Granola Politics

The far Left loves to control people. It loves to push it’s agenda, that always ends in them running your life for you. And if you resist them, they swarm you like angry bees.

They get a buzz off lawsuits.

And Ground Zero for this is California, the Granola State– What isn’t fruit and nuts is flakes! 🙂

Prop 65 originally had its voter-approved heart in the right place, identifying hazardous chemicals in drinking water. But “mission creep” is practically a sacrament among government bureaucrats, and “drinking water” has been expanded to just about everything containing an element on the Periodic Table.

Prop 65 requires warning labels on products containing chemicals “known to the State of California to cause cancer.” Violations are enforceable by private citizens who can reap a hefty bounty for successfully suing (or even for negotiating settlements).

And this the “pro-business” “pro-Job growth” agenda that liberal pursue. I want to hire more people when I have crazed leftist bounty hunters looking for an ridiculous off the wall reason to sue me.

And then the government thinks I’m “rich” and wants to tax me to death so they can spend more on entitlements for people who aren’t working or paying taxes anyhow.

This just increases the price of products, you know.

This sounds like a “good business environment” doesn’t it??

A former California Department of Consumer Affairs director recently noted how “bounty hunter shakedowns of businesses have become the norm.” This spring a snack vending company received a $60,000 legal shakedown warning over the potato chips it sells.

The whole idea of “known … to cause cancer” has become vague and watered-down. For the overzealous (who stand to make just as much money as a principled lawyer), “known” could be as wishy-washy as a single poorly designed study showing a vague link.

A chemical called acrylamide, for example, has long been in Prop 65’s crosshairs. Regulators added it to the law’s initial hit list in 1986 because it sometimes turned up in drinking water. Twenty years later, scientists identified it in cooked vegetables, French fries, potato chips, and even roasted coffee beans.

It’s present in incredibly small amounts, of course. A person of average weight would have to eat 62 pounds of chips every day, for an entire lifetime, to reach the acrylamide dose that causes cancer in lab rats. Still, warning labels are warning labels.

Sadly, Prop 65 is not an anomaly. California is quickly becoming the home of laughingstock initiatives that threaten more than just grocery shoppers’ peace of mind.

In 2008, animal rights activists passed Proposition 2. When it takes effect in a few years, this initiative will ban the keeping of egg-laying hens in conventional cages.

Moneyed interests like the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS, which doesn’t run a single pet shelter) ran slick ads making Prop 2 sound good—who doesn’t want to help chickens?—while concealing their real agenda. In an unguarded moment, a former vice president of HSUS has confessed that her group’s ultimate goal is to “get rid of the [poultry] industry.” One strategy is apparently to force cash-strapped egg farmers to shell out millions for a costly new infrastructure.

Human nature being what it is, much of California’s egg production may eventually move south to Mexico, where food safety and animal welfare standards are anybody’s guess. (How is that “humane”?)

Jobs anyone?

It gets loonier: Organic-only food activists are gearing up for a 2012 California ballot question that would require labels on foods containing genetically modified (GM) ingredients.

Most modern agricultural technology is taboo in the organic utopia. By raising the specter of (non-existent) risks, activists constantly attack biotech techniques that have been used safely for decades. Even Whole Foods now stocks some GM groceries. If they’re not “pure” enough, somebody’s standards are out of whack.

The general principle of a citizen-driven ballot initiative is a good one. But today radical groups are throwing millions into campaigns whose basic premises are deceptive, and whose arguments kick nuance to the curb.

Some state legislatures can amend ballot initiatives after they pass. Missouri is one. In April a bipartisan majority of Show-Me State lawmakers told the animal rights activists at HSUS to take a hike, repealing the more unsavory parts of an HSUS-funded initiative that eked out a slim victory last fall.

In response, the ultra-liberal HSUS is now working with conservative groups to set a “supermajority” standard for Missouri legislators who want to override future ballot initiatives. With all the strange-bedfellows special-interest money already flooding state legislatures and bankrolling carefully manicured ballot questions, it’s hard to imagine that the result will reflect the sentiment of the electorate.

If you vote against a Liberal you just make them madder.

Ultimately, the right remedy for legislative interference with ballot questions may not lie in merely raising the bar. How about a series of state laws requiring ballot initiatives to essentially stand for re-election every ten years? When public mores change, laws should follow suit. Even activist-written laws.

We could start in California. Potato chip lovers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your warning labels. (Rick Berman)

But won’t you “feel” better and “feel” safer sticking it to “the man”! 🙂

And put down that evil Potato Chip!

And forget about cooking with that Mexican Egg Fatso!

Reality is a Dish Best Served Cold

Optimists think that if we manage to turn a few things around, their kids may have it . . . almost as good. The country they inherit may be . . . almost as good. And it’s kind of a shock to think like this; pessimism isn’t in our DNA. But it isn’t pessimism, really, it’s a kind of tough knowingness, combined, in most cases, with a daily, personal commitment to keep plugging.

But do our political leaders have any sense of what people are feeling deep down? They don’t act as if they do. I think their detachment from how normal people think is more dangerous and disturbing than it has been in the past. I started noticing in the 1980s the growing gulf between the country’s thought leaders, as they’re called—the political and media class, the universities—and those living what for lack of a better word we’ll call normal lives on the ground in America. The two groups were agitated by different things, concerned about different things, had different focuses, different world views.

But I’ve never seen the gap wider than it is now. I think it is a chasm. In Washington they don’t seem to be looking around and thinking, Hmmm, this nation is in trouble, it needs help. They’re thinking something else. I’m not sure they understand the American Dream itself needs a boost, needs encouragement and protection. They don’t seem to know or have a sense of the mood of the country.

And so they make their moves, manipulate this issue and that, and keep things at a high boil. And this at a time when people are already in about as much hot water as they can take.

To take just one example from the past 10 days, the federal government continues its standoff with the state of Arizona over how to handle illegal immigration. The point of view of our thought leaders is, in general, that borders that are essentially open are good, or not so bad. The point of view of those on the ground who are anxious about our nation’s future, however, is different, more like: “We live in a welfare state and we’ve just expanded health care. Unemployment’s up. Could we sort of calm down, stop illegal immigration, and absorb what we’ve got?” No is, in essence, the answer.

An irony here is that if we stopped the illegal flow and removed the sense of emergency it generates, comprehensive reform would, in time, follow. Because we’re not going to send the estimated 10 million to 15 million illegals already here back. We’re not going to put sobbing children on a million buses. That would not be in our nature. (Do our leaders even know what’s in our nature?) As years passed, those here would be absorbed, and everyone in the country would come to see the benefit of integrating them fully into the tax system. So it’s ironic that our leaders don’t do what in the end would get them what they say they want, which is comprehensive reform.

When the adults of a great nation feel long-term pessimism, it only makes matters worse when those in authority take actions that reveal their detachment from the concerns—even from the essential nature—of their fellow citizens. And it makes those citizens feel powerless.

Inner pessimism and powerlessness: That is a dangerous combination. (Peggy Noonan)

And as one who was not abundant, and still isn’t, when I see what I see and the complete disconnect from reality that is the Twilight Zone at the Beltway around D.C. I do wonder about this.

I have no kids, I probably never will.

But that doesn’t mean I don’t look at the kids I see on the street and wonder what life is going to be like for them when they are my age.

And I don’t think it will be that good, certainly not like their childhood.

And that is a sad legacy.

But to pick up on Mrs. Noonan’s point about Arizona. (as an aside, where is the lawsuit against Missouri for slapping the government in the face? Are there not enough Latinos in the state to warrant it?).

IBD: In federal lawsuits, defendants may answer litigation filed against them with a counterclaim against the plaintiff for damages or other relief.

The Constitution of the United States mandates at Article 4: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government … that the United States shall protect each of them (the states) against invasion and … against domestic violence.”

“Republican form of government” is defined as a republic that is a system of government in which the people hold sovereign power and elect representatives to exercise that power.

To “guarantee” means to warrant or undertake that something has happened or will happen. The term “invasion” is (regarding a country or territory ) a hostile incursion.

The term “shall” used in the third person singular denotes an imperative, without discretion or choice. Thus, the phrase “shall guarantee” leaves no wiggle room.

Remedies for breach of guarantee are damages (expenses incurred in repairing guaranteed product) or rescission (return of product for refund of purchase price — i.e., “money back” guarantee).

Recently, the federal government — the present regime in particular — has not only violated the guarantee of republican form of government and the pledge to protect Arizona from invasion and domestic violence, but has actively worked to achieve the exact opposite result.

By the federal government’s determined resistance to enforcing existing federal law against illegal immigration and attempting to penalize Arizona for attempting to cope with illegal immigration on its own, the federal government has crassly flouted its obligation to guarantee a republican form of government for the state of Arizona.

One of the most effective means for destroying a republic is to bankrupt it and beggar its people.

It’s the only thing Obama & Co ARE good at.

This is what befell Rome, which went from a republic to what would now be called a dictatorship as a result of the financial drain on the country resulting from the empire.

In the case of Arizona, recent figures disclose that illegal immigration costs the state $2.5 billion annually. This amounts to approximately $400 for every man, woman and child in the state, which has a population of less than 7 million.

The federal government has not only filed litigation against Arizona, but informed an association of Arizona sheriffs that it intends to prosecute as an example at least one deputy for enforcing Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration legislation (SB 1070).

There are reports the administration is seeking ways to cease doing business with Arizona and is encouraging other states to do the same, to exercise economic coercion on the state.
The administration has praised the efforts of states such as California for economically boycotting Arizona. The sanctions the administration has imposed on Arizona are hardly less draconian than those that the same administration has imposed on Iran to prevent Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. All this for Arizona’s daring to exercise its republican form of government and passing widely popular legislation in a manner completely consistent with Arizona’s Constitution.

The Obama administration has thus tried to take control of Arizona and abridge/suppress its republican government in substance and in process.

Also violated by the federal government is the pledge to protect Arizona from invasion. The enormous influx of illegal immigrants into Arizona—uninvited, demanding and belligerent—clearly constitutes a hostile incursion.

The surge in illegal immigration has brought with it crime and violence. Phoenix is now the kidnap capital of America as a result of the Mexican gangs that have invaded Arizona using kidnapping as a form of turf acquisition and protection.

Notably, on the Independence Day weekend this year a Mexican drug gang announced that the border with Mexico and Arizona was “moved” several miles into Arizona whereby Interstate Highway 8 would now be the border. There was no response to this by the Obama administration.

I feel I should point out that Insterstate 8 is not “several miles from the border. It is a LOT of miles from the border!!

Interstate 8 starts/ends at  Interstate 10 just south of  Casa Grande, AZ. THAT IS 40 Miles from My house in South Phoenix!!!!

That is 134 miles from the Nogales, AZ on the border!!!

What we do have at the border are signs warning Americans to stay away from the gangs and cartels!!


It is undeniable that the federal government has shamelessly and willfully violated its guarantee and pledges under Article 4, constituting suitable grounds for counterclaims by Arizona against the federal government.

The question is whether the remedy for such violation should be rescission or damages. If the latter, a figure of $2.5 billion annually could be employed per the latest studies projected backward as well as forward. As to the rescission alternative (the “money back” guarantee, whereby the contract is undone or rescinded), this would constitute rescission of the breached agreement whereby Arizona entered the union in 1912.

Gaspers in disbelief regarding rescission/secession should know that there is nothing sacrosanct about the federal government; only the Constitution is inviolable. When the federal government willfully refuses to comply with a constitutional mandate, the Constitution can be upheld only by implementing its provisions, in this case the “money back” guarantee.

An independent Arizona can contract with the federal government for defense, as do small cities with the counties in which they are located, for police/fire protection. The outsourcing of defense by an independent Arizona might be expensive, but with the money saved from illegal immigration, Arizona could afford it.

The federal government might even make money on the deal and, for the first time, turn a profit on something.

To those who would label this “draconian,” the answer is this is a race to a precipice with a sheer drop greater than that of Arizona’s crown jewel, the Grand Canyon.

Personally, we’d go for damages. What’s 10 or 20 billion nowadays anyway? If the verdict came down in the early-ish morning, the Obama administration could have the money printed up by lunchtime.

After all, after the $4 Trillion Dollars in 19 Months with nothing to so for it,so what if they’d spend what another few billion…

It’s not like it’s real money to them anyhow…

Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality. –Martin Luther King, Jr.

The challenge that is already with us is the temptation to accept as true freedom what in reality is only a new form of slavery. —Pope John Paul II

Just Say NO!

MO Says NO!

Missouri voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a federal mandate to purchase health insurance, rebuking President Barack Obama’s administration and giving Republicans their first political victory in a national campaign to overturn the controversial health care law passed by Congress in March.

“The citizens of the Show-Me State don’t want Washington involved in their health care decisions,” said Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, one of the sponsors of the legislation that put Proposition C on the August ballot. She credited a grass-roots campaign involving Tea Party and patriot groups with building support for the anti-Washington proposition.

With most of the vote counted, Proposition C was winning by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1. The measure, which seeks to exempt Missouri from the insurance mandate in the new health care law, includes a provision that would change how insurance companies that go out of business in Missouri liquidate their assets.

“I’ve never seen anything like it,” Cunningham said at a campaign gathering at a private home in Town and Country. “Citizens wanted their voices to be heard.”

Missouri was the first of four states to seek to opt out of the insurance purchase mandate portion of the health care law that had been pushed by Obama. And while many legal scholars question whether the vote will be binding, the overwhelming approval gives the national GOP momentum as Arizona, Florida and Oklahoma hold similar votes during midterm elections in November.(STL Today)

So it’s time for the Feds to Sue another State to enforce their Supremacy. 🙂

And then there’s Viriginia. Possible Arizona (again), Florida,and Oklahoma.

Texas and several other states have lawsuits pending against ObamaCare.

Pretty soon they’ll have to sue everyone to enforce their supremacy.

But that won’t be a Banana Republic Dictatorship now will it?  Oh no! :0

That will be Bush’s Fault! 🙂

****************

THE STIMULUS

Remember that wunderkind of  Keynesian economics that would create millions of jobs and unemployment would not go above 8%??

Well,  not so much. There is now yet another report out on even more waste, fraud and abuse of that money. Big surprise there.

But don’t worry, ObamaCare will lower premiums, lower the deficit and foster world peace. Oh, and make your toast in the morning! 🙂

“Of course the recipients of these taxpayer dollars will complain and justify the reason for receiving these funds,” McCain said. “The question should be posed, how many jobs did this create? And obviously with these projects, little or none.”

And Remember, the signs touting these projects (like the 1 week project to repave the street near me) cost $10,000 each!

But for that week, there were jobs “saved or created”.

Rejoice!

White House Spokesperson Liz Oxhorn said the Obama administration will review the claims of the report, but it is not prepared to immediately accept the conclusion that these projects were misguided….this isn’t about partisan ‘reports’ or a single project – it’s about a choice between returning to the failed policies of the past or building on solutions like the Recovery Act that are moving America forward.”

Obama’s New Campaign slogan: It Could have been Worse– it could have been Bush! It’s all Bush’s Fault!

BUSH Made Me do it! 😦

Seriously!

So if you want to return to the Bush Doctrine, vote for Republicans.

It’s bloody August 2010, and the President has been in office now 19 months and the Democrats have controlled Congress from 3 1/2 years But it’s still Bush’s Fault!!! 😦

I hope you’re not dumb enough to fall for that. I known partisan Democrats are, there’s no hope for them.

“Eighteen months since the passage of the stimulus bill, millions of jobs are still gone and the economy is as uncertain as ever. The only thing getting a boost is our national debt. The stimulus has helped push it 23 percent higher, to $13.2 trillion, a new record.”

But remember, that’s all Bush’s Fault!  You wouldn’t want a repeat of Bush’s Fault by voting out Democrats in November now would you? 🙂

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was asked for a reaction. Here’s his exchange with a reporter:
REPORTER: Do you think it’s a credible report?
MR. GIBBS:  From what I’ve read, no.

So what are some of these dream jobs:

There’s $4.7 million for Lockheed Martin to study supersonic corporate jet travel. More than $210,000 for the National Institutes of Health to study the sex lives of college students. And roughly $233,000 for California college students to conduct exit polls in Africa about voting patterns.

• $554,763 for the Forest Service to replace windows in a closed visitor center at Mount St. Helens
• $762,372 to create “Dance Draw” interactive dance software
• $62 million for a tunnel to nowhere in Pittsburgh, PA that even Governor, Ed Rendell called “a tragic mistake”
• $1.9 million for international ant research
• $1.8 million for a road project that is threatening a pastor’s home
• $308 million for a joint clean energy venture with…BP
• $89,298 to replace a new sidewalk that leads to a ditch in Boynton, OK

$298,543 to predict the weather on other planets.

$363,000  to National Institute of Health to promote The Stimulus itself. The NIH? That’s a curious choice. And if this was before the Health Care “reform” passed makes it even more curious.

And since the government spent $700,000 to promote ObamaCare via Andy Griffith.

So how does a Billion dollars in PR for their socialism create new jobs?

It doesn’t. But it works for them.

$144,541 for Wake Forest University scientists to give monkeys cocaine and see what happens. Even scarier: they’re having the monkeys administer the coke themselves. No word yet if part of the cost is allocated to rolled up hundred dollar bills.

$712,883 to build a machine that tells jokes (presumably funnier than the ones Coburn and McCain tried to crack in this report).

$294,958 on a program to reduce menopausal hot flashes with yoga classes.

$1.2 million for research how elderly people react to playing video games.

$180,935 to discover a better method for freezing rat sperm.

$112,437 for three high school students and three college students to study alcohol in laboratories (read: pound shots out of test tubes)

McCain cited $500,000 for Arizona State University to “study the genetic makeup of ants to determine distinctive roles within the ant colony” and another $450,000 to “study division of labor in ant colonies and develop a model for humans to determine the optimal strategy for distributing a specialist in a variable work environment.”

Dana Perino, a conservative, on Hannity last night said (not in a good way)  “Even if half of them are false, that means half of them are accurate”.

Media Matters, the George Soros funded Uber-Leftist socialist site used this as a headline attacking the report!

On uber-leftist blogger even said that if it was put out by a republican it must therefore on it’s face be a lie. Period. End of Story. 🙂

Isn’t partisan cognitive dissonance  fun? 😦

And remember, these are the “open minded” and “fair” Liberals….  who are way smarter than you and are way better at running your life for you. 🙂

The Report: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=a7e82141-1a9e-4eec-b160-6a8e62427efb&utm_source=Media_Subscribers&utm_campaign=8f082e789c-Franklin_Comm_Maine&utm_medium=email

or

http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fprojects%2Fpdf%2F8_3_10_Stimulus_III_Report.pdf&images=yes