Fees are the new taxes

Published : Thursday, 15 Jul 2010, 12:18 AM EDT

I appear to be a rare bird to be found in Orlando these days. As a native Orlandonian, born at Florida Hospital, I grew up playing as a child on the shores of Lake Eola. I find it very sad that both natives and the people who moved here to claim Orlando as their new home do not express their sense of belonging to this community by remaining so silent.

I hear, or not, way too much of this "silence" in many matters that effect our lives both here in Central Florida and our Country. The silence is defining. Change is inevitable but to not preserve history and the artistic beauty from days gone by is truly a sign of our loosing our sense of identity and is a great loss to all of us and our children and their children.

I suppose this one of the dangers of having such a "homogenized" and transplanted population is that it does not have any sense of "roots" to grow in. The people and businesses that live and work here in their chosen home, be they native or not, need to realize that we are all dependent on each other for our own welfare. I must be getting old as I find it hard to understand the apathy.

My step father helped to build that fountain. What kind of statement to the world is Orlando making when the City spends millions for a new arena to replace a perfectly good one? A waste of taxes payers money! Come on! Then, want to have patrons pay $20.00 a car to park at the new arena? The "Big Business" and "Governments" have their hands in the wrong pockets. How about getting priorities straight?

The funds for repairing the fountain should be small change to the Orlando/Orange County business community. Where are they? Are there no Orlando based corporations willing to contribute to our community? Will someone please fill me in on why there is such a vacuum on this issue here in Central Florida?

Yes, the economy sucks. No, to drain the pockets of the already over taxed residents is wrong on many levels but the repairs for such an historic Orlando icon makes good business sense for continuing to attract those all important tourist revenues not to mention the beauty it adds to what was once called "The City Beautiful". Is it?

Below is one of my recent photos and links to the FB Lake Eola page.



Some History

The park and pond were established in 1888 when the first parcel of land was donated to the City of Orlando by several different families. The area was officially declared as a park in 1892. Oddly, at times, the park was a zoo, a horse racetrack, tennis courts, a pier with a dance area, and the site of music broadcasting by a local radio station. The fountain was installed in 1912 at a cost of $10,000. A replacement, originally dubbed the "Centennial Fountain," was installed in 1957 at a cost of $350,000. The actual name of the fountain is the "Linton E. Allen Memorial Fountain". The iconic water feature is the unofficial symbol of Orlando. In late August 2009, lightning struck the fountain, rendering it inoperable. The city has a $1,000,000 insurance policy on the fountain, with a $500,000 deductible. Due to the city's current budget crisis, the fate of the fountain was unknown.[3] On October 15, 2009, Mayor Buddy Dyer announced the city will not only repair the fountain, but "also replace its cracked plastic skin and install a state-of-the-art system of lights and water jets" at a cost of $2.3 million. The work should be complete in 2010.[4]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-Eola/108166989211616?v=desc

By Chuck Baldwin
July 8, 2010


This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1862


"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human
passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or
gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale
goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious
people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." So said
Founding Father and America's second President John Adams. And he was
absolutely right. And that is what is absolutely wrong with our country
today: America is in a complete moral, societal, and cultural meltdown.

Founding Father and America's first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay
correctly summarized the reason our new nation (and the fight for its
liberty and independence) was successful. He wrote in Federalist 2, "With
equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased
to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended
from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same
religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in
their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and
efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly
established general liberty and independence."

In other words, a united constitutional republic can only exist within the
framework of certain rather narrow and finite conditions. Remove those
conditions and the framework for liberty and limited government falls apart.
And the above statements by Adams and Jay succinctly summarize the
conditions necessary for freedom's framework.

"A Moral And Religious People"

At America's founding, the principles of Christian philosophy and ideology
were universally accepted. The vast majority of the colonists were
churchgoing, Protestant Christians who firmly embraced and respected the
sacred principles taught in the Holy Scriptures. In fact, the reason most
colonists placed such a high premium on education was so that children would
be able to read and study the Bible for themselves. It is more than
interesting that America's early educators all centered their curriculum
upon the Bible. Include in this august list Benjamin Harris, publisher of
the New England Primer; the "Father of American Education," Noah Webster;
along with one of early America's most successful school textbook authors,
William Holmes McGuffey.

Beyond that, when we talk about colonial America's love of worship, we are
not talking about what passes for "worship" in modern America. We are not
talking about these Disneyland entertainment villages known as
mega-churches. We are not talking about espresso Sunday Schools or glorified
social clubs. We are talking about a place where preachers were bold and
powerful proclaimers of truth and where people went to learn the Word of God
(and how to apply it to every walk of life--including politics), not wallow
in slurpy, sugary, shallow sermonettes that do nothing to prepare men for
Christian warfare.

I challenge anyone to compare any of the sermons by colonial preachers such
as Elisha Williams, Charles Chauncy, Jonathan Mayhew, Isaac Backus, Samuel
Sherwood, John Witherspoon, Jacob Cushing, Samuel Cooper, Samuel Langdon,
John Leland, Samuel Miller, Enos Hitchcock, Ebenezer Baldwin, or Jonathan
Edwards with anything preached by Joel Osteen or Rick Warren.

Is it any wonder, then, that one cannot really distinguish the conduct and
attitudes of professing Christians from those who make no Christian
profession? Is it any wonder that churchgoing "Christians" seem to be as
unkind, as deceitful, as lazy, as greedy, as unthankful, and as immoral as
those who make no pretense regarding their unbelief? In fact, in some cases,
those with no Christian profession put professing Christians to shame in
matters of basic morality, decency, and civility. Why? One reason is the
fact that the Church as a whole is no longer "the pillar and ground of the
truth." Rather, it is more commonly regarded as being a Big Business
enterprise that is focused more on political correctness and entertainment
than it is on possessing real conviction or spiritual power.

Add to the collapse of spirituality in America's churches the collapse of
morality in America's culture. We're talking about old-fashioned, basic
morality. How is it that so many Americans seem to be so ignorant about the
simplest moral principles? When did greed and ambition replace a desire for
honest character? When did comfort and ease replace conviction for (and
understanding of) good government? How is it that even "conservatives" have
come to look to Washington, D.C., for answers to State or even personal
problems? How is it that the fear of God is no longer relevant when choosing
our civil magistrates? How can businessmen continue to sacrifice the sacred
principles of liberty on the altar of financial profits? Are money and
wealth really more important than liberty and peace? How can politicians
blatantly disregard their oaths to the Constitution? How can they continue
to grovel before special interest groups--and even foreign interests? How
can they--so willingly and easily--violate the liberty principles enshrined
in the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence?

Without an understanding of (and an appreciation for) basic morality,
America will collapse. Money and military might cannot and will not replace
the time-tested foundations of morality and fidelity. The collapse of basic
morality portends the collapse of America itself.

"One United People"

Contrary to what one hears from the politically correct crowd today,
unity--not diversity--is the key to America's greatness. Jay said that early
America was united with the same ancestors, language, religion, and
principles of government, manners, and customs. And he was right.

By and large, America was a Christian nation, speaking the same language,
reading the same Bible, worshipping the same God, understanding (and
respecting) the same form of government (a constitutional confederation of
free, self-governing states), and embracing the same concepts of culture
(law, nature, manners, etc.).

No more!

Thanks to decades of federal dictation, public school indoctrination, and
media and entertainment propaganda, the principles that once united us now
divide us. And divided we are! I would even argue that America is hopelessly
and helplessly divided. We are no longer united in our understanding of (or
appreciation for) Christianity; we are no longer united in our English
language; we are no longer united in our respect for our ancestors; we are
no longer united in our respect for God's Word; we are no longer united in
our respect for the principles of federalism or constitutional government;
and we are no longer united in our appreciation for the fundamental
principles of self reliance, morality, and freedom.

In other words, it is "crystal clear" that America is in the midst of a
complete and total spiritual, societal, cultural, moral, and political
meltdown. And what is also abundantly obvious is that as long as Washington,
D.C., continues to lord it over us (and who or what is going to stop it?),
it is only a matter of time before the final collapse occurs. And at that
point, freedom lovers will be fighting against their own countrymen for
their very lives and liberty.

Accordingly, I think all this talk about "saving America" is largely a
complete waste of time and energy. Instead, we need to be talking about
saving our individual states (and the truth is, probably at least half of
the states are beyond repair), saving our families, saving our communities,
and saving our individual freedoms. To continue to focus on "saving America"
or "changing Washington, D.C.," etc., is utter foolishness! Washington,
D.C., is not going to change; it is beyond redemption. Forget it! Circle the
wagons around your State; cement your convictions; prepare your family;
ready your resolve; and start planning for life after death--the death of
liberty and law in America--because the meltdown of American society and
culture has already begun.

P.S. Many readers of this column also read my son's, Tim Baldwin's,
hard-hitting columns. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that Tim's wife,
Jennifer, just gave birth to a beautiful baby girl. If you want to send a
note of congratulations to them, this is Tim's email address:

tim@libertydefenseleague.com

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution
Party. He and his wife, Connie, have been married for 37 years and have 3
children and 7 grandchildren. See Chuck's complete bio at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=450

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=457

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://chuckbaldwinlive.com

By Ed Barnes

Published July 06, 2010

  FoxNews.com  (For the rest of the article)

he cost of harboring illegal immigrants in the United States is a staggering $113 billion a year -- an average of $1,117 for every “native-headed” household in America -- according to a study

conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

The study, a copy of which was provided to FoxNews.com, “is the first and most detailed look at the costs of illegal immigration ever done,” says Bob Dane, director of communications at FAIR, a conservative organization that seeks to end almost all immigration to the U.S. 

FAIR's opponents in the bitter immigration debate describe the organization as "extremist," though it is regularly called upon to testify before Congress.

Yesterday at 5:56pm

Today I was notified that the federal government has filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona. It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice. Today's filing is nothing more than a massive waste of taxpayer funds. These funds could be better used against the violent Mexican cartels than the people of Arizona.

The truth is the Arizona law is both reasonable and constitutional. It mirrors substantially what has been federal law in the United States for many decades. Arizona’s law is designed to complement, not supplant, enforcement of federal immigration laws. Despite the Department of Justice’s claims in paragraph 62 of today’s lawsuit, Arizona is not trying ‘to establish its own immigration policy’ or ‘directly regulate the immigration status of aliens.’ Arizona Revised Statutes § 11-1051(E) states that the federal government, along with local law enforcement officers authorized by the federal government, can only determine an alien’s immigration status. Subsection (L) of that same section goes on to state that the law ‘shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration.

The irony is that President Obama’s Administration has chosen to sue Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law and not sue local governments that have adopted a patchwork of ‘sanctuary’ policies that directly violate federal law. These patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials.

The best thing government can do is to create a stable, predictable environment, governed by an easily understood set of rules or laws. We do not need to make this more complicated than it already is. We must first and foremost create a secure border. Enhanced trade, economic opportunity and freedom will surely follow.

I am pleased that President Obama and the Department of Justice did not pursue the baseless claims of illegal racial profiling in the lawsuit. When signing S.B. 1070, I said, ‘My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law — both against illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.’ Arizona’s law expressly prohibits unconstitutional racial profiling. However, words are not enough. For this reason, I ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) to develop training on the new law for Arizona’s police officers. AZPOST has completed the training course and has published it for the all world to see at http://www.azpost.state.az.us/SB1070infocenter.htm . AZPOST has done its job professionally and served Arizona well.

I will not stop fighting to protect the citizens of Arizona, and to defend Arizonans in federal court. I have set up a legal defense fund to pay the substantial legal fees that Arizona has been, and will be, forced to incur as a result of all of these lawsuits. Contributions to the Border Security and Immigration Defense Fund can be made at http://www.keepazsafe.com/. My legal team will not hesitate to assert the rights of the State of Arizona in this matter. Arizona will ultimately prevail against the lawsuits – including this latest assault by the Obama Administration. Our laws will be found to be constitutional – because that is exactly what they are.

For entire article click here


by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Perhaps the best evidence of how American history was rewritten, Soviet style, in the post-1865 era is the fact that most Americans seem to be unaware that "Independence Day" was originally intended to be a celebration of the colonists’ secession from the British empire. Indeed, the word secession is not even a part of the vocabulary of most Americans, who more often than not confuse it with "succession." The Revolutionary War was America’s first war of secession.

America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to "alter or abolish" that government and "to institute a new government." The word "secession" was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word "separation" instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

If ever there was an abuse of power, it would be most egregious when people are voted into public office by "we the people" of America and those elected people have the audacity to attempt to deny me the right to self-defense, then have the unmitigated pomposity to steal more of my hard-earned tax dollars to hire their own armed security detail with my money while forcing me into unarmed helplessness. It must stop now. Know it.<< MORE >>

by Greg Perry
by Greg Perry
Recently by Greg Perry: A US Census Worker Came To My Home Today – Poor Lady...

The smallest caliber on earth is the one in your hands when you're being attacked.

The biggest caliber on earth is the one in the bad guy's hands when you're being attacked.

What caliber has good stopping power? The answer is that 100 Caliber is good for stopping power and a rocket-grenade launcher is not too shabby either.

But Seriously?

The best caliber is the one you will carry with you. If a full-sized 1911 .45 caliber sidearm is too much to lug with you everywhere, then you will go places without it. And the way the world's chaotic randomness seems to work, you will have left that beautiful 45 caliber home the day the baddies hold up Starbucks with you in the path of the cash register.

So the most reasonable answer is this: The best caliber is the largest one you will consistently carry.

What About the Little .380?

Well, James Bond carries a Walther PPK which shoots .380. Who are we to argue with 007?

People often ask me about which caliber they should carry. The first rule of a gun fight is always have a gun! That is why owning a gun that is too large for you to have with you at all times is ridiculous. Carry the largest caliber you will carry consistently. If that is a .22, or .380, or .38 Special, or 9mm, or .40, or .45, then great – carry that!

Stopping Power

Many myths abound about caliber and stopping power. Most are just myths. Nobody would dare say a 9mm has greater stopping power than a .45 and yet many have been shot with a .45 and were hardly fazed and many have been shot with 9's whose heart beat lasted less than a half second afterward.

A .22 right between the eyes turns off the lights far faster than a .50 caliber to the stomach.

I would rather be missed by a .45 than hit by a .22!

After the first rule – always have a gun – the answer for you is truly what are you comfortable with? A .380 has more recoil ("kick") than a .45 shot out of a full-sized 1911. Can you handle the recoil? Do you have problems with one or more hands or arms that might make a difference?

In other words, there is no best caliber for everybody. And the larger caliber does not mean better. It all depends. So do what is best for you and when you do that you will have the best caliber for you. Stop getting caught up with caliber; get on the range and start practicing with whatever you have to carry.

The Arguments Will Continue If I Have My Way

One reason I am asked about caliber a lot is because I make fun of 9mms. I like to go around repeating things I've heard and sayings I've made up such as, "A 9mm is well and good until somebody loses an eye," or "A 9mm is fine as long as you're not trying to shatter glass or shoot through cloth."

I'm a .45 bigot and I used to carry a .50. I like to tell people, "It doesn't matter what caliber you carry as long as it begins with a 4."

But I like to kick beehives as I walk by just to keep things stirred up too. When I'm having fun dissing "small" calibers it's just to keep things stirred up.

And 9mm is my biggest joke target. (And .223's, aka 5.56, the rifle caliber most-loved by foreign enemies of the United States. I'll let you figure out why that is funny unless you own an AR-15.)

My Biggest Kept Secret

The biggest secret on earth (don't tell anybody) is that I bought a 9mm for my wife to carry! I trust 9mm to be enough protect her.

The man I've learned most about guns from on earth, Gabe Suarez, carries only a 9mm. If it's good enough for Gabe Suarez then I can't say too much against it.

Considerations

I prefer a .45 because of the low recoil and the huge stopping power, but especially in the hot summers of Oklahoma concealing a huge .45 isn't the easiest thing in the world. And yet, some drugged-up baddies can go a long time after being shot by anything less than a .40. Running at you with a knife, for example, inertia will keep many of them running towards you after you've put lots of shots through them. Very few can run towards you after a .45 round or two... and yet...

More and more baddies wear bullet-proof vests in their "businesses." Hitting someone between the eyes is all well and good until you've seen how difficult it is to hit a moving target. The best thing we can hope for is a chest shot – or "center of mass" as they call it – and hopefully the baddie drops or we get a chance to put one between his eyes in the old "double tap" (more accurately known as a "deliberate pair" according to the Father of Modern Defensive Pistolcraft, Jeff Cooper who founded the world-renown Gunsite).

To be sporting you should always shoot two warning shots in the chest before putting one between his eyes.

And yet, all joking aside, any shot on any given day by anybody of any caliber might have no effect, partial effect, or full effect and one cannot predict what will happen. One can only make educated decisions ahead of time.

And always bring that gun to the gun fight. Since you are probably not a prophet who can predict when you'll find yourself in the middle of such a fight, always have your gun.

Ammunition Quality Means As Much or More than Caliber

Whatever caliber of weapon you choose, get the best ammo you can find for your gun. Find a gun shop you trust and ask them for your top options. Routinely check out the gun magazines to see what new ammo has recently been tested for self-defense effectiveness. Don't be cheap here! Don't worry about paying a lot for each box. Practice with a few rounds to get a feel for the ammo every once in a while.

Then get lots of cheap ammo. By "cheap" I mean buy it by the case for a good quantity discount and places such as AmmoMan.com usually has great prices and free shipping. Practice with the cheap stuff but keep a spare magazine loaded with the good stuff to carry.

Keep your carry gun clean and well-oiled (not overly oiled). This is what you protect your family with. Practice with it.

If hitting a target out to about 15–18 yards is difficult with the weapon you choose to carry (18 yards and beyond can be difficult for smaller guns), your sights might need adjusting. Also, a Crimson Trace laser sight might be your best answer. Crimson Trace laser sights allow smaller guns to hit where you aim as long as you hold steady as you press the trigger (never squeeze... press back until it fires).

Once you determine the gun you will have with you and can shoot best, and once you get high-quality ammunition to carry, I would not worry further about caliber.

The Every Other Bullet Trick

Consider getting both hollow point and ball ammo if both are available in a high-quality ammo you select for carrying. If you stack your magazine so that every other round is hollow and every other round is ball, you have a great set of rounds on hand for various conditions.

Depending on layering of clothing and leather outer garments, sometimes hollow-points don't penetrate. The ball ammo doesn't always tear up the body enough to damage and stop big or drugged-up attackers.

By using both, you get the best of both worlds as you shoot to end the attack.

July 1, 2010

Greg Perry [send him mail] is the pistol-packing author of more than 75 books. He loves to combine his favorite hobby – guns – with his second favorite – online auctions – by teaching others how to buy and sell firearms, knives, and ammo in online auctions legally and easily! eBay may not respect your freedoms but the free market does. You can comfortably buy and sell weapons-related items in a simpler-than-eBay environment by getting his profit-boosting book, Guns Galore! How to Buy and Sell Guns, Knives, and Ammo in Online Auctions Easily Without eBay!

Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

BY Aliyah Shahid
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Thursday, July 1st 2010, 7:41 AM

It's time to honor the living.

For the first time since the Vietnam War, the Pentagon has nominated a living soldier to be awarded the Medal of Honor, according to the Washington Post.

The soldier, whose name has not been released, courageously ran through a wall of enemy fire in Afghanistan's Korengal Valley in 2007 in effort to push back Taliban combatants that overtook his squad.

The brave soldier's actions saved the lives of about six of his comrades, said U.S. military officials.

The nomination must now be reviewed by the White House.

Awarding a recipient is a tedious process. Recommendations, which include eye-witness accounts, can run in the thousands of pages. The process is so guarded that even the soldier's family does not know the White House is considering him for the medal.

President Barack Obama last awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously in September to family members of Sgt. 1st Class Jared Monti, who was killed while trying to save an injured U.S. soldier.

The presentation of the award would be significant for Obama, whose military relationship has come under intense scrutiny. Last month, Obama fired Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, over remarks the top commander in Afghanistan made criticizing the president and his national security team.

Six posthumous Medals of Honor have been awarded for bravery for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In recent years, lawmakers, military officers and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have criticized the Pentagon for not awarding the Medal of Honor to living soldiers.

Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokesman, said Gates “finds it impossible to believe that there is no one who has performed a valorous act deserving of the Medal of Honor who has lived to tell about it.”

Read the entire story from the Washington Post here.