Roberts, part of the majority, ruled that: “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part.” NFIB v. Selebius, 567 U.S. ___, (2012). The four dissenting Justices explained various ways Obamacare is unconstitutional.
Mr. Nelson asserted that, if Obamacare is unconstitutional, “it would already be long gone”. Federal court rulings are not law, and they “are often reexamined, reversed, and qualified by the Courts themselves, whenever they are found to be either defective, or ill-founded, or otherwise incorrect.” Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 83 (1938, J. Butler). Laws can be challenged as unconstitutional on various grounds, regardless of the law’s antiquity. Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 111 S.Ct. 1032, 1043 (1991).
Courts only address arguments presented to them, not all possible reasons a law is unconstitutional. NFIB v. Selebius does not address Obamacare being unconstitutional for violating the Ninth Amendment or being overbroad or vague. Coates v. City Of Cincinnati, 91 S.Ct. 1686, 1688 (1971). Four Justices point out that, to find Obamacare constitutional under the Taxing Clause, the majority had to change Congress’ repeated use of the word “penalty” to mean “tax”, after holding that a penalty is not the same as a tax. Federal laws being unconstitutional for being changed without complying with Article I, Section 7 was addressed in Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 448-449 (1998), but not in NFIB v. Selebius. These and other issues are not settled.
David W. Peabody
Rate this article: