The Regime

Residents of Leesburg, Florida were shocked to see their local Social Security office turned into a random Homeland Security checkpoint Tuesday morning, as DHS officers armed with semiautomatic rifles and accompanied by sniffer dogs checked identifications of locals.

The activity was part of Operation Shield, an unannounced drill conducted by the DHS’ Federal Protective Service centered around “detecting the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”

Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed FPS officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon.

“Part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, FPS is the federal law enforcement agency that provides integrated security and law enforcement services to over 9,000 federally-owned and leased buildings, facilities, properties and other assets.

But they can’t find the Border and don’t know what an “illegal alien” is but they can find YOU and if you do know what they are you’re a racist and will be sued by them. 🙂

Big Brother is watching YOU (and ignoring Illegal aliens and you better do it or else!).

Rush: Obama said, “When Congress refuses to act — and as a result, hurts our economy and puts our people at risk — then I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them.” He got applause. “I have an obligation to act on behalf of the American people. I’m not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people that we elected to serve. Not with so much at stake, not at this make-or-break moment for middle class Americans. We’re not gonna let that happen.”

Now, the Founding Fathers said this is exactly what’s supposed to happen! It’s called “the separation of powers,” and it’s to make sure that things like this do not happen, that an all-powerful executive does not run roughshod over the government. But President Obama has just said: Because the Congress won’t do what I want them to do I’m gonna do it myself. Reuters again: “Hammering populist themes that show him to be a champion of the middle class, aides say the president will keep taking steps to show voters he’ll make moves on his own to help the economy if Congress refuses to act.”

If Congress “refuses to act,” it is his job to sit down and talk to ’em and make ’em act and get them to vote the way he wants. He does not have — unless they grant it to him (and they’re doing it, by the way) — the authority to run roughshod over them. But if they don’t stop him, he can do it. We can’t. Congress has to stand up for itself. Now, the Democrats run the Senate. I think they’re happy for this to happen. Dingy Harry loves for this to happen because they’re sitting there blaming it on the House Republicans who have no role in this. It’s an election year, so blame the Republicans for it. Folks, it is clearly lawless. If you regard the Constitution as law, this is lawless behavior by an out-of-control, rogue executive. This is what happens in banana republics, tinhorn dictatorships. In places like Venezuela, this is what happens — all under the guise of populism and helping the middle class.

On Thursday’s “The Laura Ingraham Show,” <New York Times Liberal Columinist David>Brooks said he still admired Obama, but conceded the president was more liberal than he originally thought.

“Yeah, I still like him — admire him personally,” Brooks said. “He’s certainly more liberal than I thought he was. And he’s more liberal than he thinks he is. He thinks he is just slightly center-left. But when you got down to his instincts, they’re pretty left. And his problem is he can’t really act on them because it would be political disaster. And so that means, I think he is doing very little — proposing very little.”

Michelle Malkin: Here is the operating motto of the Obama White House: “So let it be written, so let it be done!” Like Yul Brynner’s Pharaoh Ramses character in Cecil B. DeMille’s “The Ten Commandments,” the demander in chief stands with arms akimbo issuing daily edicts to his constitution-subverting minions with an imperious wave of his hand. His entourage of insatiable usurpers never rests.

Can’t delude legislators into adopting a $1.5 billion Kabuki summer-jobs makework boondoggle? Create an unfunded program through executive fiat.

Can’t muster up a filibuster-proof majority for radical nominees? Czar-ify ’em.

Can’t get Congress to approve vast wild lands designations? Grab them under cover of a holiday lame-duck session.

Can’t get the illegal alien bailout DREAM Act passed on Capitol Hill? Executive-order it.

“So let it be written, so let it be done!”

In keeping with the dark and defiant habits of this administration, the new head of the half-billion-dollar Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was sworn in behind closed doors on Wednesday night. The nomination of former Democratic Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to serve as Dodd-Frank regulatory enforcer had been soundly defeated in the Senate before Christmas. But as I reported last month, progressive zealots funded by billionaire George Soros goaded Obama to ignore the Senate’s constitutionally grounded advice and consent role.

At his left flank’s urging, Obama vowed to follow in President Theodore Roosevelt’s footsteps (TR recess-appointed 160 officials during a recess of less than one day) and install Cordray even though the Senate technically remained in pro forma session. Fresh from his Hawaii vacation, Obama returned to Washington and for once delivered on a promise.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters Thursday that the administration expects no retaliation for the end-run around the deliberative process. Playing the pharaoh’s helper, Carney airily dismissed widespread bipartisan questions about the legality of the power grab as “esoteric discussion.”

The GOP knew the installation of Obama’s latest super-czar was coming a month ago, but is now scrambling to respond. Republicans will get clobbered with the class warfare card again unless they forcefully counter the Democrats’ narrative of the president’s “bold” actions for “middle-class Americans.”

Obama’s liberal media supporters have rationalized the tyrannical maneuver as a response to GOP “nullification.” But it’s those who oppose common-sense reforms of the gravely flawed Dodd-Frank law — a 2,600-page monstrosity that no lawmaker read before passing it — who are obstructing good government.

As Senate Republicans have been pointing out for months, Dodd-Frank threw out judicial review, removed CFPB from the congressional appropriations process, provided five-year tenure protection for the director and transferred the agency from the Treasury Department to the opaque and unaccountable Federal Reserve.

Obama and Democratic leaders themselves recognize the recklessness of vesting so much unfettered power in a single individual. In 2009, Obama floated a bipartisan board to oversee enforcement. Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Charles Schumer of New York and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island all co-sponsored legislation backing a commission. Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank was also an original sponsor of a bill creating the very kind of five-member panel Republicans have proposed.

The House passed these and other structural reforms last year, but the Senate has failed to act, and the White House insists on demagoguing reformers. Moreover, taxpayers remain in the dark about how and how much the CFPB is spending, because Dodd-Frank allows the agency to draw funds from the Federal Reserve’s operating expenses. Out of sight, out of mind.

This is not “bold.” It’s jackboot. It won’t benefit “middle-class Americans.” It’ll line lobbyist pockets, soak taxpayer dollars and fuel a Beltway rule-making bonanza. It’s not about reining in Wall Street abuses. It’s about consolidating bureaucratic authority and granting unprecedented immunity to a single super-cop from congressional and public oversight.

Where, ahem, are those Occupiers when you need them?

And what’s really funny is that the Dodd-Frank Bill that created this new Czar says he has to be confirmed by the Senate to have any power or legitimacy!!

But an obscure paragraph in the 2010 law that created the bureau may keep Cordray in check unless the Senate formally approves of his hiring — an approval Obama sought to circumvent by making him a so-called “recess” appointment.

Section 1066 of the law says many of the bureau’s new powers are to be held by the secretary of the Treasury “until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate.”

That legal technicality ensures that Cordray’s power will be legally crippled, said Roger Pilon, the founder and director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies.

“I don’t think he would have the authority to act” because he still hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate, Pilon said. “As soon as he did [try to impose a decision], it would be challenged [in court] by one of the people or entities that is affected.”

But since Obama couldn’t get his crony in there he just appointed him, which means he technically has NO POWER. But do you think he or any of his minions will take that seriously??

They want what they want when they want it!

And it’s a “bold” political move! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie


The Collective

“If you say that we should not educate children who come into our state for no other reason than that they’ve been brought their through no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart,” Perry said. “We need to be educating these children because they will become a drag on our society. I think that’s what Texans wanted to do. Out of 181 members of the Texas legislature when this issue came up [there were] only four dissenting votes. This was a state issue. Texas voted on it. And I still support it today.”

Sounds like an Open Borders Liberal to me.

I have no allegiance to a candidate at this time. Perry’s Pro-Illegal stance makes me mad. RomneyCare makes me made. And this is the best the Republicans can do??

Good Grief. We’re Doomed…

Liberal Economist God, Paul Krugman: we have the claim that the rich have the right to keep their money — which misses the point that all of us live in and benefit from being part of a larger society.

The community comes first. Not the individual. The Collective comes first.

Thanks comrade.

Liberal Elizabeth Warren (whom Obama wanted for The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and is a (D) from Massachusetts):  “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody,”

No individual can succeed merely on their own.

“Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group — whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called ‘the common good’.” — Ayn Rand

Sound Familiar?

Sound American or Soviet? You decide.

“Individualism regards man — every man — as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being.  Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful co-existence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights — and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members.” — Ayn Rand

“Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).”–Ayn Rand

“Collectivism often sounds humane because it stresses the importance of human needs. In reality, it is little more than a rationalization for sacrificing you and me to the desires of others.” — Jarret B. Wollstein in The Causes of Aggression

“A social system is a code of laws which men observe in order to live together. Such a code must have a basic principle, a starting point, or it cannot be devised. The starting point is the question: Is the power of society limited or unlimited?
    “Individualism answers: The power of society is limited by the inalienable, individual rights of man. Society may make only such laws as do not violate these rights.
    “Collectivism answers: The power of society is unlimited. Society may make any laws it wishes, and force them upon anyone in any manner it wishes.” — Ayn Rand

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The Declaration of Independence. So which are we, and which should we be?

And our favourite fat ass rags-to-riches Millionaire Liberal (who came from working in a Flint,Mi local paper to a Hollywood Filmmaker): “The smart rich know they can only build the gate so high. And, and, sooner or later history proves that people when they’ve had enough aren’t going to take it anymore. And much better to deal with it nonviolently now, through the political system, than what could possibly happen in the future, which nobody wants to see,” Michael Moore said on Current TV’s “Countdown” program.

Moore was alluding to riots, which he was discussing with “Countdown” host Keith Olbermann prior to his comment to deal with things nonviolently now.

Was that a Threat? Probably. But it shows that Liberals are capable of anything if they don’t get their way.

So we have to repent and all bow down to the Collective and let the government guide our miserable and worthless lives or else the Liberals will riot and take it by force.

Gee, talk about a false choice.

Lawyers should be allowed to win financial damages from companies that refuse to hire unemployed people, according to a coalition of Democratic legislators, progressive advocates and entrepreneurial trial lawyers.

The existence of even a few advertisements excluding unemployed applicants in the national marketplace justifies a federal law creating a novel market for legal skills, say the advocates.

“We don’t know for sure how extensive it is … [but] if it is on one [job advertisement] website, that’s too extensive for me,” the bill’s chief backer, Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, told the TheDC.

The advocacy campaign was kicked into gear by the National Employment Law Project, a union-led advocacy group.

Law firms, however, see potential revenue amid the recession.

“We represent employes and people looking for work,” said Marilyn Widman, a partner at the law firm Allotta, Farley and Widman, based in Toledo, Ohio. The proposed law would forbid companies from openly barring unemployed applicants, but it would also allow lawyers to investigate companies that may be discriminating, she said during a joint phone press conference with Brown.

“If it a appears from all the facts that someone’s unemployment was a factor [in that person not being hired], there would be a cause of action,” and the company could be required to compensate the applicant and pay additional damages, she said.

“When businesses are investing money to hire lawyers, that’s money they’re not using to grow their businesses and create jobs,” Saltsman said.

The controversy, he said, also gives false hopes to unemployed people. “It is false hope for somebody who is unemployed, or for a country that is grappling with the fact that our labor market has not recovered.” For politicians dealing with unemployed constituents, “it is a diversionary tactic to … another topic of conversation,” said Saltsman.

Can’t win an argument, hire a lawyer to sue them into submission. Sounds like a Liberal.
Can’t get a job, sue the employer that’ll make ’em hire you!
So the reason you can’t get a job is the employer’s fault, not the fault of over-regulation, uncertainty, and a government out to get businesses anyway they can.
Damn those evil rich people! 🙂
So vote for me, the guy’s an asshole protecting the rich, the businesses and screwing you. The fact that I’m screwing you even worse doesn’t matter. It’s all a matter of perception anyhow. 🙂

Michelle Malkin: President Obama still hasn’t learned the classic First Rule of Holes: When you’re in one, stop digging. Up to his earlobes in failed stimulus grants and tainted federal loan guarantees, the shoveler in chief tunneled forward this week on his latest Government Loans to Nowhere bill. His willful ignorance is America’s abyss.

Little noticed in the White House jobs-for-cronies proposal is a provision creating yet another corruption-friendly “government corporation” that would dole out public infrastructure loans and loan guarantees.

Because, you know, the government-chartered, political hack-stacked Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “public-private partnerships” — which have incurred an estimated $400 billion in losses while enriching bipartisan Beltway operatives — worked out so well for American taxpayers.

The new monstrosity, dubbed the “American Infrastructure Financing Authority” (AIFA), would “provide direct loans and loan guarantees to facilitate investment in economically viable infrastructure projects of regional or national significance,” according to the White House plan.

President Obama would have the power to appoint AIFA’s chief executive officer and a seven-member board of directors. No doubt the nominees would include the likes of AFL-CIO Chief Richard Trumka on the left and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the right — strange Obama bedfellows who have formed a Big Labor-Big Business-Big Government alliance supporting Obama’s infrastructure slush fund.

In addition, a new bureaucracy to support AIFA would be created, including a “Chief Lending Officer” in charge of “all functions of AIFA relating to the development of project pipeline, financial structuring of projects, selection of infrastructure projects”; the “creation and management of a Center for Excellence to provide technical assistance to public sector borrowers in the development and financing of infrastructure projects”; and creation and funding of “an Office of Rural Assistance to provide technical assistance in the development and financing of rural infrastructure projects.”

In its first two years, AIFA would rake in $10 billion in congressional appropriations; $20 billion over the next seven years; and $50 billion per fiscal year after that. How would Obama ensure the loan review process is protected from special interest favor-trading and White House meddling? If the ongoing, half-billion-dollar stimulus-funded Solyndra solar company loan debacle is any indication, the answer is: not very well.

And consider Obama’s naked partisan stunt on Thursday at the Brent Spence Bridge connecting GOP House Speaker John Boehner’s home state of Ohio and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s home state of Kentucky. “There’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs,” he railed. “Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. Help us rebuild America. Help us put this country back to work. Pass this jobs bill right away!”

While he has high-mindedly called on “Washington” (as if he isn’t at the center of it) to put country over politics, he continues to use tax dollars to travel the country for campaign events assailing Republicans in front of decrepit bridges that wouldn’t see a dime of his “immediate” jobs bill money for years. If ever.

The point was made not by evil GOP obstructionists, but by the local Cincinnati Enquirer newspaper, which pointed out that the Brent Spence Bridge is not named in Obama’s jobs bill, has no guarantee of funding in the jobs bill, and “is still in the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance phase. In a best case scenario, the earliest that workers would be hired would be in 2013, but more likely 2015.”

It gets worse. Obama’s infrastructure loan corps wouldn’t just oversee bridge loans to nowhere. The AIFA board would get to dispense billions and score political points for their favorite photo-op-ready roads, mass transit, inland waterways, commercial ports, airports, air traffic control systems, passenger rail, high-speed rail, freight rail, wastewater treatment facilities, storm water management systems, dams, solid-waste disposal facilities, drinking water treatment facilities, levees, power transmission and distribution, storage, and energy-efficiency enhancements for buildings.

As I reported in my Tuesday column, a separate $6 billion “private nonprofit corporation” would be created by the Obama jobs plan to oversee the “Public Safety Broadband Corporation.” The panel would consist of 11 board members and four Obama administration officials. It, too, would be tasked with choosing winners and losers. Instead of local and state governments overseeing construction, this new federally created investing entity would “hold the single public safety wireless license granted under section 281 and take all actions necessary to ensure the building, deployment, and operation of a secure and resilient nationwide public safety interoperable broadband network.”

Given last week’s bombshell revelations of White House pressure on military and government officials to promote the president’s old broadband cronies at shady LightSquared Inc., the idea of empowering a new Obama bureaucracy to dole out more broadband contracts in the name of “public safety” is unsettling at best. Deeper and deeper we go.

When in Debt, SPEND EVEN MORE.

When in doubt, Double Down.

The Individual is subordinate to the Collective Good.

Because if you just keep hitting your head against that wall eventually you will break that wall.

Collectively, YES WE CAN!  🙂

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Insanity of 9/11 Political Correctness

Michelle Malkin: Are your kids learning the right lessons about 9/11? Ten years after Osama bin Laden’s henchmen murdered thousands of innocents on American soil, too many children have been spoon-fed the thin gruel of progressive political correctness over the stiff antidote of truth.

“Know your enemy, name your enemy” is a 9/11 message that has gone unheeded. Our immigration and homeland security policies refuse to profile jihadi adherents at foreign consular offices and at our borders. Our military leaders refuse to expunge them from uniformed ranks until it’s too late (see: Fort Hood massacre). The j-word is discouraged in Obama intelligence circles, and the term “Islamic extremism” was removed from the U.S. national security strategy document last year.

Similarly, too many teachers refuse to show and tell who the perpetrators of 9/11 were and who their heirs are today. My own daughter was one year old when the Twin Towers collapsed, the Pentagon went up in flames and Shanksville, Pa., became hallowed ground for the brave passengers of United Flight 93. In second grade, her teachers read touchy-feely stories about peace and diversity to honor the 9/11 dead. They whitewashed Osama bin Laden, militant Islam and centuries-old jihad out of the curriculum. Apparently, the youngsters weren’t ready to learn even the most basic information about the evil masterminds of Islamic terrorism.

Mary Beth Hicks, author of the new book “Don’t Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid,” points to a recent review of 10 widely used textbooks in which the concepts of jihad and sharia were either watered down or absent. These childhood experts have determined that grade school is too early to delve into the specifics of the homicidal clash of Allah’s sharia-avenging soldiers with the freedom-loving Western world.

Yet, many of the same protectors of fragile elementary-school pupils can’t wait to teach them all the ins and outs of condoms, cross-dressers and crack addictions.

We pulled our daughter out of a cesspool of academic and moral relativism and found a reality-grounded, rigorous charter school where no-nonsense teachers refuse to sugarcoat inconvenient facts and history. Many of the students are children of soldiers and servicemen and women who — inspired by the heroes of 9/11 — have voluntarily deployed time and time again to kill the American Dream destroyers abroad before they kill us over here.

There’s no better way to hammer home the message that “freedom is not free” than to have your kids go to school with other kids whose dads and moms are gone for years at a time — missing births and birthday parties, recitals and soccer practice, Christmas pageants and Independence Day fireworks.

But instead of unfettered pride in our armed forces, social justice educators in high schools and colleges across the country indoctrinate American students into viewing our volunteer armed forces as victims, monsters and pawns in a leftist “social struggle.”

A decade after the 9/11 attacks, Blame America-ism still permeates classrooms and the culture. A special 9/11 curriculum distributed in New Jersey schools advises teachers to “avoid graphic details or dramatizing the destruction” wrought by the 9/11 hijackers, and instead focus elementary school students’ attention on broadly defined “intolerance” and “hurtful words.”

No surprise: Jihadist utterances such as “Kill the Jews,” “Allahu Akbar” and “Behead all those who insult Islam” are not among the “hurtful words” studied.

Middle-schoolers are directed to “analyze diversity and prejudice in U.S. history.” And high-school students are taught “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs” – pop-psychology claptrap used to excuse jihadists’ behavior based on their purported low self-esteem and oppressed status caused by “European colonialism.”

It is no wonder that a new poll released this week showed that Americans today “are generally more willing to believe that U.S. policies in the Middle East might have motivated the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and the Pentagon,” according to Reuters.

To make matters worse, we have an appeaser-in-chief who wrote shortly after the jihadist attacks a decade ago that the “essence of this tragedy” derives “from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others.” A “climate of poverty and ignorance” caused the attacks, then-Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama preached. Never mind the Ivy League and Oxford educations, the oil wealth and the middle-class status of legions of al-Qaida plotters and operatives.

9/11 was a deliberate, carefully planned evil act of the long-waged war on the West by Koran-inspired soldiers of Allah around the world. They hated us before George W. Bush was in office. They hated us before Israel existed. And the avengers of the religion of perpetual outrage will keep hating us no matter how much we try to appease them.

The post-9/11 problem isn’t whether we’ll forget. The problem is: Will we ever learn?

College Threatens to Nix 9/11 Tribute As Too American: Human Events

If you thought that something as innocuous as putting up 3,000 American flags on school grounds to pay tribute to those murdered on September 11 couldn’t be controversial, you haven’t been to Marietta College​.

Administrators at this liberal arts college in southeast Ohio are threatening to cancel a 9/11 memorial planned by their students if flags from other countries are not observed in the activities as well.

In addition to organizing a candlelight vigil, Snow sought to plant 3,000 American flags around campus starting this Sunday morning.  She received approval from the Office of Student Life on June 23, more than two months ago.  But when she returned to campus for the fall semester, days before the memorial was to begin, the vice president of Student Life, Robert Pastoor, vowed to terminate the tribute unless foreign flags were mixed together with American ones.

“He [Robert Pastoor] insisted we add the international flags for the reason that it was a ‘global perspective’ school,”

“Other nationalities were killed in the twin towers as well” and that Marietta must “consider how the Muslim and Chinese students will feel about the [American flag] display.”

The school backed down, but Marietta officials are hosting 9/11 events on their own, but those activities pertain to how American Muslims are treated in a post-9/11 world.

DETROIT SCHOOLS: Debbie Schlussel

At Brother Rice, Kuschel — who teaches history and government — will focus on what the attacks did to American society and constitutional freedoms. “It’s important to understand who did this to us and why. Kids want to know why we’re resented abroad.”

Kuschel said he’ll look for a good, short video for students to watch, and then have them write responses to questions he poses online. Having had to focus their thoughts, those answers will provide the grist for in-class discussions.

Gregory Evans teaches seventh-grade geography at Bates Academy in the Detroit Public Schools. Since his students are younger — and because Evans remembers his own fears during the Cold War — he doesn’t want to alarm them. But he does think it’s important they understand how American policies affect people overseas, “and how our good intentions aren’t always perceived as good.”

Yes, apologists like these two jerks populate schools across America, poisoning your kids’ and grandkids’ minds and blaming America.

Ten years later, it’s amazing we still have people spouting this “here’s why they hate us” BS.  What we need to be asking is “why don’t we hate them” yet.  3,000 Americans, the Fort Hood massacre, the Underwear and Times Square bombers, multiple other failed attempts that might have succeeded. All done by Muslims. And these “teachers” are still using the same old excuses for it all.

Until we learn to hate our enemies and treat them in kind, we will continue to lose the battle.  Not just on the involuntary battlefields like the twin towers and the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field.  But willingly and insidiously throughout our culture and our society.

We are already losing that battle and have for ten years.

Seventy years ago we weren’t wasting times and minds asking and telling kids why the Nazis hated us. We spent the time hating and defeating them.

And that’s why we’ll never defeat these jihadists or their sister and brother Muslims who pose an equally sinister Islamic threat.

Middle School Analysis:

In New Jersey, many of whose residents were among the dead, middle-schoolers will mark the anniversary with a special 9/11 curriculum that will “analyze diversity and prejudice in U.S. history.”

Mark Steyn: And so we commemorate an act of war as a “tragic event,” and we retreat to equivocation, cultural self-loathing, and utterly fraudulent misrepresentation about the events of the day. In the weeks after 9/11, Americans were enjoined to ask “Why do they hate us?” A better question is: “Why do they despise us?” And the quickest way to figure out the answer is to visit the Peace Quilt and the Wish Tree, the Crescent of Embrace and the Hole of Bureaucratic Inertia.

Hugh Hewitt w/ Mark Steyn: But if half of what I read is true, that there will be no preachers, prayers, religious portion of this commemoration, I will think we have just absolutely lost our collective minds in Manhattan. What do you understand to be what’s planned for 9/11, and its implications, if any?

Wouldn’t want to offend the Muslims now would we! 🙂

MS: Well, I think there will be eunuch celebrations. They will be equivolist and mired in a kind of cultural relativism that says the real lesson we need to learn from 9/11 is that we need far more multicultural outreach. I think that’s the reason, by the way, that Nanny Bloomberg isn’t having any members of the clergy there, because if he had a Catholic preacher, or an Episcopalian, or whatever, there would probably be pressure on him to have a Rabbi. And then if he has a Rabbi, he’s probably got to have a big shot Imam. And then if he had a big shot Imam at the service, there would be people who would be objecting to him standing next to an Imam at the 9/11 commemoration. And that’s a good example of where we’ve come, by the way, because I don’t think if you’d had a sort of multi-faith civic service before 9/11, anyone would have thought you needed necessarily to have some big shot Imam in on the party. And the fact that 9/11, we are such a perversely, self-loathing culture, that the lesson we are supposed to draw from 9/11 is we need to be nicer to the people in whose faith 3,000 people died, I think gets to the heart of the 9/11 question. It’s not about them, it’s about us.

Marvin McCardle (ordinary liberal moron): Of course he was relaxed. He already knew of the attack. 911 was a conspiracy. The facts bear this out. He was not surprised at all. Some day the truth will come out, but unfortunately Bush will be gone and the shame of it all will fall on his grandchildren.

In San Francisco they are have a 9/11 Conspiracy Movie Marathon!

Guy Benson: Excerpt from AFL-CIO’s Head Skullcracker’s 9/11 Letter to his Union Members:

Just 10 years after 9/11, despite our vows, the public servants, construction workers and others who lost their lives or still suffer with the cancerous remnants of the Twin Towers haven’t just been forgotten. They’ve been vilified. The extremist small government posse has turned them into public enemy No. 1, as though teachers and firefighters, EMTs and nurses and union construction workers ruined America’s economy.

In state after state this year—with the heroism of 9/11 less than a decade behind us—politicians targeted the paychecks, benefits and basic rights of these workers in a rabid campaign to shift government support to tax breaks for the wealthy and already profitable corporations.  Wealthy CEOs, anti-government extremist front groups and frothing talk show hosts—from the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks to the Koch brothers, Karl Rove’s American Crossroads group, Americans for Prosperity, the Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and the American Legislative Exchange Council—also pushed open the door to hate.

Make no mistake—setting workers against workers is a highly profitable endeavor. How many times during the vilest state attacks on public workers did we hear the question: “Other people don’t have pensions. Why should he?” Prompting that question required twisting the American psyche—which, by its founding nature, seeks to lift the common good. The appropriate question should have been, “Why doesn’t everybody have a pension?” followed by collective action for retirement security.

We’ve seen the costs of hatred in ill-thought wars, in shameful attacks on immigrants and our LGBT neighbors. We saw it in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. We saw it in the racism that has found overt and covert expression since Barack Obama began his run for office—from outright declarations of people who said out loud they would never vote for a black man to the ridiculously persistent obsession with our president’s birth certificate. Regardless of his policies or priorities, President Obama is shadowed by the drumbeat of suspicion based on his “other”-ness. And those suspicions are fed and watered constantly by forces that were threatened by his message of “hope and change.”

We’ve seen the cost of greed in the recklessness of financial institutions that created the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and the devastating jobs crisis that persists today.  But I remember that other door that opened on 9/11—the door to our better selves, to our understanding that we are one and our values require us to care for one another.

That’s what sent 347 firefighters to their death at the Twin Towers 10 years ago. It’s also what sent firefighters to stand with teachers in Wisconsin even though Gov. Scott Walker had exempted them from his attack on public employees. It’s what moves employed people now to demand good jobs for the 26 million Americans who are looking for work. It’s what gives us the courage to take on a crumbling economy and the politicians preaching austerity and ignoring our jobs crisis—to take them on and say, “We are America. We are better than this. And we are one.” Brothers and sisters, friends, I hope you will join me in marking this solemn anniversary by committing to redouble your activism on behalf of America’s everyday working heroes. We will rise or fall together.
This is appalling, and requires no further commentary.  It truly speaks for itself.  My only concern was that it was so cartoonish and vile that it might not be authentic.  I called the AFL-CIO, and a representative told me it “appears to be legitimate.”  She said she’d get back to me with final confirmation, but conceded that it’s a fair assumption that Trumka is, in fact, the piece’s author.  Egads.
UPDATE – I received the following confirmation from an AFL-CIO spokesperson:
“The September 11 (9/11) page on the AFL-CIO’s website is valid, per our phone conversation earlier.  Thank you for your patience as we verified this.”

I feel so much better now, don’t you?

The White House Speaks:

The White House has issued detailed guidelines to government officials on how to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, with instructions to honor the memory of those who died on American soil but also to recall that Al Qaeda and other extremist groups have since carried out attacks elsewhere in the world, from Mumbai to Manila.

The White House in recent days has quietly disseminated two sets of documents. One is framed for overseas allies and their citizens and was sent to American embassies and consulates around the globe. The other includes themes for Americans here and underscores the importance of national service and what the government has done to prevent another major attack in the United States. That single-page document was issued to all federal agencies, officials said.

So depending on who you are you got a tailored politically correct message. He was talking out of 3 sides of his mouth at once. Say what you have to to the group in front of you but stand for nothing.

Sounds like him.

“The important theme is to show the world how much we realize that 9/11 — the attacks themselves and violent extremism writ large — is not ‘just about us,’ ” said one official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe internal White House planning.

Smelling a theme are we?

This is one American citizen’s response to the president’s “Guidelines on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 observances,” saying that 9/11 wasn’t just about us and that our actions to defend our nation after 9/11 angered other nations and we must be sensitive to that. I suppose we should have apologized after being attacked at Pearl Harbor.

9/11 is about us.

9/11 is about terror and the first act of war directly on the American mainland.

9/11 is about those unbelievably heroic firemen, policemen and ordinary citizens who entered the twin towers knowing they would never come out again.

9/11 is watching fellow Americans knowingly choose to jump to their deaths rather than burn alive. Think about that.

9/11 is about the unbelievable heroes of Flight 93. They personified the uniquely American spirit.

9/11 is about radical Islamic terrorists carefully and coldly plotting for years to target the primary symbol of freedom in this world, the United States of America. Saying that may not be politically correct, but it is the truth.

9/11 is about Americans putting aside differences to unite against a common enemy — evil personified.

9/11 is about all Americans praying together and honoring and respecting their religious traditions and differences. Hear that, Mayor Bloomberg?

9/11 is about all freedom and peace loving people throughout the world saying “We are with you. We are all Americans today.”

9/11 is about truth, not fear, not political correctness and not moral equivalency. To equate 9/11 with a nightclub bombing or other terror attacks does a grave disservice to those who died on 9/11.

9/11 is about confronting our enemies and supporting and defending those who seek to live in freedom and peace.

9/11 is about not apologizing for what we did to defend our nation and our freedom.

9/11 is about the millions of Americans who died defending not only the freedoms this nation cherishes, but the lives and freedoms of millions throughout the world since the founding of this nation.

9/11 is about being proud, not ashamed, of American exceptionalism, our Judeo-Christian heritage and our uncompromising principle of freedom of, and freedom from, religion for all.

9/11 is about being unabashedly and unashamedly patriotic. Other countries don’t apologize for their love of country. We shouldn’t either.

9/11 is about admitting our mistakes as a nation and correcting them.

9/11 is about freedom and not about the government telling its citizens what to say or not to say on a most sacred national observance. To do so does not do justice to the memory of those who died that day and to the millions of brave men and women who died defending our freedom, as citizens, to speak.

L.C. Ketter, Federal Way,Washington. (Federal Way Mirror)


Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie


Can I have an Order of Fear & Freeloaders, Please…

A Michigan man who won $2 million in a state lottery game continues to collect food stamps 11 months after striking it rich.

And there’s nothing the state can do about it, at least for now.

Leroy Fick, 59, of Auburn won $2 million in the state lottery TV show “Make Me Rich!” last June. But the state’s Department of Human Services determined he was still eligible for food stamps, Fick’s attorney, John Wilson of Midland, said Tuesday.

Eligibility for food stamps is based on gross income and follows federal guidelines; lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don’t count as income. As long as Fick’s gross income stays below the eligibility requirement for food stamps, he can receive them, even if he has a million dollars in the bank.

Food stamps are paid for through tax dollars and are meant to help support low-income families.

“If you’re going to try to make me feel bad, you’re not going to do it,” Fick told WNEM-TV in Saginaw on Monday.

After all, he’s “entitled”. As I have said before and will say again, Liberals are the greediest, most self-centered because they feel the most entitled to other people’s money.

Oh, and if you disagree with Liberals on this Grandma is going to be thrown off a cliff (that’s coming later on in this blog).

Then there are the frauds. Like AARP.

“I think I’m scheduled to get my AARP card in a couple of years?” President Barack Obama asked today.

“Anytime you want one,” the organization told him. “Platinum.”

Obama at AARP.jpg

The stage was set at AARP, the powerful Washington-based lobby for senior Americans, for Obama to host another “town hall” forum on healthcare reform, where the president allowed that both he and his wife Michelle have “living wills” drafted but hope they don’t have to use them anytime soon.

“If you have insurance that you like, you will be able to keep that insurance,” Obama said of the healthcare reforms that he is pursuing on Capitol Hill. “Nobody is trying to change what works.” (Obama 2009)

They were a massive supporter of ObamaCare.

Now they get a waiver for their MediGap insurance. Their main rival, Medical Advantage gets savaged by ObamaCare.

Effectively, AARP is no longer a senior advocacy group, but just another “evil” “greedy” insurance company. But since they are in bed with Obama and the Liberals, that’s ok.

Their moral outrage is selective.

The Daily Caller has learned that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rate review rules, which it finalized on Thursday, exempt “Medigap” policy providers, like the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), from oversight when such providers increase payment rates for their supplemental insurance plans.

Insurance providers who aren’t exempt from Obamacare’s rate review rules are required to publicly release and explain some health care payment rate increases.

The AARP is the nation’s biggest seller of Medigap policies, or supplemental healthcare plans that add onto what Medicare won’t cover for seniors. The senior citizens interest group advocated for Obamacare to include an attack on Medigap policies’ biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage.

Though the White House and HHS dismiss allegations of political favoritism when it comes to who’s getting exceptions from the new health care regulations – such as in the recent uproar over the disproportionate number of Obamacare waivers that went to companies in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s district — Obamacare critics say the mere appearance of the administration helping friends is disturbing.

The appearance of favoritism exists with the new AARP exemptions, too. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sens. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, and Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, wrote to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius last October asking her not to do what HHS just finalized today – that is exempt Medigap policies from rate increase oversight.underwriter

“While Medicare Advantage premiums are declining, we are hearing disturbing stories from beneficiaries across the country about excessive premium increases for Medigap supplemental insurance policies,” Reid, Baucus and Kerry wrote to Sebelius on Oct. 6.

“For example, some beneficiaries enrolled in the United of Omaha Life Insurance Company will see their Medigap premiums increase by approximately 40 percent between 2010 and 2011,” the letter read. “An increase of this magnitude raises serious concerns about premium-setting practices and rate review procedures in place for Medigap policies.”

Instead of listening to three top Senate Democrats, the Obama administration decided to go ahead anyway with the Medigap exceptions from rate increase reviews.

The AARP was a driving force behind getting Obamacare through Congress, contributing a large sum to the $121 million advertising campaign pushing it, and spending millions more lobbying for it on Capitol Hill.

The senior citizen advocacy organization stands to make huge profits from Medicare Advantage cuts and from the exemptions it will benefit from when it comes to the Medigap plans sold under what AARP CEO A. Barry Rand calls the AARP’s “for-profit side.”

The AARP’s support of Obamacare during the debate over the legislation raised lots of eyebrows nationwide, as President Obama called for $313 billion in cuts to Medicare to push the plan through. Seniors weren’t happy about it, and many ripped AARP representatives at town hall meetings nationwide.

Now, though, it’s clear that the AARP is set to make millions, if not billions, of extra dollars in Medigap plan sales moving forward because they’ve effectively knocked out their biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage, through Obamacare. (DC)

AARP aided and abetted Democrats’ efforts to inflict a disastrous bill on an unwilling public.  They now stand to profit from the resulting law — while simultaneously receiving convenient exemptions from provisions that may hurt their bottom line.  Ed Morrissey pens the appropriate response to this outrageous report:  “If the AARP and the labor unions that backed ObamaCare need waivers from its consequences, then we all do.”  Amen.  I’ll leave you with this delightful AARP/Obama walk down memory lane.  This clip still makes my blood boil:
Update from AARP: “To be clear, AARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with a membership. While there are insurance products that carry the AARP name, they are underwritten by insurers such as Delta Dental, UnitedHealth Group, and Aetna and others—not AARP.  We work to ensure those products meet our standards and provide value to our members.

And, NATO is the US so the US didn’t attack Libya…right….. 😦
Oh and if you disagree with them, Grandma is going off a cliff…
Democrats continue to try to scare seniors with a new anti-GOP Medicare ad that shows “Grandma” getting thrown off a cliff and then asks, “Is America beautiful without Medicare?”

Welcome to the land of the freeloaders and the home of the depraved. No image captures America’s regressive ethos better than that of 30-year-old Stanley Thornton Jr., self-proclaimed “Adult Baby.” Profiled on a recent National Geographic reality television show, Thornton claims to suffer from a bizarre infantilism that leads him to wear diapers, lounge around in an oversized crib and seek constant coddling.

The nappies may be extreme, but let’s face it: Thornton Jr. — let’s just call him Junior — is a symptom of our Nanny State run amok, not an anomaly.

Junior came to Washington’s attention this week when Oklahoma GOP Sen. Tom Coburn challenged the Social Security Administration to probe into how the baby bottle-guzzling 350-pound man qualified for federal disability benefits. A former security guard, Junior is handy enough to have crafted his own wooden high chair and playpen.

Junior can drive a car and has sense enough not to go out in public in his XXL footie pajamas. Yet, welfare administrators treat him as an incurable dependent. Also collecting taxpayer-subsidized paychecks: Thornton’s adult roommate, a former nurse, who has indulged Thornton’s baby role-playing for the past decade.

Junior, naturally, threw a tantrum when his government teat-sucking was called into question. He wiped his nose and un-balled his fists long enough to type out an e-mail to The Washington Times: “You wanna test how damn serious I am about leaving this world, screw with my check that pays for this apartment and food. Try it. See how serious I am. I don’t care,” Junior threatened. “I have no problem killing myself. Take away the last thing keeping me here, and see what happens. Next time you see me on the news, it will be me in a body bag.”

Not from nowhere has this stubborn, self-destructive sense of entitlement sprung. As I reported last month, a record-breaking 12 million Americans have been added to the federal food stamp rolls over the past two years, and the bloated $6 billion AmeriCorps social justice army has been converted into a publicist corps for the welfare machine.

Just this week, a Michigan man boasted that he’s still collecting food stamps after winning a $2 million government-sponsored lottery prize. “If you’re going to … try to make me feel bad, you aren’t going to do it,” he told a local TV reporter. Embedded in his rebuke is the eternal refrain of the self-esteem-puffed teenager: “You can’t judge me!”

Diana West, author of “The Death of the Grown-Up,” traced the modern abdication of adulthood to the Baby Boomer generation. “The common compass of the past — the urge to grow up and into long pants; to be old enough to dance at the ball (amazingly enough, to the music adults danced to); to assume one’s rights and responsibilities — completely disappeared” after World War II. A culture of behavioral restraint gave way to “anything goes” and morphed into the current generation’s “whatever” attitude.

Look around: Junior’s infantilism is of a piece with the refusal of celebrity mothers Dina Lohan and Tish Cyrus to act like parents — and instead serve as best friends and tattoo parlor pals for their wayward daughters Lindsay and Miley. They’re the kind of women who shop at Forever 21, buy beer for their daughters’ prom parties and give them Botox certificates for high school graduation.

Junior’s penchant for pajamas is of a piece with perpetually stunted Hugh Hefner’s fetish for velvet robes 24/7 and self-indulgent decadence. Junior’s giant playpen is a cringe-inducing symbol of the Farmville-tethered, “funemployed” class of self-gratifiers who continue to live for today and spend like there’s no tomorrow.

Adult Baby Syndrome isn’t an isolated pathology. It’s the new American Way. Or, I should say, the new American Wahhhhh. (Michelle Malkin)

On issue after issue, Republicans are putting forward serious, sober and often politically risky solutions (if sometimes a bit weak kneed) to the nation’s most pressing problems, while Democrats play class-warfare games and stoke the public’s fear.

Oh, and today was supposed to be the end of the world… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Is Sanity Overrated?

“The most snort-worthy aspect of the White House spin on its health care waiver program is the idea that the administration is ‘promoting transparency,’” <Michelle> Malkin said in an email. “As usual, Team Obama is stonewalling on full disclosure of the waiver process. Americans deserve a thorough accounting of everyone who applied, everyone who was denied, and why.” 

Obama, stonewalling, nah…that never happens! :I

Understanding Liberals by Thomas Sowell

The liberal vision of government is easily understood and makes perfect sense if one acknowledges their misunderstanding and implied assumptions about the sources of income. Their vision helps explain the language they use and policies they support, such as income redistribution and calls for the rich to give something back.

Suppose the true source of income was a gigantic pile of money meant to be shared equally amongst Americans. The reason some people have more money than others is because they got to the pile first and greedily took an unfair share. That being the case, justice requires that the rich give something back, and if they won’t do so voluntarily, Congress should confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners.

A competing liberal implied assumption about the sources of income is that income is distributed, as in distribution of income. There might be a dealer of dollars. The reason why some people have more dollars than others is because the dollar dealer is a racist, a sexist, a multinationalist or a conservative. The only right thing to do, for those to whom the dollar dealer unfairly dealt too many dollars, is to give back their ill-gotten gains. If they refuse to do so, then it’s the job of Congress to use their agents at the IRS to confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners. In a word, there must be a re-dealing of the dollars or what some people call income redistribution.

The sane among us recognize that in a free society, income is neither taken nor distributed; for the most part, it is earned. Income is earned by pleasing one’s fellow man. The greater one’s ability to please his fellow man, the greater is his claim on what his fellow man produces. Those claims are represented by the number of dollars received from his fellow man.

Say I mow your lawn. For doing so, you pay me $20. I go to my grocer and demand, “Give me 2 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer that my fellow man produced.” In effect, the grocer asks, “Williams, you’re asking your fellow man to serve you. Did you serve him?” I reply, “Yes.” The grocer says, “Prove it.”

That’s when I pull out the $20 I earned from serving my fellow man. We can think of that $20 as “certificates of performance.” They stand as proof that I served my fellow man. It would be no different if I were an orthopedic doctor, with a large clientele, earning $500,000 per year by serving my fellow man. By the way, having mowed my fellow man’s lawn or set his fractured fibula, what else do I owe him or anyone else? What’s the case for being forced to give anything back? If one wishes to be charitable, that’s an entirely different matter.
Contrast the morality of having to serve one’s fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces with congressional handouts. In effect, Congress says, “You don’t have to serve your fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces. We’ll take what he produces and give it to you. Just vote for me.”

Who should give back? Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart, Bill Gates founded Microsoft, Steve Jobs founded Apple Computer. Which one of these billionaires acquired their wealth by coercing us to purchase their product? Which has taken the property of anyone?

Each of these examples, and thousands more, is a person who served his fellow men by producing products and services that made life easier. What else do they owe? They’ve already given.

If anyone is obliged to give something back, they are the thieves and recipients of legalized theft, namely people who’ve used Congress, including America’s corporate welfare queens, to live at the expense of others. When a nation vilifies the productive and makes mascots of the unproductive, it doesn’t bode well for its future.

Obama wants to further economic development in the Middle East. Not here, in the Middle East, where he started a war in Libya. Uh, yeah….

So he wants more oil production, but only in Brazil where a Democrat Money God has investments.

Now he wants economic development in the Middle East where he started a war and they hate us to begin with.

Has Sanity gone out of fashion in Washington D.C.??

President Barack Obama is set to announce a government-directed plan for economic development in the Middle East that emphasizes the role of Western multinational organizations, but that also sidelines the role of companies, ignores the new democracy in Iraq and downplays regional cultural, tribal and religious practices.

“We’re going out of a decade of great tension and division, and now, having wound-down the Iraq war and having taken out Osama bin Laden, we’re turning the page to a positive future for the United State in the region,” said a senior administration official during a 25-minute press briefing on Wednesday that did not include any mention of Islam, the tribal cultures of the region, democracy in Iraq, or the word “company.”

The plan, which Obama will include in his Thursday speech on Middle East policy at the Department of State, calls for at least $2 billion in debt-relief and loan guarantees to be delivered to Egypt, Tunisia and other countries via non-profits, funding agencies and universities.

Obama’s economic agenda for the region will have four pillars, said the officials. Non-profits, think-tanks and universities will help provide better “economic management,” international aid will boost countries’ financial stability, international agencies can help foster “a strong private sector,” and trade-negotiators can help establish regional trading zones, said the officials. “We will galvanize support from the international community… [and] the multinational organizations will have a huge role to play here,” said one White House official.

Given his track record, if he gets what he wants this will surely defeat Al-Qaeda, Iran and Middle Eastern Terrorism. He’ll do to them what he did to us for “economic development”.

They will never have a chance, they’ll be too broke and too poor to attack us.

Good plan, Mr. President. 🙂


Here’s another reason to get rid of our Dear Leader. He will pack the Supreme Court with his cronies.

He already has at least 1, Elena “she’s not qualified” Kagan. Want More?

Newly released documents reveal Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was more involved with President Obama’s health-care law than she disclosed previously. The documents likely will lead to a revival of questions about whether the Kagan should recuse herself from future cases.

Specifically, the documents show that Kagan was involved with crafting the legal defense of the Affordable Care Act in her role as solicitor general, before her appointment to the bench. The Media Research Center and Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that was filed in February 2011.

In an email dated Jan. 8, 2010, then-Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal sent an email to Senior Counsel Brian Hauck and Deputy Attorney General Thomas Perrelli that indicates Kagan played a key role in coming up with a legal defense.

“Brian, Elena would definitely like OSG [Office of Solicitor General] to be involved in this set of issues … we will bring Elena as needed.”

In an email on March 21, 2010, Katyal urged Kagan to attend a health-care litigation meeting on defending the law. “I think you should go, no?” wrote Katyal. “I will, regardless, but feel like this is litigation of singular importance.”

The documents also show that once Kagan was nominated to the Supreme Court, she and Katyal immediately switched course to distance her from discussions about the legislation. (DC)

Gee, I wonder why? 🙂

But don’t worry, it’s all very TRANSPARENT! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

May Day Call

Michelle Malkin: On May 1, left-wing vigilantes will target companies across the country that have committed a mortal sin: sending donations to GOP Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. Rest assured, such intolerable acts of political free speech will not go unpunished by tolerant Big Labor activists. They’re calling for both a national boycott of Walker’s corporate donors and a coordinated sticker vandalism campaign on GOP-tainted products.

The Wisconsin Grocers Association is bracing for the anti-Walker witch hunt. Anonymous operatives have circulated sabotage stickers on the Internet and around Wisconsin that single out Angel Soft tissue paper (“Wiping your (expletive) on Wisconsin workers”), Johnsonville Sausage (“These Brats Bust Unions”) and Coors (“Labor Rights Flow Away Like A Mountain Stream”). Earlier this week, a “Stick It To Walker” website boasted photos of vandalized Angel Soft tissue packages at a Super Foodtown grocery store in Brooklyn, N.Y.

This destruction of private property is illegal. Not that it matters to anti-Walker protest mobsters, who trampled Wisconsin’s Capitol at an estimated $5 million in security, repair and cleaning costs to taxpayers. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “The identity of the backers of the sticker effort is unknown, although many assume it is being orchestrated by public employee unions. This latest effort follows boycotts organized by members of the Wisconsin State Employees Union AFSCME 24.”

AFSCME 24 is the same union affiliate that recently disseminated intimidation letters throughout southeast Wisconsin, demanding that local businesses support unions by putting up signs in their windows. The letter threatened not just Walker supporters, but any and all businesses that have chosen to sit on the sidelines and stay out of politics altogether: “Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means ‘no’ to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members.” Others on Big Labor’s hit list: Kwik Trip, Sargento Foods Inc. and M&I Bank.

Walker, of course, has been at the forefront of government pension and budget reforms. Similar measures are being advanced by Democratic governors and Democrat-run legislatures from Massachusetts to New York to California. But union bosses have yet to sic their goons on individual and corporate donors to Democratic politicians imposing long-overdue benefit and collective bargaining limits for public employee unions.

How convenient, yes? Just as they secured a big fat waiver from the federal health care mandate and tax scheme they lobbied to impose on the rest of America, Big Labor is giving Democratic legislative water-carriers who have been forced to adopt cuts and cost controls a big fat waiver from their organized wrath and vandalism.

Now, a few hundred or thousand ruined grocery store items may not seem to matter much to the average reader, but this little property destruction campaign spotlights a nasty tactic increasingly employed by the left: campaign finance disclosure as a speech-squelching weapon.

We saw it last fall when Democratic operatives targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for donating to Obamacare opposition ads.

We saw it in 2008 when a top alumnus launched attacks on Republican donors with the express purpose of “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.”

We saw it when Obama campaign committee lawyers lobbied the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute a GOP donor for funding campaign ads exposing Obama’s ties to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers.

We saw it during the Proposition 8 traditional marriage battle in California, where gay rights avengers compiled black lists, harassment lists and Google target maps of citizens who contributed to the ballot measure.

We saw it when “progressive” zealots smeared Target Corporation and Chick-fil-A for daring to associate with social conservatives.

And we’re seeing it again this month as the Obama White House readies an executive order that would force federal contractors to disclose all political donations to candidates and independent groups in excess of $5,000 made not just by a corporate entity, but by all of its individual executives, directors and officers.

Former Federal Election Commission official Hans von Spakovsky obtained the sweeping draft executive order, which — surprise, surprise — exempts unions and predominantly left-wing federal grant recipients from the mandate. On Wednesday, GOP senators spelled out the bullying agenda in an open letter objecting to the Obama order: “Political activity would obviously be chilled if prospective contractors have to fear that their livelihood could be threatened if the causes they support are disfavored by the administration.” Join the club.

When disclosure’s a bludgeon, all but Obama’s cronies are nails.

As I have said many times before, the Democrats only have 3 plays in their playbook: Class Ware, fear, and Intimidation.

That’s all folks.

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Weiss Ratings downgraded U.S. debt this week.

Yes, the superman of all debts, public and private, got it some kryptonite.    

“We believe that the AAA/Aaa assigned to U.S. sovereign debt by Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch is unfair to investors and savers, who are undercompensated for the risks they are taking,” Weiss Ratings President Martin D. Weiss said according to the South Florida Business Journal.

Weiss rated the U.S. a “C” credit risk, behind even Mexico.

The U.S. isn’t just a banana republic under Obama, it’s close to a failed state; at least in its ability to pay the bills.

To make matters worse, Weiss made the announcement after Federal Reserve “superman” Ben Bernanke admitted in a press conference that his policy of printing money has resulted in higher inflation and no jobs.

The announcement by Weiss may not be unrelated to the Bernanke press conference.

As Forbes observed this week, the Fed under Bernanke may not have the ability to judge anything anymore.

Just last month, the web site reminded us, the Fed assured everyone that “The economic recovery is on firmer footing, and overall conditions in the labor market appear to be improving gradually.”

On Wednesday the Fed told us “The economic recovery is proceeding at a moderate pace and overall conditions in the labor market are improving gradually.”

On cue, right after the Bernanke press conference, the estimates for GDP by the Fed were then slashed to 1.8 percent after posting 3.7 percent in the first quarter. Think that Ben didn’t know about those new numbers at his all-is-well press conference?

The revised estimates confirmed what we already knew; that the Fed policy was igniting inflation that would eventually hurt economic growth by spiking prices for things like gas, food, common stocks.

1.8 percent growth is hardly enough growth to ensure that jobless claims don’t start going up again.

Then on Friday, the Fed chief told an audience that he wants more sub-prime lending.

We’re getting into the area where we just can’t make this stuff up.

Yes, Ben Bernanke is calling on lenders to give more money to people who can’t afford mortgages.


“Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday called for more lending to people and small businesses in lower-income neighborhoods,” reports the AP “saying they’ve been disproportionately hurt by the recession.”

Does Bernanke think he’s running for re-election? What’s worse is that our chief banking officer doesn’t seem to understand how the country got where we are fiscally.     

And things have just become too complicated- and political- and dangerous for Bernanke to remain the front man for U.S. economic policy.

Instead Ben should do the decent thing:

Take off that silly cape.

It looks ridlculous. (John Ransom)

But don’t worry, everything’s fine, we aren’t broke.

We just need more investments in infrastructure and higher taxes on “rich” people to solve all our woes! 😦

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Haves Vs. Have Yours

I just wanna say, I want to be a kid in Wisconsin. Think of it. If you present a fake note as an excuse what is the Teacher going to do when they staged their ‘sick outs’ with fake doctors notes?

The kid just says, “Well you did it!”

“Yes, I did. But I’m an adult.”


Do as I say, not as I do. The perfect lesson in Liberal “fairness”. 🙂

And just in case you wonder if all the money is worth it?

Two-thirds of the eighth graders in Wisconsin public schools cannot read proficiently according to the U.S. Department of Education, despite the fact that Wisconsin spends more per pupil in its public schools than any other state in the Midwest.

In the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests administered by the U.S. Department of Education in 2009—the latest year available—only 32 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned a “proficient” rating while another 2 percent earned an “advanced” rating. The other 66 percent of Wisconsin public-school eighth graders earned ratings below “proficient,” including 44 percent who earned a rating of “basic” and 22 percent who earned a rating of “below basic.” (CNS)

Then the Indiana Democrats flees to avoid the democratic process that they don’t like.

Like Monty Python’s Brave Sir Robin and his band of quivering knights, these elected officials have only one plan when confronted with political hardship or economic peril: Run away, run away, run away.

Scores of Fleebagger Democrats are now in hiding in neighboring Illinois, the nation’s sanctuary for political crooks and corruptocrats. Soon, area hotels will be announcing a special discount rate for card-carrying FleePAC winter convention registrants. Question: Will the White House count the economic stimulus from the mass Democratic exodus to Illinois as jobs “saved” or “created”? More important question: How much are taxpayers being charged for these obstructionist vacations? (Michelle Malkin)

So, the lesson here folks is, if Democrats are in the minority and don’t like your legislation they will flee. But if they are in the Majority and YOU don’t like their legislation they will cram it down your throat and tell you how great it is and how evil you are for protesting them.

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Wisconsin reveals class war between ‘have-nots’ and ‘have yours’

As public-sector unions protest over cuts to their taxpayer-funded benefits in Wisconsin, James Poulos offers an insight so simple and so insightful, it’s been bouncing around in my head all day:

As talk turns to the ‘new class war’, the concept of a class defined not so much by its net worth or tax bracket as by its economic (and therefore political) dependence on government will sharpen step for step with the reality of this class, which will be hitting home in all its gruesome implications for those outside and inside it.

Anyone who responds to the current crisis by anointing unionized employees of the government as the epitome of ‘the working man’ is placing themselves, and I really do not say this lightly, at the mercy of socialism — not just as an intellectual theory, but as an emotional promise of happiness. There has never been a viable, durable Labor Party in the US. But neither has the government class ever been so big or faced such an existential threat.

It’s important to say that the concept is sharpening only now because public-sector unions have been a sleeper issue for years during which economic times were good (and there weren’t as many public-sector union members). Combine these three factors:

  1. Unions have represented more than a third of the public-sector workforce since the late 1970s;
  2. The public sector has expanded substantially as a portion of the American economy over the last 30 years;
  3. Union membership in the private sector has decreased sharply, going from one-in-five union membership in the private sector during the 1970s to about one-in-13 or worse.

Unions have come to rely on the public sector because government employees are easier to organize, and managers less resistent. Who’s going to put up a fight over an organizing campaign with a politically active union when taxpayers are paying the bill? If the union wants nicer benefits, it’s easy to cave in, tax dollars and budgets be damned. It’s good for campaign coffers.

That mentality may have worked during a boom period, but it doesn’t work in a bust when unemployment is rampant and the contrasts between haves and have nots are clear. Being a Wall Street banker may have some whiff of sin to the working man, but the loathsome element isn’t merely the wealth of the AIG or Goldman Sachs executive, but that it has been compensated with taxpayer subsidies when taxpayers themselves are struggling to make ends meet. It’s not so much about haves and have nots. It’s about haves and have yours.

Taxpayers are becoming acutely aware of the have-yours as a class — something like Angelo Codevilla’s ruling class — whose gains in salaries and benefits aren’t associated with harder work and important innovations but political access. Public-sector unions rallying in Madison aren’t even taking a hit for their political activism, given that their protest is made possible by paid sick days, negotiated for them by their collective bargaining units who, it must be said, donate to the very people with whom they negotiate.

Just look at the mess of the Transportation Security Administration’s decision to permit unionization among screeners. They won’t even attempt to educate workers about the perils of unionization because it’s someone else’s money and it’s politically profitable. From our editorial:

The two biggest federal employee unions behind the campaign to permit collective bargaining at TSA, the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), gave exclusively to Democratic incumbents and candidates over the last decade and now will compete to collect more than $27 million a year in union dues from the TSA’s 45,000 workers after the March 9 representation election.

Combine that with the $100 million from Teachers Unions and AFSCME (state employees) mentioned in yesterday’s blog and you can see the gravy train being porked to infinity and beyond!

And this is only the tip of the Union Iceberg.

All of the people at the bargaining table are salaried by taxpayers anyway, so it’s a big negotiation with someone else’s money. But don’t call it “negotiation” — call it “divvying up the loot.”

This whole exercise in protesting isn’t civil disobedience — it’s just another transaction, one in which the have-yours labor leaders are trying to reassert their authority over taxpayer resources by arguing that it’s inhumane to ask government workers to pay more into their own health care and pensions, and that collective bargaining means only one side gets a bargain.

To distract from the sheer avarice of this position, the AFL-CIO, the SEIU, and others are trying to get as many people as possible to protest and show some kind of consensus that Gov. Scott Walker’s, R, position is unreasonable, even cruel. The numbers are impressive and the photos really do depict the us-vs-them drama, but not in the way union leaders and member hope because the chilling have yours subtext of every sign held aloft by a protesting union member is clear: We don’t work for you, taxpayer. You work for us. (Washington Examiner)

If unions were formed to protect workers from employer abuse, right-to-work laws were created to protect taxpayers and workers from union abuse. States with such laws enjoy higher growth and purchasing power. (IBD)

Unions have become just as bad or worse than the people they were formed to fight against.

Liberals are Pro-Choice, you have the choice of giving them what they want when they want it, or they can force you to give it to them so they can do it anyhow. 🙂

We have seen the Enemy and they are the Unions themselves.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne