To The Editor:
If you check all of the organizations in South Queens funded the City, State and the Federal government, you’ll more than likely find relatives, neighbors, friends, and church members of Floyd Flake, Greg Meeks, Malcolm Smith, Barbara Clark and other elected officials who ask for, allot, and direct funds to these tax free groups.

Millions of these dollars of taxpayer monies, are actually being robbed by those who run or administer these money pots all with knowledge of elected officials who then claim as Schultz did in Hogans Heroes, I’m an elected official and “I know nothing.” What happens when these groups receive and steal these funds?

As a South Queens resident and constituent of some of these elected philanderers, please don’t let up on this expose‘ and investigation; someone must be indicted and convicted regardless of their relationships to Floyd Flake and, sad to say, my elected representatives.

Gerard L. Maggio,
South Ozone Park

To The Editor:

It has just come to my attention that Gov. David Paterson signed into law on Feb. 23 that March 29 is to be known as Knights of Columbus Day. This is a very proud moment for many us like myself who are members of the Knights of Columbus.

I am Past Grand Knight of St. Anastasia Knights of Columbus Council No. 5911 in Douglaston and have told many of our members of this proud moment. As a matter of fact there are 550 councils statewide and in Queens alone there are 36 councils. Some of the reason given in the resolution is for our volunteer efforts and in our works of charity. We have given much time, effort and funding in helping those who are mentally and physically challenged. Furthermore we have been directly involved with funding and training in the Special Olympics.

As an organization we have over 1.7 million members worldwide and have over 15,000 councils. The Knights of Columbus have given generously to those suffering from natural disasters and the efforts of war. This includes most recently Haiti and Chile.

I would at this time like to thank the Governor and the Legislature for this high honor for those of us that are committed to helping others.

Fred Bedell Jr.,
Glen Oaks

To The Editor:

This past winter brought us record snowstorms and floods, continuing collapse of the housing market, and partisan paralysis in Washington. I really look forward to March 20, the first day of spring, balmy weather, blooming flowers, and the Great American Meatout.

Several years ago, it was a local Meatout information table that gave me a new lease on life by turning me onto a healthful, nonviolent diet of vegetables, fruits, legumes, and grains. Now in its 26th year, Meatout has grown into the world’s largest annual grassroots diet education campaign, with a thousand educational events in all 50 states and 32 countries (www.meatout.org).

Meatout’s simple message of nonviolence and good health is now touted by major health advocacy organizations and leading health authorities. The supportive “World Peace Diet” has become the No. 1 bestseller on Amazon.com. Adoption of the Meatout diet has been greatly simplified by the rich selection of delicious meat and dairy alternatives in our local supermarkets. Additional transition support and free recipes are available at www.tryveg.org, and www.chooseveg.org.

Freddy Green,
Flushing

To The Editor:

Since the fraud of global warming has been exposed as an agenda to tax and control us, “greenhouse gases” should be eliminated from the Clean Air Act. Carbon dioxide is natural in our atmosphere and is essential for all of our food production. Destroying our jobs and economy in some idiot attempt to remove it is nonsensical.

The destruction caused by the EPA is immeasurable. It is about tyrannical government power and nowhere does the Constitution give authority to Washington to regulate the environment. It should be abolished, its regulations rescinded, and the vast agenda of lies to gain power over our citizens be exposed so that we can again be a free people.

Larry Burke,
Roslyn

To The Editor:

In your March 4 edition Alan Johnson expressed unhappiness with the Supreme Court’s decisions in Bush v. Gore in 2000 and January’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission regarding corporate spending in election campaigns. I would like to state the basis in law that led the court to its decisions in order to dispel any more myths that are being spread.

In the Bush case, the court debated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. In Florida, certain counties, with Democrats in control of the election board, were allowing ballots to be counted where the punched holes for a candidate were not fully pushed through resulting in the famous hanging chads. Counties with Republicans controlling the election board rejected such ballots. The Supreme Court ruled that identical ballots could not be treated differently so all such ballots were invalidated.

I do not think anyone would have a problem with that statement. Chief Justice Rehnquist in a separate concurring opinion stated that the issue is actually moot since Florida law clearly states that unless a hole is punched completely that ballot shall not be counted.

This law does not discriminate against any group of people unless you want to argue that Democrats are too intellectually challenged by this simple act. The court went on to state that only the state legislature can change the law. So, you can see that the only ones trying to steal the election were the Democrats who tried to change the law without due process similar to a third world country with a two-bit dictator.

In the Citizens United case, the court ruled that the current law was unconstitutional and that the corporation could show a documentary not flattering to Hillary Clinton during the presidential campaign. In previous cases, the court has ruled that the first amendment which reads that “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech” applies to corporations. The court included political speech. The court also cited previous rulings where they stated that political speech is “indispensable to decision making in a democracy, and it is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation”. The court also stated that First Amendment protections do not depend on the speaker’s “financial ability to engage in public discussion.”

Fortunately, the court has disallowed campaign laws where liberals have tried to restrict the ability of those groups who tend to oppose their agenda to speak out. This is a tremendous victory for freedom of speech.

Actually, the worst decision the Supreme Court has made in the past few years was Kelo v. New London where the court ruled 5-4 that states and localities could use the power of eminent domain to take over private property for the benefit of private developers. You can see the result of that in Willets Point and Brooklyn, where the city is trying to take over property for private uses. It is ironic that the four justices who voted in the minority against this power grab were the four most conservative judges who liberals love to hate.

I suggest that the next time a major Supreme Court decision is announced that your readers go online and find out how the law is interpreted rather than relying on cheap political rhetoric.

Lenny Rodin,
Forest Hills