Before I can support a bill to be passed at the federal level, I first check that the subject matter is even anything they should be doing.  In most cases, I conclude they are debating bills that they, Constitutionally, should not even be considering.  Armed with my Constitution, (something I bet only half the people in DC have in their desk drawer) I conclude for two reason the subject matter to be Constitutional.  First, Article 1 Section 8 includes, “Congress shall have the power to…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”  the section ends with the statement they may pass laws to enforce this.  Of course, at the time of the Constitution, they had no clue about CD’s, movies and such, but of course, over time writings and discoveries became to include books, movies, music, etc.

Secondly, Congress often abuses this part, but, in this case, this is certainly interstate commerace as the web certainly sells products over state lines.

With that out of the way, we can get to the meat of the issue and the bill.  Before we do that, we must agree on a couple of fundamentals.  Sadly, these are not universal, as some people not only engage in this behavior, they see nothing wrong with it.  We must agree downloading music without paying the price set by the rights holder is wrong. (It is illegal, regardless of contrary opinions)  The same is true for movies, software, etc.

This bill is intended to put a stop to these actions.  I Google’d “SOPA bad” and had a very hard time finding many facts of the bill, just opinion saying it will not work.  Okay, so the opinion is it will not work.  If it will not work, why the opposition?  One common complaint I have heard is the bill will give the government the power to shut down sites if they contain material the government finds offensive.  Let me discredit that myth right away.  From the bill, on page 2, Sec 2. “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impose a prior restraint on free speech or the press protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.”  In other words, people like me who bash Obama, the Congress, and the government in general are as safe as we are right now.

Another fear being said is that bill is so broad the government could shut down sites like Google or Facebook if they contain even a single link to an illegal download.  First, that is not true, but, let’s pretend it is.  Current drug laws could be used to confiscate an entire mall if someone is caught selling a dime bag of weed in the parking lot. (I do not know what a dime bag is, but I’ve seen it in a copyrighted movie once)  How many malls have you seen confiscated by the feds? I can assure you, many a drug deal goes down on mall property, I asked my drug dealer.

Currently the government has blocked all on-line gambling sites such as PartyPoker.  I was against that bill for I did not see where in the Constitution Congress could regulate gambling.  However, that legislation was similar to this.  How many abuses of that power have you seen?  The feds have not shut down St. Catherines Parish advertising their Sunday bingo sessions, though, technically, they are advertising gambling.

The government should have the power to stop illegal activity.  We deserve, and expect, our local government to put a chop shop out of business when it is proven they are doing illegal things.  They do the same thing with meth houses and their attempts bringing down the mob continue.  Why are people against the government stopping illegal downloading of copyrighted material?

As stated earlier, I have actually read the bill, you can also: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3261ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr3261ih.pdf

From the bill:

DEDICATED TO THEFT OF U.S. PROP2
ERTY.—An ‘‘Internet site is dedicated to theft of
3 U.S. property’’ if—
4 (A) it is an Internet site, or a portion
5 thereof, that is a U.S.-directed site and is used
6 by users within the United States; and
7 (B) either—
8 (i) the U.S.-directed site is primarily
9 designed or operated for the purpose of,
10 has only limited purpose or use other than,
11 or is marketed by its operator or another
12 acting in concert with that operator for use
13 in, offering goods or services in a manner
14 that engages in, enables, or facilitates—
15 (I) a violation of section 501 of
16 title 17, United States Code;
17 (II) a violation of section 1201 of
18 title 17, United States Code; or
19 (III) the sale, distribution, or
20 promotion of goods, services, or mate21
rials bearing a counterfeit mark, as
22 that term is defined in section 34(d)
23 of the Lanham Act or section 2320 of
24 title 18, United States Code; or

(ii) the operator of the U.S.-directed
2 site—
3 (I) is taking, or has taken, delib4
erate actions to avoid confirming a
5 high probability of the use of the
6 U.S.-directed site to carry out acts
7 that constitute a violation of section
8 501 or 1201 of title 17, United States
9 Code; or
10 (II) operates the U.S.-directed
11 site with the object of promoting, or
12 has promoted, its use to carry out
13 acts that constitute a violation of sec14
tion 501 or 1201 of title 17, United
15 States Code, as shown by clear ex16
pression or other affirmative steps
17 taken to foster infringement.

blah, blah, blah

The important parts above are the site is PRIMARILY designed or operated for the purpose of … the sale, distribution, or promotion of goods, services, or materials.  I left out the legalease mumbo jumbo referring to the US code sections related to copyright infringement and such.  The point of all that is the site must be primarily used to facilitate the distribution of illegal materials.  Putting a link on Facebook to my server for people to illegally download a song will not put Facebook in jeopardy of being blocked in the entire US.  They are targeting websites like the old Napster, Kaza, and other sites that serve little purpose than to facilitate the exchange of copyrighted materials.

The next major objection is that the government can just decide to shut down the site.  That is simply not true.  That is like saying the government can see the the drug dealer making a sale and they can put him jail for 20 years.  He is still entitled to due process, which includes a trial, and judgment.  This bill specifically states the government must notify the owner of the website of their illegal actions.  The bill gives that owner the ability to defend his site. (see page 29 of the cited pdf.)

Anyone that knows me knows I despise most of the bills passed by our government. However, this is almost a textbook definition of what our federal government should be doing besides defending our country.  There is no “free market” solution to this problem and only the government can stop this illegal behavior.

As of this writing my Congressman, Tom Graves, has stated he will be voting against this bill.  Congressman Graves is great congressman and I have agreed with nearly every vote he has made.  I understand Graves must vote with his conciense and the will of the people he represents.  I hope if you are in his district, the current or new one, you will take time to let him know you hope he will change his mind.

I fear this bill will not be passed, not because it is a bad bill, but because of all of the mis-information concerning the bill.

While the election certainly did not turn out the way we wanted, I am grateful for those who had faith in me to represent the district in Atlanta. The election for this race is now over as Senator Mullis will not face a Democrat in the general election in November. Though I will not be in Atlanta this year, I hope some of my ideas and philosophies are carried to the capital for the upcoming session.

I ask we continue our diligence to ensure we have a government working FOR us, not around us. It is easy to get excited during an election season, but the true strength in our Republic is when we stay focused all of the time. Do not hesitate to stay in contact with all of your elected officials. From the county commissioner to the Governor, when they do not hear from we, the people, the assumption of acceptance is all too often made. That is what has gotten our country in debt of over 109 Trillion dollars.

I look forward to maintaining the many friendships I have made over the past months. I intend to stay active in the political process; I hope you do as well.
Once again, thank you, and God Bless you, Georgia, and America.

Jeremy Jones

Below are the lyrics to a song by the group Stuck Mojo. I assume all rights are reserved, I hope I do not get sued, but it does say, “An Open Letter…”

An open letter to the Rev. Jesse Jackson

We, the members of the Mojo family,
feel that your actions and rhetoric as a self professed leader
of the black community are in fact detrimental to the very
people you claim to represent.
We also feel that as a result you do much to undermine the well-being
and harmony of the United States as a whole. You kind of work for
the advancement of the black community and you speak from a position
that the black population cannot advance itself socially, politically
or economically because an immovable object, the white establishment,
forever blocks its path
Yet you preach further support such as welfare and affirmative action
that put members of the population in a position of dependency and
reliance on the establishment
You bask in the glow of the media spot light, you passionately decree
that racism and prejudice are alive today as they were four hundred
years ago, but does this do anything to reverse it’s effect?
No one with the intelligence will deny that a great atrocity was committed
against the black race at the hands of white settlers of this country,
but a wound cannot heal if it is continuously re-opened
That is to say, that it will heal but it will take much longer and the
scar it leaves will be grotesque and raise high on the skin
A true leader leads by example and the example you have shown is not one
of strength of character, self-reliance, commitment to excellence or
personal accountability
It’s these traits that are necessary to advance oneself as an individual
It is only as strong, courageous, and moral individuals that any race can
live the quality of life that it chooses
We give our deepest respect to the true leaders:
Alan Keys, J.C. Watts, Tony Brown, and Dr. Walter Williams
Men who never deny their heritage but are proud to be first and
foremost a part of the human race

Today congress trying to come up with more ways to make student loans easier to get, cheaper, and in higher amounts. They cite, among other things, the huge increases in college tuition costs. The irony, by trying to fix this “problem”, they are only exacerbating the problem. However, like so many other government problems, no one will challenge this for fear of losing their power and influence. We need to remember we should only elect people who will do the best for our country, not self preservation.

To vote against this bill a congressman is going to be called “anti-education” or be characterized as someone who does not think everyone should have equal access to higher education. However it is the congressman that votes against the bill that is giving lower income people the chance to afford an higher education.

This is simple supply and demand. If anyone can go to college, regardless of cost, then more than would normally attend will attend. A college, or any institution, has a finite capacity at any given time. If more wish to attend, then the university must increase the capacity. To do this, buildings must be built, professors must be hired, janitorial staff needs to be found, land may need to acquired, and all of the support that goes into a University must be expanded accordingly. As I am sure you can imagine none of these items are free. When increasing such a capacity, the prudent plan is to expand beyond current demand and have room for future growth with minimal future expenditures. These never ending projects cost money and therefore tuition rates rise. The government is artificially inflating the demand for the these expansions. Not everyone can/should go to college. I imagine there are students at universities who would not be there, and should not be there, but are there only because of federal loans or state lottery grants.

Education is like any other product. The higher the demand, the higher the price. What if the government did this same trick to BMW’s? Imagine if congress decided BMW’s are the safest vehicles available and traffic deaths would be cut in half if everyone owned one. Oddly, not everyone can afford a BMW. To help all of our citizenry own one, congress is going to co-sign any an all loans for BMW’s, regardless of credit worthiness. If the law goes into effect on April 1st, it is reasonable to assume BMW lots are going to be quite busy. Here is the problem; not everyone needs a BMW. Some of the buyers have cars that work just fine. (just like some people have jobs that are fine, and do not require further education). Some buyers who were planning on buying a cheaper car decided to upgrade to the new BMW. (Some students may have wanted to work in an apprenticeship program or go to a technical college). Still others, who just bought a new BMW a couple of months ago can’t wait to get another one, and since there is no up-front money out of pocket, take the opportunity. (How many double majors in Political Science and Human Resources do we need).

What the government is doing with higher education is the same thing. We are creating demand where one would not otherwise exist. In the interest of full disclosure, I paid for my higher education with both student loans and savings, the majority of it with federal backed student loans.

I agree, as a society, we benefit with a higher educated populace. I also know there are those that need this help, and without it may never get the chance to go to college. But there should be some limit. Some criteria in giving these federal loans. When I applied, my credit rating was poor, my high school record was average at best, and I had nothing invested into my college. It took about 1 hour to fill out the paper work, two weeks of waiting and not only was my college paid in full for the semester, I had a credit at the book store, and a check for me! Maybe we should require higher standards on one of these aspects. My suggestion is a loan match program. One cannot get a loan for any more than you can put in. If it takes you two years to save $2500, then you would be eligible for a loan of up to $2500. The average yearly tuition for an in-state university is $4600. Once in, I would then recommend strict academic standards. As long as you meet these standards, your consecutive student loans would be for the entire amount. This simple combination would weed out those going to school for a good party. This benefit is obvious for everyone involved. This keeps the University full of students that should be there, not just those that want to be there. I understand this is still a form of government creating a false demand, but as I said, there are benefits to society that is worth this investment. However, it should not be a federal program. This program should be administered on the state level.

Fellow Citizens,

January 20th. One year ago President Barak Obama was inaugurated as our 44th President. Obviously, I was disappointed by having a Democrat in the Whitehouse, especially with a democratically controlled House and Senate. One year ago does not seem that long ago to me. However, in exactly half that amount of time, six months, Georgia will go to polls to set up the first major election to overturn this most left leaning congress in our history. July 20th is primary day in Georgia. In the 9th district of Georgia there are many candidates wanting to earn your vote to be the Republican nominee for the November general election, including myself.

I have been campaigning for over a year now. I had decided, long before our current congressman decided to not seek re-election, it was time for a new voice in DC. It was time we removed career politicians and allowed the citizen to once again represent the citizens of Georgia. Many things have occurred since I decided to run, including over a dozen other people joining the race. However, none of them were willing to take on our current congressman. Ask yourself, if they were not willing to stand up for what was right then, why would they stand up for what is right later?

It is my firm belief almost every other candidate got into this race because it was an open seat, the path of least resistance. The decisions we are facing in the next 2, 4, and 6 years will not be easy, and will certainly not be on the path of least resistance. I have proven I am willing to fight my own party, if I believe it is the right thing to do. You can rest assured; I will fight for the citizens of Georgia and the United States Constitution.

When you decide who will represent you in DC, ask yourself, who is willing to fight for the people, not the large campaign contributors? Who was willing to fight the system when the fight was going to be difficult? Jeremy Jones is the answer.

I appreciate your support, please visit my website and sign up to help us, the citizens, take back our country.

Sincerely,
Jeremy Jones
Candidate for US House

I am not sworn to the Republican party. I have my beliefs. It is the duty of the Republican Party to swear their allegiance to MY thinking, and the thinking of millions of people like me. We make the Republican Party, the Party does not make us. Just because members of the Republican party have failed the other members recently, it does not justify giving up on our values and beliefs. It IS the duty of the Republican Party Leadership to recognize the failures of some members and distance themselves from those actions, and support candidates that uphold Republican values and principles.

So, the question becomes, what are “Republican Values and Principles?” Let me tell you what they mean to me.

To me, a Republican is
• Abraham Lincoln, who believed all men, no matter the color of their skin or social status, were created equal.
• Andrew Johnson (though a Democrat, he was a Republican VP) who knew the Constitution was rules for the federal government and was willing to be impeached rather than go against The Constitution.
• Rutherford Hayes who knew political favoritism had no place in politics and enacted major civil service reform.
• James Garfield who ordered federal investigations into people of his own party when evidence of wrong doing was presented to him.
• Chester Arthur who vetoed a very popular spending bill, because it was nothing more than pork.
• Benjamin Harrison who knew we must support our troops, both during war and peace.
• Warren Harding who continued to fight for equal rights for all races.
• Calvin Coolidge who knew we do not make the poor rich by taking making the rich poor.
• Dwight Eisenhower who knew the strength of our military was the best defense for our country.
• Ronald Reagan who knew lower taxes will expand the tax base and increase the quality of life for everyone.
• George Bush who protected innocent lives of our allies.
• George W. Bush who, even to his own political determent, kept America safe.

None of the people I mentioned are without their faults, some had more faults than they did redeeming qualities. However, it is the culmination of certain aspects of each of these men, among many others, that show what being a true Republican is. So, I do not fault the Democrat party for failures on their watch, or praise the Republican party for successes on their watch. I am my own man, I am my own leader. It is time we remember for what we stand for. When like minded individuals come together to form a political party, whether it be Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, TEA, or any other label one wants to assign, the bottom line is, we must hold true to our values and our beliefs. I vow to always do so, damn the consequences from the party. Too much is at stake to worry about such things.

Jeremy Jones for Congress

Jeremy Jones is running for the Republican Nomination for the US House in the 9th district of Georgia.

Nine months is not a long time. Ask any couple deciding to start a family! The fact the election is in nine months gives me the opportunity to discuss the issue of life.

It is said Abortion is an issue about which no one will change their mind. I do not subscribe to this idea. I think it is imperative we continue to discuss the issue, and debate the issue. If we are not willing to fight for something as fundamental as life, then, why bother with anything else? If you are not willing to fight for life, then why are you willing to fight for health care? Why are you willing to fight for environmental causes? After all, a reason for both of those issues, according to many, is to provide a better LIFE for people.

We are a country looked upon by the world as the shining light of freedom. Go to any country in the world, ask them what country is the most free, America will be the overwhelming answer. We are the greatest country, no doubt about it. But, do the people who aspire to live in America know we allow, and protect with laws, the killing of the most innocent of our people? Do they know that since 1975, we have murdered over a million babies a year?

Do you cringe when you think of the holocaust of the Jewish people under Hitler? America has allowed more killing of the innocent than did Hitler. Were you upset, and ready to fight when the planes hit the towers and Pentagon, plus the heroes of flight 93, when about 3,000 innocent people were murdered? We allow that many innocent babies to be killed each day. When you watch the senseless beating of a high school student on TV, are you upset? A more horrific late term abortion is performed more than 14,000 times each year.

So, is this an issue worth fighting? Is this an issue that we should work to change the minds of those not willing to stand up for life? More so than any other issue. If we do not defend the life of the unborn, who will defend your life when you will most need it to be defended? If you are religious, I ask you pray for the unborn. If you have the means, I ask to help support a group trying to defend life. If you have the calling, consider adopting a baby so a woman can choose life. Without life, nothing else matters.

Jeremy Jones

As any issue does, this has evolved into something much bigger than anyone has ever anticipated. As far as the signs for the cheerleaders are concerned, the next step is completely in the hands of the cheerleaders. If they are satisfied with the board’s decision, and wish for their issue to subside, that is their decision. However, the issue for me is now much bigger than signs on a football field. The actions of our local school board are a symptom of a problem much bigger.

Our society has “evolved” into a society governed by DC. We have lost control of our ability for our local values to be reflected in our communities and schools. I no more want the values of Arizona Public schools to be placed upon my community than they do ours. However, because of the fear of the federal government, our local school board has bowed to the powers of DC. Our school board has decided the collective values, or lack thereof, of the entire country is more important than the people that elect them directly. This problem is not limited to our schools. It can be found in almost all aspects of our life. Everything, from national retail chains having “Holiday” sales to small town courthouses no longer having Christmas trees on display, is being done as a reflection of national blandness rather than local community values and tradition.
Our fear of DC, and our desire of the power of DC, is a serious problem. To do something in my community, whether it be how our schools are to be run to how our Sherriff treats illegal aliens, should be handled according the desires of the local community in accordance with local state law. Federal law, defined within our Constitution, is mostly limits of power, not writs of influence. However, our local roads department must depend on help from the federal government and follow federal government rules to fix a local road damaged by recent floods.

So, vote out the current school board if you feel that will solve the problem at hand. However, I submit it will not. I submit the problem is much bigger than the Catoosa County School Board. I believe if you want your local school board to reflect the values of your local community, you start higher, much higher. I believe you must work to change the mindset of the American people. You must work to remove the politicians that perpetuate the power hold of Washington DC on our lives. Our elected officials must begin to depower DC. Only then will our school board be free to truly reflect the values our community. Only then will we be able to live our lives, not in fear, but in peace and prosperity.

I cannot say I am surprised by the action, nor can I claim to have expected it. I must warn the reader, this will be a long writing, but I feel the issue is very complex, and many aspects must be addressed.

Reece claimed to be a supporter of the cheerleaders. She went as far as signing our informal petition of support for the cheerleaders. Let me be clear, no one, to my knowledge, believes Reece, or the school board, is “against” the cheerleaders. We simply believe she has made an error in judgment. More on that later.

Reece said as Christians, we must follow the law. I seem to recall Jesus breaking many laws of man. My point is not a religious one, so I will not dwell on this aspect of her speech, but, to me, it solidifies my point that the board is not examining all of the facts. The board has a set of “facts” they use to justify their decision and are not open to opposing, legitimate, counterpoints.

Speaking from the legal perspective from which the board made their decision, attorney Renzo Wiggins said several Christian law firms agree with the school board on their decision. He cited the very same law firms which have told us the board is in error, and the signs should be permitted to continue. This too, proves the board does not have the intent or desire to work with the cheerleaders to allow the signs to come back. For instance, maybe, there were some aspects of the case of which we are unaware. Maybe there was some tax money used to create the signs. If so, this problem is easily corrected. The cheerleaders, their parents, or even I, would be more than willing to repay the tax payers for these funds. I would guess, any deficiency of fact would be easily corrected, if that option were made available to the cheerleaders. These legal groups have provided us with specific requirements which must be followed for these signs to stand up against legal scrutiny. These requirements are specific, but easily attainable. Why will the board not allow the cheerleaders to cure the deficiencies and have their signs back?

At the school board meeting tonight, a prominent local attorney, Matthew Bryan, spoke on the legal aspect of this, and outlined case law and conditions which prove the courts’ acceptance of the actions of the cheerleaders. He was given 5 minutes to make his points. It took Mr. Wiggins almost 20 minutes to attempt to discredit Mr. Bryan. The objections Mr. Wiggins presented were easily answered in the material on hand with Mr. Bryan, but, the format of the meeting did not allow for such an exchange.

Therefore, we have two well known, well respected, attorneys making arguments for both sides of the issue. After which, the board unanimously sides with one? Simple logic dictates this is not acceptable.

It is the community’s wish, as evidenced by the support present at various local rallies, the school board should fight this issue. To that cry, the school board ignored the people. There are obviously two sides to this issue. Mr. Wiggins used the fact that for 20+ years the school board has never lost a court case as evidence of the good judgment of the board. First, this board has not been around for this long, members change, community values change. Second, if the board continually runs away from cases, it is easy to claim to have never lost. I have never lost a boxing match to Mike Tyson, that does not make me a prized fighter.

It was said tonight, if parents want their children to be taught Christian values, they should be enrolled in a Christian school or be home schooled. To that, I agree. However, that statement was out of order and irrelevant, for no one is advocating the teachers be involved in the religious teachings of our children. It is another example of the board simply not understanding the issue at hand. They know the outcome they want and are working to prove their desired outcome, rather than working to uphold the desires of the people they are elected to serve.

It has been said that speech can in fact be regulated, one cannot go into a crowded theatre and yell “FIRE” and claim the action to be protected by free speech. Mr. Wiggins tried to tie that aspect into this case by saying the cheerleaders could not hold up a sign before a football game reading, “The school is on fire.” To that, I disagree. It is not the words spoken by the person yelling “Fire” in the theatre that is wrong, it is the common and expected actions of creating an unsafe environment. If the cheerleaders were to hold up such a sign as described by Wiggins, an unsafe environment would not be expected or created, for a person realizes the way to communicate such a message is not through a pre-planned, labor intensive project such as a large sign or billboard. To me, this is another example of the board grasping for straws in the form of commonly understood language, to create the illusion of proper thought and reason, when in fact, neither exists.

As any issue does, this has evolved into something much bigger than anyone has ever anticipated. As far as the signs for the cheerleaders are concerned, the next step is completely in the hands of the cheerleaders. If they are satisfied with the board’s decision, and wish for their issue to subside, that is their decision. However, the issue for me is now much bigger than signs on a football field. The actions of our local school board are a symptom of a problem much bigger.

Our society has “evolved” into a society governed by DC. We have lost control of our ability for our local values to be reflected in our communities and schools. I no more want the values of Arizona Public schools to be placed upon my community than they do ours. However, because of the fear of the federal government, our local school board has bowed to the powers of DC. Our school board has decided the collective values, or lack thereof, of the entire country is more important than the people that elect them directly. This problem is not limited to our schools. It can be found in almost all aspects of our life. Everything, from national retail chains having “Holiday” sales to small town courthouses no longer having Christmas trees on display, is being done as a reflection of national blandness rather than local community values and tradition.
Our fear of DC, and our desire of the power of DC, is a serious problem. To do something in my community, whether it be how our schools are to be run to how our Sherriff treats illegal aliens, should be handled according the desires of the local community in accordance with local state law. Federal law, defined within our Constitution, is mostly limits of power, not writs of influence. However, our local roads department must depend on help from the federal government and follow federal government rules to fix a local road damaged by recent floods.

So, vote out the current school board if you feel that will solve the problem at hand. However, I submit it will not. I submit the problem is much bigger than the Catoosa County School Board. I believe if you want your local school board to reflect the values of your local community, you start higher, much higher. I believe you must work to change the mindset of the American people. You must work to remove the politicians that perpetuate the power hold of Washington DC on our lives. Our elected officials must begin to depower DC. Only then will our school board be free to truly reflect the values our community. Only then will we be able to live our lives, not in fear, but in peace and prosperity.

You must make a decision to allow the cheerleaders to continue using the signs. I understand the making of a decision must be a process entailing great thought and due diligence. I understand there may be a possibility the way the signs were created may be outside of established parameters currently accepted by our over-reaching court system. If this is this case, I ask you seek competent legal counsel as to what the proper parameters are, and correct any errors immediately.

Your goal should be to allow the cheerleaders to have their signs on the football field each Friday night for all to see. I know you believe you are the best person for the job of a school board member, or you would not have run for the position. As you know, the goal of the school board, among other things, is to represent the educational values of the community. As the informal petition you will soon receive proves, our community believes the actions of the cheerleaders espouse these community values.

As such, you should now realize, this case will go to court. Whether the cheerleaders file a suit against the school board for abridging their freedom of speech or religion, or if the ACLU sponsors a suit against the county for allowing the signs, legal action will soon begin. Therefore, as a representative of our community, I implore you to side with the cheerleaders, not the ACLU. You must vote to allow the cheerleaders to have their signs back, and you must do so soon.

The choice is simple, on which side of the forthcoming lawsuit do you want to partner; the side of the community and the cheerleaders, or the side of the federal government and the ACLU? At this point, it really is that simple.

As to the cost incurred by the county; if you decide to continue to deny the cheerleaders their right of speech and expression, the cheerleaders will be represented by nationally known, and funded, legal counsel, to which, you will have no equal. However, if you side with the cheerleaders and the limitless funds of the ACLU come to bear, the same well known, and funded, counsel will be here to defend the county. If the cost of a lawsuit has any bearing in your decision, the least expensive, by measures beyond our comprehension, is to side with the cheerleaders, and allow the return of the signs.

I thank you for your valuable time. I look forward to the board taking up this matter as soon as possible and getting on the side of the community and cheerleaders.

Sincerely,
Jeremy Jones
LFO Class of 1992