Enemies List

Happy Mothers Day to all those Mothers out there who have “never worked a day” in their lives according to the Democrats.

My mother passed away in 2010. So, if your yours is still around, give her the love and respect she deserves while you still can.

Now back to the fun…

If you were ever remotely mean to any human being or animal in your ENTIRE LIFE and you gave big money to Romney, well Obama and his crew of gravediggers and muckrackers want to know about it so they can humiliate you.

They can’t run on their bosses record, or even his REAL ideas. So they will be looking to see if Mitt ever spit up someone’s face when he was 8 months old and now they also want YOU, Mr & Mrs Donor.

They want to humiliate and intimidate you. Facts are irrelevant. Juicy Bits that would not even make the National Enquirer , invented “facts”, and exaggerated falsehoods are the name of the game.

And like the case of the dead “bully” victim write it so if the family objects to your muckracking you can blow them off with impunity because you are the caring and  sensitive ones after all.

Make sure they know there is a price for defying Big Brother and giving money to the ENEMY OF THE STATE.

It’s the Chicago Way.

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said

Or in this case, if you bring big money to the Enemy of the State we’ll bring a Nuke and shove it up your ass!!

“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.” — Saul Alinsky

Vote for Me, The other Guy (and all his donors) is/are an Asshole!

John Stossel: Here’s what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.

Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca Inc. The 63-year-old has run that wellness-products company for 26 years out of tiny Idaho Falls, Idaho. Last August, Mr. VanderSloot gave $1 million to Restore Our Future, the Super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, “Keeping GOP Honest,” (Don’t you just love the Orwellian names Liberals come up with ) took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” the post accused the eight of being “wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.” Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being “litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

About a week after that post, a man named Michael Wolf contacted the Bonneville County Courthouse in Idaho Falls in search of court records regarding Mr. VanderSloot. Specifically, Mr. Wolf wanted all the documents dealing with Mr. VanderSloot’s divorces, as well as a case involving a dispute with a former Melaleuca employee.

Mr. Wolf sent a fax to the clerk’s office—which I have obtained—listing four cases he was after. He would later send a second fax, asking for three further court cases dealing with either Melaleuca or Mr. VanderSloot. Mr. Wolf listed only his name and a private cellphone number.

Some digging revealed that Mr. Wolf was, until a few months ago, a law clerk on the Democratic side of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He’s found new work. The ID written out at the top of his faxes identified them as coming from “Glenn Simpson.” That’s the name of a former Wall Street Journal reporter who in 2009 founded a D.C. company that performs private investigative work.

The website for that company, Fusion GPS, describes itself as providing “strategic intelligence,” with expertise in areas like “politics.” That’s a polite way of saying “opposition research.”

When I called Fusion’s main number and asked to speak to Michael Wolf, a man said Mr. Wolf wasn’t in the office that day but he’d be in this coming Monday. When I reached Mr. Wolf on his private cell, he confirmed he had until recently worked at the Senate.

When I asked what his interest was in Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records, he hesitated, then said he didn’t want to talk about that. When I asked what his relationship was with Fusion, he hesitated again and said he had “no comment.” “It’s a legal thing,” he added.

Fusion dodged my calls, so I couldn’t ask who was paying it to troll through Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records. Mr. Simpson finally sent an email stating: “Frank VanderSloot is a figure of interest in the debate over civil rights for gay Americans. As his own record on gay issues amply demonstrates, he is a legitimate subject of public records research into his lengthy history of legal disputes.”

A look through Federal Election Commission records did not show any payments to Fusion or Mr. Wolf from political players, such as the Democratic National Committee, the Obama campaign, or liberal Super PACs. Then again, when political groups want to hire researchers, it is not uncommon to hire a less controversial third party, which then hires the researchers.

This is not the first attack on Mr. VanderSloot. While the executive has been a force in Idaho politics and has helped Mr. Romney raise money, he’s not what most would consider a national political power player. Through 2011, nearly every mention of Mr. VanderSloot appeared in Idaho or Washington state newspapers, often in reference to his business.

That changed in January, with the first Super PAC disclosures. Liberal bloggers and media have since dug into his past, dredging up long-ago Idaho controversies that touched on gay issues. His detractors have spiraled these into accusations that Mr. VanderSloot is a “gay bashing thug.” He’s become a national political focus of attention, aided by the likes of partisan Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald and MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. Bloggers have harassed his children, visiting their social media accounts and asking for interviews and information.

Mr. VanderSloot has said his attackers have misconstrued facts and made false allegations. In February he wrote a long reply, publicly stating that he has “many gay friends whom I love and respect” who should “have the same freedoms and rights as any other individual.” The Obama campaign’s response, in April, was to single out Mr. VanderSloot and repeat the slurs.

Political donations don’t come with a right to privacy, and Mr. VanderSloot might have expected a spotlight. Then again, President Obama, in the wake of the Gabby Giffords shooting, gave a national address calling for “civility” in politics. Yet rather than condemn those demeaning his opponent’s donors, Mr. Obama—the nation’s most powerful man—instead publicly named individuals, egging on the attacks. What has followed is the slimy trolling into a citizen’s private life.

Mr. VanderSloot acknowledges that “when I first learned that President Obama’s campaign had singled me out on his ‘enemies list,’ I knew it was like taping a target on my back.” But the more he’s thought it through, “the public beatings and false accusations that followed are no deterrent. These tactics will not work in America.” He’s even “contemplating a second donation.”

Still. If details about Mr. VanderSloot’s life become public, and if this hurts his business or those who work for him, Mr. Obama will bear responsibility. This is what happens when the president makes a list.

AND FOR THE REST OF YOU…

A newly discovered Air Force intelligence brief states that should fleets of unmanned drones accidentally capture surveillance footage of Americans, the data can be stored and analyzed by the Pentagon for up to 90 days.

The instruction, dated April 23, admits that the Air Force cannot legally conduct “nonconsensual surveillance” on Americans, but also states that should the drones”incidentally” capture data while conducting other missions, military intelligence has the right to study it to determine whether the subjects are legitimate targets of domestic surveillance.

“Collected imagery may incidentally include US persons or private property without consent,” the instruction states.

The Air Force can take advantage of “a period not to exceed 90 days” to use the data to assess “whether that information may be collected under the provisions of Procedure 2, DoD 5240.1-R and permanently retained under the provisions of Procedure 3, DoD 5240.1-R.” it continues.

The Pentagon directives cited authorize limited domestic spying in certain scenarios such as natural disasters, environmental cases, and monitoring activity around military bases.

Should the drones capture data on Americans, the Air Force says that it should determine whether they are, among other things, “persons or organizations reasonably believed to be engaged or about to engage, in international terrorist or international narcotics activities.”

The instruction also states that the Pentagon can disseminate the data to other intelligence and government agencies, should it see fit.

“Even though information may not be collectible, it may be retained for the length of time necessary to transfer it to another DoD entity or government agency to whose function it pertains.” the document reads.

Congress recently passed legislation paving the way for what the FAA predicts will be somewhere in the region of 30,000 drones in operation in US skies by 2020. (Infowars)

So fly the Friendly skies of Big Brother!!

Oh, and one more thing…

The top-secret US National Security Agency is not required to reveal any deal it may have with Google to help protect against cyber attacks, an appeals court ruled Friday.

The US Court of Appeals in Washington upheld a lower court decision that said the NSA need not confirm or deny any relationship with Google, because its governing statutes allow it keep such information secret.

So remember Big Brother is Watching you!

Prove The Mayans Wrong

For the Record on upcoming Republican “obstructionist” ads and ads that say Republicans WANT to crush College Students over the loan rates because you surely won’t here this from the Ministry of Truth:

Republicans defied a veto threat and the House voted Friday to prevent federal loan costs from doubling for millions of college students. The vote gave the GOP a momentary election-year triumph on a bill that has become enmeshed in partisan battles over the economy, women’s issues and President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

The measure’s 215-195 passage was largely symbolic because the package is going nowhere in the Democratic-dominated Senate. Both parties agree students’ interest costs should not rise, but they are clashing along a familiar fault line over how to cover the $6 billion tab: Republicans want spending cuts and Democrats want higher revenues.(revenues=Taxes).

Democrats wrote a version of the bill, paid for by ending subsidies for oil and gas companies.

Big Oil is, after all, Evil Incarnate.

But this whole created mess is the centerpiece of the President’s strategy to gin up young, naive, stupid people to vote for him. It can’t be over this fast. He can’t have the Republicans being given credit for it. He has so much more fear and loathing to spread!

FEAR IS HOPE!

So they obstruct them, then blame them for not passing a bill that does it there way. After all, it’s their way or the highway!

And the Republicans keep “obstructing” them on that.

Damn them.

Democrats trained their fire on the Republican plan to pay for the bill by abolishing a preventive health fund created by Obama’s 2010 revamping of the health care system. Democrats said that program especially helped women by allocating money for cancer screening and other initiatives and that eliminating it was only the latest GOP blow against women _ a charge Republicans hotly contested.

“Give me a break,” roared House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to rousing cheers from Republican lawmakers. “This is the latest plank in the so-called war on women, entirely created by my colleagues across the aisle for political gain.”

Democrats voted solidly earlier this year to take money from the preventive health fund to help keep doctors’ Medicare reimbursements from dropping. Obama’s own budget in February proposed cutting $4 billion from the same fund to pay for some of his priorities.

Since the early days of this year’s GOP presidential contest, Democrats have been accusing Republicans of targeting women by advocating curbs on contraceptives and other policies. Polls show women leaning heavily toward Obama and Democrats would like to stoke that margin.

In its veto message, the White House argued that “women in particular” would be helped by the prevention fund and added, “This is a politically motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America’s college students deserves.” (Townhall)

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste!

2008: The Obama campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, accused the Clinton team of playing “the politics of fear” just like George W. Bush.

Burton, now the head of the Democratic super PAC, Priorities USA (one of the main backers of ObamaCare), said at the time: “When Senator Clinton voted with President Bush to authorize the war in Iraq, she made a tragically bad decision that diverted our military from the terrorists who attacked us, and allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and regenerate his terrorist network. It’s ironic that she would borrow the President’s tactics in her own campaign and invoke bin Laden to score political points. We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, and we don’t need another.

Now: We have Throwing Grandma off a cliff, race-baiting, racial division, and so much more.

FEAR IS HOPE

In a new web video titled “One Chance,” the Obama team features former President Bill Clinton praising Obama for deciding to launch the strike last year. “What path would Mitt Romney have taken?” the clip asks.

Mind you, like the “silver spoon” comments it’s all implied. He wants to led your horse to his kool-aid so you’ll drink it.

While I am not the biggest fan of Romney, I am totally against Obama and these kind of tactics are just the opening salvo in an all-out Nuclear Armageddon that the Democrats and their Liberal Media Minions will launch.

After all, all that they have worked for for 90 years is at stake. ObamaCare is potentially still at stake depending on how it goes with the Supreme Court. And if goes against them then they have to double down to win so they can pass it again!

Don’t doubt that. It’s the Holy Grail of Liberalism. They won’t give up quite so easily. All they have to do is win again, replace at least 1 conservative Justice on the Supreme Court and they are off to the Totalitarian races!

So expect nothing less than total and absolute Nuclear Annihilation.

So you pander to base fears. You pander to Hispanics big time (gotta have that Illegal alien Vote – sorry the Liberal want to ban that phrase to because it’s “inhumane” – perfect crimethink). You get the stupid and the naive to vote for you. You get as many independents as possible to stay home and not vote for anyone as you can so you can get your base+the stupid+ the naive to overwhelm the rational.

Vote for me, The Other Guy’s an Asshole!!!

And it starts with the ludicrous notion that a President presented with info to kill or capture the #1 enemy of the country would pass on it.

I think the only reason Obama went for it is because if it leaked out that he didn’t that it would be bad politiks. After all President Clinton passed on Bin Laden several times in the 1990s (but that didn’t hurt him because the liberal media covered it up and they could have for Obama but the internet is much more pervasive now than than it was and it would have leaked out somehow).

“Thanks to President Obama, bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive. You have to ask yourself, if Gov. Romney had been president, could he have used the same slogan — in reverse?” Biden said

Yeah, and The UAW thanks you Mr. Vice President. After all, that was what it was all about in the first place– Unions. The Stimulus was also about Unions.

If you aren’t in a Union (which the vast majority of people aren’t) then you don’t have compulsory “donations” to the Democrat Party as part of your salary and that has to change.

Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said Friday. “It’s now sad to see the Obama campaign seek to use an event that unified our country to once again divide us, in order to try to distract voters’ attention from the failures of his administration.”

But don’t worry, the fear campaign has only begun to ratchet up and the swagger of “I got him and you didn’t” is only just beginning.

Before it’s over the Mayans will be right.

WSJ: Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.

Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.

Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” appalled the country for the simple reason that presidents hold a unique trust. Unlike senators or congressmen, presidents alone represent all Americans. Their powers—to jail, to fine, to bankrupt—are also so vast as to require restraint. Any president who targets a private citizen for his politics is de facto engaged in government intimidation and threats. This is why presidents since Nixon have carefully avoided the practice.

Save Mr. Obama, who acknowledges no rules. This past week, one of his campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”

These are people like Paul Schorr and Sam and Jeffrey Fox, investors who the site outed for the crime of having “outsourced” jobs. T. Martin Fiorentino is scored for his work for a firm that forecloses on homes. Louis Bacon (a hedge-fund manager), Kent Burton (a “lobbyist”) and Thomas O’Malley (an energy CEO) stand accused of profiting from oil. Frank VanderSloot, the CEO of a home-products firm, is slimed as a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.

“We don’t tolerate presidents or people of high power to do these things,” says Theodore Olson, the former U.S. solicitor general. “When you have the power of the presidency—the power of the IRS, the INS, the Justice Department, the DEA, the SEC—what you have effectively done is put these guys’ names up on ‘Wanted’ posters in government offices.” Mr. Olson knows these tactics, having demanded that the 44th president cease publicly targeting Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, which he represents. He’s been ignored.

The real crime of the men, as the website tacitly acknowledges, is that they have given money to Mr. Romney. This fundraiser of a president has shown an acute appreciation for the power of money to win elections, and a cutthroat approach to intimidating those who might give to his opponents.

He’s targeted insurers, oil firms and Wall Street—letting it be known that those who oppose his policies might face political or legislative retribution. He lectured the Supreme Court for giving companies more free speech and (falsely) accused the Chamber of Commerce of using foreign money to bankroll U.S. elections. The White House even ginned up an executive order (yet to be released) to require companies to list political donations as a condition of bidding for government contracts. Companies could bid but lose out for donating to Republicans. Or they could quit donating to the GOP—Mr. Obama’s real aim.

The White House has couched its attacks in the language of “disclosure” and the argument that corporations should not have the same speech rights as individuals. But now, says Rory Cooper of the Heritage Foundation, “he’s doing the same at the individual level, for anyone who opposes his policies.” Any giver, at any level, risks reprisal from the president of the United States.

It’s getting worse because the money game is not going as Team Obama wants. Super PACs are helping the GOP to level the playing field against Democratic super-spenders. Prominent financial players are backing Mr. Romney. The White House’s new strategy is thus to delegitimize Mr. Romney (by attacking his donors) as it seeks to frighten others out of giving.

The Obama campaign has justified any action on the grounds that it has a right to “hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable,” but this is a dodge. Politics is rough, but a president has obligations that transcend those of a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend a Constitution that gives every American the right to partake in democracy, free of fear of government intimidation or disfavored treatment. If Mr. Obama isn’t going to act like a president, he bolsters the argument that he doesn’t deserve to be one.

If I can’t get you to vote for me, I can at least try to get you to not vote at all.

But if you vote for the wrong team, expect to feel my wrath if I’m re-elected for I am vengeful God!

We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, that’s why we need to get rid of him.

And the only way is to wade through an all out Nuclear Armageddon of Liberal attacks and vote him out.

Be a Proud Enemy of This State.

And prove the Mayans wrong.

 

No They Cant! The Sequel

John Stossel: President Obama said in his State of the Union Address that he is putting colleges on notice to lower costs. A few days later, he spoke to students at the University of Michigan, with a promise of more federal aid. Politicians claim they can make college affordable. No They Can’t!

In the last 30 years, inflation is up 160%, but tuition costs are up 750%.

It’s because colleges have no incentive to cut prices when students can get money from government. Federal aid, adjusted for inflation, increased from 32 billion in 1987, to 169 billion in 2010.

Government tells us, “Here’s the gap between what you can afford and what the college is charging, we will now make up that gap. And then the college just inches up the tuition a little bit higher,” says Naomi Riley author of The Faculty Lounges: and Other Reasons Why You Won’t Get the College Education You Paid For.

Colleges don’t use all or even most of that money in the classroom. We were stunned at the gyms and dining halls that serve lobster and sushi. Check out the University of Missouri, which is proud of its spa, rock climbing wall and “Tiger Grotto” – an elaborate pool complex.

Government creates perverse incentives. Colleges compete on prestige and luxury amenities, not their price tag. Administrators don’t worry about high tuition costs because their customers have government subsidies.

And so what if they graduate with a mountain of debt and their job prospect are sh*t. They government will take of them too. And if ObamaCare survives they can be on their parents Health Insurance until they are 26.

And they’ve been raised by the liberal socialists to believe they are entitled to be look after just because.

So who cares, the Government will take care of you. You may remember that The Obama Administration took over the  student loans because they were going bankrupt.

2010: President Obama will sign a bill today that ends a 45-year-old program under which banks and other private-sector lenders such as Sallie Mae receive a federal subsidy for making government-guaranteed college loans.

Instead, the U.S. Department of Education – which already makes roughly a third of these loans through its direct-lending program – will make 100 percent of them starting July 1.

Students who previously had to choose a private-sector lender for their guaranteed loans will now have only one choice: the government. (SFGATE)

But the newly passed legislation does nothing to address the rapidly rising cost of education–and adds to our national debt. (Forbes)

A “single payer” system, you might say.

And costs are up 5 times inflation because colleges only incentive is to spend more to make college look like an French Riviera resort.

Costs? Who gives a crap about costs. The Government is paying for it.

Then they graduate and reality hits them in the face.

Students who graduated from college in 2010 with student loans owed an average of $25,250, up 5 percent from the previous year, according to a report scheduled for release Thursday.

The average debt — once again the highest on record — came as the class of 2010 faced an unemployment rate for new college graduates of 9.1 percent, the highest in recent years, according to the report by the Project on Student Debt, which pointed out that unemployment rates for those without college degrees were still higher.

The median starting salary for students graduating from four-year colleges in 2009 and 2010 was $27,000, down from $30,000 for those who entered the work force in 2006 to 2008, according to a study released on Wednesday by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University. That is a decline of 10 percent, even before taking inflation into account.

35 percent of unemployed college graduates have been without a job for a year or longer. And, the long-term unemployment rate for those 25 and older is almost the same across the board—regardless of educational level.

Sidenote: remember, most report unemployment statistics don’t count people who have given up completely looking for a job.

CNN Last week: But the competition is steep, with employers reporting that they have received nearly 33 applications for every job posting, up from 21 applications per posting last year.

Enter Occupiers. “Entitled” little skulls of  unemployed (and many cases unemployable narcissistic and anarchist) socialist mush who have had reality hit them in the face and they just want to whine about it.

New York Times: The high cost of college and the growing debt burden of student loans have become increasingly potent political issues in recent years, high on the agenda of Occupy Wall Street and related protests across the country.

And then there’s the next line of graduate-in-waiting: Teenagers

The high teen unemployment rate, which came in at 23.8% for February (2012). Their unemployment rate remains above 20% for the 40th month in a row, the first time this has happened since the government started keeping records in 1948.

And since Obama was elected the first by getting naive 20-somethings to believe in his Messianic self he has to throw bones to his peeps, especially as their support has cooled over the years because a lot of them are not college students anymore but unemployed and underemployed debtors.

So he’ll need a new crop of naive morons to vote for him.

“Student debt goes up and it doesn’t ever go down,” said Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of Finaid.org and Fastweb.com, two Web sites that offer advice on paying for college. “We’re clearly heading in the direction of decreased college affordability. Among lower-income students, the canaries in the cage that squawk first, we’re already seeing a decline in enrollment in four-year colleges and an increase in lower-cost two-year institutions,” he said.

Mr. Kantrowitz estimated that for the class of 2011, average debt was $27,200 — or, if parent loans were included, $34,000.

This is the fifth consecutive year in which the public universities that serve most students raised their tuition at a faster rate than the far more expensive private universities. (NYT)

So that’s why Obama has proposed….<<Drum Roll>> SPENDING EVEN MORE on student loan programs!!!

Now, I know that’s a shocker!

So when in Debt SPEND EVEN MORE!

When the system is bleeding red ink and it’s failing SPEND EVEN MORE!

When your house is burning down throw more Napalm on the Fire that will help!!

Liberal Economics at it’s finest.

But don’t worry, It’s all the Republicans! and “the rich”‘s Fault!

No They Can’t! And More

http://www.scribd.com/doc/85637905/No-They-Can-t-by-John-Stossel

Politicians say “Yes, we can!” and claim they solve our problems.

When the mortgage market crashed, the President said their new law, Dodd-Frank, would create a “new financial system” so such things would never happen again.

After 9/11, Senator Tom Daschle declared “you can’t professionalize if you don’t federalize!” The Senate voted 100-0 to create the TSA to run airport security.

Politicians’ promises are endless. They say they’ll: create jobs, “make college affordable for all,” protect the disabled, give disadvantaged kids a head start, and invest in “cutting edge innovation.”

But they can’t achieve what they promise.

•Billionaire Mark Cuban and other job-creators explain why government’s rules now prevent the job creation that was once America’s hallmark.

•Dodd-Frank, instead of stopping fraud, added layers to already incomprehensible banking laws. Stossel shows how simple rules in the Cayman Islands not only stop fraud, but they also create prosperity.

•While the TSA creates long lines, misses actual terrorists, and angers passengers, screeners working for a private company at one big airport work faster, more cheerfully, and find more contraband. We show how the private company does it.

Namely, San Francisco’s Airport (the mecca of Liberalism) has Private Security and it works vastly better than the TSA.

I know the most scrutiny I got from my last Trip to Wales was actually from my stop over in Amsterdam.

•Did you know that the U of Missouri is proud to have a “leisure resort” on campus? Naomi Riley, author of The Faculty Lounges: And Other Reasons Why You Won’t Get the College Education You Pay For, explains how government aid led to massive tuition hikes.

•Since the Americans with Disabilities Act took effect, fewer disabled people have been able to work.

•Lisa Snell from the Reason Foundation explains how the government’s own research found that Head Start did not help poor kids. Government’s response? Spend even more.

Government grows, despite its repeated failure.

Politicians are wrong when they say “Yes, we can”, but the fact that government can’t doesn’t mean that we can’t. Free people accomplish wonderful things. While government wastes billions on boondoggles like Solyndra, X-prize founder Peter Diamandis explains how private investors have created cars that get 100mpg, space ships, and much faster ways to clean up oil spills, all without charging taxpayers a penny.

Without big government, life can be great.

AN EXAMPLE

Everyone loves the Head Start program. Politicians across the ideological spectrum-from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to President George W. Bush-have praised the program and called it a success.

They should read the government’s own research.

The ‘Head Start Impact Study‘ was a report conducted by the federal government. It followed and compared underprivileged kids who went to Head Start, and underprivileged kids who didn’t. The study found no difference between the two groups.

Zero.

The kids who went to Head Start did better while they were in Head Start, but one year later the benefits were all gone. Not by 5th grade. Not by 3rd grade. By 1st grade, the benefits were “largely absent”.

Since President Obama has pledged over and over to “eliminate programs that don’t work”, it seems like Head Start would be a natural to get cut.

Nope.

That’s not how big government works. Even after the report came out, the Obama administration has continued to massively increase spending on Head Start by more than a billion dollars.

In my Fox News special “No They Can’t”, I talk to Congressman Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, who in spite of the evidence insists Head Start works. When I confront him on the data, he falls back on a familiar argument: we need to spend more.

Give me a break. We’ve spent 180 billion dollars already, with nothing to show for it.

The government just can’t do it.

EXAMPLE 2

That’s how much you’ll need to buy the Energy Department’s prize-winning light bulb. (You know because Thomas Edison’s Incandescent Light Bulb was deemed politically correct by the Whacko Environmentalist Left).

Last year the government announced a $10 million prize “designed to spur lighting manufacturers to develop high-quality, high-efficiency solid-state lighting products to replace the common light bulb.” The winner? A light bulb that costs $50 each.

Only in the government would they think it was “progress” worth celebrating to replace something you can buy on Amazon.com for a little more than $1 with something that costs $50.

“I don’t want to say it’s exorbitant, but if a customer is only looking at the price, they could come to that conclusion,”Home Depot worker Brad Paulsen told the Washington Post. (Fox Business)

EXAMPLE 3 FOOD POLICE:

Public health: The toxic truth about sugar

This was headline in a Nature Magazine article that basically said sugar was bad a tobacco and alcohol and need to be sold behind the counter . Anti-obesity Meme Roth says yes, to protect the interests of kids.

Ah, it’s “for the children” so you can’t possibly object now can you?

Coke is the New Cocaine. Wait, in the 19th Century it was made with cocaine…)

And It’s Government to the Rescue!!!

WANT MORE

Kids who open lemonade stands are now shutdown by police. I tried to open a lemonade stand legally in NYC. That was quite an adventure. It takes 65 days to get permission from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

With government adding 80,000 pages of rules and regulations every year, it’s no surprise that regular people break laws without even trying.

A family in Idaho can’t build a home on their land because the EPA says it’s a wetland-but it only resembles a wetland because a government drain malfunctioned and flooded it.

Ever hear of a real wetland in Idaho??

Want to start a taxi business? Too bad – it’s illegal. Illegal, that is, unless you buy a government-issued “taxi medallion” that can cost as much as a million dollars. One city has a free market for cabs – Washington, DC – but lobbyists there are pushing to regulate.

Sen. Dick Durbin reacts to the tornadoes in Dallas, Texas earlier this week. Durbin calls for more laws regulating carbon output while he sends a dire warning that we must convert to hybrid cars or lose our life. Durbin says we must spend money now to fix the problem.

“It’s your money or your life,” he said a press conference. “We are either going to dedicate ourselves to a cleaner, more livable planet and accept the initial investment necessary or we’re going to pay a heavier price in terms of loss of human life, damage and costs associated with it.” (RCP)

NEVER LET A TRAGEDY GO BY WITHOUT PUSHING THE GLOBAL WARMING AGENDA!

Now that’s “compassion” at it’s finest.

But some good news: A San Francisco judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit that sought to stop McDonald’s Corp. from using toys to market its meals to children in the Golden State. The suit had been filed in late 2010 by Monet Parham, a California mother of two, and The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.

After all, McDonald’s was and is just a Capitalist Predator out to ensnare your children in crack-addicted life of junk food and obesity!!!

<<Maniacal Laugh>>

And Finally, the ever reliable whacko, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:

“You know, what Mitt Romney and the Republicans have been doing to themselves every single day is showing women in this country day after day that they are callously indifferent to women’s health, to the priorities of women,” DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz told MSNBC on Thursday night. Really as evidenced by their obsession with cultural issues, their obsession with making sure that women can’t have affordable access to birth control, the dismissive way that the Chairman of the Republican National Committee today chalked up women being concerned about making sure that we could have affordable access to preventive screenings like mammograms as fictional as a war on caterpillars. You know, if they’re still wondering why there’s an 18-point gender gap and President Obama is ahead of Mitt Romney by that many points, then they really — they really must believe these things that they’re saying.

“Shocking,” Wasserman Schultz added.

Wasserman Schultz also says Mitt Romney is trying to “out-right-wing” his fellow Republicans. Here’s what she had to say at

“I think Mitt Romney has been so focused on trying to out-right-wing and embrace extremism that he is really beholden and has tied himself to his support for personhood amendments, his belief that Roe versus Wade was one of the worst decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, his support for the Blunt-Rubio amendment which says that bosses get to decide for their female employees what kind of access to health care they can have. And so every day there’s another example of how out of touch the Republicans are,” Wasserman Schultz said later in the interview conducted by MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell.  (Who also ripped Romney for being…<dramatic shock sting> A MORMON! Lord have Mercy we can’t elect a nutcase from a fringe religion now would you!!!) Except an Alinsky cultist called Barack Hussein Obama that is.

“Mitt Romney wants to be President of the United States, yet he fails to recognize what’s important to women. We just want to make sure that the guy in the White House is focused on creating jobs, getting the economy turned around, and making sure that as members of the middle class and working families that we have an opportunity to be successful to not just focusing on people who already are,” she said.

So when is Obama going to do that? He’s been there since 2009…

“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.” –President Ronald Reagan.

And God know these Liberals Never Let A Crisis Go to Waste!

 

Government Help

Looking to carry out an assassination or set off a bomb on US soil? Look no farther than Mexico, where murderous drug traffickers abound, ready and willing to take money for brazen acts of violence.

The United States has accused Iran of plotting to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States and bomb the Saudi embassy in Washington, according to the embattled U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Holder and the Justice Department claim the plot was hatched in Mexico last May. Two Iranians, Manssor Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri, were accused of the attack in court documents, according to the New York Times.

The Justice Department claims Iran and Mexican drug cartels worked together on the plot.

President Barack Obama was briefed in June about the alleged plot and through a spokesman expressed gratitude for it being disrupted. (Reuters and others)

Several Questions arise: Does this jive with “the border is more secure that it has ever been” as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napalitano?

Attorney General Eric Holder:  Who’s ATF gave the Cartels 2000 guns. Is now outraged by a plot coming from Mexican Cartels. Gee, maybe instead of a bomb they should have used some of the guns instead.

But we don’t need to secure the border. Nope, that would be racist.

Sheriff Babeu on KFYI: http://www.kfyi.com/pages/jimsharpe.html?article=9241621

**********

IT’S YOUR FAULT!

The Senate DEMOCRATS killed Obama’s Jobs Bill. But of course it’s not the Democrats fault. It’s the Republicans. The Tea Party…The fact that the Democrats are a Majority in the Senate doesn’t matter.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer suggested Tuesday that voters are to blame for the partisan bickering and standoffs that have defined Congress this year.

The Maryland Democrat said voters are “absolutely right” to think that “Congress isn’t working very well.” But that dysfunction, he said, is largely of their own making.

“The American people have every right to be angry [and] disappointed by the performance of the Congress,” Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol. “Of course, the American people have also elected people with hard stances, so that to some degree the American people are realizing the results of their votes.  (Read: Republicans and Tea Party, not the hardline Socialist Democrats)

“If elections have consequences — which I think they do — some of those consequences are getting what you vote for,” Hoyer added. “In this case, many people voted for people who thought compromise was not something that they ought to participate in.” (Read: Republicans and Tea Party NOT the Socialist Democrats who have been obstructing anything THEY didn’t like! or for that matter, the Nearly 900 Days since the Senate Democrats passed a Federal Budget)

It’s not Me!!  Vote for Me the other guys an obstructionist!

And on that note:

Obama Tells Advisers To Find How To Approve Stimulus Projects “Without Additional Congressional Authorization”

“Scour this report, identify all those areas in which we can act administratively without additional congressional authorization and just get it done,” President Obama said today to a “Jobs Council” meeting.

So if you won’t “pass my bill” or else I will just do it myself by executive, procedural, and administrative fiat!

But I’m not a dictator-wanna be.

“Now, I want to be very clear here. Nobody wants to punish success in America. The Republicans talk about class warfare. That’s — our goal is to make success available for everybody. What’s great about this country is you’ve got a good idea, you’ve got a service that nobody else has thought of, you know what, go out there, start a business. Make money. I want everybody out there to be rich. That’s great. Anybody in America should be able to make it if they try.”

“But none of us make it on our own. Somebody — an outstanding entrepreneur like a Steve Jobs — somewhere along the line he had a teacher who helped inspire him (read: Government union employee not “educator”). All those great Internet businesses wouldn’t have succeeded unless somebody had invested in the government research that helped to create the Internet. We don’t succeed on our own. We succeed because this country has, in previous generations, made investments that allow all of us to succeed.“  (yeah, most of them were evil capitalists!)

And that is only attainable because of Government. You can’t possibly do it on your own!!

Sums up Obama and Liberals very well doesn’t it.

Too bad 3 guys from a garage in Seattle proved him wrong: Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Steve Wozniak. (Apple Computers and Microsoft).

Or even a filmmaker from Modesto, CA: George Lucas.

But Liberals will never believe you can do it on your own and will drum it into you that it’s not possible. Just look at the mindless zombies of Occupy Wall Street for a clue…

You are completely lost without their sage guidance, control and their “help”.

You aren’t capable of doing it yourself. You can’t possible pick yourself up by your own boot straps and just do it yourself!

Mama Government has to “help” you.

Feeling condescended to or insulted yet?

******************

OCCUPY WALL STREET

“The guys in Washington are supposed to be helping me, but they don’t get it with their mansions and their millions,” says an unemployed nurse at the protest on Wednesday, who declined to give her name. “They don’t understand my situation and they don’t want to hear me. Well, now they’ll have to hear all of us.”

Yeah, helping yourself is definitely out. The Government must do it for me. Kiss me narcissistic ass.

Now they want to accost the “evil” millionaires at their homes. So when does it occur to the zer-sum gain liberal hippies that they should just take what they “deserve” from the rich?

The 53% who actually PAY taxes. Damn those evil “rich” people.

Damn you Government for not kissing my but more! And she was supposed to beg the government for assistance because she couldn’t possibly have done it on her own!

John Stossel: “We’re the country that built the intercontinental railroad,” Obama says. “So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads?” (Let’s leave the silly “57 States” style faux pas of intercontinental alone)

Ironic that he mentions the Chinese. Progressives used to complain that to build the railroad, bosses abused Chinese workers — called them “coolies” and treated them badly. Now this is big success?

Coolie: is a historical term for manual laborers or slaves from Asia, particularly China and India, during the 19th century and early 20th century.

I guess Obama doesn’t know that the transcontinental railroad was a Solyndra-like Big Government scandal. The railroad didn’t make economic sense at the time, so the government subsidized construction and gave the companies huge quantities of the best land on the continent. As we should expect, without market discipline — profit and loss — contractors ripped off the taxpayers. After all, if you get paid by the amount of track you lay, you’ll lay more track than necessary.

Credit Mobilier, the first rail construction company, made enormous profits by overcharging for its work. To keep the subsidies flowing, it made big contributions to congressmen.

Where have we heard that recently?

The transcontinental railroad lost tons of money. The government never covered its costs, and most rail lines that used the tracks went bankrupt or continued to be subsidized by taxpayers. The Union Pacific and Northern Pacific — all those rail lines we learned about in history class — milked the taxpayer and then went broke.

One line worked. The Great Northern never went bankrupt. It was the railroad that got no subsidies.

We need infrastructure, but the beauty of leaving most of these things to the private sector — without subsidies, bailouts and other privileges — is that they would have to be justified by the profit-and-loss test. In a truly free market, when private companies make bad choices, investors lose their own money. This tends to make them careful.

By contrast, when government loses money, it just spends more and raises your taxes, or borrows more, or inflates. Building giant government projects is no way to create jobs. When government spends on infrastructure, it takes money away from projects that consumers might think are more important.

When government isn’t killing jobs by sucking money out of the private sector, it kills jobs by smothering the private sector with regulation. I talked to Peter Schiff about all this. Schiff is a good authority because he was one of the few people to warn of the housing bust. Now he’s had a run-in with the federal government over job creation.

Schiff, who operates a brokerage firm with 150 employees, recently complained to Congress that “regulations are running up the cost of doing business, and a lot of companies never even get started because they can’t overcome that regulatory hurdle.”

Schiff claims he would have hired a thousand more people but for regulations.

“I had a huge plan to expand. I wanted to open up a lot of offices. I had some capital to do it. I had investors lined up. My business was doing really well. But unfortunately, because of the regulations in the security industry, I was not able to hire.”

So if he wants to hire an analyst, he can’t just hire him?

“I had to get permission to publish their research, which I didn’t get for years. And so I can’t pay analysts if I can’t sell their research.

People don’t appreciate the number of regulations entrepreneurs face. Schiff pays 10 people just to try to figure out if his company is obeying the rules.

“You can’t just act very quickly, because everything has to be done through this maze of compliance. Even my brokers … find out that maybe 20 percent, 30 percent of their day is involved in compliance-related activity, activity that is inhibiting their productivity. … All around the country, people are complying with regulations instead of producing, instead of investing and growing the economy. They’re trying to survive the regulations.”

This is no way to create jobs or wealth. Keynesian pundits and politicians can’t understand why businesses sit on cash rather than invest and hire unemployed workers. It’s really no mystery. Government is in the way.

But to Liberals the Government and their control of it and you is the ultimate answer to everything.

Rejoice.

“Green” Sidenote: More Cronyism From the Obama Administration

You know that Administration that is demonizing Capitalism and how evil Corporate America is and how the the rich, greedy corporations are steeling wealth from you and lobbyists are evil…Well…

Look whose relative just got $135.8 million energy loan

The sister-in-law of John Podesta, President Obama’s influential White House transition director, served as the lobbyist for a wind power <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354433> firm that was just awarded a $135.8 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy.

The company is Brookfield Asset Management. It boasts a board of nine directors, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s long-term girlfriend <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354433>.

The Energy Department’s promise to Brookfield marks the latest in controversial massive alternative energy loans to companies with strong ties to the Obama White House and to top Democrat <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354433> lawmakers.

Last month, the grant was finalized to build the 99 megawatt Granite Reliable wind project in New Hampshire’s <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354433> Coos County, making it the state’s largest wind plant. (In the middle of nowhere!!)

Since 2009, the company has been represented by the lobby firm Heather Podesta and Partners, LLC.

Podesta, a top financial <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354433> bundler for Democrat politicians, is wife of lobbyist and art collector, Tony Podesta, who is the brother of John Podesta.

But remember, “Don’t do as I do, Do as I say”.

So it makes you wonder about Aunt Zeituni or DUI Uncle Onyango Obama. Why weren’t they on the gravytrain!

After all, you can’t make it without the Government’s “help”!!

Freeloading America

This was just marvelous watching some elitist get skewered by Sen. Ran Paul over low-flow toilets, mercury-filled light bulbs and free choice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAn1FWInBi0&feature=player_embedded

John Stossel: Some Americans actually make a living … begging for money. Professional panhandlers, they’re called, sometimes making more than $100 in a day. I tried it in Manhattan, and made over $11 in one hour—that would be $23,000 a year—tax free!

It’s a small example of why some said that  the USA is turning into a nation of freeloaders. The Manhattan Institute’s Heather MacDonald says that beggars she’s encountered “have the most deep-seated sense of entitlement that I’ve ever come across.”

From those defaulting on their home mortgages, to those who see lawsuits as a lottery ticket, many Americans live off the hard work of others.

Which is why I am a “heartless” right-winger when I ignore them on the streets.

Then there are Million and Billion Dollar Liberals or Government Apparatchiks. Like “Job Creation Czar” Jeffrey Immelt.

General Electric CEO Jeffrey R. Immelt is super-close to President Obama. The president named Immelt chairman of his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. Before that, Immelt was on Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board. He’s a regular companion when Obama travels abroad to hawk American exports.

GE, run by Immelt, just made Billion Dollars in the US, tax free. Why?

They paid no taxes at all!

2010 was the second year in a row that GE recorded billions in profits and paid no taxes.

The company, led by Immelt, earned $14.2 billion in profits in 2010, but it paid not a penny in taxes because the bulk of those profits, some $9 billion, were offshore. In fact, GE got a $3.2 billion tax benefits.

In a statement, General Electric said that it “pays what it owes under the law and is scrupulous about its compliance with tax obligations in all jurisdictions.” The company claims that its zero-dollar tax bill is largely a result of losses at its financial arm, GE Capital, due to the Wall Street meltdown. (ABCNews)

“So for GE, in many ways the environmental movement has turned out to be profitable for our investors,” Immelt said Thursday night at a fundraiser at the College of Charleston. (P&C)

But I guarantee very little ire towards an ally from the Press and the Class Warfare Liberals.

They gamed the system and freeloaded. Just like the begger on the corner.

After all, they are “entitled”.

But the class warfare liberal will rail against “corporate” america and CEO’s and  how evil “rich” people are.

They’ll rail endlessly about Exxon, but not GE.

Exxon is EVIL! >:(

Today, White House spokesman Jay Carney said that the president is “bothered” by the idea that a U.S. company could pay no taxes, but he wouldn’t talk about GE specifically. Carney was also quick to say that Immelt’s council advises the president on job growth and not on tax policy.

“It is part of the problem of the corporate tax structure that companies hire, you know, armies of tax lawyers to understand how it works and to take advantage of the various loopholes that exist, that are legal in order to reduce their tax burden,” Carney said.

When President Obama announced his decision to appoint Immelt to the unpaid advisory role on job creation in January, some critics wondered whether the move was appropriate. Under his leadership, GE laid off 21,000 American workers and closed 20 factories between 2007 and 2009. More than half of GE’s workforce is now outside the United States. (ABC News)

Overall, the Times notes, the share of U.S. taxes paid by corporations has fallen from 30 percent of federal revenue in the 1950s to 6.6 percent in 2009. (CBS)

And guess who has to make up for it?

But he’s a Buds with the Prez ( Lobbyist!), and they will cover for him.

“Over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries,” he said. “Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense. It has to change.”–President Obama in yet another I said it but I sure as hell never actually meant it or believed it, but damn it sounded good moment last January.

Carney was asked why, if the president wants corporate tax reform, he appointed “to the head of the Competitiveness and Jobs Council a person who is now the poster child for abusing the system to get out of paying taxes.”

“The jobs and competitiveness council is designed for just that,” Carney responded. “And he has brought together a lot of voices on that. And he wants to hear the opinions of every member of that council. And we have said, with regard to questions about other members who have been appointed, that the president obviously doesn’t want a council of people who agree with him on every issue; he wants to hear diversity of opinion.” (CBSNews)

Blah, blah,blah,blah,blah…zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Face it. He’s buds with the Prez. They both have a “Green” agenda. Immelt’s is just greenbacks!

The Prez gives Billions for Brazil to drill for oil to benefit Billionaire Socialist George Soros but has a virtual moratorium in this country.

George Soros is likely the #1 Democrat $$$ contributor.

Money Leads to Power and more Power leads to More Money.

Just look at the Public Sector Unions!

Illegal Immigrants!

But don’t worry, THEY ARE ENTITLED.

Everyone is entitled (except “racist” white male Europeans that is).

It’s just matter of much entitlement you feel and how much you can grab.

The Lawsuit Lottery

__________________

Overlawyered: Fearing lawsuits over injuries, a West Virginia county is removing swing sets from elementary schools. A minor, local issue? No. America’s litigious society has changed the way kids play.

Roughly a year after a child broke his arm jumping off a swing like Superman and his parents are settling a lawsuit for $20,000, Cabell County, W.V., schools are yanking swing sets from school playgrounds. The lawsuit was one of two filed in the last year against Cabell County schools over swing set injuries, the West Virginia Record reported Thursday. School safety manager Tim Stewart, who is overseeing the removal, said he sees “a high potential when it comes to swings and lawsuits.”

What’s happening in Cabell County is not an isolated case. Local governments, fearful of lawsuits, have been for years closing pools, stripping playgrounds of equipment and banning outdoor games.

A Massachusetts elementary school has told students they can’t play tag. One Boston school forbids handstands while another in Needham, Mass., doesn’t allow students to hang upside down from the monkey bars. A pool in Hazleton, Pa., closed some years ago after a swimmer sued for $100,000 because he cut his foot running and jumping into the pool, though he’d been warned not to.

“There is nothing left in playgrounds that would attract the interest of a child over the age of four,” Philip K. Howard, lawyer and author, wrote in the Wall Street Journal in 2008.

“Exercise in schools is carefully programmed, when it exists at all. … Broward County, Fla., banned running at recess. .. . Little Leagues forbid sliding into base. Some towns ban sledding. High diving boards are history, and it’s only a matter of time before all diving boards disappear.”

Olga Jarrett, a Georgia State University professor who prepares students to teach, told the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform: “Many schools don’t have playgrounds at all, they don’t have recess. They’ve been built without playgrounds with the idea that this is not something we do at school.”

She blames “a fear of lawsuits that makes some school systems and cities design playgrounds that are completely uninteresting to kids.”

Howard, who wrote “The Death Of Common Sense” and “Life Without Lawyers,” has been warning the country for years that our fear of litigation is changing American culture.

He has preached the importance of placing reasonable limits on lawsuits and restoring reliability and justice to our legal system.

While we’ve seen enough progress to be hopeful, we don’t expect civil law reform to move as fast as it should as long as so many of our policymakers are owned by the plaintiffs’ attorneys lobby.(IBD)

Then consider all the Lawyer adds on TV. You can’t have a commercial break without one…or two…or three…

Or the whacko who sued McDonalds because her hot coffee was too hot!

Or the fact that Tort Reform (aka Trial Lawyers) were explicitly ignored by ObamaCare. Why, Trial Lawyers are one of the Democrats main source of cash!!

You have 43 warnings on a Step ladder, like do not stand on top of this ladder!

Duh!

For example, does a Superman costume really need a warning label to tell people that it doesn’t cause super-strength or the ability to fly?

Really? No Kidding. Does that mean I sell my kryptonite on E-Bay then?

A teenage boy was hit by a runaway bat . His family sued the maker of the bat and got $850,000 in a products liability suit because the company failed to adequately warn about the dangers that the product can pose.

So now, baseball bats are required to post warning labels? What should the labels say?

“Caution: Getting hit in the head by this product might cause death.” (findlaw.com)

The family of Brandon Patch argued that aluminum baseball bats are dangerous because they cause the baseball to travel at a greater speed. They contended that their 18-year-old son did not have enough time to react to the ball being struck before it hit him in the head while he was pitching in an American Legion baseball game in Helena in 2003. (USA Today)

There was a mother who wants to sue Sea World because her precious 10 year old was at the performance where the whale drowned the trainer. That was Sea World’s fault! And she wants the cash!!

I see one more “Mesothelioma” ad I think I will chuck something at my TV!!

And the Congress is made up predominately of Lawyers. The President is a Lawyer.

See: http://overlawyered.com/

I want also shed some light on the state of California’s up-to-$4,000-a-violation bounty system for freelancers who identify ADA violations in Main Street businesses, and the case for at least requiring complainants to give business owners notice and an opportunity to fix an ADA violation before suing. (The disabled-rights lobby has managed to stifle that proposal in Congress for years.)

So it’s the adult version of I-Spy, only you get $4,000 for hunting them down and killing them. Sounds more lucative than my day job.

Become a Professional ADA Violation Spotter and become rich!

You own a business, maybe a restaurant. You’ve got a lot to worry about. You have to make sure the food is safe and tastes good, that the place is clean and appealing, that workers are friendly and paid according to a hundred Labor Department and IRS rules. (and soon ObamaCare, Cap & Trade,and Tax Increases!)

On top of that, there are rules you might have no idea about.

The bathroom sinks must be a specified height. So must the doorknobs and mirrors. You must have rails. And if these things aren’t right — say, if your mirror is just one inch too high — you could be sued for thousands of dollars.

And be careful. If you fail to let a customer bring a large snake, which he calls his “service animal,” into your restaurant, you could be in trouble.

The ADA was supposed to help more disabled people find jobs. But did it?

Strangely, no. An MIT study found that employment of disabled men ages 21 to 58 declined after the ADA went into effect. Same for women ages 21 to 39.

How could employment among the disabled have declined?

Because the law turns “protected” people into potential lawsuits. Most ADA litigation occurs when an employee is fired, so the safest way to avoid those costs is not to hire the disabled in the first place.

Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of the blog, Overlawyered.com, says that the law was unnecessary. Many “hire the handicapped” programs existed before the ADA passed. Sadly, now most have been quietly discontinued, probably because of the threat of legal consequences if an employee doesn’t work out.

Under the ADA, Olson notes, fairness does not mean treating disabled people the same as non-disabled people. Rather it means accommodating them. In other words, the law requires that people be treated unequally.

The law has also unleashed a landslide of lawsuits by “professional litigants” who file a hundred suits at a time. Disabled people visit businesses to look for violations, but instead of simply asking that a violation be corrected, they partner with lawyers who (legally) extort settlement money from the businesses.

Some disabled people have benefited from changes effected by the ADA, but the costs are rarely accounted for. If a small business has to lay off an employee to afford the added expense of accommodating the disabled, is that a good thing — especially if, say, customers in wheelchairs are rare? Extra-wide bathroom stalls that reduce the overall number of toilets are only some of the unaccounted-for costs of the ADA. And since ADA modification requirements are triggered by renovation, the law could actually discourage businesses from making needed renovations as a way of avoiding the expense.

A few disabled people speak up against the law. Greg Perry, author of “Disabling America: The Unintended Consequences of the Government’s Protection of the Handicapped,” says that because the disabled now represent an added expense to businesses, many resent them.

Finally, the ADA has led to some truly bizarre results. Exxon gave ship captain Joseph Hazelwood a job after he completed alcohol rehab.

Hazelwood then drank too much and let the Exxon Valdez run aground in Alaska. Exxon was sued for allowing it to happen. So Exxon prohibited employees who have had a drug or drinking problem from holding safety-sensitive jobs. The result? You guessed it — employees with a history of alcohol abuse sued under the ADA, demanding their “right” to those jobs. The federal government (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) supported the employees. Courts are still trying to sort it out.

More money for the parasites. (John Stossel)

Stossel: http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/

Lawyers do have their place, but how much of this is too much and how much of this is the cart before the horse (trough)??

Lawsuits Make Us Less Safe

By John Stossel

Imagine if an evil business routinely deprived us of products that would help us live longer with less pain and more comfort. We’d be outraged, and lawyers would line up to sue. Yet something similar happens today, thanks to lawsuit abuse. Makers of all kinds of products are afraid to sell them to us because one lawsuit could ruin them.

Personal-injury lawyers claim they make America safer, but that’s a myth. It’s easy to see who benefits from those big damage awards we read about. Less obvious — but just as real — are the things we’d all like to have but never will get because of this climate of fear. Here are a few examples.

Monsanto once developed a substitute for asbestos — a new fire-resistant form of insulation that might save thousands of lives. But Monsanto decided not to sell it for fear of liability. Richard F. Mahoney, the CEO at the time, said, “There may well have been a safe, effective asbestos replacement on the market, and now there isn’t.”

//

Why do we have to worry about shortages of flu vaccine? Because only a handful of companies still make it. And why is that? Because when you vaccinate millions of people, some get sick and sue. Between 1980 and 1986, personal-injury lawyers demanded billions of dollars from vaccine manufacturers. That scared many American drug companies out of the business.

In 1986, Congress stepped in. To help curb the lawsuits that discouraged vaccine production, the government established a fund called the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. It would pay victims’ families directly so they wouldn’t have to hire lawyers and suffer the delays of litigation. This was supposed to entice vaccine makers back into production, but drug companies were still leery, fearing that plaintiffs’ lawyers would sue them anyway.

They were right to worry. Eli Lilly developed a mercury-based preservative called Thimerosal that was used in many children’s vaccines. Plaintiffs’ lawyers jumped on scaremongers’ claims that mercury causes autism in children. Although a government-issued review found no such link, more than 100 autism lawsuits have been filed against vaccine makers since the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act passed. No wonder most drug manufacturers still steer clear of vaccine research.

Even when new vaccines are discovered, drug companies are sometimes afraid to sell them. The FDA has approved a vaccine against Lyme disease. Want some? Forget about it. No company wants to take the risk.

Fear of being sued reduced the number of American companies researching contraceptives from 13 to two.

After scientifically groundless lawsuits against breast-implant makers bankrupted Dow Corning, Japanese silicone makers stopped producing a pain-reducing silicone coating for hypodermic needles. A company director said, “We’re sure our product is safe, but we don’t want to risk a lawsuit.”

Union Carbide has invented a small portable kidney dialysis machine. It would make life much easier for people with kidney disease, but Union Carbide won’t sell it. With legal sharks circling, the risk of expensive lawsuits outweighs the possible profit.

Are you pregnant and nauseous? Bendectin would probably cure your morning sickness. For 27 years doctors prescribed the drug to 33 million women because it was so good at stopping nausea and vomiting. But you can’t buy Bendectin today because lawyers kept suing the manufacturer, Merrell Dow, claiming the drug caused birth defects.

Studies did not show that Bendectin caused birth defects, and Merrell Dow won most of the lawsuits. But after spending $100 million in legal fees and awards, the company gave up selling the drug. Bendectin has never been effectively replaced, and morning sickness is now a major contributor to dehydration during pregnancy.

Dr. Paul Offit, professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, says, “Within two years of discontinuing Bendectin, the incidence of hospitalization for dehydration during early pregnancy doubled; the incidence of birth defects was unchanged.”

Those are just some of the life-enhancing products we know we must do without because America’s peculiar legal system makes it profitable for trial lawyers to pursue extortion — like litigation. What wonderful products will we never even hear about because the lawyers have created a climate of fear?

You can’t even look cross-eyed at a kid if you’re a teacher and you can never ever be alone with one under any circumstance whatsoever.

Why?

Because if you are, you could be on the sex-offender registry and working at McDonald’s being sued for your coffee being to hot in a nanosecond.

Thanks to Lawyers and the Lawsuit Lottery.

This lottery is similar to the regular one, you gamble that your ticket (the lawsuit) will pay you mega-millions and set you up for life. And the nice Lawyer who gets as much as 40% of it is right there to cheer you on. For there own benefit, of course.

Everyone wins, Everybody else loses.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/29/safety-caution-product-liability-entrepreneurs-law-warning-labels_slide.html

http://www.amazon.com/Remove-Child-Before-Folding-Stupidest/dp/0446696560

The author of the above book: “Predatory lawyers know they can file ridiculous lawsuits against innocent product makers and blackmail them into cash settlements — even in cases in which a user has ignored common sense,” said Dorigo Jones. “The real issue is not the obvious warning labels, but the billions of dollars in litigation costs passed on to consumers — a kind of a “lawsuit tax” we all pay. That is why M-LAW (http://www.mlaw.org/index.html) urges judges and policy makers to support civil justice reform.”

But don’t you feel better. You’ve taken responsibilities for the risks of being alive secure in the knowledge that if you do something stupid there’s always a lawyer there to make you the potential millionaire “victim”. Meanwhile, actual cases that are very legitimate could be overlooked because there isn’t enough will or money for anyone to care.

AP/Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch

Sleep tight, don’t let the bed bugs bite!

And if they do, I’m sure we can find someone to sue!

Criminal Crisis

“The Arizona law is in compliance with federal law,” said Rosemary Jenks, director of government relations at Numbers USA. “The Justice Department should stay out of it. They should be encouraging Arizona to be enforcing the laws. Secondly, they should be enforcing federal immigration law, which means challenging cities and states that have sanctuary policies.”

The Justice Department sees it differently, saying Arizona is unconstitutionally interfering with the federal government’s role in immigration control.

“There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law,” Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said.

So if you want to ignore the Federal law and set up a Sanctuary City that’s ok with us. Do something else and you’re “interfering” with our power.

The Empire has spoken!

If, in fact, any entity is actively “interfering” with the enforcement of federal immigration laws, it is these cities, which refuse cooperation with federal enforcement authorities. What Schmaler is doing, and what many legal experts claim, is willfully misrepresenting both the law in question and the role adopted by sanctuary cities.

If there is a “big difference” to be had here it is the sanctuary city is actively refusing to enforce the law while Arizona is actively attempting to enforce it.

And which is it our chief law enforcement agency decides to sue?  Of course, the entity trying to enforce our laws…

Just as a side Note, our cough-cough “esteemed” ex-gov Janet was on Greta Van Sustreen last night from Laredo, TX and asked about SB1070 and “racial profiling” and she dropped back and punted!

She refused to answer the question directly and even used Obama’s “misquided” and toted how much great stuff she has done and will be doing.

It was a real barf fest. Not that I excepted anything less from her. When she was Governor she only wanted to look tough on the border issue because of re-election campaign in 2006 and it was a poke in the eye of a Republican President.

But soon enough she bailed on the state just as everything went to hell. She drove it into the iceberg and then stole the life raft for herself.

Of course, ignored in all of this is the state of Rhode Island which has, for years, essentially had and enforced a state law that is almost a mirror of the Arizona law.

But since suing a Northeastern Liberal state not on the border which doesn’t have the vote potential is not politically advantageous we’ll just ignore it. They aren’t a big enough score.

We want spectacle. We want intimidation. We want FEAR!

The Empire has Spoken!

They have, in a very short time, turned the Department of Justice into the Department of Agendas, injecting an agenda driven politics into an area where it should never, ever be allowed. The result is a perversion of law and the breaking of a centuries old promise in our social contract.(examiner)

But if the end justifies the means, go for it!

And you have groups and the Attorney General just waiting for any whiff or any atom of any angstrom of “racial profiling” at 12:01am July 29th.

The attorney general, speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival last week in an interview aired on CBS on Sunday, said the pre-emption argument was the stronger attack against the law. But he said if the law does go into effect despite the suit, the Justice Department will watch and see whether profiling is taking place.

“If that was the case, we would have the tools, and we would bring suit on that basis,” he said.

So do I think that by 12:02am on July 29th there will be a lawsuit alledging “racial profiling”?

Yes.

But I’m a cynic of the highest order.

I think that the ACLU, LA Raza, and other groups will try there darnedest to set-up the police and then scream “racial profiling” even if it doesn’t exist. And they will do it each and every day.

Because, that’s what liberals do.

They lawyer you to death.

They beat you into submission with Lawyers.

That’s why we so many problems caused by lawyers.

Former U.S. Attorney General and Heritage Distinguished Fellow Edwin Meese addressed overcriminalization in his introduction to “One Nation Under Arrest.”  Meese writes:

America is in the throes of overcriminalization: We are making and enforcing far too many criminal laws that create traps for the innocent, but unwary, and that threaten to make criminals out of those who are doing their best to be respectable, law-abiding citizens

Last night on Fox Business, reporter John Stossel had a program about this problem:

The show focuses on the destruction that over-criminalization caused to average Americans Krister Evertson and George and Kathy Norris.

Krister, an Eagle Scout with no criminal record – not even a single traffic ticket, was initially arrested by four FBI agents wearing black SWAT gear and pointing automatic rifles at him because he didn’t know that obscure federal regulations required him to put a certain sticker on his otherwise lawful UPS package.  After spending 21 months in an Oregon federal prison, Krister today lives by himself in a ramshackle aluminum trailer sitting on the fenced-in grounds of a construction company’s equipment yard.  Because he is on parole, he is not allowed even to move to Alaska – where he was arrested – to live with his 80-year-old mother whom he used to care for.

George Norris, a 63-year-old retiree with diabetes and heart problems, had no criminal record the day armed agents with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (?!) ransacked his house looking for evidence that he had imported endangered orchids for his home-based business. Although the feds found no evidence of illegal orchids, Norris spent 17 months in prison – including over 10 weeks in solitary confinement – because a small percentage of his paperwork was inaccurate.

And he went to prison because after spending his entire life savings, $100,000, he was advised to plead guilty so he could be sentenced to probation. Instead, he spent 17 months in a Federal Prison!

Imagine: A Gang member with tatooes on his eyeballs comes up to him, “whatcha in for?”

“I sold legal orchids without the proper paperwork”

“Man, you’re one dangerous dude!”

And there’s the food police, you know, the people who want to ban salt, fat, and pop, etc. because they are bad for you and you’re too incompetent to be responsible for yourself.

The Video: http://overcriminalized.com/Video.aspx

Also: “The Food Police” – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZZgLmmtwRk

There shall be no cupcakes. No chocolate cake and no carrot cake. According to New York City’s latest regulations, not even zucchini bread makes the cut.

In an effort to limit how much sugar and fat students put in their bellies at school, the Education Department has effectively banned most bake sales, the lucrative if not quite healthy fund-raising tool for generations of teams and clubs.

The change is part of a new wellness policy that also limits what can be sold in vending machines and student-run stores, which use profits to help finance activities like pep rallies and proms.

Did you know that Girl Scouts are evil perveyers of obese-creating cookies??

They are pushers!

They are evil crack dealers of fat!!

Warning  Labels on Fast Food. A Skull and Cross Bones on your Big Mac perhaps?

A HazMat sticker on that Little Debbie Snack Cake?

A Heart attack sign on that plate of Nachos?

If you refuse to do what is right, then the government will be forced to come in and make you do it.

It’s in your best interest.

All those who believe they are born with free choice, need to take a few classes in marketing psychology to understand how limited their scope of personal freedom really is in today’s America. In fact, our free choice is really the freedom to choose between Pepsi and Coke, not freedom to choose a healthy lifestyle. There are too many psychological cues pushing the average Joe and Jane towards obesity – mostly cheap unhealthy fare available anywhere anytime. (fooducate blog)

Part of being free is being free to make bad choices, to take risks, and to bear the consequences. Part of being free is that you, personally, may decide what you eat or drink. It’s a liberty so elementary that our founders never even imagined that it would need protection, but today, it does.

To be sure, there are many costs associated with socialized health care, and some of the choices we make will certainly raise those costs. That’s one big reason why the nanny state is suddenly in the food business. But if we absolutely must have socialized health care — a point I don’t for a moment concede — then I’d prefer to pay a little bit extra and keep all my other liberties, thanks.(Cato Institute)

But liberals and their pit bull lawyers never give up that easily.

They are, after all, vastly superior in every way to you. You just don’t know it. And if you want disagree, well, meet Mr and Mrs Lawsuit!

San Francisco is banning pop in vending machines, but not Starbucks, as bad for you.

Much like the Financial Reform that just passed that heaps tons of regulations on the private sector, but says absolutely nothing about federally-owned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the real problem that is still out there.

But it make it look like they are “doing something” and it’s for “your own good”.

And if you want to complain that the government is not doing it’s job, and you want to do it or help them do it, shut up and sit down, they know better.

We’ll sue you for trying to do our job too.

So if you step on a federal law land mine or are arrested by the food police, it’s for your own good, citizen.

Want to take responsibility for yourself, NOT ALLOWED.

That’s the government’s job.

We are are from the government and we are here to protect your from yourself!

Bow to your Masters or else!

Rejoice Citizen.