The Inequity of it All

Today is my Birthday.

What I want for my birthday is for Liberals to stop thinking with their emotions and be rational, logical adults who aren’t narcissistic, greedy, power mad, 2 years old at heart.

Not going to Happen.

Neither is getting Establishment Republicans and RINOs to stop being narcissists and thinking only of their own agenda and thinking about The American People for a change.

I might as well wish for World Peace at the same time, it’s just as likely.

Strike up a conversation with any taxi cab driver or any fry cook at a roadside diner and the word “inequality” is unlikely to ever come up. That’s not on the list of top concerns for middle class America. It’s also not on the list of concerns for the world’s poor. Millions of people are willing to risk life and limb just to come here and start out at the bottom of the income ladder.

(Don’t the immigrants realize how unequal things are? Yes, they want to live in a country where a poor immigrant can become a billionaire.)

So why is anyone claiming that inequality is our most important problem? Because the chattering class has decided that stoking envy is the only way to energize the Democratic Party. Think about the problems we really do have: runaway entitlement spending, poor public schools, welfare dependency, an overly burdensome tax system and anemic economic growth. In every case the solutions we are debating come from the right: Privatization, school vouchers, tough love, a flat tax and lower taxes on capital.

The left has no solutions, or at least none that anyone takes seriously. So, over the years of the Obama presidency the topic of inequality has emerged front and center. Democratic candidates could rail against the super rich and imply that their high incomes are the cause of everyone else’s stagnating income, without ever saying what exactly they would do about it.

Until Bernie Sanders came along. Sanders actually has a few concrete proposals – including the idea that we should become like Denmark, a high tax welfare state. Once the discussion turns from pure demagoguery to serious conversation, inevitably we are forced to look at what economists have to say. (Warning: it’s not good for Democrats.)

In other words, you can’t solve the problem by taxing the rich. If taxation is your only tool, you have to break again one of Barack Obama’s frequently broken promises and raise taxes on the middle class.

In a Brookings Institution study, Peter Orszag (former chief economist for President Obama) and his colleagues discovered that if you raised the top tax rate from 40 percent to 50 percent and redistributed that money to people at the bottom, the top 1 percent’s share of income would only decline from 16.4 to 15.6 percent. The Gini coefficient (the numerical measure of inequality) would change so little you would have to squint to see it.

Then there is the question of why we have increasing inequality in the first place. Another study by Orszag and current Obama chief economist Jason Furman found that a primary source of inequality among people is inequality among firms. Take a look at the chart below. If you happened to be working for one of the top 10 percent of most successful companies over the past two decades your salary, bonuses and other compensation probably soared. If you have been working for the median firm, your income has probably risen modestly. If your employer is in the bottom half of the distribution, your income has probably been stagnant.

So what can be done about that? The idea of arresting the growth of highly successful companies is silly. But that isn’t necessarily a deal breaker for the left. The problem for Democrats is that Silicon Valley is heavily Democratic. It’s one of the places Democrats go to get mega gifts. My bet is that you won’t hear a peep about inequality among firms in the coming election.

orszag chart

 

SOURCE: KOLLER ET AL. (2015); MCKINSEY & COMPANY

That leaves Denmark. People on the left are fond of citing the Nordic states — Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland — as examples of countries with higher taxes and less inequality. It’s easy to see why. As Matt Yglesias writes

Danish mothers enjoy 18 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave at 100 percent of their ordinary pay. Danish students leave college free of debt. Everyone is covered by a national health insurance system and can take advantage of subsidized child care; plus, thanks to a generous welfare system, Denmark’s child poverty rate is about a quarter of America’s.

So how do the Danes afford all that? With high taxes. As Yglesias makes clear, it’s not just taxes on the rich. The top tax rate in Denmark is 57 percent, about the same as it is in California. If California wanted to become like Denmark, it would basically leave the rich alone. But it would have to sock it to the middle class with effective tax rates averaging from 35 to 48 percent. Then the state would need to pile on with 25 percent value added tax — which is basically a form of sales tax and every bit as regressive. Car addicted Californians would also experience a huge spike in the price of gasoline and a 180 percent tax on the price of a new car!

So how does Denmark keep from looking like Greece? Answer: They believe in privatization, deregulation and free enterprise. Denmark is rated as one of the best places in the world to do business. It scores higher on the Heritage Economic Freedom ranking than the United States does. Unlike the US, public sector unions in Denmark don’t control public services and push up costs with job protecting regulations. For example, a private, for-profit company is currently in charge of 65 percent of municipal fire departments and 85 percent of ambulance services in the country. According to Yglesias:

In Copenhagen … the metro is driverless, the suburban rail network features one-man train crews, and many urban bus lines are run by private companies. These are all kinds of measures that US labor unions would normally oppose….

Øresund Bridge from Copenhagen to Malmö was constructed at a drastically lower price than the United States is prepared to spend to replace the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York even though the Nordic bridge is substantially longer and includes a major train component along with the roadway.

The Danish model is awfully hard to emulate if public sector unions are the backbone of your party.

Finally, there is Yale law professor Stephen Carter’s observation that the word “inequality” was used eight times by the candidates and once by the moderator in the Democratic debate the other night. In every instance the focus was on taxing the rich, not on helping the poor. In fact, the word “poverty” was used hardly at all. Apparently, envy sells better than charity when communicating with Democratic voters.

Yet Carter, himself a bona fide liberal, notes that we don’t really have an inequality problem. We have a poverty problem.

That Democrats ignore it is hardly surprising. When is the last time you heard a Democratic candidate for president talk about the poor in any respect? The last one I can remember was John Edwards and that was eons ago. (Townhall)

And look what happened to him… 🙂

Oh, the inequity of it all.

 

Got it?

The economy is “fine” and all we need to do is more stimulus spending. The Democrats plan is working.

Just how bad have the last three years been for some Americans? A Fed survey has some brutal data today showing that both median family income and net worth dropped dramatically over the last three years.

The median family net worth dropped a staggering 40% to $77,300 in 2010 from $126,400 in 2007, the Fed said in its Survey of Consumer Finances which is released every three years. The median family income dropped as well from $49,600 in 2007 to $45,800, or a 7.7% drop.

Middle-class families faced the brunt of the declines with those in the 60th to 80th percentile of income seeing a 40.4% drop in net worth from $215,700 to $128,600. Families with a net income in the the 20th to 39.9th percentile of income saw a 35.4% drop in net worth from $39,600 to $25,600.(Forbes)

Damn those “obstructionist” Republicans  and evil rich corporate pigs!

Not only were Americans still facing significant debts, but they were making less money. Median income fell nearly 8 percent.

We just need more taxes and more spending and everything will be “fine”….eventually.

“The share of families with any type of debt decreased 2.1 percentage points to 74.9 percent over the 2007–10 period , reversing an increase that had taken place since 2001.” In particular, the share of a family’s outstanding credit card balances decreased 0.6% over the three-year period.

Meanwhile The Obama Administration has Spent $6 Trillion Dollars in ADDITIONAL DEBT. And they want to SPEND EVEN MORE!

Gee, I wonder who get’s it?  (and who SHOULD get it in November!) 🙂

But in truth, the president doubled down, explaining again his argument that the only real problem that the private sector really has is the decline in government hiring as federal stimulus funds have dried up. (FOX)

The Unemployment rate for Government employees is 4.2%. It’s been over 8% since February 2009 otherwise. But it’s “fine” and we just need to spend even more!

Compare that to private-sector industries such as construction (14.2 percent unemployment), leisure and hospitality services (9.7 percent), agriculture (9.5 percent), professional and business services (8.5 percent) and wholesale and retail trade (8.1 percent). As Andrew Biggs of the American Enterprise Institute points out, the public-sector unemployment rate “is the lowest of any industry or class of worker, even including the growing energy industry.” If the rest of Americans enjoyed the same unemployment rate as government workers, Obama would be cruising to reelection. (townhall)

“I would like to be able to know that my home, no matter what happens to my income or my life, is not going to be taken away from me because I can’t pay a tax,” said Susan Beehler, one in a group of North Dakotans who have pressed for an amendment to the state’s Constitution to end the property tax. They argue that the tax is unpredictable, inconsistent, counter to the concept of property ownership and needless in a state that, thanks in part to wildly successful oil drilling, finds itself in the rare circumstance of carrying budget reserves.

“When,” Ms. Beehler asked, “did we come to believe that government should get rich and we should get poor?”(NYT)

In a Word: “fair”. 🙂

Still, even if the measure here fails on Tuesday, the notion is picking up steam in some Republican circles in other states, including North Carolina, Texas and Pennsylvania.

“No tax should have the power to leave you homeless,” said Jim Cox, a state representative in Pennsylvania who has proposed legislation to eliminate the school property tax in the state where, he said, such taxes have led to residents’ losing homes to sheriff’s sales, entering into reverse mortgages or simply moving away.

Do you think some people are ahead of the self-interested bureaucrats and Tax-and-spend Liberals?

Yes.

Are they right?

Maybe.

But shaking up the liberal status quo is always a good thing. But be prepared for the rattlers and cobras that you turn over when peeking under those rocks. They will be VERY MAD.

But, if all else fails the Nobel Peace Prize Winner will just step up the Drone attacks on his “kill list” and make himself look like a bad ass. 🙂

But there is a Bright Side:

Union workers in the Sharpsville Area School District cafeteria were the victors in a dispute with the school over what they could, and could not eat.

Members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees filed the grievance in 2011, according to the settlement which was approved by a unanimous vote of the school board May 21.

The board’s solicitor Bob Tesone approved the release of a copy of the three-page resolution this week following an earlier request by The Herald.

The grievance was based on the allegation that the school district “violated established past practice” in charging cafeteria workers for food or drinks that couldn’t be sold or consumed by students. These items would include food or drinks with expired dates or foods that had been reheated, none of which can be served to students according to safe food regulations.

But according to the settlement, cafeteria employees indeed can eat and drink those expired or reheated items – at their own risk. And they don’t have to pay for them. (Sharon,PA Herald)

Now ask yourself why this was litigation worth to begin with??

But at least this Union has won an important victory for the people to eat expired food that the taxpayers paid for and now they get to scarf as much of it as possible without paying for it!
Onward to Wisconsin! 🙂
Job growth has stalled, the Democrats have been humiliated in Wisconsin, the attorney general is facing a contempt-of-Congress citation, talks with Pakistan have broken down, Bill Clinton is contradicting Obama, Mitt Romney is outraising him, Democrats and Republicans alike are complaining about a “cascade” of national-security leaks from his administration, and he is now on record as saying that the “private sector is doing fine.” (Washington Post)
But at least Union workers can eat expired food!!
“It’s not as bad as the Great Depression.  There’s a winning slogan…but it’s incredibly awful.”–Uber Liberal Paul Krugman.
Jared Bernstein, a former Obama economic adviser, said the president’s gaffe won’t do lasting damage “because that’s not the way he sees it.”
Well, that make me feel better. that’s settled.
Blame high private sector unemployment on Republicans.  This second point is particularly rich, considering that Democrats already had their bite at the “shovel ready jobs” apple, and failed spectacularly.  The president was even reduced to chuckling at his multibillion dollar miscalculation. Oops!  Democrats didn’t need any Republican support to pass the stimulus.  They could have fashioned whatever bloated monstrosity they wanted, and they did.  When voters elected Republicans in a landslide in 2010 to rein in the spending carnival, the GOP slammed the breaks on Obama’s unpaid-for son-of-stimulus known as the “American Jobs Act.”  The White House would have us believe that this “obstructionism” is what has prevented a guns-blazing recovery.  Does Carney not recall that this legislative panacea was also repeatedly blocked and stalled by Senate Democrats?  And is he unaware that the GOP has passed a decent chunk of The One’s jobs agenda?  Of course not, but he’s got nothing else to say. It’s that simple.
Obama promised that his $825 Billion boondoggle would increase household incomes by $3,000 on average.  Median income has since dropped to 15-year lows, and American families’ net wealth has plunged even further.  But blame Bush.  Yes, the downward trend started under Bush (the cause of the 2008 meltdown is a subject for another day), but Obama promised to fix things.  He has not. (Guy Benson)
But that’s not his fault!
And all we need to do is raise taxes, screw the rich and corporations, and Spend even more more and Utopia awaits!!
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Torturous Illogic

Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that his wife, as well as the wife of President Barack Obama, would have had “no chance” in life had it not been for government help. According to vice presidential pool reports:

Vice President Biden met with leaders from 10 colleges this afternoon to kick off a new effort to increase transparency in financial aid packages. …

“I know, literally, Barack and I talk about it. Neither one of us would have had any shot,” Biden said. “The same with our wives. Both wives are smarter than both of us. Literally, these very accomplished women would not have any chance without some help.” (free beacon)

What’s with the war on women, Mr. Vice President?

Plugs hits new levels of desperation when he’s trying to convince people they’ll have no chance of survival if his bloated government sacred cow is ever made to stop churning out Julias on a 24/7 basis. Biden’s like a big-government version of Kathy Bates in Misery reminding the hobbled James Caan, “If I die, you die” — and it’s all packaged under the guise of compassion.

Forget about just having a chance in life — the problem is that without a major course correction, it soon will be impossible to exist without government “help.” At that point Biden will be proven correct, and that’s a scary thought. (Michelle Malkin)

Speaking of Scary…

The new liberal spin (courtesy of Ed Schultz of MSNBC) that “money has entered the race” aka evil corporate money (it was never a factor before this moment-ever (Politifact says Unions gave- $206.7 million in 2008 alone)). The fact that he Unions have been pumping and pimped 100’s of millions of dollars EVERY year for decades into the process is completely missed by the sanctimonious liberals who are unhappy with the results in Wisconsin.

So the Liberal lost because evil corporate money and rich people bought the election. Class Warfare is everywhere because it is the very core of liberalism.

2010 NY Times: At over $5 million, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a labor union, has been the biggest outside group spender on the Democratic side, followed closely by America’s Families First Action Fund, with about $4.8 million.

And gee what labor union was at the forefront in Wisconsin, AFSCME. Gee, no coincidence there! 🙂

They can’t possible have lost for any other reason than evil capitalists bought the election, after all buying elections is a Union job!!

From the White House: “While tonight’s outcome was not what we had hoped for – no one can dispute the strong message sent to Governor Walker. Hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites from all walks of life took a stand against the politics of division and against the flood of secret and corporate money spent on behalf of Scott Walker…”

Love the “New Tone”. The “civility” is very evident.

But the funniest comment comes from our gal-pal DWS, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:

Despite the disappointing outcome, #WIrecall effort sent Scott Walker a message that his brand of divisive politics is offensive & wrong.

(I’ll be right back. I have to bust several guts laughing….) 🙂

My 3 Part Series of Blogs in 2010 on the incestuous relationship: https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/incestuous-narcissism-part-1/

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/incestuous-narcissism-part-2/

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/incestuous-narcissism-part-3/

Update: Unions Lose again….In California?

The Granola State? (What isn’t fruits and nuts is flakes).

In San Diego and San Jose, voters overwhelmingly approved ballot initiatives designed to help balance ailing municipal budgets by cutting retirement benefits for city workers.

Around 70 percent of San Jose voters favored the pension measure, while 66 percent of San Diego residents supported a similar measure.

“This is really important to our taxpayers,” Mayor Chuck Reed of San Jose, said Tuesday night. “We’ll get control over these skyrocketing retirement costs and be able to provide the services they are paying for.” (NYT)

The smear & fear is to come as always. Liberals don’t know how to argue any other way.

Speaking of fear…

Protesters who picketed the restaurant last month disagreed. Madeline Bernstein, president of the local Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said: “People are allowed to eat food, not allowed to torture it first.”

California is going to ban foie gras.

Foie gras (play /fwɑːˈɡrɑː/; French: [fwa ɡʁɑ]); French for “fat liver”) is a food product made of the liver of a duck or goose that has been specially fattened. This fattening is typically achieved through gavage (force-feeding corn), according to French law, though outside of France it is occasionally produced using natural feeding.

Gavage dates back 4600 years.

California’s only foie gras producer is Sonoma Artisan Foie Gras, Owner Guillermo Gonzalez told The Daily Telegraph: “Our farm is being forced to shut down at the end of June, and the most unfortunate fact is that science has not been given a chance to play a role in this debate.

“Ultimately, chefs’ and consumers’ freedom of choice is being taken away. Who knows what food product is next?”

The ban was originally drawn up by John Burton who was State Senate president in 2004 and is now the chairman of the California Democratic Party.

My beef (pun intended) is more with the Food Police than the dish. I have never had it. I am unlikely to have it, not my style of food.

So what’s next on the Vegan “torture” list. Since, “torture” to a liberal generally means anything they disagree with and it’s to be used to inflame the situation and cow-tow you to their way because you don’t want to be a “torturer” now do you. (Or “racist” or a “bigot” or “mean”, “unfair” etc).

So that burger you’re eating is not only unhealthy, but you are supporting “torture”!!

Think I’m kidding?

PeTA Asia-Pacific Website:

Everyone who eats animal products is responsible for the abuse and deaths of beings with lives and personalities of their own—beings who did not choose to be carved up and put on the dinner table.

Because eating meat is torture.

And of course…

Because eating meat just isn’t fair.

Where would a Liberal be without saying that everything they disagree with isn’t “fair”!

The suffering of humans and the suffering of other animals are interconnected. By alleviating the suffering of other animals, we also help alleviate human suffering.

Will Dairy farms be next? Was that Chicken I had for dinner last night “tortured” when it’s head was cut off? Was that Fish “tortured” when it was taken out of the water and effectively drowned in the air gasping until it was dead?

PeTa A-P: And let’s not forget about fish. Whether they’re hooked through the mouth, dragged out of the ocean in nets, or “harvested” from fish farms, fish and other marine animals feel pain and don’t deserve to die.

And of course, eating meat discriminates against the poor and is not Pro-Union:

In addition to exploiting poor people, immigrants, and children and doing little to protect workers from workplace hazards, the farmed-animal industry has also been charged with union busting. When workers try to unionize, the industry uses illegal intimidation and harassment tactics to ensure that pro-union employees are silenced. According to Human Rights Watch, “Many workers who try to form trade unions and bargain collectively are spied on, harassed, pressured, threatened, suspended, fired, deported or otherwise victimized for their exercise of the right to freedom of association.”

You evil little Nazi “torturer” you!!

Give a Liberal a millimeter they’ll take a light year.

More Liberal Love, Tolerance, Compassion and Sensitivity to go with their “New Tone”: (from twitchy-twitter feeds)

KILL SCOTT WALKER KILL SCOTT WALKER KILL SCOTT WALKER KILL SCOTT WALKER KILL SCOTT WALKER KILL SCOTT WALKER! Ole Bitch Ass Pig Ass Nigga!!!!

They gone JFK Scott Walker. Shoot his mfn head off BANG BANG!!! *chief keef voice* 🏃🔫—
ERIN M. (@DONTTouchTheFRO) June 06, 2012

Please somebody kill Scott Walker.—
  (@Prototypeisgame) June 06, 2012

Before I die, I’d like to kick Scott Walker in the balls @theburiedlife

Oh Yeah, Somebody Gone Shoot Scott Walker White Ass.—

NBS I Know What School Scott Walker Son Go To—
Tj Fucked Yo Bitch (@iWusGetnSumHead) June 06, 2012

Can’t you just feel the Love!

It’s only “fair” that they get everything they want when they want and because they want it and you can’t take it away from them…Ever! 🙂

MINE! MINE! MINE!

ME! ME! ME!

It’s only Logical. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

 

Is it Fair?

Stephen Moore: President Obama has frequently justified his policies—and judged their outcomes—in terms of equity, justice and fairness. That raises an obvious question: How does our existing system—and his own policy record—stack up according to those criteria?

Is it fair that the richest 1% of Americans pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes, and the richest 10% pay two-thirds of the tax?

Is it fair that the richest 10% of Americans shoulder a higher share of their country’s income-tax burden than do the richest 10% in every other industrialized nation, including socialist Sweden?

Is it fair that American corporations pay the highest statutory corporate tax rate of all other industrialized nations but Japan, which cuts its rate on April 1?

Is it fair that President Obama sends his two daughters to elite private schools that are safer, better-run, and produce higher test scores than public schools in Washington, D.C.—but millions of other families across America are denied that free choice and forced to send their kids to rotten schools?

Remember Liberals are “Pro-Choice”. Just not about anything other than abortion, especially not Education,Unions, or Health Care.

Is it fair that Americans who build a family business, hire workers, reinvest and save their money—paying a lifetime of federal, state and local taxes often climbing into the millions of dollars—must then pay an additional estate tax of 35% (and as much as 55% when the law changes next year) when they die, rather than passing that money onto their loved ones?

Damn those evil rich people! The only thing you should pay along to your kids is fealty to the government and DEBT.

Is it fair that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel and other leading Democrats who preach tax fairness underpaid their own taxes?

Or “Job Creation Czar”‘s GE who paid no corporate taxes at all. And speaking of “rich” people who’s giving Obama $38,500 a pop at his copious fundraisers, the guy who says “Do you want Fries with that?”.

Oh, right, as I said yesterday, when you have no standards you can be a doubletalking, double-dealing, hypocrite in your mind and no one on ‘your side’ will care and the people who do care should just shut up.

Is it fair that after the first three years of Obamanomics, the poor are poorer, the poverty rate is rising, the middle class is losing income, and some 5.5 million fewer Americans have jobs today than in 2007?

8%+ unemployment for more than 3 years. Oh, and the CBO just projected what everyone with a brain cell and some integrity said was going to happen, The Price of ObamaCare doubled BEFORE 2014 already!

Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?

But they are FAIR and Unbiased. 🙂

And that Public Sector Unions (government employees) are one of the biggest contributors. And in most of them, you have mandatory due that are collected and given to the Democrats. Now that’s “pro-choice”.

Is it fair that the three counties with America’s highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?

A coincidence. Nothing more, move along…nothing to see here…:)

Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is “subsidized”?

Big Bad Oil is so Evil! 🙂

Solyndra, Beyond Solar, and all the others that have gotten fat checks from the government and then given fat bonus to their execs just before they went bankrupt (usually with an year or so of getting the money) is the fault of the Chinese after all, so nothing to see here…more along… 🙂

Is it fair that those who work full-time jobs (and sometimes more) to make ends meet have to pay taxes to support up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits for those who don’t work?

You don’t want to be “mean” and “heartless” now do you? 🙂

Is it fair that those who took out responsible mortgages and pay them each month have to see their tax dollars used to subsidize those who acted recklessly, greedily and sometimes deceitfully in taking out mortgages they now can’t afford to repay?

Well, that was the “predatory” banks and mortgage companies fault. The fact that they were pushed by the Democrats in that direction forcefully and then the SEC was too busy watching Porn at work to notice is not relevant. 🙂

Is it fair that thousands of workers won’t have jobs because the president sided with environmentalists and blocked the shovel-ready Keystone XL oil pipeline?

Oil is evil. We only want Politically correct jobs.

Is it fair that some of Mr. Obama’s largest campaign contributors received federal loan guarantees on their investments in renewable energy projects that went bust?

Crony Capitalism is so Washington.

Is it fair that federal employees receive benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those of private-sector workers whose taxes pay their salaries, according to the Congressional Budget Office?

They think so. And no, they aren’t “greedy”. 🙂

Is it fair that soon almost half the federal budget will take income from young working people and redistribute it to old non-working people, even though those over age 65 are already among the wealthiest Americans?

Yeah, but the old people vote! 🙂

Is it fair that in 27 states workers can be compelled to join a union in order to keep their jobs?

The Unions and The Democrats certainly think so. That’s their #1 $$$ gravy train.

Is it fair that nearly four out of 10 (47%) American households now pay no federal income tax at all—a number that has risen every year under Mr. Obama?

Yes, because the more dependent on the government you are the more you’ll vote to continue porking yourself with other people’s money. Hey, it’s free! 🙂

And you don’t want to be “mean”,”Heartless”, or “racist” now do you? 🙂

Is it fair that Boeing, a private company, was threatened by a federal agency when it sought to add jobs in a right-to-work state rather than in a forced-union state?

Yeah, the Liberals have to stick up for their cronies in the Unions. 🙂

Is it fair that if you want to enforce Federal Laws about immigration you get sued by that same Federal government and are branded as racists?

Is it fair that our kids and grandkids and great-grandkids—who never voted for Mr. Obama—will have to pay off the $5 trillion of debt accumulated over the past four years, without any benefits to them?

Better than the people who spent it paying for it! 🙂

Is it fair The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that President Barack Obama’s tax and spending policies will yield $6.4 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than double the shortfall in CBO’s own fiscal baseline — even after taking credit for reduced war costs. (Politico)

Is it fair: While HHS under the Obama administration does everything in its power to force religions employers to pick up the cost of providing birth control against their religious conscience, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is allowing an Indian tribe an exemption to kill two bald eagles a year … for religious purposes:

The AP reports: “A federal government decision to allow a Wyoming tribe to kill two bald eagles for a religious ceremony is a victory for American Indian sovereignty as well as for long-suppressed religious freedoms, the tribe says.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service granted a permit March 9 to the Northern Arapaho Tribe allowing it either to kill or capture and release two bald eagles this year.” (Townhall.com)

‘African Americans for Obama’

The program urges black Americans to volunteer their time by making calls, organizing events and going door to door in their neighborhoods encouraging other African Americans to vote for Obama.

Again, imagine what the reaction would be any of the Republican candidates launched a ‘Whites for Romney’, ‘Whites for Santorum’ (Christian Conservatives for Santorum) or ‘Whites for Gingrich’ campaign. There would be non-stop uproar. But Obama does the equivalent and gets a free pass.

Now that’s fair, isn’t it? 🙂

Well, when Liberals have no standards…is it fair to judge them then? 🙂

Now doesn’t that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside as to how “fair” everything thing is…

Surprises

Gee, This is a Surprise!  NOT!

The politically aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has quietly created a national network of at least eight community-organizing groups, some of which function alongside the Occupy Wall Street movement, a Daily Caller investigation shows.

Incorporated by the SEIU as local non-profits, the groups are waging concerted local political campaigns to publicly attack conservative political figures, banks, energy companies and other corporations.

Each local group has portrayed itself as an independent community organization not tied to any special interest. But they were founded, incorporated, and led by SEIU personnel.

The individual activist groups use benign-sounding names including This Is Our DC; Good Jobs, Great Houston; Good Jobs, Better Baltimore; Good Jobs Now in Detroit; Fight for Philly; One Pittsburgh; Good Jobs LA; and Minnesotans for a Fair Economy.

In reality, they are creations of the wealthy and influential labor union, amounting to a secret network of new SEIU front groups.

Union Liberals behind the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Gee, I’m shocked! 🙂

If you think the Occupy Movement is just a bunch of smelly hippies playing drums in the park, you’re wrong. The Occupy Movement is an organized group of union leaders, academics and anarchists with one common goal: to destroy capitalism. Don’t believe it?

http://www.breitbart.com/breitbart-tv/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/03/05/occupy_seui_and_academics_working_together_to_destroy_capitalism

GAS PRICES

Now DNC Chair Wasserman-Schultz- Under Bush: She blamed Bush and his cronies in the Oil Industry for the high gas prices (going to $3.22 a gallon by the way).

May 2007: “We are now paying more than double than when President Bush took office”

Now comes the Weasel 4 days ago:“What I was referring to in that speech, as I have for many years, is that focusing on fossil fuels and continuing the ‘drill baby drill’ strategy that President Obama rightly referred to the other day in south Florida as ‘a bumper sticker, not an energy policy,’

Ohhh! Am I surprised with the about face- no!

“We are not going to address gas prices over the long-term because there is — there is no President in the short-term that can really change policy and impact gas prices in a significant way. But what we do need to do is over the short-term and long-term make sure that we are using the ‘all of the above’ strategy that President Obama has employed: more domestic energy production than we’ve had in eight years (Thanks to Bush as she says, it takes time so Obama benefits from THAT time), making sure that we invest for the future in alternative energy like wind and solar and hydroelectric power, so that we can really start to impact our need to depend on…” (Go Algaeman! Solyndra Abroad Solar, etc)

“But A lot of Americans are wondering what’s going to happen now and a lot of those things take time,” Carlson shot back.

“Affecting gas prices takes time,” Schultz acknowledged. “You’re absolutely right,”

Unless it’s Republican President then that is.

President Obama’s election-year prescription to accelerate steeply higher energy prices is to add billions of dollars to the oil companies’ tax bills. Expensive gasoline fits the Obama political template.

‘Every time you fill up the gas tank, they’re making money.” That applause line, delivered Thursday by the president from Nashua, N.H., speaks volumes about the thinking that lies at the root of this presidency.

Resentment against the successful is what Barack Obama wants to cultivate among Americans, dividing the dependents of the government, who pay no income taxes to fund it, against the nation’s private-sector producers, who finance the state’s dependency machine by paying the vast bulk of the income taxes.

Fed up with prices at your local gas station going up, up and away, past the $4 level toward $5 and even higher? The president says you should take out your frustration by telling Congress to end the perfectly reasonable oil-and-gas industry tax deductions on drilling costs and other technical aspects of production.

House Speaker John Boehner was quick to respond that “a freshman-year economics student could tell you that increasing taxes on energy production would make gas prices go up, not down.” But Obama’s crass appeal to baser instincts has nothing to do with economics — or solving problems — and everything to do with politics.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu let the cat out of the bag years ago. “Somehow,” he said in 2008, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

Why would anyone want the government to try to make oil prices skyrocket? Answer: So they can get the public to stop resisting the radical environmentalist agenda, have people accept their fate that they have to drive cars that are little better than golf carts, and ultimately convince them to keep their driving to a bare minimum. Mass transit anyone? Ever try carpooling? (IBD)

Surprise! Class Warfare…who saw that coming…. 🙂

OBAMACARE

Our friend Matt Lewis of The Daily Caller has an amusing and still quite relevant piece this weekend regarding the Supreme Court’s upcoming review of Obamacare in general and the individual mandate in particular. In it, he describes a meeting he had with Karen Harned of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) who are knee deep in the battle. She turns out to be relatively optimistic about the challenge to the law.

It’s crowded at the Caribou Coffee on 17th and L streets in Washington, but over the din of lobbyists and caffeine fiends, I ask her to sketch out the NFIB’s arguments. “What we’ve seen in all the cases,” she explains — “the one question they cannot answer is: ‘Where does it end?’”

Hers is a slippery slope argument, but that doesn’t mean questioning the government’s ability to regulate economic “inactivity” isn’t legitimate. “You could say, ‘Well it’s good for everybody to exercise — so let’s mandate everybody to join the gym.”

I stir my coffee nervously. As if the thought of being forced to (gulp!) exercise isn’t horrifying enough already, Harned continued: “It’s good for everybody to take vitamins … It’s good for people to eat five fruits and vegetables a day! — Why don’t we make all grocers give those foods away for free — and [require] more people buy broccoli?”

At first, the broccoli reference threw me, but it’s actually pertinent. During a previous trial — when appeals court Justice Laurence Silberman asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General Beth Brinkmann if requiring Americans to buy broccoli would be unconstitutional — she answered: “No. It depends.”

This may sound trite at first blush, but in the end it does seem to be the pertinent question which the justices will have to consider. I agree that “slippery slope” argument are frequent, easy targets for critics, and many are little more than straw men. But there are still some cases where they would apply, and this seems to be one of them.

Handing the federal government the power to regulate a lack of economic activity – as opposed to their recognized power to regulate some actual activity for the public good – opens up a door to a hallway which would seem to stretch to infinity. Can the President, in fact, force us to eat our peas as opposed to saying it in a rhetorical fashion?

The government’s argument would seem to be that such a mandate could be construed as being “for the common good” of society, and would save money in the long run. And while that may prove to be true, is it their place to make that determination? This smells suspiciously like the court’s decision in Kelo vs. New London when the phrase “public use” was not very subtly morphed to include “for the public benefit.” And as soon as you let Washington have the final say as to what is in your personal best interest, all bets are off.

Broccoli? I happen to like it.. sometimes. But I don’t want Washington, DC telling me to buy it. Do you? (Hot air)

The other government argument the NFIB intends to eviscerate is the free rider argument — the notion that health care mandates are vital because otherwise people will just “game” the system by refusing to pay for health care coverage while simultaneously using health services.

This, of course, is a conundrum. But the government’s “solution” would also open up a can of constitutional worms.

The government hopes to argue that the health market is unique — that the slope isn’t slippery at all. But cost shifting occurs all the time, everywhere. “We all pay in fees to our credit cards for the people who don’t pay their credit card bills,” Harned says. “We all pay in our mortgage interest for the people who default on their mortgage”…

It all comes back to this: If the government can mandate the purchase of health care insurance, what can’t they mandate?

“They could create a crisis a day if they want to,” Harned warns.

And we all know about “Never Let a Crisis go to Waste ” 🙂

Surprise! 🙂

Pro-ILLEGALS

Lawyers representing Latinos who accuse Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office of racial profiling are asking a federal judge to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees from being called to testify by the sheriff’s lawyers at a trial.

Motions filed late Friday in the suit say ICE gave the sheriff’s lawyers permission to depose five ICE employees, but the depositions were never conducted.

Lawyers for the five Latinos who sued say they were therefore unable to counter with their own questions for the ICE workers. They say Arpaio’s lawyers should be barred from calling the employees to the stand.

The plaintiff’s attorneys also wrote that two other ICE agents who did give depositions have no relevant testimony and also should not be called. (AZStarnet)

This is bunk. But the Liberals and Pro-Illegals just want their side and only their side to come out and forget about the other side.
But is it a Surprise? NO!

Transformation

“California’s new municipal bankruptcy law could be put to the test in its first trial, as the rumor mill is churning that the city of Stockton is preparing to file for bankruptcy. You may recall that under AB 506, local governments are now required to deal with a “neutral evaluator” for at least 60 days before seeking bankruptcy court protection. That being said, this mediation process can be avoided if a municipality declares a financial emergency.”

Unions, who would lose their sweetheart contracts and control of those making personnel decisions, can use the “neutral” evaluator to continue their gripe on the wallets of the citizens of Stockton.  Instead of the fiscal crisis being the deciding factor, it will be the control of special interests and unions.

The local government is facing a $20 million deficit in the next fiscal year. Stockton has also been voted the “most miserable” city in America, TWICE.

But you mess with the Public Sector Unions and their fat-cat, not “greedy” overly indulgent benefits and you’re asking for the gate of hell to open and the hounds to devour your carcass whole!

The city consented to a wide variety of bond agreements that have contributed to its increasing debt, but officials say that generous retirement health benefits and the increasing costs of maintaining them also threaten to cripple the city with insolvency. The city estimates that it will pay $9 million in retiree health care benefits in the 2012 fiscal year, and that the amount will double over the next 10 years.

Much of the harshest criticism of the current city administration has come from the police union, which has accused Mr. Deis of manipulating numbers. The union paid for billboards that proclaimed “Welcome to the 2nd most dangerous city in California: Stop laying off cops!” and included a running tally of murders in the city and Mr. Deis’s (City Manager) telephone number, against a background depicting spatters of blood. Mr. Deis accused the union of harassing him after it bought a house next door to his. The union said the purchase was an investment and not intended to antagonize Mr. Deis.

Uh, huh..sure..whatever you say….

Denise Jefferson, a former city planner and the executive director of the Miracle Mile Improvement District, said previous administrations had ignored signs of problems for years, despite internal criticism from employees.

Everyone kept pretending that the problems were something the next generation could clean up, but there’s no way to clean this up anymore,” she said. “In high times everyone wants to grow, but the growth we had was never something we could sustain. We played the game, and now there’s no longer a game to play.”

Does this Sound like Congress and The President, anyone? 😦

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told The Daily Caller that federal employees should not have to “carry an undue burden” by paying more into their pensions to fund legislation that would extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance for a full year.

Congressional negotiators had reportedlyconsidered requiring all federal employees to contribute an additional 1.5 percent into their pensions to partially pay for a package that would extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits. At this point, they have agreed to require only new federal employees to put an additional 2.3 percent of their salaries toward pensions.

Pelosi also praised President Obama’s leadership in advocating for the payroll tax cut portion of the approximately $150 billion package without paying for it through spending cuts elsewhere.

“The payroll tax cut unpaid for, I think, responds to the argument that we have been making: Why are we paying for this when we don’t pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest people in our country? I just think this was something that happened because the public was fully aware of it and I salute the president for his leadership,” Pelosi said.

And: Tim Geithner said that the “most fortunate Americans” should pay more in taxes for the “privilege of being an American.”

Now that’s “shared Sacrifice”. 🙂

Oh, and being an American is now a “privilege”. 😦

So all rights are now “privileges” granted by a benevolent government. 🙂

I know I feel better….

Oh and this:

Democrats have a message for American job creators: Nice business you have there.  It would be a real shame if you donated to Republicans and something…unfortunate were to happen to it:

Democrats on K Street are warning their corporate clients: Give to Republican challengers in the 2012 election, and you’ll regret it come tax reform time. Lobbyists are getting that message from allies of powerful Democrats such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who is closely watching support for Rep. Denny Rehberg, a Republican challenging Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). Baucus supporters fear that if Rehberg ousts Tester, Baucus could be next to face a serious Republican challenge in the state.

One K-Streeter close to the Baucus operation said the senator considers a gift to Rehberg a contribution against him. Another Democratic lobbyist told a client to take his name off a Rehberg fundraising event because it would be hurtful to his company, according to sources. The case K-Streeters are making to their clients: It will be a hard sell next year to get Baucus’s support on business-friendly tax perks set to expire or the Bush-era tax cuts that must get through his committee.

Nothing like a Little Chicago-Style Blackmail to be “fair”. 🙂

{House Majority Leader Reid} has also been vocal at his weekly breakfast fundraisers — telling attendees that it’s important for Democrats to maintain the majority and support all of the Democratic candidates and take a broad view in political giving, according to sources familiar with the discussions. “Everybody is watching right now,” said Democratic consultant Penny Lee of Venn Strategies, noting that the majority in the Senate could be in play by just one or two seats. The former adviser to Reid said the Nevada Democrat has a special interest in Republican Sen. Dean Heller’s seat in Nevada, “but he’s also keeping a larger watch to see what happens.”
Ah yes, the ole’ electoral “broad view.”  Allow me to summarize: “Republican X might represent your interests better than that Democrat Y — who will probably vote to raise your cost of doing business, then demonize you in the press — but we Democrats have long memories and will use our power to retaliate against any perceived affront, so act accordingly.” (Guy Benson)

In short, Democrats are petty, vindictive, partisans and they will get their revenge in the most childish way possible if you cross them. 🙂

That’s the real “hot topic” here — whether a majority of citizens, in America as elsewhere in the West, are willing to “leave it up to the government” to make decisions on everything that matters.

And if the government has the “right” to dictate that you.

The Democrats surely think so.

Everything flows from the generous “compassion” of the government and the power to be the supreme being that should be worshiped for it greatness.

“There are those in the Oval Office who believe that’s not the case, that rights do, in fact, come from the government, and they have gone around convincing the American people that they can give you rights. We see what happens when government gives you rights. When government gives you rights, government can take away those rights. When government gives you rights, they can coerce you in doing things in exercising the rights that they gave you.”–Candidate Rick Santorum

Like Mandates that say you must do it because the Government says so.

Mark Steyn: The transformation of “human rights” from restraints upon state power into a pretext for state power is nicely encapsulated in the language of Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that everyone has the right “to receive free compulsory education.” Got that? You have the human right to be forced to do something by the government.

And So It Continues My Subjects. This is Big Brother Obama signing off for today… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

I Have a Secret

Very disturbing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ajkAP_M4ZAM#at=60

******

Ben Bernanke, The Fed Chairman held a news conference for the first in it’s history. Be Afraid Be very Afraid.

If the Fed is resorting to explaining itself in a press conference, you know we are in the doo-doo big time.

“The markdown of growth in 2011, in particular, reflects the somewhat slower than anticipated pace of growth in the first quarter,” Bernanke said in prepared remarks before he took reporter questions.

The U.S. dollar fell to a fresh 3-year low against major currencies while Bernanke spoke.

Politics, re-election, and The Fed’s policies. A Lethal combination??

U.S. economic growth slowed more than expected in the first quarter as higher food and gasoline prices dampened consumer spending, and sent a broad measure of inflation rising at its fastest pace in 2-1/2 years.

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

As usual, Paul Krugman is leading the liberals to the briar patch, calling death panels a necessity to help balance the budget. In a roundtable discussion on ABC’s “This Week,” Krugman said of what recently came out of the president’s deficit commission: “Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.” He also said, “Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for. And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, [the deficit commission] should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.”

Once Krugman pulled back the curtain, other liberals started talking about the “lie of the year.”

Writing for the Atlanta Constitution, Jay Booker admitted that death panels exist and defended their goals in a column entitled “Why ‘Death Panels’ are a necessary evil.” He said:

By law, the panel is prohibited from recommending health-care rationing; its role is simply to find the most cost-effective approaches to health care, with Congress given the power to override its decisions.

Inevitably, that proposal revived talk of “death panels.” It’s an emotionally powerful phrase, but only because it strips things down to uncomfortable truth: Death panels exist, they will exist in any conceivable system of health-care delivery, and we all know they are necessary but prefer to ignore it.

The only problem is, when it comes to medicine, what works for someone else may not work for you. But if the IPAB deems something unworthy of payment, it doesn’t matter that your doctor thinks is may work for you. You won’t get it, unless you’re wealthy and can pay for it yourself.

Leftist columnist Cynthia Tucker also joined the crusade, proclaiming: “Yes, we need death panels.” In Tucker’s world, the government would pick winners and losers in the health care arena. She writes, “If we keep spending our health care dollars disproportionately on the elderly, we will have little left to spend on children. That makes for an upside-down society that cannot thrive for long.” Kids win. Seniors lose.

These liberals are giving cover to the bureaucrats who are beginning to implement their vision of a new health care system in America. While this may seem a ways away, the bureaucrats at the FDA are already moving to deny the cancer drug Avastin to breast cancer patients. This is just the fist volley in the fight over rationing, and the IPAB hasn’t even started yet.

MASSACHUSETTS VOTES TO CUT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING!

Oh here’s news you probably won’t here on the Mainstream Liberal media:

Government-sector collective bargaining reform: When the Republican dictator Governor of Wisconsin accomplishes it with a series of high-profile votes, all hell breaks loose.  When the Democrat-dominated Massachusetts House passes it by a huge margin — crickets:

House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers, teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for financially strapped cities and towns.

The 111-to-42 vote followed tougher measures to broadly eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states. But unlike those efforts, the push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats who have traditionally stood with labor to oppose any reduction in workers’ rights.

DeLeo said the House measure would save $100 million for cities and towns in the upcoming budget year, helping them avoid layoffs and reductions in services. He called his plan one of the most significant reforms the state can adopt to help control escalating health care costs.

“By spending less on the health care costs of municipal employees, our cities and towns will be able to retain jobs and allot more funding to necessary services like education and public safety,’’ he said in a statement.

But union leaders said that even with the last-minute concessions, the bill was an assault on workers’ rights, unthinkable in a state that has long been a bastion of union support. Some Democrats accused DeLeo of following the lead of Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin and other Republicans who have targeted public employee benefits

By the looks of that quote in bold, it seems as though Speaker DeLeo hired Scott Walker’s speechwriter.  Meanwhile, the Bay State’s liberal Democratic Governor, Deval Patrick, has lent some mild support to the measure and is urging incensed labor leaders to “dial down” their heated rhetoric in opposing the bill:

There’s “room for debate” about whether a House-passed bill gives labor unions enough of a seat at the table on health insurance issues, Gov. Deval Patrick said today, adding that he’s glad the House dealt with the controversial topic and hopes to see a final bill soon.

“I want labor to be involved,” Patrick told reporters after signing a financial literacy bill. “I want labor to be at the table.”

The governor also urged labor unions, who are comparing the House plan to the stripping of collective bargaining rights that has occurred in Wisconsin, to pull back on their commentary. “They should dial it down because that’s not what’s happening here,” said Patrick, who plans to visit Wisconsin on Saturday at the invitation of Democrats in that state to discuss collective bargaining issues.
True, the Wisconsin law limits the scope of government-sector employees’ collective bargaining privileges to wages, whereas the Massachusetts law only constrains the public unions’ ability to collectively bargain on healthcare benefits.  But the Wisconsin law exempted unions representing first responders from the new rules; the Massachusetts has no such carve-outs. 

After Gov. Walker signed his controversial bill into law, lefty commentators predicted that his actions would trigger a powerful pro-labor backlash across the country.  No dice.  Wisconsinites re-elected a conservative supreme court justice in the face of intense left-wing opposition, Ohio passed a more expansive measure, and now deep blue Massachusetts has taken a major step to do the same.  It’s amazing what a little political courage can do.

UPDATE: In case you’re curious about just how blue Massachusetts is, the state House is currently comprised of 128 Democrats and 32 Republicans.  All but two of the GOP lawmakers voted with the Speaker’s plan.  Theoretically, every single Republican in the chamber could have voted no, and the bill still would have passed comfortably.

Soo…shh..It’s a secret…

Just like Bernanke working to get Obama re-elected regardless of the harm and the inflation it will cause… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez