Medicare @ 50 Part 1


Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson traveled to Independence, Mo., to sign legislation creating Medicare and Medicaid in the presence of fellow Democrat and former President Harry Truman, who during his presidency led unsuccessful efforts to establish a national health insurance system.

The battle over the legislation was long and bruising, with conservatives including then-General Electric spokesman Ronald Reagan warning it would lead to socialized medicine.

So on this 50th anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid, as our nation struggles with its latest effort at health reform, it’s a good time to reflect on the programs’ successes and failures.

Medicare and Medicaid passed with broad bipartisan support. Medicare was a new federal program designed to provide health coverage to senior citizens over age 65. Medicaid, something of an afterthought, would be a joint federal-state program to assist the poor.

The legislation passed the Senate with 57 Democratic and 13 Republican votes and the House with 237 Democrats and 70 Republicans. So both parties had a stake in fixing the program problems that inevitably arose.

Proponents saw the programs as major steps forward in expanding access to health coverage — moving toward their ultimate goal of a single-payer national health care system. They certainly have made progress toward that goal.

In 1965, only about half of seniors and very few poor Americans had health coverage. Today, Medicare covers 46 million seniors and 9 million disabled Americans, and Medicaid covers nearly 70 million lower-income people.

Critics of the 1965 legislation warned that both programs would spend much more than supporters predicted, that price controls and rationing of care would follow and that the quality of care would eventually suffer. All of the warnings have proved correct.

Take Medicare. In 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare Part A, which covers hospital bills, would cost $9 billion a year by 1990. But the actual cost after the first 25 years was $67 billion, and that didn’t include Medicare Part B, which primarily covers outpatient costs.

As health economist Theodore Marmor pointed out: “Hospital price increases presented the most intractable political problem for the Johnson administration. In the first year of Medicare’s operation, the average daily service charge in America’s hospitals increased by an unprecedented 21.9%. Each month the Labor Department’s consumer price survey reported further increases . … In the State of the Union Address, Jan. 17, 1968, Johnson … promised to ‘stem the rising costs of medical care.’”

Washington has been trying, unsuccessfully, to do that ever since.

Congress imposed a type of price-control mechanism in 1983 called Diagnostic Related Groups, or DRGs. And in the early 1990s, Congress tried to cut spending on physicians by creating the Resource Based Relative Value Scale.

Then there was the infamous Medicare “Sustainable Growth Rate,” later dubbed the “doc fix,” which passed in 1996 to contain Medicare spending by cutting doctors’ fees. It was repealed only recently, after Congress had postponed the vote 17 times.

Today, both Medicare and Medicaid have exploding budgets. Medicare spent more than $600 billion last year. Federal Medicaid expenditures are estimated at $331 billion, with the federal portion averaging about 57% and states and some local governments paying the rest.

Once Congress creates such a mammoth entitlement, it can’t seem to leave the program alone. In 1973, Medicare began covering the disabled and patients with end-stage kidney disease. In 1980, Medicare expanded to cover the cost of home health care services and in 1982 included hospice care for the terminally ill.

In 1988, Congress tied Medicaid to the federal cash-assistance welfare program, known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children. States were required to cover AFDC-eligible, first-time pregnant women and children up to age five. That coverage now extends up to 185% of the federal poverty level. As a result, Medicaid pays for 40% of all U.S. births.

Budget pressures eventually will force cutbacks, though the politicians will usually claim the cuts are “improving” or making the program “more efficient.” Those cuts usually mean less access to care. Less than half of physicians accept Medicaid, and a growing number refuse to see Medicare patients because of low reimbursement rates and bureaucratic headaches.

No assessment of Medicare and Medicaid would be complete without mention of the rampant fraud and abuse plaguing both programs. Even the government pegs Medicare’s fee-for-service “improper payments” level at 12.7% — and that’s probably on the low side.

But now we face a new era where ObamaCare defenders are trying to expand health coverage and yet haven’t learned anything from 50 years of Medicare and Medicaid. Indeed, 6.5 million of ObamaCare’s newly insured were just dumped into an unreformed Medicaid system. As a result, we are already seeing many of the same problems emerge in ObamaCare.

States are struggling to balance their budgets as Medicaid spending soars, even for those that chose not to expand. States that created their own health insurance exchanges are facing financial challenges in operating these new bureaucracies. Health care costs are exploding as they did after the passage of Medicare and Medicaid, and the people who predicted the new program would force costs down are shocked.

Many lower-income, newly insured, who’ve been forced into policies with high deductibles (the average individual bronze plan deductible is $5,181, and $10,545 for a family), are returning to the few remaining free clinics for care. They may now have insurance, but not the money to cover the deductibles.

In short, it appears the Democrats who passed this massive and convoluted ObamaCare system learned nothing from 50 years of Medicare and Medicaid. Government involvement dramatically increases spending, followed by clampdowns on soaring prices, leading to restrictions on doctors and patients.

Perhaps next time, we might try market forces rather than another failed effort at centralized government programs.

Nah, not on The Agenda, plus it doesn’t benefit the government and the politicians to do that way.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Never Saw that Coming…

Yeah, right… :)

Thirty-four percent fewer healthcare providers are available to Obamacare patients — backing up “anecdotal reports that exchange networks contain fewer providers than traditional commercial plans,” a new report says.

According to an analysis by Avalere Health, the Washington-based advisory firm, the Obamacare networks offer an average of 42 percent fewer heart and cancer doctors — along with 24 percent fewer hospitals and 32 percent fewer primary care physicians for patients to choose from.

Less Choice, Higher Premiums. :)

Preliminary 2016 premiums for benchmark silver plans in exchanges grew by 4.4 percent in major metropolitan areas in 11 states, including the District of Columbia, according to analysis by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. While this is much lower than the numbers being tossed around the Senate floor, it’s a sharper increase than last year, which saw premiums climb by 2 percent nationwide.

An Avalere Health analysis released this month found similar results. Silver plans on exchanges (the plans of choice for more than two-thirds of enrollees) are expected to increase 5.8 percent in the eight states that Avalere examined.

In a House Ways and Means subcommittee meeting Wednesday, lawmakers pointed to instances where insurers were seeking drastic increases. For example, in Maryland, two of eight options in the individual market are seeking more than a 30 percent increase, and a third option is seeking a 26.7 percent premium hike.

“Many of the proposed increases are eye-poppingly huge,” said subcommittee Chairman Peter Roskam.

“These rates are premised on the assumption that the court will side with the government. If the court signs with the challengers, all bets are off,” Levitt said. “There’s no doubt that we’d see some insurers pulling out of the market and the ones that stay would raise rates significantly next year.”

And they did. I wonder if that really why? :)

But most importantly, the Affordable Care Act’s restrictions on out-of-pocket costs by patients do not apply to healthcare services outside the plan’s network.

“Out-of-network care does not accrue toward out-of-pocket maximums, leaving consumers vulnerable to high costs if they seek care from a provider not included in their plan’s network,” said Elizabeth Carpenter, Avalere’s vice president. “Patients should evaluate a plan’s provider network when picking insurance on the exchange.

Overall, however, the limited choices are seen as a way of keeping patient costs down, said Dan Mendelson, the firm’s CEO.

“Plans continue to test new benefit designs in the exchange market,” he said. “Given the new requirements put in place by the ACA, network design is one way plans can drive value-based care and keep premiums low.”

Republicans and other health professionals have long charged that Obamacare has reduced healthcare coverage and choices for Americans.

“The American people are not happy on this birthday,” Sally Pipes, president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute, told Newsmax TV as the law marked its fifth anniversary in March.

The report was based on a study of large healthcare networks in Florida, California, Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina, Avalere said. (Newsmax and more)

Forbes: June 2015

Texas Blue Cross stands out. The health plan commented in its federal government rate filings that it covered 730,833 Obamacare individuals in 2014 with premium of $2.1 billion and claims totaling $2.5 billion––for a medical loss ratio of 119%. The plan further commented that, after the “3Rs” reinsurance adjustments, they lost 17% to 20% of premium in 2014–that would be about $400 million. And, they are only asking for a 20% rate increase.

While we won’t see all of the rates in all of the states for a few months, some state regulators have begun to make the 2016 rate actions public:

• CareFirst Blue Cross of Maryland is asking for a 34% rate increase on its PPO plan and a 26.7% rate increase for its HMO. CareFirst has an 80% market share in the Obamacare exchange and only 30% of the eligible Maryland market has signed up on the exchange.

• In Oregon, where less than 35% of the eligible have signed up on the exchange, the biggest insurer with 52% of the market, Moda, has asked for a 25.6% increase. Lifewise, with a 19% market share, has asked for a 38.5% increase.

• Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee, with a 165,000 members making up 70% of the Obamacare exchange is asking for a 36.3% increase. The second biggest player, Humana HUM +1.18%, is asking for a 15.8% increase. Less than 40% of the eligible exchange market signed up in Tennessee.

• Georgia is the second biggest Obamacare market for Humana, having enrolled 254,000 people out of a total market of 479,000, and Georgia “maybe its biggest misstep”. Its CEO has said about Georgia, “We can’t have one business being subsidized by another business.” Humana is asking for 2016 individual plan rate increases from 14.8% to 19.44%.

• In Iowa, with the lowest enrollment rates in the country, and where its biggest Obamacare insurer went broke last December, Wellmark Blue Cross, which only sells off the exchange, is asking for a 43% increase on its Obamacare compliant policies. Coventry, which has 47,000 Obamacare customers, is asking for an 18% increase for its on-exchange business.

• The Kansas insurance department has not made its rate increases public yet but has said that plans will increase by as much as 38%. Less than 40% of the eligible have so far enrolled.

• Pennsylvania is not encouraging with market leader Highmark asking for increases ranging from 13.5% to 39.65% and the Geisinger HMO asking for increases from 40.6% to 58.4%. Pennsylvania enrolled 50% of the potential exchange market in 2015.

So let the politicking of your health continues.

We are from the Government, we are here to Help you…  :)

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Greasing The Bank

In another blow to conservatives, the Senate has voted to reauthorize the Ex-Im bank.

Is that a Cave-in noise I hear?

It had expired. It IS corporate welfare, but it’s also welfare for the Political Elites so they did it in THEIR OWN interest only.

The Vote was one of a series of interlocking dramas as lawmakers went about task of completing must-pass transportation legislation before a Friday deadline.

So under pressure they caved Yet again!

The vote to move forward on the Export-Import Bank reauthorization measure was 67-26, setting up a vote by Monday night on the amendment to reinstate the bank.

Cruz and other Republicans are incensed not only because McConnell offered the Ex-Im amendment, but also because he rejected their attempts to defund Planned Parenthood, which they tried to do for obvious reasons.

By the way, Republicans determined to stop the president’s health care law are not letting today’s defeat slow them down. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has already made clear he will introduce the Obamacare repeal amendment again once the highway funding debate is over.

Update II: Cruz responds. He’s not happy.

Ted Cruz: The American people elected a Republican majority believing it would somehow be different from a Democratic majority.

Unfortunately the way the Senate currently operates, there is one party: The Washington party.

That would be correct.

Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric Co., (and former Obama Jobs Czar!!) is playing hard ball with congressmen such as Jeff Duncan of South Carolina. Caught in the crossfire are more than 3,000 GE jobs in Greenville.

Immelt is among the U.S. business leaders who want Congress to re-authorize the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

That arm of the federal government finances export deals of American companies, including some of the overseas sales of the power turbines that GE designs and makes in Greenville…

Like some other Republicans, Duncan thinks export financing is generally a matter for the private sector, not the federal government.

But the private sector thinks we the taxpayers should fund it. And then they can pay off the Congressman with their profits.

You grease me, I grease you!

First of all, Ex-Im was supposed to be giving a leg up to small businesses who want to expand their markets overseas. The reality quickly became something very different though, with some of the largest corporations scooping up most of the benefits.

Working to influence public policy is one thing, but issuing clear threats which involve chopping the legs out from under American workers if you don’t get your way is something else entirely. The only remaining question is if this will work and Congress will cave to GE’s demands.

YES, they will.

The people get screwed AGAIN!

“This is a battle. Do you stand for the rich and powerful who corrupt Washington and use this institution against the American taxpayer, or do you stand with the taxpayer?” presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, asked at a recent news conference with leaders of Club for Growth, Tea Party Patriots, the Senate Conservatives Fund and Heritage Action for America.

Well, we know which The Republican Elites picked.

It is becoming increasingly possible that lawmakers might end up having to pass a shorter-term extension than either chamber has wanted. The House has passed a five-month bill to buy time for a more ambitious six-year plan that would involve remaking the system for taxing multinational companies, while the Senate is pushing ahead with a six-year bill that includes three years of funding.

Six year expenditure and 3 years funding, gee that sounds like a Democrat. :)

“Speaking the truth about actions is entirely consistent with civility,” Mr. Cruz said Sunday on the Senate floor. “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

I wonder where I’ve heard that before… :)

“When there is overwhelming bipartisan support for an idea, even if I oppose it, it doesn’t require some ‘special deal’ to see a vote occur on that measure,” Mr. McConnell said on Sunday in defending his decision. “This is the United States Senate, after all, where we debate and vote on all kinds of different issues.”

Orwell has been institutionalized.

Now it’s “Jar Jar” Boehner’s turn to cave in, yet again.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another Big Lie

 

Entitlements: Medicare’s latest annual report, issued days before its 50th anniversary, seems to show that, thanks to ObamaCare, it has a long and healthy future in front of it. But it’s not true. Not by a long shot.

President Obama’s top economists, Jeff Zients and Jason Furman, claim that the new Medicare Trustees Report “confirms the major progress that has been made in recent years in improving the financial position of the Medicare program.”

The Ministry of Truth says so. You can’t doubt The Ministry. You are not allowed to.

Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will remain solvent until 2030, they say, which is 13 years longer than it was before ObamaCare. Plus, they say, growth in per-beneficiary spending was just 2.3% last year, “less than one-half of the 5.5 average rate from 2000 to 2010.”

But this sunny outlook doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

Medicare is still a fiscal time bomb. As the nearby chart shows, its hospital insurance deficits will hit $110 billion in 2031 — the first year after its trust fund runs out of money. Annual deficits will eventually top $1 trillion a year.

Even that is a fantasy, since it assumes ObamaCare’s steep Medicare provider payment cuts actually happen. Even Medicare’s trustees are skeptical.

Buried in an appendix, the report admits that “there is substantial uncertainty” regarding the likelihood that those cuts will be feasible.

They are so deep, the report says, that what Medicare pays will “fall increasingly below providers’ costs.” By 2019, for example, as many as 15% of hospitals will have negative Medicare margins, it says. And the only way to avoid such massive losses would be for doctors and hospitals to “generate and sustain unprecedented levels of productivity gains.”

Washington has already shown that it won’t swallow such Medicare cuts. Soon after a 1997 payment cut plan — called “Sustainable Growth Rate” — went into effect, Congress repeatedly nullified it. In the likely event that Congress cancels the ObamaCare-imposed cuts, then “the actual future costs for Medicare may exceed the projections shown in this report, possibly by substantial amounts,” the trustees say.

Medicare remains in financial jeopardy and is in need of serious reform. Any politician who pretends otherwise is doing taxpayers and retirees a huge disservice.

(IBD)

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mainstream Jujitsu

I never realized how much mainstream media had an affinity with martial arts. Over the past week, we’ve seen some of the most ferocious journalistic jujutsu in my lifetime. Shocking undercover videos are released revealing the true essence of Planned Parenthood—a cold, callous, commercial abortion and human-parts trafficking chain—and America’s news media can’t move quickly enough to spar with the messengers.

I don’t know, the jujitsu of lies, attacks and distortions around Benghazi are some of the Orwellian Left’s finest.

Lois Lerner and The IRS targeting.

Fast & Furious.

The Dukes of Hazzard :)

It’s all just a hoax! Planned Parenthood said so. And every news network is quick to rally to the abortion giant’s defense…one of the only times the liberal MSM will defend capitalism and corporate America. Apparently, the only videos that have credibility are the ones produced by MSNBC, CNN, CBS News, ABC News, or any other member of the multi-billion Network of Lies. Oh, but wait! They’ve never done any kind of exposé on Big Abortion. The last time news media took a critical look at the seedy abortion industry was when Pamela Zekman and Pamela Warrick, writing for the Chicago Sun Times, engaged in phenomenal undercover reporting of the Gosnell-like conditions in “Chicago’s thriving abortion business”. It was a 15-part series entitled: “The Abortion Profiteers”. That was in 1978, people. Today’s mainstream media, with billions of dollars in assets, won’t spend a dime to investigate this corrupt industry.

The Agenda is The Agenda! No one questions the The Agenda! Or else…

Enter Lila Rose. Jill Stanek. James O’Keefe. And now, David Daleidan of the Center For Medical Progress. These citizen journalists have riled the gatekeepers whose religiously devout efforts to protect Big Abortion don’t have a prayer. With the exception of Fox News, Brit Hume’s deeply stirring commentary of the destruction the abortion industry has brought to this country was epic. He reflects what the journalist’s creed, in part, proudly proclaims: “I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man…always respectful of its readers but always unafraid, is quickly indignant at injustice.”

But the only “injustice” the Left sees is that not everything bows and scraps to kiss their ass and do as they are told because they are so vastly superior to you grubby,dirty, little morons of hate.

My childhood hero, Frederick Douglass, started his own newspaper (The North Star) because mainstream media wasn’t telling the truth about slavery. Fast forward 168 years, and the same media malfeasance exists today. Douglass declared: “…justice must be done, the truth must be told. I will not be silent.” This remarkable freed slave is the reason why I became a citizen journalist. His passion to educate the public and to help set people free inspired me in my recent fight against the NAACP. This radically pro-abortion “civil rights” organization tried to sue my organization (and me personally) into silence for accurately parodying their name. The National Association for the Abortion of Colored People lost in court. Truth won.

Abortion is the number one killer in the black community, at rates 5 times higher than those among whites. But the NAACP still stands with its corporate sponsor, Planned Parenthood. Just like the Congressional Black Caucus, Sharpton’s National Action Network, and the National Urban League, the NAACP has responded to these shocking videos with less-than-surprising silence. Every one of these groups actively partners with the nation’s leading abortion and harvesting chain. With all of the hypocritical rhetoric and tweeting of #BlackLivesMatter, and the absurd backlash against declaring #AllLivesMatter, it’s become apparent that human life doesn’t really matter to certain people.

But it’s whitie’s fault! Check your Privilege, y’all. :)

Planned Parenthood can continue on aborting and selling those unwanted babies in their uncrushed wanted parts. Liberals won’t be outraged. But they’ll feign outrage at the ones who are exposing the inhumanity of it all. Cecile Richards, in a feeble attempt to discredit the Center for Medical Progress’ shocking videos, apologized for the “tone” of her top doctor, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, in a video that was supposedly a hoax. Never mind that Richards, a $583k per year salaried abortion mogul, told PBS “protesting abortion was like protesting a man’s colonoscopy”. Sure. The comparison of an unborn human life to feces has no despicable tone at all.

These recent events have me hopeful, though, and enjoying the desperation of the leading entity of population control going into serious damage control. Congress, and allegedly the DOJ, will investigate this situation. I encourage people to sign the Americans United for Life’s petition to demand that the White House order the Attorney General to investigate Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted baby parts.

The DOJ will ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! NOTHING! The Agenda must be protected. That’s why virtually no one from the numerous scandals has been prosecuted. You turn the evidence over the DOJ and they conveniently lose it, wipe it, or ignore it. It’s their mandate to cover it all up.

They are the Gatekeepers of The Agenda, they are the ones who protect it. They serve only the Agenda.

And we can’t stop there. This abortion behemoth gets $528.4 million of our tax dollars every year to do their corrupt work. There are many reasons to defund Planned Parenthood. It kills human lives. It is fundamentally dishonest (suffering from a condition known as Mythomania-an abnormal or pathological tendency to exaggerate or tell lies). It has defrauded Medicaid (aka taxpayers) of millions of dollars. It grossly miseducates our youth (e.g. “There’s nothing unhealthy or bad about having a big number of sexual partners”). It is America’s biggest hoax.

Well, I have said, that polyamory is next. Nothing is “abnormal” unless it’s not on The Agenda, then it’s just evil.

One day, our nation will look back and wonder how so many were duped, for so long, by Planned Propaganda.

Not if the Ministry of Truth has anything to do with it.

It will be like the plans to destroy the Earth for a hyperspacial bypass in “Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy”

“But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months.”

“Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything.”

“But the plans were on display …”

“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”

“That’s the display department.”

“With a flashlight.”

“Ah, well the lights had probably gone.”

“So had the stairs.”

“But look, you found the notice didn’t you?”

“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard’.”

And Ministry has the Mainstream Media to lie for them.

One day, our collective soul will mourn for the millions of lives that were crushed by the violent social injustice of abortion. One day, because Truth is relentless and freeing, Big Abortion will be heavily edited out of our society. (Ryan Bomberger)

It will be heavily edit out society so that this kind of think won’t happen again and the Agenda won’t be exposed. That is what the Left is so upset about.

Remember, in the pursuit of their Agenda they have no morals or ethics of any kind, least of all unborn children, who they can’t even manipulate into voting for them.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!!

The End justifies the Means.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

CLASS WARFARE IS PEACE!

FEAR IS HOPE!

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Save Yourself!

Last fall, voters in the Bay Area cities of San Francisco and Oakland followed Seattle’s lead and approved costly new minimum-wage mandates ($15 an hour and $12.25 an hour, respectively) for most businesses in the city boundaries. Now the bills have begun arriving, and some businesses can’t pay them.

The consequences of minimum-wage increases, at the historical levels studied in the U.S., are well known to labor economists. A summary of the research published last year by the Institute for the Study of Labor, and authored by University of California-Irvine economist David Neumark, found that each 10% hike in the minimum wage on the state and federal level has caused a 1% to 2% drop in youth employment. Similarly, researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago found an increase in fast-food prices associated with the same wage change.

Given the scope and schedule of these new minimum-wage increases, the impact on prices and employment may be even steeper this time. The current federal minimum wage is $7.25, half of what San Francisco’s wage floor will be set at by 2018 after a series of increases that begin in May. Nationally, Congress phased in the last 40% increase to $7.25 over a three-year period; in Oakland, an almost-identical 36% increase happened overnight on March 1.

 
Photo: Getty Images

Businesses’ first line of defense against these labor-cost increases is an offsetting increase in prices. The magnitude is staggering: In Oakland, local restaurants are raising prices by as much as 20%, with the San Francisco Chronicle reporting that “some of the city’s top restaurateurs fear they will lose customers to higher prices.” Thanks to a quirk in California law that prohibits full-service restaurants from counting tips as income, other operators—who were forced to give their best-paid employees a raise—are rethinking their business model by eliminating tips as they raise prices.

Ironically, this change in compensation practices has reduced the take-home pay for some of the employees it was supposed to help: At the Oakland restaurant Homestead, the East Bay Express reported that servers are taking “a substantial pay cut,” earning a flat wage of $18 to $24 an hour and no tips instead of the $35 to $55 an hour they were accustomed to earning when tips were included.

Though higher prices are a risk that some businesses were able to take, others haven’t had the option. The San Francisco retailer Borderlands Books made national news in February when the owner announced that the city’s $15 minimum wage would put him out of business, in part because the prices of his products were already printed on the covers. (A unique customer fundraiser gave Borderlands a stay of execution until at least March of 2016.)

One block away from Borderlands, a fine-dining establishment called The Abbot’s Cellar—twice selected as one of the city’s top-100 restaurants—wasn’t so lucky. The forthcoming $15 minimum wage, combined with a series of factors like the city’s soaring rents, put the business over the edge and compelled its owners to close. One of the partners told me the restaurant had no ability to absorb the added cost, and neither a miraculous increase in sales volume nor higher prices were viable options.

These aren’t isolated anecdotes. In the city’s popular SoMa neighborhood, a vegetarian diner called The Source closed in January, again citing the higher minimum wage as a factor. Back across the Bay in Oakland, the Chronicle reported that some of the city’s businesses have been similarly affected. According to a board member of the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce, 10 restaurants or grocery stores opted to permanently close this year alone as a partial consequence of the wage hike. Even the Salvation Army’s child-care facility is “scrambling to find ways to keep the doors open” in response to labor cost increases, according to the organization’s county coordinator.

Faced with convincing evidence of the policy’s failures, you’d think advocates would be chastened or apologetic. You’d be wrong: Ken Jacobs, who runs the University of California-Berkeley’s labor-backed Center for Labor Research and Education, chalked up possible consequences of new mandates to labor-market “churn.” Research that Mr. Jacobs co-authored predicted that the Bay Area hikes would be mostly cost-free. At a forum earlier this month where dozens of Oakland business owners fretted about their viability, representatives of Lift Up Oakland—the labor union-backed coalition that advocated for the wage hike—were not in attendance.

It’s probably too late to save other Oakland and San Francisco businesses. But it’s not too late for cities like New York and Los Angeles to heed the evidence before following their footsteps. (Michael Saltsman)

But “sticking it” to “rich” corporations is what Liberals like to use for their class warfare Divide & conquer. Doesn’t matter what the consequences are, they never do.

It makes their minions feel “righteous” and “angry”.

It gets them to vote for Democrats.

In the end the sheep slip their own throat, but they do it happily and will gladly gut themselves afterwards.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fact Free Left

The outrage over another multiple murder of American military personnel on American soil by another Islamic extremist has been exacerbated by the fact that these military people had been ordered to be unarmed — and therefore sitting ducks.

Millions of American civilians have also been forbidden to have guns, and are also sitting ducks — for criminals, terrorists or psychos.

You might think that, before having laws or policies forcing fellow human beings to be defenseless targets, those who support such laws and policies would have some factual basis for believing that these gun restrictions save more lives, on net balance, than allowing more legal access to firearms. But you would be wrong.

Facts, Liberals don’t need no stinking facts. They have their Agenda and that’s all that matters because they are Homo Superior Liberalis and they are never wrong.

evolution of the left

Most gun control zealots show not the slightest interest in testing empirically their beliefs or assumptions. There have been careful factual studies by various scholars of what happens after gun control laws have been instituted, strengthened or reduced.

But those studies are seldom even mentioned by gun control activists. Somehow they just know that gun restrictions reduce gun crime, no matter how many studies show the opposite. How do they know? Because other like-minded people say so — and say so repeatedly and loudly.

And then they get MSNBC and CNN and the Liberal media to repeat it over and over again.

The end justifies the means, regardless of how you got there. The Agenda is The Agenda.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” –Josef Goebbels

A few gun control advocates may cherry-pick examples of countries with stronger gun control laws than ours that have lower murder rates (such as England) — and omit other countries with stronger gun control laws than ours that have far higher murder rates (such as Mexico, Russia and Brazil).

You don’t test an assumption or belief by cherry-picking examples. Not if you are serious. And if you are not going to be serious about life and death, when are you going to be serious?

On Left, about how righteous they are about their Agenda and how to make you follow it no matter what. That is serious business.

Unfortunately, gun control is just one of many issues on which the political left shows no real interest in testing their assumptions or beliefs. The left glorifies the 1960s as a turning point in American life. But they show no interest in testing whether things turned for the better or for the worse.

Homicide rates had been going down substantially, for decades on end — among both blacks and whites — until the 1960s. Plotted on a graph, there is a big U-shaped curve, showing the turnaround after the bright ideas of the left were applied to criminals in American courts of law in the 1960s.

This was not the only U-shaped curve, with its low, turnaround point in the 1960s. The same was true of the venereal disease gonorrhea, whose rate of infection went down in every year of the 1950s — and then skyrocketed, beginning in the 1960s.

Teenage pregnancies had also been going down for years, until the late 1960s, when “sex education” was introduced in schools across the country. Then pregnancy rates rose nearly 50 percent over the next decade, among girls 15 to 19 years old — exactly the opposite of what had been predicted by the left.

Another program that had the opposite effect from its advocates’ claims was the “war on poverty” program created by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Contrary to what was said during the celebrations of its 50th anniversary last year, the loudly proclaimed purpose of the “war on poverty” was not simply to transfer money or other benefits to the poor. Both Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and their supporters in Congress and in the media, all clearly stated that the central purpose of the “war on poverty” was to reduce dependency on government.

Both poverty and dependency on government had already been declining for years before this massive program began. The proportion of people whose earnings put them below the poverty level — without counting government benefits — declined by about one third from 1950 to 1965.

This was yet another beneficial trend that reversed itself after another bright idea of the left was put into practice in the 1960s. After half a century and trillions of dollars, the only response of the left has been to change the criteria, so that now the “war on poverty” could be portrayed as a success because it proved that, if you transferred more resources from X to Y, then Y would now have more resources. Who could have doubted that?

And now there are more poor children than in the Depression itself. Less jobs than in the last 40 years. But you won’t hear THAT from the Left.

Changing the goal after the fact is just one of the ways the left has portrayed its failures as successes.

And they continue to do so. Or, for the sake of The Agenda, they just ignore any “inconvenient” truths :) that get in the way of it and demonize you for daring to defy them.

Just do as you are told. Believe what you are told, without question like they do and Utopia awaits you.

And if it doesn’t happen, it’s someone elses fault, like George W. Bush! :)

There is no way to know what is going on in someone else’s mind. But sometimes their behavior tells you more than their words.

The political left’s great claim to authenticity and honor is that what they advocate is for the benefit of the less fortunate. But how could we test that?

T.S. Eliot once said, “Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.”

This suggests that one way to find out if those who claim to be trying to help the less fortunate are for real is to see if they are satisfied to simply advocate a given policy, and see it through to being imposed — without also testing empirically whether the policy is accomplishing what it set out to do.

The first two steps are enough to let advocates feel important and righteous. Whether you really care about what happens to the supposed beneficiaries of the policy is indicated by whether you bother to check out the empirical evidence afterwards.

Many, if not most, people who are zealous advocates of minimum wage laws, for example, never check to see if these laws do more good by raising some workers’ wages than harm by preventing many young and inexperienced workers from finding jobs.

One of my own pieces of good fortune, when I left home at age 17, was that the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males was in single digits that year — for the last time. The minimum wage law was ten years old, and the wage specified in that law was now so low that it was irrelevant, after years of inflation. It was the same as if there were no minimum wage law.

Liberals, of course, wanted the minimum wage raised, to keep up with inflation. The result was that, ten years later, the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males was 27.5 percent — and it has never been less than 20 percent in all the years since then.

As the minimum wage kept getting raised, so did the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males. In 1971 it was 33.4 percent — and it has never been under 30 percent since then. It has often been over 40 percent and, occasionally, over 50 percent.

But people who advocate minimum wage laws seldom show any interest in the actual consequences of such laws, which include many idle young males on the streets, which does no good for them or for their communities.

Advocates talk about people who make minimum wages as if they are a permanent class of people. In reality, most are young inexperienced workers, and no one stays young permanently. But they can stay inexperienced for a very long time, damaging their prospects of getting a job and increasing their chances of getting into trouble, hanging out with other idle and immature males.

There is the same liberal zeal for government intervention in housing markets, and the same lack of interest in checking out what the actual consequences are for the people who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of government housing policies, whether as tenants or home buyers.

They have the best of intentions so consequences don’t matter and they are someone elese fault anyways.

Government pressures and threats forced mortgage lenders to lower their lending standards, to allow more low-income and minority applicants to qualify. But, after the housing boom became a bust, the biggest losers were low-income and minority home buyers, who were unable to keep up the payments and lost everything — which was the very reason they were turned down before lending standards were lowered.

Rent control laws have led to housing shortages in cities around the world. More than a thousand apartment buildings have been abandoned by their owners in New York alone — more than enough to house all the homeless in the city.

High tax rates on “the rich” — however defined — are an ever popular crusade on the left. Who cares about the consequences — such as the rich investing their money overseas, where it will create jobs and economic growth in other countries, while American workers are unemployed and American economic growth is anemic?

All these policies allow the political left to persist in their fact-free visions. And those visions in turn allow the left to feel good about themselves, while leaving havoc in their wake.

For they are Homo Superior Liberalis!

Liberals are like Wile E. Coyote.  For example:

  • Elaborate and expensive ideas and contraptions that always fail miserably.
  • These ideas always come from the same source.  Like Wile E. Coyote using ACME, liberals use John Maynard Keynes, Saul Alinsky, and Karl Marx for their sources every time.
  • The goal is more important than the damage attempting to achieve it causes along the way.
  • Never focusing on the possible consequences, but only focusing on the goal. Unfortunately, for Wile E. Coyote, a Mac truck, a train, an explosive rocket, etc. bring the reality of the lack of ability to see all possible consequences into the picture.  For liberals, the realities of human nature and economics seem to elude them, as they seem to think that this ACME product will work this time, and that their “super genius” will exert control over what is uncontrollable.

Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”  Anyone watching Wile E. Coyote knows it is just a cartoon intended to make you laugh at the Coyote’s rampant stubbornness and stupidity.  In real life, we would call such behavior insanity.

The Liberals call it The Agenda, and it’s perfection, just like they are. All they have to do is force you to see it. :)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
But you’re just a “hater” if you disagree.
 crazy old socialist
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kids Count

Ever since President Obama took office, the poverty rate among children has soared to 22 percent, with three million more children living in poor conditions, according to an authoritative new report released Tuesday.

A higher percentage of children live in poverty now than did during the Great Recession, according to a new report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation released Tuesday.

The 2015 “KIDS COUNT” report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation said that the percentage of children living in poverty jumped from 18 percent in 2008, the year Obama was elected, to 22 percent in 2013. It added that the rate dropped from 2012 to 2013, in line with the improving economy.

About 22% of children in the U.S. lived below the poverty line in 2013, compared with 18% in 2008, the foundation’s 2015 Kids Count Data Book reported. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Human and Health Service’s official poverty line was $23,624 for a family with two adults and two children.

“The fact that it’s happening is disturbing on lots of levels,” said Laura Speer, the associate director for policy reform and advocacy at the Casey Foundation, a non-profit based in Baltimore. “Those kids often don’t have the access to the things they need to thrive.” The foundation says its mission is to help low-income children in the U.S. by providing grants and advocating for policies that promote economic opportunity.

More “White Privilege”? :)

Evil, greedy “rich” people?

This has to be “racist” at some point, doesn’t it? :)

Among minority children and in some states, especially the South, however, the situation is dire. The report said, for example:

• The rate of child poverty for 2013 ranged from a low of 10 percent in New Hampshire, to a high of 34 percent in Mississippi.

• The child poverty rate among African Americans (39 percent) was more than double the rate for non-Hispanic whites (14 percent) in 2013.

The report also explained that a lack of jobs or good income above the poverty rate of $23,624 was the reason more children have grown up in poor families.

• In 2013, three in 10 children (22.8 million) lived in families where no parent had full-time, year-round employment. Since 2008, the number of such children climbed by nearly 2.7 million.

• Roughly half of all American Indian children (50 percent) and African-American children (48 percent) had no parent with full-time, year-round employment in 2013, compared with 37 percent of Latino children, 24 percent of non-Hispanic white children and 23 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children.”

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2170063/aecf-2015kidscountdatabook-2015.pdf

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Middle Class Economics

So where do you get the money to allegedly pour into the poor to allegedly make them richer (which hasn’t happened BTW-there are now MORE poor people), rich people.

But in the perfect scenario if the rich are getting poorer and the poor are getting richer who gets squashed in the middle?

The Middle Class. :)

The big challenge for President Obama — and for Republicans seeking their own agenda to woo the middle class — is that middle-income economic fortunes are driven mostly by private employers. The government can raise the minimum wage, but it can’t make employers raise wages for workers already making well above that. It can give out targeted tax cuts, but these can’t have large effects on the average family’s income without getting really expensive. It can impose labor regulations, but it cannot overcome the fact that employers are powerful when many workers chase a small number of jobs.

So you can make them pay $15/hr but they can lay off a lot of people to do it. :)

Contrary to the Liberal hoary and class warfare battle cry, government does not create private sector jobs.

The White House had a telling spat last month with the Tax Policy Center, a center-left joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution that produces estimates of the distributional impacts of tax proposals. Len Burman, the center’s co-director, who was a Treasury official in the Clinton administration, ran the numbers and found the president’s plan produced an average tax cut of just $12 for families in the middle quintile — a surprising result for a plan aimed at the middle class, and one that produced inconvenient headlines.

Inconvenient= Means they didn’t fit the Agenda driven truth. An Inconvenient truth, how ironic. :)

Treasury’s own numbers show the average middle-income family would get a tax cut of about $150 under the president’s plan. Whether $12 or $150, the average effects are small — much smaller than the several hundred dollars a typical family is saving this year because of falling gas prices, and much smaller than the raises Americans would get from a tight labor market that induces employers to offer higher wages. (NYT)

So that’s why Obama wants to raise gas prices! :)

It’s not just that he hates rich Oil companies in this country (in the middle east he’s just fine). That’s good to know.

“Many people in the middle class will get no benefit from the president’s proposal,” said Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. “Among the middle class, it’s targeted at people with kids and second earners. Virtually no single middle class people without kids will get anything.”

Far fewer middle class single and elderly taxpayers would benefit from Obama’s plan.

Only 12.5% of single filers would get a tax cut. Overall, this group would see a $61 increase, because nearly 7% of middle class singles would see their taxes go up and that skews the overall average.

Among the elderly, only 10% would enjoy a dip in their taxes. But because many in this group would be hit with another of the president’s provisions — that would require estates to pay capital gains on appreciated assets — they would pay an additional $152, on average. (CNN)

So you have to be the politically advantageous “middle class” to get any sucar from this government succubus that has spent $8 Trillion in less than 7 years.

But you have to play it like everyone gets it. Like the $2500 reduction in Health Care Costs from Obamacare.

Mind you, the NFL Player making multiple millions a year is not the target. The target is Corporate America. The evil rich people who make jobs for people.

After all, socialism is about the Government largesse not Private Sector largesse.

So you have to be Agenda approved.

In socialism there are only 2 classes, The Elites, and the Poor and they don’t meet. That’s is the Utopia the Democrats want to achieve.

And since Liberals have no capacity intellectually to believe they can ever be wrong about anything, ever, they if they don’t succeed they will just keep trying because it will always be someone elses fault that they didn’t succeed.

Divide and Conquer, eventually. Because they only way they succeed is to destroy all methods that do succeed and leave you with no choice but to d it their way.

And that’s Obama and The Democrats in a nutshell. My ideas can’t succeed but I will prevent any other ideas from even forming.

Orwell would be proud of you, my son.

The Ministry of Truth (even Inconvenient ones) stands ready to defend your right to fail miserably but blame someone for it and make everyone believe it.

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

White Privilege Myth

Remember, if you’re born White, you’re Evil incarnate (the original sin not forgiven- EVER!)  and minorities should hate you. And you should be aware of it and act accordingly.

Minorities MUST hate White People.

That’s how we’ll “improve” race relations. :)

FeministBreeder.com: After one reads McIntosh’s powerful essay, it’s impossible to deny that being born with white skin in America affords people certain unearned privileges in life that people of another skin color simple are not afforded. For example:

  • “I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.”
  • “When I am told about our national heritage or about “civilization,” I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.”
  • “If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven’t been singled out because of my race.”
  • “I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.”

If you read through the rest of the list, you can see how white people and people of color experience the world in two very different ways. BUT LISTEN: This is not said to make white people feel guilty about their privilege. It’s not your fault you were born with white skin and experience these privileges. BUT, whether you realize it or not, you DO benefit from it, and it IS your fault if you don’t maintain awareness of that fact.

And by default that means that Minorities are shit upon from day one, and it’s whities fault! The rich! Republicans! Conservatives! Capitalism! (see where this is going…) :)

Oh, and Quoting Dr. Martin Luther King (who was black) is ‘mind rape’ according the Far Left. Politically Incorrect bad juju.

That’s 3 counts of “mind rape”.

You’re welcome.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

You’ve been Data Mined

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”

Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.

This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.

Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.

So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.

“There are no doubt complexities that come with White Americans working for racial justice. White privilege can lead to a chronic case of undiagnosed entitlement, creating poor listeners, impatient speakers who talk over others, and people unaccustomed to taking orders. Nevertheless, the movement for racial justice needs more White Americans to get involved. And it’s our responsibility to help each other get involved–and get involved productively,” Jon Greenberg  (High School Teacher) wrote, linking to a blog post that claims quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to black women is a violent and “cisheteropatriarchy” act.

Apparently that $5 word means: Cis- Hetero Patriarchy is class based oppression of gender and sex and racism is the class based  oppression of nationality and race and apparently they use “rape” analogies a lot. So quoting Dr. King to a black person is ‘mind rape’, apparently:(

Greenberg was the recipient of the Courage in the Pursuit of Social Justice Award from the the University of Washington chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

The fabric of our society, and consequentially our organizing spaces, are weaved together by the ongoing legacies of colonization, genocide, slavery, white supremacy, and cis-hetero-patriarchy. (Praxis)

So, Yea

I’m Male.

I’m White.

But I’m not a Christian.

But I dislike the Gay Leftist Control Freak Mafia.

I am a Fan of “The Dukes of Hazzard”

I value The Constitution.

So please, data mine this…

The granddaddy of them all is the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database, which the Department of Housing and Urban Development rolled out earlier this month to racially balance the nation, ZIP code by ZIP code. It will map every US neighborhood by four racial groups — white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino — and publish “geospatial data” pinpointing racial imbalances.

The agency proposes using nonwhite populations of 50% or higher as the threshold for classifying segregated areas.

Federally funded cities deemed overly segregated will be pressured to change their zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing in affluent areas in the suburbs, and relocate inner-city minorities to those predominantly white areas. HUD’s maps, which use dots to show the racial distribution or density in residential areas, will be used to select affordable-housing sites.

HUD plans to drill down to an even more granular level, detailing the proximity of black residents to transportation sites, good schools, parks and even supermarkets. If the agency’s social engineers rule the distance between blacks and these suburban “amenities” is too far, municipalities must find ways to close the gap or forfeit federal grant money and face possible lawsuits for housing discrimination.

Civil-rights groups will have access to the agency’s sophisticated mapping software, and will participate in city plans to re-engineer neighborhoods under new community outreach requirements.

“By opening this data to everybody, everyone in a community can weigh in,” Obama said. “If you want affordable housing nearby, now you’ll have the data you need to make your case.”

Mortgage database

Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, headed by former Congressional Black Caucus leader Mel Watt, is building its own database for racially balancing home loans. The so-called National Mortgage Database Project will compile 16 years of lending data, broken down by race, and hold everything from individual credit scores and employment records.

Mortgage contracts won’t be the only financial records vacuumed up by the database. According to federal documents, the repository will include “all credit lines,” from credit cards to student loans to car loans — anything reported to credit bureaus. This is even more information than the IRS collects.

The FHFA will also pry into your personal assets and debts and whether you have any bankruptcies. The agency even wants to know the square footage and lot size of your home, as well as your interest rate.

FHFA will share the info with Obama’s brainchild, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which acts more like a civil-rights agency, aggressively investigating lenders for racial bias.

The FHFA has offered no clear explanation as to why the government wants to sweep up so much sensitive information on Americans, other than stating it’s for “research” and “policymaking.”

However, CFPB Director Richard Cordray was more forthcoming, explaining in a recent talk to the radical California-based Greenlining Institute: “We will be better able to identify possible discriminatory lending patterns.”

Credit database

CFPB is separately amassing a database to monitor ordinary citizens’ credit-card transactions. It hopes to vacuum up some 900 million credit-card accounts — all sorted by race — representing roughly 85% of the US credit-card market. Why? To sniff out “disparities” in interest rates, charge-offs and collections.

Employment database

CFPB also just finalized a rule requiring all regulated banks to report data on minority hiring to an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. It will collect reams of employment data, broken down by race, to police diversity on Wall Street as part of yet another fishing expedition.

School database

Through its mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection project, the Education Department is gathering information on student suspensions and expulsions, by race, from every public school district in the country. Districts that show disparities in discipline will be targeted for reform.

Those that don’t comply will be punished. Several already have been forced to revise their discipline policies, which has led to violent disruptions in classrooms.

Obama’s educrats want to know how many blacks versus whites are enrolled in gifted-and-talented and advanced placement classes.

Schools that show blacks and Latinos under-enrolled in such curricula, to an undefined “statistically significant degree,” could open themselves up to investigation and lawsuits by the department’s Civil Rights Office.

Count on a flood of private lawsuits to piggyback federal discrimination claims, as civil-rights lawyers use the new federal discipline data in their legal strategies against the supposedly racist US school system.

Even if no one has complained about discrimination, even if there is no other evidence of racism, the numbers themselves will “prove” that things are unfair.

Such databases have never before existed. Obama is presiding over the largest consolidation of personal data in US history. He is creating a diversity police state where government race cops and civil-rights lawyers will micromanage demographic outcomes in virtually every aspect of society.

The first black president, quite brilliantly, has built a quasi-reparations infrastructure perpetually fed by racial data that will outlast his administration. (NYP)

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

McMinimum

Let’s get one thing straight. We live in America. A country built on free enterprise and capitalism. If you have a good idea and the the drive to see it through to completion.

Just because you make minimum wage doesn’t mean you HAVE to make minimum wage.

America wasn’t built on the backs of men and women who whined about not having enough until they got it.

It was built by men and women who demanded this life give them more than what it had originally allotted them, and they didn’t give up until they got it.

mcdonaldskiosk

What this mass protest does show is that if enough people get together and yell and complain, they probably will have their demands met by a country that continues to cater to those who complain when they don’t get their way instead of actually finding something better.

What ever happened to making the most of yourself and working hard for something more than a job flipping burgers? I personally thank McDonald’s for replacing these people. Maybe now they will strive to do more with their life.

I read an article on TheBlaze a few weeks ago with the title, “Fast Food Workers: You Don’t Deserve $15 an Hour to Flip Burgers, and That’s OK”. this writer is 100% right.

Here’s an important quote from the writer…

“You think the jobs I had when I was 16 should have provided me with the comfortable living I just established in my late 20s? Frankly, I think you’re delusional.

To understand how delusional, consider that a $15 an hour full-time salary would put you in the same ballpark as biologists, auto mechanics, biochemists, teachers, geologists, roofers and bank tellers.”

This kind of wage hike for an entry level food job just adds fuel to the entitlement mentality that is increasingly rising in our nation.

But all they wanted was $15 per hour?

Until 5-10 years from now when $15/hr will be “slave wages” that is…

Hillary Clinton Declines To Support A National $15 Minimum Wage

Clinton says she supports raising the national minimum wage, but adds that “what you can do in L.A. or in New York may not work in other places.”

How hilarious is that? Mrs. “One of you” Populist (who said basically the opposite once already).

If raising the minimum wage were cost-free, why stop at $10 or $15 an hour? Why not go straight to $25 an hour, the average hourly wage? That might be considered fair, because no one would have to earn less than today’s average.

The answer, of course, is because some people are displaced at any minimum wage. It is obvious to the general public that increasing the minimum wage to $25 an hour would displace workers. It is less obvious when amounts are smaller. But when the minimum wage is raised, employers hire higher-skilled people, or switch to different forms of technology such as placing orders through touch screens.

Forbes:

As we keep trying to point out to people there really isn’t anything even remotely resembling a free lunch when it comes to the discussion of wages and labor. Meaning that just because well meaning liberals wave their magic wand and decree that wages will rise there will indeed be countervailing effects. And in San Francisco, where the minimum wage was recently raised we did indeed see that comic book shop insisting that it just couldn’t survive. And now we’ve another tale, this time from Chipotle. Beef prices have been rising around the country so they’ve raised the prices, around the country, of their beef products. Wages in San Francisco have been rising strongly so they’ve raised the prices of all their products in San Francisco strongly. There really is no free lunch. A rise in wages will come out of either less labor being employed, lower profit margins (and fast food doesn’t have those wide enough to take the strain) or price increases to consumers.

And it’s that last which is happening as Mark Perry points out:

• In our weekly survey of ten of Chipotle’s markets, we found the company implemented price increases in half of the surveyed markets this week—San Francisco, Denver, Minneapolis, Chicago, and Orlando. In most markets, the price increases have been limited to beef and average about 4% on barbacoa and steak, toward the lower end of management’s expectation for a 4% to 6% price increase on beef.

• San Francisco, however, saw across-the-board price increases averaging over 10%, including 10% increases on chicken, carnitas (pork), sofritas (tofu), and vegetarian entrees along with a 14% increase on steak and barbacoa. We believe the outsized San Francisco price hike was likely because of increased minimum wages (which rose by 14% from $10.74 per hour to $12.25 on May 1) as well as scheduled minimum wage increases in future years (to $13 next year, $14 in 2017, and $15 in 2018).

A rough guide to the finances of the fast food industry is as follows. 30% goes on wages, 30% of revenues goes on ingredients and the other 40% is everything else. Rents, advertising, capital costs and, of course, profits. Those profits are pretty low. 5% of revenues isn’t an out of order estimation of the net profit margins in the business (and, of course, that’s an average, as some locations and some whole chains lose money).

So, if we by legislative fiat raise the price of one of those inputs then something, somewhere, has to give. Those profit margins are already pretty thin and so they’re not going to be where that extra cost comes from. More than that if we reduce the returns to capital in a particular line of business then less capital will be invested in that line of business in the future. This means fewer jobs in that line of business: This is one of the ways that a rise in the minimum wage destroys jobs. Fewer will be created in the future than would have been in the absence of the rise in the minimum wage.

It’s possible that employers will be encouraged to deploy their labor in a more productive manner as a result of the price increase. This is the same statement as fewer jobs will be created. For if I go and raise labor productivity then by definition I need less labor for any given level of output. Or of course employers could just automate the process a little more and that also means fewer jobs.

So, if employers either economize on labor or profits, there will be job losses: the minimum wage rise does reduce employment.

Or there is this final method: raise prices. Which also causes job losses: for the more money that consumers are spending on reasonably priced Mexican food (although now less reasonably priced Mexican food than it used to be) the less they have available to spend on other things. We might think that there could be an interesting overlap between those who consume reasonably priced Mexican food and those who frequent comic book shops for example. If the food now costs more then there might well be less being spent in the comic book shop: again, we see reductions in the number of jobs.

And just to head off at the pass one of the more insane points that people try to make. That if the workers at Chipotle are now making more money then they’ll spend more at Chipotle, and the company’s profits will rise! This doesn’t even pass the basic math test, let alone any economic one. For note above the split in revenues. About 30% of revenue is spent upon labor. The other 70% is spent upon other things, including that 30% or so on food ingredients. So, if Chipotle raises wages by $100 (just as an example) and all of those wages are then spent in the same store, it is impossible for profits to rise. Think about it for a moment: the wage bill has just gone up by $100. Revenues have just gone up by $100. But the food bill has also gone up by $30. So, the increase in costs is $130 (even in the very best, best, case) while revenues have gone up by $100. This is known to the cognoscenti as a loss, not an increase in profit.

There really is no such thing as a free lunch. Only lunches of variable cost. And if we increase the cost of one of the major inputs into such lunches then something else will give. Here, as a result of the rise in the minimum wage Chipotle has raised prices in that specific location where the minimum wage rise occurred.

This doesn’t help minimum wage earners: some unknown but knowable reduction in sales of reasonably priced Mexican food will take place as a result of this price rise. Demand curves really do slope downwards. Thus some unknown but knowable number of people will not be employed to produce said food.

As we’ve been saying all along: a rise in the minimum wage really does destroy jobs.

Finding the effects of raising the minimum wage is challenging, because 97 percent of American workers now make above the minimum wage—not because it is the law, but because employers have to pay higher compensation packages to retain workers. That is one reason that some academic studies do not find major negative effects of minimum-wage increases.

Those who would be harmed by increasing the minimum wage are young people. Half of minimum-wage workers are under 25, and 24 percent are teens. This group’s unemployment rate is already higher than the 5.3 percent overall rate. The teen unemployment rate is 18 percent, and the African-American teen unemployment rate is 32 percent. The youth unemployment rate is 10 percent. (Federalist)

But the Left will continue with their class warfare because that suits THEIR Agenda, so what if you get hurt in the process, like that matters. The end justifies the means, remember. :)

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Liberals Win

 Derek Hunter nails it again…

Tactics are important. History is replete with examples of superior forces being defeated by smaller armies with a better battle plan. Conservatives lose for the same reason: We have no battle plan.

For years conservatives were content to be correct. Socialism doesn’t work. Fascism was a horrendous failure. Communism collapsed under its own weight. Each time conservatives were vindicated in their opposition to these failed branches of the progressive ideological tree. But at the end of each battle we made the mistake of assuming the war was over. It wasn’t and never will be.

Every progressive victory was preceded by repeated failure, sometimes decades of it. And each time, conservatives thought that was the end of the issue. A prime example of this is Hillarycare in the early ‘90s. It was a crushing rebuke of socialism and led to the Republican revolution in 1994. But the issue never went away, progressives never stopped working toward their goal, and, eventually, they won.

Remember the Contract with America in the ‘90s? A balanced budget amendment, term limits, Social Security reform, etc., etc. What happened to those policy goals? Aside from random candidates pledging to serve X number of terms, they aren’t talked about anymore with regularity on a national scale.

When Hillarycare went down, Republicans didn’t rush to fill that void. The problems with the health care system did not miraculously go away when that project went down in flames. There was no concerted effort to rally the country around a free-market-based health care system. There were just minor nips around the edges to appease various groups. The GOP’s failure to put forth a vision and fight for passage of any sort of reform in the wake of that victory led to a massive loss for the country on Obamacare.

I’ve asked several Republican members of Congress, mostly conservatives, about the party’s vision for replacing Obamacare. Most say they are waiting to get behind the plan of the eventual presidential nominee. But that’s not a strategy. That’s a dodge.

That’s a lack spine, exemplified by “Jar Jar” Boehner.

Rather than focus on issues that affect people’s lives and create jobs, such as replacing Obamacare with a real, market-based system that empowers individuals, Republicans sit and wait. But no matter how long they wait, Godot never shows.

Conservatives are rudderless, but progressives are relentless.

Not a day goes by I don’t get some email from the Democratic National Committee or Organizing for America or some other left-wing group extoling whatever issue they’re pushing. Forcing companies to provide paid sick leave to every employee? It’s a national imperative. Raising the minimum wage? Lives depend on it. “Stronger” overtime rules? People are being hurt. Guns? People are being killed by these inanimate objects and we must stop it now.

Or “The Dukes of Hazzard”. :)

It’s all garbage and lies. These issues are nowhere near the top of the list of concerns of the American people, but, if history holds, some form of each will be rammed through Congress and signed by a progressive president within the next 20 years unless conservatives offer a counter-vision.

That’s not to say the GOP has to offer its own “solutions” to these problems. There are plenty of issues out there and no reason to let opponents choose the battlefield. But what do Republicans want to do? What’s their vision?

The left not only chooses the battlefields, it defines the terms of the fight. A lone monster does something awful with a gun, and the narrative becomes the need to control everyone’s exercise of their Second Amendment rights. The president and progressive politicians (and the media, but I repeat myself) stampede to microphones with a uniform message of how “something must be done.”

And the Republicans wait for inspiration and a spinal implant.

An illegal alien with a gun stolen from the government murders a woman walking with her father, and she might as well not have existed. For all his faults, were it not for Donald Trump, the name Kate Steinle not only already would be forgotten, it never would have been known. Yet progressives are unified in their “You shouldn’t punish everyone for the actions of one person” message (in this case; they do want to punish everybody for Dylann Roof’s crimes), and no prominent politician on the right points out the hypocrisy.

An Illegal Alien makes a documentary on the evils of “White People”.

Progressives never stop, and they don’t care how many bodies or how much destruction they leave in their wake in achieving their objectives. Dozens of Democrats were thrown out of Congress for their vote in support of Obamacare, and they knew it would happen before they cast it. Republicans can’t bring themselves to use the constitutional power of the purse to force any concessions on Obamacare – even though that’s how most of them got to Congress in the first place – because they’re afraid of how people could perceive it and they might lose their jobs.

Worrying about “being liked” when faced with a rampaging, unthinking Monster is the last thing you should be doing. Besides, the Monster’s Press agents hate you already and will hate you no matter what anyhow.

Democrats have a strategy, a battle plan they’re willing to do anything to advance. Republicans have facts, statistics, history and no clue what to do with them. If you can’t sell freedom, if you can’t convince citizens of the importance of liberty, you will lose. More importantly, you will deserve to lose.

If the GOP and whoever the presidential candidate ends up being can’t commit to an agenda with vision, one of growth and liberty with the tenacity their political opponents bring to its antithesis, 2016 will be another example of Republicans snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. 

Being spineless and appeasing the Left Wing Media will not win you anything.

The Marquess of Queensbury rules of gentlemanly behavior do not work anymore.

Passion, Vision, and Tenacity do.

Democrats are Water, And Republicans need to be the Dam. But it takes strength, and planning because water is relentless.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

In His Interest Only

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Columnist and author of “The Undocumented,” Mark Steyn argued comparing President Obama to Neville Chamberlain is “rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain” on Tuesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

Steyn said of comparisons between Obama and Chamberlain, “I think actually that’s rather unfair to Neville Chamberlain, Sean. He got the central question of the 1930’s wrong, but he was an honorable man, who believed he was acting in the interests of his country and the British Empire which he loved. When Churchill became prime minister he kept Chamberlain on and had him chair the War Cabinet in his absence. And Churchill wept over Chamberlain’s funeral casket, and claimed he was an honorable man who just happened to be wrong. I don’t think you can say that about Obama. I think what Obama did is significantly worse than what Neville Chamberlain did. I don’t think, in effect, Obama was negotiating on behalf of the United States. I think what happened at these talks is that he and the Iranians were, in a sense, negotiating together to anoint Iran as the regional power in the Middle East and to facilitate Iran’s reentry, the biggest planetary sponsor of terrorism, to facilitate its reentry into the global community. That’s what Obama was there doing.”

“I think the nuclear issue was a mere pretext, a Hitchcockian McGuffin. Iran will be a nuclear state, and very soon. The joke inspections regime – under which Teheran can block any inspections for the best part of a month – will facilitate the nuclearization of Iran and prevent anyone who objects to it – such as Israel – from doing anything about it. That’s a given.”

But that’s not what the talks were about. Obama’s vision of the post-American Middle East sees Iran as the dominant power, and that’s what the negotiations were there to finesse.

Steyn added, “I think that’s the other difference between Obama and Chamberlain. The horrors of the — of what Germany did were not known to Neville Chamberlain. And in a sense the appeasers of the 1930’s did so because of the horrors of the first World War and the lost generation, and they didn’t want that to happen again. And it’s because we know they got it wrong, that history won’t give us the same opt out card. Because we should have known better because it had happened before. And I think what Obama gets here, i think it does come back to a — to his classic Marxist worldview in which he sees America as the problem on the world’s stage. And if you look at everything he did — he’s done, Sean, what he did with Iran fits into that context. I mean, whether you look at missile defense in Eastern Europe, where he takes the side of Russia over US allies like Poland and the Czech Republic. If you look at little things, like the Falklands Islands, where he takes the side of Argentina over a US ally like United Kingdom. And in the Middle East, he’s taken the side of Iran over US allies like the Sunni monarchies and Israel, because his central view is that America and American power is the problem in the world. And, therefore, American allies are part of that problem. And, therefore, what he does is, in a sense, withdraw from the world, and enhance the position of the enemies of American allies. That’s what he’s done in the Middle East. And it won’t be confined to the Middle East, it’ll spread beyond that.”

Sheldon Filger: In a private meeting with leftwing progressive activists in the Democratic Party held in January 2014, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes, spelled out the administration’s intentions. Unknown to Rhodes, his confidential briefing was secretly recorded, and details would subsequently leak out. The core of what he had to say about the negotiations with Iran:

“So no small opportunity, it’s a big deal. This is probably the biggest thing President Obama will do in his second term on foreign policy. This is healthcare for us, just to put it in context.” He went on to say, “We’re already kind of thinking through, how do we structure a deal so we don’t necessarily require legislative action right away. And there are ways to do that.”

Largely in secret, and based on a belief that the American people lacked the sophistication to fully understand the Iran issue as thoroughly as President Obama and his expert advisors, a policy decision was apparently made to engage in a grand act of appeasement, allowing Iran to maintain intact its illicit nuclear infrastructure designed solely to fabricate fissile materials suitable for ultimately only one purpose — manufacturing nuclear weapons. A fig leaf of a 10-year moratorium on full-scale use of that capacity by Iran, with a supposedly strict inspection regime that is obfuscated by a complex treaty that is so arcane, it allows Iran numerous opportunities to thwart its intent and cheat successfully, has been presented as largely a public relations exercise. The real intent of the Iran deal, as Ben Rhodes suggested 18 months ago, is to transform Iran from an adversary to a regional ally of America’s and serve as the Middle East policeman, allowing the United States to finally extricate itself from military involvement in that region.

Barack Obama, John Kerry and Ben Rhodes apparently believe in a manner similar to Stalin’s that the Ayatollahs’ vehemently anti-American hatred is not a core value of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and will be sublimated by pragmatism. Yet, even as the Iran Deal was being finalized, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei publicly chanted “death to America!” American flags were burning on Iranian streets as Kerry and Zarif exchanged smiles. And the regime’s most militant instrument of power, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, was staging naval exercises that involved the “sinking” of a replica of an American aircraft carrier.

President Obama has apparently convinced himself that Tehran’s hostility is only a passing phase, and that in time it will become the trustworthy guardian of the Middle East, protecting the United States from what the administration seems to regard as the unruly Sunni Arab world. Decades of alliances with the broader Arab world, and especially Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries, along with Israel, are in the process of being abandoned, in what must be regarded as the most reckless crapshoot in American geostrategic planning.

Unfortunately, the administration has lulled itself into sleepwalking with a hegemon whose core ideology, as the leaders of the Islamic Republic have repeatedly stated, is centered on hatred of the United States. Unless other forces can prevent what at this point seems inevitable, the ultimate outcome of the Iran deal is that Americans will one day awaken to the reality of an apocalyptic regime pointing nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles at their shores.

But it makes THEM feel good. It makes THEM feel superior. It MAKES them look “strong” in their eyes. And we know the only opinion that matters to Obama, Is Obama’s.

And in 10-15 years (or less) when Iran is terrorizing the world with Nuclear weapons the Left and Obama will be firmly and resolutely convinced beyond a shadow of any doubt that it will be someone elses fault! :)

Somebody Else’s Problem field, or SEP, is a cheap, easy, and staggeringly useful way of safely protecting something from unwanted eyes. It can run almost indefinitely on a torch (flashlight)/9 volt battery, and is able to do so because it utilises a person’s natural tendency to ignore things they don’t easily accept, like, for example, aliens at a cricket match. Any object around which an S.E.P. is applied will cease to be noticed, because any problems one may have understanding it (and therefore accepting its existence) become Somebody Else’s. An object becomes not so much invisible as unnoticed.

“The Somebody Else’s Problem field is much simpler and more effective, and what’s more can be run for over a hundred years on a single torch battery. This is because it relies on people’s natural disposition not to see anything they don’t want to, weren’t expecting, or can’t explain.”

― Douglas Adams, Life, the Universe and Everything

Problem Solved. :)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Neville Chamberlain’s Ghost?

Wow, what a deal.

The arrogant ideologue Obama got his deal, at any cost. He will strut around and defend his ego while everyone else thinks he’s mad.

He doesn’t care. His “legacy” and his ego are intact.

I can’t wait for the “hate speech” to start from The Left and anyone who disagrees with Obama’s foolhardy plan is a “racist” (they hate it just because he’s black!).

The spin on this one should knock the Earth out of orbit.

Only an ideologue with a massive God complex could think the deal he struck with Iran was a good deal.

“I have no doubt 10 or 15 years from now the person who holds this office will be in a far stronger position with Iran further away from a weapon and with the inspections and transparancy that allow us to monitor the Iranian program. For this reason I believe it would be irresponsible to walk away from this deal,” Obama said.

The president stated that “no deal  means a greater chance of more war in the Middle East.”

Is Harley Quinn running the White House?

trust

It such a great deal.

Example:  The 1990’s style inspectors who will “find nothing” have a inspection request. Iran has 24 days in total to stall them in the agreement!

24 days!

Are you kidding me!

That’s so far beyond a joke there is no word in the English language for it.

And I that’s not even the half of it.

Iran get the sanctions lifted so they get hundred of millions of dollars in revenue and can come back later (After Obama is not in office so it won’t be “his” fault) and terrorize the world.

They gave Iran everything including the baby AND the bath water and only a hard core ideologue like him would think his NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN moment in history was a great idea!!

Moreover, we give nothing up by testing whether or not this problem can be solved peacefully.

This is why Liberal NEVER learn anything from history. And why they have to re-write it to cover up their mistakes later.

I think I’ll stick this metal rod in that electrical outlet, i give up nothing by testing whether or not it might electrocute me!

“I welcome a robust debate in Congress on this issue, and I welcome scrutiny of the details of this agreement,” Obama said. “But I will remind Congress that you don’t make deals like this with your friends.”

“Robust debate” Ideologue translation= Jawbone all you want, Do as I say or else my petulant pen will come out again and I will win anyways! <<<phhhfttt!>>>

If this is how he deals with his enemies, imagine what the American people must be after the IRS, ObamaCare, et al… :(

Obama stressed there would be “very real consequences for a violation” of the agreement by Iran

Yeah, the wagging of his finger and the UN inspections saying please can we inspect your sight in 24 days (oh and her’s $150 million+ as a bonus) is a real deterrent!

Only a mindless ideologue caught up in his ego fantasy would think that’s ‘good enough’ to stop them.

Oh, and the Iranians will be cheating from second 1.

All this radioactive residue will make it far more difficult to figure out what’s new and what’s old. “They enriched uranium to a high level. Well, environmental sampling from now for eons will detect that,” Kay said. “The Iranians have an easy out, having acknowledged that they did it in the past. They can say, ‘That’s from the old program’…It’s one thing inspecting in a place like Iraq after the first Gulf War where everything was prohibited. The background was supposed to be null.”

Even the promise of real-time camera feed monitoring will likely become a matter of dispute and argument. “Modern equipment has outages. The Internet goes down,” Kay said. “Every time an anomaly occurs, it will require another inspection effort to verify it was a genuine anomaly and not an intentional one.” Inspectors, in short, will be asked to look for signs of nuclear activity in a place where the signatures of such activity abound. (defenseone.com).

So it will be like your internet service. Iran will have the occasional “outage” the Inspector will REQUEST an inspection and Iran has 24 days to stall them so when they do come in they “find nothing”.

Neville Chamberlain’s Ghost would be proud of you, Barack.

Also…David Kay, a former United Nations chief weapons inspector who ran the Iraq Survey Group”any inspector working in Iran should assume constant phone and email hacking attempts. “You can’t believe how hard it is on inspectors when you know every conversation is going to be overheard, that there’s probably video monitoring in your hotel room,” he said. “The sense of privacy disappears. For the IAEA, maintaining the integrity of the inspection process is going to be a constant concern.” It will be a concern that will last for years.” (defense one)

Gee, that sounds rather Obama/Hillary-esque. :)

“If I had to place a bet on the first violation, it would be in the procurement of potentially nuclear-related —in other words, dual-use equipment. The Iranians have the best clandestine procurement at work that I’ve ever seen … With dual-use equipment, you’re often able to gin up a permitted use,” said David Kay, a former United Nations chief weapons inspector who ran the Iraq Survey Group. “It’s going to be very hard for inspectors to determine whether they are inside or outside the agreement.” (defense one)

But they can REQUEST an inspection and wait 24 days! Yippee!

Does all this make it certain that Iran will cheat? Is the deal rotten to the core? Not at all, says Kay. He calls the deal “workable.” It can succeed, he says, but only on one condition: that political powers in the United States support the inspectors when they try to ring alarm bells. “From an inspector’s point of view, the worst thing that can happen is that you find stuff that is suspicious and your political masters simply aren’t prepared to take the difficult steps to resolve it.” (defense one)

Another beer summit! More “negotiations” that drag on for years…Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Well, done, Mr. President!

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Uncle Sam’s Haul

The federal government raked in a record of approximately $2,446,920,000,000 in tax revenues through the first nine months of fiscal 2015 (Oct. 1, 2014 through the end of June), according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released today.

That equaled approximately $16,451 for every person in the country who had either a full-time or part-time job in June.

Are these just the jobs Americans “will do”? :)

The percentage of Americans working or looking for work fell to 62.6 percent in June, after 432,000 people dropped out of the labor force. That’s the lowest rate since October, 1977, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

It is also up about $178,156,270,000 in constant 2015 dollars from the $2,268,763,730,000 in revenue (in inflation-adjusted 2015 dollars) that the Treasury raked in during the first nine months of fiscal 2014.

Despite the record tax revenues of $2,446,920,000,000 in the first nine months of this fiscal year, the government spent $2,760,301,000,000 during those nine months, and, thus, ran up a deficit of $313,381,000,000 during the period.

So they have record tax collection but yet they still run a deficit! (but Obama would say that they run less of a deficit than when he started so that’s ‘progress’).

Anyone else see the flaw in the tax slaw?

The debt is now 18.3 Trillion and climbing.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total seasonally adjusted employment in the United States in June (including both full and part-time workers) was 148,739,000. That means that the federal tax haul so far this fiscal year has equaled $16,451 for every person in the United States with a job.

In 2012, President Barack Obama struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes. That included increasing the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, increasing the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent, and phasing out personal exemptions and deductions starting at an annual income level of $250,000.

An additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends, interests, capital gains and royalties–that was embedded in the Obamacare law–also took effect in 2013.

The largest share of this year’s record-setting October-through-June tax haul came from the individual income tax. That yielded the Treasury $1,167,500,000,000. Payroll taxes for “social insurance and retirement receipts” took in another $771,048,000,000. The corporate income tax brought in $255,453,000,000.

But don’t worry, if you take this seriously, you have to be a “hater” of Obama, right?

The truth doesn’t matter any more, remember. :)

irony  government assistance

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The New Rules

We conservatives have spent far too long playing by the old rules when liberals have completely changed the game. There was a time when laws meant what they said, when individual rights were important, when the government did not make it its business to oppress the executive’s ideological opponents, and when principles mattered. But that time has passed.

There’s a new set of rules, and while we don’t have control in Washington right now, we do have control most everywhere else – and someday a conservative will be president again. So there is no reason not to get going right now playing by the same rules the liberals do!

Of course, first we need to understand the basis of the new rules – it’s about having the moral courage to obtain and keep power. Until now, we conservatives have been guided by “principles” and “values” that only serve to distract us from what’s really important. Under the new rules, we will no longer let arbitrary ideas about how America should work get in the way of maximizing our ability to exercise our authority over others. After all, our supremacy is a moral imperative.

We will step beyond obsolete notions about process and embrace the primacy of results. We will stop treating “means” and “ends” like they are distinct and different – as 1984 (Read it – lots of great tactics, techniques and procedures!) teaches, “Power is not a means; it is an end.” Means and ends will flow together seamlessly, and we will stop getting hung-up on how we do things and focus on the real goal under the new rules – consolidating our power for the greater good.

Take the law. Under the old rules, judges were constrained by the plain meaning of the text, but that is far too restrictive. Words must mean what we need them to mean, no more and no less. We have to appoint judges who won’t prattle on about “judicial restraint” and “not legislating from the bench,” and who will reliably rule exactly how we need them to rule on each and every case. Let’s appoint judges, who understand that their purpose is to rationalize rulings that support our policy priorities, not seek some “legally correct” decision that might not. The law of the land is whatever we want it to be!

We should celebrate Judge Robert’s recent Obamacare decision – it was liberating! He made it clear that when we want a different result, we don’t have to be deterred by the fact that the law means exactly the opposite. He affirmed that judges should interpret statutes – and the Constitution too – based upon a subjective desire for a particular outcome. Think of the possibilities for conservative progress if we aren’t hamstrung by some inconvenient text in a statute or the literal meaning of the words on some ancient parchment!

Where we have control of law enforcement, we have another great opportunity to play by the new rules. There are all sorts of liberal organizations out there shamelessly advocating policies and ideas we disapprove of. As we have learned, we can turn the power of the government upon them to root out this wrongdoing. We do not need to bother with accusing them of any kind of specific crime – why should we restrict our investigations to clear violations of laws? Instead, we can launch fishing expeditions to see what we can dig up – and even if there’s nothing, well, remember that the process is the punishment. Regardless, it’s important to establish that our political opponents will pay a price for presuming to oppose us.

And, naturally, when our allies are accused of breaking the law, we just ignore it. There needs to be two sets of laws – one for us, and one for everyone else. Otherwise, we might be constrained from doing what we please.

And there are other opportunities a huge government can provide us. Beyond audits and blocking vital certifications, the IRS has plenty of juicy information on every American – we can selectively release it to intimidate those who do not support us. And when we get a hold of everyone’s medical records under Obamacare – wow! What an opportunity!

Of course, there will not be any Obamacare. Oh, technically it might be hard to repeal (though getting rid of the filibuster entirely will make it much easier!), but who needs to repeal it when we can just choose not to enforce it? Our next president simply has to instruct the rest of the executive branch that they will not be taking any action with regard to implementing Obamacare, not collecting any of its taxes (they are taxes this week, right?) and not enforcing any of its mandates. Understand that we won’ be refusing to carry out the law – we’ll just be focusing on different executive priorities!

Perhaps the mainstream media will speak up, at least at first. But, you know, the New York Times, NBC and the rest really seem to have way too much power over our national conversation. It just isn’t fair how these big companies drown out the voices of regular people. Heck, these corporate entities are not even people and certainly should not have rights like people do to speak freely and so forth. They are more of a public utility, and frankly, they have not been serving the public good. That’s why we will use the FCC to take charge and oversee the shamefully deregulated mainstream media. We especially need some sort of doctrine to ensure fairness that forces the Washington Post and CNN to give a fair hearing to conservative ideas, religious views, and traditional values.

You know, there’s been a lot of bigotry against conservatives, religious people, and traditional Americans, and it is time the government took action by concentrating its anti-discrimination efforts on those spewing hate against them. We will have to root out policies and practices that result in such prejudice. Step one is focusing on colleges, where hate against normal Americans runs amok. Colleges that refuse to conform will lose their funding and tax exempt status – oh, and we will be taxing excessive endowments too. Schools like liberal Harvard have billions socked away, money that could be better used serving working Americans’ priorities than those of wealthy college administrators.

And speaking of billions, Hollywood and the entertainment industry need our attention. They spew out a tremendous amount of hate against conservatives, religious people, and traditional Americans, and that kind of intolerance simply cannot be tolerated. We’ll need to take action under the discrimination laws to punish the kind of offensive words and portrayals that make normal Americans feel unsafe and marginalized in theaters and their own homes.

Moreover, those in Hollywood and in the high tech world are getting far too rich. They are simply not paying their fair share – remember that their wealth came from the regular Americans who buy movie tickets and iPhones, and it is only right that these rich liberals give something back to working American families.

A 40% surcharge on all Hollywood and Silicon Valley windfall profits would go a long way towards making things fairer – and this has nothing to do with the fact that most Hollywood and Silicon Valley political money goes to our opponents. But don’t worry about our conservative allies in those two fields – if they don’t pay we just won’t prosecute them! But if you’re liberal, watch out!

Of course, it’s entirely possible that we and the Hollywood and high tech moguls can resolve the issues that led to them pouring money into our enemy’s coffers and come to some understanding that keeps us from having to rollback copyright protections on their intellectual property to, say, ten years.

This is only the beginning – the new rules liberate us from the constraints that for so long kept us from truly making conservative progress. All those “principles” and “ideals” about right and wrong and all that only served to take our eyes off of the real prize – our power, which we would only use for the common good.

Sure, we were all sad to see the old rules go, but gone they are. Our liberal friends made sure of that. So let’s make the best of it! (Kurt Schlichter)

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

This one’s a Cracker!

Sign the Petition to be sent to the President. (the following is serious sarcasm for the unintelligent who might read this) Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.

https://www.change.org/p/america-change-the-name-of-cracker-barrel-to-caucasian-barrel

Cracker, sometimes white cracker or cracka, is a derogatory term for white people,especially poor rural whites in the Southern United States.

It’s not politically incorrect at this time because it is said by blacks about whites and we all know that is not only not un-PC it’s probably encouraged by the PC Leftists.

Though I think Cracker Jacks is far more “offensive” because it has a white person (and an evil sailor-military person) on the cover and an insultingly puerile prize inside. I mean really, that prize is so childish, so insignificant it’s insulting.

Then we could get into saltine crackers.

They are white with a little brown toasting. That should make them doubly un-PC “offensive” to both brown people and white people.

White board, Black Board, White Out, Black out…ad nauseum.

It all mean to be racist against white people. Yeah, yeah, I know, on the Leftist side of reality there can be no such thing as Minorities (especially blacks) who are racists but fair is fair and if a Leftist demands one thing all the time it’s “fairness”. :)

The human races favorite food, Chocolate comes in White Chocolate and Dark Chocolate (with brown being Milk Chocolate) so it has to be the most “equality” and “fairness” food on the planet.

So why can’t we all just be “fair” about this and get rid of Crackers all together, or start calling them something else. Lets start a campaign to rename the cracker to something less racist.

Can’t we all just get along…. :)

(of course not, that would be bad for the liberal race hustling warfare business)

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
 And it’s the Republicans fault….The gun killed her! :)
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Offensensitivity

I have an acquaintance I have done panels with at Phoenix Comic Con who wrote this blog…

Offensensitivitosis: Also Known As Whinybitchitis
Jul 8, 2015

Offensensitivitosis: Also Known As Whinybitchitis

Ladies and Gentlemen, children of all ages, creeds, and colors; I, E. Adam Thomas, being of sound mind and vaguely not-too-decrepit body, hereby serve notice upon all humanity that I am fucking sick to death of all of your whining and bullshit. I’m fed up with all of you. Gay or straight, black or white, theist or atheist… all of you can fuck right the hell off. Why, may you ask? Because about 98% of everybody who makes a big stink about being offended by one thing or another have no business being offended by it at all. You band-wagon hopping, trend-following, faux-vegan, hipster douchebags are finally hitting my last raw nerve.

I started flipping my lid like this as a youngster

Now, I think of myself as a generally sensitive guy. I don’t like to offend people (outside of my blog and my videos, anyway), and I try to be considerate of other people’s feelings, but lately, you dorks have made it almost impossible for me to avoid pissing someone off. I therefore hath decreed that I am officially out of fucks to give. They’re all gone, and the warehouse has notified me that there won’t be any more fucks in stock for the foreseeable future. Too many cooks, not enough fucks. The fuck train has been derailed, exploded, and burned up all the fucks it was supposed to deliver to needy fuck givers like myself. The fuck mines are depleted, and the manufacturer of fucks has shut down the plant indefinitely. The fuck fairy has died, and they can’t find a replacement. There is a massive fuck drought, impacting all of Fucklifornia. The fuck well has run dry. The National Fuck Service has declared that no more fucks will be made available in perpetuity, citing nonexistent supply sources. We’re all give-a-fucked out!

We're also out of these!

What has so egregiously exhausted my patience here? Well, let me tell you, Buddy Boy, I think the final straw was this bad boy here…

The source of all evil?

You see, this boring-ass piece of cloth has generated more furrowed brows and heightened heart rates than the time Jay Leno tossed Martha Stewart’s salad on the Tonight Show. It was sparked by some ignorant fucking hillbilly murdering several innocent people in a church because they weren’t white. Instead of getting mad at ignorant hillbillies, we get mad at an obsolete piece of cotton? Are you fucking stupid people? The problem isn’t the symbol, it’s the death-deprived jackfucks who think they have the right to murder people. That’s what it boils down to. They think they have a right to murder people. Doesn’t matter why, if they have some religious or ethnic prejudice… You can’t murder people! You just can’t, okay Opie? We understanding each other, Boah? Now you take that gun, clean ‘er up real purty like, and put ‘er away, then go git washed up fer supper. Aunt Bea’s made us a real fine pot roast!

What pisses me off about this whole situation is that, first of all, instead of demonizing the fuckheads that perpetrate these monstrous acts, we’re demonizing a fucking piece of fabric. That, my friends, is the textbook definition of STUPID! We overreact about the symbol, and under react about the crime. Nobody is even mentioning the event itself, because they’re all too wrapped up in trying to make it impossible to show the flag, or any representation of it therein. We’re always doing that kind of shit. Retconning the past to make it more politically correct. It’s absolutely idiotic. This kind of garbage is turning us into a society of over reactionary knee-jerkers, and I’m sick of it. Now, some folks like to blame 911 and the subsequent sociological fallout from that event, but that’s just bullshit. Political Correctness has been the scourge of our society since the 1990’s, and its impact is escalating to the extent that absolutely nothing is safe to talk about. Can’t talk about the weather, because someone in earshot may have lost an uncle in Hurricane Katrina. Can’t look at an old picture of the New York City skyline, lest we accidentally catch a glimpse of the World Trade Center. And Heaven forbid TV Land leave a show like the Dukes of Hazzard on the air, because a car has that fucking FLAG painted on it.

Now, I may catch some shit for this, but frankly, I can’t stand The Dukes of Hazzard.  (ed: I obviously have a different view of the show, but not the issue) It’s a fucking stupid show. It’s not amusing, the stunts are lame, the characters are absolutely irritatingly unfunny and badly written… which makes it perfect for the demographic for which it was developed. Nonetheless, it is absolutely insane to stop airing the show on TV Land just because of an automotive paint job. It was not placed there to upset anyone.

Without the flag, it's just another ugly-ass car.

Look, if someone punches you in the face, you have every right to get upset and even retaliate, but you can’t get mad at someone because they possess a hand, that could  be made into a fist. You’re simply feeding into a monster of fear and intimidation created by your own weak, paranoid brain. It’s not entirely your fault, of course. The media has been force feeding tragedy and terror to you ever since the first newspaper guy noticed his circulation going up everytime the headline had something to do with one soggy bucket of blood and bones fucking over another soggy bucket of blood and bones out of no truly respectable reason whatsoever.

Here's a picture of a bucket, minus the sogginess, blood or bones. Still a pretty apt metaphor!

I’m not singling out the so-called “Liberal” media, either. All media outlets thrive on panic, terror and suffering. It’s infinitely more lucrative than headlines about a fireman saving a kitten from a tree, or a boy scout helping an old lady across the street. It ain’t news unless the kitten goes feral and attacks the fireman, or both the old lady and the boy scout are killed (the more horrible the gore the better) by a stolen semi full of nuclear bomb parts blasting through the intersection at 125 mph, spewing blood, viscera and merit badges in all directions. If both the kitten and the fireman are also impaled by pieces of the old lady’s walker, that’s extra money in the bank! This is why I cannot, in all good conscience, take any of your offensensitivity bullshit the least bit serious.

Hell, Burke Breathed was calling us out on this shit nearly 30 years ago!

I have always loved Bloom County! Best comic strip other than Peanuts ever!

Also, you might want to take into consideration the fact that the more you whine and pout about being offended by something, the more it hurts the credibility of anyone else who might have a valid reason to take offense to something truly egregious. You’re basically making things worse for people who don’t need things to get any worse, and you’re only doing so to make your own visibility on social media more prominent. In your own way, you’re trying to make yourself a microcelebrity on the backs of other people’s legitimate misery. That, my friend, makes you a selfish fucking prick! Pure and simple! You suck as a human being, because you’re trying to make yourself feel more important than the people who are genuinely hurt by whatever it is.

Therefore, I decree that, as of this day, anyone who flies into a rage about a topic that frankly has nothing to do with their own personal experience, or anyone who takes a peripherally tangible issue and exaggerates it out of proportion, can go fuck themselves into a corner. You have just made yourself and your “cause” a subject of scorn and ridicule, and anyone truly affected by whatever it is that you are flopsweating about should have the right to come right up behind you and smack you hard on the back of your head!

Here endeth the lesson!

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

White People

Are evil. End of discussion. :)

MTV will air a show later this month entitled White People which shows young white Americans crying on camera over their “white privilege” and publicly shaming them for “what they’ve done in America”.

Remember, back in the Jurassic Era when MTV stood for Music Television and all they showed was Music Videos?

No, this is not a joke. The documentary is hosted by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant and amnesty activist who has worked for the Washington Post and the Huffington Post.

The trailer for the show, which has been widely criticized by YouTube respondents, features white people expressing angst about how they are desperate not to appear “racist” or “offend people.”

According to Kimberly Ricci, the documentary forces the participants “to internalize what they’ve done in America” – in other words, this a huge exercise in white guilt tripping for public consumption.

An MTV write up of the show also explains how Vargas talks to young Native Americans who feel that European settlers did not ‘save the country’.

“They are the ones who invaded. They are the ones who took,” says Vargas.

Thus marches on the Progressive Liberal guilt trip meant to cow you and to destroy your will to resist their take over of your mind and body.

The high-and-mighty Homo Superior Liberalis behind this piece of shit wants to have a “constructive conversation”…LIKE HELL HE DOES!

Liberal Translation– “Constructive conversation”= You are guilty and you should repent and feel bad about not doing everything we want you to do or say because we are so much better than you.

It’s Sermon on the Mount time when The Progressive Gods pontificate and you repent not only YOUR sins but the sins of every Caucasian that has ever lived.

It’s Political Correctness gone beyond Orwell’s even most fervent imaginings.

Frankenstein’s Orwellian Monster sees itself as God.

Responses to the video trailer on YouTube were savage, with the clip receiving twice as many ‘thumbs down’ in comparison to ‘thumbs up’.

“I’m black, even I know this show is straight up racist. Only because it’s stereotyping white people, all white INDIVIDUALS are not like that,” wrote one respondent.

But the Agenda is the Agenda and they are on a Holy mission to make you them, or at least a mindless, cowed,servile, slave of THEM.

After all, they are Homo Superior Liberalis and they are just so vastly superior to you that they just can’t even comprehend how you can’t see The Light and The Truth of just how magnificent they are.

However, many in the liberal media are celebrating the show, with Kristen Yoonsoo remarking how pleased she is about the fact that, “lots of white people tears lie ahead.”

“It’s always a good time poking fun at white people,” she concludes.

They enjoy their superiority too much. They are a callous GOD. And they don’t care.

This GOD is cruel, judgmental, callous, and only interested in your total and absolute servitude in both mind and body. Nothing less will be acceptable.

So we have to tear you down and destroy you before we can build you up againas the perfect slave to your superior Masters.

Enjoy.

They certainly do.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

CLASS WAR IS PEACE

FEAR IS HOPE

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 70 other followers

%d bloggers like this: