Rosenberg Orders Hearing On White Recount Commission Proceeding Delay

Marion Co. Circuit Court Judge Louis Rosenberg, who three weeks ago ordered the Indiana Recount Commission to hear a petition filed by the Indiana Democratic Party challenging Secretary of State Charlie White's eligibility to hold office because he allegedly cast a vote from a precinct in which he did not reside, has issued an order granting the Democrats' request for a hearing on the Republican Party's failure to name a replacement for White on the Commission and to proceed with hearing their petition. White's attorney, James Bopp, says the Recount Commission cannot proceed with hearing the petition because he has appealed Judge Rosenberg's order to the Indiana Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals, however, has not issued an order granting a stay of those proceedings. Judge Rosenberg's order gives state GOP Chairman Eric Holcomb two days to appoint White's replacement on the Commission, and he has requested the Commission's Director, Brad Skolnick, to appear and explain why the Commission should not be held in contempt of his order for not moving more quickly in scheduling a rehearing of the Democrats' petition.

Hoprah Before Civic Duty

A potential juror in the retrial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich noted on a jury questionnaire form that she had a conflict in serving because she had tickets to see Oprah Winfrey. Yes, she'll probably wind up on the jury. She's precisely the type of shallow-thinking people Blagojevich is counting on to set him free. The Sun-Times provides the exchange between the potential juror, a member of the local AFSCME union, and Judge Zagel:

“You don’t want to miss Oprah on May 10?” Judge James Zagel asked the woman.


Zagel asked if she had one ticket to attend the Oprah Winfrey Show, whose days in Chicago are numbered.

“Four tickets,” she corrected him.

Zagel didn’t indicate whether he’d suspend proceedings for the day in the event that the woman, who is a member of AFSCME Local 106, made the final cut and ended up on the jury.

She was one of more than half a dozen potential jurors who were questioned this morning, the second day of jury selection for the former governor’s retrial.

At this point, I'm hoping Blagojevich wins a full acquittal on the charges since our goverment has decided to pin all of the blame on him for corruption that included two principal co-conspirators, President Barack Obama and newly-elected Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who have been given a complete pass by the U.S. Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's office for their criminal activity. Blagojevich committed no crimes those two did not also commit, so I'm not interested in seeing him take the rap for the culture of corruption that remains unchecked in the White House, Illinois State House and Chicago City Hall. Blagojevich was a bit player. We've seen enough of this circus act. Let's move along. Wake us all up when federal prosecutors plan to hold those truly responsible for all of the corruption emanating from the Windy City accountable.

New York Times Falls For Tiger Beat Cover Parody With Obama

The Obama chorus at the New York Times is so determined to make Obama a part of America's youth pop culture that its editors included a parody magazine cover for teen gossip rag magazine, "Tiger Beat", showing Obama's smiling face and pearly whites alongside the Jonas brothers. It's an error that pretty much sums up the state of our lousy news media coverage today on all things Obama. Their correction:

A series of pictures last Sunday of covers of the magazine Tiger Beat, with an article about how the original teen-girl tabloid has remained virtually unchanged since its inception in 1965, erroneously included a parody cover, produced by the satiric newspaper The Onion, that featured a picture of President Obama.

When Elitists and Moral Supremacists Rule Our Country

IMPD Handling Of Person In Distress Questioned

A couple on the City's southside are questioning the manner in which police responded to an emergency call at their apartment complex after they discovered a young man, Maxwell Harper, passed out in front of their door. WRTV's Rick Hightower showed video the apartment residents recorded of police and emergency responders mistreating Harper, who they placed in handcuffs, picked up by the throat and then drug him down a flight of stairs like they were dragging trash out to a dumpster to dispose of. The witnesses said police also dropped him several times.

Amber Owens said she heard something outside her door and when she looked out, she found Maxwell Harper, 19, laying unconscious on the ground.

Owens said Harper's brother called 911. When paramedics and police arrived, they treated him "more like a prisoner rather than a patient" by putting handcuffs on him and allegedly dragging him down the stairs, Owens said.


Owens called 6News after recording video of the incident on her cell phone.

"(In the video) you're going to see them pick him up by his throat," said Owens, commenting on the video. "They said the reason why they threw him on his head is that he was resisting, and there was no way he could have done anything. He was laying in front of our apartment complex completely passed out."

Harper's brother and girlfriend said they also think the incident was mishandled by police and paramedics.

"It wasn't a professional way to take care of a sick person. Even though he was underage and drinking, it was a very unprofessional way to take care of the situation," said Nick Harper, Maxwell's brother.

Nick also said his brother was dropped to the ground more than once during the incident.

"They dropped him again while they had the cuffs on him. Then they got him about three feet up off the ground and just dropped him right on his face while his arms were behind his back," said Nick Harper.

"We called for help and they beat him up pretty much," said Kirstin Brand, Maxwell's girlfriend.

Police claimed they handcuffed and treated Harper as they did because he was resisting arrest, but the witnesses say he was completely passed out and incapable of resisting, which seems rather apparent from the video.

The Rights Of Muslims Trump The First Amendment In Dearborn

A controversial Florida Christian minister, Terry Jones, planned to publicly demonstrate against jihad and sharia law outside a mosque in Dearborn, Michigan, which is home to one of the largest Muslim-American communities in the country. A Detroit prosecutor and judge had other plans for Jones. Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy filed an emergency petition in court to block Jones' planned demonstration because she said the threat of violence was too great to allow Jones to hold the planned gathering on Friday near the Islamic Center of America, the largest U.S. mosque. Judge Mark Somers ordered Jones to stay away from the mosque for at least three years after a jury found that his planned demonstration would likely disturb the peace, and then ordered him jailed after he refused to post a $1 peace bond before he would release him. The case appears to strike directly at the heart of long-established First Amendment jurisprudence barring prior restraint on the exercise of free speech rights. The Dearborn Free Press reports on the court's decision:

A defiant Terry Jones says he plans to protest next week at the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn despite a judge's order that he stay from the mosque for three years. The Quran-burning pastor from Florida said his rights were violated Friday by a judge due to the influence of Islamic law.


"We plan to protest next week in front of the Islamic Center," Pastor Terry Jones said today.

"The arrests, the whole proceedings, were a definite violation of our Constitutional rights," Jones added. "As a matter of fact, we were arrested and had not even committed a crime. It is a complete violation of our First Amendment right of freedom of speech. It was clearly influenced by the mosque. "

Jones had wanted to protest Friday against jihad and sharia outside the Islamic Center on Friday, but was thwarted by authorities. The center is the largest mosque in metro Detroit, a region with a sizable Muslim population.

On Friday, Judge Mark Somers ordered that Jones and Pastor Wayne Sapp be remanded to jail after a jury determined they would be likely to breach the peace. In his decision Judge Somers set a $1 cash bond for Jones and Sapp, and also said Jones and Sapp could not go to the mosque or adjacent property for three years.

One has to wonder where the American Civil Liberties Union was yesterday while Jones' constitutional rights were being trampled upon. It was the ACLU which took up the case of Neo-Nazis who wanted to parade through Skokie, Illinois, a predominantly Jewish Chicago suburb in 1978, and succeeded in declaring a local ordinance that required the demonstrators to obtain an unreasonable amount of liability insurance as a condition to obtaining their permit to demonstrate in the city as violating the controversial group's First Amendment rights. Judge Somers made quite apparent in his decision barring Jones from demonstrating outside the mosque for 3 years his belief that the rights of the Muslims who would be offended by Jones' demonstration trumped his free speech rights. Somers told Jones the only exception to his ban on visiting the mosque would be if the leadership of the mosque consented to his viist.

"Sharia is much closer than we thought," Jones said. "The judge even made a statement, that if the mosque elders and leadership would have desired the restraints placed on us of not going near the mosque be lifted, then he would have taken that into consideration. Thus proving that this whole thing is a direct violation of freedom of speech and that they are favoring the religion of Islam."

Critics claim that past actions of the city of Dearborn suggests a form of Sharia law is already being enforced in the community. Last year, Christians were arrested for passing out leaflets at a Muslim festival in the city. There have even been claims of police cover ups of murders that were carried out in the form of honor killings that are permitted under Sharia law as practiced in many predominantly Muslim countries throughout the world. The local Muslim community reacted with joy to Jones' arrest. "That's what we wanted," said one man. "He got lucky," yelled another man. I'll let you interpret what was meant by that last comment.

A little more than a month ago, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of a controversial Christian church, Westboro Baptist Church, to hold anti-gay protests outside military funerals. The group carries signs that read "God Hates Fags" and "You're Going To Hell" at military funerals, a display that is very upsetting to grieving family members who are attending the funerals of their loved ones who have died while serving their country. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an 8-1 opinion:

Simply put, the church members had the right to be where they were. Westboro alerted local authorities to its funeral protest and fully complied with police guidance on where the picketing could be staged. The picketing was conducted under police supervision some 1,000 feet from the church, out of the sight of those at the church. The protest was not unruly; there was no shouting, profanity, or violence.

The record confirms that any distress occasioned by Westboro’s picketing turned on the content and viewpoint of the message conveyed, rather than any interference with the funeral itself. A group of parishioners standing at the very spot where Westboro stood, holding signs that said "God Bless America" and "God Loves You," would not have been subjected to liability. It was what Westboro said that exposed it to tort damages.

Given that Westboro’s speech was at a public place on a matter of public concern, that speech is entitled to “special protection” under the First Amendment. Such speech cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt. “If there is a bedrock principle underly-ing the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” . . . . Indeed, “the point of all speech protection . . . is to shield just those choices of content that in someone’s eyes are misguided, or even hurtful.” 

It's hard to argue the facts of Jones' case would have reached any different outcome in the high court. He alerted local officials of his plans to conduct a peaceful demonstration. He was willing to keep a reasonable distance from the mosque. And his speech related to a matter of public concern that should be afforded "special protection" under the First Amendment. The only reason the judge offered for blocking his planned demonstration was his concern that it would lead to a disturbance because of how it might upset or arouse contempt from Muslims who objected to the content of his message. Surely the sensibilities of Muslims should be accorded no greater deference than those of the family members who lost loved ones while in service to their country at the occasion of celebrating their lives on this earth at their funerals.

UPDATE: Hat tip to Indy Student for the heads up on this. The ACLU of Michigan did file an amicus brief with the Michigan court siding with Jones' right to demonstrate. Here are some exerpts from it:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (ACLU) vehemently disagrees with the content of Pastor Jones’ and Mr. Sapp’s speech. However, if the First Amendment has any meaning, it is that the government cannot suppress the free speech because it – or anyone else – disagrees with the speech. As the Supreme Court recently held, “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. Indeed, the point of all speech protection ... is to shield just those choices of content that in someone's eyes are misguided, or even hurtful.” Snyder v Phelps, 131 S Ct 1207, 1219 (2011) (citations and quotations omitted). Because these important constitutional concerns have not been adequately raised during the process of these proceedings, we feel it is crucial to provide the court with analysis . . .

On April 9, 2011, a group associated with Pastor Jones submitted a permit request to the City of Dearborn to hold a demonstration “[p]rotest[ing] Sharia and Jihad” in front of the Islamic Center of America, located at 19500 Ford Road in Dearborn, Michigan. The application stated that only two people were anticipated to attend the demonstration and Mr. Jones and Mr. Sapp have said that the demonstration would be peaceful. On April 15, 2011, Wayne County Prosecutor Kym L. Worthy filed a complaint in the 19th District Court of the State of Michigan “To Institute Proceedings To Prevent Crime” under MCL 772.1 et. seq., commonly known as the “peace bond” statute, to compel Pastor Jones and Wayne Sapp (“Mr. Sapp”), the defendants in the case, to appear before the court. Pet Comp, People v Terry Jones, et al, Case Nos 11S0229, 11S0231 (19th Dist Ct, Apr 15, 2011).

The peace bond statute may only be invoked when “a person has threatened to commit an offense against the person or property of another.” MCL 772.2. Ms. Worthy claims that Mr. Jones and Mr. Sapp are planning to incite a riot and therefore the court should set a bond in the amount necessary to cover the amount of money it will cost the City of Dearborn to police the event. A trial is being held today to determine whether defendants are likely “breach the peace.” MCL 772.4(2). If Mr. Jones and Mr. Sapp are found likely to breach the peace, the government will likely ask the court to require them to either pay the peace bond or be placed in the county jail. MCL 772.6.

It is a basic principle of First Amendment jurisprudence that one may not be charged a price to engage in expressive activity because others may react negatively to that expressive activity . . .

Amicus Curiae ACLU Fund of Michigan urges this court to deny the Wayne County’s Prosecutor’s unconstitutional attempt to use the peace bond statute as a prior restraint on constitutionally protected, albeit offensive, speech.

You can view the entire brief filed by the ACLU here. I'm not sure whether the ACLU objects to Jones' opposition to jihad or sharia law given the statement in their brief that it "vehemently disagrees with the content of [his] speech." That was the stated purpose of the exercise of his free speech rights.

More Media Misrepresentation On Presidential Eligibility Legislation

The Star has a lengthy story from the AP discussing the continued doubts many Americans have about Obama's natural born status and asking why "it's the conspiracy theory that won't go away." You need look no further than an item the Star originated in its "Behind Closed Doors" column this weekend that blatantly misrepresents legislation Sen. Mike Delph and Sen. Sue Landske have asked that a summer study committee look at to determine whether Indiana should enact a law that requires all presidential candidates to furnish evidence they meet the eligibility requirements set out in the U.S. Constitution to be president.

Now, Delph wants the legislature to assign a summer study committee to explore whether Indiana should require candidates to prove they are citizens--a proposal Democrats find absurd and an untrue, unfair attack on Obama.

Presumbably, Mary Beth Schneider, the Star's State House reporter, is the person who contributed this false information to this item in the column because she was the only reporter for the newspaper in attendance at this week's hearing on the resolution. If Schneider bothered to read Delph's legislation, SB 114, or had bothered to listen to the testimony at the hearing, she would know that her reporting was patently false. In addition, I spent considerable time discussing the legislation with her earlier in the session that should have cleared up any misapprehensions she had about it. As with all of the mainstream reporters who have covered this issue to date, Schneider is not interested in the truth; rather, she is simply interested in casting aspersions at anyone who raises legitimate constitutional questions about the process for electing persons to the most important elected office in the free world.

The purpose of requiring a candidate to provide a birth certificate is not to prove he or she is a citizen as she falsey writes in the item, but rather to establish that they meet the age requirement and the natural born citizenship requirement, which the constitution specifically requires. We already know presidential candidates are citizens by virtue of them being participants in the political process as registered voters. I also furnished to Schneider proof that the Democratic Party refused to affirm that Obama met the constitutional eligibility requirements when it filed its nominating certificate with the Indiana Elections Division in 2008, unlike the certificate of nomination the Republican Party filed for John McCain. Of course, Schneider won't report that fact. Instead, she used the item to poke additional fun at Donald Trump calling Delph to offer his support for his efforts. "Trump--yes, THAT Donald Trump, the one with the hair, the bank account and the TV show . . . the most famous 'birther,'" she writes. She throws in a dissing quip from Mitch Daniels, who also jumps on the trash the birthers bandwagon with this: "I'm one of the few people in America who can honestly claim to have said, 'Donald, you're fired." Let's see, Mitch, didn't you tell the American people when you were Bush's budget director that the war in Iraq was only going to cost the American taxpayers $50 billion? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Yes, this is why the American people have doubts about who President Obama is. They have been repeatedly lied to on so many fronts about his biographical narrative not only by Obama, but also by his deceiving allies in the American news media, that they don't know what to believe about him anymore. They want you to believe this issue is all about Obama when it knows full well that McCain similarly faced lawsuits and challenges over his natural born status because he was born in Panama where his father was stationed on a naval base. Sen. Richard Bray also pointed out during the hearing at which Schneider was present his vivid recollection of George Romney's natural born citizenship being challenged in 1968 because of his birth to U.S. citizen parents who were living in Mexico at the time of his birth. Perhaps if the media wants the "conspiracy theories" to go away, it should begin by leveling with the American people candidly about who this man is and what his policies actually are and honestly report on the ideas any other person offers that runs counter to his views instead of the non-stop marketing pieces fit for those charlatans who produce those half-hour infomercial ads that run on late-night TV.

UPDATE: Senate Republicans chickened out under pressure from the same elitist and moral supremacist thinking that has destroyed this country. Sen. James Merritt (R-Indianapolis) and Sen. Tom Wyss (R-Ft. Wayne) skipped out on the hearing to vote on the resolution this morning, along with the Senate Democrats who claim the only motive behind the resolution is racism against a black president, in order to ensure no vote could be taken and no summer study committee could be established. They will show up to vote to cut corporate taxes, force consumers to pay for a farcical new coal gasification plant that will enrich pay-to-play contributors at the cost of residential ratepayers and allow the robber barons to take your land by eminent domain to build their pipeline over your farmland and property. Great leadership.

Professional Fees For Parking Meter Lease Deal Cost Taxpayers Nearly $3 Million

It's always the driving force behind these deals. The only way the pay-to-play insiders can make big money off representing government is to convince corrupt elected officials to undertake one-sided deals that screw over taxpayers as an excuse to bill hefty fees they earn for carrying them out. The one-sided parking meter lease deal the Ballard administration entered into with ACS was no exception. Fees for that deal reached nearly $3 million, or about 15% of what the city received in the form of an upfront payment for the deal. The Star's Jon Murray breaks the fees down as follows:

• $1.9 million to Morgan Stanley for financial services;
• $950,000 to Ice Miller for legal services; and
• $109,000 to Hirons & Co. for public relations.

A public interest group in Washington was critical of the Ballard administration's decision to use Morgan Stanley because of its role in other parking meter deals around the country. "The company is one of the primary investors in the Chicago deal and stands to gain from the deals they advise on," PIRG's Phineas Baxandall noted in a report it released on the deal. "That is a clear conflict of interest." On the lease agreement drawn up by Ice Miller, the Urbanophile's Aaron Renn noted it was essentially a "cut and paste" job lifting heavily from the lease agreement the City of Chicago used for it long-term parking meter lease. Murray's story omits the real reason Hirons & Co. was paid $109,000 a year to work on public relations for the deal--the firm's owner hired Mayor Ballard's son a short time before he awarded the no-bid contract to the firm. Ballard similarly awarded an even larger no-bid contract to Hirons for work on the Citizens Energy deal for the water and sewer utilities. The Star, like the rest of the news media in town, continues to ignore the fact that ACS installed used electronic parking meters combining old city assets with used assets owned by the company in only the high volume areas to allow the private vendor to start raking in its fees as opposed to new, state-of-the-art technology promised when the deal was approved. Nobody in the media has yet to report on the role Pay To Play has in deals undertaken by this administration on so many fronts to the detriment of city taxpayers.

Indiana Supreme Court Reinstates Hammond GOP Mayoral Candidate Illegally Removed From Ballot By Democratic-Controlled Election Board

In an outrageous act of partisan over-reaching, the Democratic-controlled Lake County Elections Board earlier this year removed from the May primary ballot Republican mayoral candidate George Janiec, who narrowly lost to Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott (D) by 500 votes four years ago. Without citing any statute to support their decision, the elections board claimed Janiec could not seek a partisan office while serving as a trustee for Hammond's public school system. An appointee of Mayor McDermott, Dawn Tomich, filed the complaint against Janiec seeking his removal from the ballot. The Indiana Supreme Court issued an order to reinstate Janiec to the ballot only a day after the elections board filed its brief in the case on Janiec's petition for transfer after the election board's decision was unbelievably upheld by a Lake County Superior Court Judge Jesse Villalpando, a former Democratic legislator. The Court's unanimous opinion reads, in part:

The Board and Lake Superior Court held that Janiec’s candidacy was inconsistent with the ethical policies applicable to members of the Hammond School Board. The Court finds no basis in statute or law for disqualifying Janiec on this basis. See Burke v. Bennett, 907 N.E.2d 529, 532 (Ind. 2009) (disqualification statute to be construed “consistent with the longstanding respect for the right of the people to free and equal elections”). Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the Verified Petition for Emergency Transfer and REVERSES the Lake Superior Court’s “Judgment Order” issued on March 30, 2011. The Board and its members are ENJOINED from removing Janiec’s name from the ballot as a Republican candidate for Mayor of Hammond in the May 2011 primary election.

The May decision comes with a little more than two weeks left before the primary election. More than 3,200 absentee votes have already been cast, which cannot be undone according to the Court's order. The parties were ordered by the Court to come up with a mechanism to allow persons who have received absentee ballots but have not yet returned them, or who will be casting early votes in person at satellite voting sites, to cast a vote for Janiec no later than Monday. There were already five other candidates on the ballot in the Republican mayor's race. Mayor McDermott incredulously blamed Janiec for the ordeal he has endured at the hand of his political operatives according to the Northwest Indiana Times:

McDermott said Janiec showed a lack of respect for his opponents by glossing over the Republican primary and saying he would square off against him in November.


"Right now he's running against field of Republicans that want to beat him," McDermott said. "He obviously has no respect whatsoever for his opponents. That's not a good way to approach politics. You always respect your opponents, regardless of whether you think you can beat them or not."

The Lake County Election Board's actions were bad enough, but it is inexcusable for Judge Villalpando to uphold their actions knowing that there was absolutely no basis in law for removing Janiec from the ballot. Thankfully, the Supreme Court acted quickly enough to provide at least the possibility of Janiec winning the Republican nomination, who Mayor McDermott concedes is his strongest potential opponent for the November general election.

It's noteworthy that the Supreme Court cited the Burke v. Bennett decision in support of its construction of the disqualification statute as "consistent with the longstanding respect for the right of the people to free and equal elections." Secretary of State Charlie White's attorney, James Bopp, is relying on that decision in support of his contention that the Recount Commission could not disqualify him on the basis of an alleged criminal violation for which he had not been found guilty prior to the election contest petition being filed by the Indiana Democratic Party. Although Democrats knew of the alleged violation prior to the election, they waited until after the election to contest his eligibility to hold the office. Bopp's attorneys maintain the remedy post-election is removal through conviction for committing a felony. They are appealing an order by Marion Co. Circuit Court Judge Louis Rosenberg for the Recount Commission to hear the Democrat's petition, which it dismissed last December. If the Recount Commission ruled in favor of the Democrats, their candidate, Vop Osili, would assume the office even though voters overwhelmingly chose White over him. Republican-sponsored legislation is making its way through the legislature in its closing days that would allow Gov. Daniels to name White's successor if the Commission disqualifies him.