July 11, 2012
The Honorable Chief Justice John G. Roberts
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, D.C. 20543

Dear Justice Roberts and Associate Justices:

Re: Freedoms Lost

On 4 July 2012 the American Flag was raised early, and then I continued to observe Independence Day in BLACK, the garb of grief, while mourning for freedoms lost in the decades of my adult life.

Issue must be taken with the major decisions listed below; the countless freedoms lost through unelected federal agencies as well as other court actions are legion, defying enumeration here.

Warren Court: In the 1960’s this court limited the role of religion in public schools to deny prayer and attempt to remove the “God In Whom We Trust.”

Berger Court: Strapped the nation with Roe vs. Wade decision making a moral judgment that belongs with the people of each state. “Res ipsi loquitur;” indeed, the issue speaks for itself.

Rehnquist Court: Set aside the 5th Amendment on private property rights in the eminent domain decision of Kelo vs. New London. (A separate response to this issue was written but not mailed after the June, 2005 travesty of our freedom and is enclosed.)

Roberts Court: The recent 28 June 2012 decision did not, thankfully, add more muddy water to the Commerce Clause which over the years has been guided by both the Court and the Congress from a “clear mountain stream” regulating commerce between foreign Nations, between the several states, and the Indian Tribes, into a “wide muddy river” with tributaries into places never imagined by the Founders. While not upheld under the Commerce Clause, the individual mandate of “Obamacare” assessing a penalty in some tortuous manner was morphed into a TAX. It would appear, then, that Congress has been given unlimited power to control the behavior of citizens by naming anything it designates as a tax.

EXAMPLE: Consider a tax on obesity since that condition has widely been described as a national health concern. The law would have a benign name such as the “Health Enhancement Act for Longevity of Life” which would then mandate a penalty for failure to exercise adequately with the noble goal of producing weight loss. The penalty would, of course, be veiled as a tax; failure to diminish one’s obesity by parameters (Federal Agency Designated) of moving toward ideal B.M.I. (body mass index) could easily be checked bi-annually or quarterly at local I.R.S. Health Functionary Office by certified measurement of weight and height. This information would require far less calculations or pages than are needed for the A.M.T. on I.R.S. Form 1040. The law would simply be ANOTHER tax on inactivity, the failure to exercise.

I applaud the decision of the Court to not allow the Federal Government to “extort” the states of previously granted funds for Medicaid.

Many thanks are to be given to Justices Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito for a clear defining of the constitutional basis supporting their dissenting opinion.

Respectfully,

John M. Long, M.D.
Drawer M , Tivoli, Texas 77990

Encl: Reflections on Kelo vs. New London decision in June, 2005
c.c. :
Justice Antonio Scalia
Justice Samuel A. Alito
Justice Anthony Kennedy
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Justice Clarence Thomas
Justice Elena Kagan
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Justice Stephen G. Breyer
Public Information Officer, S.C.O.T.U.S.
Dolphin Talk, Pt. O’Connor, TX

July 4, 2006

The Honorable Justice Antonio Scalia
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20543

Dear Justice Scalia:

I celebrate this Independence Day of 2006 with the heavy concern on my heart just as distinct as it was a year ago soon after the 2005 decision regarding Kelo vs. New London. I know that my children, grandchildren, and I are now significantly less free than any time before in our lives as American citizens because of this June, 2005 ruling by the Supreme Court.

Assurance of the integrity of individual property rights, regardless of how “unimportant” a person may seem be to the local, state, or national power brokers, is as much a part of the backbone of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness as is the “Rule of Law.”

I am not without experience of the personal injustice and financial ravages caused by the process of eminent domain, having been a victim of such in Houston, Harris County, Texas, in the early 1970’s. At least, however, in this instance my property was taken for a public use (library) and not to accomplish transfer of property from one person to improve the economic position and progress of an entity deemed to be “more important.” A single little child is the most important one of all if he/she happens to be your baby.

Without question, I must side with the dissenting opinion as succinctly stated by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, and supported by you as well as Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justice Clarence Thomas. Many thanks to those of you who understood the crucial point of freedom designed in our Constitution to protect the property rights of each individual citizen.

Respectfully,

John M. Long, M.D.
Common Citizen

Ben Kocian Remembered

Port O’Connor lost one nice part-time resident and the state of Texas lost one heck of an artist when Ben passed away recently.

Ben had the ideal fishing cabin. No telephone, no air conditioning, no television. He just thew open the windows and let the Gulf breezes blow through. Those of us who knew him will miss having a good talk with him.

We miss you, Ben.

G.B.

What are they scared of?

In Texas there have been very few cases of documented voter fraud. Most of those were write in ballots which had nothing to do with picture I.D.

While I personally have no problem with showing my drivers license at the polls, there are many older people and minorities who do not have a picture I.D.

My mother did not drive, buy alcohol or tobacco, but she could vote.

I think this picture I.D business in Texas is just a ploy to make it more difficult for the elder citizens and certain ethnic groups to vote.

If I had it my way, we would have a National Identification Card for every citizen and one for those who are here on a work permit.

That’s my two cents worth.

G.B.

The Dolphin welcomes letters from our readers on any subject that is of general interest to our audience. Letters should be 300 words or less (with exceptions at the Dolphin’s discretion). Letters reflect the opinion of the writer, and not that of Dolphin Talk staff, and we retain the right to determine suitability for publication. It is the policy of this newspaper to promote area interests: therefore, complaints against local businesses should be directed elsewhere. Letters must be signed and include day and evening phone numbers, which will not be published. Your name will be withheld upon request, but anonymous material will not be considered for publication.

Letters to the Dolphin:

Dolphin Talk, P.O. Box 777,
Port O’Connor, TX 77982
dolphin1@tisd.net