Happy Anniversary!

Today is the 4th anniversary of this blog.

Egads, how time flies.

So let’s not let it go to Waste….on second thought….
let’s scroll through the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) annual report highlighting just some of the waste and redundant programs still funded by our tax dollars.

Wasteful Spending Program #1: $14 million on Catfish Inspections

“Government doesn’t have a spending problem.”- President Obama, Jan. 2013

Not only does government have a spending problem, but with a budget shortfall estimated at $845 billion this year, we have a massive wasteful spending problem. Take for instance Catfish Inspections. The GAO reports that we could easily save $14 million annually by consolidating the overlapping inspection processes on Catfish.

The actual cost of our absolutely critical Catfish inspections are more than $100 million every year, but due to a system riddled with inefficiencies we’re throwing money down the stream. The United States Department of Agriculture, under a provision of the 2008 Farm Bill, has the power to inspect and create inspection programs for meat, poultry, and seafood. One inspection process, Catfish, has grown into three separate taxpayer-funded agencies each with overlapping research and responsibilities.

Wasteful Spending Program #2: $4 Billion by not buying in bulk

“Deficit reduction is not a worthy goal.” – White House spokesman Jay Carney

Ask any big American family how they save money on groceries and household supplies, and they’ll probably pull out a Costco card. We understand that buying in bulk will reduce costs, but sadly our Federal Government doesn’t understand that basic tip for saving tax dollars. Instead each department or agency buys many of the same goods independently, dramatically reducing our national purchasing power and wastefully spending your tax dollars. The GAO reports that, “By simply buying together the critical agencies like the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Energy, and Veterans Affairs could save over $4 billion a year.”

Wasteful Spending Program #3: $82 million spent on 7 different camouflage uniforms

“It’s almost a false argument to say that we have a spending problem.” – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

In 2002 the military began a change from two camouflage patterns to the seven service-specific camouflage uniforms, all with different colors and patterns which we have today. The camouflage uniforms look incredibly similar, yet because each branch of the military is developing its own uniforms they are spending nearly $82 million in the design, creation and acquisition of the different uniforms. Instead of the military branches working together, they are all moving separately. The GAO report found that consolidating the uniforms would be more efficient, better protect service members and save millions. During the sequester debate, we made it clear that providing for national defense was a legitimate and vital function of the US Government, but maintained that even the military could trim spending by finding and eliminating inefficiencies. The $82 million in overspending here seems like a great place to start.

Implementing just these three simple changes above would save $5 billion the very first year. With the hundreds of other reforms suggested by the GAO report there would be an annual savings of roughly $250 billion. As Senator Coburn said, “That’s three times what the sequester was. Just in waste, in duplication, in stupidity, and lack of efficiency and effectiveness by the federal government. (It) makes you want to pull your hair out.”

Well said Senator Coburn…well said.

I don’t really have that much hair left to pull though.

You remember the Sequester, the 2% cut in the increase in spending that, as Liberals portray, has brought Hell on Earth, people are starving, kids as being thrown out into street, grandma is eat dog food in a back alley!

Nothing serious. 🙂

So here’s more ditties for ya:

According to the Washington Post, the U.S. government is going to leave 7 billion dollars worth of military equipment behind in Afghanistan.

The NIH plans to spend $509,840 on a study that “will send text messages in ‘gay lingo’ to methamphetamine addicts to try to persuade them to use fewer drugs and more condoms.”

The National Science Foundation has given $384,949 to Yale University to do a study on “Sexual Conflict, Social Behavior and the Evolution of Waterfowl Genitalia”.  Try not to laugh, but much of this research involves examining and measuring the reproductive organs of male ducks.

The IRS spent $60,000 on a film parody of “Star Trek” and a film parody of “Gilligan’s Island”.  Internal Revenue Service employees were the actors in the two parodies, so as you can imagine the acting was really bad.

The NIH has given $1.5 million to Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts to study why “three-quarters” of lesbians in the United States are overweight and why most gay males are not.

The NIH has also spent $2.7 million to study why lesbians have more “vulnerability to hazardous drinking”.

The U.S. government is giving sixteen F-16s and 200 Abrams tanks to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt even though the new president of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi (a member of the Muslim Brotherhood), constantly makes statements such as the following…

 
 

“Dear brothers, we must not forget to nurse our children and grandchildren on hatred towards those Zionists and Jews, and all those who support them”

 During 2012, the salaries of Barack Obama’s three climate change advisers combined came to a grand total of more than $370,000.

 Overall, 139 different White House staffers were making at least $100,000 during 2012, and there were 20 staffers that made the maximum of $172,200.

Amazingly, U.S. taxpayers spend more than 1.4 billion dollars a year on the Obamas.  Meanwhile, British taxpayers only spend about 58 million dollars on the entire royal family.

 During 2012, $25,000 of federal money was spent on a promotional tour for the Alabama Watermelon Queen.

The U.S. government spent $505,000 “to promote specialty hair and beauty products for cats and dogs” in 2012.

NASA spends close to a million dollars a year developing a menu of food for a manned mission to Mars even though it is being projected that a manned mission to Mars is still decades away.

During 2012, the federal government spent 15 million dollars to help the Russians recruit nuclear scientists.

 Over the past 15 years, a total of approximately $5.25 million has been spent on hair care services for the U.S. Senate.

The U.S. government spent 27 million dollars to teach Moroccans how to design and make pottery in 2012.

 At a time when we have an epidemic of unemployment in the United States, the U.S. Department of Education is spending $1.3 million to “reduce linguistic, academic, and employment barriers for skilled and low-skilled immigrants and refugees, and to integrate them into the U.S. workforce and professions.”

 The federal government still sends about 20 million dollars a year to the surviving family members of veterans of World War I, even though World War I ended 94 years ago.

 The U.S. government is spending approximately 3.6 million dollars a year to support the lavish lifestyles of former presidents such as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

During fiscal 2012, the National Science Foundation gave researchers at Purdue University $350,000.  They used part of that money to help fund a study that discovered that if golfers imagine that a hole is bigger it will help them with their putting.

 The U.S. government is giving hundreds of millions of dollars to the Palestinian Authority every single year.

 Federal agencies have purchased a total of approximately 2 billion rounds of ammunition over the past couple of years.  It is claimed that all of this ammunition is needed for “training purposes”.

During 2012, the National Science Foundation spent $516,000 on the creation of a video game called “Prom Week” which apparently simulates “all the social interactions of the event.”

 If you can believe it, $10,000 of U.S. taxpayer money was actually used to purchase talking urinal cakes up in Michigan.

 When Joe Biden and his staff took a trip to London, the hotel bill cost U.S. taxpayers $459,388.65.

 Joe Biden and his staff also stopped in Paris for one night.  The hotel bill for that one night came to $585,000.50.

If you can believe it, close to 15,000 retired federal employees are currently collecting federal pensions for life worth at least $100,000 annually.  That list includes such names as Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Trent Lott, Dick Gephardt and Dick Cheney.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has spent $300,000 to encourage Americans to eat caviar.

The National Institutes of Health recently gave $666,905 to a group of researchers that is conducting a study on the benefits of watching reruns on television.

The National Science Foundation has given 1.2 million dollars to a team of “scientists” that is spending part of that money on a study that is seeking to determine whether elderly Americans would benefit from playing World of Warcraft or not.

The National Institutes of Health recently gave $548,731 to a team of researchers that concluded that those that drink heavily in their thirties also tend to feel more immature.

The National Science Foundation recently spent $30,000 on a study to determine if “gaydar” actually exists.  This is the conclusion that the researchers reached at the end of the study….

 
 

“Gaydar is indeed real and… its accuracy is driven by sensitivity to individual facial features”

In 2011, the National Institutes of Health spent $592,527 on a study that sought to figure out once and for all why chimpanzees throw poop.

 The National Institutes of Health has spent more than 5 million dollars on a website called Sexpulse that is targeted at “men who use the Internet to seek sex with men”.  According to Fox News, the website “includes pornographic images of homosexual sex as well as naked and scantily clad men” and features “a Space Invaders-style interactive game that uses a penis-shaped blaster to shoot down gay epithets.”

The General Services Administration spent $822,751 on a “training conference” for 300 west coast employees at the M Resort and Casino in Las Vegas.  The following is how the Washington Post described some of the wasteful expenses that happened during this “conference”…

 
 

Among the “excessive, wasteful and in some cases impermissable” spending the inspector general documented: $5,600 for three semi-private catered in-room parties and $44 per person daily breakfasts; $75,000 for a “team-building” exercise — the goal was to build a bicycle; $146,000 on catered food and drinks; and $6,325 on commemorative coins in velvet boxes to reward all participants for their work on stimulus projects. The $31,208 “networking” reception featured a $19-per-person artisanal cheese display and $7,000 of sushi. At the conference’s closing-night dinner, employees received “yearbooks” with their pictures, at a cost of $8,130.

 Do you remember when credit rating agency Egan Jones downgraded U.S. government debt from AA+ to AA?  Well, someone in the federal government apparently did not like that at all.  According to Zero Hedge, the SEC planned to file charges against Egan Jones for “misstatements” on a regulatory application with the SEC.

Normally, the SEC does not go after anyone.  After all, when is the last time a major banker went to prison?

No, the truth is that the SEC is usually just a huge waste of taxpayer money.  According to ABC News, one investigation found that 17 senior SEC officials had been regularly viewing pornography while at work.  While the American people were paying their salaries, this is what senior SEC officials were busy doing…

 
 

One senior attorney at SEC headquarters in Washington spent up to eight hours a day accessing Internet porn, according to the report, which has yet to be released. When he filled all the space on his government computer with pornographic images, he downloaded more to CDs and DVDs that accumulated in boxes in his offices.

An SEC accountant attempted to access porn websites 1,800 times in a two-week period and had 600 pornographic images on her computer hard drive.

Another SEC accountant used his SEC-issued computer to upload his own sexually explicit videos onto porn websites he joined.

And another SEC accountant attempted to access porn sites 16,000 times in a single month.

According to InformationWeek, the federal government is spending “millions of dollars” to train Asian call center workers.

If you can believe it, the federal government has actually spent $750,000 on a new soccer field for detainees held at Guantanamo Bay.

 The U.S. Agency for International Development spent 10 million dollars to create a version of “Sesame Street” for Pakistani television.

 The Obama administration has plans to spend between 16 and 20 million dollars to help students from Indonesia get master’s degrees.

The National Science Foundation spent $198,000 on a University of California-Riverside study that explored “motivations, expectations and goal pursuit in social media.” One of the questions the study sought an answer to was the following: “Do unhappy people spend more time on Twitter or Facebook?”

 In 2011, $147,138 was given to the American Museum of Magic in Marshall, Michigan.  Their best magic trick is making U.S. taxpayer dollars disappear.

The federal government recently spent $74,000 to help Michigan “increase awareness about the role Michigan plays in the production of trees and poinsettias.”

In 2011, the federal government gave $550,000 toward the making of a documentary about how rock and roll contributed to the fall of the Soviet Union.

 The National Institutes of Health has contributed $55,382 toward a study of “hookah smoking habits” in the country of Jordan.

 The federal government gave $606,000 to researchers at Columbia University to study how heterosexuals use the Internet to find love.

A total of $133,277 was recently given to the International Center for the History of Electronic Games for video game preservation.  The International Center for the History of Electronic Games says that it “collects, studies, and interprets video games, other electronic games, and related materials and the ways in which electronic games are changing how people play, learn, and connect with each other, including across boundaries of culture and geography.”

The federal government has given approximately $3 million to researchers at the University of California at Irvine to fund their “research” into video games such as World of Warcraft.

 In 2011, the National Science Foundation gave one team of researchers $149,990 to create a video game called “RapidGuppy” for cell phones and other mobile devices.

 In 2011, $936,818 was spent developing an online soap opera entitled “Diary of a Single Mom”.  The show “chronicles the lives and challenges of three single mothers and their families trying to get ahead despite obstacles that all single mothers face, such as childcare, healthcare, education, and finances.”

Last year, the federal government spent $96,000 to buy iPads for kindergarten students in Maine.

 The U.S. Postal Service once spent $13,500 for a single dinner at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse.

In 2011, the Air Force Academy completed work on an outdoor worship area for pagans and Wiccans.  The worship area consists of “a small Stonehenge-like circle of boulders with [a] propane fire pit” and it cost $51,474 to build.  The worship area is “for the handful of current or future cadets whose religions fall under the broad category of ‘Earth-based’, which includes Wiccans, druids and pagans.”  At this point, that only includes 3 current students at the Air Force Academy.

The National Institutes of Health once gave researchers $400,000 to study why gay men in Argentina engage in risky sexual behavior when they are drunk.

 The National Institutes of Health once gave researchers $442,340 to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam.

 The National Institutes of Health once spent $800,000 in “stimulus funds” to study the impact of a “genital-washing program” on men in South Africa.

 The National Science Foundation recently spent $200,000 on a study that examined how voters react when politicians change their stances on climate change.

The federal government recently spent $484,000 to help build a Mellow Mushroom pizzeria in Arlington, Texas.

 At this point, China is holding over a trillion dollars of U.S. government debt.  But that didn’t stop the United States from sending 17.8 million dollars in foreign aid to China in 2011.

 The U.S. Department of Agriculture gave the largest snack food maker in the world (PepsiCo Inc.) a total of 1.3 million dollars in corporate welfare that was used to help build “a Greek yogurt factory in New York.”

 The National Science Foundation recently gave a whopping $697,177 to a New York City-based theater company to produce a musical about climate change.

The federal government once shelled out $2.6 million to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly.

 The U.S. Department of Agriculture once handed researchers at the University of New Hampshire $700,000 to study methane gas emissions from dairy cows.

 The federal government has spent $175,587 “to determine if cocaine makes Japanese quail engage in sexually risky behavior”. (zero hedge)

But remember the Sequester has ruined everyone and everything! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

20+ Things

You have to give liberalism a certain amount of credit. It doesn’t work, destroys lives, and pits people against each other, but that’s not to say that there are no advantages to being a liberal. Sure, you may end up sleeping in a tent in Zuccotti Park, reading Noam Chomsky’s laughably ignorant books, or having to watch Rachel Maddow babble incoherent nonsense on MSNBC, but the fringe benefits cannot be beaten!

1) If you’re a politician, no matter how dumb you are or how poor your decision-making is, the press will still never question your intelligence.

2) You can claim to personally speak for everyone in your gender or racial group, like you’re their leader, and the press will take you seriously.

3) You can feel completely superior to people who are more admired, more influential, richer, happier, more successful, and just generally better than you in almost every way (like Sarah Palin) because they’re conservatives.

4) You can declare that other people should have their money taken away and given to the government and still get credit for being “compassionate” even if you give nothing yourself.

5) You can leave a woman to die at the bottom of a tidal pool, use crack, or have a gay prostitution ring run out of your apartment and other liberals will STILL vote for you.

6) You can suggest that black Americans are too incompetent to handle something as simple as getting a photo ID without being called racist.

7) You can use capitalism to make huge piles of money and then turn right around and score brownie points with your fellow liberals by ripping an economic system that made it possible for you to actually become filthy rich writing, making music, or acting for a living.

8) No matter how many insults you lob at people you disagree with or how determined you are to refuse to listen to their arguments, you will never feel as if you’re being uncivil or close minded.

9) You can be a white man who calls himself the first black President without getting in trouble with Al Sharpton and be a serial adulterer who even cheats with an intern without getting in trouble with NOW.

10) You can go an entire lifetime without having a single kind thing to say about America and still consider yourself to be patriotic.

11) Similarly, you can disregard the Bible, ignore slurs aimed at Christianity, and mock people who take their religious beliefs seriously and still consider yourself to be a Christian.

12) You can be perfectly fine with cheating on your own taxes while you call other people “greedy” for not wanting to pay higher taxes themselves.

13) If you’re a minority, you can actually hold a prominent media job centered around regularly accusing other people of being racists.

14) You’ll be considered “courageous” by your left-wing friends when you get up in front of a group of liberals and say things that all of you believe to be true.

15) If you run for office, you’ll get questions like, “(Do you think your opponents are) uninformed, out of touch, or irresponsible?” from the media while your opponents will be getting asked questions that start with the presumption that they hate half the country or their economic policies couldn’t possibly work.

16) You can be a former KKK member who drops the N-bomb on TV and people will still deny you’re a racist.

17) You can ride around in an SUV, fly on a private jet, and have a mansion while you lecture other people about the importance of having a small environmental footprint and other liberals won’t have a problem with it at all.

18) You can claim to hold the exact same position as conservatives on gay marriage and you won’t be called a homophobe.

19) You can regularly call conservative women sluts, whores, tw_ts, and even the C-word and still call yourself a feminist without other people laughing out loud.

20) You get to feel comfortable with lying to other people because you know what’s in their own best interests better than they do and if they were a little more enlightened — like you — they’d thank you for misleading them into doing the right thing!

And Orwell would be proud of you.

Additionally, when you do run for office all you have to do is tell your future dependents…I mean constituents…”Vote for Me, The other guy’s and asshole!” and they will flock to you in droves. The fact that you might be an even bigger asshole has no relevance on the Left.

And “diversity” means that everyone should share your views only and anyone who disagrees with you should be muzzled, silenced or called a homophobe or misogynist and dismissed as insignificant!

The merger of Two airlines is bad. But Weed and Illegal Aliens coming across the border with abandon are not.

Pass Executive Orders doing what you want rather than going through an “obstructionist” “Congress” (meaning those uncaring, insensitive, nasty, evil trolls in The House).

Pass regulations that hurt job growth and then blame the lack of job growth on the businesses and be cheered on by the media and your dependents who can’t get those jobs.

And if all else fails, just call them a racist and walk away feeling vastly superior.

Viva Homo Superior Liberalis!

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

The Race Bank

A poignant anniversary

A poignant anniversary

The 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, and of the Reverend Martin Luther King’s memorable “I have a dream” speech, is a time for reflections — some inspiring, and some painful and ominous.

At the core of Dr. King’s speech was his dream of a world in which people would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by “the content of their character.”

Judging individuals by their individual character is at the opposite pole from judging how groups are statistically represented among employees, college students or political figures.

Yet many — if not most — of those who celebrate the “I have a dream” speech today promote the directly opposite approach of group preferences, especially those based on skin color.

How consistent Martin Luther King himself was as he confronted the various issues of his time is a question that can be left for historians. His legacy to us is the “I have a dream” speech.

What was historic about that speech was not only what was said but how powerfully its message resonated among Americans of that time, across the spectrum of race, ideology and politics. A higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted in Congress for both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

To say that that was a hopeful time would be an understatement. To say that many of those hopes have since been disappointed would also be an understatement.

There has been much documented racial progress since 1963. But there has also been much retrogression, of which the disintegration of the black family has been central, especially among those at the bottom of the social pyramid.

Many people — especially politicians and activists — want to take credit for the economic and other advancement of blacks, even though a larger proportion of blacks rose out of poverty in the 20 years before 1960 than in the 20 years afterwards.

But no one wants to take responsibility for the policies and ideologies that led to the breakup of the black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and generations of discrimination.

Many hopes were disappointed because those were unrealistic hopes to begin with. Economic and other disparities between groups have been common for centuries, in countries around the world — and many of those disparities have been, and still are, larger than the disparities between blacks and whites in America.

Even when those who lagged behind have advanced, they have not always caught up, even after centuries, because others were advancing at the same time. But when blacks did not catch up with whites in America, within a matter of decades, that was treated as strange — or even a sinister sign of crafty and covert racism.

Civil rights were necessary, but far from sufficient. Education and job skills are crucial, and the government cannot give you these things. All it can do is make them available.

Race hustlers who blame all lags on the racism of others are among the obstacles to taking the fullest advantage of education and other opportunities. What does that say about the content of their character?

When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was pending in Congress, my hope was that it would pass undiluted, not because I thought it would be a panacea but, on the contrary, because “the bitter anticlimax that is sure to follow may provoke some real thought in quarters where slogans and labels hold sway at the moment.”

But the bitter anticlimax that did follow provoked no rethinking. Instead, it provoked all sorts of new demands. Judging everybody by the same standards was now regarded in some quarters as “racist” because it precluded preferences and quotas.

There are people today who talk “justice” when they really mean payback — including payback against people who were not even born when historic injustices were committed.

The nation has just been through a sensationalized murder trial in Florida, on which many people took fierce positions before a speck of evidence was introduced, basing themselves on nothing more than judging those involved by the color of their skin.

We have a long way to go to catch up to what Martin Luther King said 50 years ago. And we are moving in the opposite direction.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Ann Coulter

The media’s fixation on the Trayvon Martin case, while ignoring much more brutal crimes with clearer racial motivations, is a return to pre-O.J. America.

The thesis of my book, “Mugged: Racial Demagoguery From the Seventies to Obama” — out in paperback this week! — is that after decades of liberals play-acting Racist America, wherein they cast themselves as civil rights champions, and other, random white people as Bull Connor (a Democrat), it all ended with the O.J. verdict.

That’s when white America said, That’s it. The white guilt bank is shut down. It was one of the best things that ever happened to America — especially for black people.

But then in 2007, Barack Obama brought it all back. In order to immunize the most left-wing presidential candidate the nation has ever seen, the Non-Fox Media went into overdrive reporting their fantasies of an America full of racists, constantly terrorizing innocent blacks.

Of course, once Republicans got the Democrats to stop terrorizing black people, there was no one else doing it. Nonetheless, for decades, the media would highlight every apparent white-on-black crime, treating each such incident as the Crime of the Century.

White-on-black crimes were, and are, freakishly rare. But the media weren’t showcasing these one-off events as man-bites-dog stories, but rather as dog-bites-man stories in a universe brimming with packs of rabid dogs. According to liberals, whites attacking blacks was an epidemic — a nationwide “cancer,” in the words of erstwhile New York City Mayor Ed Koch.

In December 1986, a gang of white toughs were roaming around Howard Beach, Queens, brawling with anyone they met. They beat up an off-duty white fireman. They attacked a couple of Hispanics. But it was only when the young delinquents fought with three black men — Cedric Sandiford, Timothy Grimes and Michael Griffith — that they secured their place in history and became the literary event of the season!

After the initial encounter between the black and white punks — there were epithets exchanged and criminal records on both sides — the white gang returned with a baseball bat, spoiling for a fight. Grimes ran off unharmed, Sandiford got beaten, and Griffith tried to flee by climbing through a hole in a fence — and ran directly into a busy six-lane highway, where he was hit by a car and killed.

The police summarily concluded that the white gang’s other fights that night had “no racial overtones.” Only the fight with the blacks constituted a hate crime. The FBI opened an investigation and 50 police officers were assigned to investigate. Hollywood made a movie about Howard Beach. The New York Times still celebrates anniversaries of the Howard Beach attack.

News stories were brimming with references to Birmingham and Selma. Columnist Jimmy Breslin wrote, “Howard Beach suddenly has become what Birmingham once meant.” (A few years later, the ethnically sensitive Breslin was suspended for denouncing a young Korean-American colleague in the newsroom as a “slant-eyed b***h.”)

In an op-ed for The New York Times, Atlantic editor Jack Beatty blamed Howard Beach on the Republican Party: “From Richard M. Nixon’s ‘Southern strategy’ to Ronald Reagan’s boilerplate about ‘welfare queens,’ the legatees of the party of Lincoln have wrung political profit from the white backlash. Howard Beach shows that the politics of prejudice may have some vile life left in it yet.”

In 1986, only 2.6 percent of all homicides in the entire country were white-on-black killings. Black criminals killed nearly three times as many white people (949) as whites killed blacks (378) and they killed 16 times as many black people (6,235) as whites did.

Mayor Koch called the Howard Beach attack “the most horrendous incident of violence in the nine years I have been mayor.”

Earlier that year, a 20-year-old white design student, Dawn Livecchi, answered the doorbell at her Fort Greene, Brooklyn, townhouse and was shot dead by a black man, Anthony Neal Jenkins, who had followed her home from the grocery store.

One Queens woman interviewed by the Times about the Howard Beach attack mentioned that her husband had been beaten so badly by a group of blacks that he remained in a coma two years later.

In one of dozens of “retaliatory” attacks that invariably follow these media-created racial incidents, the day after the attack, a black gang beat and robbed a white, 17-year-old boy sitting at a Queens bus stop, shouting, “Howard Beach! Howard Beach!” “He’s a white boy, and they killed a black boy at Howard Beach.”

Just a week before the Howard Beach attack there was another interracial crime in a neighborhood only slightly farther away from The New York Times’ building than Howard Beach is. A 63-year-old white woman, Ann Viner, was attacked at her home in New Canaan, Conn., savagely beaten, dragged to her swimming pool and drowned by two 20-year-old black men.

It was the first murder in the affluent town in 17 years. That seems like a newsworthy event to me.

But the Times mentioned Viner’s murder only in three short news items, totaling less than a thousand words. The longest piece, 500 words, was an initial report on the murder — when there was still hope that the killers were white! No other major news outlets in the country mentioned Viner’s murder.

So if you’re confused by the blanket coverage of the Trayvon Martin case — attracting even the attention of the president of the United States! — while far more common and more vicious black-on-white murders are ignored, try to understand that liberals are frightened by change. They are desperately clinging to a world that never existed.

Their fantasy of an America bristling with racists allows them to portray any criticism of our massively incompetent and dangerous president as just another sad episode of oh-so-typical white racism. They have to protect Obama, so the rest of us have to get Mugged .

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

Food For The Sowell XIII

“Greetings True Believers” -Stan Lee

Many years ago, I was a member of a committee that was recommending to whom grant money should be awarded. Since I knew one of the applicants, I asked if this meant that I should recuse myself from voting on his application.

“No,” the chairman said. “I know him too — and he is one of the truly great phonies of our time.”

The man was indeed a very talented phony. He could convince almost anybody of almost anything — provided that they were not already knowledgeable about the subject.

He had once spoken to me very authoritatively about Marxian economics, apparently unaware that I was one of the few people who had read all three volumes of Marx’s “Capital,” and had published articles on Marxian economics in scholarly journals.

What our glib talker was saying might have seemed impressive to someone who had never read “Capital,” as most people have not. But it was complete nonsense to me.

Incidentally, he did not get the grant he applied for.

This episode came back to me recently, as I read an incisive column by Charles Krauthammer, citing some of the many gaffes in public statements by the President of the United States.

One presidential gaffe in particular gives the flavor, and suggests the reason, for many others. It involved the Falkland Islands.

Argentina has recently been demanding that Britain return the Falkland Islands, which have been occupied by Britons for nearly two centuries. In 1982, Argentina seized these islands by force, only to have British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher take the islands back by force.

With Argentina today beset by domestic problems, demanding the return of the Falklands is once again a way for Argentina’s government to distract the Argentine public’s attention from the country’s economic and other woes.

Because the Argentines call these islands “the Malvinas,” rather than “the Falklands,” Barack Obama decided to use the Argentine term. But he referred to them as “the Maldives.”

It so happens that the Maldives are thousands of miles away from the Malvinas. The former are in the Indian Ocean, while the latter are in the South Atlantic.

Nor is this the only gross misstatement that President Obama has gotten away with, thanks to the mainstream media, which sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no evil when it comes to Obama.

The presidential gaffe that struck me when I heard it was Barack Obama’s reference to a military corps as a military “corpse.” He is obviously a man who is used to sounding off about things he has paid little or no attention to in the past. His mispronunciation of a common military term was especially revealing to someone who was once in the Marine Corps, not Marine “corpse.”

Like other truly talented phonies, Barack Obama concentrates his skills on the effect of his words on other people — most of whom do not have the time to become knowledgeable about the things he is talking about. Whether what he says bears any relationship to the facts is politically irrelevant.

A talented con man, or a slick politician, does not waste his time trying to convince knowledgeable skeptics. His job is to keep the true believers believing. He is not going to convince the others anyway.

Back during Barack Obama’s first year in office, he kept repeating, with great apparent earnestness, that there were “shovel-ready” projects that would quickly provide many much-needed jobs, if only his spending plans were approved by Congress.

He seemed very convincing — if you didn’t know how long it can take for any construction project to get started, after going through a bureaucratic maze of environmental impact studies, zoning commission rulings and other procedures that can delay even the smallest and simplest project for years.

Only about a year or so after his big spending programs were approved by Congress, Barack Obama himself laughed at how slowly everything was going on his supposedly “shovel-ready” projects.

One wonders how he will laugh when all his golden promises about ObamaCare turn out to be false and a medical disaster. Or when his foreign policy fiascoes in the Middle East are climaxed by a nuclear Iran.

But sure of one thing, The true Believers, The Partisans, and the willfully and not so willfully ignorant will lead the charge to say it was someone elses fault! And if only you had worked with him more and let do what he wanted to do (instead of what he could do) and everything would have been Utopia.

And Liberal Media will right their to cheer and egg them on, because they to, The Ministry of Truth, are True Believers.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Relative Morality

This week bored teens shot and killed a jogger for the thrill of it. A teen purposely shot a 13-month old baby in the face during a robbery.

In 2000, teens kidnapped, tortured and murdered an 85 year old woman. They rode her dead body around in the trunk, showing it off to at least 10 friends. Not one friend reported the murder.

In 1997 a teen gave birth in the restroom at her senior prom; cut the umbilical chord, choked her baby to death, put him in a plastic bag which she threw away and returned to dancing the night away.

I could go on and on with countless examples of youths displaying a callous disregard for human life and the moral decay eating away at the soul of America.

In an on going discussion with colleagues, we ponder. What marked the genesis of it going so horribly wrong in America?

My wife Mary believes it began with liberals being allowed to infiltrate our public schools. Their philosophy is, in a nutshell, God out and government in. Liberals introduced the concept of moral relativity. In other words, nothing is absolutely right or wrong.

Personal accountability is for the most part unheard of in our liberal government and liberal media-dominated America. Consequently, disability, food stamp, and welfare fraud are through the roof.

A colleague suggested that the root of our decline is parents dropping the ball and surrendering responsibility for their kids to the schools – free breakfast and lunch, not vetting the curriculum, and so forth.

Rush Limbaugh believes our youth’s callous disregard for life stems from abortions on demand (4,000 per day) and Dr. Jack Kevorkian promoting assisted suicide. In essence, the devaluation of life.

I was devastated after watching the Fox News special report, The Great Food Stamp Binge. The program exposed how the Obama Administration is actively attempting to change the mindset of Americans, telling them self-reliance is bad and government dependency is moral and just.

Another thing that I find depressing is that the Obama administration believes enforcing our laws should not be applied equally. They claim defending our borders and enforcing immigration law is racist because the offenders are mostly people of color. And who can forget when Attorney General Eric Holder refused to prosecute New Black Panthers members for intimidating voters at the polls?

Beyond the obvious negative political and economic consequences of our cultural and moral decline, what breaks my heart is the loss of what it means to be an American.

I have written about my dad on numerous occasions, but for those of you who are unfamiliar, my dad epitomizes what it used to mean to be an American.

Born out-of-wedlock, dad was raised in the ghetto of east Baltimore by his aunt, and has been an entrepreneur since age 10. He shined shoes on the weekends at the Greyhound bus station. On a good weekend dad earned $1.25. Dad bragged to his buddies that he was a man because he purchased his own clothes — a t-shirt — and paid room and board — 25 cents to Aunt Nee. Now in his 80′s, I still feel dad’s pride when he talks about his first job.

Dad served in the Merchant Marines. He still bears deep emotional scars from an incident when whites in the South tried to hang dad for simply getting off the ship. White shipmates saved dad’s life.

Dad married and had five kids, while breaking the color barrier in the Baltimore City Fire Department in the mid 1950s. Dad could not use the same eating utensils or drink from the same coffee pot as the white firefighters. Despite deplorable, humiliating and unfair conditions, dad won Firefighter of the Year twice. Not once did dad expect or request special concessions or lower his standards due to his skin color.

As a young minister, dad strove to be excellent; a good representative for Christ and Negroes.

After two years, a new white firefighter arrived at Engine 6. Dad said the new guy came upstairs and invited dad to have coffee with the crew.

Dad’s oxygen mask malfunctioned causing him to pass out in a burning building. The chief ordered his crew out of the inferno. Upon realizing that dad had not exited the building, John, who was the most racist of the crew, went back into the smoke filled burning building. He found dad and saved his life. The two became lifelong friends.

Dad became Baltimore’s first black paramedic. He was also a chaplain in the Baltimore Fire Dept for 50 years. He earned a doctorate in theology and has authored books.

I feel incredibly blessed that I still get occasional phone calls from my 85 year old dad who calls to tell me his latest corny joke, or one he forgot he told me. I laugh regardless. His wife, my mother, passed away almost 20 years ago.

Dad is all about trying to do the right thing and striving for excellence, not expecting anyone to give you anything. Pastor of four churches, dad still stays busy visiting the sick and the shut-ins.

So, when I see Obama and the mainstream media constantly lowering the bar, expecting less and less of Americans in every area of our lives, morally, educationally, economically and etc, I mourn the loss of what it use to mean to be an American.

If Obama and the mainstream media’s vision for America is realized, there will be far fewer great American success stories like my dad’s. Most Americans will be on food stamps, abortions and murder rates will continue to skyrocket, and mediocrity will be distributed equally. (DC)
But at least it will be “fair” and “equal” for everyone. You can’t get more than that from a Liberal.

All hell all the time.

Oh, and it’s the Republicans/Conservatives Fault! 🙂

“I actually think that a lot of people have lost their ability to laugh. Look at the country as a whole. There’s a lot more to be mad at than a rodeo clown at a rodeo trying to make somebody laugh.”– Tuffy Gessling, the Missouri rodeo clown who wore a President Obama mask at the state fair,now gets death threats from the “kind” “compassionate” and “sensitive” Liberals.

Though shalt not make fun of their God, Government, nor his emissary, B.O.

After all, Government always makes everything “fair” 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Discretion

The Obama administration issued a policy late last week telling immigration agents to try not to arrest and deport illegal immigrant parents of minor children — a move that adds to the categories of people the administration is trying not to deport.

In a nine-page memo issued Friday, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said agents should use “prosecutorial discretion” to try to avoid detaining parents and, if parents are detained, agents should make sure they have the ability to visit with their children or participate in family court proceedings.

The move won praise from immigrant rights groups who said it’s a step toward a kinder detention policy. But a top Republican blasted the memo as another effort by the Obama administration to circumvent the law.

“President Obama has once again abused his authority and unilaterally refused to enforce our current immigration laws by directing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to stop removing broad categories of unlawful immigrants,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Virginia Republican.

Mr. Goodlatte, whose committee is in charge of many of the immigration bills the House could consider this year and who is working on a legalization bill for young illegal immigrants, said the Obama administration’s move “poisons the debate” and shows that the president is trying to “politicize the issue” rather than work for a compromise bill.
Compromise? Obama? Compromise the Agenda? Never!
He’s got to have as many New Democrats as he can before Amnesty comes so he and Hilary and their successors can crush any opposition to their 1,000 year reign (reich).

We only want surveillance and law enforcement on those that disagree with Big Brother.

That’s reasonable, isn’t it? 🙂

 

Extremism in The Defense of Liberty Is A Vice

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch recently obtained a Department of Defense training manual which lists people who embrace “individual liberties” and honor “states’ rights,” among other characteristics, as potential “extremists” who are likely to be members of “hate groups.”

Judicial Watch’s FOIA request asked for “Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to the preparation and presentation of training materials on hate groups or hate crimes distributed or used by the Air Force.”

As the group notes, “The document defines extremists as ‘a person who advocates the use of force or violence; advocates supremacist causes based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or national origin; or otherwise engages to illegally deprive individuals or groups of their civil rights.’”

The manual goes on to bar military personnel from “active participation” in such extremist organization activities as “publicly demonstrating,” “rallying,” “fundraising” and “organizing,” basically denying active-duty military from exercising the rights they so ardently fight to defend.

It begins its introduction of a section titled, “Extremist ideologies,” by describing the American colonists who sought independence from British rule as a historical example of extremism.

“In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples,” according to the training guide.

In a section drawing inspiration from a 1992 book titled “Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America,” the manual also lists “Doomsday thinking” under “traits or behaviors that tend to represent the extremist style.”

Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation or from a failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a kind of crisis-mindedness. It can be a Communist takeover, a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever it is, it is just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen to their special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the beginning of the end.

“Nowadays,” the manual explains, “instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.”

Judicial Watch also acknowledges the Southern Poverty Law Center “is listed as a resource for information on hate groups and referenced several times throughout the guide,” even though the group itself was directly responsible for a “hate crime” perpetrated on the Family Research Council after it was listed on the SPLC’s “hate map.”

Infowars readers will find much of the training guide’s contents unsurprising as they merely reinforce what we have exhaustively documented in the past.

In 2009, Infowars obtained the “law enforcement sensitive” contents of a Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report entitled “The Modern Militia Movement” which listed supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as potential “militia” influenced terrorists.

Also, in July 2012 Infowars blew the lid on a Department of Homeland Security-funded study, produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland, that characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

Indeed, the latest report echoes scenes from Alex Jones’ prescient documentary 9/11: The Road to Tyranny, made over a decade ago, which covered the fact that FEMA and other government bureaus have for years been training law enforcement agencies to regard people who espouse conservative ideologies, such as those represented by the Founding Fathers, as terrorists.

So it’s off to launder my hood…

 

Law & Order: D.C.

The administration is building a detective squad that will target consumers and companies that don’t follow ObamaCare’s rules. The game of “good cop, bad cop” has arrived in American health care.

They are the “good cop” and you are the perp. They are also the “bad cop” and you’re the victim. 🙂

It was bad enough to know that an Internal Revenue Service that targets the political opponents of the Obama administration between partying on the taxpayer dime would be in charge of monitoring compliance with ObamaCare’s individual mandate via our tax returns.

Now, the Daily Mail, which lodged a Freedom of Information Act with Health and Human Services, reports that the agency has hired a bevy of criminal investigators as we continue to learn what is in the Orwellian-named Affordable Care Act.

Post-Obamacare law hiring at the Department of Health and Human Services included 86 ‘criminal investigators,’ but just two ‘consumer safety’ officers

  • On the day President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010, HHS received authority to make 1,814 new hires
  • The authorization included positions for 50 criminal investigators. The agency increased that number to 86
  • The agency was also authorized to hire  261 ‘consumer safety officers.’ Only two such employees were hired (Daily Mail)

Never did we imagine that buying insurance and going to the doctor or providing coverage to employees would come under the full-time purview of federal criminal investigators.

On the day in 2010 that President Obama signed the bill into law, HHS got authority from the Office of Personnel Management to make as many as 1,814 new hires under an emergency “Direct Hiring Authority” order.

The agency was authorized to hire 50 criminal investigators to ensure compliance with mandatory provisions and regulations. But as is typical with an administration with no respect for the Constitution and the law, HHS unilaterally upped that number to 86.

Of course these investigators won’t be digging into the Obama administration’s lack of compliance with its own law. A president doesn’t have the legal authority to decide what parts of the law he wants to obey; the Constitution does not grant him that authority.

But that’s exactly what Obama is doing with Obama-Care.

As noted in Forbes, first there was the delay of ObamaCare’s Medicare cuts until after the election. Then there was the delay of the law’s employer mandate.

After that there was the announcement, buried in the Federal Register, that the administration would delay enforcement of a number of key eligibility requirements for the law’s health insurance subsidies, relying on the “honor system” instead.

Now comes word that another costly provision of the health law — its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs — will be postponed for one more year.

According to the Congressional Research Service, as of November 2011, the administration had missed as many as a third of Affordable Care Act’s deadlines specified by law. Adhering to the law, apparently, is of no concern to an administration that hires criminal investigators to make sure we accede to it.

Interestingly, HHS was authorized to hire 261 “consumer safety officers,” presumably to protect us from getting ripped off or being ill-served. So far, to indicate where HHS’ priorities are, it has hired only two. Can we say that HHS seems to be more interested in our acquiescence than our safety or health?

As the IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups shows, the ambition for absolute power has corrupted this administration absolutely. A White House that routinely disobeys the laws, including its own, cannot be entrusted, either through the IRS or HHS, to not further trample our rights under ObamaCare.

“The Obama administration continues to assert near unilateral power when it comes to ObamaCare,” said Dan Holler, communications director for Heritage Action for America, a conservative lobby group that opposes implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

“This blatant disregard for the rule of law raises serious questions as to how these new criminal investigators will behave, what guidelines they will follow and who will provide much-needed oversight.”

Criminal investigators to enforce ObamaCare? Do we have to be Mirandized? Now put down that tongue depressor, and back away slowly.

http://archive.opm.gov/oca/10tables/pdf/gs.pdf

GOING UP!

The average employer-provided family health insurance premiums have climbed $2,976 since 2009, according to an annual Kaiser Family Foundation survey released this week. They’re up $3,671 compared with the year before President Obama took office. That’s despite Obama’s repeated promises that the health care reform law he championed would cut premiums by $2,500 in his first term.

And while annual premium increases have moderated over the past two years, that’s due to trends in the insurance market largely unrelated to ObamaCare, and trends the law could actually reverse.

The Kaiser survey found that the average family premium this year is $16,351, up 4% over last year, and up 22% since 2009. After adjusting for inflation, premiums climbed an average 3.2% a year in Obama’s first term, higher than the 2.7% average during President Bush’s last four years in office.

During his first campaign for president, Obama repeatedly claimed that his health reform plan would, as he said at a Virginia rally in 2008 “lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year.”

Nevertheless, the White House has been touting recent signs of health cost moderation as evidence that ObamaCare is “already working to reduce costs.”

Officials cite the fact that national spending on health care climbed just 3.9% in 2011, the same as the previous two years, and the slowest increase since the 1960s.

But the trends driving the slowdown in health spending have little to do with the Affordable Care Act.

The sluggish economy played a big role. “The failure of the economy to bounce back as quickly as it has after past recessions has prolonged this dampening effect on health spending,” noted Joseph Antos, a health care expert at the American Enterprise Institute.

Also important has been a broader shift that has been underway for years toward higher-deductible plans. These plans provide consumers with a stronger incentive to economize on health spending.

The Kaiser survey found, for example, that 78% of workers now face at least some deductible, up from 59% in 2008. And nearly a third has a deductible of at least $2,000, up from 12% in 2008.

In addition, the private insurance market has seen an explosion in Health Savings Account-type plans — an idea long championed by conservative Republicans — which combine high deductibles with a tax-free savings account that consumers can roll over if they don’t spend it all in one year.

Kaiser found that one in five workers are now enrolled in an HSA-type plan, up from 8% in 2008.

A separate survey by America’s Health Insurance Plans finds that more than 15 million people are now enrolled in HSA plans, up 15% from last year andmore than double the number in 2008.

Drew Altman, the Kaiser foundation’s president, on a conference call with reporters called it “part of a quiet revolution in health insurance from more comprehensive to less comprehensive.”

But it’s clearly a revolution that can help control health costs. A Rand Corporation study last year — titled “Skin in the Game” — found that families in HSA-type plans spent 21% less, on average, in the first year after they switched from a traditional plan. The study found that annual health costs would fall $57 billion if half of workers signed up with an HSA.

Unfortunately, ObamaCare will likely shift the market in the opposite direction, toward less out-of-pocket spending, greater reliance on insurance to cover small health coasts, and higher premiums. ObamaCare, for example, already requires that preventive care be provided at no direct cost to the patient. It also puts strict limits on deductibles and out-of-pocket spending.  (IBD)

Which will drive up the costs significantly. More of those perverse (and may not so unintendedly) perverse incentives to suck at tit of Government.

 

Doesn’t this all make you feel so much better? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy


136355 600 LOCAL FL Marco Rubio Immigration Reform Shame cartoons


 

 

Trust and Fear

reasons

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Obama on the NSA:

“Yes, but what I’ve also said is that it can only work if the American people trust what’s going on. And what’s been clear since the disclosures that were made by Mr. Snowden is that people don’t have enough information and aren’t confident enough that, between all the safeguards and checks that we put in place within the executive branch, and the federal court oversight that takes place on the program, and congressional oversight, people are still concerned as to whether their e-mails are being read or their phone calls are being listened to,” Obama responded.

CUOMO: Especially when they hear that they are and mistakes are made. You know, it shakes your confidence.

OBAMA: Well — yeah, but I think it’s important — for example, this latest revelation that was made, what was learned was that NSA had inadvertently, accidentally pulled the e-mails of some Americans in violation of their own rules, because of technical problems that they didn’t realize. They presented those problems to the court. The court said, “This isn’t going to cut it. You’re going to have to improve the safeguards, given these technical problems.” That’s exactly what happened. So the point is, is that all these safeguards, checks, audits, oversight worked. (WS)

So, starting very soon, The Government will have all your health records and be in charge of your Health Care.

Sure. I trust them! 🙂

trust-me-i-know-what-i-m-doing-2

“Let’s just put the whole elephant out there so people know what they are looking at,” said Obama who argued the government “is not interested in spying on ordinary people.”

One could be forgiven for reading that remark as another way of saying, “You are not worth our time and worthy of our interest.” To which one then thinks, “Maybe not now.”

The issue, of course, isn’t whether or not the government is “interested” in you (and if NSA isn’t, there are certainly other departments, bureaus, divisions, offices, agencies, etc. etc. that are) but what it is constitutionally permitted and not permitted to do even if it should become interested.

The president’s remarks were typically imperious and condescending.  And, furthermore, just who gets to decide who is “ordinary”?   

Would that the citizenry could say to the government, on any number of occasions and issues, “Sorry but we’re just not that interested in you. Buzz off.”

President Obama declaratively said, “When it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program is about.” (WS)

Enough with the “phony” scandals! 🙂

Trust Me. Have I ever lied to you…:)

Less than two months before the health insurance exchanges open nationwide, more Americans disapprove (49%) than approve (41%) ….

The feeling of those in charge of ramming Obamacare through is, evidently, that people will learn to like it once they’ve come understand it and lived with it a little while.

And we either give them no choice or hook them on it like a pimp dealing to their drug-addicted “clients” then the Democrats can use their “you want grandma thrown over a cliff” fearmongering even more.

And there is nothing a Democrat loves more than Fear!

And with a Debt Ceiling fight coming, Fear will be the appetizer, main course, and desert on the Menu.

And you, will have an apple shoved in your mouth and placed on a skewer and roasted over an open flame of hatred, division, and fear.

 

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

What Can Brown Not Do for You?

“If you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable.”

— President Barack Obama, June 28, 2009

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”

— President Barack Obama, Aug. 11, 2009

 

“If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.”

— President Barack Obama, Sept. 9, 2009

ALL LIES. Big Surprise.

In any case, President Barack Obama somehow managed never to read the full-disclosure follow-up line to “you can keep your plan”:

“Unless the people in Washington, D.C., who know what’s good for you don’t like your plan.”

Word of the fine print has now reached New Jersey.

Residents of the Garden State have recently been informed that state-approved, private health insurance coverage that suited 106,000 of them just fine does not suit the federal government at all, and thus will come to a sudden and non-negotiable end next year.

At that point, those New Jersey residents who have taken advantage of low-cost insurance because they’re rich in health but poor in financial resources will be at the mercy of a government-fabricated “market” in which the individual buyer has no leverage at all.

In fact, the individual buyer is under legal obligation to participate in the market, to buy a plan that’s more comprehensive and more costly than he desires, and to pay a fine — call it a tax, if you’re a Supreme Court justice — if he fails to comply.

(Hint: Fail to comply. That fine will be a bargain for anyone who gets really sick or really injured, then shows up to demand treatment — which he most certainly will get.) (cleveland.com)

Thousands of UPS workers have found out what’s actually in that Obama-Care package Democrats shipped out in 2010. Their company decided to drop coverage for spouses to avoid the law’s added costs.

“[T]he ACA has mandated several changes that have been impacting the cost of coverage for UPS employees since its implementation. These include:

  • Coverage for dependent children up to age; regardless of whether they are enrolled in school, are married, or (beginning 2014) have coverage available from their own employer;
  • Removal of lifetime and annual benefit limits;
  • Fees for comparative effectiveness research; and
  • Fees to help fund the public exchanges.

We are making these changes to, in part, offset cost increases due to the ACA and so that healthcare premiums remain the same for most of our people.” (Page 18 of the memo).

President Obama has been claiming lately that most of his signature law is already in place, and that all the fuss about delays and premium hikes is over parts of the law that don’t go into effect until next year and are relevant only to the small share of uninsured.

“For the 85% to 90% of Americans who already have health insurance,” he says, “they don’t have to worry about anything else.”

Tell that to the 15,000 UPS workers who recently learned that the shipping giant is dropping coverage for husbands and wives who can get insurance from another employer.

A chief reason for the change? The added costs ObamaCare is imposing, including the mandate that plans cover children up to age 26, its ban on lifetime spending limits, and the $65 in ObamaCare fees that will be imposed on every enrollee starting next year.

Rising medical costs, “combined with the costs associated with the Affordable Care Act, have made it increasingly difficult to continue providing the same level of health care benefits to our employees at an affordable cost,” UPS told its employees in a memo.

As Kaiser Health News reports, many of these spouses will end up on worse health plans.

This is just the beginning. While almost no large companies excluded spouses from coverage three years ago, 6% did last year, according to Mercer. And many others are making such coverage exorbitantly costly in the hope that spouses will drop it on their own.

Once the ObamaCare exchanges are open, the incentive to dump spouses will be even greater. After all, why should companies bear such costs when they know spouses can get coverage “guaranteed” — and likely subsidized by taxpayers — in one of the exchanges?

This is, of course, just the latest revelation about the ill effects ObamaCare is causing among the 85% who Obama says have nothing to worry about from the law.

Companies are already cutting part-time worker hours to get below the new 30-hour workweek rule imposed by Obama’s regulators. Or they’re moving full-time workers to part time to avoid the eventual employer mandate.

As IBD reported last week, four industries that employ lots of low-wage workers have seen an historic drop in the workweek, thanks to ObamaCare.

In other evidence of harm, a recent Chamber of Commerce survey found that nearly three quarters of businesses it queried say ObamaCare will make it harder to grow their businesses, and the American Action Forum calculates that ObamaCare will impose $30 billion in compliance costs on businesses — money that will eventually come out of workers’ pockets.

Despite what the president claims, there is no escape from ObamaCare’s punishing effects. Don’t think so? Just ask your UPS delivery man the next time he drops off a package. (Townhall)

An ObamaCare cause their company to drop them or their family…. 🙂

The University of Virginia said Wednesday that it will stop offering health insurance to some employees’ spouses because of rising costs under ObamaCare.

The university said the Affordable Care Act will add $7.3 million to its healthcare costs next year. It indicated that it could face additional costs in the future because of the law’s tax on especially generous insurance policies.

In an effort to cut costs, UVA’s healthcare benefits will no longer be available to some employees’ spouses. (The Hill)

According to the Towers Watson survey, when asked how they thought plans would change by 2018—the year that Obamacare’s “Cadillac” tax on high-cost plans takes effect—92 percent of employers said plans would be different, with 47 percent saying they anticipated significant or transformative change. Do you like your health care plan? Sorry. With Obamacare in effect, costs are going up and plans are changing. (Heritage)

Now, like all Americans as Obamacare takes hold, they will see their choices diminish and the calculations and their circumstances cease to matter.

Decisions about health care will become less and less individual and more and more governmental. What market remains for health coverage will serve precisely one customer: the federal government. Its priorities will rule decisions over every insurance and treatment call.

Obama knew that when he issued his serial promises that all sorts of choices would remain in the hands of individual Americans.

Now, he delays certain particularly onerous aspects of Obamacare to postpone the inevitable pain that comes with converting what has been a medical system with bureaucrats into a bureaucracy with doctors and nurses.

Yes, the medical coverage and payment system was a mess before, but at least one could argue with it. At least there were exits. At least there were options.

Today, it’s which kind of insurance is appropriate. A few years hence, it will be who should get what sort of care — and, perhaps more to the point, who should be denied what sort of care. Those decisions will be made with the priorities of the customer in mind.

The customer will be the federal government. The patient will be nothing more than a faceless inconvenience. (cleveland.com)

But at least the evil Insurance Companies and The satanic Koch Brothers are screwed! 🙂

Don’t you feel better now, Citizen. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Because they are out to get YOU….

WASHINGTON — The federal government is making progress on developing a surveillance system that would pair computers with video cameras to scan crowds and automatically identify people by their faces, according to newly disclosed documents and interviews with researchers working on the project.

The Department of Homeland Security tested a crowd-scanning project called the Biometric Optical Surveillance System — or BOSS — last fall after two years  of government-financed development. Although the system is not ready for use, researchers say they are making significant advances. That alarms privacy advocates, who say that now is the time for the government to establish oversight rules and limits on how it will someday be used.

In a sign of how the use of such technologies can be developed for one use but then expanded to another, the BOSS research began as an effort to help the military detect potential suicide bombers and other terrorists overseas at “outdoor polling places in Afghanistan and Iraq,” among other sites, the documents show. But in 2010, the effort was transferred to the Department of Homeland Security to be developed for use instead by the police in the United States. (WP)

The National Security Agency’s surveillance network has the capacity to spy on 75 percent of all U.S. Internet traffic, The Wall Street Journal reports. 

Citing current and former NSA officials for the 75 percent figure, the paper reported that the agency can observe more of Americans’ online communications than officials have publicly acknowledged. 

The NSA’s system of programs that filter communications, achieved with the help of telecommunications companies, is designed to look for communications that either start or end abroad, or happen to pass through the U.S. between foreign countries. However, the officials told the Journal that the system’s reach is so broad, that it is more likely that purely domestic communications will be intercepted as a byproduct of the hunt for foreign ones. 

The system works by using algorithms that act as filters, designed to let high-value information through amid more benign chatter. However, after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, a former to intelligence official told the Journal that the government changed its definition of “reasonable” intelligence collection, enabling the NSA to widen the holes in the “filtering” system. 

The details are the latest to emerge about the NSA’s operations and capabilities, as authorities in the U.S. and other countries try to stop the release of more information about the elaborate surveillance network. Members of Congress on the intelligence committees, as well as past intelligence officials, recently have spoken up in defense of the agency, particularly after a report showing the agency had broken privacy rules and overstepped its authority thousands of times. 

The NSA programs described by the Journal differ from the programs described by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in a series of leaks earlier this summer. Snowden described a program to acquire Americans’ phone records, as well as another program, known as PRISM, that made requests from Internet companies for stored data. By contrast, the Internet monitoring systems have the capability to track almost any online activity, so long as it is covered by a broad court order. 

The NSA programs are overseen and approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. An NSA spokeswoman told the Journal that its actions were both legal and respectful of Americans’ privacy. In a statement made to Reuters, the NSA repeated the assertion, saying, “We defend the United States from such threats while fiercely working to protect the privacy rights of U.S. persons.”

”It’s not either/or. It’s both.” (FOX)

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Paranoid??

Big Brother wants more!

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

If the police arrest you, do they need a warrant to rifle through your cellphone? Courts have been split on the question. Last week the Obama administration asked the Supreme Court to resolve the issue and rule that the Fourth Amendment allows warrantless cellphone searches.

In 2007, the police arrested a Massachusetts man who appeared to be selling crack cocaine from his car. The cops seized his cellphone and noticed that it was receiving calls from “My House.” They opened the phone to determine the number for “My House.” That led them to the man’s home, where the police found drugs, cash and guns.

July 30th (NY Times): In a significant victory for law enforcement, a federal appeals court on Tuesday said that government authorities could extract historical location data directly from telecommunications carriers without a search warrant.

The closely watched case, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, is the first ruling that squarely addresses the constitutionality of warrantless searches of historical location data stored by cellphone service providers. Ruling 2 to 1, the court said a warrantless search was “not per se unconstitutional” because location data was “clearly a business record” and therefore not protected by the Fourth Amendment.

The Leftist ACLU: “This decision is a big deal,” said Catherine Crump, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union. “It’s a big deal and a big blow to Americans’ privacy rights.”

You have no privacy from Big Brother. He sees all, he knows all. You cannot escape him. He knows what you are thinking. And it better not be Thoughtcrimes citizens…

The defendant was convicted, but on appeal he argued that accessing the information on his cellphone without a warrant violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Earlier this year, the First Circuit Court of Appeals accepted the man’s argument, ruling that the police should have gotten a warrant before accessing any information on the man’s phone.

The Obama Administration disagrees. In a petition filed earlier this month asking the Supreme Court to hear the case, the government argues that the First Circuit’s ruling conflicts with the rulings of several other appeals courts, as well as with earlier Supreme Court cases. Those earlier cases have given the police broad discretion to search possessions on the person of an arrested suspect, including notebooks, calendars and pagers. The government contends that a cellphone is no different than any other object a suspect might be carrying.

But as the storage capacity of cellphones rises, that position could become harder to defend. Our smart phones increasingly contain everything about our digital lives: our e-mails, text messages, photographs, browser histories and more. It would be troubling if the police had the power to get all that information with no warrant merely by arresting a suspect.

On the other hand, the Massachusetts case involves a primitive flip-phone, (Remember in Star Trek when that was cool and “futuristic”?) which could make this a bad test case. The specific phone involved in this 2007 incident likely didn’t have the wealth of information we store on more modern cellphones. It’s arguably more analogous to the address books and pagers the courts have already said the police can search. So, as Orin Kerr points out, if the Supreme Court ruled on the case, it would be making a decision based on “facts that are atypical now and are getting more outdated every passing month.” (WP)

The super extreme Leftists at Daily Kos:

In the wake of the twin revelations about the National Security Agency’s dragnet of phone calls and online activity, polling suggests that a majority of Americans apparently remain comfortable with their civil liberties being compromised in the cause of preventing terror attacks.  Probably just as predictable, a survey from Pew Research showed a fair amount of partisan hypocrisy, as Democratic and Republican opinions of NSA domestic surveillance changed dramatically from 2006 to 2013 when George W. Bush was replaced by Barack Obama in the White House.

But largely overlooked in the conventional wisdom is a vital point. That is, while the Obama administration’s regime of NSA electronic surveillance of Americans may or not be illegal, there is little question that President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping broke the law.

Bush Derangement Syndrome. Our guy quadruples the program and expands its like nobody ever conceived, but at least that the law. Bush, on the other hand…Oh god the unhinged derangement of partisanship.

In 2005 The New York Times was complaining about 500 Americans being tapped by Bush.

But The NSA under Obama has violated it Thousands and Thousands of times, routinely and with complete abandon.

Wow, now that’s cognitive dissonance and Orwellian at it’s best.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Wards of Big Brother

1013299_546406508746852_1312478900_nPresident Barack Obama said “health insurance isn’t a privilege — it is your right,” and slammed Republicans, saying they are more concerned about how the debate will hurt them politically than they are with how denying Obamacare will hurt the country.

“There’s also a group of Republicans in Congress working hard to confuse people and making empty promises that they’ll either shut down the healthcare law, or if they don’t get their way, they’ll shut down the government,” Obama said in his weekly address Saturday.

“They’re actually having a debate between hurting Americans who will no longer be denied affordable care just because they’ve been sick — and harming the economy and millions of Americans in the process,” Obama said. “And many Republicans are more concerned with how badly this debate will hurt them politically than they are with how badly it’ll hurt the country.”

House Republicans are continuing their battle to repeal or defund part or all of Obamacare, including threatening to use the upcoming government spending debate to fight against the health care law.

“A lot of Republicans seem to believe that if they can gum up the works and make this law fail, they’ll somehow be sticking it to me,” Obama said. “But they’d just be sticking it to you … Some even say that if you call their office with questions about the law, they’ll refuse to help. Call me old-fashioned — but that’s lousy constituent service. And it’s not what you deserve.” (Newsmax)

What don’t deserve is a President who turns everything into a “right” so that he further his Agenda to make us all wards of Big Brother.
But our Sanctimonious Leftist Big Brother doesn’t see it that way.
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Predicitable Behavior

BBC News 2007:  Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.

Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.

Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.

Summer melting this year reduced the ice cover to 4.13 million sq km, the smallest ever extent in modern times.

Remarkably, this stunning low point was not even incorporated into the model runs of Professor Maslowski and his team, which used data sets from 1979 to 2004 to constrain their future projections.

In the end, it will just melt away quite suddenly
Professor Peter Wadhams
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC.

“So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”

…Former US Vice President Al Gore cited Professor Maslowski’s analysis on Monday in his acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

It’s 2013. Nothing to see here. Big Brother Global Warming wasn’t wrong.

John Ransom: A reader last night posted an article via Reddit that dug back into the BBC archives from 2007.

It was the journalistic equivalent of a high school yearbook photo of the Global Warming crowd sporting mullets in 1987, complete with high tops and black jeans.

“Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice,” said the BBC article. “Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.

Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.”

The article was very dramatic but… it also contained many of the hokum, nostrums and fake ‘ems that we’ve all grown used to with decades-long global warming alarmism.

The article was propped up by many impressive sounding titles and contained acronyms and experts that in subsequent years we have all learned to have little faith in. Their predictions have been less reliable than Republican pollsters handicapping a presidential race.

The researcher in the BBC article, Wieslaw Maslowski , we are told, worked at the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California. His “group includes co-workers at NASA and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS).”

And, of course, what attempt to frighten people over global warming would be complete without a cameo appearance from Al Gore? I guess we all NEVER get tired of Al Gore sounding off on Global Warming.

In what today would pass for a punch line of a good joke rather than serious science, the BBS, er, BBC concluded with this high point: “Former US Vice President Al Gore cited Professor Maslowski’s analysis on Monday in his acceptance speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo.”

Ha, ha, ha.

Because those projections of an ice-free Arctic Sea, with dachas lining sugar-sand beaches in Northern Canada, all reposing in a warm, tropical breezes, made audible only by the sound of palm trees rustling…well, that prediction was just a tad premature.

The ice, it turns out, is still there!!??

(and the Global Warming Nuts would say, well we only said it was possibly by 2013 but for sure by 2030!! So you better do as we want or else!!)

After all, Proper Science always has a fudge factor in it’s predictions, right? 🙂

I know what you’re thinking: It’s shocking to all of us.

Especially shocking to guys like Al Gore who will have to put off their timeshare scheme developed for an island in the Arctic Circle called Umingmak Nuna. Umingmak Nuna is apparently the Inuit phrase for “land of the Muskox.”

I’ve never seen a real muskox before; only pictures.

Kind of looks like it’s half man, half bear, half pig.

Kind of a pig-bear-man.

There was a time I suppose when each of us were inclined to believe experts who told us that the rainforest would be gone by the year 2000, the extinction of whales would trigger an alien arms race to kill our planet in revenge and the artic sea ice would disappear by the summer of 2013.

And more than being shown to be fanciful predictions that have been born mostly out of fiction rather than science, such prophesies have served to reinforce skeptics’ claims that the whole “science” of global warming is based on faulty assumptions.

The absolute inability of warming science to have any predictive value ought to cause us to reexamine the whole debate.

Normal science works that way.

But instead of accepting the obvious answer– that there is something wrong with their models—warmists blame others for questioning the basic assumptions underlying their premise.

You have to be a moron “denialist” to disagree with them.

Any fair-minded, objective persons would now have to admit that at this point, most projections of doom and gloom predicated on the false science of global warming have not materialized despite a mighty attempt to tie EVERY WEATHER EVENT to global warming. 

But of course global warmists are not fair-minded, objective persons.

Instead, they are high-priests of expertism, technocrats with the power to legislate the cosmos; nerds with power.

Nerds gone Sith. Where they are so narcissistic that, of course, any scientist with any credibility would agree with them and any who would dare challenge them has no credibility whatsever.

A poll done conducted by the Washington Post in 2012 on global warming found that only 26% of respondents trusted scientists “completely” while 35% trusted them “not at all.” For the skeptic crowd that’s an 11 point swing from 2007 when only 24% of respondents trusted scientists “not at all.”

That lack of trust sits right now like a mullet on the head of the scientific community.

Even Michael Bolton eventually bowed to the inevitable and got a haircut.

If scientists can’t get the haircut, they should at least be required to wear hairnets or big floppy hats.

True, that wouldn’t change anything, but at least we wouldn’t take them so seriously. 

But I’m afraid they are stuck in their ways and even Clinton Kelly and Stacy London could not help these people out of their fashion rut.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Complaint Department

I found the following article (but I have to rant a bit first…) interesting because it touches on the internet’s ability to make everyone “an idiot” or a star all in the same sentence.

13 Days ago my geeky corner of the internet was set on fire by the casting of Peter Capaldi as the 12th Doctor in “Doctor Who”.

There was general nashing of teeth, and cries of ‘oh god not another white guy’ and pronouncing the premature death of the show because there won’t be a 20’s to 30s heartthob to drool over. How shallow is that, by the way??

Missing the point that they were fine actors first. They were “white” first.

There had been a lot of “discussion” by the internet showrunner-wanna-be’s and the politically correct about casting anything BUT an old white guy.

Let’s be bold and cast a woman (a joke started by the 4th Doctor in 1981). A Black….A Black woman…A Gay person…etc.

You see where this is going I trust?

And Peter Capaldi was cast, the politically correct had their collective hairs set on fire.

The fact that Mr. Capaldi, a very well know actor of great gravitas and the first Academy Award Winner (for writing and directing “Franz Kafka’s It’s Wonderful Life” in 1994) doesn’t mean anything to these people. He’s just an old white guy. Same old, same old. Boring.

The “missed opportunity”. To be politically correct.

An opportunity I will gladly miss every single time I can.

Slate.com:  The Doctor also has two hearts, but there’s no reason he has to have a penis.

But there’s no reason to make him a woman either. Except to pander to the Politically Correct squeaky “superior” wheel.

So next up, Mary Poppins played by a Bi-sexual, Transgender Male!

Ellen Ripley will be played by Arsenio Hall.

Denzel Washington can play Juliette in “Romeo  & Juliet” where Romeo is a Hispanic Male.

Let’s go nuts!

Showrunner Stephan Moffat had it right, “”Time for a Man to Play the Queen!”.

Science writer Jennifer Ouellette says her reasons for championing a female Doctor go beyond feminism and the obvious fact that a female Doctor would be really cool. “Artistically, it would be a very rich vein for the series writers to mine, both thematically and in terms of character development. It’s a perspective on history he hasn’t experienced yet: that of being the “other” in, shall we say, a less than enlightened time. It changes everything: where he can go, what behavior is appropriate, how others respond to him (both intellectually and sexually).”

Less than “enlightened”?? Seriously…

Whatculture.com:

However, you invariably meet people out on the wilds of the internet who cry foul, that the Doctor must stay white and probably retain his XY chromosomes while he’s at it. They bring up the same arguments each and every time, and I’ve had it.

One of the argument SHE “rebutts” is about “civil rights”: Everyone knows black people contributed nothing to the world and were second-class citizens before the 1950s and when they started fighting for equal rights. Everyone knows that except for anyone with a basic grasp of history.

And the point before this was about a black Doctor not being a token, but overdue.

Ah, the mind of the Politically Correct.

Onto the Article From TIME Magazine that set this off:

I’ve become fascinated, over the last week or so, at the reaction online to the announcement of Peter Capaldi as the Twelfth Doctor in Doctor Who. When his name was initially announced, during an admittedly-overblown, overlong television special designed to make the news “an event” that it really wasn’t, I’ll admit that the news surprised me. It wasn’t that I thought it was a bad choice — quite the contrary; Capaldi’s gift at playing irascible could be very welcome in the character. But the tendency in recent years has been towards younger, more heartthrob-y Doctors: Capaldi is a 55-year old former punk-rocker.

That said, what seems to be drawing so much online ire is just how expected a choice it was.  While Capaldi may be the oldest Doctor since William Hartnell, the very first Doctor in 1963, he is —like the 11 before him—a white male. After all the speculation, excitement and rumor-mongering that, this time, we’d finally get a female Doctor or a black Doctor or some kind of Doctor that wasn’t just like all of the other Doctors that we’ve seen before, we ended up with one we’d expected all along. For a show in which the endless potential of people is such a recurring theme, Doctor Who can be very limiting at times in its casting choices.

Of course, the Internet wasn’t slow to be disappointed in the casting decision. Not in Capaldi as an individual — In fact, I suspect the grudging respect for Capaldi’s experience dulled a lot of the online disdain; I can only imagine what the reaction would have been like had the BBC chosen another attractive 20-something white male for the role to replace Matt Smith. But there was lack of nerve shown in choosing another white man for a role that could, in theory, be played by any actor on Earth with the right chops. The Who producers had, in effect, tried to play it safe only to discover that that was pretty much exactly what they were being condemned for.

Watching the response, I was reminded in an tangential way to the insane, appalling fallout that followed the Bank of England’s decision to put author Jane Austen on the ten pound note. For those who aren’t aware of this story, the BoE announced, in mid-July, that it was going to replace Charles Darwin as the face on the ten-pound note with Austen, celebrating one of the greatest — and most popular — writers the country had produced. You’d think that that would be something few would object to, but you would be entirely wrong. Opposition to the decision came from those finding fault with Austen’s never marrying, Austen being white and even the quote chosen to accompany the portrait on the note itself. As Slate’s Katie Roiphe put it, “the left, the right, the middle, the highbrow, the tabloidy, and the bloggy all found something to take issue with and object to.”

The fact is, there’s no safe choice anymore. The Internet’s ability to not only give voice to everyone with a web connection, but also — to an extent, at least — democratize the discussion by giving almost equal weight to all the voices participating has meant that, no matter what anyone may choose, for whatever reasons, someone will always be there to tell you that you’re wrong (and an idiot). For everything else, everything wonderful that the Internet can do, it has succeeded the greatest at being a machine that will tell you that Abraham Lincoln was only part right. Sure, you can please some of the people all of the time, but you really can’t please all of the people some of the time. Someone, somewhere, will always be so displeased with what you’ve done that they’ll tell you online (often accompanied by a “I don’t even care” disclaimer, even though they obviously care enough to spend the time to complain publicly).

The, well if he another old white guy I won’t watch it any more! Or teenage girls won’t watch an old guy.

The shallowness of Politically Correctness never ceases to amaze.

This isn’t to complain about the Internet and the voice it provides everyone. Instead, it’s a suggestion to the moviemakers and TV makers and authors and artists and creative people of all stripes out there: Please consider this a license to go nuts. Seriously: If you’re going to have people criticize you no matter what you do, then why not do something worth criticizing? Look at the ubiquity of complaints as a reminder to stay true to your own instincts, and make the work you want to see. Everything else will follow — including, of course, the complaining.

You Decide.
Me, I’m happy to have my favorite MALE British, Science Fiction Hero continue with an actor of great stature.Sex and skin color don’t matter.
Except to those who will endlessly complain about their “superior” enlightenment and” insight”.
So I’ll end this with Spiro Agnew: “nattering nabobs of negativism”
He once described a group of opponents as “an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals.”
Or would that be “Enlightened”….:)

12th-j

Congratulations!

 

To Be Young…

Nearly 4 million young people will be much better off financially if they refuse to buy an ObamaCare insurance policy and instead pay the fine for going without coverage next year, according to a study released Thursday by the National Center for Public Policy Research.

The study found that 3.7 million childless single people age 18-34 would save at least $500 if they didn’t buy insurance and instead paid the tax penalty next year. Of those, more than 3 million would save at least $1,000.

That’s despite the heavy taxpayer subsidies many of these young people would be eligible to get. The ObamaCare insurance exchanges provide tax credits to offset the cost of insurance to those with incomes up to 400% of the poverty rate. The NCPPR study used Census data on income and insurance coverage in this age group, along with the Kaiser Family Foundation’s subsidy calculator to arrive at its results.

These findings are troubling because they point to what could be a fatal flaw of ObamaCare if the administration can’t convince enough of these “young invincibles” to buy coverage.

“This age group must buy insurance in the exchanges to cross-subsidize people who are older and sicker,” explained David Hogberg, a policy analyst at the conservative National Center. “Without them, the exchange will enter a ‘death spiral’ where only the older and sicker participate and the price of premiums increases precipitously.”

Most of those who stand to gain by not buying ObamaCare insurance are currently uninsured today, said Hogberg, who used to work for Investor’s Business Daily. “Getting these people to shell out $500 or $1,000 of their own after-tax income is going to be a difficult task, to say the least,” he noted.

Hogberg cites the example of an uninsured 22-year-old earning $18,100 a year. Under ObamaCare, she’d be eligible for $1,329 in subsidies. But she would likely save $117 if she paid the fine and remained uninsured. “I could easily use that money for groceries or transportation,” she’s quoted as saying.

As a result, ObamaCare is likely to come up well short of the 2.7 million young people the administration figured it would need to sign up in the exchanges next year in order to make them work, the study concluded.

Getting young people to buy coverage is critical to the success of ObamaCare due to insurance regulations that begin next year. Under the law, insurers will be forbidden from turning anyone down based on their health status — called “guaranteed issue” — or charging the sick more than the healthy, called “community rating.”

 

Further, ObamaCare mandates comprehensive benefits rather than the catastrophic coverage that best suits “invincibles”.

In essence, the reforms amount to a massive cross-subsidy, with the healthy paying more so the sick can get coverage guaranteed and pay less than they would otherwise. President Obama has often touted these reforms as protecting middle class families, but the eight states that have already imposed these reforms show how they can lead to huge premium hikes.

Because people know they can get coverage no matter what their health status, guaranteed issue can encourage the healthy to put off buying coverage until they get sick. And because community rating subsidizes premiums for the sick, they know that they won’t be charged more for waiting.

The result is that the young and healthy drop out, and the insurance pool becomes increasingly older, sicker and more expensive to cover.

A Milliman study of the states that had tried these reforms found that they “resulted in a rise in insurance premiums, a reduction of individual insurance enrollment and no significant decrease in the number of uninsured,” according to Karen Ignagni, CEO of America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group that commissioned the report. Two of the states later repealed those reforms.

The crafters of ObamaCare tried to avoid this “death spiral” problem in several ways. Individuals can only buy coverage during a three-month “open enrollment” period in the exchanges each year, which is meant to reduce attempts to game the system by going without until just when a health need arises. The subsidies are also designed to make coverage more affordable. And the individual mandate penalty — which starts at $95 in 2014 and climbs over the next several years — is supposed to take care of the rest.

The National Center’s study suggests, however, that these efforts aren’t likely to be terribly effective among the very group that ObamaCare desperately needs to sign up if it’s to have a chance at success. (IBD)

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Rant On…

Nobody has ever offered a more succinct indictment of the global warming hoax than H. L. Mencken, who said: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste! 🙂
Or the Koch Brothers will Get you!
The Rich will eat you!
Walmart will destroy you!
Global Warming!!
Racism!
Voter Suppression!
War on Women!
War on Children!
War on the Poor!
Gun Toting Maniacs roam the streets hunting you!
The Monsters are under the bed and only Government, Liberal Democrat Government can possible save you!
So Don’t Blink, or you’re dead! Your kids are Dead! Your Grandmother will be out on the street eating garbage thrown away by rich people and polluted by evil corporations!
Trust Government to save you!
“Sustainability” proponents believe that the Earth is under an imminent threat from humans, and therefore humanity must be controlled.
You’re evil, so Repent and give yourself over to Mama Government and Big Brother!
Save yourself!
*******

Screen shot 2013-08-14 at 9.12.37 AM

The illegal alien murderer of Vanessa Pham
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2013

Why is gun control the only policy we’re allowed to discuss when horrific murders occur? In the liberal mindset, “root causes” of crime begin and end with the Second Amendment. But who pays the price when our public guardians fail to secure our borders, refuse to deport serial criminal offenders, and enable drug-crazed menaces to prey upon innocent citizens?

Meet 27-year-old Julio Miguel Blanco-Garcia. An illegal alien from Guatemala, he has lived and worked in Fairfax County, Va., for at least 11 years. The region is a notorious “sanctuary” for immigration law-breakers where elected officials and big business look the other way for cheap labor and cheap votes.

When he wasn’t working illegally as a construction worker in the government-fueled Boomtown ‘burb or getting himself high on drugs, Blanco-Garcia was building up a lengthy rap sheet. According to Fairfax County court records cited by the Fairfax City Patch.com, Blanco-Garcia has been arrested for:

–Public swearing/intoxication in March 2010.

–Petit larceny in September 2011.

–Concealment/Price alteration of merchandise in April 2012.

With the feds granting blanket amnesty waivers by administrative fiat and refusing to fix the deportation abyss, coupled with brazen “don’t ask, don’t tell” sanctuary policies by local officials, Blanco-Garcia managed to escape detention and deportation for more than a decade. In December 2012, the Capital Area Regional Fugitive Task Force (which includes U.S. Marshals staff, Fairfax County police, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and D.C. fugitive operations officers) finally caught up with Blanco-Garcia. They detained him after determining “that he was in violation of U.S. immigration law.”

But it was too late for 19-year-old college freshman Vanessa Pham. In July 2010, the bubbly art student’s decision to be a Good Samaritan to open-borders beneficiary Blanco-Garcia cost her life. After getting her nails done at a Fairfax Plaza salon, she encountered the illegal alien and his infant daughter in the parking lot. Blanco-Garcia was strung out on $400 worth of PCP.

According to prosecutors, he asked Pham to take him to the hospital. She let the man and his baby into her car. When Pham took a wrong turn, Blanco-Garcia turned on her — stabbing her more than a dozen times with a knife he was carrying. She veered into a ditch; he coldly wiped her blood off of his hands with a baby wipe and clambered out of the sunroof with the child.

Cops found the blade of the murder weapon, with the killer’s DNA, under Pham’s seat. But for nearly three years, her friends and family agonized as the DNA remained unidentified and the case unsolved. The investigative break? Illegal alien Blanco-Garcia continued his criminal havoc — surprise, surprise — and attempted to steal several bottles of champagne from a local grocery store. He was convicted of larceny in April 2012. By December, law enforcement had tied his fingerprints to Pham’s murder. Blanco-Garcia’s trial begins next week.

True to form, the whitewash media have ignored Blanco-Garcia’s immigration status and the public policy implications of our government’s systemic, bipartisan refusal to enforce the laws already on the books. The Washington Post (which employed illegal alien reporter turned amnesty activist Jose Antonio Vargas for years and glorified the amnesty mob marches in 2006 and 2007) conveniently failed to mention Blanco-Garcia’s illegal alien status. Some crimes are more equal than others.

According to immigration activists pushing to grant Guatemala “temporary protected status” — a de facto amnesty program run by the Department of Homeland Security that confers permanent residency, taxpayer subsidies and preferential employment treatment to line-jumpers, border-crossers and visa overstayers — there are approximately 1.7 million Guatemalans in the U.S. A whopping 60 percent of them, like Blanco-Garcia, are here illegally.

That’s on top of the jaw-dropping backlog of 500,000-plus fugitive deportees who had their day in immigration court, were ordered to leave the country and then were released and absconded into the ether.

And that’s on top of 1 million-plus visa holders whom the feds have lost track of because Congress never bothered to fulfill its legislative mandate to create a functioning entry-exit system — something Washington has promised to do six times over the past 17 years.

The horrific murder of Vanessa Pham was 100 percent preventable. Blanco-Garcia never should have been here in the first place. After each encounter with law enforcement, he should have been detained, deported and kept out. For good.

I repeat: We spend billions of dollars on homeland security, but our government can’t even track and deport repeat convicted criminal aliens. These are not the well-meaning “newcomers” who just want to “pursue economic opportunities” by “doing the jobs no one else will do.” These are foreign-born thugs, druggies, sex offenders, murderers and repeat drunk drivers who are destroying the American Dream.

If our immigration and entrance system cannot effectively monitor, detain and kick out known American Destroyers, how can amnesty-peddling politicians in either party be trusted to provide for the common defense of law-abiding citizens pursuing the American Dream?

But remember, if you disagree, you’re a RACIST! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Charity Begins with Washington :) IN Triplicate

No good deed will go unpunished under ObamaCare. If a charitable hospital treats a homeless person who staggers into the emergency room without insurance, it may be punished with taxes and fines.

One of the “unintended” consequences of the misnamed Affordable Care Act was to place charitable tax-exempt hospitals in a medical Catch-22: To maintain their tax-exempt status they’re required to treat a minimum number of patients who can’t pay, yet ObamaCare requires everyone to have health coverage.

Right now, about 60% of the 6,000 or so hospitals in the U.S. are tax-exempt nonprofits, while 25% are government-owned. The rest — fewer than 1,000 — are for-profit. But this may change under provisions of ObamaCare to be enforced by the IRS.

A provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code that takes effect under ObamaCare sets new standards of review and installs potential financial penalties if hospitals don’t conform to IRS standards of when and how much charitable work can be performed.

Religious groups, especially Catholic orders, opened many of these facilities as charitable institutions. The IRS originally granted tax-exempt status to institutions that provided a “community benefit,” defined as spending 3% of operating revenue to take care of patients who couldn’t pay.

This benefited the hospitals as well as the community, for if you counted all the sales, property and income taxes that nonprofit hospitals currently avoid paying, it would total $20 billion.

The quality of mercy may not be strained, but it must now be carefully defined and audited with stringent new reporting requirements. “It (the IRS) requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file additional paperwork with the IRS every three years,” says John Kartch of Americans for Tax Reform. “This is to prove that the charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by ObamaCare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats.”

“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status,” Kartch adds. “The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax.”

Failure to complete a community health needs assessment in any applicable three-year period results in a penalty on the organization of up to $50,000, according to a report by Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation.

It is our belief that community need is best determined by those who reside in the community, not by faceless Washington bureaucrats with a vested interest in growing government and imposing leftist ideology.

We also believe the record shows faith-based and charitable institutions are most efficient at delivering needed services to the poor, hungry and sick. They should be encouraged, not punished, for their work.

Yet the government is rigging the game against them, in this case against nonprofit charitable hospitals. All blessings must flow from that government, which will determine who can help the needy and when, lest they be punished, either with loss of tax-exempt status or fines for not having the proper paperwork.

Faith-based institutions such as Catholic hospitals are already under attack because of ObamaCare’s mandate that free contraceptives be provided in any health plan even if that violates your free exercise of religion under the First Amendment.

One in six patients in the U.S. is in a Catholic hospital. Catholic charities provide needed services to the hungry, homeless and poor. Many would be forced to close, and many would do so rather than render unto Caesar that which is not his. ObamaCare may spell the doom of nonprofit hospitals.

So, if you’re that Good Samaritan who sees someone in need along the road, make sure the government approves and have your forms in order. (IBD)

In triplicate, stamped,  and countersigned no doubt.

Dr. Hawkeye Pierce (M*A*S*H): “We’ve been getting double-talk in triplicate.”

.“The Late Captain Pierce” (M*A*S*H Season 4): Back in Colonel Potter’s office, Hawkeye and the Colonel are visited by an army bureaucrat named Captain Pratt. After listing the procedures for bringing Hawkeye back to life, which, of course, entails the filling out of way too many forms, Captain Pratt chuckles and classifies Hawkeye as an ‘unperson’  lists the numerous forms Hawkeye will have to fill out and have signed by other officers (in triplicate). They include ‘a request to rescind the certificate of death on form ten-stroke-249, in triplicate, accompanied by an SF-88-stroke-11-0-7, signed by three officers of equal or higher rank, followed by a personal written report on form 63-stroke-E-B-Y by a ranking officer who actually saw the deceased not die, in triplicate’.An unperson is a person who has been “vaporized”; who has not only been killed by the state, but effectively erased from existence. Such a person would be written out of existing books, photographs, and articles so that no trace of their existence could be found in the historical record. The idea is that such a person would, according to the principles of doublethink, be forgotten completely (for it would be impossible to provide evidence of their existence), even by close friends and family members. Mentioning his or her name, or even speaking of their past existence, is thoughtcrime; the concept that the person may have existed at one time and has disappeared cannot be expressed in Newspeak.Sounds like Ambassador Chris Stevens….Or am I just be UNcharitable… 🙂

Consider: Hit by years of budget cuts, some U.S. public school boards are looking to avoid providing health benefits to substitute teachers and supporting staff under President Barack Obama’s reform law, education officials say.

According to the law, employers will have to offer health coverage to all full-time employees, defined as those who work an average of 30 or more hours per week each month, or else pay a fine starting in 2015.

School boards, already struggling to manage after years of state budget cuts, are trying to get ahead of the potential costs of Obamacare for the current academic year, education and labor officials say. The need to find creative solutions, or risk cutting back staff hours further, will increase as they finalize their budgets, they say.

In Pennsylvania’s Penn Manor School District, Superintendent Mike Leichliter said there is no room in its constrained budget to provide additional employee insurance. Instead of cutting hours, the district used a substitute-teacher contracting service to pay part of the salaries for 95 employees. Money for such a service does not count against the school’s budget.

“When we looked at our costs, (healthcare) was one area that really had the potential to skyrocket,” Leichliter said. “This is absolutely the worst time for school districts to be faced with mandated increases.”

“It creates a lot of inconsistency in staffing, and I can’t see how that would be good for students,” Wehrbein said. “How could you have a teacher teaching English four days a week and then on the fifth day you have someone else?” (townhall)

Aren’t you happy that the same people who want all this want even more! 🙂

Enjoy…

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Here We Go Again

First, there was the delay of Obamacare’s Medicare cuts until after the election. Then there was the delay of the law’s employer mandate. Then there was the announcement, buried in the Federal Register, that the administration would delay enforcement of a number of key eligibility requirements for the law’s health insurance subsidies, relying on the “honor system” instead. Now comes word that another costly provision of the health law—its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs—will be delayed for one more year.

Obamacare contains a blizzard of mandates and regulations that will make health insurance more costly. One of the most significant is its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs, such as co-pays and deductibles. Section 2707(b) of the Public Health Service Act, as added by Obamacare, requires that “a group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage may not establish lifetime limits on the dollar value of benefits for the any participant or beneficiary.” Annual limits on cost-sharing are specified by Section 1302(c) of the Affordable Care Act; in addition, starting in 2014, deductibles are limited to $2,000 per year for individual plans, and $4,000 per year for family plans.

Out-of-pocket caps drive premiums upward

There’s no such thing as a free lunch. If you ban lifetime limits, and mandate lower deductibles, and cap out-of-pocket costs, premiums have to go up to reflect these changes. And unlike a lot of the “rate shock” problems we’ve been discussing, these limits apply not only to individually-purchased health insurance, but also to employer-sponsored coverage. (Self-insured employers are exempted.)

These mandates have already had drastic effects on a number of colleges and universities, which offer inexpensive, defined-cap plans to their healthy, youthful students. Premiums at Lenoir-Rhyne University in Hickory, N.C., for example, rose from $245 per student in 2011-2012 to between $2,507 in 2012-2013. The University of Puget Sound paid $165 per student in 2011-2012; their rates rose to between $1,500 and $2,000 for 2012-2013. Other schools have been forced to drop coverage because they could no longer afford it.

According to the law, the limits on out-of-pocket costs for 2014 were $6,350 for individual policies and $12,700 for family ones. But in February, the Department of Labor published a little-noticed rule delaying the cap until 2015.

The delay was described yesterday by Robert Pear in the New York Times.

Last month the White House announced a one-year delay in enforcement of another major provision of the law, which requires larger employers to offer health coverage to full-time employees. Valerie Jarrett, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, said that the delay of the employer mandate showed “we are listening” to businesses, which had complained about the complexity of federal reporting requirements.

Although the two delays are unrelated, together they underscore the difficulties the Obama administration is facing as it rolls out the health care law.

Advocates for people with chronic illnesses said they were dismayed by the policy decision on out-of-pocket costs.

“The government’s unexpected interpretation of the law will disproportionately harm people with complex chronic conditions and disabilities,” said Myrl Weinberg, the chief executive of the National Health Council, which speaks for more than 50 groups representing patients.

For people with serious illnesses like cancer and multiple sclerosis, Ms. Weinberg said, out-of-pocket costs can total tens of thousands of dollars a year.(NYT)

Delay needed to align ‘separate computer systems’

Notes Pear, “Under the [one-year delay], many group health plans will be able to maintain separate out-of-pocket limits for benefits in 2014. As a result, a consumer may be required to pay $6,350 for doctors’ services and hospital care, and an additional $6,350 for prescription drugs under a plan administered by a pharmacy benefit manager.”

The reason for the delay? “Federal officials said that many insurers and employers needed more time to comply because they used separate companies to help administer major medical coverage and drug benefits, with separate limits on out-of-pocket costs. In many cases, the companies have separate computer systems that cannot communicate with one another.”

The best part in Pear’s story is when a “senior administration official” said that “we had to balance the interests of consumers with the concerns of health plan sponsors and carriers…They asked for more time to comply.” Exactly how is it in consumers’ interests to pay far more for health insurance than they do already?

It’s not. Unless you have a serious, chronic condition, in which case you may benefit from the fact that law forces healthy people to subsidize your care. To progressives, this is the holy grail. But for economically rational individuals, it’s yet another reason to drop out of the insurance market altogether. For economically rational businesses, it’s a reason to self-insure, in order to get out from under these costly mandates.

Patient groups upset

While insurers and premium-payers will be happy with the delay—whose legal justification is dubious once again—there are groups that grumbled. Specifically, groups representing those with chronic diseases, and the pharmaceutical companies whose costly drugs they will use. “The American Cancer Society shares the concern” about the delay, says Pear, “and noted that some new cancer drugs cost $100,000 a year or more.” But a big part of the reason those drugs cost so much is because manufacturers know that government-run insurers will pay up.

“The promise of out-of-pocket limits was one of the main reasons we supported health reform,” says Theodore M. Thompson of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. “We have wonderful new drugs, the biologics, to treat rheumatoid arthritis,” said Patience H. White of the Arthritis Foundation. “But they are extremely expensive.”

The progressive solution to expensive problems? More subsidies. But subsidies don’t reduce the underlying cost of care. They only excuse the high prices that manufacturers and service providers already charge.

It’s one of the many aspects of Obamacare that should be repealed, if we are to combat the rate shock that the health law imposes on tens of millions of Americans. But that will require Republicans to come up with a smarter strategy than shutting down the government. (Forbes)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2012/03/22/how-obamacare-dramatically-increases-the-cost-of-insurance-for-young-workers/

135698 600 ObamaCare waivers cartoons

Food For the Sowell XII: Solutions are The Problems?

It is hard to read a newspaper, or watch a television newscast, without encountering someone who has come up with a new “solution” to society’s “problems.” Sometimes it seems as if there are more solutions than there are problems. On closer scrutiny, it turns out that many of today’s problems are a result of yesterday’s solutions.

San Francisco and New York are both plagued with large “homeless” populations today, largely as a result of previous housing “reforms” that made housing more expensive, and severely limited how much housing, and of what kind, could be built.

The solution? Spend more of the taxpayers’ money making homelessness a viable lifestyle for more people.

Education is a field with endless reforms, creating endless problems, requiring endless solutions. One of the invincible fallacies among educators is that all sorts of children can be educated in the same classroom. Not just children of different races, but children of different abilities, languages, and values.

Isn’t it nice to think so? I suspect that even most conservatives would prefer to live in the kind of world conjured up in the liberals’ imagination, rather than in the kind of world we are in fact stuck with.

The result is that many very bright children are bored to the point of becoming behavior problems, when the school work is slowed to a pace within the range of students who are slower learners.

By federal law, even children with severe mental or emotional problems must be “mainstreamed” into classes for other students — often in disregard of how much this disrupts these classes and sacrifices the education of the other children.

Parents who complain about the effect of these “solutions” on their own children’s education are made to feel guilty for not being more “understanding” about the problems of handicapped students.

Nothing is easier for third party busybodies than being “understanding” and “compassionate” at someone else’s expense — especially if the busybodies have their own children in private schools, as so many public school educators do.

Whether in housing, education or innumerable other aspects of life, the key to busybody politics, and its endlessly imposed “solutions,” is that third parties pay no price for being wrong.

This not only presents opportunities for the busybodies to engage in moral preening, but also to flatter themselves that they know better what is good for other people than these other people know for themselves.

Right now, there are people inside and outside of government who are proposing new restrictions on how you may or may not visit the national parks that your taxes support. Among their proposals is doing away with trash cans in these parks, so that visitors have to take their trash out with them.

Just how they would enforce this, when millions of people are visiting places like Yosemite or Yellowstone, is something the busybodies need not bother to think through — much less pay a price, when trash simply accumulates in these parks after trash cans are removed.

ObamaCare is perhaps the ultimate in busybody politics. People who have never even run a drugstore, much less a hospital, blithely prescribe what must be done by the entire medical system, from doctors to hospitals to producers of pharmaceutical drugs to health insurance companies.

This includes federal laws requiring the turning over of patients’ confidential medical records to the federal government, where these records can be looked at by politicians, bureaucrats and whoever can hack into the government’s computers. Neither you nor your doctor has a right to keep this information confidential.

What could lead anyone to believe that they have either the right or the omniscience to dictate to hundreds of millions of other people? Our educational system may have something to do with that, with their constant promotion of “self-esteem,” and especially their emphasis on developing “leaders.”

Our schools and colleges are turning out people who cannot feel fulfilled unless they are telling other people what to do. The price of their self-indulgence is the sacrifice of our freedom. If we don’t defend ourselves against them, who will?

After all, they are superior and it’s for “your own good” and it makes them “feel good”. So it can’t be wrong now can it? 🙂

Cartoon of the Day