This has got to be great for employee morale with sheriffs coming by to take company property, vehicles and cash.
02/27/2012 Garnishment Returned Non-Est
Document ID - 11-EXEC-4211; Served To - CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; Server - GOODRICH, ROBERT; Served Date - 31-JAN-12; Served Time - 00:00:00; Service Type - Execution 3; Reason Description - No Cash Found; Service Text - NULLA BONA
12/02/2011 Execution/Garnishment Issued
This is garnishment 11-EXEC-4211 for CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; LEVY UPON CASH REGISTER & SAFE LOCATED AAAAT 9977 LIN FERRY RD 63123; returnable date: 31-JAN-2012
10/14/2011 Garnishment Returned Non-Est
Document ID - 11-EXEC-3021; Served To - CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; Server - GOODRICH, ROBERT; Served Date - 07-OCT-11; Served Time - 00:00:00; Service Type - Execution 3; Reason Description - Property Not Found; Service Text - NULLA BONA
09/07/2011 Execution/Garnishment Issued
This is garnishment 11-EXEC-3021 for CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; VEHICLE LEVY; returnable date: 07-OCT-2011
Friday, March 30, 2012
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
Flush Rush Updated 3/13/12 06:33 am
Saturday, March 13th, 2011
Boycott Rush Limbaugh’s Sponsors
It was the loss of sponsors is what forced Fox Programming to Fire Glenn Beck. His over the top Conservative Extremism was just too much for Sponsors to take a chance of having their products Brand Labeled to this Nut Job.
Well I am proposing that by boycotting those who sponsor Rush Limbaugh could be just as effective. Please take note and not purchase any of the sponsor’s products and services.
Oreck Upright Vacuum Cleaners
Oreck Corporation
100 Plantation Road
New Orleans, Louisiana 70123
800-289-5888
Instead of buying Oreck, may I suggest:
Tacony Corp. (St. Louis, MO): in 2000, Tacony brought production of Riccar and Simplicity upright vacuums from Taiwan to the U.S. at a new facility in St. James, MO. (Cannister vacuums are imported.) Find a Simplicity or Riccar retailer at SimplicityVac.com or Riccar.com
AutoZone Inc.
901-495-7185; Fax: 901-495-8374
P.O. Box 2198, Memphis, TN 38101
investor.relations@autozone.com
Citrix Online (GoToMyPC)
6500 Hollister Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
Phone: 805-690-6400; Fax: 805-690-6471
info@citrixonline.com
American Forces Network
Contact Us: @MyAFN.net
Mission Pharmacal Company
10999 IH-10 West Suite 1000
P.O. Box 786099
San Antonio, TX 78278-6099
Telephone: (800) 531-3333
Bennett Kennedy - Citracal Product Manager
Life Quotes, Inc.
32045 Castle Court
Evergreen, CO 80439
1-800-670-5433
info@lifequotes.com.au
Lending Tree
(704) 541-5351
Online Contact page
With any luck, by cutting off the finanicial gains of those who sponsor this ASS WIPE that is Rush Limbaugh, they will soon drop him like the plague and possible any future sponsors.
Posted by Engineer of Knowledge at 5:31 PM
Labels: conservative politics, Conservative Radio, Fox News, Republican Con jobs and scams, Rush Limbaugh, U.S. Right Wing Extremist
Boycott Rush Limbaugh’s Sponsors
It was the loss of sponsors is what forced Fox Programming to Fire Glenn Beck. His over the top Conservative Extremism was just too much for Sponsors to take a chance of having their products Brand Labeled to this Nut Job.
Well I am proposing that by boycotting those who sponsor Rush Limbaugh could be just as effective. Please take note and not purchase any of the sponsor’s products and services.
Oreck Upright Vacuum Cleaners
Oreck Corporation
100 Plantation Road
New Orleans, Louisiana 70123
800-289-5888
Instead of buying Oreck, may I suggest:
Tacony Corp. (St. Louis, MO): in 2000, Tacony brought production of Riccar and Simplicity upright vacuums from Taiwan to the U.S. at a new facility in St. James, MO. (Cannister vacuums are imported.) Find a Simplicity or Riccar retailer at SimplicityVac.com or Riccar.com
AutoZone Inc.
901-495-7185; Fax: 901-495-8374
P.O. Box 2198, Memphis, TN 38101
investor.relations@autozone.com
Citrix Online (GoToMyPC)
6500 Hollister Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
Phone: 805-690-6400; Fax: 805-690-6471
info@citrixonline.com
American Forces Network
Contact Us: @MyAFN.net
Mission Pharmacal Company
10999 IH-10 West Suite 1000
P.O. Box 786099
San Antonio, TX 78278-6099
Telephone: (800) 531-3333
Bennett Kennedy - Citracal Product Manager
Life Quotes, Inc.
32045 Castle Court
Evergreen, CO 80439
1-800-670-5433
info@lifequotes.com.au
Lending Tree
(704) 541-5351
Online Contact page
With any luck, by cutting off the finanicial gains of those who sponsor this ASS WIPE that is Rush Limbaugh, they will soon drop him like the plague and possible any future sponsors.
Posted by Engineer of Knowledge at 5:31 PM
Labels: conservative politics, Conservative Radio, Fox News, Republican Con jobs and scams, Rush Limbaugh, U.S. Right Wing Extremist
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Does Someone Have This Stipulation of Facts
Mike--
This comment has nothing to do with this post, so no need to publish it. But I was writing to ask if you could follow up on the Mehlville Fire Board's agreement with the attorney general. In my mind these are agencies funded by public dollars, so any non-personnel documents should be available to the public. The case is viewable on Case.net under this information:
Case number 10SL-CC00741. Here is the last docket entry:
"
Judgment Entered
JUDGMENT IS ENTERED DECLARINGT THAT THE DISTRICT'S PROPOSED LEVY FOR 2009 DID NOT VIOLATE STATE LAW. EACH PARTY IS TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS. SO ORDERED: JUDGE PATRICK CLIFFORD
THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO A STIPULATION OF FACTS THAT WAS FILED WITH THE COURT ON MARCH 18, 2011.
I have searched the Attorney general's website for a copy of this stipulation but find nothing. I would be very interested to know how the tax levy was deemed appropriate. Perhaps you have contacts that can get a copy? If so, please please post.
Thanks Mike
This comment has nothing to do with this post, so no need to publish it. But I was writing to ask if you could follow up on the Mehlville Fire Board's agreement with the attorney general. In my mind these are agencies funded by public dollars, so any non-personnel documents should be available to the public. The case is viewable on Case.net under this information:
Case number 10SL-CC00741. Here is the last docket entry:
"
Judgment Entered
JUDGMENT IS ENTERED DECLARINGT THAT THE DISTRICT'S PROPOSED LEVY FOR 2009 DID NOT VIOLATE STATE LAW. EACH PARTY IS TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS. SO ORDERED: JUDGE PATRICK CLIFFORD
THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO A STIPULATION OF FACTS THAT WAS FILED WITH THE COURT ON MARCH 18, 2011.
I have searched the Attorney general's website for a copy of this stipulation but find nothing. I would be very interested to know how the tax levy was deemed appropriate. Perhaps you have contacts that can get a copy? If so, please please post.
Thanks Mike
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Bevis and Buttheads Continued
Nobody likes getting a ticket. Nobody likes the idea of it being easier through a
camera to get a ticket. But as a civilized society, we realize that we must conform to rules that promote the public safety. Certainly rational people can agree on this.
But Senator Lembke doesn't care about public safety. Or should I say, Senator Lembke cares more about politics than he cares about public safety?
Lembke has been fighting his ticket for running a red light for a year now. A year!
He's gotten the assistance of the Show Me Institute's lawyers in trying to overturn his violation of the law.
Perhaps I'm being nostalgic when I remember a time when conservatives were about law and order and responsibility.
Upcoming: defendant JAMES LEMBKE and court case number 1122CR00921. A(n) Hearing has been scheduled for 1/26/2012 at 9:30 AM. This will take place in St Louis City Circuit Court, located at: 10 N. Tucker Blvd. in St. Louis, MO 63101.
Defendant Lembke may seek another delay again to further serve his political interests.
camera to get a ticket. But as a civilized society, we realize that we must conform to rules that promote the public safety. Certainly rational people can agree on this.
But Senator Lembke doesn't care about public safety. Or should I say, Senator Lembke cares more about politics than he cares about public safety?
Lembke has been fighting his ticket for running a red light for a year now. A year!
He's gotten the assistance of the Show Me Institute's lawyers in trying to overturn his violation of the law.
Perhaps I'm being nostalgic when I remember a time when conservatives were about law and order and responsibility.
Upcoming: defendant JAMES LEMBKE and court case number 1122CR00921. A(n) Hearing has been scheduled for 1/26/2012 at 9:30 AM. This will take place in St Louis City Circuit Court, located at: 10 N. Tucker Blvd. in St. Louis, MO 63101.
Defendant Lembke may seek another delay again to further serve his political interests.
Friday, February 3, 2012
The Tenther Movement and State Senator James Lembke
It’s difficult for me to accept the fact that Lembke is currently our state senator. I realize he’s a good salesman but his product, himself, is not what’s good for our community. It’s more than his unethical actions such as targeting judges that don’t rule in favor of his friends. It’s more than just about his attempts to stifle the use of technology to make our highways safer. It's about his ideology. It’s hard for me to describe so let me just say Lembke is a Tenther. Go ahead and ask him. This is the kind of stuff he pushes in our state legislature. These folks aren’t right and Lembke shouldn’t be our state senator.
Below is verbatim as it appeared in Wikipedia. Note the word "bipartisan" in the opening paragraph. It was slid in by the Tenthers but removed by Wikipedia.
Look at their website and see if you think they’re “bi-partisan.”
Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
State Sovereignty Resolutions and Nullification Acts
The Tenth Amendment Center, an organization seeking to promote the concept of state sovereignty, has gathered information on various actions taken by state legislatures in protest to federal actions. The organization is bipartisan. The movement has quietly gained support in a number of states.
* State Sovereignty Resolutions ("10th Amendment Resolutions") – During 2009, "state sovereignty resolutions" or "10th Amendment Resolutions" were introduced in the legislatures of 37 states; in seven states the resolutions passed (Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Tennessee). As of April 2010[update], resolutions were introduced or reintroduced into the legislatures of 19 states; the resolution has passed in five states (Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).[4] [5]
* State Sovereignty Bills ("10th Amendment Bills") – As of March 2010[update], in five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma) Tenth Amendment supporters have introduced "State Sovereignty Bills" (one step beyond the Resolution stage discussed above), which would mandate action against what the state legislature perceives as unconstitutional federal legislation; none have made it past the introductory stage.[6]
* Firearms Freedom Act Legislation and Federal Gun Laws Nullification – As of April 2010[update], resolutions have been introduced in the legislatures of 27 states that would "declare[] that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states". During 2009 the legislation passed in Montana and Tennessee and during 2010 the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.[7] South Carolina has taken the issue one step further: in 2010 a bill was introduced which would effectively nullify all gun registration laws within the state.[8]
* Medical Marijuana Laws – As of March 2010[update], 14 states (Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) have passed legislation which permit the use of medicinal marijuana.[9] California has a proposed November 2010 constitutional amendment which would go one step further, and legalize marijuana use by persons over age 21 for any purpose whatsoever.[10] The Obama Administration announced in October 2009 that it advised federal prosecutors not to target medicinal marijuana users, or their suppliers, in states that have passed such laws.[11]
* REAL ID Act – As of March 2010[update], 25 states (beginning with Maine in 2007) have passed legislation and/or resolutions which opposed this legislation. Though the legislation is still on the books, its implementation has been delayed on several occasions and is currently not being enforced.[12]
* National Health Care Nullification – As of March 2010[update], 30 states have introduced legislation which would declare certain provisions of any proposed national health care bill to be null and void within the state; the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Virginia.[13] Such provisions include mandatory participation in such a system as well as preserving the right of a patient to pay a health care professional for treatment (and for the professional to accept it) outside of a single-payer system. Arizona's legislation passed as a proposed constitutional amendment, to be submitted to the voters in 2010.[14] On February 1, 2010, the Virginia Senate took a stand against a key provision of a proposed federal health care overhaul, passing legislation declaring that Virginia residents cannot be forced to buy health insurance. On March 17, 2010, the Governor of Idaho signed a bill requiring the Attorney General to sue the Federal Government if Idaho residents are required to buy health insurance.[15]
* "Bring the Guard Home" – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would permit the Governor of the state to recall any National Guard troops from overseas deployments (such as in Iraq and Afghanistan); the bills failed in Maryland and New Mexico.[16]
* Constitutional Tender – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would seek to nullify federal legal tender laws in the state by authorizing payment in gold and silver or a paper note backed 100% by gold or silver; the legislation failed in Colorado and Montana.[17]
* "Cap-and-trade" Nullification – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify any proposed federal emissions regulation under the "cap and trade" model); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[18]
* State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Acts – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would require businesses (and in some cases, individuals) to remit their Federal tax payments to the state Treasurer (or equivalent body) for deposit into an escrow fund. If the state Legislature determined that a portion of the federal budget was not constitutional, or if the federal government imposed penalties or sanctions upon the state for creating the fund, then the money would be withheld.) None have advanced beyond the introductory stage[19]
* "Sheriffs First" Legislation – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would make it a crime for any federal agent to make an arrest, search, or seizure within the state without getting the advanced, written permission of the sheriff of the county in which the event would take place); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[20]
* "Federal Land" Legislation – As of February 2010[update], Utah has introduced legislation to allow the use of Eminent domain on federal land. Rep. Christopher Herrod has introduced the bill in a state where the Federal Government controls over 60% of the land. The effort has the full support of Republican Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who would have to defend the law. The proposal includes setting aside $3 million for legal defense.[21]
* "Nullification of Federal Intrastate Commerce Regulation" – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify federal regulation of commerce and activities which are solely within the boundaries of a state and which do not cross state lines. The Virginia legislation has passed one house.[22]
Source: WikiPedia/10th_Amendment
Related
About the "Tenthers" (Wikipedia)
Tenth Amendment Center — Where the Wild Things Are
The 10th_Amendment (Wikipedia)
Below is verbatim as it appeared in Wikipedia. Note the word "bipartisan" in the opening paragraph. It was slid in by the Tenthers but removed by Wikipedia.
Look at their website and see if you think they’re “bi-partisan.”
Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
State Sovereignty Resolutions and Nullification Acts
The Tenth Amendment Center, an organization seeking to promote the concept of state sovereignty, has gathered information on various actions taken by state legislatures in protest to federal actions. The organization is bipartisan. The movement has quietly gained support in a number of states.
* State Sovereignty Resolutions ("10th Amendment Resolutions") – During 2009, "state sovereignty resolutions" or "10th Amendment Resolutions" were introduced in the legislatures of 37 states; in seven states the resolutions passed (Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Tennessee). As of April 2010[update], resolutions were introduced or reintroduced into the legislatures of 19 states; the resolution has passed in five states (Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).[4] [5]
* State Sovereignty Bills ("10th Amendment Bills") – As of March 2010[update], in five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma) Tenth Amendment supporters have introduced "State Sovereignty Bills" (one step beyond the Resolution stage discussed above), which would mandate action against what the state legislature perceives as unconstitutional federal legislation; none have made it past the introductory stage.[6]
* Firearms Freedom Act Legislation and Federal Gun Laws Nullification – As of April 2010[update], resolutions have been introduced in the legislatures of 27 states that would "declare[] that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states". During 2009 the legislation passed in Montana and Tennessee and during 2010 the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.[7] South Carolina has taken the issue one step further: in 2010 a bill was introduced which would effectively nullify all gun registration laws within the state.[8]
* Medical Marijuana Laws – As of March 2010[update], 14 states (Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) have passed legislation which permit the use of medicinal marijuana.[9] California has a proposed November 2010 constitutional amendment which would go one step further, and legalize marijuana use by persons over age 21 for any purpose whatsoever.[10] The Obama Administration announced in October 2009 that it advised federal prosecutors not to target medicinal marijuana users, or their suppliers, in states that have passed such laws.[11]
* REAL ID Act – As of March 2010[update], 25 states (beginning with Maine in 2007) have passed legislation and/or resolutions which opposed this legislation. Though the legislation is still on the books, its implementation has been delayed on several occasions and is currently not being enforced.[12]
* National Health Care Nullification – As of March 2010[update], 30 states have introduced legislation which would declare certain provisions of any proposed national health care bill to be null and void within the state; the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Virginia.[13] Such provisions include mandatory participation in such a system as well as preserving the right of a patient to pay a health care professional for treatment (and for the professional to accept it) outside of a single-payer system. Arizona's legislation passed as a proposed constitutional amendment, to be submitted to the voters in 2010.[14] On February 1, 2010, the Virginia Senate took a stand against a key provision of a proposed federal health care overhaul, passing legislation declaring that Virginia residents cannot be forced to buy health insurance. On March 17, 2010, the Governor of Idaho signed a bill requiring the Attorney General to sue the Federal Government if Idaho residents are required to buy health insurance.[15]
* "Bring the Guard Home" – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would permit the Governor of the state to recall any National Guard troops from overseas deployments (such as in Iraq and Afghanistan); the bills failed in Maryland and New Mexico.[16]
* Constitutional Tender – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would seek to nullify federal legal tender laws in the state by authorizing payment in gold and silver or a paper note backed 100% by gold or silver; the legislation failed in Colorado and Montana.[17]
* "Cap-and-trade" Nullification – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify any proposed federal emissions regulation under the "cap and trade" model); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[18]
* State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Acts – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would require businesses (and in some cases, individuals) to remit their Federal tax payments to the state Treasurer (or equivalent body) for deposit into an escrow fund. If the state Legislature determined that a portion of the federal budget was not constitutional, or if the federal government imposed penalties or sanctions upon the state for creating the fund, then the money would be withheld.) None have advanced beyond the introductory stage[19]
* "Sheriffs First" Legislation – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would make it a crime for any federal agent to make an arrest, search, or seizure within the state without getting the advanced, written permission of the sheriff of the county in which the event would take place); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[20]
* "Federal Land" Legislation – As of February 2010[update], Utah has introduced legislation to allow the use of Eminent domain on federal land. Rep. Christopher Herrod has introduced the bill in a state where the Federal Government controls over 60% of the land. The effort has the full support of Republican Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who would have to defend the law. The proposal includes setting aside $3 million for legal defense.[21]
* "Nullification of Federal Intrastate Commerce Regulation" – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify federal regulation of commerce and activities which are solely within the boundaries of a state and which do not cross state lines. The Virginia legislation has passed one house.[22]
Source: WikiPedia/10th_Amendment
Related
About the "Tenthers" (Wikipedia)
Tenth Amendment Center — Where the Wild Things Are
The 10th_Amendment (Wikipedia)
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Letter to the St. Louis Post Dispatch Editor
The article “A to-do list for legislators” offered opinions on state funding for the St. Louis Public Schools and the State of Missouri.
The authors share their conclusions but offered zero facts from which they were based. The article suggested the funding formula be changed because the city schools (according to them) were not using their money effectively. The State of Missouri took over the city school district several years ago. If there is something wrong with the district, it’s the state’s fault. That’s not a good reason to change policy for the other 523 school districts.
The Missouri K-12 budget is short some 500 million dollars.To suggest that the legislature give out tax credits worsens the problem.
Perhaps since these doctoral fellows are working from Arkansas, they aren’t familiar with public education in the state of Missouri and have no idea about what’s going with the St. Louis Public Schools. But likely they do. We know the authors are KIPP school promoters. KIPP, like Imagine, is a corporate school operator. Like any business, they are motivated by profits. They make promises and take over schools. They selectively weed out the underperforming kids and your left with the same problems and a lot less money.
The legislature must deal with the state’s education funding formula. They also have a challenge dealing with the St. Louis Public School District since they took it over. These simple solutions offered by those with corporate agendas will only help their shareholders.
Mike Heins Concord/SouthCounty
The authors share their conclusions but offered zero facts from which they were based. The article suggested the funding formula be changed because the city schools (according to them) were not using their money effectively. The State of Missouri took over the city school district several years ago. If there is something wrong with the district, it’s the state’s fault. That’s not a good reason to change policy for the other 523 school districts.
The Missouri K-12 budget is short some 500 million dollars.To suggest that the legislature give out tax credits worsens the problem.
Perhaps since these doctoral fellows are working from Arkansas, they aren’t familiar with public education in the state of Missouri and have no idea about what’s going with the St. Louis Public Schools. But likely they do. We know the authors are KIPP school promoters. KIPP, like Imagine, is a corporate school operator. Like any business, they are motivated by profits. They make promises and take over schools. They selectively weed out the underperforming kids and your left with the same problems and a lot less money.
The legislature must deal with the state’s education funding formula. They also have a challenge dealing with the St. Louis Public School District since they took it over. These simple solutions offered by those with corporate agendas will only help their shareholders.
Mike Heins Concord/SouthCounty
Monday, January 2, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)