You Knew it

ferguson americaLast week local black activists held a sit-in protest at the office of MORE (Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment) in St. Louis to press their claim that groups led by whites have collected tens of thousands of dollars in donations off of the Black Lives Matter movement without paying the Black participants their fair share.

MORE is the successor group to the now-bankrupt St. Louis branch of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now).

So these ACORNs have not fallen far from the Liberal Agenda Tree.
cut the check

During the sit-in, one of the Black activists threatened the white representative for MORE, saying, “We gon’, we gonna just **** you up.” (Expletive deleted.)
Apparently much of the money raised by MORE didn’t reach the local protesters.

In response to this protest MORE released a list of names and amounts paid out to protesters and protest groups who agitated and harassed police night-after-night in Ferguson last fall and winter climaxing in the torching and looting of dozens of local Ferguson businesses.

The list of over 80 groups and individuals was posted on Twitter by an irate protester.
Via Weasel Zippers:
more payout 1

more payout 2Note: This is just the list that we know about… What else are they hiding? And which groups, individuals are linked to Democratic politicians?

MORE (Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment) and OBS (Organization for Black Struggle) advertised for paid protesters in Ferguson.

more payoutLast weekend it was revealed that Ferguson protest leaders were being paid $5,000 a month to disrupt communities and inflame racial hate.

Shaun King was also in Cleveland:

King, who writes for Daily Kos, lied claiming the 12 year old boy, Tamir Rice, who had been shot by police after brandishing a toy gun, claimed that the police charged Rice with a crime after they killed him. Obviously, the point was to inflame, because it had nothing to do with the truth.
Screen Shot 2015-05-24 at 3.44.56 PM

Deray was there a special friend, he was there with Dorian Johnson, whose lying in Ferguson spread the ‘Hands up, don’t shoot” myth.

Akiba Solomon of Colorlines stated, “More than 500 of us have traveled from Boston, Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Nashville, Portland, Tucson, Washington, D.C., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and other cities to support the people of Ferguson and help turn a local moment into a national movement,” the Times noted.

“There’s absolutely no doubt that part of the reason that Ferguson flared up was because protesters were being paid to be there. That makes you wonder how many are being paid in Baltimore? How many more will be paid in the future?” The Right Scoop asked.

Protesters directed much of their anger against MORE director Jeff Ordower, former Missouri head of ACORN and ACORN’s Midwest operations, FrontPage Mag reports.

“The unpaid rent-a-mob operatives complain that MORE stiffed them the same way ACORN did to hired protesters throughout its 40 years of radical left-wing rabble-rousing,” FrontPage Mag reports.
The Kansas City Star estimates that the Ferguson riots, characterized as a spontaneous eruption of anger over the shooting of unarmed black criminal Michael Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, cost the county $4.2 million.

The Soros Factor

But First a Fast & Furious Update:

Attorney General Eric Holder claimed during congressional testimony today that internal Justice Department emails that use the phrase “Fast and Furious” do not refer to the controversial gun-walking operation Fast and Furious.

Under questioning from Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who read excerpts of the emails at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Justice Department oversight, Holder claimed that the phrase “Fast and Furious” did not refer to Fast and Furious but instead referred to another gun-walking operation known as “Wide Receiver.”

However, the emails refer to both programs — “Fast and Furious” and the “Tucson case,” from where Wide Receiver was launched — and reveal Justice Department officials discussing how to handle media scrutiny when both operations become public.

The evasion and prevarication continues.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/06/07/watch_highlights_of_fast_and_furious_questions_to_holder

GEORGE SOROS — The LEFT’s $$$ Big Brother

Summary: The media often talk about left-wing billionaire George Soros – especially his investments and his charity work. But those same news stories seldom give a complete picture of the man behind many of the liberal or “progressive” organizations in the United States and around the world.

Soros has amassed monumental wealth ($20 billion according to Forbes), but he has used much of that money to underwrite political operations, liberal higher education and an international organization that makes him one of the most powerful and influential men in the world. It has also made him among the most hated, not that the U.S. news media report on that. In fact, the American media seldom tell anything about Soros’s problems abroad or his hard-left agenda here at home. Some of the low points all-but ignored by the media include his $3 million fine for insider trading in France and how he operates his “own foreign policy” that often goes against U.S. interests.

The Media Research Center’s Business and Media Institute has undertaken more than a year of investigation into George Soros, his business dealings, his political involvement and his extensive connections to the media. That investigation shows that much of the more than $8.5 billion Soros has given to charity has in turned been used to advocate for hardcore left-wing policies around the globe. Those findings include:

Soros, the moneybags of the left, has spent $36 million in the last several years funding politicians and the left’s political machine. He also gave $550 million to liberal causes in 2000-2009.

There’s no product the Soros family likes better than Obama. The Democratic president has received more money from Soros and his kin than any other political candidate in the last 11 years – $16,000 and counting. They gave an additional $250,000 to the inauguration fund, with five members of the family each giving the maximum contribution of $50,000.

To recap:

  • He and his family gave more than $36 million to politicians and political groups through the past two decades.
  • Most of that $36 million came in Soros’s epic battle to defeat President George W. Bush in 2004. Soros alone spent more than $32 million of that total to fund the anti-Bush campaign with liberal grassroots groups MoveOn.org, Joint Victory Campaign 2004, and America Coming Together among the top recipients.
  • This is only a hint at Soros’s real political funding. He’s given more than $550 million to fund the liberal infrastructure in the United States – pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, pro-gay marriage, pro-drug legalization, pro-union and pro-government-funded media as well as anti-faith, anti-death penalty and as anti-conservative as they come.

To put that in perspective, he vastly outspent the libertarian Koch Brothers in individual political donations 8 to 1. Promoting left-wing ideology to include everything from electing judges to immigration reform, Soros has exerted his power over the nation’s liberal political elite.

The Kochs have been labeled as everything from “Tea Party puppeteers” by New York Times columnists Charles M. Blow to industrialists that “help keep the Tea Party movement well-caffeinated,” and vilified for their extensive giving to conservatives. But Soros has fondly been described as a philanthropist. The media fail to note that Soros has outspent the Kochs in individual-funded political activity.

See also: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/09/opensecrets-battle—koch-brothers.html

Then there is more:

  • $400 Million to Manipulate Higher Education: Journalists who thought the Koch brothers were dominating college funding with a mere $7 million should check out Soros. He’s given more than 50 times more and even helped establish his own university, Central European University, which teaches his own bizarre political/social philosophy of “open society.”
  • The “progressive” Bard College in New York is a favorite of the Soros family. With more than $70 million in funding, Bard is the prime example of what Soros aims to achieve with his university funding. He gave an entire department for his now ex-wife Susan Weber to run after she was turned down for the job she really wanted. Bard celebrates left-wing causes and encourages students to go out and become activists for their own favorite causes.The grants to Bard College show exactly what type of efforts Soros gives to in order to train student activists. Programs at Bard include a Palestinian youth group, an initiative to educate prisoners across the country, and various other groups for “community service and social action.” The school received $76,792,265 in gifts and commitments from Soros since 2000. From 2000-2010 they were granted more than $16 million with an additional $60 million in funding added to their endowment by Soros in 2011. Soros was quoted in The New York Times, “as a general rule I do not support higher education in the United States.” Soros continued that the grant will “help Bard in its efforts to transform liberal education and bolster critical thinking worldwide.” While this is inherently false seeing as  Soros gave more than $100 million to U.S. universities, it still highlight the fact that the programs at Bard are well representative of his views.
  • Imagine the hysterical fits from the liberal bloggers and the main stream media if one of the Koch brother’s wives did such a thing!
  • All of the Ivy League universities, along with a variety of state schools, private institutions, and even religiously-affiliated institutions are funded by Soros. These grants went a documentary on the War on Terror from Harvard to studying race and ethnicity at Ohio State University.Every one of the Ivy League colleges and universities received funding from Soros. More than $15 million was granted since 2000 to promote specific programs that line up with the Soros ideology.  Columbia and Harvard were the real winners, receiving more than $8 million and more than $5 million respectively. Dartmouth bottomed out with a mere $3,000 with Princeton following at $36,000. All of the other institutions received over $200,000.Nineteen schools received more than $1 million from Soros. Central European University and Bard College led the pack followed by Columbia, the European University at St. Petersburg, and Indiana University.

Money from Soros goes to everything from general operating funds to specific pet projects that influence the local community and the world.  Whether it’s a top ranked university or a religiously-affiliated one, Soros has managed to find a left-wing cause to back with the help of his foundations.

  • Global Scandals Largely Unreported: Soros has admitted to helping start revolutions, funding radicals and attacking national currencies. His insider trading conviction in France cost him $3 million and has been upheld by European courts repeatedly. His foundations have been opposed by nations around the globe, yet almost the only negative press he has received on ABC, CBS and NBC was linked to a sex scandal with a 28-year-old Brazilian actress.
  • Political Contributions to Most Major Liberal Politicians: Soros has personally funded some of the top names in America’s left from Barack Obama to Nancy Pelosi. Soros donates hundreds of millions to politically active liberal organizations as well. He’s even given $500,000 to the allegedly neutral Center for Responsive Politics, which is the source for much of the information on political donations.
  • More Than Half a Billion Dollars to Finance the Left: George Soros aids hundreds of left-wing groups in America each year under the auspices of his Open Society Foundations. Since 2000, Soros has given more than $550 million to liberal organizations in the U.S., underwriting every major liberal initiative – pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, pro-gay marriage, pro-drug legalization, pro-union, pro-government-funded media and even attacks against the concept of free elections and voting for judges.

Recommendations:

The Business and Media Institute has several recommendations for news outlets on how they can improve their coverage of George Soros and his foundations.

  • Do Some Genuine Journalism and Investigate Soros: George Soros is the embodiment of media bias. While the American media obsess about almost any action of the libertarian Koch brothers, they all-but ignore his one-man quest for global power. Soros has given more than $8.5 billion to his Open Society Foundations, leaving an imprint on more than 70 nations. Any business, organization or individual with that kind of financing and international reach is ripe for investigation. It’s time journalists did some digging on their own.
  • Treat Public Figures Equally: If someone on the left squawks about Charles and David Koch, journalists from some major news organizations jump to write about it. But criticisms of Soros, his business practices and even his conviction seldom get noted by the media. Journalists should treat all public figures equally.
  • Don’t Ignore Soros Connections to Major News Events: Newspaper front pages are filled with protests, complaints and supposedly grassroots initiatives that are easily tied to Soros – through the Center of American Progress and other entities he funds. But that connection is almost never made made. Journalists ignore obvious funding connections and sometimes don’t even check connections openly made on organizational websites. It’s the job of news to show when organizations are blatantly working together toward an end and to show the obvious ties these groups might share. (MRC)

The full report:  http://www.mrc.org/special-reports/special-report-george-soros-godfather-left

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

 

Thrown Under the Bus

Are feeling like you have tire treads  running up your body??

You’re not alone.

You must have Obama Bus Syndrome.

Where you are naively or purposely thrown under the bus to serve his ego and his mission to destroy all freedom everywhere.

After all, he is a Nobel Peace Prize Winner! 🙂

The latest victim, Israel. The long time ally of the United States.

Oh, and Christians and Jews, but who cares about them, they are just right wing religious nuts anyhow. 🙂

Obama, in a policy speech on Thursday on the “Arab spring” uprisings across the Middle East, laid down his clearest markers yet on the compromises Israel and the Palestinians must make for resolving their decades-old conflict.

His position essentially embraces the Palestinian view that the state they seek in the West Bank and Gaza should largely be drawn along the lines that existed before the 1967 war in which Israel captured those territories and East Jerusalem.

On the eve of Netanyahu’s visit, it was seen as a message that Obama expects Israel to eventually make big concessions.

“The viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of Israel’s existence,” Netanyahu said in a statement before flying to the United States for his talks with Obama.

Mind you some of the holiest sights in all of Christiandom and Judism would be turned over to Palestinians. Nothing too major since religion is hardly a concern of this administration except for that whole Muslim thing that he keeps reaffirming by doing Pro-Muslim things like this.

So what if Hamas, which is the government of the Palestinians, has in their charter, “KILL ALL THE JEWS” they can be reasonable and Israel has to stop being mean to them if they want peace. 😦

So what if a central tenant of these groups is the non-existence of Israel. Let’s be fair! They are the oppressed.

And Hezbollah, which is in Lebanon, and South America (I might add).

No biggie.

Syria, Iran. No biggie. if you’re just nice to them and you’re “fair” everything will come out kumbuya!

You have to do the 60’s hippie peacenik routine and everything will be a Summer of ’69 Lovefest.

Which I don’t know if he’s naive or deliberate. But the headline in the leftist LA Times might give us a Clue:

Obama: U.S. has chance to pursue the ‘world as it should be’

After decades of ‘accepting the world as it is’ in the Middle East, President Obama in his Middle East speech says the U.S. has a chance to ‘speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people.’

<<BARF BAG ON STANDBY>>

This is liberalism at it’s core, the way the world should be, according to them, not the way it is. So deal from a position of unreality and try and force it into reality because it makes you feel “good” and…<<drum roll>>…It’s FAIR! 🙂

God Help Us All!

He wants to expand Oil production because his re-election depends on it, BUT NOT HERE. he wants to expand in Brazil where a Major Democratic $$ Donor has ownership in…<<drum roll>> and OIL company!

He wants businesses to create jobs, but he wants to choke them do death with regulations , Obamacare, and bad mouthing them.

He wants the government to take over health care because it will save money, only it doesn’t. But it doesn’t give them control over life and death and that can’t be all bad. 🙂

He go all pro-“democracy” in Egypt calling for that rulers head. Now the Muslim Brotherhood (read: radical islam) are leading to taking over there.

Oh, and then there’s the “war” he started in Libya that both he, the media, and the Democrats are trying desperately to ignore. And you’re 60 days (War Powers Act) are up Mr.  Nobel Peace Prize.

Then there’s 9% unemployment for basically the last 2 years. Has anything positive been done on that at all? I say thee neigh.

He is pandering to the hispanic vote to get them to vote for him promising them the sky and the moon and whatever he has to knowing full well it will never pass in Congress.

So border security is just PR, pat down and legal sexually molestations.

He doesn’t care. He’ll just throw legal immigrants and legal Americans under the Bus.

It’s, after all, ALL ABOUT HIM. All about his greatness. His superior vision.

His superiority, period.

And it’s your turn.

“You can’t do $2 trillion just in cuts,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in an interview in his Capitol office. “There has to be a mix of spending cuts, including defense. There has to be a more fair apportionment of tax policy in this country.”

Read more taxes! Targeted to evil rich people mind you, but it never works out that way.

Especially with the proposals for a VAT TAX or a Vehicle Mileage Tax.

Because when a Liberal talks about “fairness” grab your wallet you’re under attack and about to be hit by that bus!

“That certainly would be a big, big number,” Reid said Thursday. “But you know these are numbers that are not impossible — if you do savings with the Pentagon, in addition to domestic discretionary [accounts] and rearrange the tax stuff. That’s all doable.

Aka, slash the military, crush businesses, raise taxes massively on “the rich”.

Throw them all under the bus. They are evil anyhow.

But it will create jobs and grow the economy! 🙂

Oh, and then there’s the new Food Devil on the block, McDonald’s. They are the Devil Incarnate. Evil Corporate devils preying on your innocent children for their evil profits! Bwah hahahahahahahahaha! <<organ sting>> <<Thunder and Lightning!!>> <<maniacal laughter>>

The national debate on corporate responsibility played out in a microcosm at McDonald’s annual meeting Thursday, when votes on shareholder proposals became a referendum on the pursuit of profit versus the question of what constitutes the public good.

Critics hammered McDonald’s executives not only for offering unhealthful menu items but also for marketing fast food to kids with its Ronald McDonald character and Happy Meal toys — all while boasting eight straight years of sales growth despite a deep economic recession.

McDonald’s response was powerful too, tapping into the fundamental notion of American freedom.

“This is all really about choice,” McDonald’s Corp. CEO Jim Skinner said at the meeting, held at company headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill. He said that while shareholders have the right to communicate concerns, the company should also have the right to advertise its menu offerings. “It’s about protecting people’s rights in this democratic society that we live in.”

As for Ronald McDonald?

“Ronald McDonald is an ambassador to McDonald’s, and he is an ambassador for good,” Skinner said. “Ronald McDonald isn’t going anywhere.”

Critics’ main beef with McDonald’s is its marketing to America’s children, thus side-stepping the thorny retort “If you don’t like McDonald’s, don’t eat there.”
Children are susceptible to the advertising that McDonald’s spends hundreds of millions of dollars on each year, said Juliana Shulman, national compaign organizer for Corporate Accountability International.

“For adults that’s one thing, but children aren’t just little adults. Their brains are just forming,” Shulman said. “McDonald’s marketing is really designed to get around parents and get to kids directly. For nearly 50 years, McDonald’s has been working to hook kids on unhealthy foods…. Parents are exercising parental responsibility. That alone won’t stop the problem.” (LA Times)

So if you’re feeling tired it’s probably because you have a bus parked on you by Obama and his Leftist apparatchiks.

And let’s not evil talk about how evil you are if your not in a union and your <<shudder>> a white person!!  EVIL!!!:)

Pure Evil! You must be destroyed.

Or at least repeatedly run over by my bus!

Oh, and do vote for me in 2012 because I have a (D) after my name and I represent all that is sweetness and light and good in the world. 🙂

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever. (Psalms 23)

You just have to find a place to park that bus on top of you! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

P.s.A D.C. Circuit decision this week in Oberwetter v. Hilliard <a href="” target=”_blank”><http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/748BE2DE8AF2A2A485257893004E07FC/$file/10-5078-1308285.pdf&gt;, concluding that (1) the Jefferson Memorial is a “nonpublic forum” in which reasonable, viewpoint-neutral restrictions are permissible, and that (2) the government could therefore bar from people from engaging, inside the Memorial, in picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms of conduct which involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers.

Isn’t freedom just fun under the Obama Bus…

P.P.s.

There is a report that the TSA faked its safety data on its X-ray airport scanners in order to deceive the public about the safety of such devices.

As evidenced by recent events in Washington, we now live in an age where the federal government simply fakes whatever documents, news or evidence it wants people to believe, then releases that information as if it were fact. This is the modus operandi of the Department of Homeland Security, which must fabricate false terror alerts to keep itself in business — and now the TSA <http://www.naturalnews.com/the_TSA.html> division has taken the fabrication of false evidence <http://www.naturalnews.com/evidence.html> to a whole new level with its naked body scanners.

The evidence of the TSA’s fakery is now obvious thanks to the revelations of a letter signed by five professors from the University of California, San Francisco and Arizona <http://www.naturalnews.com/Arizona.html> State University. You can view the full text of the letter at: http://www.propublica.org/documents… <http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/april-2011-letter-to-john-holdren>

The letter reveals:

• To this day, there has been no credible scientific testing of the TSA’s naked body <http://www.naturalnews.com/body.html> scanners. The claimed “safety” of the technology <http://www.naturalnews.com/technology.html> by the TSA is based on rigged tests <http://www.naturalnews.com/tests.html>.

• The testing that did take place was done on a custom combination of spare parts rigged by the manufacturer of the machines (Rapidscan) and didn’t even use the actual machines installed in airports. In other words, the testing was rigged.

• The names of the researchers who conducted the radiation <http://www.naturalnews.com/radiation.html> tests at Rapidscan have been kept secret! This means the researchers are not available for scientific questioning of any kind, and there has been no opportunity to even ask whether they are qualified to conduct such tests. (Are they even scientists <http://www.naturalnews.com/scientists.html>?) (KFYI)

So are you feeling securing under that bus?… 🙂

The Devil You May Not Know

(ARLINGTON, Va.) – A draft executive order that would force government contractors to disclose all political contributions would make it too easy for political appointees to punish contractors for their political views or to coerce contributions from firms, officials with the Associated General Contractors of America warned today in testimony submitted to Congress.

“The process outlined in the draft executive order would make it much easier for government officials to use the political activities of government contractors as a factor when awarding contracts,” Stephen E. Sandherr, the association’s chief executive officer noted in testimony submitted today to a hearing held jointly between the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Small Business. “This order actually introduces, instead of excludes, politics from government contracting.”

So you have if you give your political contributions to the wrong source (aka Republican or Tea Party) then you might not get that big fat government contract.

Be a toadie and and an apparatchik or else. Even if you hate me (a Liberal Democrat), give me money or else!!

Now that’s good for business…

“This rule makes it look like the Administration is more interested in punishing political opponents and propping up political allies than protecting public taxpayers.”–Stephen E. Sandherr, CEO Associated General Contractors of America.

It does indeed. Now ask them if they (the liberal progressives) care? 😦

My bet, Not even a little bit.

Oh, and the journalists covering the stories, well, they just might not be very impartial either.

Gov. Mike Huckabee (2010): I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004 (and millions getting Obama elected), has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press (see later story), NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press. 

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Party “extreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.” 

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features: 

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Oh and that polling data showing how Obama is now Mohammad Ali and is staging a miraculous comeback and people love him after he gave the order to Kill bin Laden like something out of a Video Game…

Well… IT JUST MIGHT BE RIGGED!!

Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected!

And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval!

It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.

But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.”

With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream?

(Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)

AP response: Some conservatives criticized the AP-GfK poll as heavy with responses from Democrats that skewed the results. AP-GfK polls use a consistent methodology that draws a random sample of the population independent of party identification.

But the question isn’t really whether the sample changed too much from their poll in April; the question is whether the sample accurately reflects the American public at large, and whether we indeed have 1.63 Democrats in this country for every 1 Republican. If their sample had an unrealistic proportion of Democrats one month, it’s entirely possible they can get a similar unrealistic proportion the following month. (NRO)

Ya Think? 🙂

Naw, Liberals would never do that…

Lying, cheating, and stealing…Naw, never happen.

Dishonesty, disingenuous and pure self-interest…never happens… 🙂

So Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Are We Still On?

Did the Government shutdown (partially since only a quarter of them would have been effected)?

<<knock knock>>

Nope. I guess not.

Darn.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

What a deal...

 

So who caved?

The Republicans mostly. In my view.

They got talked down from $100 Billion to $61 to $39Billion.

Obviously, less than $40 billion in cuts is just a piece of seaweed in the vast ocean of federal spending. Everyone can talk about how big a single-year spending reduction this is (and they will-especially the Liberal media), but spending is now so high that what would have been historic even a decade ago is almost trivial now.

The United States accumulates over $3.5 billion in new debt each and every day. That’s more than $2 million per minute.

So this budget deal means 11 days of Interest payments. That’s ALL that was cut.

Talk about a drop in an red ink ocean.

If this is what is going to happen, imagine when it’s not Billions on the chopping block but TRILLIONS.

Old school “negotiations” will not save us for a financial crisis. Period.

The Democrats were squealing like stuck pigs over this, imagine what kind of Armageddon is coming when it comes to the Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget!

I agree with Rep. Michelle Bachmann, “I’m Disappointed”.

Republicans had included language to deny federal money to put in place Obama’s year-old health care law. The deal only requires such a proposal to be voted on by the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it is certain to fall short of the necessary 60 votes.

A symbolic gesture and an empty concession. So what, big deal…

“Unless we act soon, government spending on health and retirement programs will crowd out spending on everything else, including national security. It will literally take every cent of every federal tax dollar just to pay for these programs,” Sen. Paul Ryan said Saturday.

That debate could come soon.

The Armageddon Hysterics to follow!

The Treasury has told Congress it must vote to raise the debt limit by summer. Republicans hope to use this issue to force Obama to accept long-term deficit-reduction measures.

After this deal, I’m am not hopeful of real change, just “politically viable” change. 😦

President Obama: “But beginning to live within our means is the only way to protect those investments that will help America compete for new jobs,” he said.

And given his track record for completely forgetting what he said from one minute to the next…Remember the “new tone”? The Democrats sure as hell don’t.

Or “I’m open to new ideas” that are comfortable to Democrats only.

Or a “summit” where he “listens”. 😦

Where was Minority Leader Former-Queen Pelosi?

She was at George Soros funded socialist event ALL DAY.

“You really can’t split the difference if splitting the difference means half the kids are going to be thrown off Head Start, but not the full number, or that half the home-bound seniors will lose meals,” Pelosi said. “…You can’t just talk about dollars — you have to talk about values.”

The Values of even BIGGER GOVERNMENT and even more Government Control that is…

Just down the road in Boston, a Soros-funded media conference is trying to manipulate that emerging order as well. Close to 350 left-wingers from a variety of organizations are gathering there for the National Conference for Media Reform. (aka The Ministry of Truth)

That “change the world” conference includes two commissioners from the FCC, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Bernie Sanders, four Democratic representatives, the head of Columbia University, and assorted left-wing journalist types, from Salon’s Glenn Greenwald to disgraced former MSNBC host David Shuster, who now works for a Soros-funded investigative operation.

The rest of the list reads like a “Who’s Who” of left-wing organizations and talking heads, including the president of PBS, a senior vice president with American Public Media, an Al Jazeera English executive, the president of the Newspaper Guild – CWA and Washington Post columnist Rob Pegoraro.

The left-wing billionaire is helping fund two major conferences that start on the same day, in two different locations just a three hours apart by car. Two liberal events packed into one long weekend. God created the world in six days. Apparently, Soros, who sees himself as “some kind of god,”needs just a long weekend to start remaking today’s world in his image.

The emphasis of both conferences is a familiar one to American voters – change. Soros wants to begin changing the global economy in one event. In the other, his flunkies want to “Change the world. Change the media.”

Now that is change you can believe in. Sadly, those who actually report the news must believe in it because they sure as heck aren’t reporting on Soros or either event. And that’s even though staffers or even executives from Reuters, the Financial Times, NPR, PBS, The Washington Post and other major media outlets are speaking at one event or the other.

But the over-arching theme is getting government to fix the media. Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, whose school also includes the well-known and partly Soros-funded Columbia School of Journalism, is one of several speakers advocating for increased government funding for media.

The Ministry of Truth incarnate.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, et al anyone? 😦

Two other speakers, Free Press founder Robert McChesney and co-author John Nichols…they are consistent in wanting U.S. media to be more like it is in Europe and oppose the “fantasy of a free-market solution.”

That’s not surprising. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who is speaking at both conferences, is wildly critical of people who support free markets, or what he calls “free market fundamentalists.” Free markets are directly in opposition with the Soros-funded group think that sees Big Government as merely a starting point for Ever Bigger Government.

This weekend, we get two visions of taxpayer-funded solution, only most in the news media are too short-sighted to see them. (Dan Gainor)

I think that’s why Democrats have such Armageddon feeling about a government shutdown, it’s their drug, their baby. It’s what they live for.

I don’t.

But they want to Force me to.

After all, the Government, and Government power is the end-all and be-all of Liberal Progressive Socialist Utopia.

Machiavelli advised to rulers use most barbarous fear if you want remain on power. Hope is not reliable, man  is very selfish he can revolt against you if his hope is not fulfil but fear of punishment  people not revolt and obey your order without grumble.

It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.
It is much more secure to be feared than to be loved.
Politics have no relation to morals.
Niccolo Machiavelli

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”– George Orwell.

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

 

Extreme!

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The President in Pennsylvania, the state, instead of Pennsylvania Ave being a leader:  “If you’re complaining about the price of gas and you’re only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know,” Obama said laughingly. “You might want to think about a trade-in.”

There’s that liberal “compassion” and “sensitivity”. 🙂

So if you are struggling with inflation in gas prices, food prices and utility costs the best thing you can for yourself is to get a new car that will cost you even more money!!

So what if you can’t afford it!

But you’ll get better mileage. 🙂

Sounds like an Obama plan. When you are struggling economically, spend even more!! 😦

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/07/krauthammer_obamas_energy_plan_is_drill_in_brazil_and_windmills.html

Before Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget released yesterday, the Liberal Establishment was telling us that what was needed was an adult conversation on the budget and entitlements. Now that they have got their adult conversation, they can’t handle it.

Evidenced by one of our favourite radical leftists and now head of the DNC (while still a Congressman):

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) comments on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget proposal for FY 2012.

“Representing a large number of seniors in south Florida, I can tell you that this budget would be devastating for seniors and older Americans. This Republican path to poverty passes like a tornado through America’s nursing homes, where millions of America’s seniors receive long-term and end of life care,” Rep. Wasserman Schultz said.

And good “rich” Billionaire (because he’s a socialist): I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control otherwise they might get me into trouble. ‘I have always harboured an exaggerated view of my self-importance,’ he wrote. ‘To put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god or an economic reformer like Keynes, or, even better, like Einstein (“Alchemy of Finance”).-George Soros

“‘I’ve come to the conclusion,’ Soros told Fortune, ‘that one can do a lot more about the issues I care about by changing the government than by pushing the issues.’  In short, he has become the world’s angriest billionaire.”  (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03).

Sounds a bit like Obama. 🙂

A fundraising appeal from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee warns supporters that “Tea Party Republicans are threatening to shut down the government on Friday unless we surrender to their outrageous demands.”

The fundraising email, penned by DCCC Chairman Steve Israel (N.Y.), went out late Wednesday and asks for small donations to the committee’s “GOP Accountability Fund,” setting a goal of raising $50,000 by Friday “so we can hold Speaker Boehner and his Tea Party fringe Republicans immediately accountable for shutting down the government.”

“The world is watching our next move,” Israel wrote. “Will we cave to the Tea Party’s disgraceful act of political extortion or will we fight back with the full force of our grassroots strength?”

Never let a Crisis go to waste!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

“What if the president and your representative saw it coming and could have prevented it from happening?” Ryan said. “What would you think of them if they didn’t?” A hush came over the audience at the American Enterprise Institute. It was Ryan’s way of saying that the financial meltdown arrived largely without warning, while the impending fiscal crunch is like a runaway freight train. “This is the most predictable crisis in the history of our country,” he went on. “We are on our path to a debt crisis” like those we’ve seen recently in Europe, with the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product rising, under Barack Obama’s budget, past the 90 percent danger point on its way to 800 percent. (townhall.com)

So if it’s that predictable, even the Democrats would drop their partisanship and do what is best for the nation and it’s people….

Yes, that was cynical chuckle moment.

The Democrats have only 3 plays in their playbook and variations on it.

1. Class Warfare  2. Fear  3. Intimidation

That’s it.

And if you disagree with them at any level you are an “extremist” !!!!

Ryan’s budget is based on the idea that people are capable of making decisions for themselves.

EVIL!!!

1961: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you  can do for your country.

2011: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what you can do for the country; ask what the government can do for you.

Karl Rove: In the White House Press Room on Tuesday, President Barack Obama did what comes naturally—scold others, in this case the Congress. Mr. Obama complained that a budget agreement “could have gotten done three months ago.”

What he didn’t say was that the budget should have “gotten done” six months ago, before the current fiscal year started last Oct. 1. Our government’s failure to have a budget in place halfway through the fiscal year is the president’s responsibility. He and his party dominated Congress by wide margins when the budget was supposed to be put in place.

Also on Tuesday, at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan did what the president has not. Demonstrating leadership and more than a little courage, Mr. Ryan laid out a thoughtful, ambitious blueprint for the next decade.

The Path to Prosperity would return discretionary spending to its 2008 levels and hold it flat for five years; reduce the federal government’s work force by 10%; slash corporate welfare; reform the tax code; and reduce the corporate and top personal rate to 25%. It would repeal ObamaCare, change Medicare so the government helps all seniors pay for an insurance policy they choose, and send states money for each person covered by Medicaid, plus the flexibility to spend that money as they see fit.

The Obama-Ryan budget battle foreshadows what Americans are likely to hear in the 2012 campaign: an unengaged, reactive chief executive versus a bold, reform-minded GOP.

In the short term, it’s obvious what Mr. Obama hopes to gain. Having watched his standing as “a strong and decisive leader” drop to 52% in last month’s Gallup poll from 60% last year, the president is looking to profit politically from a shutdown of the federal government.

When the government was twice shut down in 1995 and 1996, Congressional Republicans survived the controversy and kept their majorities in the 1996 election. At the same time, the shutdowns boosted Bill Clinton’s image. Only 37% viewed him as “a strong leader” in a June 1995 ABC News poll. In a January 1996 CBS News poll after the shutdowns, 53% said Mr. Clinton had “strong qualities of leadership.”

The president will instruct his party to demagogue the House Republican budget, labeling it as an assault on the poor and a windfall for the rich that will rip America’s social safety net to shreds.

Never mind that these charges are false and irresponsible. Mr. Ryan would have the government spend $40 trillion over the next 10 years, $6.2 trillion less than Mr. Obama’s budget plan of $46 trillion. This is an overall reduction in what the government plans to spend, not a cut from what it is spending today.

Under Mr. Ryan’s proposal, for example, health-care spending would still rise for both Medicaid, which serves the poor, and Medicare, which serves seniors. The $275 billion spent on Medicaid this year would grow to $305 billion in 2021 while the $563 billion spent on Medicare this year would grow to $953 billion in 2021. Nor would anyone 55 years or older be affected by any Medicare reforms.

Mr. Ryan and his colleagues want to act now to keep entitlement programs solvent. They want to keep Americans from experiencing the pain of the ­crisis that will come when the public debt has doubled by 2012 (from the level when Mr. Obama came into office) and nearly ­tripled by 2021, as it would under the president’s plan. Already mandatory spending, the part of the budget that’s automatic and not subject to approval each year by Congress, eats up all available revenue this year. Medicare goes broke in 2029, and Social Security is bankrupt in 2037.

The White House doesn’t care—it perceives a political path to victory in 2012. What makes this strategy doubly reckless and cynical is that the administration knows a debt crisis is coming and that its spending plans cannot continue.

But the Obama administration’s adults—Chief of Staff Bill Daley, Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew, and National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling—are clearly not in charge. The politicos—Senior Adviser David Plouffe (who managed Mr. Obama’s 2008 campaign) and Communications Director Daniel Pfeiffer (who had the same title in the 2008 campaign) have their hands on the wheel. The White House is in full re-election mode.

The House GOP budget will not become law this year, but it will smoke the president out on spending and provide a framework for Republicans to discuss the nation’s fiscal challenges. The contrast between the GOP’s boldness and the president’s cowardice is striking. The question is whether the president and his party will pay a political price for their abdication of leadership. We’re about to find out.

But rest assured the Liberal Press will be there to ignore it entirely and will tirelessly cheerlead for the Liberal progressive cause.

I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function. (Gov. Huckabee 2009)

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

 

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

Skin in the Game

Today, a record number of Americans—52 million, or 36 percent of all filers—have no direct connection with the basic cost of government because they pay no income taxes. If we add this group to the people who have some income but don’t file a tax return, the ranks of American households outside the income tax system rise to 48 percent.

It gets worse, just keep reading. And remember the liberal mantra that evil Rich people don’t pay any taxes!

Tax Expenditures and Progressivity

There is a common belief that because so many tax expenditures benefit upper-income taxpayers, the “rich” are not paying their fair share of taxes. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Indeed, because of the expansion of tax benefits aimed at low- and middle-income households, the OECD finds that the U.S. has the most progressive income tax system of any industrialized country. What that means is that the top 10 percent of U.S. taxpayers pay a larger share of the income tax burden than do the wealthiest decile in any other industrialized country, including traditionally “high-tax” countries such as France, Italy, and Sweden.

Meanwhile, because of the generosity of such preferences as the EITC and child credit, low-income Americans have the lowest income tax burden of any OECD nation. Indeed, the study reports that while most countries rely more on cash transfers than taxes to redistribute income, the U.S. stands out as “achieving greater redistribution through the tax system than through cash transfers.”

The share of the income tax burden borne by America’s wealthiest taxpayers has been growing steadily for more than two decades. Figure 4 compares the share of income taxes paid by the top 1 percent of taxpayers to the share paid by the bottom 90 percent of taxpayers.

The chart shows that, as of 2008, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 38 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent of taxpayers paid just 30 percent of the income tax burden. By any measure, this is the sign of a very progressive tax system.

Indeed, many of these 52 million tax filers now look to the IRS as a source of income thanks to the more than $100 billion in refundable tax credits paid to people who have no income tax liability.

As a result of removing millions of people from the bottom of the tax rolls, we have dramatically reduced the number of people with “skin in the game.” Indeed, the top 1 percent of taxpayers now pays a greater share of the income tax burden than the bottom 90 percent combined.

Sadly, individuals are not the only taxpayers looking to the IRS as a source of income. The proliferation of tax credits aimed at promoting technologies such as renewable energy and fuel-efficient products has addicted many companies and industries to IRS handouts. In a recent case, one-third of the profits of a major appliance company were attributable to energy production credits.

Ironically, but perhaps not surprisingly, the sectors suffering the biggest financial crises today—health care, housing, and state and local governments—all receive the most subsidies through the tax code.  The cure for what ails these industries is to be weaned off the tax code, not given more subsidies through such things as the First Time Homebuyer’s Credit, Premium Assistance credits, or more tax-free bonds.

Washington can actually do more for the American people by doing less. The solution lies in fundamental tax reform. Indeed, as the plan authored by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson (co-chairmen of President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform), demonstrated, Americans could enjoy much lower tax rates, and the government could raise the same amount of revenue if most—if not all—tax expenditures were eliminated.

That said, the primary goal of fundamental tax reform should not be raising more money for government. The primary goal should be improving the nation’s long-term economic growth and lifting living standards.

Economists at the OECD have determined that high corporate and personal income tax rates are the most harmful taxes for long-term economic growth. Unfortunately, the U.S. has one of the highest corporate income taxes among industrialized nations and one of the most progressive personal income tax systems.

Cutting these rates while broadening the tax base would greatly improve the nation’s prospects for long-term GDP growth. The benefits of higher economic growth will accrue to taxpayers and Uncle Sam alike.

To be sure, many people improperly view the forgone revenue from tax expenditures as “the government’s money.” By this view, what the tax code allows taxpayers to keep through tax preferences has thus been “spent” in the same manner as a government program.

But there is a very real moral and functional difference between the government taking $1,000 from a taxpayer and giving it to the Department of Energy for switch grass research, and a tax preference which allows that taxpayer to keep $1,000 of his own money because he purchased new windows for his home. The tax credit may be poor tax policy, but the transaction is clearly one that the taxpayer chose of his own accord. The government did not actively take his money and give it to Home Depot for the new windows.

One of the dominant issues in any discussion of tax expenditures is who benefits from them. Because the value of a tax deduction depends upon the taxpayer’s marginal tax rate, many of the largest and best known tax preferences, such as the mortgage interest deduction, do tend to benefit upper-income taxpayers. However, over the past 20 years or so, lawmakers have increasingly turned to using tax credits to benefit low- and middle-income taxpayers. This has had the unintended consequence of removing millions of taxpayers from the tax rolls altogether.

Most tax credits can only reduce the amount a taxpayer owes to zero, but the EITC and the child tax credit are also refundable, meaning that taxpayers are eligible to receive a check even if they have paid no income tax during the year. Those tax returns have become, in effect, a claim form for a subsidy delivered through the tax system in much the same way that a traditional government program sends out a welfare check or a farm support check.

In 2008, according to the most recent IRS data available, 25 million tax filers received $51.6 billion in EITC benefits. Of this amount, $50.5 billion was refundable in excess of their income tax liability. Also in 2008, some 25.3 million filers received $30.7 billion in child tax credit benefits, with more than 18 million of these filers getting $20.5 billion in refundable checks. Many families are eligible for both the EITC and the child credit. These are not refunds of overpaid tax; they are payments to people who have already gotten back everything that was withheld from their paychecks during the year.

In an important 2009 study, in order to gain a better understanding of the overall amount of redistribution that occurs through both tax and spending policies, Tax Foundation economists measured how much families at various income levels paid in taxes versus how much they received in spending benefits.  The results of this analysis show that federal tax and spending policies are very heavily tilted to the poor and middle-class, even before considering the Obama administration’s major policy initiatives such as health care reform. For 2010, the Tax Foundation report found that the bottom 60 percent of American families received more in government spending than they paid in taxes.

Not surprisingly, as Figure 5 shows, government spent $10.44 on the lowest-income families for every dollar they paid in taxes. Remarkably, families in the middle-income group received $1.15 for every dollar they paid in taxes.

By contrast, the top 40 percent of families paid more in taxes as a group than they received in government spending benefits. The highest-income families received 43 cents in government spending for every dollar they pay in taxes, even though they are assumed in this study to disproportionately benefit from public goods such as national defense.

Overall, federal tax and spending policies combined to redistribute more than $824 billion from the top 40 percent of families to the bottom 60 percent of families in 2010. In other words, the entire federal fiscal system is very progressive and redistributive.

But you’ll never hear that from your anti-rich, anti-corporate Class Warfare liberal.

Why?

Because that like asking Al Sharpton to not be a Race Baiter. It’s what they do. It’s at the core of what they do.

That’s the game.

And that’s their skin in that game. Without it, they have no skin.

And speaking of snakes and skin: Rep. Anthony “The Weiner” Weiner who once boasted that ObamaCare and he were “one” now wants waivers from ObamaCare for New York City because he wants to run for Mayor some day soon.

That’s his skin in the game.

New York Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner toasted the one-year anniversary of Obamacare this week — and accidentally spilled his champagne glass all over the disastrous, one-size-fits-all mandate. Ostensibly one of the federal health care law’s staunchest defenders, Weiner exposed its ultimate folly by pushing for a special cost-saving regulatory exemption for New York City.

If it’s good for the city Weiner wants to be mayor of, why not for each and every individual American and American business that wants to be free of Obamacare’s shackles?

Weiner joins a bevy of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s” loudest cheerleaders — unions, foundations and left-leaning corporations — in clamoring for more waivers for favors. (The list of federal waiver recipients now tops 1,000, covering more than 2.6 million workers.) And he follows a gaggle of health care takeover-promoting Democrats maneuvering on Capitol Hill for get-out-of-Obamacare loopholes.

At a speech before the George Soros-supported Center for American Progress, as reported by Politico.com, Weiner revealed that he’s “in the process now of trying to see if we can take (President Barack Obama) up on” a favor waiver and is “taking a look at all of the money we spend in Medicaid and Medicare and maybe New York City can come up with a better plan.” Echoing all the Republican critics of Obamacare who objected to top-down rules that override local variations in health care expenditures, Weiner explained: “I’m just looking internally to whether the city can save money and have more control over its own destiny.”

More local control over taxpayers’ destiny, eh? Give that man a “Hands Off My Health Care” sign, a Gadsden flag and a tea party membership card ASAP!

I kid, of course. The ultimate agenda of many waiver-seekers is to create a wormhole path to even more radical restructuring of the health system. Weiner has brazenly called for a single-payer “public option” to replace Obamacare should it be repealed. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon has also crusaded for more Kabuki “flexibility” in the law through a bipartisan state waiver proposal.

But as The Heritage Foundation noted, the plan “simply changes a date on an existing ‘state innovation’ provision of Obamacare from 2017 to 2014 — still well after the federal Obamacare infrastructure has been cemented in place.” And it is essentially “a back-door vehicle for progressive states to enact the ‘public option’ and speed up the establishment of a single-payer system for health care.” White House health care advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter further reinforced in a conference call to liberal advocates that the bill would help states implement single-payer health care plans, such as those tested in Connecticut and Vermont.

Weiner argues that the waiver process dispels “this notion that the government is shoving the bill down people’s throats.” But only the politically connected, deep-pocketed, lawyered-up and Beltway-savvy can apply. And the White House refuses to shed more light on its decision-making process. Obama’s selective favor waivers simply underscore the notion that unaccountable regulatory bureaucrats are presiding over government by the cronies, for the cronies and of the cronies.

Real control over our destinies means flexibility and choice for all. Repeal is the ultimate democratic waiver. (Michelle Malkin)

But more likely, we’ll be skinned as game!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Glenn Foden