Econ 101

America’s 18- to 34-year-old “millennials” have been tutored in group-think schools that extol socialism. Now they lionize Bernie Sanders, whose class-warfare prescriptions include taxing away all but maybe 1% of the nation’s 0.0001% billionaires’ wealth, then going after Wall Street, Big Business, millionaires and upper middle classes – and giving the “revenue” to those who “need” or “deserve” it more.

The entire process revolves around three central questions. Which ruling class elites get to determine who loses, who wins, by how much? Who grants them the power to do so, and holds them accountable? And what happens when the inevitable discontent over their autocratic decisions boils over?

Interestingly, many of the same generation have flocked to see films that glorify individual liberty and defiance of centralized government control. InThe Hunger Games, a few small gestures of disobedience grew into a revolution against Capital elites who lived well and ruled imperiously, while subjugated masses in the Districts starved in poverty and sent their children to die in televised “hunting games.”

In Divergent, a Faction system preserves a society that primarily benefits the ruling Erudites by stifling individuality. The heroes and heroines refuse to confine their lives and ambitions to only one of the other four factions in which they were placed at age sixteen. Again, the ruling class lives far better than the ruled masses. (Ponder the politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists in counties around Washington, DC.)

Are so many millennials really willing to let ruling classes confiscate wealth, impose penalties, determine appropriate welfare payments, and dole out favors? Has their “education” made them incapable of understanding the blessings of liberty, free enterprise capitalism, reliable and affordable fossil fuel energy, and entrepreneurial opportunities? Have instructors so brilliantly presented socialism through rose-colored glasses that young voters are blissfully unaware of its abject failures and horrid excesses?

Are millennials perhaps a little schizophrenic – loving liberty in theory and celluloid, but content to live reality in the Districts, among the Amity and Abnegation Factions, while enjoying the bread and circuses (welfare payments and show trials for humbled banker and corporate bigwigs) bestowed upon them? Or perhaps they simply assume they will be among the Capital’s Erudite and Candor classes, governing the rest of America, in the name of justice, fairness, diversity and equality?

They clearly view free or low-cost college tuition, child care, healthcare, food and housing – along with “living wages” of $15 per hour for entry-level jobs … and six-figure incomes after college – as “constitutional rights.” But when they “feel the Bern,” have they pondered how this system must necessarily work in the Real World, where they will feel the actual burn?

As the late Southern Baptist pastor and author Adrian Pierce Rogers succinctly explained, the hard reality is that “government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn’t first take from somebody else. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving.”

That is precisely what Senator Sanders’ wealth taxation and redistribution scheme proposes to do. The problem, as former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher astutely observed, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Even in the wealthy United States, “eventually” would come quickly, because socialism destroys the incentive to work, innovate, invest, take risks and create new wealth.

Ultimately, nations are left with a large and growing population of have-nots who demand more – when there is no “more” to be had. That is whatItaly, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela and other socialist, populist, egalitarian paradises are now discovering.

They used to provide all kinds of free stuff. Today they are basket cases – struggling with anemic growth, recession and bankruptcy. Their government bonds have turned to “junk” that no sane investor wants.

Today, 59% of young Greeks are unemployed. Youth unemployment is 56% in Spain, 42% in Italy, 38% in Portugal. In Brazil, electricity rates soared 51% last year, food prices rose 15% and overall inflation stood at 11% – a vast improvement over its 5000% annual inflation rate (!) in the early 1990s but still awful. In all of Latin America, only Argentina at 27% and Venezuela at 200% had worse inflation.

American students are immersed in “sustainability” studies and projects, mostly based on still persistent notions that we are running out of essential resources and destroying Planet Earth. Those ideas are the foundation of policies and regulations that perpetuate what really is unsustainable: unemployment, government spending, anti-growth policies, and the anger and unrest they cause.

It may be, as Winston Churchill once observed, that “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.” However, he continued, “the inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery and scarcity.” Unfortunately, simple, basic truths like this are rarely taught in our schools.

Students today want equality of outcomes, rather than of opportunities that yield positive outcomes by dint of hard work. If millennials applied their socialist principle to grades – with all scores on exams and projects averaged out among smart and less talented, hard-working and deadbeat students – shiftless classmates would be happy to coast along, once ambitious scholars would exert far less effort, and all would soon flounder in a sea of F’s.

Similarly, socialist policies stifle the innovation, economic growth and job creation that young people need if they are to get beyond minimum-wage service jobs, and out of their parents’ basements.

Free tuition? City University of New York had that for awhile, until 1976, when it ran out of money and the city nearly went bankrupt. Even Sanders admits his plan would cost some $750 billion over ten years. But perhaps it would work if half of the administrative positions were eliminated, faculty salaries got a 25 or 35% trimming, and sabbaticals came just once a decade.

Surely the “progressives” who rule our campuses – and try to ban and silence speakers like Ben Shapiro – would support this “pro-free-stuff” approach. Surely, the next generation of Erudite and Candor classes in The Capital would be content with salaries that are no higher than those of the masses they govern.

Moreover, the bills must eventually be paid. Millennials may get free stuff today. But they and their children and grandchildren will pay for their freebies many times over, through higher taxes, increasing control over their lives, higher inflation, fewer jobs at reduced salaries, and lower living standards.

Then there is the matter of accountability. Government is very good at fining and jailing citizens and businessmen for violating any of the thousands of regulations that carry criminal sanctions, even if the “perpetrator” did not intend to violate the rule or had no clue that such a rule could possibly exist. But government expects and demands that its own incompetent or criminal actions be ignored.

Thus a rancher is prosecuted for “terrorism” for accidentally burning 139 acres of national forests, but government officials get off scot free when they torch 160,000 acres a couple miles away. Citizens go to prison for inadvertently “impacting” a wetland, but EPA bureaucrats receive “get out of jail free” cards when they deliberately open an abandoned mine and unleash 3,000,000 gallons of toxic sludge. IRS directors simply “take the Fifth” after targeting conservative groups, an OPM director resigns rather than testify before Congress about her screw-ups, and VA incompetence is ignored – while private citizens are hounded and threatened until they cave in or run out of money to defend themselves.

The more government control and socialist wealth redistribution we get, the worse these abuses become. Will the Bernie Sanders voters demand accountability? Or do they simply not care when ruling elites and fellow socialists violate laws and abuse their public trust, to advance agendas or protect themselves?

All these questions would make for very interesting discussions with socialist candidates and voters. (Townhall)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

The End

Well, it is the end and The moment has been Prepared for.

My Prediction: Supreme Court Justice Eric Holder today helped the Left disband The Constitution of The US to be replaced by the Orwellian Diversity, Fairness, and Inclusion Contract on America.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died, the San Antonio Express-News reported on Saturday afternoon. He was 79.

Scalia passed away in his sleep while on a hunting trip in Marfa, Texas. Foul play is not suspected.

But the Foul stench of Sith Lord Obama is going to smell up the place for generations.

But Paul Ryan and The Republican will stop him….Really? If that’s our only hope then we need help, serious help.

No, it’s campaign season, and Hillary Clinton is fired up. Unfortunately, she’s fired up about who should nominate a judge to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Harry Reid and his coalition, which very likely includes the president himself, are urging President Obama to put up a nominee as soon as possible, while Mitch McConnell and crew maintain that the next president should make the decision.

Clinton has weighed in, and, as usual, the “progressive who gets things done” takes a shot at conservatives.

Mind you, she NOTHING BUT PARTISAN Herself.

Talk about NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!!  I’m surprised they haven’t got a nominee already (hence the Holder allusion at the beginning of this blog) for entirely partisan reasons.

And we all know how much the Left respects The Constitution. 🙂

It’s certainly no surprise that the No. 1 trending topic in the United States tonight is #Scalia, but why is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas trending just a couple of steps behind?

The Liberals are on Death Watch. They are praying as hard as their non-secular hearts can go for all the Conservatives to just DIE!

Leftists, ever tolerant, loving assholes that they are, want him to die this weekend too.

— Amy Curtis (@moderncomments)

They have your best interests and the interests of The Founding Fathers and the Constitution at their core. 🙂

Their care and compassion overflow this Valentine’s Day with Love. 🙂

The love of Death to your enemies.

This is going to sound cold, but one down, one to go. Uncle Ruckkus (Clarence Thomas) needs to go next. Then our country can start healing.

— George freeman (@Numbers28)

Spread the Love. Here Comes Big Brother to give you Bear Hug. After all, The Constitution and Conservatives are the evil that must be exterminated for real compassion, caring and sensitivity to take over.:)

Now we just need the Grim Reaper to take out Clarence Thomas and Mitch McConnell and there’ll be #DancingInTheStreets! 😃👍

— Rosetta_GhoSTONED ;D (@RedRoseQueen1)

So a moment of silence for the end. She was a grand country, but the rot is nearly complete.

Conservatives will be hunted down and “re-educated”.

The End is nigh.

(if you’re expecting the Establish Republicans or Paul Ryan to save you…Why?)

The Diversity Games

CBS’ new Nancy Drew will look very different should the network move forward with the reboot.

CBS Entertainment president Glenn Geller revealed Tuesday that the network’s reimagining of the iconic character will be diverse.

“She is diverse, that is the way she is written,” the executive told THR immediately following his time in front of the press at the Television Critics Association’s winter press tour Tuesday. While Geller said it was too early in the process to explain just what he meant by diverse — whether Nancy is African-American, Asian-American or Latino, he said it would hinge on finding the right actress for the part. “[She will] not [be] Caucasian,” he stressed. “I’d be open to any ethnicity.”  

Nancy Drew first appeared in books in 1930 and was originally created by Edward Stratemeyer.

But White People are politically incorrect.

The news comes a day after Netflix announced it was teaming with Norman Lear for an all-Latino remake of his classic sitcom One Day at a Time, as networks make diversity a priority in a bid to attract new underrepresented communities and better reflect society.

During his time in front of the press Tuesday, Geller stressed that diversity is playing a major role in his development season. “We have a lot of new series in development, both series targeted to have full African-American or Latino casts but also many leads that are being developed [as diverse]. We’re not casting color blind, we’re casting color conscious,” he said. 

As we found out in yesterday’s blog, color blind is racist.

We’re not “racists” :), we just will not employ any more White people. 🙂

They win us no points in the Politically Correct “diversity” game. White people are not “diverse”.

We are “inclusive” of anyone EXCEPT white people.

“I’m just a gay guy from Indiana who doesn’t play basketball, but now I’m the president of entertainment at CBS,” he said to laughs.

Isn’t he wonderful? 🙂

No Wedding Pizzas for him…

No Straight White People need apply.

That’s The Diversity Games.

THR: Minorities make up 13.7 percent of writers rooms while comprising 37.9 percent of the population nationwide, with only 10 individuals of color (out of 73) on THR’s 2015 Power Showrunners list.

But there’s no quota. 🙂

There are no stats available on how many minority writers made it in TV without going through a program, though one Latino alum jokes: “John Ridley had to win an Oscar to get a television show.” Which is why new-talent development and “inclusion” programs, such as the ones every single broadcast network supports — no doubt part good business, part public relations, part social conscience — are a key part of writers room staffing. Like college scholarships for minorities, these programs are all about removing as many barriers to entry as possible, including financial ones. But with every good intention can come inadvertent side effects, from writers of color who are perceived as less qualified to the subsidization of first-season salaries that can lead to a “freebie” mentality among showrunners toward those scribes.

None of the programs guarantees a job afterward, but they work closely with graduates to provide them priority consideration for staffing, often as a diversity hire. (Diversity is nowadays defined broadly by the programs to include unique voices and experiences, but it usually refers to underrepresented demographics — chiefly minorities, women and LGBT individuals.) A diversity hire is a minority scribe who occupies a staff-writer position that is fully network-subsidized. Showrunners are thus incentivized to take on an unfamiliar face since his or her salary isn’t coming out of the show’s budget. There’s no limit to the number of times a writer can be the diversity hire, provided he or she is fine with staying at entry-level pay.

But there’s no quota and no discrimination against majority White writers of the same or better talent, right? 🙂

…the network-funded diversity initiatives that help writers rooms avoid homogeneity also have created a system that can condition showrunners to regard diverse writers as unpaid labor. “After they are no longer free, the vast majority of diversity writers are released from their shows,” says a Latina writer who wasn’t hired on her network program (she later was independently staffed on a cable series). Jones agrees: “Programs should stop pitching diverse writers as ‘free’ because it creates an affirmative action mentality.”

But affirmative action was “diversity” before “diversity”was all the liberal rage. So what if they lack respect and low pay, it’s “diversity” for “diversity” sake right? 🙂

On rare occasions when strained showrunners can’t cover the cost of a diversity hire beyond the program, Disney-ABC vp creative talent development and inclusion Tim McNeal will subsidize half the salary from a safety-net reserve called the breakage fund. “It’s important that shows don’t look at this as a free pass to get an extra body, so I ask them to match dollar for dollar so they have skin in the game,” he says. “This is a onetime payment.”

A Bailout!  How Leftist is that. 🙂

…as the Latina writer puts it: “I’d hate to see what our statistics would be like without these diversity initiatives.”

Evil Racist White people as far as the eye can see, of course.

It’s only Natural. 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

 

Encouragement

The Greatest Orwellian Speaker in American History has struck again.

A government mandate that is backed up by law by IRS jackboots is now “encouragement”. 🙂

President Barack Obama told a fundraising crowd in his hometown of Chicago that Obamacare, known mostly for the individual mandate, is simply a free-market tool “to encourage people to buy insurance.”

Obama says individual mandate is simply meant to encourage people to buy insurance

“Encourage” is an interesting characterization of what both Republicans and Democrats consistently called a “mandate” during the debate over the Affordable Care Act, and during the legal fight that went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2012 that the mandate was constitutional as a tax. The law also contains subsidies for lower income Americans to purchase health insurance, which would be a carrot for some to buy insurance, and a stick for all who didn’t.

Although the health law relies on penalties to get people to buy private insurance plans, the Merriam-Webster definition of “encourage” is “to make (someone) more determined, hopeful, or confident,” “to make (something) more appealing or more likely to happen,” or “to make (someone) more likely to do something : to tell or advise (someone) to do something.”

In 2014, the penalty for an adult without insurance is $95, and $47.50 per child – or 1 percent of a household income, whichever is greater. That penalty increases to $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, or 2 percent of a household income – whichever is greater. In 2016 the penalty rises to $695 per adult, $347.50 per child, or 2.5 percent of a household’s income. After 2017, the fine increases with the rate of inflation.

The financial penalties perhaps would meet the third definition of encourage: “to make (someone) more likely to do something : to tell or advise (someone) to do something.” Meanwhile, the Medicaid expansion would also likely fall under the traditional definition of encourage, at least for those who qualify.

Nevertheless, the Obamacare law is most known for the mandate that individuals buy insurance either through their job, through subsidies if they qualify or through the marketplace exchanges on Healthcare.gov and in the states. The law further mandates that all employers with more than 50 workers provide government-approved health insurance plans.

Obama spoke Thursday night at a private home in Chicago at a fundraising event for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee where he was critical of Republicans.

“They operate on a single theory — which is, if government is dismantled and folks at the top can do more and more without restraint, that everybody else is going to benefit from it,” Obama said. “I don’t know if they actually believe it, but that’s what they say and this is not a situation of equivalence where the Democrats are this far-left crazy group and we’re not willing to meet in the middle.”

“If you need a better example than that, take a look at a health care law that uses the private sector to encourage people to buy insurance and has brought health care inflation down to its lowest rate in 50 years,” Obama continued. “And you would think that I had dismantled the entire free-market system — despite the fact that we now have somewhere between 13 and 15 million people who have insurance now that didn’t have it before. So I need a new Congress. But at a minimum, I’ve got to have a Democratic Senate.”

You can Keep Your Doctor…

You can Keep Your Plan…

Your Premiums will Decrease by $2500…

Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Nothing to see here… 🙂

  • Next year, the CBO expects the average price for a benchmark plan to increase by $100, but rates will vary by state and the geographic regions within them. In Arizona, Indiana, Virginia and Washington state, insurers have already submitted rate proposals, with most seeking premium hikes.Some larger carriers in Washington state and Indiana have asked for rate hikes of 8 to 10 percent, while others are seeking double-digit increases, said Gary Claxton, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health-policy research group. (McClatchy)
  • SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV): “I’ll be able to dig up some emails that make part of the Affordable Care Act that doesn’t look good-especially from people who made up their mind that they don’t want it to work because they don’t like the president. Maybe he’s of the wrong color, something of that sort. I’ve seen a lot of that and I know a lot of that to be true. It’s not something you’re meant to talk about in public but it’s something I’m talking about in public because that is very true.”
  • And on that bombshell…Good night! 🙂
  • Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
  • Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

State of The Zombie Union

In a video preview e-mailed to millions of supporters on Saturday, as South Carolina Republicans went to the polls to help pick an alternative to him, Mr. Obama promised a populist “blueprint for an American economy that’s built to last,” with the government assisting the private sector and individuals to ensure “an America where everybody gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share and everybody plays by the same set of rules.”

Mr. Obama has honed that message for months as he has attacked Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail, contrasting it with what he has described as Republicans’ “go it alone” free-market views.

Don’t you just love the polar extremes.

Either you are for government running everything or nothing at all.

All or Nothing.

With most Americans registering disapproval of the president’s economic record after three years, it is all the more imperative for Mr. Obama to define the election not as a referendum on him but as a choice between his vision and that of his eventual Republican rival.

Emotion over logic. Throw reason out the window and go for “Hope & Change” 2.0 because he’s such a brilliant P.T. Barnum Speaker that he will bamboozle you again.

Fool me once, same on you. Fool Me twice, Shame on me!

And he will kick it off with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords who says she is resigning. He will pimp that for all the juice he can. The sugar overload will make everyone a diabetic.

Mr. Obama said he would call for “a return to American values of fairness for all and responsibility from all.” (Read: Marxist style socialism)

Because responsibility for all is not personal responsibility. That’s “going it alone”. 🙂

“We can go in two directions,” he said. “One is towards less opportunity and less fairness. Or we can fight for where I think we need to go: building an economy that works for everyone, not just a wealthy few.”

Class warfare, envy, and “fairness”. The Zombie march continues.

“We must offer an alternative vision,” Mr. Romney said. “I stand ready to lead us down a different path, where we are lifted up by our desire to succeed, not dragged down by a resentment of success.” (New York Times)

But resentment, envy, and fear are Zombie food.

Rolling up your sleeves, nose to grindstone, and being responsible for your choices and actions is like bullet to the brain of the Zombies.

The Government-must-do-it-for-me (and someone else must pay for it not realising it’s them anyhow) Zombie crowd is immune to reason and logic.

That’s why he will broadcast his Zombie-inspiring, Zombie-infecting State of the Union address.

The Zombie infection must spread and having an big TV audience will do nicely.

So, my recommendation: Watch “Chopped”. It will be more interesting…

P.s.

When burglar Kesler Dufrene became a twice-convicted felon in 2006, a  Bradenton judge shipped him to prison for five years. And because of  his convictions, an immigration judge ordered Dufrene deported to his  native Haiti.

That never happened.

Instead, when Dufrenes state prison term was up, Miami immigration  authorities in October 2010 released him from custody. Two months later,  North Miami police say, he slaughtered three people, including a  15-year-old girl in a murder case that remains as baffling today as it  did the afternoon the bodies were discovered.

DNA on a rifle found inside the house and cellphone tracking technology later linked Dufrene to the Jan. 2, 2011, slayings.

But North Miami detectives never got to interrogate him. Just 18 days  after the murders, Dufrene shot and killed himself when he was cornered  by Manatee County sheriffs deputies in Bradenton after an unrelated  break-in and shooting there.

 Now be “fair” and government will provide… 🙂

Nothing to Worry About

Nothing to worry about:

according to the US Treasury, America has closed the books on 2011 with debt at an all time record $15,222,940,045,451.09. And, as was observed here first in all of the press, US debt to GDP is now officially over 100%, or 100.3% to be specific, a fact which the US government decided to delay exposing until the very end of the calendar year. We wonder, rhetorically, just how prominent of a talking point this historic event will be in any upcoming GOP primary debates. And yes, technically this number is greater than the debt ceiling but it excludes various accounting gimmicks. When accounting for those, the US has a debt ceiling buffer of… $14 billion, or one third the size of a typical bond auction.

Nothing at all. 😦

And speaking of Nothing to worry about…

RUBBER STAMP

Probe reveals feds pressuring agents to rush immigrant visas – even if fraud is feared.

Higher-ups within U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are pressuring rank-and-file officers to rubber-stamp immigrants’ visa applications, sometimes against the officers’ will, according to a Homeland Security report and internal documents exclusively obtained by The Daily.

A 40-page report, drafted by the Office of Inspector General in September but not publicly released, details the immense pressure immigration service officers are under to approve visa applications quickly, sometimes while overlooking concerns about fraud, eligibility or security.

One-quarter of the 254 officers surveyed said they have been pressured to approve questionable cases, sometimes “against their will.”

The report does not call out any particular officials and indicates that the agency has had a problem with valuing quantity over quality since at least the 1980s.

But high-ranking USCIS officials said the pressure has heightened after the Obama administration appointed Alejandro Mayorkas as director in August 2009 during an effort to pass comprehensive immigration reform, bringing with him a mantra of “get to yes.”

Internal communications provided to The Daily indicate that the new leadership seemed to fundamentally clash with career agency employees over when to afford the benefit of the doubt, culminating in a whistle-blower investigation into a senior appointee and, ultimately, the agency-wide inspector general inquiry that produced the report.

“We recognize their right to interpret things as liberally as possible, but you still have to follow the law,” said one high-ranking official who was unhappy with the current push.

At least five agency veterans seen as being too tough on applicants were either demoted, or given the choice between a demotion or a relocation from Southern California — where their families were — to San Francisco and Nebraska, according to sources and letters of reassignment provided to The Daily.

Those kind of threats have caused lower-level employees to fall in line, sources said.

“People are afraid,” said one longtime manager, who requested anonymity for fear of being fired. “Integrity only carries people so far because they’ve got to pay the rent.”

A rank-and-file officer who was not involved in the investigation claimed he was demoted to working on less technical cases because he had a high denial rate. “They don’t reprimand you, they just move you,” he said.

“They attempted to basically get me to come into line and approve a bunch of cases. And I just wouldn’t compromise myself because the approvals they ordered, they weren’t in line with the laws,” said the officer.

These employees’ claims are reflected in the inspector general report, which found that 14 percent of respondents had “serious concerns” that employees who focused on fraud or ineligibility were evaluated unfairly. The report also found that supervisors sometimes take cases away from an unwilling officer and assign them to someone else, against agency rules.

Recommendations for improvements in the report included raising the burden of proof and doing away with the popular informal and special appeals practices, which immigration lawyers said would only lengthen an already onerous process.

Attorney David Leopold, who was recently president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the formal appeals process can take up to two years.

“When you’re dealing with business visas, those visas cannot wait around a year, or two years, for review. They needed an answer yesterday,” said Leopold. “I think when they’ve [the officers] made a mistake at that level … sometimes you can just reason with people and ask them to take a look at it again.”

Nevertheless, USCIS approved 86 percent of the 3.9 million immigration cases it reviewed between October 2008 and October 2009 — a 4 percent drop from the year before, according to the most recent data provided to The Daily.

And immigration attorneys complained that it seems like officers are just looking for reasons to deny a case, and already demand a higher standard of proof than what is required. That standard is now considered a 51 percent likelihood that a fact is true.

“We’re getting ridiculous denials and requests for evidence on things that should be approved very easily,” said immigration attorney Deb Notkin, adding that it’s particularly tough for specialty industries like fashion, software development and graphic design.

The attorneys applauded Mayorkas’ more open dialogue with them, and other proponents of immigration reform, who had previously felt shut out of the bureaucracy. “Mayorkas, to his credit, is very accessible, so we are able to express our concerns about the adjudication process,” said Leopold.

But sometimes, the openness led to a perception that private attorneys were “running” the agency, according to the inspector general’s report, which cited emails in which individual cases were granted special review after private attorneys complained to management.

Mayorkas and Homeland Security press officers said yesterday they could not comment on the allegations.

Homeland insecurity

The Daily has exclusively obtained a Homeland Security Office of Inspector General draft report on fraud detection issues within the agency’s immigration arm. The inspector general interviewed 147 managers and staff at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, and received 256 responses to an online survey. Here are some of the findings in the report.

“63 of 254 Immigration Services Officers (24.8%) responded that they have been pressured to approve questionable applications.” 

“Several USCIS employees informed us that officers have been required to approve specific cases against their will.” 
 “Another 35 ISOs (13.9%) had serious concerns concerns that employees who focus on fraud or ineligibility were evaluated unfairly.”

“Cases are sometimes taken away from us and given to officers who the supervisor knows will approve the case … Another survey respondent was threatened with a formal reprimand if a case was not approved as the supervisor required.”

“… data confirm that USCIS was more likely to grant O visa status [for aliens who have extraordinary ability in science, arts, business, or athletics] incorrectly than to deny a legitimate position.”

Source: Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General, “The Effects of USCIS Adjudication Procedures and Policies on Fraud Detection by Immigration Service Officers,” September 2011. (The Daily)

As I have said often in the past, THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA and everything else in the universe be damned.

That is the Liberal way.

THE DEMOCRATS

“Part of what 2012 is about is both reminding the American people of how far we’ve traveled and the concrete effects that some of our work … but part of it is also framing this larger debate about what kind of country are we going to leave for our children and our grandchildren,” Obama said.

As part of that reframing effort, Obama caricatured the GOP’s free-market policies as “a different theory that says, we’re going to cut taxes for the wealthiest among us, and roll back regulations on things like clean air and health care reform and Wall Street reform, and that somehow, automatically, that assures that everybody is able to succeed.”

“I don’t believe that” theory, said Obama, who has described himself as a progressive.

Progressives, generally speaking, believe that university-trained managers should manage people’s economic and social lives. Conservatives, including social conservatives and libertarians, object to government-imposed management of the economy and society.

Obama also framed his progressive goals in the populist language chosen for his Dec. 6 speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, saying he was fighting for “an America where [government ensured] everybody had a fair shot, everybody did their fair share; that responsibility was rewarded and that the game wasn’t fixed.”

Only he wants to fix the game in HIS favor, and for the pet projects, like solar panels and “green tech” that get’s the Obama stamp of approval. Pick the Winners and Losers, that’s “free market” to socialists like him. But he’s not going to tell you that. And neither is the media.

It’s all about soaring rhetoric and meaningless double talk about how government should run everything and everyone because after all, government bureaucrats are vastly more “fair” and being dependent on government largess and it’s beneficence is all that you really need in life after all.

Nothing to Worry about.

“If you want to compete in a free market,” he told the campaign workers, “then you should compete on the basis of price and service and quality, not on the basis of somebody not being able to understand what they’re buying,” he declared.

Unless you’re a Non-Union employer, like say, Boeing in South Carolina….

Translation: You were too stupid to understand that when the government forced the banks to lend to anyone with a pulse (because that was more “fair”) and they did it and when the people couldn’t pay it back (as everyone already knew) that was the banks fault!

Capitalists are evil, greedy, tricksters out to screw you and I’m not. 🙂

Government control of everything is much more “fair”.

Nothing to Worry About. Trust Me sssssssssssssssssssssss…….

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

Republicans are determined to “end Medicare as we know it,” she intoned.  When the moment presented itself, Katie jumped in to ask why Democrats continue to insist on repeating the political “lie of the year,” as determined by the typically left-leaning fact check organization, Politifact.  Wasserman Schultz, visibly perturbed, interrupted the question and launched a meandering answer that hinged on an empty distinction.  Off camera, I chimed in with two quick follow-ups — to which DWS was substantively unresponsive.  Here’s the full exchange, culminating in the Florida Congresswoman throwing in the rhetorical towel.

After reciting a few platitudes, DWS pivoted back into attack dog mode, bitterly demanding that Republicans “sit down and compromise” with Democrats to help preserve Medicare.  Well, as it happens, the very Republican she regularly demonizes has recently done exactly that.  Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin teamed up with lefty Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon to introduce bipartisan legislation that incorporates many elements of Ryan’s original proposals, while maintaining “traditional Medicare” as an option in market-driven exchanges.  It also offers a more generous benchmark for spending increases than Ryan’s 2012 budget called for — a concession to the Left.  Although many conservatives have voiced significant concerns about some of the compromise’s elements, the Wyden/Ryan plan does precisely what DWS claims to crave.  Nevertheless, the White House instantly dismissed it out of hand — they’re too invested in Mediscare as a political strategy to abide any plausible solution.  Does DWS share the president’s opposition to the break-through, consensus-building reform plan?  As the clip reveals, she wasn’t interested in answering that question.  What a surprise.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

Nothing to Worry about. As AG Holder famously said, Lying is “complicated”. 🙂

Definition of Marxism: The economic, social, political, pseudo-scientific philosophy, theory, belief, or system based on the works of Karl Marx of Germany. The theory seeks the elimination of the notion of private property in order to gain control of the economic “means of production” by taking it from the bourgeois (the wealthy or propertied class) for the benefit of the proletariat (working class.) His philosophy of history was called “historical materialism” in which his goal was to bring about the end of history, by means of an eventual perfect, classless, utopian society he called Communism.

Nothing to Worry about….

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

One Glorious Hole

To “reduce racial isolation among students,” the Obama Administration has issued official guidelines to promote diversity in the nation’s public education system by, among other things, blending the rich with the poor.

What does “race” have to do with income?

A district with two elementary schools—one with a large enrollment of students from households with “higher than average annual incomes” and the other with a population of kids from “lower than average annual incomes”—should mix pupils, according to the new guidelines.

What does “race” have to do with income?

This will help achieve racial diversity and ultimately prevent “racial isolation,” the administration claims. A joint venture between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Education (DOE), the guidelines are expected to be implemented by the nation’s elementary and secondary schools as well as colleges and universities that receive taxpayer dollars.

What does “race” have to do with income?

Obama took aim at the Republicans, saying they would only return the same structures that led to America’s economic downturn. “Their philosophy is simple: We are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules,” Obama said. “I’m here to say they are wrong.”

Overly simplistic and extremist, but what do you expect from the Fearmonger-in-chief. And what’s his plan: The Government gets to rule every aspect your life for you because you’re too stupid to do it for yourself.

“Every day we go without a consumer watchdog in place is another day when a student or a senior citizen or member of our Armed Forces could be tricked into a loan they can’t afford — something that happens all the time.”-Obama

In Teddy Roosevelt’s era, President Barack Obama explained to the nation this week, “some people thought massive inequality and exploitation was just the price of progress. … But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you want from whoever you can.”

And he’s right. Even today there are people who believe they should have free license to take whatever they want from whomever they can. They’re called Democrats. 🙂

And he’ll play Robin Hood and take from the rich and give to the poor. But not in any healthy or just way. He just wants to spend more and make you more dependent on him. He wants to be the King.

Cutting Spending (we spend more than we took again in 2011) is not even on the radar of a Liberal. Cutting spending  is “making people fend for themselves”, throwing grandmas out in cold and running over her with the bus.

Gee, that’s inspiring!

Mind you, he’s not telling you that’s what he’s going to do, and has been doing for that last 3 years.

How have you expanded the fortunes of the bitter, occasionally clingy bourgeois in the past three years — by adding $5 trillion to their offspring’s tab? With no restraint in sight.

That would violate the unspoken campaign strategy of “Vote for Me, the other guy’s an asshole”. The fact that I’m an even bigger one doesn’t bare mentioning and Liberal media, our Ministry of Truth, will give him a pass.

“In the end,” he said, “rebuilding this economy based on fair play, a fair shot and a fair share will require all of us to see the stake we have in each other’s success.”

And we all know life is “fair”. 🙂

Thanks comrade. The individual doesn’t matter. And individual success or failure doesn’t matter. We are all one glorious whole.

I will tell you who is one glorious HOLE (asshole that is). 🙂

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)-Karl Marx.

That way everything is “fair” and no one has too much. And that will inspire you onto success won’t it! 😦

If you have that next great idea, in Obama’s world, why would you bother because if you make too much you’re an evil rich bastard and you’re just a selfish cretin who just wants to hoard your wealth and screw the poor!

And he’ll want to take it all way. Just to be “fair”!

That is unless you’re an apparatchik. Then you can make as much as you want and do whatever the hell you want because you’re a liberal or a liberal ass-kisser and liberals never complain about their own.

Michael Moore anyone? Jeffrey Imhelt? Warren Buffet? or any of the other “rich” people that can afford the $38,500 donor dinners.

He’s going to raise a Billion Dollars from somewhere other “the middle class” or “the poor” after all.

And my question is why do this rich people want to give money to a guy who demonizes them, unless that’s just the public face for the ignorant masses (the plebs) but if you’re an apparatchik and a supporter you’re in like flint with his cronies.

So if you’re in the “party” you get all the perks. if you’re not, you’re sh*t.

Gee…that sounds familiar….SOVIET RUSSIA!

But don’t worry, if you point this out to a Liberal they will just go insane with “fairness”.

And they are the most unfair and greedy of them all. Ironically…:)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell