The Death Trolls

The Liberals had quite a party this weekend. The Death Trolls were partying like it was 1922 and the Communist Revolution.

scalia

Said no Liberal Ever.

So has Obama appointed Loretta Lynch yet? She properly Black -Not an evil Uncle Tom Conservative (Doubleplusgood), She’s a Woman, and a Left Ideologue who will stay the Partisan course no matter what the nasty, old, white guy Constitution says…

Retirement is one thing. Death is quite another. Antonin Scalia leaves behind a wife, children, grand children, friends, and other family. Life is something we should all be respectful of, even when we disagree with the politics of the person.

But plenty of people who politicize everything disagree. It is the measure of how miserable a person’s life is that they would politicize the death of someone who served his country with distinction because they disagree with him.

Not everything is political. Death will come to us all. Therefore, we should work hard to not make death a political issue, even if it is the death of one we disagree with. We then only incentivize others dancing on our own graves when that day comes. We will not all become Supreme Court justices. We will not all become someone of note. We will not all merit even a Wikipedia entry. But we all will die. So show some class.

 

“I feel bad for his family” and “That guy was a homophobic, racist jerk” are not mutually exclusive sentiments. — Brooklyn Spoke (@BrooklynSpoke)

Scalia was a retrograde bigot who, just this week, voted with his colleagues to kill climate regs and the planet. I don’t care how he rests.— Bae Talese

Scalia *gleefully* shat on minorities of all stripes while he was alive. No one owes him respect and decorum now that he’s dead.— Bae Talese

Wow, Scalia died. it’s not cool to speak ill of the dead, so RIP to one of the BEST racist, fascist enemies of democracy & humanity.— dave ciaccio

Wow, TWO Supreme Court openings! (I assume Thomas will be buried alive with Scalia)

— Drew Magary

The party of “compassion”, “sensitivity” and “tolerance” strikes again. 🙂

Ann Coulter: [The Republicans know] “if they screw us over one more time, on something as big as this, Trump gets another ten million voters right there.”

But how likely are they to stand on principle? Really…

 

 

20 Quotes

20) “The shrill little twerps shrieking ‘You can’t say that!’ are a far bigger problem than the stuff they object to.” — Mark Steyn

19) “The biggest thing leaders don’t do now is listen. They no longer hear the voices of common people. Or they imitate what they think it is and it sounds backward and embarrassing. In this age we will see political leaders, and institutions, rock, shatter and fall due to that deafness.” — Peggy Noonan

18) “President Obama is a wartime president who doesn’t seem to realize it.” — Tom Cotton

17) “Republican leaders believe the goal of the Republican Party is to gain and maintain power; conservatives believe the goal of the Republican Party is to represent conservative interests, no matter what comes. The Republican Party has become an excellent vehicle for the former goal, and a smoking garbage heap when it comes to the latter.” — Ben Shapiro

16) “Many Americans who say that we should learn from other people, especially Europeans, mean that we should imitate what they did. That may make those who talk this way feel superior to other Americans. But let us never forget that the most disastrous ideologies of the 20th century — Communism, Fascism and Nazism — all originated in Europe. So did both World Wars.” — Thomas Sowell

15) “Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn’t know because they might reflect badly on Democrats.” — Jim Treacher

14) “If angry political rhetoric bred violence, America would look something like Syria – awash in genocidal conflict. For sheer viciousness the robust debates between politicians and activists often pale in comparison to the “flame wars” on Twitter and Facebook, where arguments quickly become deeply personal. America’s political culture is thoughtful in parts, but it’s also a shouting culture, and anyone who’s looking for angry or extremist rhetoric can find it. It’s everywhere.” — David French

13) “This is why, for example, I basically disengage from anyone who uses the phrase ‘white privilege’ or the term ‘patriarchy’. There is a possible world in which these might be useful terms of discussion, but if that were ever our universe it has long since ceased to be. Now what they mean is ‘I am about to attempt to bully you into submission using kafkatraps and your own sense of decency as a club.’” — Eric Raymond

12) “The left is always dabbling in fictional dystopias where there is a yawning chasm between rich and poor, where the country is riven by racial conflict, and where the whole nation has to be impoverished to serve the power and vanity of the Capitol—and yet somehow this is the system they always create when they’re in power, in places like Baltimore and Chicago.” — Robert Tracinski

11) “Conservatives say ‘you can be somebody.’ Liberals say ‘you should hate somebody.’ The latter mentality is exactly what we’ve seen play out in Ferguson and Baltimore.” — Carl Jackson

10) “Years ago Marvin Olasky wrote how compassion traditionally meant to ‘suffer with.’ Over the years it turned into writing a check. Now it means making other people write checks.” — Doug Bandow

9) “Am I morally obligated to defend the president every time somebody says something bad or controversial about him? I don’t think so! …If someone made a nasty or controversial statement about me to the president, do you really think he would come to my rescue? No chance!” – Donald Trump

8) “There’s a revealing tendency in most liberal and left-wing histories of the United States of America. When something bad happens, there tend to be only two possible villains: conservatives or America itself (or a combination of the two). During the McCarthy period, evil conservatives whipped up paranoia and fear. But the Red Scare of 1919, overseen by Woodrow Wilson’s progressive attorney general, A. Mitchell Palmer, was a blot on America’s soul. When FDR interned Japanese-Americans, it was an example of America’s sins. When FDR’s party ruthlessly enforced Jim Crow in this country, racism was a stain on America. After the Democrats lost the South, and the South in turn became less racist, the stain was moved to the Republican Party. Liberalism is never to blame.” — Jonah Goldberg

7) “How did all these illegal aliens get into ‘the shadows’ in the first place? They weren’t kidnapped and dragged across the border. They came here. At most — and this is dubious — it’s a crisis for the illegal immigrants. But ‘living in the shadows’ is evidently better than living in Guadalajara, otherwise, there’s an easy solution. Living in the shadows doesn’t seem to be much of a crisis even for them.” — Ann Coulter

6) “The gentlemen who wrote the Constitution did not get around to enfranchising women or abolishing slavery, but they snuck in a constitutional right to gay marriage that we’ve somehow overlooked for 228 years or so: No mentally functional adult, regardless of his views on gay marriage, should be expected to pretend that that is true.” — Kevin Williamson

5) “Taken literally, Islamophobia means ‘fear of Islam.’ OK, well, there are many Muslims who have gone to great lengths to convince us to fear it. So what if I finally oblige them?” — Matt Walsh

4) “The questions asked in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. And you look at the questions—Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain? Ben Carson, can you do math? John Kasich, will you insult two people over here? Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign? Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen? How about talking about the substantive issues? And Carl, I’m not finished yet. The contrast with the Democratic debate, where every thought and question from the media was, which of you is more handsome and why?” – Ted Cruz had the best moment in any debate so far when he slammed the moderators

3) “Deciding who is eligible to complain about microaggressions is itself an act by which the majority imposes its will, and it is felt as alienating by the minorities who are effectively told that they don’t have the same right to ask for decent treatment as other groups.” — Megan McArdle

2) “If gun free zones save lives, why doesn’t Obama just declare Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan one big gun free zone?” — Wayne LaPierre

1) “We are not a nation of immigrants. We are a nation of citizens.” – Mark Levin

Happy White Privilege Everyone! 🙂

Now the irony Quote (From Politico)

Among the “legacies” Obama will be traveling on Air Force One to every corner of the globe to promote will be “progress against the Islamic State and significant global movement on climate change.”

Obama has asked aides to set a busy international travel schedule for him in his final year, with “half a dozen” trips already in the works and more potentially coming together. The travel will be aimed at cementing a foreign policy legacy he hopes will include the Trans-Pacific Partnership, increased attention to Asia, an opening of Latin America, progress against the Islamic State and significant global movement on climate change.

The only continents the White House is ruling out as presidential destinations are Australia and Antarctica

Why does he not hate Australia? 🙂
He’s going to go around the world and tell them how great he is, and they’ll be just as glad he’s come and gone as we will be in January 2017.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

 

The Best and Worst of 2015

Derek Hunter: As far as years go, 2015 certainly was one of them. The news was not wanting for content, and we columnists were not wanting for material. It was a year of tragedies and triumphs bookended by terrorist attacks in Paris. A reality TV star became the leading candidate of a major political party, “Star Wars” returned, and I got married. Yep, 2015 was quite a year.

I had a health scare that resulted in a pacemaker and a different view on mortality just months after my Dad died.

Not the best of times by far.

Politics:

The Best

Donald Trump. For all his problems, and they are legion, and the bluster, and it is constant, he’s done more than anyone in recent years to get people to pay attention to politics and just how corrupt the media and the Democrats have become. He’s been battering the media since the start, slamming his opponents since and changing how politics is done.

While, I’m still not a full on Trump guy I do like that he makes the Left and the RINOs crazy and just doesn’t give a damn. That really shakes them up.

Trump has been holding a clinic on how to run against Democrats and the media since his announcement. Aside from momentary flashes, none of the rest of the field appears to have learned a thing.

Because they are all stuck in their ways. They can’t see doing it any other way. Especially, Democrats, they have one playbook and they go to it every nanosecond of every day.

Expect all out nuclear war again on the Republicans. No atom will be lest un-nuked, no ethic or moral will not be cr0ssed in the quest for the Coronation of King Barack’s successor Queen Hillary.

The Republican RINOs are just plain lost.

If Trump is the nominee, Democrats may well win, but they will have been so battered and bruised they’d be hard-pressed to govern with any effectiveness. If he isn’t the nominee, whoever is will have learned how to be locked in a box with a rabid spider monkey and survive. The eventual nominee, whoever it ends up being, will be a much more devastating candidate thanks to Trump’s entry into the race.

The Media is still setting up the Coronation of Queen Hillary I like they have for 4 years now. I doubt they are going to change.

But maybe, just maybe, the sleeping stupid will recognize it for what it is.

That,and just maybe, the Republicans will actually run a campaign to WIN this time. Maybe.

 

The Worst

As awful as she is, Hillary Clinton is not the worst person on the national political stage. Until he leaves office, Barack Obama’s head wears the crown.

In a post-9/11, post-Paris, post-San Bernardino world, the president of the United States managed to go 12 months in which he used the words “radical Islamic terrorism” only to chastise others for saying them.

Well, you’re talking about his friends and mentors, the Muslims. They can’t be evil. That’s like Lule finding out Darth Vader is his Father…. 🙂

The economy continues to falter, our enemies are on the march, and the president has improved his short-game. The Obama presidency is a hilarious joke, but sadly it’s not the funny kind of joke.

But the Democrats continue to self-delude themselves that everything is awesome and we just need to get rid of those naybobs negativity.

One more year…

11 Months+ a few days. Don’t make it any longer than it has to be. Though if Queen Hillary wins we’re all doomed and you might as well close up shop and move to Fiji because it’s over.

Lie Of The Year

The “winner” of this category is obvious, which is why it hasn’t won any of these “awards” from the mainstream media: Hillary Clinton’s ever-evolving claims about classified material on her secret, unsecured email server.

Though I think her saying that the Benghazi families who have been ripping her for years about her You Tube cause of the incident are now lying because she never said it was pretty close.

“What Difference Does it Make?”

Her original statement at her press conference at the UN, was, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” High-stakes divorce settlements are less carefully worded.

Note how she specifically said she didn’t send any classified material, and how there “is” nothing classified on her server. She’d wiped it by then, though not thoroughly, so, in using present tense, she was telling her version of the truth.

After that original statement, Hillary’s story “evolved” at least two more times to she never “sent or received anything marked classified at the time.”

After that lie the media lost interest. Why wouldn’t they? Their candidate is ensnared in an FBI investigation that, were it anyone else, already would have led to an indictment and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees by now.

But we aren’t named Clinton; we haven’t been selling, or at least renting, our positions for sums of money that rival the worth of third-world economies, and a president of her party still controls the prosecutors.

No, we’re civilians, bound by truth, and she’s Hillary, utterly unburdened by such trivialities.

As we wind up 2015, I think we’ve dwelled enough on politics. So a few notes on a couple of other things.

Sports

The year started with a great Super Bowl. What a game! But it will be remembered as the game that gave us Deflategate. Tom Brady won – everything. He continues to live a charmed life, and good for him. Unless you bet against him.

And the Seahawks created a blunder for the ages that will be talked about until Liberals outlaw football altogether sometime later in the Century.

 

The Super Bowl was the highlight of the year for New England sports fans, but the rest of the world had to suffer until the World Series. After decades of miserable losing, New England (particularly in Boston) started winning. And their fans, both in baseball and football, became even more miserable to be around during a game. And I say that as someone with many friends who fit this description.

But the highlight of the year was the World Series.

The Kansas City Royals are a lot of fun to watch. They scrap and scrape together runs in a way no other team does.

Arizona Cardinals anyone? Anyone?? 🙂

Movies

I love “Star Wars,” saw it three times the weekend it opened. But it doesn’t win for movie of the year with me. There were a lot of great “art house” movies, and I’m sure one with $48 in box office receipts will win the Oscar. But “The Martian” was the most enjoyable movie of 2015. If you haven’t seen it yet, do yourself a favor. Even if you don’t care for Matt Damon (and I wouldn’t blame you), you’ll enjoy this movie.

I love “Star Wars” but I still think either Jurassic World or Avengers 2. I never saw “The Martian”.

Television

“The Walking Dead” remains TV’s best drama.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

The zombie aspect might turn your off, but it’s much more than that. Moreover, it’s a show that generates true suspense, in which no one knows what’s going to happen from week to week and no character, no matter who they are, is safe.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

If you’re a comic book nerd, or if you don’t mind super hero movies, might I also suggest checking out “Jessica Jones” on Netflix. It’s a surprisingly good series with humor, action and a great anti-hero. And, unlike “The Walking Dead,” you can binge-watch it over a weekend.

Haven’t got around to it yet. And that shows you how technology has changed so much.

I’m not sad to see 2015 go, though it does seem like it went fast. With 2016 being an election year, it will fly by as well. While I work and play in the first half of this column, life happens in the rest. Hope you had a great 2015, and I hope you have as much fun as possible in 2016. 

Here’s to 2016. The Hope of the future of our Country rests on your shoulders.

No pressure. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Star Wars Matters
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Bend Over, Here Comes ObamaClaus

KING Barack Hussein Obama…

And he’s going to make it with your taxes. So the tax that’s a penalty that actually a tax is now going to raise your taxes to pay for the penalty that is a tax. Got it.

Obamacare is killing the heath insurance industry, but help for health insurers is on the way – and it will be coming out the pockets of American taxpayers via higher insurance rates and a federal bailout.

When the government says, “Explore other sources of funding” and “working with Congress on the necessary funding,” it’s time to hide your wallet and get ready to study a few more pages of tax code.

As MRCTV reported Thursday, United Healthcare lost $425 million on its policies sold via the Obamacare exchanges, and they might back out of the exchanges all together after 2016. And United Healthcare isn’t alone. U.S. insurers had to absorb nearly $2.9 billion in unexpected medical expenses from their customers in Obamacare’s exchanges in 2014, according to new data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The Milwaukee Sentinel Journal reports that some of the deficit will be made up with higher premiums, much higher premiums.

And Obama and Company will blame it on “corporate greed” not a fatally flawed partial socialized medicine designed to fail.

Many insurers have requested premium increases of 20% to 40% for next year. In August, Blue Cross Blue Shield secured approval in Tennessee for a 36.3% price hike, while Oregon OK’d a 25.6% increase for Moda Health Plan.

Even these premium increases are mild compared with what’s coming when the risk corridor provision and other stopgaps expire.

A recent University of Minnesota study found that after 2016, the cheapest plans would experience some of the most dramatic premium increases. Families who purchased “bronze” plans on the exchanges could see 45% increases. Some unlucky individuals could see their premiums shoot up 96%.

“Our data still indicate that — for at least the next decade — premiums will increase faster than they did in the years before the Affordable Care Act’s implementation,” cautioned one of the study’s authors. “Federal subsidies for ACA plans won’t be able to keep up.”

But, the federal government is going to try make the subsidies keep up. Pres. Obama’s Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) is promising insurance companies that taxpayers will help them out.

After the United Healthcare announcement on Thursday, HHS issued a letter to insurance companies recognizing the 2014 shortfalls and declaring that the U.S. Government needs to make good:

 In the event of a shortfall for the 2016 program year, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will explore other sources of funding for risk corridors payments, subject to the availability of appropriations. This includes working with Congress on the necessary funding for outstanding risk corridors payments

Risk corridors were created by the Obamacare bill.  The corridors are meant to redistribute money (sound familiar?) from insurance companies who make a bigger profit from exchange plans than expected and give to companies who lost money on the exchange plans.

Yeah, it’s called redistribution. Socialism…

The problem with the risk corridor in 2014 was that too many companies lost money – so, there wasn’t enough money to cover everyone’s losses.  HHS is promising a bailout, or in HHS language, it will work with Congress to get more money for the risk corridors in order to cut insurance companies losses. 

Robert Laszewski, president of consultancy Health Policy and Strategy Associates in Virginia, told CNBC:

“‘The Obamacare business model doesn’t work,’ ‘Obamacare has got to be retooled.’ Laszewski cited the fact that insurers overall still are losing money selling exchange plans in the second year of Obamacare, and that as a result many of them are raising prices, which could in turn lead to current and prospective customers taking a pass on further coverage.” 

According to Nathan Nascimento, Senior Policy Advisor for Freedom Partners:

“We already knew that this Administration has no problem with putting special interests ahead of Americans’ health care – but yet another bailout for insurance companies on the backs of taxpayers only throws more good money after bad. Washington’s flawed one-size-fits-all approach to health care has failed, leading to plan cancelations, skyrocketing premium and out-of-pocket costs, and instability for American families and business. The solution is to get government out of the way – not dig the hole even deeper.”

Supporters of Obamacare are in denial. Much higher heath insurance premiums, insurance company losses needing a federal bailout, and news that almost half of the state-run Obamacare exchanges  have bitten the dust, add up to one inconvenient fact: Obamacare is a failure.  

Was never meant to be anything else.

But the supporters have no choice but to be in denial. They have wanted Socialized Medicine for 100 years and it’s failing so they have hide that from everyone, including themselves.

Sadly, it won’t be the politicians who forced the program down the American people’s throats who will be reaching into their pockets to pay for that failure.  It will be the rest of us, average American families, our children, and our grandchildren paying for this unmitigated disaster. 

Get ready to dig deep for failure. Also, get ready for the spin that will not make it the Liberals fault.

After all, they are always right and always have the best of intentions.

Welcome to the Road to Hell. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

 

 

You Don’t Need to Know

In a call with senior Obama administration officials Tuesday evening, several governors demanded they be given access to information about Syrian refugees about to be resettled by the federal government in their states. Top White House officials refused.

The Agenda is The Agenda. You are not allowed to change that.

It’s not like Obama cares if you disagree with his Agenda.

It’s on a need to know basis, and since you are not of “the body” you don’t need to know.

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Over a dozen governors from both parties joined the conference call, which was initiated by the White House after 27 governors vowed not to cooperate with further resettlement of Syrian refugees in their states. The outrage among governors came after European officials revealed that one of the Paris attackers may have entered Europe in October through the refugee process using a fake Syrian passport. (The details of the attacker’s travels are still murky.)

The administration officials on the call included White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, State Department official Simon Henshaw, FBI official John Giacalone, and the deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center John Mulligan.

On the call several Republican governors and two Democrats — New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan and California’s Jerry Brown — repeatedly pressed administration officials to share more information about Syrian refugees entering the United States. The governors wanted notifications whenever refugees were resettled in their states, as well as access to classified information collected when the refugees were vetted.

“There was a real sense of frustration from all the governors that there is just a complete lack of transparency and communication coming from the federal government,” said one GOP state official who was on the call.

The administration officials, led by McDonough, assured the governors that the vetting process was thorough and that the risks of admitting Syrian refugees could be properly managed. He added that the federal government saw no reason to alter the current method of processing refugees.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting “it needs to stop.”

“Apparently they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America,” Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they’re tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for the Islamic State group. He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn’t make good decisions “based on hysteria” or exaggerated risk.

“We are not well served when in response to a terrorist attack we descend into fear and panic,” the president said. (Townhall)

The Agenda is The Agenda. My Reality is the one one. Anything else is just stupid and not worth my time. So shut the f*ck up and do as you’re told!!

Florida governor Rick Scott asked McDonough point blank if states could opt out of accepting refugees from Syria. McDonough said no, the GOP state official said.

In a readout of the call Tuesday night, the White House said that several governors “expressed their appreciation for the opportunity to better understand the process and have their issues addressed.” The White House noted that “others encouraged further communication” from the administration about the resettlement of refugees. 

In other words, they can go fuck themselves. I’m going to do it anyways.

“I understand why Americans have been particularly affected,” he said.

I just don’t care.

Hassan, one of two Democrats to challenge the administration on the call, had already come out in favor of halting the flow of Syrian refugees to the United States. She expressed anger that state officials aren’t notified when Syrian refugees are resettled in their territory.

Brown said he favored continuing to admit Syrian refugees but wanted the federal government to hand over information that would allow states to keep track of them, the GOP state official said.

McDonough responded to Brown that there was currently no process in place to give states such information and the administration saw no reason to change the status quo. The non-governmental organizations that help resettle the refugees would have such information.

Brown countered by noting that state law enforcement agencies have active investigations into suspected radicals and that information about incoming Syrian refugees could help maintain their awareness about potential radicalization. He suggested the U.S. had to adjust the way it operates in light of the Paris attacks.

McDonough reiterated his confidence in the current process. While promising to consider what Brown and other senators had said, he emphasized that the administration had no plans to increase information sharing on refugees with states as of now.

Top GOP senators echoed the concerns of governors Tuesday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr joined House Speaker Paul Ryan’s call for a “pause” in the flow of Syrian refugees, which is intended to include 10,000 people by 2016. McConnell said “the ability to vet people coming from that part of the world is really quite limited.”

Democratic senators are split on the issue. Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein said Tuesday there may be a need for a pause in accepting Syrian refugees but they both wanted to hear more from the administration about the issue. Sen. Dick Durbin said that refugees aren’t the primary source of concern. He pointed to the millions of foreign visitors who enter America each year.

“Background checks need to be redoubled in terms of refugees but if we’re talking about threats to the United States, let’s put this in perspective,” he said. “Let us not just single out the refugees as the potential source of danger in the United States.”

The White House is trying hard to engage governors and lawmakers. Top administration officials held several briefings about the issue Tuesday on Capitol Hill. But if they don’t agree to share more with state and local politicians, the opposition to accepting Syrian refugees could quickly gain ground. (Bloomberg)

And your King’s petulance will grow louder.

30 states now refuse to accept #SyrianRefugees after #ParisAttacks but State Dept. says they may have no choice.

Fundamentally, the biggest problem is that no one trusts Obama and his “Vetting process” because it’s entirely politically and ideologically driven and he doesn’t actually care what you think.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Liberty’s 800th Anniversary

Today is the 800th Anniversary of The Magna Carta.

I did my own blog about this a month ago after returning from England and seeing the exhibit itself.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/magna-carta-2015/

Mark Steyn: The most important anniversary this year falls on Monday June 15th, marking the day, eight centuries ago, when a king found himself in a muddy field on the River Thames near Windsor Castle with the great foundational document of modern liberty under his nose and awaiting his seal. Here’s what I had to say about it earlier this year:

The world has come a long way since Magna Carta, and not always for the best. A couple of years back, testifying to the House of Commons in Ottawa about Canada’s (now repealed) censorship law, I said the following:

Section 13 is at odds with this country’s entire legal inheritance, stretching back to Magna Carta. Back then, if you recall–in 1215–human rights meant that the King could be restrained by his subjects. Eight hundred years later, Canada’s pseudo-human rights apparatchiks of the commission have entirely inverted that proposition, and human rights now means that the subjects get restrained by the Crown in the cause of so-called collective rights that can be regulated only by the state.

I liked it better the old way. Real rights are like Magna Carta: restraints on state power. Too many people today understand the word “rights” to mean baubles and trinkets a gracious sovereign bestows on his subjects – “free” health care, “free” community college, “safe spaces” from anyone saying anything beastly – all of which require a massive, coercive state regulatory regime to enforce.

But, to give it its full name, Magna Carta Libertatum (my italics – I don’t think they had ’em back then) gets it the right way round. It was in some respects a happy accident. In 1215, a bunch of chippy barons were getting fed up with King John. In those days, in such circumstances, the malcontents would usually replace the sovereign with a pliable prince who’d be more attentive to their grievances. But, having no such prince to hand, the barons were forced to be more inventive, and so they wound up replacing the King with an idea, and the most important idea of all – that even the King is subject to the law.

On this 800th anniversary, that’s a lesson worth re-learning. Restraints on state power are increasingly unfashionable among the heirs to Magna Carta: in America, King Barack decides when he wakes up of a morning what clauses of ObamaCare or US immigration law he’s willing to observe or waive according to royal whim; his heir, Queen Hillary, operates on the principle that laws are for the other 300 million Americans, not her. In the birthplace of Magna Carta, a few miles from that meadow at Runnymede, David Cameron’s constabulary leans on newsagents to cough up the names and addresses of troublesome citizens who’ve committed the crime of purchasing Charlie Hebdo.

The symbolism was almost too perfect when Mr Cameron went on TV with David Letterman, and was obliged to admit that he had no idea what the words “Magna Carta” meant. Magna Carta Libertatum: The Great Charter of Liberties. I’m happy to say Mr Cameron’s Commonwealth cousins across the Atlantic in Ottawa are more on top of things: One of the modestly heartening innovations of Stephen Harper’s ministry is that, when immigrants to Canada take the oath of citizenship, they’re now given among other things a copy of Magna Carta.

Why? Because everything flows therefrom – from England’s Glorious Revolution to the US Constitution and beyond. It’s part of the reason why the English-speaking world, in contrast to Continental Europe, has managed to sustain its freedoms across the generations – at least until now. As John Robson, my old colleague from Conrad Black’s Hollinger group, puts it:

All the rights we cherish, from due process of law to elected representatives, trace back to it. It has been assailed time and again and always defended. It’s why we have rights today. But that story needs to be told again and again or it will be lost and with it our freedom.

Security of the person, property rights, religious freedom, due process… The core animating principles of modern free societies began in that muddy field in Runnymede eight centuries ago. That’s why it’s the most important anniversary of the year: when the pampered, solipsistic beneficiaries of an 800-year inheritance start to lose the habits of liberty, only darkness lies ahead. Better to re-learn the old lessons while we still can.

“Foul as it is, hell itself is made fouler by the presence of King John,” wrote Matthew Paris in the 1230s.

Someone should tell King Obama that one.

For Freedom

Forget for a moment the ever-failing economy, the implosion of our foreign policy coherence, and our virtually unilateral withdrawal in the war on terror under Barack Obama’s presidency. If liberty lovers don’t start fighting back soon, we’ll forfeit our freedom of thought and religious expression under the assault of fascist leftist activists in our culture.

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

Let’s just look at two of the many recent events that should have us very concerned. As you may have guessed, they revolve around the controversial matter of same-sex marriage. At the outset, let me say that this issue is no longer about same-sex marriage or gay rights; it is about our basic liberties.

George Orwell — ‘He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.’

First, we read via The New York Times that “Ian Reisner, one of the two gay hoteliers facing boycott calls for hosting an event for Senator Ted Cruz, who is adamantly opposed to same-sex marriage, apologized to the gay community for showing ‘poor judgment.'”

What was Reisner’s sin for which he is now openly flaying himself in faux repentance? He and his business partner allowed Sen. Cruz to participate in a “fireside chat” for about a dozen people, which was not even a fundraiser. But as soon as word got out, gay activists apparently mobilized in force through social media outlets and phone calls calling for boycotts of Reisner’s properties.

An ostensibly shocked Reisner, in an effort to stanch the bleeding represented by more than 8,200 likes on a Facebook page calling for the boycott, apologized on Facebook. “I am shaken to my bones by the e-mails, texts, postings and phone calls of the past few days. I made a terrible mistake,” wrote Reisner.

Yes, he made the unforgivable “mistake” of hosting an event for a presidential candidate who has different views on social issues than the fascist boycott organizers have — and he has himself, for that matter, seeing as he’s a prominent figure in the gay rights community, according to the Times.

Supporters of same-sex marriage, as many used to predict would happen, are not content with their recent victories on the issue. They obviously want to punish anyone who dissents for any reason — including religious and conscience reasons — and also bludgeon those (such as Reisner) who even inadvertently assist those who dissent (such as Cruz).

Next, we should consider the horrendous ordeal of Aaron and Melissa Klein, who used to own Sweet Cakes by Melissa, a bakery they built from scratch in Sandy, Oregon, in 2013. When they respectfully declined, on religious grounds, the request of two women to bake a cake for their wedding, the happy couple filed a civil complaint against them for failing to provide them equal service in a place of public accommodation. You know, live and let live — the attitude the activists and their fellow liberal foxhole buddies told us they would have if they prevailed in their quest to legalize same-sex marriage.

A group of unspecified people — real or robotic constructs of social media legerdemain — went into battle. “They got together and harassed all of our vendors,” Melissa said. The vendors, according to The Daily Signal, folded and took Sweet Cakes off their referral lists, resulting in a 65 to 70 percent reduction in the Kleins’ annual income, forcing them to close the bakery. (The Kleins have five children, and Melissa is reduced to baking a few cakes a month at home. Aaron now has a job as a garbage collector.)

But that heartless result wasn’t enough for the victors. They pursued their legal action against the Kleins with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, and last Friday, an administrative law judge with that agency recommended the Kleins be fined $135,000 for the damages caused to the happy — and now happily married — couple.

As a result – Aaron and Melissa Klein could lose everything they own — including their home in the name of “tolerance”.

When I first heard about this, my jaw literally dropped, and that takes quite a bit in this upside-down, crazy world we’ve grown to understand we now inhabit.

Aaron Klein said: “This country should be able to tolerate diverse opinions. I never once have said that my fight is (to) stop what they call equality.”

Sorry, Aaron, and I do mean I am profoundly sorry for the injustice that has been imposed on you, but these activists are not willing to tolerate diverse opinions. They don’t care that you are not proactively trying to oppose their march for whatever it is they’re marching for. It appears that the true quest of leftist gay activists — and not just gay activists but those of many other leftist causes in this country (e.g., “climate change”) — is to wholly shut down and censor opposing opinions, whether thought or expressed, whether publicly or privately.

“The past was dead, the future was unimaginable. What certainty had he that a single human creature now living was on his side? And what way of knowing that the dominion of the Party would not endure for ever? Like an answer, the three slogans on the white face of the Ministry of Truth came back to him:

WAR IS PEACE  (Even a “Culture” or “Social” War)

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH IS WATCHING YOU!

I repeat: The real fight on these types of issues in this nation is no longer about the underlying “rights” involved. It concerns the appalling mission of activists to marshal the coercive power of government and of commercial blackmail to compel other people to agree (and publicly say they agree) with their opinions on issues they deem important.

DO AS WE SAY, THINK AS WE SAY, OR ELSE!

Isn’t it ironic that the people who are pushing for these rights always wave banners of tolerance, love, compassion and liberty? More than ironic, it’s outrageous. And fewer and fewer people of principle are standing up to this tyrannical bullying because, understandably, they don’t want to put themselves in the crosshairs of this gestapo. But history tells us the logical conclusion of this story. Some socially liberal Republicans naively believe that this is only about the social issues themselves, but it’s about liberty.

God help us. (David Limbaugh)

It’s Baltimore. It’s Ferguson.Stand around and let the crazies destroy and get it out of their system, they’ll take your freedom with them.

When they are done taking your freedom of religion and conscience from you, what will they take next??

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone:
From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings !–George Orwell

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Thou Shalt Not…

Do not Violate the Sanctimony of The Politically Correct Leftist Activist or else they will find a judge who crush you for your impudence, slave.

This, by the way, is the “pro-choice”, “tolerance”, “diversity”, “fair”, “compassionate” Left. 🙂

Owners of a family farm in Schaghticoke, New York, are being fined $13,000 for refusing to allow a gay wedding ceremony to take place on their property in 2012, just one year after the state legalized same-sex nuptials.

Cynthia and Robert Gifford, owners of Liberty Ridge Farm, a family-friendly farm and special events venue, told Jennifer McCarthy and Melisa Erwin, a lesbian couple from Newark, New Jersey, that they were welcome to hold their reception on the property, but not the actual wedding ceremony, according to Religion News Service.

The Giffords live on the premises and these ceremonies are typically conducted on the first floor of their home or on the nearby property. Considering that they are Christians and consider marriage to be confined to relationships involving one man and one woman, the two weren’t comfortable hosting McCathy and Erwin’s nuptials.

An attorney for the couple told Religion News Service that the two have both employed gay staffers and hosted events for same-sex couples in the past, but that a gay wedding ceremony in their home was too close for comfort.

McCarthy and Erwin weren’t happy with this rejection, so they took their complaint to the New York’s Division of Human Rights, claiming that they were discriminated against as a result of their sexual orientation.

Yeah, like it was the only wedding chapel type farm in all of North America. Boo-Hoo. Gee, ever heard of talking your money somewhere else, instead of ringing your Lawyer on speed dial!

A judge subsequently ruled in their favor in the case New York State Division of Human Rights v. Liberty Ridge Farm, rejecting the Giffords’ argument that the family owns a private business that is legally permitted to issue such refusals.

Judge Migdalia Pares, who argued that the fact that the owners live on the premises does not mean that the business is private in nature, ruled that Liberty Ridge Farm is a public accommodation as it rents its space and regularly collects fees from the public.

So their house is a public accommodation? Fascinating…

As a result, the judge found that the couple must abide by anti-discrimination regulations under New York’s Human Rights Law, ruling that the Giffords must pay a $10,000 fine and give an additional $1,500 each to McCarthy and Erwin, Religion News Service reported.

“No one should have the happiest time of their life marred by discrimination,” McCarthy, who was represented alongside her wife by the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement, according to the New York Law Journal. “We hope this decision will protect all New Yorkers from having to go through the hurt that we experienced.”

Or, they could have just been mature and “tolerant” and gone somewhere else. But no, the little Dominatrix’s wanted you to bow down to them or else!

They wanted to be offended so they could get their Speed Dial Lawyers and Leftist Agenda Judges out to summarily crush the infidels who dared to defy them!

But attorney James Trainor of Cutler, Trainor & Cutler, who represented the Giffords, said that the recent Hobby Lobby Supreme Court decision that barred the government from forcing small companies with religious objections to provide controversial birth control devices for employees should have been considered in this case.

“The judge and commissioner each had the opportunity to reconsider the Giffords’ religious rights after the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that businesses can exercise the religious rights of their owners in Hobby Lobby decision of June 30, yet failed to do so,” Trainor told the New York Law Journal.

It is currently unclear whether the Giffords will continue a legal battle against the ruling.

A phone message left for the Giffords by TheBlaze Thursday was not immediately returned. (The Blaze)

Unfortunately, New York’s Human Right’s law (Executive Law, art. 15) creates special privileges based on sexual orientation that trump the rights of business owners. Because the Giffords’ family farm is open to the public for business, New York classifies it as a “public accommodation” and then mandates that it not “discriminate” on the basis of sexual orientation.

So they have special rights. They are More “equal” than you. Now that’s fair.

Man, I need to see if I can find my college roommates, The Gay Wiccan and The Satanist, we need a New York Holiday. 🙂

Of course the Giffords were not engaging in any insidious discrimination—they were acting on their belief about the nature of marriage. They do not object to gay or lesbian customers attending the fall festivals, or going berry picking, or doing any of the other activities that the farm facilitates. The Giffords’ only objection is to being forced to abide by the government’s views on sexuality and host a same-sex wedding. The Human Rights Commission has now declared this historic belief about marriage to be “discrimination.”

The Giffords must pay a $1,500 mental anguish fine to each of the women and pay $10,000 in civil damages penalty to New York State. If they can’t pay in 60 days, a nine percent interest rate will be added to that total. Like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Giffords must also institute anti-discrimination re-education classes and procedures for their staff.

The question before all citizens is whether this law and this fine are just. Should the government be able to force family businesses to betray their consciences and participate in ceremonies that violate their beliefs? Should the government be in the business of “rehabilitating” consciences or “re-educating” its citizens to change their moral beliefs about the definition of marriage?

Government should not create special legal privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Instead, government should protect the rights of Americans and the associations they form to act in the public square in accordance with their beliefs. The Giffords’ case illustrates the growing conflict between religious liberty rights and laws that grant special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In a nation founded on limited government and religious freedom, government should not attempt to coerce any citizen, association, or business into celebrating same-sex relationships.

But we’re talking about the Sanctimony and the Outrage of the Politically Correct Thought Police Leftists who want to force you, in the name of “fairness”, “tolerance” and “diversity” to bow down and submit to them like a good submissive slave does to their Masters and Mistresses.

Infidels!!!

What could possibly be wrong with that? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

Hoist By Their Own Petard

More ObamaCare mess.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a federal regulations that implemented subsidies that are vital to President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul, in direct conflict with another ruling on the issue handed down earlier on Tuesday.

A three-judge panel unanimously said the law was ambiguous, and that it would defer to the IRS’s determination that subsidies could go to individuals who purchased health insurance on both federal and state-run exchanges.

The second court was obviously more liberal agenda driven since the Law does state the Feds are excluded from the exchanges. This was a political attempt, that partially failed, to get Republican Governors to cave-in and they didn’t. Now the Agenda has a new problem.

The ACA (ObamaCare) say the subsidies shall be available to persons who purchase health insurance in an exchange “established by the state.” But 34 states have chosen not to establish exchanges.

Nothing a few Agenda-driven judges can’t confuse! 🙂

A separate panel from a federal appeals court in Washington on Tuesday morning said the IRS could not offer premium tax credits to people who purchase insurance through the federal insurance marketplace that serves most of the 8 million consumers who have signed up for private coverage for 2014.

Analysts estimate that as many as 5 million people could be affected if subsidies disappear from the federal marketplace, which serves 36 states through the website HealthCare.gov.

The subsidies are available to people with annual incomes of up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $94,200 for a family of four.

The subsidies were the bribes to get people in the door of ObamaCare in the first place, as well as the cudgel against Republicans.

Did anyone mention cost? 🙂

Democrats in Congress passed a law that explicitly limited Obamacare subsidy eligibility to consumers who purchased plans on state-level exchanges. They did so in order to coerce and bribe states into setting up their own marketplaces under the law. (Another attempt at coercion, mandatory Medicaid expansion, has been struck down 7-2 by the Supreme Court). Given the controversial law’s unpopularity, a majority of states declined to establish exchanges, forcing the federal government to create the infamous federal version — with Healthcare.gov as its centerpiece. Subsequent New York Times reporting indicated that HHS never expected to have to set up any exchange at all, let alone for 36 states. That’s because they were laboring under the belief that the law’s sticks and carrots would compel every state to implement marketplaces on their own. Many did not, and the plain text of the law clearly states that anyone buying coverage through any system other than a state-based exchange would not be eligible to receive generous taxpayer subsidies, which relieve much of the heavy cost burden for many consumers (even with the subsidies, many enrollees say they’re struggling to pay).
Faced with this predicament, the IRS decided that Congress’ true intent was for all exchange consumers to have a shot at subsidies if they were financially eligible, so it simply decreed it to be so in the form of a regulation that effectively rewrote a major provision the law. Today, the Court ruled that the law says what it says, and that the IRS overstepped. This decision, at least for now, plunges Obamacare into chaos — and furious Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. When you ram through a lengthy, hastily slapped-together, unpopular law without reading it, unintended consequences sometimes arise. And this one’s a biggie. Then again, as Will notes in his piece, a strong case can be made that this passage of the law was very much crafted intentionally, even if today’s fallout was ‘never supposed to happen.’ Congress debated how to phrase the subsidy eligibility language, and ended up passing the Senate’s version — a move made necessary by the anti-Obamacare election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. A previous House version’s verbiage had been much more encompassing. But it didn’t pass. Obamacare did. If it stands, this ruling not only strips subsidy eligibility from many Americans (which could/will touch off a breathtaking adverse selection death spiral), it liberates tens of millions from the unpopular individual mandate tax. Why? (Guy Benson)

Time for King Fiat and His Executive Order Super Glue? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

So Israel should stop being so mean to the Palestinians… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

White Devils

The White Devils are evil and must be collared and chained because given half a second they will put black and minorities back on plantations and “disenfranchise” them.

Damn! Them Crackers!

That’s effectively what the race baiters are saying about the Voting Rights Act decision by the Supreme Court.

You must have “black” districts or “hispanic” districts just to be “fair”. But if you want to have a “white” district, you’re a racist! 🙂

So you must segregate to be “fair”.

And the Liberals in government must have a veto power on Voting decisions in racist states like Arizona, and South Carolina.

It must always be the Mid-1960s. Time can never move on. They must fight the good fight against the White Devils and The Uncle Toms….

Meet Ryan Patrick Winkler. He’s a 37-year-old liberal Minnesota state legislator with a B.A. in history from Harvard University and a J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School. He’s also a coward, a bigot, a liar, and a textbook example of plantation progressivism. 

On Tuesday, Winkler took to Twitter to rant about the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down an onerous section of the Voting Rights Act. The 5-4 ruling overturned an unconstitutional requirement that states win federal preclearance approval of any changes to their election laws and procedures. Winkler fumed: “VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.”

This Ivy League-trained public official and attorney relied on smug bigotry to make his case against a Supreme Court justice who happens to be black. “Uncle Thomas” wasn’t a typo. Denigration was the goal, not an accident. It was a knowing, deliberate smear.

After being called out by conservative social media users for his cheap attack on Clarence Thomas, Winkler then revealed his true color: yellow. He deleted the tweet (captured for posterity at my Twitter curation site, twitchy.com) and pleaded ignorance. 

“I did not understand ‘Uncle Tom’ as a racist term, and there seems to be some debate about it. I do apologize for it, however,” he sniveled. “I didn’t think it was offensive to suggest that Justice Thomas should be even more concerned about racial discrimination than colleagues,” he protested.

Holding a black man to a different intellectual standard based on his skin color. Accusing a non-white conservative of collectivist race traitorism. Employing one of the most infamous, overused epithets against minority conservatives in the Democratic lexicon. “Apologizing,” but disclaiming responsibility. Sorry . . . that he got caught. 

Just another day at the left-wing racist office.

Rabid liberal elitists expect and demand that we swallow their left-wing political orthodoxy whole and never question it. When we don’t yield, their racist and sexist diatribes against us are unmatched. My IQ, free will, skin color, eye shape, name, authenticity, and integrity have been routinely ridiculed or questioned for more than two decades because I happen to be an unapologetic brown female free-market conservative. My Twitter account biography jokingly includes the moniker “Oriental Auntie-Tom” — just one of thousands of slurs hurled at me by libs allergic to diversity of thought — for a reason. It’s a way to hold up an unflinching mirror at the holier-than-thou NoH8 haters and laugh. 

We conservatives “of color” are way past anger about the Uncle Tom/Aunt Tomasina attacks. We’re reviled by the left for our “betrayal” of our supposed tribes — accused of being Uncle Toms, Aunt Tomasinas, House Niggas, puppets of the White Man, Oreos, Sambos, lawn jockeys, coconuts, bananas, sellouts, and whores. This is how the left’s racial and ethnic tribalists have always rolled. But their insults are not bullets. They are badges of honor. The Uncle Tom card has been played out. 

Of course Winkler didn’t think it was offensive. Smarty-pants liberal racists never think they’re being racist. In their own sanctimonious minds, progressives of pallor can never be guilty of bigotry toward minority conservatives. Ignorance is strength. Slurs are compliments. Intolerance is tolerance. 

And when all else fails, left-wing prejudice is always just a well-intended joke. (PBS commentator Julianne Malveaux’s death wish for Justice Thomas set the standard: “I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease. . . . He is an absolutely reprehensible person.”) 

Back in her day, before the advent of democratizing social media, Malveaux and her elitist PBS friends could get away with such vile bile. But liberal crabs in the bucket, viciously trying to drag dissenters “of color” down, can no longer engage in hit-and-run with impunity. Conservatives on Twitter have changed the dynamic in an underappreciated, revolutionary way. The pushback against liberal political bigotry is bigger, stronger, and swifter than it’s ever been.

You can delete, but you cannot hide. (Michelle Malkin)

The fatuous claim that nothing significant has changed in the field of American race relations since the 1960s was expressed most perfectly yesterday by Senator Bernie Sanders. The Voting Rights Act, Sanders wrote, “is as necessary today as it was in the era of Jim Crow laws.” We wonder whether anybody genuinely believes this. Perhaps MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry does, for she went further than Sanders. “Damn,” Harris-Perry tweeted, “that citizenship thing was so great for awhile.”

Contrast this hyperbole with the Supreme Court’s actual ruling. By five votes to four, it held that, while certain states may still be required to submit changes in their voting rules for federal approval, Congress must update the data it uses to determine which are subject to its adjudication. The dramatic changes of the last 40 years, the majority concluded, have rendered the existing formula worthless. This should come as no surprise. That formula was last amended in 1972, while George Wallace was still governor of Alabama.

In making the case for reform, Chief Justice Roberts noted that

in the first decade after enactment of [Section 5] the Attorney General objected to 14.2 percent of proposed voting changes. In the last decade before reenactment, the Attorney General objected to a mere 0.16 percent.

The difference is remarkable. In 1965, Mississippi saw a gap of 63.2 percentage points between white and black voter-registration rates; by 2004, black voters were 3.8 percentage points more likely to be registered than their white counterparts. It is a similar story across the South. So successful has the Voting Rights Act been that New York University election specialist Rock Pildes recently observed that, instead of ensuring the franchise, the Justice Department now employs Section 5 primarily as a tool to ensure that minorities are well-represented in legislative bodies. For a law that was cast as a temporary emergency measure, this evolution is problematic.

Notwithstanding the peculiar claim of ABC’s Terry Moran yesterday morning that “now there is no Voting Rights Act operative in the United States,” the rest of the Voting Rights Act remains very much intact and in effect. Americans whose voting rights have been violated are still able to take to the federal courts and sue their local or state governments. The decision brings an end to the automatic and perpetual punishment of states that are guilty of crimes in decades past. It does nothing else.

Many of the Court’s critics appear to believe that the VRA serves as vital scaffolding, the even partial removal of which will prompt the United States to backslide into segregation or worse. This strikes us as nonsense. Like Boy Mulcaster complaining to Charles Ryder in Brideshead Revisited that he never got the chance to fight in the First World War, many of today’s naysayers exhibit a palpable regret that they missed the moral clarity of the 1960s. It is not the role of Congress to indulge them.

Justice Ginsburg complains that it is not the role of the Court to force a revision to the law. Perhaps not. Amending the law to reflect contemporary realities remains the right thing for Congress to do. Instead of gnashing our teeth and reliving old battles, we Americans should consider it a source of great pride that legal provisions contrived to ensure that the Jim Crow era was brought to a welcome close have finally outlived their necessity. (NRO)

So the Left will continue to CROW forever. That’s how their bread is buttered.

Showtime!

One of the few times I have agreed with Sen. McCain:

“Well my position is it is a classic Schumer grandstanding use of his subcommittee,” McCain said when asked by a reporter outside his party’s policy lunch in the Capitol about Schumer’s subcommittee hearing earlier in the day on Arizona’s 2010 immigration law, SB 1070.

Arguments are in front of the Supreme Court today. So Schumer had his There-all-racists dog-and-pony show yesterday. Political theatre at it’s most grotesque.

After all, only 2 of 11 members of Upchuck’s committee (the other being “Ticked Turbin” Dick Durbin) bothered to show up for this narcissistic nakedly political dog-and-pony show.

“I agree with [former Kansas] Sen. [Bob] Dole who once said the most dangerous place in Washington to be is between Sen. Schumer and a television camera,” McCain added. “Of course, he never consulted me or [Arizona] Sen. [Jon] Kyl,” he joked.

Speaking of “UpChuck” Schumer…How much upchuck would Upchuck chuck if  Upchuck could Chuck his upchuck. 🙂

“We have a border agent killed because of Fast and Furious. We today have guides sitting on mountaintops in Arizona as drugs are smuggled up to Phoenix and distributed throughout the country. There frustration was real and understandable.”

McCain said the solution to the problem is simple: “Secure the border.”

Mind you, I will not forgive him for the Amnesty Bill of 2007. And he knows it, which is why in 2010 he ran so far to right to save his own job.
And with our incompetent former Governor, Janet Napalitano rise to her Peter-Principle heights of incompetence and the Race-Biased DOJ run by a political hack and a Labor Department run by a Pro-Illegal Hispanic we have no chance.
“Under federal law, under the U.S. Constitution and the Arizona Constitution, you know, we have the Equal Protection Clause,” he added. “I knew those kinds of issues would be raised by those open-border folks that are against any enforcement. We’ve been sued on everything we’ve done from voting fraud — to stop voting fraud — to welfare fraud to going after illegal employers who compete illegally, immorally and have a competitive advantage over the honest employer. Doesn’t seem like no matter what we do, Mr. Chairman, we’re attacked for simply enforcing the law, trying to protect American citizens and jobs for Americans. … We simply wrote the bill to preempt those kinds of silly arguments and try to protect everybody’s rights.”-Russell Pearce, the author of SB1070 who was railroaded out of his job by the hysterical Left.
Sen. Schumer describes state immigration laws as “counterproductive and unconstitutional.”

Because after all, The Federal Government must be Supreme in all things! And they don’t needy in any uppity States asserting their own rights!
And if the Federal Government wants to ignore any law then that’s just tough sh*t for you. Buck up and suck it up!!
Your Imperial Masters have spoken!
Do you believe individual states should have the right to make their own immigration laws and protect their borders, if they believe the federal government has failed to act, or not?

Yes, states should have that right 65%  2010: 65%
No, not up to states 31  2010: 32
(Don’t know) 4  2010: 3  (Fox)
“Illegal is a crime, not a race. It doesn’t pick out any nationality. It just so happens 90 percent of those who violated our immigration laws come from across that southern border or are Hispanic.”–Russell Pearce

Durbin asked Gallardo if SB 1070 made it easier or harder for illegal immigrants to report domestic violence or abuse of their children to law enforcement.

(State Lawmaker-Democrat) Gallardo said the bill makes it harder to report abuse, because women are fearful that if they come forward, they may be separated from their children and deported.

Can you spot the Liberal Diversions?
“I’m sure it didn’t escape notice that none of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle came to this hearing. That’s not surprising. They’re absent from this hearing just like they’ve been absent from every attempt we’ve made to negotiate a comprehensive solution to our immigration problem. We need people to sit down, people on both sides of the aisle in a bi-partisan way and solve this problem. and we have been unable to find negotiating partners,” Schumer said.
It’s the Republican’s Fault!!!
If they’d only kissed our ass on Amnesty then we would not have this political dog-and-pony show!
Remember, “Bi-Partisan” in Liberal land means you do exactly what they want and there will be no partisan childishness and you won’t be to blame for not letting us do whatever we want. It’s BY-Partisan.
And the fix is in, Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the decision leaving a 4-4 split on the Court that would mean the low court and the liberals win.
But she refuses to recuse herself from ObamaCare which she also worked on.
Sickening.
MORE FUN WITH KU KLUX KLAN
An unhinged Chris Matthews on Monday excoriated Republican primary voters as racist, deriding them as the “Grand Wizard crowd.”
Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele (who is black BTW): Are you saying that we’re Ku Klux Klan?

MATTHEWS: Okay, I’m just saying, the far right party.

Mr “Tinkle up my Leg” was in rare form.
I guess he wasn’t invited to be on the Panel with Schumer and Durbin.
And the former Grand Wizard of The Klu Klux Clan, Sen. Robert Byrd (D) was dead.

The administration says the law, and Arizona’s approach of maximum enforcement, conflict with a more nuanced federal immigration policy that seeks to balance national security, law enforcement, foreign policy, human rights and the rights of law-abiding citizens and immigrants.

Obama:  The president said, “you can try to make it really tough on people who look like they, quote, unquote look like illegal immigrants. One of the things that the law says is that local officials are allow to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers — but you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.” (townhall)

But at least Attorney General Holder  and Homeland Security Secretary Napalitano have actually read it…NOT! 🙂
Supreme Court ruled in favor of Arizona on a law that allows the state to require employers to verify citizenship of job applicants, the court has shown it is not opposed to giving the states some form of control over immigration policy.
So hopefully State’s Rights wins the day.
But with the fix in, I doubt it.
CRIMINAL CASES IN THE SOUTHWEST (You, those “more secure” borders):
Eighty percent of cases filed against criminal defendants in United States Magistrate Courts in fiscal year 2011 occurred in parts of the country along the U.S. border with Mexico, according to a recent Justice Department report.Of the total 71,387 cases filed in that court system between Oct. 1, 2010 and Sept. 30, 2011, 57,310 were along the southern border, the United States Attorneys’ Annual Statistical Report for Fiscal Year 2011 states.

Arizona accounted for the highest number of criminal defendants (23,125), followed by Southern Texas (19,453), Western Texas (10,546), New Mexico (2,913) and Southern California (1,273).  Those four regions are among the top five in the country for the number of cases filed in the Magistrate Courts. (The other is Eastern Virginia, with 3,034 cases.)

Created by Congress in 1968, Magistrate Courts handle a “considerable criminal caseload,” according to the report.  Assigned by district courts, magistrate judges preside over misdemeanor trials, conduct preliminary hearings, and enter rulings or recommended dispositions on pretrial motions.

Regions along the southwest border also accounted for the most criminal cases handled by U.S. Attorneys in FY2011.  Of all criminal cases filed in U.S. District Courts, 43.3 percent occurred in the four border states – Western Texas (7,271), Arizona (7,033), Southern Texas (6,797), Southern California (5,689) and New Mexico (3,044).

Overall, U.S. Attorneys’ offices dealt with 163,908 criminal matters during FY2011.

Immigration accounted for 41.8 percent of all criminal cases – the highest number by program category. Next came drug-related offenses, at 22.1 percent, followed by violent crime, 17.2 percent.

Gee, Mexican Drug Gangs anyone?

Although the most recent report does not mention illegal immigration, the report for FY2010 does.

“Illegal immigration provides the initial foothold with which criminal elements, including organized crime syndicates, use to engage in a myriad of illicit activities ranging from immigration document fraud and migrant smuggling to human trafficking,” the earlier report states.

“Violence along the border of the United States and Mexico has increased dramatically during recent years,” it adds. “The violence associated with Mexican drug trafficking organizations pose[s] a serious problem for law enforcement.” (CNS)

But, don’t worry, it’s more secure than it has ever been and they have made ‘significant’ progress! 🙂

THE CHURCH OF ME

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

And Church of My God is ME has come again:

“The fact is that since most of you were born, tuition and fees at America’s colleges have more than doubled,” Obama said. “And that forces students like you to take out a lot more loans, there are fewer grants, you rack up more debt. Can I get an ‘amen’?”

The students responded: “Amen!”

Obama continued: “The average student who borrows to pay for college now graduates with about $25,000 in student loan debt—that’s the average, some are more. Can I get an ‘amen’ for that?”

“Amen,” the students responded.

As mentioned in a previous blog, one of the main reasons for the higher tuition IS BECAUSE OF THE GOVERNMENT. Since they will pay more an more in subsidies to Colleges to “keep prices low” the incentive is to raise them to new heights because the government will just pay them anyways.
But for Obama, he want 2008 back, when he was worshiped as The Savior of Mankind and the only people stupid enough to believe that are the young Liberally-educated socialists-in-training.
So the campaign strategy is Class Warfare, Appeal to the Stupid, and then everyone else is misogynist (War on Women) or a Racist if they don’t support him.
Wow! Whatta Guy!
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay
Media Research Center
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

More Posterior Worship

More kissing up to future Democrats and social welfare recipients by Obama:

Illegal immigrants closely related to U.S. citizens would no longer have to leave the country to try to obtain legal status under a proposed change in immigration policy announced Friday by President Barack Obama’s administration.

The change, which would greatly reduce the amount of time U.S. citizens are separated from undocumented family members seeking legal status, is the latest attempt by the Obama administration to use its authority to implement some immigration reforms without congressional approval.

Some analysts also said the proposed policy change was likely an election-year ploy meant to bolster the president’s standing among Latino voters unhappy with the record numbers of immigrants deported under his administration.

The proposal, published in the Federal Register, does not require congressional action to become final.

The agency will accept public comment about the proposed change, with a goal of implementing it this year, Mayorkas said.

Here’s mine: F*UCK YOU!

But I’m just a “racist” and insensitive. 🙂

“We are proposing a process change to better serve the current law’s goal, a change that will reduce the time of separation and thereby alleviate the extreme hardship to the United States citizen,” Mayorkas said.

How about stopping them from coming here illegally in the first place. Thus alleviating the hardship all together! :0

He said the high standard for obtaining a waiver would not change. To be granted a waiver, illegal immigrants would still have to prove that their separation would harm their citizen spouses or parents.

Oh, like squishy “fair” Liberals who are kissing up to Illegals and Latinos would be so “heartless” and unfair.

The change, however, would likely spur a larger number of waiver applications because the requirement to leave the country has been a deterrent to applying, he said.

And we wouldn’t want to deter Illegal Immigration now would we…

Eli Kantor, an immigration lawyer in Beverly Hills, Calif., said he is worried that illegal immigrants without strong hardship cases might rush to apply for the waivers and then be subject to deportation if they lose.

He also fears the proposed change was politically motivated to gain support from Latinos as the presidential election heats up.

Ya Think?! 🙂

“I’m sure there are people out there who say it’s political, but family separation is real, it’s not political.”
Oh, yes it is. Everything is political to Liberals and Especially Obama.

Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington, D.C.-based immigration-enforcement group, said the proposed change would undermine laws aimed at discouraging illegal immigration by effectively nullifying the 10-year ban on returning to the U.S.

He also called the change the latest attempt by the Obama administration to weaken immigration enforcement.

Last year, the Obama administration announced policy changes to focus on deporting immigrants who commit serious crimes instead of those whose only offense is being in the country illegally.

Immigration officials are currently reviewing thousands of deportation cases and closing the files of illegal immigrants who have not committed serious crimes.

Critics say that policy is de facto amnesty.

Given that policy, Mehlman expects the government to make it easier for illegal immigrants to be approved for hardship waivers.

“In the political context of the way this administration is operating, this is just one more step in their effort to basically say we are going to disregard the fact that people violate immigration laws unless they have gone on to commit some other crime here in the United States,” Mehlman said.

MORE ASS KISSING

Documents released in a classic Friday afternoon news dump show that labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama‘s signature legislation since June 17, 2011.

By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Emperor Obama Update

Election season is here, and you might think President Obama would be going out of his way to show voters that he can be trusted with the powers of the presidency. But you would be wrong. Just a few days before Christmas, Obama served notice to all Americans that he will continue to abuse executive privilege by seeking new ways to vilify gun owners and further his anti-gun agenda.

But with this being the “Civility” anniversary of the Gifford’s shooting in Tucson I bet no one on the Left of the Leftist Media will talking about it. 🙂

“I don’t have anything new for you,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said Thursday when asked about the anniversary.

And why was the NIH involved in gun issues to begin with??
Congress placed a provision in the $1 trillion omnibus spending bill for 2012 designed to bar the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from using any of its $30.7 billion taxpayer funds to “advocate or promote gun control.” However, upon signing the bill into law, President Obama issued a caveat of his own:

I have advised Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.

In other words: “Congress may pass laws, but I decide which of its laws are constitutional and which I can simply choose to ignore.”

Of course, the Constitution doesn’t actually give the president this power, but Obama won’t allow a little thing like the U.S. Constitution get in his way. And in the present case, Congress is right to try to prevent him from using a federal health agency, not to mention our tax dollars, as a weapon in his ongoing war against the Second Amendment. As The Washington Times reports, NIH has wasted over $5 million since 2002 producing deceptive studies aimed at furthering gun control — including one study that tried “to prove that a home without firearms was essential to a child’s safety and well-being.”

Even more importantly, Congress knows that there is no scheme too radical, or dangerous, for the Obama administration when it comes to using federal agencies to push its anti-gun agenda.

Last month, email exchanges surfaced between employees at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) that show the administration helped illegally transfer guns to violent Mexican drug cartels in order to manufacture a case for gun registration. Now gun dealers in four Southwest border states must abide by a new gun registration requirement, courtesy of BATFE, that forces them to register the sales of any law-abiding American who purchases more than one semi-automatic rifle within five business days.

Congress never passed any law like this. Rather, Obama’s BATFE orchestrated the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal to give cause for its unconstitutional gun-control edict. Given this, how hard is it to envision the Obama administration issuing a phony “health” study that maligns gun owners?

Obama may not have a majority in Congress, or the will of the people, behind his anti-gun agenda. But that isn’t stopping his administration from finding deceitful ways to evade Congress and build public support for gun bans, gun registration and other regulations designed to weaken and destroy our Second Amendment rights.

But first we have shooting anniversary to celebrate. That’ll distract them…

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

What is Old is New Again

That 1%er Update:

While millions of Americans saw their incomes decrease, their job opportunities dissipate and their home values drop as the economy dipped, the 535 men and women they elected to represent them in the U.S. Congress were not only shielded from the economic downturn but gained during it.

The average American’s net worth has dropped 8 percent during the past six years, while members of Congress got, on average, 15 percent richer, according to a New York Times analysis of financial disclosure. The median net worth of members of Congress is about $913,000, compared with about $100,000 for the country at large, the Times’ analysis found.

This wealth disparity between lawmakers and the people they represent seems to be continually growing . Nearly half of Congress — 249 members — are millionaires, while only 5 percent of American households can make the same claim .

But THEY (the 5%) are the 1%ers who are so evil and greedy! Not 1/2 of Congress! 🙂

To win a House seat, candidates spent an average of $1.4 million in 2010, four times as much as was spent in 1976, according to the Federal Election Commission. Winning a Senate seat is nearly 10 times as expensive, with the average successful Senate campaign shelling out nearly $10 million in 2010.

And there is no quid pro quo going on with the people who fund them! 🙂

And ’tis the Season for New Laws: Mostly from the Granola State, California, (“What isn’t fruits & nuts is flakes”) and boy has it ever been…

California also became the first state in the nation to require a prescription for obtaining any drug containing dextromethorphan, an ingredient found in many popular over-the-counter cough suppressants, including Robitussin, NyQuil and Dimetapp.

Voter identification continued to be a hot topic for legislators in 2011. Four states — Kansas, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Texas — approved laws requiring voters to present photo identification before casting ballots.

A fifth state, South Carolina, had passed its own voter-identification law, but it was overturned Dec. 23 by the Justice Department. South Carolina is required to submit revisions in voting procedures for federal clearance as a state with a history of discrimination at the ballot box, but it can appeal Justice’s ruling in federal court.

Yeah, the Justice Department doesn’t want you to discriminate against Illegals. They are future Democrats!!

Supporters say the laws are needed to combat voter fraud, but the effort has touched off an outcry among civil rights groups, which contend that the laws are aimed at suppressing minority-voter participation. The NAACP recently launched a campaign, Stand for Freedom, to fight voter-identification measures.

Naturally, they are going to play the Race Card. What else would they play…

Employers will be required to use E-Verify to determine the eligibility of their employees starting Jan. 1 in four states — Louisiana, Tennessee, South Carolina and Georgia. In California, however, legislators bucked the trend by prohibiting any state or local government from requiring employers to use the E-Verify program unless required by federal law or as a condition of receiving federal funds.

In education, California approved two hotly debated laws slated to take effect on New Year’s Day. The California Dream Act expands eligibility for institutional grants and fee waivers to students who are in the country illegally at the state’s university systems and community colleges.

Everyone who’s illegal move to California! 🙂

To qualify, students must attend for at least three years and graduate from a California high school and prove that they are applying for legalized immigration status. The students must also meet certain academic standards.

California also becomes the first state to mandate the teaching of gay history. A new law requires schools to include in the public-school curriculum the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans, along with disabled persons and others. The statute, which has no age limit, also bans instructional material that discriminates against those groups.

Students taking the SAT in California caught a break with a law requiring the sponsors of standardized tests to accept “alternative methods” of identification for students without a driver’s license or other traditional identification.

Yeah, we wouldn’t want to discriminate against illegal aliens who can’t prove there here illegally. 🙂

Worth Watching (on Free Speech):

In North Carolina this week, a young man named Mostafa Kamel Hendi hit upon a plan to make ends meet in this rotten economy: He decided to knock over a local gold store. Tape shows this determined and enterprising flower of American youth strolling into the store, hoodie over his head, and then gesturing to the clerk, Derek Mothershead, to shove some money in a plastic bag.

Mothershead, however, not being a member of the liberal effete class who believe that all robbery is a noble redistributionist impulse, had an unexpected reaction. He handed Hendi some money — and then, as Hendi bent to put the money in the bag, Mothershead clocked him with a tremendous left. Hendi went down, bleeding profusely. “There was just an opportunity there where I thought that I could actually do something and justice could be served,” said Mothershead, “and I thought that’s what needed to be done.” This tough Mother then forced Hendi to clean up his own blood with paper towels and cleaning solution. “If he wants money,” Mothershead added, “get a job. Work like everybody else in this world.”

Poor Hendi. If only he had worked for the government, none of this would have ever happened. Unfortunately, it seems there’s simply no way to fight back against a government full of Hendis hell bent on taking our money at the point of a gun — for our own good, of course.

Next up: The CAIR will file a lawsuit against the shop owner for being anti-Muslim. After all, at Fort Hood a Muslim went into a building yelling “Allah Ackbar” and killed 13 people and that was just “workplace violence” according to the Obama cronies. So this must be racism! 🙂

When 2011 dawned, it seemed a year of hope and change. After all, at the end of 2010, we elected Republicans in a Congressional landslide. President Obama was on the rocks thanks to charting a committed course of spending, spending and more spending. Most of all, the voting populace seemed to understand for the first time in 60 years that not only is there no such thing as a free lunch, but the man who offers the free lunch expects your firstborn child in return. Government, we realized, was Rumpelstiltskin rather than Santa Claus.

As the year progressed, however, it became clear that no matter who we elected, they were unwilling to say Rumpelstiltskin and make the greedy monster disappear. Republicans collapsed not once but twice on the spending issue. First, led by hack Speaker John Boehner, they imploded in April when, to avoid the dreaded “government shutdown” — a shutdown which, by the way, would essentially impact nobody except those on government benefits — Republicans agreed to cut a mere $38 billion from the 2010 baseline budget and keep funding to Planned Parenthood flowing. As it turned out, that $38 billion wasn’t $38 billion at all but actually $352 million.

Then, in July, Republicans caved again. This time, they agreed to raise the debt ceiling so that Obama could continue his Mary Kate and Ashley Olson style spending spree, complete with Rodeo Drive montage. What did they get in return? A big, heaping bowl of nothing: A promised $2.2 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years that actually amounts to a cut of $7 billion in 2012 budget authority and baseline cuts that actually allow Obama’s plans to move forward. And, to top that off, Obama got to push the debt crisis down the road past the election so that he wouldn’t have to discuss his shopaholic problem until after his re-election. Oh, yes, we were also downgraded, to boot, on our national credit by Standard & Poors. So that worked out well.

The Republican Party has responded to all of this chicken-heartedness by feting Boehner as a great leader and proposing that conservatives nominate one Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts. Romney is clearly to the GOPs liking — he fits the profile of the tough-talking scalpel-wielder and the in-office wimp. And we’ve been told that he’s inevitable, like death and taxes. Meanwhile, Iowa Republicans, in the apparent grip of rabies, are now considering nominating Congressman Ron Paul, who is a real scalpel-wielder on domestic policy but has his cannon fixed on self-slaughter on the foreign front.

To no one’s surprise, with the GOP offering a contrast like this, many Americans are content to settle for the real thing: a second Obama term. Despite a list of scandals that would have sunk any Republican president, despite leading America to the worst economic performance since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, despite crippling American influence in the Middle East for the next two generations, Obama rides high with a 44 percent approval rating. All he needs is to split the independent vote evenly to win re-election.

So what will 2012 be like? It depends on whether Americans are willing to punch back — not just at Democrats but at Republicans as well. It depends on whether they are willing to tell their fellow citizens to stop leeching off of the 1 percent and start working for themselves rather than the great collective.

When Mothershead investigated Hendi’s gun after K.O.-ing him, he found that it wasn’t genuine — it was a pellet gun. The truth is that if we stand up to it, our government is armed with pellet guns, too. Let them shut down the government, other than essential services. Good riddance. Let them warn of dire economic consequences if they’re unable to send billion-dollar checks to abortion clinics. Somehow, we’ll deal with it.

If we want 2012 to be a year of freedom, we’ll have to stand up for it rather than settling for an agenda of half-freedom. Half-freedom is no freedom at all, no matter who is in office. (Ben Shapiro)

A Year In Review

Here’s a look at the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s year in review.

– Jan. 14: Kansas announces its intention to become the 26th state to file suit against the federal government to stop implementation of the health care overhaul.

– Jan. 19: The House of Representatives votes to repeal the health care law.

– Jan. 26: Illinois-based pharmaceutical company Abbott Labs cuts 1,900 jobs “in response to changes in the health-care industry, including U.S. health-care reform and the challenging regulatory environment.”

– Jan. 31: A second federal district judge rules that the law is unconstitutional.

– Feb. 2: All 47 Republican senators vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but the measure fails.

– Feb. 16: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testifies before the Senate Finance Committee and admits that the CLASS Act, a key portion of the law that was touted as a $70 billion savings, is “totally unsustainable.” But not to worry: Sebelius says her department has the authority to rework the legislation to make CLASS tenable.

– Feb. 18: The House votes to block federal funding to implement the Affordable Care Act. The Congressional Budget Office also estimates that repealing the law would add $210 billion to the combined federal deficits from 2012 to 2021.

– Feb. 22: A federal judge tosses a lawsuit claiming that the Affordable Care Act violates the liberties of those who choose to rely on God to protect and heal them instead of buying health insurance.

– March 3: The House votes to end an unpopular tax paperwork-filing requirement for businesses tucked into the health care law.

– March 23: The law turns one year old. On the same day, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce finds that the temporary Early Retirement Reinsurance Program will spend its allotted $5 billion far earlier than its Jan. 1, 2014 expiration date.

– March 30: The CBO estimates that health care reform will cost $1.1 trillion, an increase of $90 billion from its February estimate.

– May 17: The Daily Caller reports that 20 percent of new waivers from the law have gone to gourmet restaurants, nightclubs and fancy hotels in former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s district.

– June 8: A McKinsey & Company survey of over 1,300 private sector employers found that 30 percent of employers would definitely or probably stop offering insurance to their employees after the law is implemented in 2014.

– June 18: HHS announces that it is axing waivers from the law. After over 1700 of them, 24% of them are for Public and private sector UNIONS and “small” employers like McDonalds. And they only stopping kissing up because of too much bad press.

– June 21: A glitch in the law, discovered after Obama signed it, would allow middle-class Americans to get subsidized health care intended for poor people, the Associated Press reports. Medicare’s chief actuary says the policy “doesn’t make sense.”

– June 29: In the face of a constitutional challenge, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of the law.

– July 18: An Employment Policies Institute report finds that the Affordable Care Act would incentivize employees to switch to a government-subsidized insurance exchange even if employers were to continue their health care coverage, costing taxpayers “significant[ly].”

– July 19: The bipartisan “gang of six” puts forward a debt-reduction plan that would repeal the CLASS Act.

– Aug. 1: HHS issues a regulation requiring all group health insurance plans to cover FDA-approved “contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.” Even if you are morally opposed to Planned Parenthood. 🙂

Now that’s “Pro-Choice” !!!!

– Aug. 12: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals rules that the law’s individual health insurance mandate is unconstitutional.

– Sept. 8: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejects a pair of challenges to the law on procedural grounds. It does not rule on the law’s constitutionality.

– Sept. 15: A bicameral Republican report accuses Democratic supporters of the health care law of recklessness for promoting the CLASS Act despite knowing that the program would eventually blow up the budget.

– Oct. 5: The signatures of about 1.6 million petitioners pressing for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act are delivered to Capitol Hill at a press conference.

– Oct. 13: A federal inspector general finds that the IRS is having trouble collecting the 10-percent federal tanning tax established by the law.

– Oct. 14: HHS completes its 19-month review of the CLASS Act, determining that “we do not have a path to move forward,” Sebelius says. CLASS remains on the books, but the administration essentially gives up on it.

– Nov. 4: Tennessee Rep. Phil Roe and 23 Republican colleagues send a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman objecting to a new IRS rule authorizing subsidies for participants in the yet-to-be-created federal health care exchange program. They argue that the agency is seeking to rewrite legislation, something it is not allowed to do.
Conservative experts say the IRS rules are covering up a glitch in the original law that provides subsidies for people enrolled in state exchanges, but not federal exchanges. Shulman does not agree with their analysis.

– Nov. 9: The National Federation of Independent Business releases a report saying that in 2012 the law’s new health insurance tax will reduce private sector jobs by between 125,000 and 249,000.

– Nov. 10: The Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty announces it is suing HHS on behalf of Belmont Abbey College, a Catholic educational institution. The lawsuit claims the Aug. 1 regulation violates the college’s teaching on contraception, sterilization and abortion.

– Nov. 14: The Supreme Court agrees to hear arguments on the Affordable Care Act.

– Nov. 16: Forty-seven percent of Americans favor repeal of the law, Gallup finds.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 55% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law passed by Congress in March 2010, while 35% at least somewhat oppose repeal. The intensity remains on the side of the law’s opponents since these findings include 42% who Strongly Favor repeal versus 26% who are Strongly Opposed.

– Nov. 29: Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank joins the effort to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a key portion of the law that would “recommend levels at which Medicare recipients, including seniors, can
be reimbursed for health care expenses.”

– Nov. 30: The House energy committee votes to repeal the CLASS Act.

– Dec. 15: The Obama administration announces that the number of young uninsured Americans has fallen by 2.5 million, attributing it to his law’s provision permitting young adults to stay on their parents’ health care plans
until age 26. (yeah and their parents are not underemployed) 🙂

– Dec 16: Seeking to defuse a potential showdown over a key part of the new healthcare law, the Obama administration moved Friday to let states, rather than the federal government, define which medical benefits insurance companies will have to offer consumers starting in 2014. That allows state leaders to retain more control of health insurance even as the law extends a new federal guarantee that all Americans can get coverage, even if they are sick.

But it’s just a “pre-rule”.

By giving states authority to define the scope of covered benefits, the Obama administration potentially sidestepped an ugly showdown between consumer and business groups in the run-up to the presidential election. Administration officials also may have undercut a charge from opponents of the law that the federal government is usurping state authority. (aka The 10th Amendment argument)

That’s tricky territory for the administration, which is trying to avoid the “big brother” label on health care.

“However, flexibility must yield to reliable, comprehensive coverage of benefits for consumers.… It is essential that HHS provide strong oversight and enforcement.”

The proposed rules, which will take months to finalize. What do you want to bet it will right up to the March arguments in the Supreme Court. 🙂

Gee, I’m not a little cynical. I’m nothing BUT cynical. 🙂

That means that some states may require insurers to cover services such as chiropractic therapy or in vitro fertilization, while others may not. The rules will not affect co-payments, cost sharing and deductibles, which play a major role in determining premiums.
– Dec. 18: Health care experts doubt that the federal insurance exchange program will be fully operational by the Jan. 1, 2014 deadline, since many states have refused to implement the state exchange program, the Washington Post  reports.

– Dec. 19: The Supreme Court announces it will hear an unprecedented week’s worth of arguments in March 2012 to determine whether the health care overhaul law is constitutional.

So it’s all politics and chaos. They passed the buck so that them not sawing off the finger on your right hand would also you to not notice they want to or have sawed over your legs.

But don’t worry, when the IRS comes knocking on your wallet, it’s only a “penalty” nothing to be concerned about. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Role of Government

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Obama Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett: “We have to give people a livelihood so they can provide for their families,” Jarrett says in the video. “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

But that’s not socialism or government trying to run your life for you. Nope. Nothing to see here…

Contrast that with Sen. Marco Rubio during a recent speech at the Reagan Presidential Library:

These are proper roles of government — within the framework of creating an environment where economic security and prosperity is possible.  And on the compassion side of the ledger, which is also important to Americans — and it’s important that we remind ourselves of that — I don’t really like labels in politics, but I will gladly accept the label of conservatism. Conservatism is not about leaving people behind. Conservatism is about empowering people to catch up, to give them the tools at their disposal that make it possible for them to access all the hope, all the promise, all the opportunity that America offers. And our programs to help them should reflect that.

Now, yes, there are people that cannot help themselves. And those folks we will always help. We are too rich and prosperous a nation to leave them to fend for themselves. But all the others that can work should be given the means of empowering themselves to enter the marketplace and the workforce. And our programs and our policies should reflect that. We do need a safety net, but it cannot be a way of life. It must be there to help those who have fallen, to stand up and try again.
Amen.  Even if you’re a bleeding heart type who’s inclined to agree with Jarrett that the feds ought to take a more proactive role in directly aiding the poor through wealth redistribution, I’d point out that Big Government has done a really lousy job at achieving that goal through the years.  The Democrats’ Great Society and its “war on poverty” has been a wildly costly and tragically ineffective proposition.  More recently, President Obama promised that his 2009 “stimulus” program would “lift two million Americans from poverty.”  Hundreds of billions of dollars later, 2.9 million more Americans have fallen into poverty.  Which is to say nothing of the gutwrenching economic desolation that has afflicted so many of human history’s socialistic dystopias. 

Big, overbearing, meddling government isn’t merely philosophically wrongheaded, it just doesn’t work.  That’s why conservatives are exempliying true compassion when they work to limit the size, scope, and influence of a Leviathan that consumes greedily, but has little to show for it. (Guy Benson)

Speaking of overbearing…

The Obama administration is escalating its crackdown on tough immigration laws, with lawyers reviewing four new state statutes to determine whether the federal government will take the extraordinary step of challenging the measures in court.

Justice Department lawyers have sued Arizona and Alabama, where a federal judge on Wednesday allowed key parts of that state’s immigration law to take effect but blocked other provisions. Federal lawyers are talking to Utah officials about a third possible lawsuit and are considering legal challenges in Georgia, Indiana and South Carolina, according to court documents and government officials. (WP)

This would be the same Justice department that refused to prosecute the Black Panther Case, and is trying desperately to cover up the forceable walking of guns into Mexico under “Fast & Furious” amongst many other problems.

But states wanting to crack down on illegal immigration where this government refuses to go, well…That’s just evil. 🙂

He <Obama> told a roundtable of Latino reporters Wednesday that Arizona’s immigration law created “a great danger that naturalized citizens, individuals with Latino surnames, potentially could be vulnerable to questioning. The laws could be potentially abused in ways that were not fair to Latino citizens.”

The same old tired parroted argument that is, of course, utterly false and has been proven to be so. But since when did truth ever stop a liberal from using fear and intimidation? NEVER.

“We can’t have a patchwork of 50 states with 50 different immigration laws.”

We must have only 1 law. Ours. And if we chose to ignore it well too F*cking bad for you you can’t do anything about it! We are all powerful and what we say goes. Period. End of story.

Isn’t Democratic government grand? 🙂

PASS THE BILL

“Are they against putting teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job? Are they against hiring construction workers to rebuild our roads and bridges and schools? Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every worker and small business in America?”–President Obama

He’s going to drive the price of straw through the roof if he keeps this up? The army of straw men he’ll have by election time will rival the Chinese Military.
So if you’re against his bill not only are you racist, but heartless, mean, cruel and just want to kick people in the nuts repeatedly!
Emotions must trump logic because logic tells you he’s full of bovine fecal matter!
“Well, this isn’t about giving me a win, and it’s not about [Republicans],” Obama said.

Pinocchio’s nose just grew so long it hit the other side of the universe!
“This isn’t just about what I think is right.”
Yes it is.
Your Ego would have it no other way.
Liberal Economist God Paul Krugman: The truth is that we’re in this mess because we had too little regulation, not too much.
Dozens of infrastructure projects could qualify for expedited treatment under a White House plan to create jobs by cutting through regulatory red tape that critics say is holding up important initiatives.
But I thought we needed MORE regulations? 🙂

President Barack Obama last month ordered Interior, Agriculture, Housing, Transportation and Commerce Department officials to identify by Friday up to three big projects each that could merit faster environmental approvals and other permits. Funding must already be arranged or identified.

Obama is facing a tough re-election fight next year in the face of a stubborn 9.1 percent unemployment rate. Infrastructure projects, which can help state and local economies, are a key part of his job creation strategy.

Administration officials would not discuss proposals while they were under review, but transportation and construction groups say there are at minimum 50 projects in the permit process that could qualify for faster treatment.

Most are winding their way through a federal, state and local maze that often takes several years and can last between 15 and 20 years for the biggest proposals.

“It’s just the whole process itself. The way we build things in this country ensures that it will take decades,” said Mark Policinski, executive director and chief executive of the Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments.

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

“We are very interested in any relief the president and his agencies can give us on the red tape that usually ties our projects up for years,” John Horsely, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, told Reuters. “I’ve characterized the process we’ve been going through as one step forward, two steps back.”

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

We Need to Spend More. Regulate More. And it is the role of government to make sure everyone is “lifted up” and provided for.
Thanks comrades, but no thanks.
OBAMACARE
Guy Benson

ABC Newsman Jake Tapper surveys the national landscape and is startled by the observation that several of President Obama’s famous healthcare promises don’t quite seem to be coming to fruition.  (You don’t say).  He confronts White House deputy chief of staff Nancy-Ann DeParle with the evidence, and oh my does she spin.  Even I’m dizzy:

A new study by the Kaiser Family Foundation underlines that many of the promises surrounding President Obama’s health care legislation remain unfulfilled, though the White House argues that change is coming.  Workers at the Flora Venture flower shop in Newmarket, NH, remember when presidential candidate named Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., promised that their health care costs would go down if they elected him and his health care plan was enacted.  On May 3, 2008, the president told voters that he had “a health care plan that would save the average family $2,500 on their premiums.”  Last year workers at the flower shop saw their insurance premiums shoot up 41 percent.

The Kaiser Family Foundation shows family premiums topped $15,000 a year for the first time in 2011, increasing a whopping 9% this year, three times more than the increase the year before. The study says that up to 2% of that increase is because of the health care law’s provisions (me: and that’s just the beginning), such as allowing families to add grown children up to 26 years old to their policies.

What does Nancy-Ann have to say for herself?

DeParle insists families will see that savings — by 2019.  “Many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act are starting this year, and in succeeding years,” DeParle told ABC News, “and by 2019 we estimate that the average family will save around $2,000.”  DeParle said that the “big increases that occurred last year were probably driven by insurance plans overestimating what the impact would be and maybe trying to take some profits upfront before some of the changes in the Affordable Care Act occur.

In other words, everything will be turning up roses eight years from now — you’ve gotta trust us.  Plus, these know-nothing insurance companies are “probably” overestimating the impact of the law.  I mean, what do they know?   I wonder if Kathleen Sebelius is scribbling furiously in her “zero tolerance” notebook.  Tapper continues:

The Kaiser study also indicates employers are switching plans and shifting costs onto employees. Half of workers in smaller firms now face “deductibles of at least $1,000, including 28 percent facing deductibles of $2,000 or more,” according to the study.  Doesn’t that fly in the face of the president’s promise that “if you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan”? ABC News asked DeParle.

Perfectly legitimate question.  Back to you, White House flack:

She said no — the president wasn’t saying the legislation would guarantee that everyone can keep his or her preferred plan, just that the legislation wouldn’t force anyone to change. “What the president promised is that under health care reform, that he would make it more possible for people to have choices in these (health insurance) exchanges,” DeParle said. “And that’s going to be what will help businesses bring costs down. Right now, they’re just struggling. That’s one reason why they’re shifting costs to employees.”

Unbelievable.  President Obama didn’t really mean you could keep your plan if you like it, we’re now told; he just meant the law would help provide more choices in the government-approved exchanges.  I’m sorry, but I’m quite certain that’s not what he said at all.  Unfortunately for the White House, there’s this thing nowadays called “the internet,” on which people can research topics such as, “what exactly did President Obama say about me being able to keep my plan?”  Well, well, well.  Look at what the search engine turned up:

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.

Contrast that unambiguous, definitive pledge with DeParle’s historical revisionism and hedging.  You know, I’m beginning to suspect Joe Wilson’s sentiment — albeit disrespectful and inappropriate for the venue — was absolutely, positively on the money.

So remember how this blog started: “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

Now don’t you feel all warm and fuzzy… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers


Channeling Your Inner Banana II: The Indoctri-NATION

June 26th I wrote a blog entitled, “Getting in Touch with your Inner Banana” (https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/) in which I espoused about the coming more than just leanings of Banana Republic Dictatorship that our current President seems to aspire to.

Well, it’s Time for a sequel.

But first a word about his friends in the Ministry of Truth (The Mainstream Media).

The TV networks have aggressively demonstrated their dislike of Arizona’s state law “cracking down on illegal immigrants,” a law that “pits neighbor against neighbor.” An MRC review of morning and evening news programs on ABC, CBS, and NBC from April 23 to July 25 found the networks have aired 120 stories with an almost ten-to-one tilt against the Arizona law (77 negative, 35 neutral, 8 positive).

The soundbite count was also tilted over the last three months — 216 to 107, or an almost exact two-to-one disparity. Network anchors and reporters sided against defenders of border control and championed sympathetic illegal aliens and their (usually American-born) children. In 120 stories, they never described “immigrants rights activists” as liberals or on the left.


Between them, the three networks described the Arizona law as “controversial” on 27 occasions, despite its popularity in opinion polls. The Obama administration’s decision to sue file a lawsuit against Arizona to crush the law was never described as “controversial.”

These are the Journo-Lists who profess to be “journalists” that are fair and objective. They are anything but.

They are toadies for their guy and their ideology. Nothing more, Nothing less than full on indoctrination.

The networks highlighted the “army” of protesters against the Arizona law and ignored their sometimes radical connections. As with sympathetic media coverage of large amnesty rallies in 2006, none of the stories allowed anyone to suggest it was improper for illegal aliens to petition the government whose laws they’re breaking or cancel out the votes of law-abiding citizens.

On May 30, ABC anchor David Muir asked, “Will an army of protesters be heard?” Reporter Jeremy Hubbard began his story for World News: “In their most massive numbers yet, a deluge of adversaries rally and rail against what could soon be the law of the land in Arizona.”

Network correspondents routinely mourned how illegal aliens didn’t feel welcome in Arizona, and felt they had to move back to Mexico or other friendlier states. On July 8, NBC reporter Lee Cowan sympathized with Marcial Bolanos, who didn’t think Arizona was a good place any more. “He took his 15-year-old son out of school and is headed back to Mexico, which brings Hugo to tears. But you’re really going to miss your friends?” Hugo said “Yeah.” The networks didn’t apply this blatant emotional appeal on behalf of families who’ve lost loved ones in crimes committed by illegal aliens.

You get one sob story after another, emotional appeals about heartless Arizonans who want to destroy “immigrant” (not illegal immigrant) families and friends.

Only Fox as far as I can see ever mentions Richard Krentz, the farmer who was murdered on his own land by drug smugglers as a victim. they even talked to his widow. If they do mention him, it is only in passing.

Take ABC News:  Ranchers have seen cattle slaughtered and pulled apart by hungry people stealing across the border, and one resident, Robert Krentz, may have been shot dead by an alleged illegal immigrant as he patrolled his land last month.

They tracked the killers all the way to the Mexican Border, by the way.

Then the media always follows up with their own lies, damn lies and statistics.

The U.S. Border Patrol says apprehensions along the Arizona-Mexico frontier are up 6 percent from October to April.

The Arizona Republic went on to report that, “according to the Border Patrol, Krentz is the only American murdered by a suspected illegal immigrant in at least a decade within the agency’s Tucson sector, the busiest smuggling route among the Border Patrol’s nine coverage regions along the U.S.-Mexican border.”

So it’s no big deal. Nothing to see here. But then again, he was white, so not much sympathy there. 😦

In 18 of 120 stories, the networks mentioned the public opinion polls, in which broad majorities favor the Arizona law. One poll question the networks didn’t ask was if it might seem odd for the Obama administration to sue Arizona for trying to enforce immigration laws, but would not sue cities that vowed to ignore immigration laws, which call themselves “sanctuary cities.”

A Rasmussen poll found 54 percent favored the Justice Department suing “sanctuary cities,” and 61 percent favored cutting off federal aid to them. But the three networks haven’t used the words “sanctuary city” since 2007, when it was a hot topic in the Republican primary debates. It was never mentioned, so was never described as “controversial.” (MRC)

So upwards of 70% of the American People are for Arizona, but the Ministry of Truth Mainstream Media is not. So they continue to hammer the propaganda home.

Just like the media of a dictator.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken after the judge’s Tuesday ruling, finds that 59% favor passage of an Arizona-like immigration law in their state, marking little change from earlier this month. Just 32% oppose such a law.

Support for the building of a fence along the Mexican border has reached a new high, and voters are more confident than ever that illegal immigration can be stopped.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of U.S. voters now believe the United States should continue to build a fence on the Mexican border. That’s up nine points from March when the Obama administration halted funding for the fence and the highest level of support ever.

Support for the fence is strong across all demographic groups. But while 76% of Mainstream voters think the United States should continue to build the fence, 67% of the Political Class are opposed to it.

So what you have is a Mainstream Media that reports the news the way they want to hear it and the way they want you to think about it.

It’s Propaganda.

********

AMNESTY II

With Congress gridlocked on an immigration bill, the Obama administration  is considering using a back door to stop deporting many illegal immigrants – what a draft government memo said could be “a non-legislative version of amnesty.”

“This memorandum offers administrative relief options to . . . reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization,” it reads. (see below)

The memo, addressed to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas and written by four agency staffers, lists tools it says the administration has to “reduce the threat of removal” for many illegal immigrants who have run afoul of immigration authorities.

“In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, USCIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations, exercising discretion with regard to parole-in-place, deferred action and the issuance of Notices to Appear,” the staffers wrote in the memo, which was obtained by Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican.

The memo suggests that in-depth discussions have occurred on how to keep many illegal immigrants in the country, which would be at least a temporary alternative to the proposals Democrats in Congress have made to legalize illegal immigrants.

Chris Bentley, a USCIS spokesman, said drafting the memo doesn’t mean the agency has embraced the policy and “nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions.”

“As a matter of good government, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will discuss just about every issue that comes within the purview of the immigration system,” he said in an e-mail statement. “We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation’s immigration challenges.”

He said the Homeland Security Department “will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation’s entire illegal immigrant population.”

The memo does talk about targeting specific groups of illegal immigrants.

Mr. Grassley said it confirms his fears that the administration is trying an end-run around Congress.

“This memo gives credence to our concerns that the administration will go to great lengths to circumvent Congress and unilaterally execute a backdoor amnesty plan,” Mr. Grassley said.
The memo acknowledges some of the tools could be costly and might even require asking Congress for more money.

At one point, the authors acknowledge that widespread use of “deferred action” – or using prosecutorial discretion not to deport someone – would be “a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty.’ ”

The authors noted several options for deferred action, including targeting it to students who would be covered by the DREAM Act, a bill that’s been introduced in Congress.

In testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 11, Mr. Mayorkas first said he was unaware of discussions to use these kinds of tools on a categorical basis, then later clarified that officials had talked about expanding the use of those powers.

“I don’t know of any plans. I think we have discussed, as we always do, the tools available to us and whether the deployment of any of those tools could achieve a more fair and efficient use or application of the immigration law,” he said.

He acknowledged, though, that he was not aware that those powers had ever been used before on a categorical basis.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who queried Mr. Mayorkas on the subject, warned him against pursuing that strategy.

“I think it would be a mistake for the administration to use administrative action, like deferred action on a categorical basis, to deal with a large number of people who are here without proper legal documents to regularize their status without Congress’ participation. I will just say that to you for what it’s worth,” Mr. Cornyn, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee, told Mr. Mayorkas.

“The American public’s confidence in the federal government’s ability and commitment to enforce our immigration laws is at an all-time low,” Mr. Cornyn said in a statement. “This apparent step to circumvent Congress – and avoid a transparent debate on how to fix our broken immigration system –  threatens to further erode public confidence in its government and makes it less likely we will ever reach consensus and pass credible border security and immigration reform.”

After reports earlier this year that the agency was working on these sorts of plans, Senate Republicans, led by Mr. Grassley, have sent letters to President Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano asking for details.

In recent weeks, Sen. Chuck Grassley and others in Congress have been pressing the administration to disavow rumors that a de facto amnesty is in the works, including in a letter to Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano. “Since the senators first wrote to the president more than a month ago, we have not been reassured that the plans are just rumors, and we have every reason to believe that the memo is legitimate,” a Grassley spokesman tells NR. (NR contacted DHS, but a spokesman did not have a comment on the record.)

Many of the memo’s proposals are technical and fine-grained; for example, it suggests clarifying the immigration laws for “unaccompanied minors, and for victims of human trafficking, domestic violence, and other criminal activities.” It also proposes extending the “grace period” H-1B visa holders have between the expiration of their visa and the date they’re expected to leave the country.

With other ideas, however, USCIS is aiming big. Perhaps the most egregious suggestion is to “Increase the Use of Deferred Action.” “Deferred action,” as the memo defines it, “is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to pursue removal from the U.S. of a particular individual for a specific period of time.” For example, after Hurricane Katrina, the government decided not to remove illegal immigrants who’d been affected by the disaster.

The memo claims that there are no limits to USCIS’s ability to use deferred action, but warns that using this power indiscriminately would be “controversial, not to mention expensive.” The memo suggests using deferred action to exempt “particular groups” from removal — such as the illegal-immigrant high-school graduates who would fall under the DREAM Act (a measure that has been shot down repeatedly in Congress). The memo claims that the DREAM Act would cover “an estimated 50,000” individuals, though as many as 65,000 illegal immigrants graduate high school every year in the U.S.

Mind you this Memo was 11 Pages long!

Grassley says it is “ridiculous” to think a memo containing this kind of detail was drawn up without specific direction from someone in the administration. “Bureaucrats don’t write memos like that for the fun of it,” he said.

This is not a school grade writing exercise, after all.

And the memo seeks to out ‘touchy-feely’ ’emotional’ exemptions. So if you want to object to them you’re just a heartless, mean and cruel, uncaring bastard.

Sound familiar? 🙂

UPDATE: USCIS has released a statement on the memo:

Internal draft memos do not and should not be equated with official action or policy of the Department. We will not comment on notional, pre-decisional memos. As a matter of good government, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will discuss just about every issue that comes within the purview of the immigration system. We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation’s immigration challenges.

Internal memoranda help us do the thinking that leads to important changes; some of them are adopted and others are rejected. Our goal is to implement policies wisely and well to strengthen all aspects of our mission. The choices we have made so far have strengthened both the enforcement and services sides of USCIS — nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions. To be clear, DHS will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation’s entire illegal immigrant population.

Don’t mind us, we just write 11-page detailed judicial memos as way of just chewing the fat, nothing to see here.

Given the backroom secrecy that has been “transparent” in this administration shouldn’t the fact that they are even discussing ways to circumvent Congress worry you?

Yes, they should.

Much like the “promises” made about Health Care reform which we know now from sworn testimony to be false.

So doesn’t that sound like he and his apparatchiks are getting in even more touch with their Inner Banana (Dictatorship)?

It does to me.

Beyond the confines of the courtroom, however, that question is all that the controversy over S.B. 1070 is about: Do we as a country want to enforce the immigration laws or not? It’s time to answer that question.

And is the Government of The People, By the People and For the The People going to perish under a propaganda and legal parsers onslaught with the willing compliance of the touchy-feely Fifth Column Ministry of Truth Media? 😦

That is the question.

The Empire Strikes Back

Episode V

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

It is a dark time for the
Rebellion. Although the Government
By the People for the The People
has been nearly destroyed,
Imperial troops have driven the
Rebel forces from their hidden
base and pursued them across
the country.

Evading the dreaded Imperial
Media a group of freedom
fighters led by Gov. Jan Brewer
has established a new secret
base on the remote desert oasis
of  Phoenix, AZ.

The evil lord Darth Holder
obsessed with finding New
Voters for his Emperor has
dispatched thousands of
Trial Lawyers into the far
reaches of the desert…

<<cuhh huah>>  <<cuhh huah>>  <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>>

The lawyers for the for The InJustice Department fanned across the desert with their allies from the American Communist Liberals Union (ACLU), SEIU, The Raza, Somos America, MeCHA, MSNBC, The Los Angeles Times, and others.

“I’m hunting Wacists!” Stormtrooper  E. Fudd was heard to say.

Then they found their base, SB 1070.

And they launched an all-out assault against the rebels strong hold.

The Imperial Walkers of  “outraged” minorities , out-of-state agitators, and Union stormtroopers descended on the based armed with their sanctimony and their signs carrying their race cards in their media pockets.

The base was taken temporarily but the rebels themselves escaped.

Though they were temporarily beaten, battered, and bruised, they lived to fight another day.

For after all, the Empire’s main weapon was the dreaded RACIST CANNON, able to fire invectives of pure hatred and partisanship.

But  not all hope was lost for the Rebels.

For the people were on their side….

Darth Holder, minion of the Emperor Himself, was heard to proclaim that just because the Empire has no interest in securing the border doesn’t mean the individual governors can usurp Imperial power and do his job for or with him.

IF THE EMPIRE WANTS TO IGNORE BORDER SECURITY YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DISAGREE!

<<cuhh huah>>  <<cuhh huah>>  <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>> <<cuhh huah>>

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO “HELP” or  “ASSIST” or otherwise burden or force the Empire into DOING IT’S JOB!

I AM EMPEROR OBAMA, What I say goes. Period.

IF WE WANT TO IGNORE BORDER SECURITY, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DO OUR JOB FOR US!

We have 12 million new potential Democrats and millions of Latinos lemmings to pander to. You  rebel scum are not allowed to disobey with the wishes of your Imperial Federal Masters!

So what if we ignore Voter Intimidation by The New Black Panthers.

So what if 60% of Americans were against our Imperial Health Care.

So, we said repeatedly and loudly that the Health Care Mandate wasn’t a Tax, but then said it was in court.

So what. We are are Supreme. We can do that!

So what if 60-70% of the Americans support the rebels in securing our border first.

So what if we still go on about “racial profiling” and create racial division as justification, but then in court assert none of it and go for SUPREMACY instead.

So what if we pass 2000+ page bills that “you have to pass them to know what’s in them” that we never read anyhow.

So what if the Journo-List Ministry of Truth lies.

Like it matters to us.

WE ARE THE EMPIRE and we Are SUPREME.

If you don’t like it, lump it!

And don’t you dare “over burden” us with doing our job!

We have too many rounds of golf to play. To many private concerts, 5-star luxury hotels to take over for our imperial vacations.

We are just better than you. Live with it.

We work really hard at dividing this country by class and race. It’s exhausting!

Judge Bolton: “requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is check.” She additionally found that the burdensome verification requirement “will divert resources from the federal government’s other responsibilities and priorities.”

Judge Bolton wrote in her stay that “preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely preempted by federal law to be enforced.” She adds in her 36-page ruling “There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens.” She concludes that “By enforcing this statue, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”

Don’t you dare burden the Empire with actually doing their job!!! HOW DARE YOU!!

You do have to feel sorry for the Empire in this sense:

They have know had to admit their own incompetence on National Security and that doing their job is too “burdensome” for them.

They have had to admit they told a bold faced lie about the Health Care Mandate being a Tax.

They have had to admit that they are racially biased (The New Black Panther Case) and are not interested in anyone who isn’t their “base”. No crackers need apply.

Every time they say they are going to be “transparent” they become more secretive.

Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

The law, signed last week by President Obama, exempts the SEC from disclosing records or information derived from “surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities.” Given that the SEC is a regulatory body, the provision covers almost every action by the agency, lawyers say. Congress and federal agencies can request information, but the public cannot.

I guess that means that Congress and the SEC are too big to fail. 🙂

Every problem or criticism of them they think can be solved by unfettered use of the RACE CARD.

The “culture of corruption” the Democrats ran on in 2006 and 2008 turns out to be like Luke Skywalker in the dream cave sequence, it turns out to be THEM! 🙂

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Tuesday noted that it was Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), not him, who promised to “drain the swamp” of corruption in Washington.

“I didn’t use that term,” Hoyer said when asked if he thinks Democrats have “drained the swamp.”  “What I believed and continue to believe is that we have made the ethics process work, and we have made it work in a meaningful way.”(The Hill)

Yes, FOR THEM and AGAINST YOU! 🙂

They know that raising taxes in a recession that hasn’t gotten better despite all their claims to the contrary but they can’t not do it because they have to demonize “the rich” and have no choice but to stick it to everyone because of it.

The Ideology is The ideology.

The Agenda is The Agenda.

The Empire must Strike Back!

The Empire Must be Supreme!

All Hail The Emperor!

The Emperor has No Clothes! 🙂

The April Fools

The Cone of Silence is being lowered.

The government takeover of Health Care is no longer to be discussed openly.

If we don’t talk about it, enough people will forget about it by November.

“My assumption is that this is going to wash out. It’s just not going to be that central (to the election). If anything, it might turn out to be a net plus for the Democrats,” said Joel Aberbach, director of the Center for American Politics and Public Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles.

The Fifth Column/Mainstream Media/Ministry of Truth will beat the drum that it’s no big deal, nothing to see, it’s the law, get over it.

Not worth debating. (which it wasn’t before it was passed either).

They will diminish it.

You’re just a bitter old right winger if you continue complaining it about.

“We Won. You Lost” get over it.

But we will talk about it as little as possible.

Let the fire die of neglect.

Then I read this from David Broder:

Most Republicans I have talked with say they are convinced that their outnumbered legislators have done the right thing by denying virtually all their votes to Obama and using every device possible to slow down or derail his agenda.

Most of the Democrats I interviewed are just as certain that the folks in the White House and the speaker’s office were justified in pushing the health care bill ahead to final passage in the face of polls showing most voters were opposed.

But the partisanship on both sides was itself a turnoff to independents.

They were the people who had taken Obama seriously when he said he wanted to move Washington beyond the recriminations of the George W. Bush years.

Regardless of their views on health care — or the economy or education or anything else — they are turned off by the inability of both parties to overcome their parochial concerns and find agreement on steps to curb the joblessness and debt that are consuming the country. (IBD)

And I got to thinking about the coming court fight over ObamaCare and my concern that Liberal Judges will dismiss it out of hand, like many liberal Democrat Attorney Generals do just because they are Liberals.

Not because of legal merit, but because of ideology.

We have a new Political structure in this country.

We have Homo Sapien Liberalis and Homo Sapien Non-Liberalis.

And Homo Sapien Liberalis will not go against it’s own kind.

So it’s not merely that you have to defeat them in November, you have to defeat them in every election on every level, every time.

Otherwise, they’ll keep popping up like the weeds in my backyard.

And you are the fool to think otherwise.

The days of actual bi-partisanship are gone.

Homo Sapien Liberalis doesn’t work that way.

And if they are in power and you oppose them, they will try and crush you, destroy you, diminish, demean and disrespect you.

You are, after all, a mental defective for disagreeing with them.

After their victory in the Health Care fight, what have they done since?

Gone on full bore attack on the Tea Party activist. Full on.

And the Fifth Column is right there with them.

Think I’m kidding: Read this from the Leftist Huffington Post:

Is there a double standard going on here? Surely there is. But what is worse is that the way that Tea Baggers and the Republican leaders frame the issue is that anyone who “stands up” and “protests” the Obama administration is a patriot, but anyone who does the same to a Republican is a spoiler, a low life, and a possible traitor.

When Republicans in Congress heckle the president or other legislators, they model the kind of behavior that degenerates further into the kind of violence the young heckler at the McCain rally experienced. When Republicans do not stand up for the right to express one’s opinion regardless of party, they enforce a kind of group-think that can only harm freedom of speech. The Supreme Court has defended the right of citizens to engage in robust and raucous colloquy. That ruling applies not only to Tea Party protesters but to all Americans as well. (Lennard Davis-Professor at University of Illinois-Chicago)

The poor leftists are victims of the mean, nasty “violent”, Free speech crushing right-wingers! Waaaaa!!

The nerve of those oppressive Tea party activists! 😦

And the whole “racism” angle is back.

The Left’s favourite pit bull is being let out into the yard again.

Frank Rich of The New York Times and Colbert King of The Washington Post are among the columnists willingly checking their honesty – or their brains – at the door to throw political mud. Either these people are too ignorant to know their charges or false, or they don’t care and spit their bile anyway.

King wrote last week of looking at “angry faces” at Tea Party rallies and finding them “eerily familiar,” resembling protesters seeking to prevent a black University of Alabama enrollee in 1956.

Rich peppered his column with Third Reich imagery, eventually backing up his claim of racism with comparisons to those who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Leaving aside for the moment that much opposition to that measure came from Democrats, it cannot be said plainly enough today: These men and their numerous partners in this smear should be ashamed – if nothing else, for logical flaws beneath a fifth-grader.

Their argument is: (A) This movement is filled with vocal people displeased with the way things are going; (B) I can find examples in history of people whose vocal displeasure was fueled by racism. Hence, (C) these people must be fueled by racism.

OK, boys, let’s see how you like it: (A) You are fans of ObamaCare; (B) Castro is a fan of ObamaCare, so, (C) you are communists.

Logic and basic human decency prevent me from making that connection seriously. I would like to believe that if these craven critics actually attended a Tea Party event, their testimony would change. But I doubt it. Theirs is a screeching born of panic, the need to demonize a movement rather than debate it. (Mark Davis)

So it’s fight between two species both fighting for survival.

But to illustrate the problem, this was found in the Comment Section of Mark Davis’s Op-ed piece:

Yesterday, the University of Washington held a debate about the constitutionality of the recently passed health care reform bill. The Seattle Times reports that none of the panelists at the debate argued that the bill was unconstitutional because the organizers of the event couldn’t find any law professors who held that view:

The University of Washington billed it as a debate among distinguished law faculty over whether the new federal health-care law is constitutional.

But while the four panelists at a packed event Tuesday may have differed on some of the finer points, they all agreed on the big question: They said the new law passes constitutional muster and that various lawsuits arguing the opposite — including the one joined last week by state Attorney General Rob McKenna — have little merit or chance of success. Even John McKay, the former Republican U.S. attorney for Western Washington (who was forced out in 2006 under contentious circumstances) said that while he sympathized with some of the political issues in play, he thought the lawsuits lacked merit. In fact, he questioned the timing and thrust of the cases: “One way to say it is, that this has to be seen as a political exercise,” he said.

Moderator Hugh Spitzer noted the lack of a vigorous dissenting voice. “I will say that we tried very hard to get a professor who could come and who thinks this is flat-out unconstitutional,” he said. “But there are relatively few of them, and they are in great demand.”

My guess is that they either didn’t look hard enough, didn’t care to look to hard, or that no one wanted to be the Christian thrown to the lions in a Liberal Coliseum to shreded by the panel and the liberal audience.

The fact that they held a “debate” anyways, with the other side being debated at all is indicative of Homo Sapien Liberalis.

The Liberals smugly went on with the show confident that they are right simply because they “couldn’t find anyone” to oppose them.

Which I’m positive is disingenuous at best.

It’s not like Homo Sapien Liberalis is actually capable to listening to arguments against it’s own positions and changing their minds.

No, that would be a Jedi Mind Trick. And they must stay strong.

They are after all, always right. No Matter what.

Just ask them.

Hope and Change, you say.

Bi-Partisanship, you say.

Freedom and Democracy, you say.

I say APRIL FOOLS!

Only, you’re a fool to believe the Left anymore.