[Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma

Tue Oct 7 11:30:06 PDT 2008

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.'

- The Declaration of Independence

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
 "It doesn't require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires in people's minds."- Samuel Johnson [1709-84] From: editor at lataheagle.comTo: idahotom at hotmail.com; ophite at gmail.com; no.weatherman at gmail.comCC: vision2020 at moscow.comSubject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama DilemmaDate: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:10:01 -0700

Secession is the highest form of dissent.

From: Tom Hansen 
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 10:55 AM
To: Andreas Schou ; No Weatherman 
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com 
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." - Thomas Jefferson   Seeya round town, Moscow. Tom HansenMoscow, Idaho

> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:25:28 -0700> From: ophite at gmail.com> To: no.weatherman at gmail.com> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 7:34 AM, No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:> > ACS,> >> > You're the one who cannot (or will not) distinguish between domestic> > terrorism and vandalism:> > This is ironic, coming from someone who cannot (or will not)> distinguish between treason and patriotism.> > > http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2008-September/056263.html> > "Terrorist" describes their goals: they were attempting to change> policies through use of public fear. "Vandalism" describes their> methods: they did property damage, and didn't kill anyone other than> -- incompetently -- themselves. Ex post facto, they claimed that they> were going to step up and start killing people, but they didn't> actually do that; that may be conspiracy commit murder. Incidentally,> that's also what G. Gordon Liddy did with regard to Jack Anderson.> > Incidentally, I don't see that you've made any further defense of your> assertion that Liddy was a great patriot.> > > Therefore, it's slightly ironic that you would try to impeach law> > professor Steve Diamond based upon your understanding of grantee> > agencies.> > As a former nonprofit executive, I'm quite aware of what the fiduciary> duties of such an executive are. They do not involve the selection of> a nonprofit board: the board must be selected independently of the> executive. Incidentally, the CAC did this the opposite way most> nonprofits do it: usually, the president forms a board, then hires an> executive. I suspect it was done this way because Ayers, as a> potential grantee, *could not* be president of the board.> > > Interestingly, I noticed that you ignored this salient point from Diamond:> >> > "In social science and law, written contemporaneous records are> > considered a more credible source than ex post recollections by only a> > small number of the individuals involved. I thought the same standards> > applied in journalism as well."> > Incidentally, Diamond's "evidence" takes this form: "Bill Ayers had> an executive role at CAC; that executive role conferred a fiduciary> duty on him; that fiduciary duty must have given him a primary role in> selecting the board of directors; Ayers must have selected Obama,> QED."> > This is convincing to anyone without a whit of knowledge regarding> nonprofit boards. The board of directors cannot be selected by someone> with a financial stake in the nonprofit; doing so creates an inherent> conflict of interest. The operative section of the tax code is here:> > "A section 501(c)(3) organization must not be organized or operated> for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the> creator's family, shareholders of the organization, other designated> individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such> private interests. No part of the net earnings of a section 501(c)(3)> organization may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or> individual. A private shareholder or individual is a person having a> personal and private interest in the activities of the organization."> > -- ACS> > =======================================================> List services made available by First Step Internet, > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. > http://www.fsr.net > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> =======================================================

======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet,  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.                  http://www.fsr.net                                 mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com======================================================= 
Kai EiseleinEditor, Latah Eagle
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20081007/612177d8/attachment.html 