Remember, only Republicans commit voter fraud…(according the The Ministry of Truth)… 🙂
La Raza has been busy distributing an informative infographic to help people find polling places that do not require identification to cast a ballot. Efforts to get out fraudulent votes aren’t even happening in the shadows anymore, it seems.
The pro-amnesty Hispanic activist organization the National Council of La Raza helpfully promoted a Washington Post article explaining which states people can vote in without having to use a photo ID.
The Chicago chapter of Asian Americans Advancing Justice tweeted Blake’s article with the message, “Reminder — #Illinois does NOT require #voterID to cast a ballot,” along with the pro-Democrat hashtag #TurnOutForWhat. The tweet was helpfully retweeted by the National Council of La Raza.
It’s just a helpful guide, not a guide to how to and where to cheat the system for your own benefit, yeah that’s the ticket.
After all, if this didn’t exist all those illegals and multiple voters would live in fear of not being able to vote and that’s “voter suppression” and we can’t have that now can we!
And those evil, racist Voter ID laws…
Every warm body should be able to vote for a Democrat! 🙂
Legally, who cares about that, it’s about beating those evil Republicans before they destroy America and kill people! 🙂
Remember yesterday when the Dems were all happy about how wonderful ObamaCare was regardless of the facts…
The Affordable Care Act was supposed to make health care more affordable, but a newly released study of insurance policies before and after Obamacare shows that average premiums have skyrocketed, for some groups by as much as 78 percent.
Average insurance premiums in the sought-after 23-year-old demographic rose most dramatically, with men in that age group seeing an average 78.2 percent price increase before factoring in government subsidies, and women having their premiums rise 44.9 percent, according to a report by HealthPocket scheduled for release Wednesday.
The study, which was shared Tuesday with The Washington Times, examined average health insurance premiums before the implementation of Obamacare in 2013 and then afterward in 2014. The research focused on people of three ages — 23, 30 and 63 — using data for nonsmoking men and women with no spouses or children.
The premium increases for 30-year-olds were almost as high as for 23-year-olds — 73.4 percent for men and 35.1 percent for women — said the study, titled “Without Subsidies Women & Men, Old & Young Average Higher Monthly Premiums with Obamacare.”
“It’s very eye-opening in terms of the transformation occurring within the individual health insurance market,” said Kev Coleman, head of research and data at HealthPocket, a nonpartisan, independently managed subsidiary of Health Insurance Innovations in Sunnyvale, California.
“I was surprised in general to see the differences in terms of the average premiums in the pre-reform and post-reform markets,” Mr. Coleman said. “It was a higher amount than I had anticipated.”
The eye-popping increases among younger insurance buyers could be a problem for Obamacare’s long-term solvency given that young people are needed to offset the higher costs associated with older policyholders.
“Obviously they’re very important, and as much as they’re healthier, they tend to use health care less, so you want to try and have as many of those people enrolled as possible. And the cost for them went up very [steeply],” Mr. Coleman said.
The price increases for 63-year-olds were less dramatic: a 37.5 percent increase on average for women and 22.7 percent for men.
The study doesn’t include the federal premium subsidies offered to those earning between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty limit, but Mr. Coleman points out that not everyone in that bracket qualifies because their premiums must exceed a certain percentage of their income.
“So you still have this issue of health insurance rising for that very young group and, depending on where they are with respect to income and premium, they may not qualify for a subsidy,” Mr. Coleman said. “That’s what we like to refer to as a subsidy gap.”
The report also notes that somebody pays for the subsidy, even if it’s not the policyholder.
“Another important consideration in the discussion of subsidized premiums is that the subsidized portion of the premium still must be paid by the government through the money it collects from the nation,” says the study. “In other words, the subsidized costs of health insurance do not disappear but instead change payers.”
A spokeswoman with the Department of Health and Human Services declined to comment because she had not yet seen the report.
The reasons for the premium increases start with the ACA’s prohibition on rejecting applicants with pre-existing conditions, which means that insurance companies must account for the additional costs of covering chronically ill or disabled people.
Another cost driver is the heightened benefit mandate. The ACA requires insurance policies to include 10 “essential health benefits,” including pediatric dental and vision care, maternity care and newborn care, even for policyholders with no children or whose children are adults.
“If you’re expanding the services you’re covering, and you’re increasing the number of less healthy people in your risk pools, that’s going to increase costs,” Mr. Coleman said. “Attendant to that would be an increase in premiums to be able to appropriately cover those costs.”
He also noted that the study doesn’t weigh policies based on enrollment, meaning that it includes the costs of insurance plans that may have few enrollees.
The report examines premium costs from the two largest metropolitan areas of each state, using data from public insurance records obtained from the Department of Health and Human Services. (WT)
It’s ok, the Liberals won’t even notice their Holy Grail has a hole in the bottom of it the size of the Grand Canyon.
The New York Times on Monday featured a huge news package claiming that ObamaCare is delivering on all its main promises. But the Bible of the liberal press has badly misled its flock.
‘After a year fully in place,” the Times story begins, “the Affordable Care Act has largely succeeded in delivering on President Obama’s main promises.” So case closed, right? After all, a team of New York Times “reporters and data researchers” came to that conclusion.
Just like the “consensus” on Global Warming. The Left has proclaimed their Agenda is perfect and right and that’s it. The End.
In a word, no. To claim success, the Times gets things wrong or ignores the law’s most glaring failures.
The uninsured rate has gone down? It’s true that several private surveys show a decline in the uninsured rate this year. But how much of this is due to ObamaCare and how much is due to the fact that millions of people have found work since early 2013?
The Times doesn’t even try to answer that question, even though the long-term census survey shows a connection between job growth and uninsured rates.
Meanwhile, most of those who did gain coverage didn’t get it from a private insurance company. They went on Medicaid. That isn’t what Obama or anyone else pushing ObamaCare had promised.
More affordable? The Times claims that ObamaCare has made insurance affordable for many, “but not for all.” Well, if you spend $1 trillion in subsidies, then yes, some are bound to get a break.
But ask anyone who’s been forced to buy an ObamaCare plan after his old insurance was canceled, and he will probably laugh at the Times’ conclusion.
Even in California, which wholeheartedly embraced ObamaCare, the state’s insurance commissioner found that average premiums for those who had coverage before ObamaCare rocketed 22% to 88%.
In any case, the law came nowhere near fulfilling Obama’s promise of a $2,500 cut in premiums for the average family.
Improving the nation’s health? There’s simply no way to draw any conclusions about that so early in the game. What you can say is that having insurance doesn’t equal improved health.
A comprehensive study published in the New England Journal of Medicine made that abundantly clear. It found that people on Medicaid were no better off healthwise than the uninsured.
A working ObamaCare exchange? The fact that the federal exchange is still unfinished despite spending more than $2 billion over several years would constitute an epic failure in any private business. That’s not true, unfortunately, in big government.
The Times also concludes that the health care industry is better off today than it was before ObamaCare was passed. But since when was that a priority of Democrats, who sold the law by demonizing insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and drug companies?
What’s more, the Times simply ignores other “main promises” that have unquestionably failed. Anyone remember Obama’s oft-repeated “keep your plan” promise? Or the one about how it wouldn’t add a dime to the federal deficit?
A new Senate report concludes the same thing that IBD did back in July 2013 — that ObamaCare will add red ink in its first 10 years, thanks to lower-than-expected revenues, unrealistic budget cuts and various “fixes” since it was passed.
And what about the promise that ObamaCare wouldn’t affect those who get coverage at work? Even the Times has occasionally reported on the disruptions the law is causing — companies dropping coverage, cutting hours, putting off hires. ObamaCare architect Ezekiel Emanuel predicts it will destroy the employer market altogether.
Essentially, all that the New York Times has done is lower the bar enough for ObamaCare to crawl over and declare victory. (IBD)
But that’s what you have to do hen the Party can’t be wrong and the Agenda must succeed no matter what and anyone who disagrees must be a “hater”. 🙂
ON OCTOBER 7, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Idaho’s ban on same-sex marriage. On Oct. 15, county clerks in the state for the first time issued marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
Then, five days later came startling news out of the Idaho resort town of Coeur d’Alene: Two Christian ministers, owners of the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel, had reportedly been told by local officials that they were now required to perform same-sex weddings, or risk fines of up to $1,000 and as much as six months in jail if they refused. Under the city’s antidiscrimination ordinance, the Hitching Post is considered “a place of public accommodation,” and refusing to marry couples on the basis of sexual orientation was no longer a legal option.
So the two ministers, Donald and Evelyn Knapp, filed a lawsuit, seeking to block the city from forcing them to host same-sex ceremonies in violation of their sincere religious beliefs. “The Knapps are in fear that if they exercise their First Amendment rights they will be cited, prosecuted, and sent to jail,” their attorney told reporters.
At first blush, the story seemed to confirm the grimmest forebodings of those who have warned that the gay marriage juggernaut will roll right over religious liberty concerns. Was the government really threatening to jail clergy who refused to perform same-sex weddings?
The lawsuit, filed Oct. 17 in federal trial court by the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, stoked long-held fears among opponents of marriage equality.
“The day liberals promised would never come is already here,” Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council warned in a press release announcing the lawsuit, which was brought on behalf of Donald and Evelyn Knapp, two ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel.
Mike Huckabee, former presidential candidate and Southern Baptist minister, weighed in on Facebook: “Remember when same-sex marriage activists used to claim that it would never infringe on other people’s religious beliefs? Well, that was a lie.”
But Coeur d’Alene isn’t ruling out the possibility, either. Only if the Hitching Post truly operates on a not-for-profit religious basis, City Attorney Michael Gridley wrote in an Oct. 20 letter, would the Knapps be legally exempted from the antidiscrimination ordinance “like any other church or religious association.” Conversely, if their wedding chapel provides services “primarily or substantially for profit and they discriminate in providing those services based on sexual orientation,” they could be cited for breaking the law.
Should they be?
Religious convictions haven’t sheltered florists, bakers, and other vendors who have declined to provide their services for same-sex ceremonies. The Supreme Court earlier this year let stand the penalty imposed on a New Mexico photographer who turned down a request to shoot a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony. The American Civil Liberties Union argues that wedding chapels, like bakeries and photo studios, are bound by nondiscrimination law, regardless of the owners’ moral beliefs. By that argument, it makes no difference that the owner of a company is an ordained minister. An operation like the Hitching Post isn’t a ministry, the ACLU would say, it’s a business — and the First Amendment can tell the difference.
Yet there is considerably more to the First Amendment than the unique protection it extends to churches. The freedom of expression it enshrines secures the right to speak no less than the right not to speak. Time and again the Supreme Court has confirmed that government may not force Americans to utter words they disbelieve or deny.
“If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation,” Justice Robert Jackson wrote in a landmark 1943 decision that struck down a law compelling students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, “it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”
Whatever one’s views on same-sex marriage — or on nondiscrimination statutes generally — it is unfathomable that ministers could be forced by law to pronounce the words of a marriage ceremony against their will. That they are being paid to perform the ceremony doesn’t diminish the significance of the words they are saying, or erode their constitutional liberty to choose not to say them.
Supporters of same-sex unions have nothing to gain by forcing anyone, least of all clergy members, to officiate at weddings when it would violate their principles to do so.
Yes, they do. They have the satisfaction of sticking it to the “haters” and stroking their “entitled” “civil rights” ego.
That is “just something we don’t do in a liberal society,” insists Andrew Sullivan, a stalwart advocate for gay marriage. Concerns about what “marriage equality” is doing to religious tolerance and dissent run deep; surely the best way to allay those concerns is with respect and goodwill. As same-sex wedlock comes to Idaho, it is in everyone’s interest that freedom of speech and conscience not be driven out.
But then they don’t get the thrill of the ego that they have gotten in other place around the country where THEY HAVE forced those evil, discriminatory, Christians to bow down to their Lawyers and Judges on Speed Dial.
“I think there are a lot of people in this country who have anxiety about what marriage equality is going to mean for them, and there’s a widespread misperception that changes to the marriage laws or discrimination laws are going to mean faith leaders are forced to perform weddings they don’t want to perform,” said Amanda Goad, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Tell that to the Farm in NY or the T-Shirt shop owner in Kentucky…
P.s. Liberal Compassion (from Huffington Post): “It’s such a heartbreaking challenge to be martyred these days. Just ask the Knapps They’ve done everything in their power – built crosses for themselves, climbed into position, and set-up nail guns pointed at their hands and feet. How much longer must they beg for someone passing by to please, please, just pull the trigger? ”
“Religious organizations in this country enjoy immense freedom from taxation, civil rights laws, public accommodation laws, etc. The claim that they are being persecuted is sillier than me claiming there are winged children flying around doing good deeds for humanity.”
“Religion and stupidity go together like bread and butter.”
“Christians” pretending to be “persecuted” if they can’t persecute others and finding out”Oh wait, we CAN still persecute…” but let’s fund raise and promote bigotry anyway…”
Remember this from the last campaign season..
and the dead on Parody of it…
Well it’s back!
The Liberal Meme about how everyone and everything is not only dependent on Government, but that Government creates everything anyhow.
So Government running your life is not only good, but it’s the way the universe should work and anyone who says differently is an evil, capital, elite corporate “hater” of middle class and poor Americans!
Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”
“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.
“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”
“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Clinton said, which elicited loud laughs from the crowd.
That would be the arithmetic of When in Debt Spend EVEN More!! And when you take in more in taxes than ever before, you spend even more!
Now that’s Liberal Math!
I bet she forgets her husbands Budget Deal with the Devil in the late 1990’s. It was a satanic deal, after all, and ruined the economy.
So what if this President will spend more than every President combined, at least he’s not a Corporate America Hack who just want to suck your life’s blood from you for his own ends! 🙂
Corporate America is Evil!
Only Government is GOOD!
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!
FEAR IS HOPE!
There’s a word for complete government control of everything….
In a totalitarian society, all control of public and private life are government run.
Because YOU Didn’t Build That! 🙂
YOU Didn’t Build that! You don’t Create Jobs!
ONLY GOVERNMENT CAN DO THAT!
Pelosi 2010: Unemployment Checks Serve As “Job Creator”
“It injects demand into the economy,” Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said of unemployment checks.
“It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”
Pelosi calls unemployment checks a “stimulus” that is a “double benefit” helping “those who lost their jobs” and at the same serves as a “job creator”
“It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say ‘we’re not going to have unemployment benefits,'” Pelosi said.
SO YOU DIDN’T BUILD THAT!
Government did! 🙂
We are From the Government and we are here to help you!
A Dinosaur sized info dump was laid yesterday. If you want to bury a story release it on Friday, especially so that the Ministry of Truth can kill it by Monday.
So we have Your friend and mine, “Fast & Furious”.
Obama and had the documents buried in the filing cabinet. You know the ones where Holder shared potential classified internal emails with his wife and mother and Obama issued 30 executive orders to try and keep it hidden.
Judicial Watch announced today that it received from the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) a “Vaughn index” detailing records about the Operation Fast and Furious scandal. The index was forced out of the Obama administration thanks to JW’s June 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and subsequent September 2012 FOIA lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice (No. 1:12-cv-01510)). A federal court had ordered the production over the objections of the Obama Justice Department.
The document details the Attorney General Holder’s personal involvement in managing the Justice Department’s strategy on media and Congressional investigations into the Fast and Furious scandal. Notably, the document discloses that emails between Attorney General Holder and his wife Sharon Malone – as well as his mother – are being withheld under an extraordinary claim of executive privilege as well as a dubious claim of deliberative process privilege under the Freedom of Information Act. The “First Lady of the Justice Department” is a physician and not a government employee.
This is the first time that the Obama administration has provided a detailed listing of all records being withheld from Congress and the American people about the deadly Fast and Furious gun running scandal. The 1307-page “draft” Vaughn index was emailed to Judicial Watch at 8:34 p.m. last night, a few hours before a federal court-ordered deadline. In its cover letter, the Department of Justice asserts that all of the responsive records described in the index are “subject to the assertion of executive privilege.”
The Vaughn index explains 15,662 documents. Typically, a Vaughn index must: (1) identify each record withheld; (2) state the statutory exemption claimed; and (3) explain how disclosure would damage the interests protected by the claimed exemption. The Vaughn index arguably fails to provide all of this required information but does provide plenty of interesting information for a public kept in the dark for years about the Fast and Furious scandal.
Based on a preliminary review of the massive document, Judicial Watch can disclose that the Vaughn index reveals:
- Numerous emails that detail Attorney General Holder’s direct involvement in crafting talking points, the timing of public disclosures, and handling Congressional inquiries in the Fast and Furious matter.
- President Obama has asserted executive privilege over nearly 20 email communications between Holder and his spouse Sharon Malone. The administration also claims that the records are also subject to withholding under the “deliberative process” exemption. This exemption ordinarily exempts from public disclosure records that could chill internal government deliberations.
- Numerous entries detail DOJ’s communications (including those of Eric Holder) concerning the White House about Fast and Furious.
- The scandal required the attention of virtually every top official of the DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). Communications to and from the United States Ambassador to Mexico about the Fast and Furious matter are also described.
- Many of the records are already publicly available such as letters from Congress, press clips, and typical agency communications. Ordinarily, these records would, in whole or part, be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Few of the records seem to even implicate presidential decision-making and advice that might be subject to President Obama’s broad and unprecedented executive privilege claim.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton criticized President Obama and his disgraced Attorney General in a statement today:
This document provides key information about the cover-up of Fast and Furious by Attorney General Eric Holder and other high-level officials of the Obama administration. Obama’s executive privilege claims over these records are a fraud and an abuse of his office. There is no precedent for President Obama’s Nixonian assertion of executive privilege over these ordinary government agency records. Americans will be astonished that Obama asserted executive privilege over Eric Holder’s emails to his wife about Fast and Furious.
Once again, Judicial Watch has proven itself more effective than Congress and the establishment media in providing basic oversight of this out-of-control Administration. This Fast and Furious document provides dozens of leads for further congressional, media, and even criminal investigations.
On June 28, 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt by the House of Representatives over his refusal to turn over records explaining why the Obama administration may have lied to Congress and refused for months to disclose the truth about the gun running operation. It marked the first time in U.S. history that a sitting Attorney General was held in contempt of Congress.
A week before the contempt finding, to protect Holder from criminal prosecution and stave off the contempt vote, President Obama asserted executive privilege over the Fast and Furious records the House Oversight Committee had subpoenaed eight months earlier. Judicial Watch filed its FOIA request two days later. Holder’s Justice Department wouldn’t budge (or follow the law), so JW filed a FOIA lawsuit on September 12, 2012.
But then the Justice Department convinced U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates to stay our lawsuit, in part to allow ongoing settlement discussions between the Holder’s government lawyers and the House Committee to continue. Unsurprisingly, the “negotiations” between politicians running the House and the Justice Department went nowhere.
Fed up with the interminable delay caused Holder’s gamesmanship and stonewalling, JW renewed its request to the Court to allow our transparency lawsuit to continue. Thankfully, this past July, Judge John D. Bates ended the 16-month delay and ordered the Obama administration to produce a Vaughn index of the alleged “executive privilege” records by October 1. Judge Bates noted that no court has ever “expressly recognized” President Obama’s unprecedented executive privilege claims in the Fast and Furious matter.
Unhappy with having to produce the records prior to the elections, Justice lawyers asked the judge to give them one extra month, until November 3 (the day before Election Day!) to produce the info. Judge Bates rejected this gambit, suggested that the Holder’s agency did not take court order seriously. Rather than a month, Judge Bates gave Justice until yesterday to cough up the Vaughn index. Judge Bates issued his smack down on September 23.
Attorney General Eric Holder announced his resignation two days later.
Many share our opinion it was “no coincidence” that Holder’s resignation came “on the heels of another court ruling that the Justice Department must finally cough up information about how Holder’s Justice Department lied to Congress and the American people about the Operation Fast and Furious scandal, for which Eric Holder was held in contempt by the House of Representatives.”
On September 9, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, citing Judicial Watch’s success, ordered the Justice Department to produce information to Congress by November 3.
Fast and Furious was a DOJ/Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “gun running” operation in which the Obama administration reportedly allowed guns to go to Mexican drug cartels hoping they would end up at crime scenes, advancing gun-control policies. Fast and Furious weapons have been implicated in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and hundreds of other innocents in Mexico. Guns from the Fast and Furious scandal are expected to be used in criminal activity on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border for years to come.
Guns from the Fast and Furious scandal continue to be used in crimes. Just last week, Judicial Watch disclosed that a Fast and Furious gun was used in gang -style assault on a Phoenix apartment building that left two people wounded. We figured this out from information we uncovered through another public records lawsuit against the City of Phoenix.
Congress officially confirmed the AK-47 was used in the assault that terrorized residents in Phoenix. In an October 16 letter sent from Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) to Deputy Attorney General James Cole discloses that “we have learned of another crime gun connected to Fast and Furious. The [Justice] Department did not provide any notice to the Congress or the public about this gun….This lack of transparency about the consequences of Fast and Furious undermines public confidence in law enforcement and gives the impression that the Department is seeking to suppress information and limit its exposure to public scrutiny.”
We have many other active lawsuits over the Fast and Furious scandal:
On October 11, 2011, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ and the ATF to obtain all Fast and Furious records submitted to the House Committee on Oversight.
On June 6, 2012, Judicial Watch sued the ATF seeking access to records detailing communications between ATF officials and Kevin O’Reilly, former Obama White House Director of North American Affairs at the U.S. National Security Council.
On September 5, 2013, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ seeking access to all records of communications between DOJ and the Oversight Committee relating to settlement discussions in the Committee’s 2012 contempt of Congress lawsuit against Holder. The contempt citation stemmed from Holder’s refusal to turn over documents to Congress related to the Fast and Furious gunrunning scandal.
On May 28, 2014, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ on behalf of ATF Special Agent John Dodson, who blew the whistle on Operation Fast and Furious and was then subjected to an alleged smear campaign designed to destroy his reputation.
And the fun never stops…
The president is upset. Very upset. Frustrated and angry. Seething about the government’s handling of Ebola, said the front-page headline in the New York Times last Saturday.
And Now that it show’s up in New York, after all his protestations that he’s got it under control, he even has his Political Thought Police Arm ready to go, his Ebola Czar to cover for him and it still happened. How rude!! Don’t they know he’s The Most Arrogant Man in the World. He’s too important to the World to keep having these things inconveniently happening.
There’s only one problem with this pose, so obligingly transcribed for him by the Times. It’s his government. He’s president. Has been for six years. Yet Barack Obama reflexively insists on playing the shocked outsider when something goes wrong within his own administration.
It’s always someone elses fault, after all. He’s perfect, he just wished everyone and everything would abide by that edict.
IRS? “It’s inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it,” he thundered in May 2013 when the story broke of the agency targeting conservative groups. “I will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency, but especially in the IRS.” Except that within nine months, Obama had grown far more tolerant, retroactively declaring this to be a phony scandal without “a smidgen of corruption.”
ObamaCare rollout? “Nobody is more frustrated by that than I am,” said an aggrieved Obama about the botching of the central element of his signature legislative achievement. “Nobody is madder than me.”
Veterans Affairs scandal? Presidential Chief of Staff Denis McDonough explained: “Secretary (Eric) Shinseki said yesterday … that he’s mad as hell and the president is madder than hell.” A nice touch — taking anger to the next level.
The president himself declared: “I will not stand for it.” But since the administration itself said the problem was long-standing, indeed predating Obama, this means he had stood for it for 5-1/2 years.
The one scandal where you could credit the president with genuine anger and obliviousness involves the recent breaches of White House Secret Service protection. The Washington Post described the first lady and president as “angry and upset,” and no doubt they were.
But the first Secret Service scandal — the hookers of Cartagena — evinced this from the president: “If it turns out that some of the allegations that have been made in the press are confirmed, then of course I’ll be angry.”
An innovation in ostentatious distancing: future conditional indignation.
Orwell would be proud.
These shows of calculated outrage — and thus distance — are becoming not just unconvincing, but unamusing. In our system, the president is both head of state and head of government. Obama seems to enjoy the monarchial parts, but when it comes to the actual business of running government, he shows little interest and even less aptitude.
His principal job, after all, is to administer the government and to get the right people to do it. (That’s why we typically send governors rather than senators to the White House.) That’s called management. Obama had never managed anything before running for the biggest management job on earth. It shows.
What makes the problem even more acute is that Obama represents not just the party of government, but a grandiose conception of government as the prime mover of social and economic life.
The very theme of his presidency is that government can and should be trusted to do great things. And therefore society should be prepared to hand over large chunks of its operations — from health care (one-sixth of the economy) to carbon regulation down to free contraception — to the central administrative state.
Government is God. Government is Good. Government is everywhere and everything.
But this presupposes a Leviathan not just benign, but competent. When it then turns out that vast, faceless bureaucracies tend to be incapable, inadequate, hopelessly inefficient and often corrupt, Obama resorts to expressions of angry surprise.
He must. He’s not simply protecting his own political fortunes. He’s trying to protect faith in the entitlement state by portraying its repeated failures as shocking anomalies.
Unfortunately, the pretense has the opposite effect. It produces not reassurance, but anxiety. Obama’s determined detachment conveys the feeling that nobody’s home. No one leading. Not even from behind.
The National Science Foundation has awarded $300,000 to the State University of New York at Buffalo to develop “underwater internet” or “real-time video streaming in the Internet of underwater things.”
The four-year project is not about “trying to stream Netflix to scuba divers,” according to the principal investigator for the project, Tommaso Melodia.
Well, at least they aren’t wasting any money…
A poll conducted two weeks ago showed that 64% of likely voters (in competitive races) think that “things in the U.S. feel like they are out of control.” This is one degree of anxiety beyond thinking the country is on the wrong track. That’s been negative for years, and it’s a reflection of failed policies that in principle can be changed. Regaining control, on the other hand, is a far dicier proposition.
With events in the saddle and a sense of disorder growing — the summer border crisis, Ferguson, the rise of the Islamic State, Ebola — the nation expects from the White House not miracles, but competence. At a minimum, mere presence. An observer presidency with its bewildered-bystander pose only adds to the unease. (Charles Krauthammer)
But it’s all he knows and if we know one thing about this President and that is he NEVER steps outside of what he knows. He’s a rigid ideologue.
Now his rigidity is paralysis.
But at least he has an Ebola Czar to take the heat for him! 🙂
Read the following and you don’t see the REAL problem with the Leftist Progressive narrative maybe you are one. 🙂
Here’s how the economy works, at least according to the people who are ignorant enough to actually believe something posted from a page like this one. Apparently, the president doesn’t get to take credit for the economy unless he’s a Republican and that’s only if the economy is doing well. If it’s doing poorly, then it’s the fault of the last Democrat. However, if the president is a Democrat, then it’s the exact opposite and the recession that happened under Bush is somehow President Obama’s fault. The economy is also allegedly a failure because some people in their 20s and 30s are living at home and that’s totally not the fault of the companies pulling in record profits but refusing to hire workers or pay decently, despite their firm belief in trickle-down economics. Trust me, writing that train of logic was hard for me and I can imagine it was just as hard for you to read.
And reading that liberal screed described as “logic” is making MY head hurt!
But I suppose trickle-down poverty is a better solution. 🙂
This list is so utterly ridiculous that I don’t even know where to start. Last time I checked, it was Republicans who were trying crush free speech and free expression.
Yeah, the Republican are The Politically Correct Thought Police who waant to boycot Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A and they routinely go around to Christian businesses and harrass, sue , and harrangue them in the name of “Civil rights”. 🙂
Are you starting to see the problem yet?
Remember Occupy Wall Street and how they cheered for that California cop who casually pepper sprayed students in the face?
Remember the Tea Party when Leftist assaulted people and blamed it ON THE TEA PARTY? Remember the little cherubs of Occupy Wall Street who made Zuccoti Park look like a war zone? No, I’m sure they don’t.
Religious freedom? Seriously? Newsflash, just because you can’t force your religious beliefs on other people doesn’t mean you are being persecuted.
Yeah, having your business fined or ruined because they won’t kow-tow to the Progressive Liberal Gays is not persecution… 🙂
Privacy? Ok, that’s an issue for both parties, so if you’re a Republican don’t pretend like you’re innocent. 2nd Amendment? Again, regulations don’t equal confiscation. Private property? Ok, this has to be a joke. Republicans oppose pretty much everything on here, especially stopping corporate welfare. Then again, if you’re delusional enough to subscribe to that page, you probably still think President Obama is going to come for your guns any day now. (forwardprogressive.com)
Not quite. You’ll need it when his IRS and his drones come for you, Citizen. 🙂
Now do you see the delusions you face when dealing with a Liberal?
I’m waiting for the attack in Ottawa to be
a) “workplace violence”
b) “racist” to talk about it.
c) “George Bush’s Fault”
After all, doesn’t everything on then Left these boil down to a combo of these?
I could say “I told you so”, but I have to wait until he destroys America first. 🙂
The White House intended to remain silent about its plans for immigration. Revealing a scheme to open the floodgates of amnesty would be disastrous on the eve of the critical midterm elections. But this is the gang that can’t shoot straight.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Friday threw open the door to as many as 100,000 Haitians, who will now move into the United States without a visa. Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, rightly and accurately denounced enabling Haitians awaiting a U.S. visa to enter the country and legally apply for work permits as “an irresponsible overreach of the executive branch’s authority.”
That was just the beginning. The immigration agency earlier this month had solicited a printer able to handle a “surge” of 9 million green cards “to support possible future immigration-reform initiative requirements.” In an ordinary year, about 1 million green cards are issued, and over the life of this contract the company is expected to produce up to 34 million cards, a figure representing an increase of the population of the United States by 10 percent.
The cards do not come with automatic voter registration, but that’s obviously what the scheme portends. President Obama’s promised “executive actions” to bring about this enormous wave of amnesty constitute a transparent and cynical ploy to expand the Democratic voter base, creating a permanent majority. Republicans running for the House and Senate should demand that Mr. Obama lay his green cards on the table now, before — and not after — the Nov. 4 elections. No other campaign issue carries as much of an impact on the future of the nation.
In economic terms, importing millions of unskilled workers creates competition for the diminishing number of available jobs. Combine a flooded job market with the Democratic proposals for a doubling of the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and millions more American citizens will be without a job. Those who do have jobs will pay to provide federal freebies, from Obamaphones to Obamacare, to the formerly illegal aliens now with a green card.
As the recent influx of minor children over the southern border demonstrates, word of amnesty on the way travels fast. Handing green cards to those who cheated the system and entered the country illegally creates an incentive to millions more to follow in their path, collecting as many benefits as possible along the way. It’s a disaster in the making — indeed already here — for public health and national security, straining the welfare state to its limit.
Most Americans want no part of this. A Gallup survey finds that 74 percent of Americans want the level of immigration to stay where it is, or reduce it. Mr. Obama has no support for his amnesty scheme except from those who want to transform America into a nation that no one would recognize. Voters can get to work on stopping the transformation on Nov. 4.
But the Agenda is The Agenda!
It’s not like he gives a crap what you think. After all, you’re just a bunch of “racists” who hate poor people and want them to starve an die….:)
“Good morning Pooh Bear…if it is a good morning… which I doubt.” –Eeyore, “Winnie the Pooh,” 1926
I have loved Eeyore since I was a kid. I identify with Eeyore.
The depressive donkey in A.A. Milne’s “Winnie the Pooh” stories pretty much matches the mood of Americans lately, according to the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released last week. When 1,000 potential voters were asked whether they think the nation is on the right or wrong track, 65% of them said the country had taken a wrong turn, and only 25% said the U.S. was on the right path.
The only time the public has felt worse was in October 2008, during the first, deep spasms of the recession. Then, 78% said the nation was on the wrong track, and only 12% felt good about the country’s direction. The last time “right direction” beat out “wrong track” was in January 2004 — and the last election cycle where that was the case was 2002.
“Why are people so gloomy? Well, it might just be everything,” says pollster Micah Roberts, sounding a bit like Eeyore himself. Mr. Roberts is vice president of Public Opinion Strategies, which along with Hart Research Associates conducted the poll. “We haven’t had a plurality saying ‘right track’ in over ten years so that’s pretty amazing. After 10 years it’s just part of the collective consciousness of Americans,” to think the nation’s gone off the rails, he added.
The most negative responses came when people were asked, “Tell me, what are the one or two reasons you feel things in the nation are (headed in the right direction/off on the wrong track)?”
A politically independent millennial from California had quite a few more than that on her list: “Disease, economy. Like Ebola and economy as in people can’t really find jobs. I guess turmoil, like I can’t explain it. Senseless slayings, like in St. Louis downtown there’s like cops shooting people for no reason, public fighting, public riots, people fighting outside of Congress offices, and there’s still a sense of racism. I guess human trafficking. I noticed there was like weird public fires in San Diego. That’s all I can think of right now.”
As if that weren’t enough.
Even those who said they thought the nation was on the right track seemed to doom the future with faint praise.
Take this response from a Democrat, a middle-aged white woman living in the swing state of Pennsylvania: “People are not buying enough. I work for a company Neiman Marcus and we sell to the richie rich. Jobs are an issue. There are none to be had in this area. I believe free trade killed us. I believe it’s done that. I don’t know, there are things that are going in the right direction. This was not done by one President, meaning the damage. As far as I’m concerned, jobs are the most important. The healthcare, a lot of companies aren’t hiring because they have to pay the health insurance. The minimum wage is disgusting. People are not making a living on minimum wage. Anything under ten dollars an hour is not a wage. I believe the minimum wage should be raised.”
Or this, from an African-American Republican female, aged 55-plus, living in New York: “For one thing, we haven’t got wars going on, or fighting.” Or, from a young Republican man in California: “I definitely think the economy is picking up a little. I just left a bank job. So I’m aware of more of that than the Obama administration…That’s it.”
If things seem that bad among people who are happy with where the U.S. is headed, what about the rest?
Here’s a Democrat, a white, retirement-age woman from Iowa who said the nation is on the wrong track: “The wars, the bombings, the terrorism and that, this Ebola thing, that’s not good. Social Security, is that enough. I guess I don’t know what else to tell you.”
Many among the 1,000 voters surveyed named Ebola as a concern. The poll was conducted during the second week in October–just after Thomas Eric Duncan, the first person in the U.S. to be diagnosed with Ebola, died Oct. 8, and a nurse who cared for him was diagnosed.
An astounding 98% had seen, read or heard something about the disease, and 70% had seen, read or heard “a lot” about it. Compare that with the General Motors recall of cars linked to at least 54 accidents and a dozen U.S. deaths: 75% of people surveyed by CNBC in June knew something about it, and 32% knew a lot.
Only slightly more than half of Americans, 56%, think the U.S. is prepared to handle an Ebola outbreak, according to the WSJ poll.
A disturbing 42% feel the nation isn’t prepared enough, or not at all. This Virginia woman is likely one of them: “The economy sucks, jobs suck, health-care sucks,” said the 30-something Democrat.
However, the absolute, chart-topping bogeyman for Americans was again Congress. Indeed, the poll’s overall negativity “is about Washington, about an economy that seems stuck and not improving –and of course Ebola, ISIS, endless wars,” Mr. Roberts said.
“Collectively, this is all a weight on the shoulders of the average American.” (WSJ)
But I bet the Democrats will still vote for the Democrats and the Republicans the Republicans and not much will change because they can’t.
Do you see a lifelong Democrat who thinks everything is going “in the wrong direction” voting against a Democrat? Really??
And there in lies the real problem. After all, if you look at the graph above the country has been “on the wrong track” is a majority since 2002 but what has been done since 2002, the rise of the Progressive Liberal in Congress and The White House.
You shouldn’t judge the Affordable Care Act based on headlines or by listening to politicians or talking heads. I tried for a while, but only heard wildly conflicting stories that seemed to have little basis in reality.
Instead, you should ask someone who actually deals with the law on a daily basis — a doctor, for instance.
The Physicians Foundation did exactly that in its “2014 Survey of American Physicians,” which was released last month. The survey, which reached over 80% of doctors in the U.S. and elicited responses from some 20,000, is doctors’ collective report card on the Affordable Care Act’s first four years.
The grades aren’t good. Only 25% of doctors give it an “A” or a “B” grade. Nearly half ( 46%) give it a “D” or an “F”.
I can help explain why so many of us are fed up with the law: In many cases, it shifts our focus from patients to paperwork, from finding cures to filing documents.
The survey indicates that physicians now spend 20% of their time on non-clinical paperwork. I now spend many hours at a desk or a computer rather than at the bedside assisting patients. This isn’t why I became a doctor.
Unsurprisingly, this shift negatively influences patients’ access to health care — doctors simply don’t have the time to see the same number of patients.
The survey indicates that 44% of doctors “plan to take one or more steps that would reduce patient access to their services.” This includes “cutting back on patients seen, retiring, working part-time, closing their practice to new patients or seeking a non-clinical job.”
I would add another important effect based on my own observations: Spending less time with patients.
The ACA’s regulatory burden directly bears on these decisions. There are already at least 11,000 pages of government regulations related to the law. Some of it applies to insurers, some of it applies to doctors and some applies to the relationship between the two.
No matter who it applies to, it adds bureaucratic hassles to the health care process that may impact your doctors’ ability to attend to your medical needs.
It should come as no surprise, then, that 69% of physicians “believe their clinical autonomy is sometimes or often limited,” meaning they have a diminished ability to make medical decisions in consultation with patients.
And “limited” may be an understatement. The ACA’s implementation has also coincided with a dramatic decline in private practice — the small, personal doctors’ offices that have been in local communities for generations.
According to the survey, 35% of physicians are now independent practice owners. In 2012, half were independent. In 2008 — two years before the ACA was passed — 62% were independent. In the last two years alone, the number of solo practitioners has dropped from 25% to 17%.
No wonder: Private and solo practitioners often lack the staff and the financial resources required to implement and keep up with the ACA’s dramatic changes to medicine.
The Physicians Foundation survey indicates that our country’s health care is still going in the wrong direction. Of course, it’s important to note that the Affordable Care Act is only one of many issues affecting doctors’ decisions and outlook.
But it is not a good sign that in the law’s first few years, physicians are seeing fewer patients, private practices are disappearing and nearly twice as many doctors believe the law is harming, not helping, American health care.
• Fodeman is an internal medicine doctor practicing in Tucson, Ariz. (IBD)
Jon Gabriel, Richochet.com: We’ve all argued with liberals, especially online. The issue could be health care, tax rates or city zoning rules, but they’ll quickly turn their policy disagreement into personal attacks.
Conservative: “I think hiking the minimum wage will reduce jobs.”
Progressive: “You would say that, RICH RETHUGLICAN!”
Conservative: “Actually, I’m lower middle class, so…”
Progressive: “Are you denying your WHITE privilege?”
Conservative: “Well, I’m Asian, and…”
Progressive: “I’m glad the PATRIARCHY protects your precious job!”
Conservative: “Wrong again. I’m a woman.”
Progressive: “Probably sitting at home baking cookies for your husband!”
Conservative: “I’m a lesbian. By the way, who are you?”
Progressive: “Stop voting against your own self-interest by electing old white men like me!”
Mine usually end in being called a racist, a moron, idiot,or some other ad homimem is thrown at me with as much daintiness, precision or “compassion” and tolerance as an armed Nuclear Warhead.
The argument gets trickier when progressives argue with each other. Since they aren’t used to debating the substance of issues, they revert to form. The goal is always to find who is more of a victim:
Prog 1: “We need to raise the minimum wage to $15!”
Prog 2: “No way, oppressor! $25 an hour!”
Prog 1: “Oh, you think a black man like me should just keep my mouth shut?!”
Prog 2: “Shut up, homophobe! My lesbian sisters need ‘$25 to Stay Alive!’ Want a bumper sticker?”
Prog 1: “As a Bisexual of Color, I only use mass transit, planet raper!”
Prog 2: “Oh yeah, well my last name is Gomez and I was raised by a single mom!”
Prog 1: “My mom died of breast cancer when I was 12!”
Prog 2: “How dare you speak that way to a proud working-class Latina lesbian with transient fibromyalgia!”
The key isn’t to discover the best solution, but to prove one’s superior moral authority. A progressive can only be the winner if he proves he’s the biggest loser.
Or at the very least that they are morally and intellectually superior (in their own mind) to you, you low-life, knuckle dragging Neanderthal idiot. 🙂
I’ve decided to help my liberal friends save time with an easy quiz. By printing and filling out the form below, they can quickly determine who is more victimized and therefore the victor in any given argument:
Now they can be happy about their oppression and complete moral authority to oppress you and make you adhere to THEIR agenda or else!
After all, it’s for your own good. They are Homo Superior Liberalis, and you’re not! 🙂
“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Progressive Liberalism, and to the Dictatorship for which it stands, one Nation under Government, divisible, with liberty and social justice for the faithful only.”
- Oh, am I going to get labelled a homophobe and a “hater” again for this one. 🙂
- Oh well. They’d do it anyways. Reality doesn’t matter, the Narrative does.
- But the Liberal’s favorite cudgel of social and legal enforcement was used again this week when the Federal Government overturned a voter approved State Constitutional Amendment on gay marriage.
- The Court of Social Justice & Liberalism has struck again.
- I wonder if this applies to all the Illegal Aliens the Feds say we aren’t allowed to catch also? 🙂
- Am I against gay marriage? Nope.
- Am I against liberals “supremacy” clause and their need to destroy you in court if you cross them, HELL YEAH!
- But since the Leftist Gay Narrative is that they are next great Civil Right struggle and they are the oppressed and their cause is righteous and “moral”, rational thought is not possible. So you’re a “hater” if you disagree with, period.
- So will Wedding venues that refuse to hold a Gay Wedding be subjected to the Gay Mafia Hammer?
- Businesses already have to watch out for the Gay Thought Police prowling around to destroy them if they do or say the wrong thing.
- That’s my objection.
- But I’m evil automatically in Big Gay Brother’s eyes, so don’t bother listening to me. 🙂
- A little history, that an irrational gay pride activist will not even comprehend in their haze of righteousness, so here goes.
- Back in the early 1980’s when I was a freshmen in college I encountered my first gay people ever and you know what I thought– So what, I don’t care. They were good people and that matters more than their sexual proclivities.
- I truly didn’t care.
- Actually, they were more accepting and better people than a lot of heterosexuals were back in the day to be honest.
- My college roommates for a time consisted of a Gay Man, a Witch, and a Satanist, all under one roof. All friends. No political agenda AT ALL!
- And well before it was “fashionable”.
- Hell, it was considered I must be gay because I keep hanging around with gays.
- So you see, I am not a “hater”. (I can here the leftist snark “Oh, he had a few gay friends…”)
- But to the modern gay rights activist I must be a “hater” because I disagree with their need to FORCE their life style and your acceptance of it at the point of a Law Book and destroy good and decent people for the simple fact that they don’t want to kow-tow to them. Those filthy peasants!
- After all, THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!
- I think they were winning in general without being so heavy-handed and impatient. Their indoctrination techniques over the last generation or so were having the desired effect. But their secular hatred for the “Christian Right” and their own self-aggrandized Sanctimony gets the better of them.
- They’d been working on it for decades, just like Obamacare took 90 years, many were patient.
- But the squeaky activist gets the law greased.
- So I can accept gay marriage because I always have, BUT the activist, no, sorry, you’re just another bunch of totalitarian social justice liberals who want what they want, when they want it, because they want it, and if you object you must therefore, by default be EVIL.
- The oppressed become the oppressor, but because of righteous blindness can’t and won’t see it that way.
- They are the triumphant aggrieved sackers of Christian Right “extremism”, after all.
- Arizona’s governor, Jan Brewer, who has clashed with President Barack Obama over immigration and border security, said in a statement that federal courts have gone against the will of voters and eroded the state’s power. “Simply put, courts should not be in the business of making and changing laws based on their personal agendas,” Brewer said. (AP)
- But personal agendas is the only thing The Left understands. They want it, you’re evil, you must be crushed! Period.
- The federal court decision bars Arizona officials from enforcing a 1996 state law and a 2008 voter-approved constitutional amendment that outlawed gay marriage.
- The Feds are The Supreme Law of The Land and you peasant will do as you are told or else!
- So who’s next on their target list. Who do they want to crush next in their crusade to FORCE you do things their way or else??
- Among the couples there were Bailey and Majors (outside the courthouse). Though marriage never seemed possible to them in their youth, they began to get hope in recent years as the nation started to debate the legality of same-sex unions.
Despite all the joy they felt Friday, Bailey said it was still hard to express her feelings about such a sweeping social turn-around that she witnessed in her lifetime.
There was no sweeping “social change”. There was a LEGAL hammer slammed into the State’s nuts and then they were cut off. That is not “social change” that is Legal ENFORCEMENT of one’s agenda regardless of any “social” feelings to the contrary.
It’s a LEGAL victory, not a “social” victory.
As The Doctor in “Doctor Who” last week said:
“People with guns to their heads cannot mourn”
- Big Gay Brother is watching you citizen, and you better not step out of line or else the Thought Police will come down on you…
- Next up, Polyamory!!! 🙂
It may not be the sexiest topic or the one that gets your venom flowing, but what more important in the long run? $17.865 Trillion (that a a $Billion since yesterday’s blog-check it). It’s irresponsible. Period. We overspent less this year Yippee!! 😦
Red Ink: The White House is crowing that the deficit fell sharply this year. But in fact, there’s little to celebrate. The decline wasn’t a result of sound fiscal policy, and it won’t last.
This week, the Treasury Dept. reported that the total deficit for fiscal 2014, which ended Sept. 30, was $483 billion. Budget director Jacob Lew seized on the news to declare, “Not since World War II, more than 60 years ago, has there been faster and more sustained deficit reduction.”
Of course, time was that a nearly half trillion dollar deficit was the sign of abject failure, not success.
In mid-2008, then Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad said, “If we gave Olympic medals for fiscal irresponsibility, President Bush would take the gold, the silver and the bronze.” That was after the administration said that deficits would hit $482 billion.
Given that Obama’s deficits topped $1 trillion for four years straight, anything less looks good by comparison.
But a closer look at the numbers reveals that this meager good deficit news is not particularly good.
First, the decline came almost entirely from rising corporate and personal income taxes. That’s just a sign that the economy has been growing — albeit painfully slowly. And as people return to work, they start paying taxes again. This growth rate in revenues won’t continue.
And while spending climbed by less than 2% in 2014, that’s misleading as well. A big chunk of the slowdown came from a $25.6 billion drop in unemployment insurance costs, in part because Congress didn’t extend long-term jobless benefits. That’s not likely to be repeated.
It’s true that there has been spending restraint in so-called discretionary programs, largely because Republicans control the House.
Entitlement programs are another matter. Medicaid spending climbed an eye-popping 13% last year as ObamaCare expanded eligibility. Medicare spending went up 2.5%, which seems low but is almost twice the rate of overall federal outlays. Social Security spending climbed 4.4%. Interest on the debt climbed 3.3%.
On top of that, ObamaCare added $13 billion in new subsidies to the ledger.
All of which is why the Congressional Budget Office projects that, starting in 2016, annual deficits will start to march upward, as entitlement growth starts to outstrip even historically high tax revenues.
By the decade’s end, the CBO projects, deficits will once again be in the trillion-dollar range, while debt held by the public will have climbed to 77.2% of GDP.
And this assumes that ObamaCare costs don’t climb faster than expected, and its taxes come in as planned.
That’s not likely, given that several ObamaCare taxes — most notably a tax on devices — are coming in below expectations, while costs are higher than planned.
A Senate Budget Committee analysis released this week finds that ObamaCare’s net costs are running $300 billion ahead of what the CBO had forecast back in 2010, when it claimed that the law would cut the deficit in its first 10 years. Instead, the committee report says, it will likely add $131 billion in red ink by 2019.
The CBO’s projections also assume that interest rates won’t spike, which would send already massive interest payments spiraling up, or that the economy won’t hit another brick wall.
The administration says that the latest deficit news marks “a return to fiscal normalcy.” If deficits as far as the eye can see and massive debt are what they consider normal, we’re in big trouble. (IBD)
The federal government collected a record amount of taxes in fiscal year 2014, topping $3 trillion in revenue for the first time in its history, according to Treasury Department numbers released Wednesday that show the influx helped drop the deficit to its lowest level under President Obama.
The recovering economy was the key, sending personal and corporate incomes higher — and thus sending more money to Washington. Individual taxes rose 6 percent and corporate-income taxes, which are the best indicator of a business recovery, leapt 17 percent.
Just five years ago, the Treasury took in $2.1 trillion, but fiscal year 2014, which ended Sept. 30, saw the final take at $3.020 trillion. The government spent $3.504 trillion, leaving it $483 billion in the red. That’s down from $1.4 trillion in 2010, and is the lowest figure since 2008.
The good news is, that the government has never taken in more money ever. The bad news, it come from you! You’ve never given more.
The good news is the government has never taken in more money. The bad news is that th THEY STILL SPENT MORE THAN THEY TOOK IN.
The good news, according to Democrats, they spent more than they took in LESS than they did 5 years ago. The bad news is that they have overspent EVERY SINGLE YEAR since 2008.
But it’s less, so you should be proud of them. 🙂
So the National Debt stands at $17.864 TRILLION dollar. That’s the good news, because, as the Democrats are proud to say, they overspent less than before.
The bad news is it’s nearly $8 Trillion more debt in 5+ years of Obama. He will spend more and accumulate more debt than all Presidents in the history of the country combined.
But that’s Bush’s fault, you know! 🙂
And hey, he’s got his drug addiction down 60% from 5 years ago. Of course he did it by taking more money in taxes than ever before and snorting roughly the say, but hey who’s counting that you “hater”! 🙂
“The president’s policies and a strengthening U.S. economy have resulted in a reduction of the U.S. budget deficit of approximately two-thirds — the fastest sustained deficit reduction since World War II,” Mr. Lew said.
Deficit reduction while the debt rises faster than ever.
Orwell would be proud of your dis-assembly of the language.
Over spending and debt is good, as long as you over spend less every year!
I really should try that with my credit cards… Nah! I’m not that stupid.
Just five years ago, in 2009, the trough of the recession, revenue was only $2.1 trillion. That means it’s leapt $900 billion in just five years.
Spending, meanwhile, has remained relatively flat at about $3.5 trillion.
So he’s overspending less and that’s a good thing… 🙂
Mr. Obama fought for higher personal income-tax rates in 2012, winning a postelection deal in the so-called “fiscal cliff” debate that saw income taxes hiked for the wealthiest, and payroll tax hikes for everyone. (WT)
President Obama made a promise to not increase taxes for families making less than $250,000 a year.
Mind you, Obamacare IS a Tax, but it’s not a Tax, it’s a Penalty that is a Tax that isn’t a Tax. but then the Supreme Court said it was a Tax!
But the government has collected more taxes, so when it spends too much they can cheer that they are overspending less and you should be happy for them.
The $$$ drug addicts have cut back. No, they just got people to give them more drugs so they can maintain their habit and it LOOKS like they cut their consumption.
It’s good news for Orwell, bad news for the Country, as a whole.
Rejoice, we Overspend Less. Lets all throw a Party!
“I don’t think the government’s going to get any more out of the American economy. The only way Europe does is because they have the VAT taxes,” Mr. Edwards said, referring the Value Added Tax system that is prominent on the Continent. He predicted VAT would be the next big tax battle in the U.S.
Of course, the addicts still need more money. They can’t survive on a flat income source. THEY WANT MORE!
They NEED MORE! FEED ME!
FEED ME! The BEAST IS HUNGRY!
And you get a starring role on the BIGGEST LOSER! 🙂
So now the federal health bureaucrats in charge of controlling diseases and pandemics want more money to do their jobs. Hmph. Maybe if they hadn’t been so busy squandering their massive government subsidies on everything but their core mission, we taxpayers might actually feel a twinge of sympathy.
At $7 billion, the Centers for Disease Control 2014 budget is nearly 200 percent bigger now than it was in 2000. Those evil, stingy Republicans actually approved CDC funding increases in January larger than what President Obama requested.
What are we getting for this ever-increasing amount of money? Answer: A power-hungry busybody brigade of politicized blame-mongers.
Sounds like typical progressive liberalism to me.
Money, money, it’s always the money. Yet, while Ebola and enterovirus D68 wreak havoc on our health system, the CDC has been busying itself with an ever-widening array of non-disease control campaigns, like these recent crusades:
–Mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden appoints a 15-member “Community Preventive Services Task Force” to promote pet Nanny State projects. An obscure Obamacare rule — Section 4003(b)(1) — stealthily increased the task force’s authority to study “any policies, programs, processes or activities designed to affect or otherwise affecting health at the population level.” Last year, the meddling panel extended the agency’s reach into transportation safety with a call to impose a federal universal motorcycle helmet law on the country. Is riding a Harley a disease? Why is this the CDC’s business?
–Video games and TV violence. At Obama’s behest, in the wake of high-profile school shootings, the CDC scored $10 million last year to study violent video games and media images, as well as to assess “existing strategies for preventing gun violence and identifying the most pressing research questions, with the greatest potential public health impact.” Whatever that means. Why is this the CDC’s business?
–Playground equipment. The CDC’s “Injury Centers” (Did you know there are 13 of them?) have crafted a “national action plan” and funded countless studies to prevent boo-boos and accidents on the nation’s playgrounds. Apparently, there aren’t enough teachers, parents, local school districts, and county and state regulators to police the slides and seesaws. Why is this the CDC’s business?
–“Social norming” in the schools. The CDC has funded studies and campaigns “promoting positive community norms” and “safe, stable, nurturing relationships (SSNRs)” in homes and schools. It’s the mother of all government values clarifications programs. So bad attitudes are now a disease. Again, I ask: Why is this the CDC’s business?
How about more agenda driven BS (from The Hill):
Senate Democrats are asking the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) how research is coming on gun violence.
Democratic Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) and Brian Schatz (Hawaii) sent a letter to CDC Director Tom Frieden on Friday asking for a progress report on the current state of research at the agency on the causes and prevention of gun violence.
“Gun violence kills or injures more than 10,000 children a year. It kills more than 30,000 people each year. It destroys families and damages communities. It is a public health crisis in every sense of the word, and it is critical that we treat it is as such,” the senators wrote.Last year, President Obama asked the CDC to research gun violence after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., where 20 first-graders were killed. Lawmakers asked the CDC if they have a budget and timeline for conducting studies on guns.
“Part of these efforts must include serious substantive research into the problem of gun violence in order to better craft additional strategies with which to combat it,” the letter stated. “Unfortunately, there have been no clear signs that the CDC is beginning to implement this agenda.”
Markey has also called for legislation that would provide the CDC with $10 million a year for six years in order to conduct more research on gun violence prevention and firearms safety.
That has to be way more important than Ebola because it’s part of THE AGENDA!
After every public health disaster, CDC bureaucrats play the money card while expanding their regulatory and research reach into anti-gun screeds, anti-smoking propaganda, anti-bullying lessons, gender inequity studies and unlimited behavior modification programs that treat individual vices — personal lifestyle choices — as germs to be eradicated.
Just like Liberal educators are always wanting more money for their failures.
As I have said on many, many occasions, Liberals are the Greediest people on Earth.
Their failures are always someone elses fault and because they didn’t have enough money (thus enough power) to do it with (which is also someone else fault). So you have to feed the beast and give them more money and more power so that they can succeed.
But it’s a perpetual motion machine, enough is never enough for a Liberal. They never worker smarter. They don’t have to. They are always on the side of right and Light so denying them anything and everything they want is Darkness. Pure and simple.
Here’s a reminder of what the CDC does with money that’s supposed to go to real disease control. In 2000, the agency essentially lied to Congress about how it spent up to $7.5 million earmarked each year since 1993 for research on the deadly hantavirus. “Instead, apparently without asking Congress, the CDC spent much of the money on other programs that the agency thought needed the funds more,” The Washington Post found. The diversions were impossible to trace because of shoddy CDC bookkeeping practices. The CDC also misspent $22.7 million appropriated for chronic fatigue syndrome and was investigated in 2001 for squandering $13 million on hepatitis C research.
So when a real potential plague rears it’s ugly head?
Time to play the partisan card! (especially 3 weeks from an election)
Democrats have rushed out of the gate with an attack ad against Republicans claiming if only we had spent more money, we would be able to solve the Ebola situation.
It’s a defensive ad that reeks of desperation. At a time when more and more Americans, including millennials, are concluding government just doesn’t work, it probably won’t be effective. And Republicans can respond in kind.
For example, instead of studying Ebola, the National Institutes of Health were studying the propensity of lesbians to be fat.
Then there was the money for a study on wives who calm down quickly.
And the Centers for Disease Control spent its budget on gun violence studies on order of the President as part of his agenda to curtail the second amendment.
The CDC also spent its money to survey what bus riders thought of HIV videos.
Hey, and let’s not forget all the money the CDC spent to convince people to stop smoking and now we need tobacco to manufacture the drug to fight Ebola. Classic. (Red State)
But it’s not their fault! They are the Angels of Best Intentions and Compassion so it must be those evil Satans of Conservatism that have caused all this suffering and strife!
As I pointed out years ago, the CDC has its own private funding pipeline in the form of “Friends of CDC,” an Atlanta-based group of deep-pocketed corporations, now including ATT, Costco, General Motors, Google, IBM and Microsoft. To date, the entity has raised some $400 million to support the CDC’s work. (Michelle Malkin)
But there is not enough money in the universe to satisfy the addicted hunger of a Liberal.
This one was fascinating, in the fact that someone actually made an actual guide from it. Government health care at it’s finest, from Wales Online.
Sickness guide for parents provokes fury by recommending NO days off school for youngsters with tonsillitis and glandular fever
The booklet was described as a ‘joke’ by angry parents after it was distributed in schools.
Parents have criticised a new health guide which advises children struck down with tonsillitis, conjunctivitis and even glandular fever should take no time off school.
The controversial booklet, which was handed out in schools across South Wales this week, sets guidelines for parents to follow should their child fall ill.
It recommends pupils take zero days off school should they contract a range of conditions including hand foot and mouth, conjunctivitis, glandular fever, head lice, threadworm, tonsillitis and slapped cheek.
It comes as local authorities across the region are put under increasing scrutiny by education watchdog Estyn to improve their attendance levels.
Estyn is the office of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales. It is a Crown body, established under the Education Act 1992. Estyn is independent of the National Assembly for Wales but receives its funding from the Welsh Government under Section 104 of the Government of Wales Act 1998.
Estyn inspects quality and standards in education and training providers in Wales. (from there website)
Here is the real story, the attendance levels aren’t what they want them to be so let’s shoehorn it by “advisors” funded by the Government.
Because the “experts” have determined that everything should be exactly like this and reality must conform to their data.
Another writer wrote, “Indeed it is so draconian in parts your offspring will need to be suffering bubonic plague before they have any chance of pulling an authentic sickie.”
Mom & Pop Government don’t believe you’re sick or it should fit in-between these guidelines or else…
Seething parents took to social networking sites in their droves to criticise the guide, with some describing the recommendations as “nonsense”.
Dad-of-two Gareth Whittle, from Cardiff, said: “I thought it was a joke. I think as parents we are responsible enough to know when and for how long we should keep our children away from school.”
Another parent added: “My daughter had hand foot and mouth. She couldn’t eat for five days due to the ulcers in her mouth.
“If she talked she would dribble as it was too painful to swallow her saliva, so there was no way she could have gone to school. Who makes up this rubbish?”
The booklet was published by the Central South Consortium, a joint partnership between Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan, Rhondda Cynon Taf, Bridgend and Merthyr county councils.
It urges parents to initially seek advice from NHS Direct or consult their GP before making a decision to remove their child from the classroom.
It also says children should spend five days off school for chicken pox, four days for measles, five days for whooping cough and five days for mumps.
Pauline Jarman, who is a governor at both Caegarw Primary and Mountain Ash Comprehensive School in Rhondda Cynon Taff, added: “When I had glandular fever I was too run down to function.
“I am inclined to trust the judgement of the parent or guardian. If they think the child’s illness is severe enough to keep them home – or are eager to avoid spreading the illness to other children – they will seek the appropriate advice from their GP.
“Some of the conditions where they are not highlighting a specific number of days will, in my opinion, vary in severity.”
Karen Roberts, Vice Chair of Governors Tonypandy Community College, said there was a “distinct lack of clarity” in the leaflet.
She said: “Sickness absence can be as much of a problem amongst school pupils as it can in the workplace.
“Children cannot be taught and learn if they are not in school, and of course it is right that as much advice and support as possible is given to parents who need it to encourage them to ensure their children miss as little school as possible.
“However, I can also see how this leaflet may to some be seen as the ‘nanny state’ – interfering with parents’ responsibilities and rights.
“Different people react differently to illnesses. Some children suffering for instance from hand, foot and mouth may feel fine whereas others will be much more severely affected and certainly not feel up to attending school. It is contagious and will spread to classmates.
“The recommendation for some illnesses is that the sufferer be kept away from vulnerable children and pregnant women.
“The only way to ensure this is to keep them home. Vulnerable children and pregnant women do not generally walk around with signs on them to make them easily identifiable.
“I can only assume that the intended meaning is that there is no set recommended time, that children stay home until they are better.
“I hope it is the case that this is merely an issue with communication and poor design of this leaflet as if not then it raises serious questions as to the standard of advice coming from the consortium.”
Parents are told to inform their school of their child’s absence at 9.30am every day. By law, only the headteacher can authorise for a pupil to be off school.
The guide concludes: “If you child is frequently missing school due to illness, medical confirmation may be requested from your GP and/or a referral may be made to the Attendance and Wellbeing Service or Education Welfare Service.”
A spokesperson for Rhondda Cynon Taf Council, one of the local authorities in the Consortium, said: “The medical advice printed has been obtained directly from the Health Protection Agency in England in conjunction with the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.
“Consultation was carried out with Cwm Taf, Cardiff and the Vale and Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Boards and Public Health Wales who all approved the content of the advice table.”
Bureaucratic blow off anyone?
Government knows best. Government Hegemony. “best practices” aka do it our way or else.
Head lice, meanwhile, is also no excuse to stay home according to the sickness absence guide.
While a scalp full of crawlies won’t make a youngster feel off colour, sending an untreated child to school who is the Typhoid Mary of the nits world will certainly make you the least popular parent at the school gates.
Ironically, the only illness that gets the softly softly treatment from the guide is flu. “Keep home until recovered” is the recommendation.
That is reasonable advice for “proper” flu but as every accomplished young sickie-puller knows, a bad cold can easily masquerade as proper flu. (Wales Online)
As a kid I tried, as all kids do, to get out of school by “being sick” but I had a disadvantage, my Dad was a Doctor and my mother was also well versed.
Go to far, and they’d start talking about hospitals… YIKES!
But what really caught my eyes about this was the specificness of it. 5 days for Chicken pox and extra, like you can cookie cutter kids.
“Well, the government says you should only be sick for 5 days…” strikes me as Government as parent or at least some kind of overlord. If you go past 5 days, then what?
Mama Government will be very cross with you…
P.s. I WONDER WHAT EBOLA WILL BE PRESCRIBED? 🙂
My seventh-grade son recently wrote a U.S. History paper extolling the virtues of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. “It ended the Great Depression,” he wrote with great certainty. He’s only 12 and parroting what the history texts and his teachers told him.
That’s his excuse. What’s Ken Burns’?
Mr. Burns’ docudrama on the Roosevelts—for those who weren’t bored to tears—repeats nearly all the worn-out fairy tales of the FDR presidency, including what I call the most enduring myth of the 20th century, which is that FDR’s avalanche of alphabet-soup government programs ended the Great Depression. Shouldn’t there be a statute of limitations on such lies?
Not for Liberals. They spent 90 years working up to ObamaCare, after all…
Ask nearly anyone over the age of 80, and they will say that FDR cared about the working man and “gave the country hope,” a point that Mr. Burns emphasizes. Roosevelt exuded empathy, which isn’t a bad thing—remember Bill Clinton’s memorable line “I feel your pain”?—but caring doesn’t create jobs or lift gross domestic product.
Nor does spending government money revive growth, despite the theories put into practice by the then-dean of all economists, John Maynard Keynes. Any objective analysis of these facts can lead to no other conclusion. U.S. unemployment averaged a rate of 18 percent during Roosevelt’s first eight years in office. In the decade of the 1930s, U.S. industrial production and national income fell by about almost one-third. In 1940, after year eight years of the New Deal, unemployment was still averaged a god-awful 14 percent.
Think of it this way. The unemployment rate was more than twice as high eight years into the New Deal than it is today, and American workers now are angry as hornets. Imagine, if jobs were twice as scarce today, the pitchforked revolt that would be going on. This is success?
Almost everything FDR did to jump-start growth retarded it. The rise in the minimum wage kept unemployment intolerably high. (Are you listening, Nancy Pelosi?) Roosevelt’s work programs like the Works Progress Administration, National Recovery Administration and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration were so bureaucratic as to have minimal impact on jobs. Raising tax rates to nearly 80 percent on the rich stalled the economy. Social Security is and always was from the start a Madoff-style Ponzi scheme that will eventually sink into bankruptcy unless reformed.
The cruel irony of the New Deal is that the liberals’ honorable intentions to help the poor and the unemployed caused more human suffering than any other set of ideas in the past century.
The most alarming story of economic ignorance surrounding this New Deal era was the tax increases while the economy was faltering. According to economist Burt Folsom, FDR signed one of the most financially devastating taxes: “On April 27, 1942, he signed an executive order taxing all personal income above $25,000 [rich back then] at 100 percent. Congress balked at that idea and later lowered it to 90 percent at the top level.” The New Dealers completely ignored the lessons of the 1920s tax cuts, which just a decade before had unfurled an age of super-growth.
Then there was the spending and debt barrage. Federal spending catapulted from $4.65 billion in 1933 to nearly $13.7 billion in 1941. This tripling of the federal budget in just eight years came at a time of almost no inflation (just 13.1 percent cumulative during that period). Budget surpluses during the prosperous Coolidge years became ever-larger deficits under FDR’s fiscal reign. During his first term, more than half the federal budget on average came from borrowed money.
The cruel irony of the New Deal is that the liberals’ honorable intentions to help the poor and the unemployed caused more human suffering than any other set of ideas in the past century.
The road to Hell is paved with Liberal Good Intentions. Since they are The Enlightened , and they Care, it worked in their minds– in their reality. So, therefore, it will work again, and again, and again.
They are the good, compassionate, loving, caring, sensitive Angels of the World. Anyone who disagrees must therefore be a Devil and out to do everyone (but especially the poor) harm.
It just stands to reason, in their heads.
What is maddening is that thanks to this historical fabrication of FDR’s presidency, dutifully repeated by Mr. Burns, we have repeated the mistakes again and again. Had the history books been properly written, it’s quite possible we would never had to endure the catastrophic failure of Obamanomics and the “stimulus plans” that only stimulated debt. The entire rationale for the Obama economic plan in 2009 was to re-create new New Deal.
Doubly amazing is that at this very moment, the left is writing another fabricated history — of the years we have just lived through. The history books are already painting Obama policies as the just-in-time emergency policies that prevented a Second Great Depression. I wonder if 80 years from now, the American people will be as gullible as they are today in believing, as my 12-year-old does, that FDR was an economic savior.
Originally appeared in The Washington Times by Stephen Moore
Answer: YES. History is written by the winners, or at least, in this case the Liberal educators. So as long as they control the process, the falsehoods of the Liberal Narrative will become fact.
After all, if you often enough it becomes the truth. No one like this axiom better than a Liberal.
Ask nearly anyone over the age of 80, and they will say that FDR cared about the working man and “gave the country hope,” a point that Mr. Burns emphasizes. Roosevelt exuded empathy, which isn’t a bad thing—remember Bill Clinton’s memorable line “I feel your pain”?—but caring doesn’t create jobs or lift gross domestic product. (Chris Cook)
And then you have now the 24/7 Ministry of Truth to spew “the facts”.
So, yes, Liberals never learn from REAL history (because they are SO MUCH smarter than the average bear) and we are doomed to repeat them.
Soft Tyranny: What is the purpose of government in America? To protect rights and freedoms? That’s how the nation started. But now government is seen as more of a cross between a nanny and an operations manager.
Not every American adheres to that notion. Enough governments are moving in that direction, however, to make us freedom-lovers more than a little nervous. Consider a trio of recent events moving us from a nation of liberty to a society that is over-governed and over-monitored.
Late last month, the Seattle City Council voted to make it a crime for residents to put too many food scraps into their regular garbage. The law says that regular trash bins can’t be filled with more than 10% of compostable waste, including food and paper products.
On first offense, citizens are punished with a $1 fine. Serial offenders could be fined $50. The whole thing gives new meaning to the dinner-table question: “Are you going to finish that?”
So do they have to eat the extra calories they would have thrown away (thus increase obesity, which the liberal will also get you for) or do you have save it for the poor or leftovers??
Well, don’t save them too long, then you’ll have to throw them out and Mama will be unhappy if it’s “too much”.
In a recent study, Seattle households estimated that about 1/3 of all food scraps they throw out could’ve been avoided. This includes foods that went bad before being eaten and leftovers no one wanted to eat.
That rotten apple isn’t the only thing going into your food and yard waste cart, though. You’re also throwing away all the water, energy and other resources used to grow that apple and get it to your plate. That’s a lot of waste!
You horrible peach of ungrateful shit! How dare you! Mama Government is unhappy with you.
Monthly residential food and yard waste cart rates
Effective April 1, 2014.
|Service Level (weekly)||Curb or Alley
|13-gallon (mini-can)||$5.15||20 pounds||11″W x 12″D x 27″H|
|32-gallon||$7.75||60 pounds||21″W x 23″D x 40″H|
|96-gallon||$9.90||180 pounds||29″W x 34″D x 46″H|
|extra yard waste (per bundle)||$4.90||60 pounds||4′ x 2′ x 2′|
Customers changing their food and yard waste cart size more than once in a twelve month period may incur a $23.80 fee charged to their solid waste account.
Apparently, you get to pay for the privilege of being condescended to by Mama Government. How sweet…
Reuters reports that the law is “one of the toughest mandatory composting efforts in the country” in a city considered “a leader in urban sustainability and recycling efforts.” Which means that the nonsense started there is likely to spread to other urban areas.
Actually, Seattle is the second American city to pass such a law. San Francisco — of course — was the first.
They are also banning plastic bags in California too. It’s a ‘environmentally friendly’ sanctimonious thing to do and it. But we have to start small. You have throw the frog into cold water first, soften him up, before you go for the full boil of Government.
Under SB270, plastic bags will be phased out of checkout counters at large grocery stores and supermarkets such as Wal-Mart and Target starting next summer, and convenience stores and pharmacies in 2016. The law does not apply to bags used for fruits, vegetables or meats, or to shopping bags used at other retailers. It allows grocers to charge a fee of at least 10 cents for using paper bags.
Selective Liberal outrage?
Shoppers leaving a Ralphs supermarket Tuesday in downtown San Diego were divided as they weighed the legislation’s environmental benefits against its costs. San Diego does not ban plastic bags.
“With the amount of waste that we produce, we can try to help out by slightly inconveniencing ourselves,” said Megan Schenfeld, 29, whose arms were full of groceries in plastic bags after leaving reusable bags at home.
Well, she needs to be handcuffed, arrested and fined for her bad behavior don’t you think? 🙂
Robert Troxell, a 69-year-old former newspaper editor, said the fees are more than an inconvenience for retirees living on fixed incomes like him. He shops daily because he has only a small refrigerator in his hotel for low-income seniors.
“It becomes a flat tax on senior citizens,” said Troxell, who lives off social security and other government assistance. “I have not disagreed with Jerry Brown on anything — until this.”(AP)
Environmental jingo-ism or people, which would the liberal choose? 🙂
Several hundred miles south of Puget Sound, drought-weary Californians who are keeping their lawns green or taking too long to wash their cars are being turned in to the authorities by their neighbors.
The Water Police and their little minions of sanctimony, how cute. Can we get some Scarlett Letters made next?
As we noted over the summer, “water officials in Los Angeles will soon offer hangers that residents can ‘slip anonymously around the doorknobs of neighbors whose sprinklers are watering the sidewalk.'” The Golden State has become the land of drought-shaming apps and water cops on the way to becoming the next Great American Dust Bowl.
The drought could have been avoided, as it is entirely man-made. No, we’re not blaming everyday Californians; we blame government policymakers.
We find guilty the “operations managers” at the state and federal levels who have refused to allow water to cost what it would in an open market unobstructed and unsubsidized by government, and who for environmental reasons have cut off water flows to “protect” a 3-inch fish and dumped the water into the ocean.
The Delta Smelt anyone? 🙂
And then there are the nannies in Washington — or more specifically, the nation’s First Nanny, who wants to dictate what every kid eats for lunch at school.
Michelle Obama is afraid that students across the country are consuming too many calories, too much fat and not enough of the right kinds of foods, so she’s been campaigning to be every student’s mom.
The Nation’s Mom! Think Mrs. C, not Mrs G(overnment). There’s no harm in that, after all, it’s for your own good!! 🙂
Instead of packing food that children will actually eat, she’s stuffing lunchboxes with kid-unfriendly green, leafy vegetables and tasteless wheat bread, making sure they don’t consume more than one packet of ketchup per meal.
It’s for your own good dear!
But the National School Lunch Program is both wasteful and, given Seattle’s and San Francisco’s laws, counterproductive.
But that’s what Liberal sanctimony does best.
As Warner Todd Huston observed last month on Breitbart.com, many of the 31 million children who are fed by the program “are throwing away the vegetables, fruits and snacks forced on them by the new federal nutrition standards.”
Better do it the right way or Mama Government will get you for THAT too… 🙂
Sounds like a practice that would run afoul of Seattle’s ordinance. Maybe the operations managers and government nannies need to work a little closer together so there won’t be any conflicts.
No, that’s not a good idea at all. It would be better for everyone if they all stopped trying to engineer society and let us live our lives without interference. (IBD)
But that’s impossible for a Liberal. They are so vastly superior in vision and purpose and they just want you to be like them and be “enlightened” or else they will have put the hammer to your nuts until you do as you are told.
You are a child, they are the adult- at least their minds- and you must be forcefully taught how to behave properly.
They are you “enlightened” Masters, and the sooner you do as you’re told Mama Government will not be cross with you anymore.
Love you, Kiss kiss…now shut up and do as you’re told!