The Fight for 2012 Begins Today

To those who say that the House Vote to repeal ObamaCare is a waste I say, a journey of a 1000 days starts with but a single step.

But ultimately, the best chance is the US Supreme Court.

ObamaCare is Unconstitutional. It’s just that the Democrats  and the Liberal Media don’t care.

And why do I say the campaign starts now.

Because the “grandma will be homeless” “children starving in the streets” “you’ll be eating dog food” kinda of liberal hysteria has ratcheted up again.

Polls are being released AGAIN, showing how much people love ObamaCare and don’t want it repealed. 😦

Perhaps it’s no surprise that on the same day Obama announced his Executive Order — and the day before the House of Representatives is expected to vote on a repeal of Obamacare (except for the Tucson shooting delay) — the Department of Health and Human Services released a study subtitled “129 million people could be denied affordable coverage” without Obamacare because of pre-existing conditions. (American Spectator)

So someone wind up Andy Griffith!!

If the Democrats weren’t worried they wouldn’t be trotting out the usual time-tested “fear” campaigns.

And yes, the fight is going to be long and hard and depends on Obama not being re-elected so you can bet the Democrats and their Liberal Media Ministry of Truth will have the full on 24/7 FEAR and MANIPULATION campaign going from now until 2 years from now.

So buckle up. The Socialists aren’t giving up without a major trench warfare. And just like last time they will fight till your last breath to save their Golden Goose of Utopia.

And it won’t be “civil”. 🙂

Political Cartoon

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

UNIONS, THE CHICAGO WAY  OR ELSE!

Labor unions give more money to the Democratic Party than any other source, and critics have long accused President Barack Obama’s administration of doing their bidding.  Now there is evidence that the White House has indeed put its thumb on the scale on behalf of unions. After saying that “union jobs are, by and large, good jobs,” the Department of Labor’s “strategic plan” for the next five years says: “many of the Department’s outcome goals are furthered by high rates of union membership.”

Don Todd, Americans for Limited Government’s head of research and a former DOL agency head under George W. Bush, told The Daily Caller that the Obama administration wants to “shame” companies into unionizing.

“In a worst-case scenario, your union organizer comes to you, offers you a deal to unionize, you say, ‘no,’ and, the next thing you know, OSHA’s [Occupational Safety and Health Administration] at your door,” Todd said in a phone interview. “Then, Wage and Hour show up, and they want to publicize it. They always find something wrong – it’s like with bed-checks in boot camp in the army.”

Todd said some companies will fight the DOL’s intimidation tactics, but many will give in to unionizing forces.

“It makes it the path of least resistance,” Todd said.

The current Solicitor of Labor, Patricia Smith, specialized in that kind of corporate intimidation when she served in a similar position in New York’s Department of Labor. Senate Republicans strongly opposed Smith’s appointment to her current post for that reason. In New York, Smith set up a neighborhood watch-style system for monitoring and investigating wage and hour violations by companies.

Former union executives and confidants are leading almost every agency within the DOL, including, but not limited to, John Lund, who has deep ties to the AFL-CIO, Craig Becker, who has worked with the AFL-CIO and the SEIU, and Joe Main, who had worked for the United Mine Workers of America.

Smith and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis recently released the DOL’s “Strategic Plan” for 2011 through 2016, in which they link the recent economic recession and the recently high unemployment numbers with the decline in private sector union membership. (This being the same dingbat that wanted Illegal Aliens to call her if they were being oppressed by their boss!!)

Holis has made the case publicly that unionization is a good thing as it is the only way workers get “higher wages,” “good jobs” and “flexibility and benefits like paid leave, childcare and education assistance.”

“It’s not enough to have fair wages and a safe workplace — workers also need a voice on the job! Some people say that, given the state of the economy, we can’t afford unions right now,” Holis said in a September 2009 speech to the AFL-CIO. “They’ve got it backwards. Today unions are more important than ever. Workers are facing unprecedented challenges, and they need the voice on the job that unions provide.”

DOL is pushing unionization by turning the fraud investigation arms of the Department of Labor into intimidation tools. Todd said DOL’s enforcement arms repeatedly audit and investigate businesses that refuse to unionize. They demand records of everything from Wage and Hour compliance to health and safety regulations, and won’t stop until the business they’re targeting unionizes.

Another way the Obama administration helps unions is by overloading the arms of the DOL that normally fight union fraud. The Obama administration, for instance, doubled the duties of the Office of Labor and Management Standards (OLMS). OLMS historically has been used primarily for investigating labor union fraud, but since Obama took office, OLMS is also charged with dealing with “whistleblower” complaints, or complaints from employees all over the country about companies that aren’t following safety requirements. That used to be handled by OSHA.

Another thing the DOL is doing in what appears to be an effort to weaken union investigations is shifting many career employees out of OLMS and into other, non-investigative agencies that pose no immediate threat to union survival. Todd said that’s the only explanation for shifting the employees he and previous administrations spent years training to different jobs.

“They’re moving people out of OLMS over to places like Wage and Hour, which is a waste of all the training they received in prosecuting and investigating union misconduct,” Todd said in a phone interview. “In the time that I was there, we convicted close to 1,000 union officers and employees. That was not for unfair practices – that was for stealing from members.”

Todd said he thinks it’s more likely that union leadership would rather “suffer from the thefts than from the bad publicity they’d get from investigations and convictions” of union members and leaders.

“The Obama Department of Labor is being organized to push a pro-union agenda without regard to the welfare of the worker,” Rick Manning, a spokesman for Americans for Limited Government, told TheDC. (The Daily Caller)

More Unions. More Democratic Party Money. More money for underfunded lavish pensions estimated to be short $2 Trillion dollars.

Political Cartoon

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

RICHMOND, Va. – A power struggle is unfolding in Virginia over climate change research.

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has been taking the University of Virginia to court to get information on a climate change researcher who once worked at the school.

Now several members of the State Assembly say they’ve had enough and have introduced legislation to rein in Cuccinelli’s investigation.

Cuccinelli, a global warming skeptic, is looking into whether UVA professor Michael Mann manipulated data to show that there has been a rapid, recent rise in the Earth’s temperature.

Democratic Sens. Donald McEachin of Henrico and Chap Petersen of Fairfax County say their bills won’t give blanket immunity to colleges to defraud the state, but they would curb politically motivated probes.

McEachin and Petersen, both lawyers, said Cuccinelli had abused the authority the office obtained under a 2002 law.

Their legislation would force Cuccinelli to sue and obtain subpoenas as is required of other civil litigation. This would afford defendants the right to defend themselves.

So the global warming frauds want to hide their deception. Gee, no one saw that coming.

So if the Democrats were in power to run “politically motivated” investigations would they be so concerned??

No.

Just like the Democrats using the Tucson tragedy for their own political purposes (and deriding anyone who says they are) . Last week, using the non-radio-inspired Tucson massacre as fuel, the National Hispanic Media Coalition called on the FCC to gather evidence for the left’s preconceived conclusion that conservative talk radio “hate speech” causes violence. It’s Red Queen science — sentence first, research validation later.

The movement “is grounded in the belief that social and economic justice will not be realized without the equitable redistribution and control of media and communication technologies.” But, hey, we better just ignore these communications control freaks lest we be accused of suffering a “persecution complex.” (Michelle Malkin)

So just like Global warming, it’s political goals first, actual science, compassion or civility, later.

Much, Much Later!

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

Obama also puts on his newly acquired pro-capitalism mask when talking about the sheer burden of regulation:

We’re also getting rid of absurd and unnecessary paperwork requirements that waste time and money. We’re looking at the system as a whole to make sure we avoid excessive, inconsistent and redundant regulation. And finally, today I am directing federal agencies to do more to account for — and reduce — the burdens regulations may place on small businesses. Small firms drive growth and create most new jobs in this country. We need to make sure nothing stands in their way.

Unfortunately, despite the laudable sentiment contained in the president’s words, it’s difficult to take Obama 2.0 seriously. In particular, is the American public, especially our entrepreneurs, supposed to sing the praises of Obama’s claimed conversion from class warfare redistributionist to proto-capitalist while his signature “accomplishment,” commonly known as Obamacare, is the single biggest small-business-killing piece of legislation in generations? (American Spectator)

I would say Obama and the Democrats words are hollow, cynical, and manipulative.

There actions needs speak louder than their words.

And right now all I see is a guy trying to get re-elected.

Nothing else.

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Freedom of Information

“You’re are coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter.  With iPods and iPads and XBoxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation.”

Emancipation?  Curious choice of word there, or was it? 🙂


“All of this is not only putting new pressures on you, it is putting new pressures on our country and on our democracy.”

The Pressure being that he can’t lie as freely as past generations could.

As Liberals have control of most of the Ministry of Truth they do a good job of trying.

Hence the push for “net neutrality” aka government control of the internet information, the biggest thorn in his side.

People like me. 🙂

“So many voices clamoring for attention on blogs and on cable, on — on talk radio. It — it can be difficult at times to sift through it all, to know what to believe, to figure out who’s telling the truth and who isn’t.”–Obama at Hampton University

And, of course, the government is always telling the truth…
But then there’s: “President-elect Barack Obama has repeatedly said how much his BlackBerry means to him and how he is dreading the prospect of being forced to give it up, because of legal and security concerns, once he takes office,” and he did not give it up, he still has it.  So as usual it’s “do as I say, not as I do.” NYT
Perhaps it’s easier these days to spread disinformation, but it’s also easier to correct it. If the president doesn’t know how to use these devices, how does he explain the June 26, 2008, issue of Rolling Stone noting that Bob Dylan, Yo-Yo Ma, Sheryl Crow and Jay-Z were featured on his, uh, iPod.

Maybe it’s programmed for him, like his teleprompters?
In this administration, freedom of speech, press or information is a distraction and a threat. That’s why they sought to impose the doctrine of “net neutrality” on the Internet. In the name of opening up broadband to all, it’s designed to suppress the voices of those who have competed in the marketplace of ideas and won.
Being informed depends on information and the free flow thereof, with no one, especially not the government, being the final arbiter of truth. That’s for the individual to decide. That’s why in words inscribed in a frieze below the dome of his memorial in Washington, D.C., Jefferson said: “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”
We disagree with what some have to say, but will defend to the death their right to tweet it.
(IBD)

Speaking of Free Speech…

“up” Chuck Schumer and  Sen. Van Hollen have introduced legislation (supported by the Obama administration) reimposing the same type of First Amendment restrictions that the United States Supreme Court recently declared unconstitutional in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission  (FEC). In other words, their response to having free speech limitations overturned by the Supreme Court is to roll the same rock back up the same hill.

Under their bill, all contractors with the government and recipients of Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds would be prohibited from U.S. election spending. The legislation would impose that same prohibition upon American businesses with as few as 20 percent of shares owned by foreign nationals, or whose boards of directors happen to have a majority of foreign nationals. (No word yet on whether Schumer, Van Hollen or the Obama administration will recognize their error and suddenly amend their bill to except illegal immigrants.)

But note one big-spending group that Schumer and Van Hollen suspiciously omitted from their prohibition: labor bosses.

According to a report in The Hill quoting Loyola Law School election law professor Richard L. Hasen, Big Labor may receive a free pass in the bill:

“Hasen said some of the biggest campaign spending restrictions in the summary would only affect corporations. For example, large federal contractors, recipients of government bailout funds who have not repaid the money and foreign-owned companies would be banned from election spending. ‘There are no foreign-owned unions, and unions are not government contractors,’ Hasen said. ‘The biggest limitations in this bill apply only to corporations because there are no parallels in the labor world.’“

There is simply no logical or ethical justification for exempting union bosses from the same restrictions that would limit their employer counterparts, considering the hundreds of millions in union members’ dues redirected toward union-friendly politicians. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) alone spent approximately $85 million to elect Obama and Democrats in 2008.

That’s 85 hardworking union members that the SEIU could make millionaires using the same money that it instead spent on political campaigns.

Sadly, that enormous campaign spending explains why Big Labor is excluded from the bill.(Daily Caller)

This is the way it used to be and they want it to be again. When the Court struck down the Campaign Finance Law, it wasn’t free speech that the Liberals were mad about, it was the competition.

They were no longer going to be the big stick on the block.

The biggest Bully.

The biggest purveyor of misinformation and disinformation.

And we all how much Liberal hate competition. 🙂

The sight of the American flag in America—even on Cinco de Mayo—should not be a source of offense to Americans of Mexican descent, but pride, providing of course that one sees him or herself as an American first. And here is the point that this young woman, the school administrators and a handful of sympathizers seem forever not to grasp. Americans do not want to be an extension of Mexico! Indeed many of us have had a peek south of the border and do not like what we see. The political culture and the values that support it hold little interest for those proud of our flag and “the republic for which it stands.”

Among many Americans, there is a growing sense that immigrants to this country have no interest in becoming Americans. Illegal immigrants are largely seen as people who disrespect our laws, our language, and our traditions. More significantly, they are viewed as taking advantage of everything this nation has to offer and yet refusing to assimilate into our American culture. The political class says that these fears are unfounded, and the elite label such thoughts as bigoted. And yet we are treated to stories like this one, wherein American children are sent home from school for wearing an image of the American flag. Should we believe the political elites? Or our lying eyes? (Daily Caller)

And lying eyes are everywhere… 🙂