Surprises

Gee, This is a Surprise!  NOT!

The politically aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has quietly created a national network of at least eight community-organizing groups, some of which function alongside the Occupy Wall Street movement, a Daily Caller investigation shows.

Incorporated by the SEIU as local non-profits, the groups are waging concerted local political campaigns to publicly attack conservative political figures, banks, energy companies and other corporations.

Each local group has portrayed itself as an independent community organization not tied to any special interest. But they were founded, incorporated, and led by SEIU personnel.

The individual activist groups use benign-sounding names including This Is Our DC; Good Jobs, Great Houston; Good Jobs, Better Baltimore; Good Jobs Now in Detroit; Fight for Philly; One Pittsburgh; Good Jobs LA; and Minnesotans for a Fair Economy.

In reality, they are creations of the wealthy and influential labor union, amounting to a secret network of new SEIU front groups.

Union Liberals behind the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Gee, I’m shocked! 🙂

If you think the Occupy Movement is just a bunch of smelly hippies playing drums in the park, you’re wrong. The Occupy Movement is an organized group of union leaders, academics and anarchists with one common goal: to destroy capitalism. Don’t believe it?

http://www.breitbart.com/breitbart-tv/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/03/05/occupy_seui_and_academics_working_together_to_destroy_capitalism

GAS PRICES

Now DNC Chair Wasserman-Schultz- Under Bush: She blamed Bush and his cronies in the Oil Industry for the high gas prices (going to $3.22 a gallon by the way).

May 2007: “We are now paying more than double than when President Bush took office”

Now comes the Weasel 4 days ago:“What I was referring to in that speech, as I have for many years, is that focusing on fossil fuels and continuing the ‘drill baby drill’ strategy that President Obama rightly referred to the other day in south Florida as ‘a bumper sticker, not an energy policy,’

Ohhh! Am I surprised with the about face- no!

“We are not going to address gas prices over the long-term because there is — there is no President in the short-term that can really change policy and impact gas prices in a significant way. But what we do need to do is over the short-term and long-term make sure that we are using the ‘all of the above’ strategy that President Obama has employed: more domestic energy production than we’ve had in eight years (Thanks to Bush as she says, it takes time so Obama benefits from THAT time), making sure that we invest for the future in alternative energy like wind and solar and hydroelectric power, so that we can really start to impact our need to depend on…” (Go Algaeman! Solyndra Abroad Solar, etc)

“But A lot of Americans are wondering what’s going to happen now and a lot of those things take time,” Carlson shot back.

“Affecting gas prices takes time,” Schultz acknowledged. “You’re absolutely right,”

Unless it’s Republican President then that is.

President Obama’s election-year prescription to accelerate steeply higher energy prices is to add billions of dollars to the oil companies’ tax bills. Expensive gasoline fits the Obama political template.

‘Every time you fill up the gas tank, they’re making money.” That applause line, delivered Thursday by the president from Nashua, N.H., speaks volumes about the thinking that lies at the root of this presidency.

Resentment against the successful is what Barack Obama wants to cultivate among Americans, dividing the dependents of the government, who pay no income taxes to fund it, against the nation’s private-sector producers, who finance the state’s dependency machine by paying the vast bulk of the income taxes.

Fed up with prices at your local gas station going up, up and away, past the $4 level toward $5 and even higher? The president says you should take out your frustration by telling Congress to end the perfectly reasonable oil-and-gas industry tax deductions on drilling costs and other technical aspects of production.

House Speaker John Boehner was quick to respond that “a freshman-year economics student could tell you that increasing taxes on energy production would make gas prices go up, not down.” But Obama’s crass appeal to baser instincts has nothing to do with economics — or solving problems — and everything to do with politics.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu let the cat out of the bag years ago. “Somehow,” he said in 2008, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

Why would anyone want the government to try to make oil prices skyrocket? Answer: So they can get the public to stop resisting the radical environmentalist agenda, have people accept their fate that they have to drive cars that are little better than golf carts, and ultimately convince them to keep their driving to a bare minimum. Mass transit anyone? Ever try carpooling? (IBD)

Surprise! Class Warfare…who saw that coming…. 🙂

OBAMACARE

Our friend Matt Lewis of The Daily Caller has an amusing and still quite relevant piece this weekend regarding the Supreme Court’s upcoming review of Obamacare in general and the individual mandate in particular. In it, he describes a meeting he had with Karen Harned of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) who are knee deep in the battle. She turns out to be relatively optimistic about the challenge to the law.

It’s crowded at the Caribou Coffee on 17th and L streets in Washington, but over the din of lobbyists and caffeine fiends, I ask her to sketch out the NFIB’s arguments. “What we’ve seen in all the cases,” she explains — “the one question they cannot answer is: ‘Where does it end?’”

Hers is a slippery slope argument, but that doesn’t mean questioning the government’s ability to regulate economic “inactivity” isn’t legitimate. “You could say, ‘Well it’s good for everybody to exercise — so let’s mandate everybody to join the gym.”

I stir my coffee nervously. As if the thought of being forced to (gulp!) exercise isn’t horrifying enough already, Harned continued: “It’s good for everybody to take vitamins … It’s good for people to eat five fruits and vegetables a day! — Why don’t we make all grocers give those foods away for free — and [require] more people buy broccoli?”

At first, the broccoli reference threw me, but it’s actually pertinent. During a previous trial — when appeals court Justice Laurence Silberman asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General Beth Brinkmann if requiring Americans to buy broccoli would be unconstitutional — she answered: “No. It depends.”

This may sound trite at first blush, but in the end it does seem to be the pertinent question which the justices will have to consider. I agree that “slippery slope” argument are frequent, easy targets for critics, and many are little more than straw men. But there are still some cases where they would apply, and this seems to be one of them.

Handing the federal government the power to regulate a lack of economic activity – as opposed to their recognized power to regulate some actual activity for the public good – opens up a door to a hallway which would seem to stretch to infinity. Can the President, in fact, force us to eat our peas as opposed to saying it in a rhetorical fashion?

The government’s argument would seem to be that such a mandate could be construed as being “for the common good” of society, and would save money in the long run. And while that may prove to be true, is it their place to make that determination? This smells suspiciously like the court’s decision in Kelo vs. New London when the phrase “public use” was not very subtly morphed to include “for the public benefit.” And as soon as you let Washington have the final say as to what is in your personal best interest, all bets are off.

Broccoli? I happen to like it.. sometimes. But I don’t want Washington, DC telling me to buy it. Do you? (Hot air)

The other government argument the NFIB intends to eviscerate is the free rider argument — the notion that health care mandates are vital because otherwise people will just “game” the system by refusing to pay for health care coverage while simultaneously using health services.

This, of course, is a conundrum. But the government’s “solution” would also open up a can of constitutional worms.

The government hopes to argue that the health market is unique — that the slope isn’t slippery at all. But cost shifting occurs all the time, everywhere. “We all pay in fees to our credit cards for the people who don’t pay their credit card bills,” Harned says. “We all pay in our mortgage interest for the people who default on their mortgage”…

It all comes back to this: If the government can mandate the purchase of health care insurance, what can’t they mandate?

“They could create a crisis a day if they want to,” Harned warns.

And we all know about “Never Let a Crisis go to Waste ” 🙂

Surprise! 🙂

Pro-ILLEGALS

Lawyers representing Latinos who accuse Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office of racial profiling are asking a federal judge to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees from being called to testify by the sheriff’s lawyers at a trial.

Motions filed late Friday in the suit say ICE gave the sheriff’s lawyers permission to depose five ICE employees, but the depositions were never conducted.

Lawyers for the five Latinos who sued say they were therefore unable to counter with their own questions for the ICE workers. They say Arpaio’s lawyers should be barred from calling the employees to the stand.

The plaintiff’s attorneys also wrote that two other ICE agents who did give depositions have no relevant testimony and also should not be called. (AZStarnet)

This is bunk. But the Liberals and Pro-Illegals just want their side and only their side to come out and forget about the other side.
But is it a Surprise? NO!

The Swamp Monsters Strike Again

Remember when Soon-To-Be Ex Speaker Pelosi promised to “drain the swamp” of corruption and I cynically said that all that meant was she wanted to fill it up again with Democrat corruption?

Well, here are the latest alligators to add to the swamp.

Alligator #1: General Electric, owner of NBC (for now), with a CEO who is on a Board of Economic Advisors (with the AFL-CIO Union Boss and others) to the President.

Alligator #2: Government Motors (GM), bailed out by taxpayers.  Given millions of the money to the Union and to develop “green” technology. The purveyors of the “green” wonder the Chevy Volt- The pseudo “all electric” car.

They are having a love child called Corruption. 🙂

It works like this: GE has promised to buy $500 Million dollars of  Chevy Volts from GM, thus raising the sales figures for this “hot new car”.

17% of GM is owned by the UAW now because the government that took them over said so, a union fused at the hip of the Democrat party since before I was born. So a little payback will undoubtedly leak back to Obama for his 2012 re-election campaign.

Just like there cousin the August bailout of Teacher’s Unions.

Then GE is granted a $2 BILLION contract while Obama is in India for airplane engines.

Plus GE is going to be at the forefront of the “green” light bulbs that will be mandatory in a few years because the incandescent light bulb will be banned.

So you buy $500 Million dollars of electric cars, get $2 Billion in airplane sales. And Obama gets a union kickback in the process.

Sweet.

But don’t worry, Liberals and Democrats are anti-Big Business. They hate Corporate America. The greedy, capitalistic pigs!

I have come to the conclusion that they hate just hate Corporate America that doesn’t kickback ,or cowtow to THEM, or they have a Union that votes and supports them.

Those are good Businesses.

After all, Obama did bailout  GM to save the UAW not to save GM.

The Stimulus was designed to save state workers’ pension funds or at least delay the inevitable. Those were the jobs worth saving and creating. 🙂

Unions are good.Government Unions are great.

“Green” Jobs are the best. (Both kinds of green, by the way) 🙂

So what if it’s corrupt. So what if it’s quid pro quo.

Kickbacks are good if you’re a Democrat.

As long as you’re the beneficiary. Otherwise, it’s just corrupt. 🙂

What to see it: http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/follow-money/index.html#/v/4417259/coulter-on-government-corruption/?playlist_id=158277

At least they aren’t Republicans, because that would be bad. 🙂

So corruption is good as long as you benefit and you can control it.

Now that’s “draining the swamp”.

And “rich” people are good as long as they are liberals, Like George Soros.

And “big business” is ok as long as they kick it it back to the Democrats,like GE.

And Unions are always much better than non-unions because of their overwhelming support for Democrats.

And Government Unions are the best, because they are dependent on the government for their jobs so they are loyal to a fault and will vote for self-preservation no matter what.

So corruption is good for Liberals, as long as they control them.

Isn’t that special! 🙂

Meanwhile, your average joe schmo who works in the private sector and pays taxes is a “moron”, and “idiot”, a “domestic terrorist”, a “racist”, “stupid” if they object.

Fascinating…