No trials at all. Oh the hypocrisy.
Archive for the ‘Government Gone Wild’ Category
Posted by iusbvision on March 22, 2011
Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2011
By the way, some of these Democrats do not have the funds to live in a hotel for a month on the road, so someone is donating the money and since this is out of state travel it means that the money is almost certainly illegal.
Although the Republican right-to-work proposal prompted the walkout, the protest was expanded to include education reforms.
The protesting Democrats have objected to charter school expansion in House Bill 1002, as well as a proposal to allow low-income parents to have scholarships for private school tuition.
Amid the ongoing controversy, local education reform leaders are offering the first local showing of the film, “The Cartel,” Tuesday at the Indiana Historical Society. The film shows the practical effects of the status quo in education as well as corruption in the current system. Sponsored by the Freedom Foundation for Educational Choice, this film is just one of several pleas to put children first in education.
An earlier movie, “Waiting for Superman,” offered moving accounts of children longing for a better school.
One of those better schools locally is Herron High, which state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett has cited for its gains on Advanced Placement tests. The percentage of the Indianapolis charter school’s students who passed an AP exam increased from 5 percent to 38 percent last school year. With its college prep emphasis, Herron also has seen a 78 percent increase in students who take AP exams.
It’s hard to tell why the House Democrats mixed up worker rights with opposition to education reform. In staying out to protest charters, Indiana Democrats have put themselves at odds with national Democratic leaders such as President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.
State Democrats also object to private school choice for low-income families. Yet that idea originated in Milwaukee with a Democratic mayor, John Norquist. A Democratic candidate for mayor of Indianapolis, Louis Mahern, advocated the idea in his campaign 20 years ago.
Where were these Democrats when Mahern was running for mayor? Where are they now when one of their own, former Mayor Bart Peterson, has helped lead the charge for charter schools?
“There’s a schism in the Democratic Party around education reform,” notes David Harris, founder and CEO of a local reform group, The Mind Trust. “A new generation of Democrats, led by the president and Secretary Duncan, is demanding we remake public education even though that means upsetting the teacher unions. But we don’t have enough Obama/Duncan-style Democrats in Indiana.”
House Minority Leader Pat Bauer has identified the reform legislation as part of a war against the middle class.
What will really hurt the middle class is killing these education reform initiatives.
Obama’s illegal offshore drilling moratorium explained. This will infuriate you. UPDATE – Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Confirms: Democrat Energy Policy is To Push For Less Energy and More Deficit Spending
Posted by iusbvision on March 18, 2011
In 2012, the only way someone can vote for Obama in good conscience is by ignorance.
This is an administration that does not act in good faith.
UPDATE I – Listen for yourself all:
Democrat energy policy: Less drilling, more deficit spending. Pinheads like Debbie Schultz have said that there would be “no immediate” new oil if we started drilling today is cute, but they have been saying that for 20 years. Now if we started more drilling back then, or even five years ago it would be an entirely different story. By the way Obama’s illegal drilling ban has already cost many thousands of jobs.
If I start digging a well, it will not immediately result in more water, so lets all have massive thirst. If you start your car, it will not immediately result in you being at work, so lets ban cars and have trains….
Someone is voting for these idiots.
NOTE – If Sarah Palin had uttered the shear nonsense that Schultz puts out on a regular basis it would be the headline almost every other night on the news.
Schultz has been making these kind of orbital statements for a long time. I think it is time for Rush Limbaugh to start giving her a little of what the Democrats need right now:
Posted by iusbvision on March 16, 2011
A great interview. I like Marco because he sees the big picture. He attacks the nations problems as if he wakes up in the morning and reads a list of the reasons why he ran for the job in the first place.
So you hear it in his voice? The anger? The frustration? The worry? Marco has had enough. He is fighting to be nice, but you can tell that he is ready to launch on some bad guys.
More Marco Rubio:
Posted by iusbvision on March 12, 2011
The Obama administration wants passing grade of an F for policer officer exam so more minoritities pass.
The scores are so low for passing now that even the NAACP opposes the lower standards.
DAYTON — The Dayton Police Department is lowering its testing standards for recruits.
It’s a move required by the U.S. Department of Justice after it says not enough African-Americans passed the exam.
Dayton is in desperate need of officers to replace dozens of retirees. The hiring process was postponed for months because the D.O.J. rejected the original scores provided by the Dayton Civil Service Board, which administers the test.
Under the previous requirements, candidates had to get a 66% on part one of the exam and a 72% on part two.
The D.O.J. approved new scoring policy only requires potential police officers to get a 58% and a 63%. That’s the equivalent of an ‘F’ and a ‘D’.
“It becomes a safety issue for the people of our community,” said Dayton Fraternal Order of Police President, Randy Beane. “It becomes a safety issue to have an incompetent officer next to you in a life and death situation.”
“The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed,” agreed Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward.
The D.O.J. and Civil Service Board declined Dayton’s News Source’s repeat requests for interviews. The lower standards mean 258 more people passed the test. The city won’t say how many were minorities.
“If you lower the score for any group of people, you’re not getting the best qualified people for the job,” Foward said.
UPDATE – O’Reilly comments:
If George W Bush were torturing Bradley Manning like Obama is would the Left rollover the way they do for Obama
Posted by iusbvision on March 12, 2011
A good question from MSNBC talker Dylan Ratigan and from all of the information I have been able to gather Ratigan has this story correct and Manning is being treated this badly.
MSNBC is so often so brutishly anti-journalism and anti-intellectual that just ignoring them seems best, but when they get it right we have no fear of saying so.
Posted by iusbvision on March 10, 2011
Amazing. Your money being used to fund enemy propaganda, but Democrats say we cannot cut funds for this nonsense.
An analysis of the propaganda campaign to get Al-Jazeera carried by more cable and satellite systems reveals an interesting fact. The terrorist TV channel is already available through something called MHz Networks. And it turns out that the MHz Networks is supported by the American taxpayers at the federal and state levels.
MHz Networks is a division of Commonwealth Public Broadcasting and receives over $2 million a year from federal and state governments. In this case, because Commonwealth is based in Virginia, the culprit is the state of Virginia. However, Governor Robert F. McDonnell has proposed eliminating state funding of public broadcasting by cutting $2 million in fiscal 2012 and $2 million in fiscal 2013. Even if state legislators go along with this proposal, that still leaves the federal subsidies for Commonwealth and MHz Networks.
According to figures supplied by Joseph H. Koch, Commonwealth Public Broadcasting Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, $1.4 million of that $2 million came from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which is funded by Congress. The CPB distributes taxpayer money to public broadcasting stations and entities.
Since Al-Jazeera is totally owned, run, and paid for by the Emir of Qatar, officially known as “His Highness,” this means that American tax dollars are paying for foreign propaganda in the U.S.
Not only that, but American taxpayers are being fleeced on behalf of an Arab dictator with billions of oil dollars. The Emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, is number 8 on the Forbes list of the “richest royals,” with an estimated net worth of $2.4 billion. His channel has been labeled “the greatest Arab media organization” by the Muslim Brotherhood, which has spawned various terrorist organizations and is now poised to take power in Egypt and perhaps other countries.
MHz distributes Al-Jazeera, as well as the Moscow-funded Russia Today channel, under the rubric of “Programming for globally-minded people.”
Republicans Find Multi-Billion Dollar Slush Funds Hidden in ObamaCare Bill – UPDATE: PolitiFact, FactCheck, WashPo Fact Checker, Heritage say Bachmann is Right
Posted by iusbvision on March 9, 2011
So what about those CBO numbers again far left?
$105 billion hidden in the bill so that the GOP could never cut off funds for it, a $16 Billion slush fund, and unlimited budgetary authority to bail out state insurance pools. None of it known, none of it counted by the CBO and much of it unconstitutional.
Now you know why Nancy Pelosi had to say this:
UPDATE I - Michele Bachmann speaks.
The liberal media has been attacking my work to expose the truth about Obamacare. But all the major political fact-checking outlets–PolitiFact, FactCheck and the Washington Post Fact Checker–agree: the $105 billion hidden in Obamacare does exist! Get the facts: http://bit.ly/ggdOtv .
Today former Congressman Ernest Istook testified before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee about the $105 billion slush fund in advance appropriations liberals tucked inside Obamacare. The $105 billion bypasses the traditional yearly budgeting process and is spread throughout the 2,700 page legislation. It took the Congressional Research Service (CRS) seven months to identify all the disparate funds and it was not until February (11 months after the bill passed) that all of the funds could be totaled up.
Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) has been beating the drum to raise awareness of this unprecedented level of advance spending. But the liberal media has been attacking her for calling it “hidden” funding. In reality, Rep. Bachmann said that “practically no Member of Congress even knew that $105 billion of funding was” in the bill.FactCheck says that this funding was known to “those who read the bill … including members of Congress.” But does FactCheck really believe that any member of Congress read all 2,700 pages of the bill? Do they have any evidence at all that any member of Congress knew about the $105 billion figure before CRS published their report this February?
But more importantly, in their attempted take down of Rep. Bachmann, PolitiFact, FactCheck, and The Washington Post Fact Checker all confirm her underlying charge: the $105 billion exists. Poltifact writes: “We added up the spending Bachmann was referring to and got $104 billion — very close to her number.”
And a note to The Washington Post Fact Checker: Former Congressman Ernest Istook served in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.
UPDATE II –
UPDATE III – Speaker Boehner Blasts Democrats for Hidden Slush Funds in ObamaCare
David Gregory at NBC is all broken up by Michelle Bachmann’s description of White House behavior as Gangster Government
Posted by iusbvision on March 6, 2011
Video – Michelle Bachmann: GM care dealers who donated to Republicans were targeted for closure. Those who donated to Democrats in many cases were taken off.
Michael Barone: Gangster government stifles criticism of ObamaCare.
Car dealerships being closed that are profitable are owned by mostly GOP donors.
THUGOCRACY – OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THREATENS INSURANCE COMPANIES TO KEEP QUIET ABOUT RISING HEALTH CARE COSTS DUE TO LEGISLATION….OR ELSE
CNN Analyst Advocates Obama Go “Chigaco-Style Al Capone Gangsta” on Political Opponents.
Posted by iusbvision on March 5, 2011
Meet the lovely and quite brilliant YouTube personality Laurbubble.
I sent Laurbubble the following message:
You have just figured out the American left. They make a “policy” and cry “WERE SAVED!” without any regard for the unintended consequences of their policy. The policy usually makes matters worse as you have so eloquently described. Usually the policies they make for the “public good” increase the stock of one of their contributors, or stick it to those who donate to the other party.
The more the planner’s plans fail the more the planners plan.
Posted by iusbvision on March 4, 2011
$900.00 breakfasts and the list goes on….
Indianapolis Graduation Rate Second Worst In The NationONLY DETROIT’S GRADUATION RATE IS WORSE
Indianapolis officially scores the designation of having the second worst graduation rate among the nation’s 50 leading cities. “Seventeen of the nation’s 50 largest cities had high school graduation rates lower than 50 percent, with the lowest graduation rates reported in Detroit, Indianapolis and Cleveland, according to a report released Tuesday,” the AP’s Ken Thomas reports. Detroit finished last with a graduation rate of 24.9%. Indianapolis finished 49th with a 30.5% graduation rate, finishing just head of 48th-ranked Cleveland with a 34.1% graduation rate. Oh well, Mark Miles says our chances of winning the 2012 Super Bowl are real good. Why worry about a silly report like this?
Sebelius Cracks! Admits the Obamacare Books Were Cooked! Admits to Double Counting Half Trillion Dollars!
Posted by iusbvision on March 4, 2011
Via Fox Nation:
The House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee invited Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to swing by and have a little chin wag about the budgetary implications of ObamaCare. Representative John Shimkus (R-IL) noticed that the rather large sum of $500 billion was dedicated to both sustaining Medicare and funding ObamaCare. When he asked Sebelius which destiny awaited those five hundred billion clams, she replied, “Both.”
That’s right, folks: another part of the ObamaCare fraud involved double-counting half a trillion dollars. Shimkus said he was “shocked” to learn this. “We knew the health care law’s actual cost was much greater than originally told to the public,” he declared. “And now, the truth is slowly coming out in administration reports and testimony.”
Government Union Collective Bargaining 101 – UPDATE O’Reilly: New York Times publishing bogus polls about unions and lying about the budget crisis
Posted by iusbvision on March 4, 2011
How government union collective bargaining works.
What FDR understood and what the left does not want you to figure out is that “The Man” is the taxpayer because with Democrats in charge government unions are essentially negotiating with themselves, it is not adversarial at all, and the politicians are not negotiating to preserve their own money, they are negotiating (wink wink, nod nod) with YOUR money.
More from the Heritage Foundation - HERE.
Rasmussen Poll: 71% Believe Government Workers Get Better Pensions Than Those In Private Sector - LINK.
NPR and PBS execs make more than the President! They are funded by taxpayers! – LINK.
UPDATE - New York Times publishing bogus polls about unions and lying about the budget crisis:
Posted by iusbvision on March 4, 2011
Hillary should resign as Sec. of State as the political damage will soon be too great to overcome.
Posted by iusbvision on March 3, 2011
Note – Indiana is now fining missing Democrats $250 a day, Wisconsin is fining missing legislators $100 per day, both plan to bill them with expenses.
Talia Reed now holds elected office in Starke County.
Indiana needs jobs. We didn’t get them when the Democrats had control of the Indiana House in 2008 and so voters traded them in for a Republican leadership in 2010. And with that change of leadership, Republicans have for the most part, spent the first two months of the General Session doing the hard work of creating legislation that will establish an environment in our state to keep and attract business because Republicans know that it is business not government that creates jobs and wealth, and the only way for Hoosiers to have jobs and wealth is to have a business-friendly state. And in comparison to neighboring states such as Illinois, Indiana has been just that.
According to the October 2010 issue of Forbes Magazine, Indiana is first in the Midwest and tenth in the overall nation for lowest cost locations. And because Indiana has the common sense to pay its bills and keep government expenses filed down to match its tax revenue, we are one of only nine states in the nation to hold triple-A credit ratings from all three agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Fitch, and Moody’s).
Practicing common sense and keeping government at bay in order to boast as such is indeed hard work (even if only common sense) because of the incredible fight that ensues by the numerous supplicants who circle our state building seeking whose tax dollars they may devour. And standing up to such brute forces takes real guts and real leadership. But it is the path to prosperity.
We see no such guts nor leadership from the those Democrat Congressmen and women who fled the state for which they claim to serve and high-tail it to that neighboring state whose government surely sympathizes with them. You know which state that is—the one that raised taxes 66% during a lame duck session. The state that is more than $9 billion in debt and carries the worst pension debt in the nation. The one where President Barak Obama was schooled in politics, right next to disgraced Governor Rod Blagojevich. While meaningful bills have waited their turn in line, been refined through the committee process, and now deserve their day on the floor, most Democrats, including our own Nancy Dembowski, have chosen to seek sanctuary in this state of Illinois.
Abandoning ship to avoid a quorum is cowardly and irresponsible. Sometimes tough decisions have to be made, even if it means saying no to the unions whose demands taxpayers no longer want nor can afford. Sometimes it means saying no to the unions who contribute considerably to campaigns. Sometimes it means being the minority and not getting your way.
The loophole shenanigan isn’t a new tactic, nor is it a Democrat tactic. In fact, as Pat Bauer, the House Minority leader pointed out in a press conference, it’s one Abraham Lincoln used himself, jumping out of a window to avoid a quorum while he served in the Illinois State Legislature. However, what Pat Bauer left out was the fact that doing so was not something Lincoln was proud of. In fact, his biographer William H. Herndon called it something Lincoln, “always seemed willing to forget.”
It is time for Indiana’s government to stop acting like the government of those debt-ridden, unsustainable states that live from hand to mouth on unrealistic promises that can’t be met, and start acting like the responsible leaders we need and deserve.
Stop wasting our resources and get back to doing the business of the Indiana people.
Talia isn’t alone The Indy Star has had it as well:
It becomes harder by the day to take Indiana House Democrats seriously.
First, they went on strike to protest legislation they didn’t like — the so-called right-to-work bill. Then they fled the state, holing up in an Urbana, Ill., hotel, where they continue to draw paychecks courtesy of Indiana taxpayers but do no real work.
And now, after Republicans gave in and agreed to pull the right-to- work legislation from the agenda, House Minority Leader Pat Bauer and his caucus have demanded that as many as 10 other bills be killed. Their demands are so absurd that they even included one bill that the General Assembly already has approved and sent to Gov. Mitch Daniels for his signature.
What’s next? Asking Daniels to personally deliver room service?
Whatever arguments House Democrats had going for them, principally that Republicans had sprung the right-to-work legislation on Hoosiers by surprise, they’ve now squandered.
No matter how much they dislike charter school legislation, or the school voucher bill, or merit pay for teachers, Democrats can’t honestly claim that Indiana voters didn’t have the opportunity to weigh those issues before the November elections. The governor and Republican leaders in the General Assembly made clear the planks of their education reform platform well ahead of Election Day.
Voters rewarded the GOP with a landslide victory that included a supermajority in the state Senate and 60 seats in the House. Bauer, who decried the reform efforts, was resoundingly dumped as Speaker.
Now, after having been swept into a distinct minority in the Statehouse, those Democrats who remain in office are trying to block through childish antics what they couldn’t win through democratic action.
ATF Whistle-blower: My bosses ordered me to allow illegal guns to flow to Mexican cartels – UPDATED! w/Larry Pratt from GOA
Posted by iusbvision on March 3, 2011
Attorney General Eric Holder, Sec. Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama pushed for a new ban on self loading rifles by claiming that they were the primary source of guns to the Mexican cartels. Internal government reports showed that this was not true and that only 17% of drug cartel guns in Mexico can be traced back to organized crime straw man sales in the US.
Fox News got their hands on the government report and blasted the government and the other news media outlets for swallowing the bogus narrative from the government and not doing their homework (VIDEO). As a result the left lost the argument.
Oh so what to do. I know, make sure more illegal guns get to Mexico and push for a gun ban later! Well now they have been busted again.
Of course, guns at American gun stores are not machine guns, they shoot one bullet at a time and merely look like the fully automatics. This is why, as the government report states, that most of these weapons are coming from the Mexican Military and the Communist Columbian Rebels such as FARC.
CBS (Be sure to watch the video at the CBS link to see how the agents unhappy with the policy were threatened and how Senator Grassley has asked for documents from the ATF and the Obama Administration is not cooperating):
(CBS News) WASHINGTON – Federal agent John Dodson says what he was asked to do was beyond belief.
He was intentionally letting guns go to Mexico?
“Yes ma’am,” Dodson told CBS News. “The agency was.”
An Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms senior agent assigned to the Phoenix office in 2010, Dodson’s job is to stop gun trafficking across the border. Instead, he says he was ordered to sit by and watch it happen.
Investigators call the tactic letting guns “walk.” In this case, walking into the hands of criminals who would use them in Mexico and the United States.
Dodson’s bosses say that never happened. Now, he’s risking his job to go public.
“I’m boots on the ground in Phoenix, telling you we’ve been doing it every day since I’ve been here,” he said. “Here I am. Tell me I didn’t do the things that I did. Tell me you didn’t order me to do the things I did. Tell me it didn’t happen. Now you have a name on it. You have a face to put with it. Here I am. Someone now, tell me it didn’t happen.”
Agent Dodson and other sources say the gun walking strategy was approved all the way up to the Justice Department. ***The idea was to see where the guns ended up, build a big case and take down a cartel. And it was all kept secret from Mexico.
ATF named the case “Fast and Furious.”
Surveillance video obtained by CBS News shows suspected drug cartel suppliers carrying boxes of weapons to their cars at a Phoenix gun shop. The long boxes shown in the video being loaded in were AK-47-type assault rifles.
So it turns out ATF not only allowed it – they videotaped it.
*** This is nonsense. American law enforcement cannot go into Mexico armed if the Mexican Military can’t take down the Cartel how will we with anything short of a military invasion? CBS says that none of this evidence was used in a cartel prosecution. No kidding. CPI has more, but spins it as positive as they can for the government which is no surprise. They report that their ATF supervisors reacted with glee over the connection between American guns that they let go to Mexico and the violence. Abuse and lawlessness at the ATF has been an ongoing problem for decades – LINK.
Posted by iusbvision on February 25, 2011
Of course we have talked about the cozy and monetary relationship that the Obama Administration has with Google before.
Consumer Watchdog, an advocacy group largely focused in recent years on Google’s privacy practices, has called on a congressional investigation into the Internet giant’s “cozy” relationship with U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration.
In a letter sent Monday, Consumer Watchdog asked Representative Darrell Issa, the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, to investigate the relationship between Google and several government agencies.
The group asked Issa to investigate contracts at several U.S. agencies for Google technology and services, the “secretive” relationship between Google and the U.S. National Security Agency, and the company’s use of a U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration airfield in California.
Federal agencies have also taken “insufficient” action in response to revelations last year that Google Street View cars were collecting data from open Wi-Fi connections they passed, Consumer Watchdog said in the letter.
“We believe Google has inappropriately benefited from close ties to the administration,” the letter said. “Google is most consumers’ gateway to the Internet. Nonetheless, it should not get special treatment and access because of a special relationship with the administration.”
Consumer Watchdog may have an ally in Issa, a California Republican. In July he sent a letter to Google raising concerns that White House Deputy Chief Technology Officer Andrew McLaughlin, the former head of global public policy for Google, had inappropriate e-mail contact with company employees.
A Google spokeswoman questioned Consumer Watchdog’s objectivity. Some groups have questioned the group’s relationship with Google rival Microsoft, and Consumer Watchdog’s criticisms of online privacy efforts have also exclusively zeroed in on Google, with the group rarely mentioning Microsoft, Facebook and other Web-based companies in the past two years.
“This is just the latest in a long list of press stunts from an organization that admits to working closely with our competitors,” said the Google spokeswoman.
But Consumer Watchdog gets no funding from Microsoft or any other Google competitor, said John Simpson, consumer advocate with the group. “We don’t have any relationship with Microsoft at all,” he said. “We don’t take any of their money.”
Consumer Watchdog has decided to focus on Google’s privacy practices because the company’s services serve as a gateway to the Internet for many people, Simpson said. If the group can push Google, “without a doubt the dominant Internet company,” to change its privacy practices, other companies will follow suit, he said.
“Google’s held itself to be the company that says its motto is, ‘don’t be evil,’ and they also advocate openness for everyone else,” he said. “We’re trying to hold them to their own word.”
Consumer Watchdog, in January 2009, suggested that Google was preparing a lobbying campaign asking Congress to allow the sale of electronic health records. Google called the allegations “100 percent false and unfounded.”
In September, Consumer Watchdog bought space on a 540-square-foot video screen in New York’s Times Square with the video criticizing Google’s privacy practices.
In April, Consumer Watchdog officials called for the U.S. Department of Justice to break up Google. They appeared at a press conference with a representative of the Microsoft- and Amazon.com-funded Open Book Alliance.
Consumer Watchdog’s latest complaints about the relationship of Google and the Obama administration are outlined in a 32-page report.
The paper questions a decision by NASA allowing Google executives to use its Moffett Federal Airfield near Google headquarters. Although H211, a company controlled by Google top executives, pays NASA rent, they enjoy access to the airfield that other companies or groups don’t have, Simpson said.
The paper also questions Google contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense and other agencies, suggesting that, in some cases, Google contracts were fast-tracked. The paper also questions Google’s relationship with the U.S. National Security Agency and calls for the company to be more open about what consumer information it shares with the spy agency.
When asked if other companies, including broadband providers, should disclose what customer information they share with the NSA, Simpson said they should, too.
“I understand the NSA is a super-secret spook organization,” he said. “But given Google’s very special situation where it possesses so much personal data about people, I think that there ought to be a little more openness about what precisely goes on between the two.”
Posted by iusbvision on February 25, 2011
What if a President Palin had behaved this way? Does anyone doubt that the elite media would be asking for her impeachment?
Calling the law unconstitutional he says he wont enforce it – LINK. But wait, ObamaCare was declared unconstitutional and he is ignoring the ruling. His offshore drilling ban also unconstitutional and he ignores that and then ignores being held in contempt of court.
If it comes to the court ruling demanding the end of the offshore drilling ban he is ignoring which has resulted in a 13% drop in domestic oil production, the ruling finding O-Care unconstitutional he is ignoring, the uncalled for revocation of coal mining permits, the EPA now making “law” via abuse of the regulatory power in spite of the will of Congress, the FCC regulating the internet in spite of Congress and the courts telling them no, the refusal to enforce the Voting Rights Act when it comes to the Black Panthers and now this, what we are seeing the refusal by this president to recognize any limits on his power, be it the laws of Congress, the courts or even separation of powers.
This is also demonstrated by some of his judicial nominees such as Elana Kagan who wrote in a law review article that government should redistribute speech and that government has no interest in preserving a marketplace of ideas. In essence that government should pick whose and what speech is good for society.
He is abusing that regulatory power given by Congress, which is supposed to be used to make the laws Congress passes easy to comply with and understand, as a tool for social engineering.
Megyn Kelly comments:
Posted by iusbvision on February 18, 2011
Posted by iusbvision on February 17, 2011
As Governor Rick Perry of Texas has told us, 151 companies left California and moved to Texas in last year alone.
The recent census data shows us that people are voting with their feet. They are leaving progressive states and moving to “right to work” states.
Via Verum Serum:
Nine of the top 10 metro jobless rates in the nation are California, and seven are in California’s Central Valley:
- El Centro, CA – 29.3% (east of San Diego near border with Mexico)
- Yuma, AZ – 26.7%
- Yuba City, CA – 17.8%
- Merced, CA – 16.3%
- Stockton, CA – 16.3%
- Modesto, CA – 16.2%
- Visalia-Porterville, CA – 15.9%
- Fresno, CA – 15.7%
- Palm Coast, FL – 15.5%
- Hanford – Corcoran, CA – 15.0%
Hat Tip Hotair.com!
Posted by iusbvision on February 16, 2011
And the police officer who just couldn’t figure out the First Amendment has earned his department a nice big fat monetary loss.
Posted by iusbvision on February 15, 2011
This is one of the ideas that have been floated inside the Obama Administration.
People’s retirement savings are a convenient source of revenue for governments that don’t want to reduce spending or make privatizations. As most pension schemes in Europe are organised by the state, European ministers of finance have a facilitated access to the savings accumulated there, and it is only logical that they try to get a hold of this money for their own ends. In recent weeks I have noted five such attempts: Three situations concern private personal savings; two others refer to national funds.
The most striking example is Hungary, where last month the government made the citizens an offer they could not refuse. They could either remit their individual retirement savings to the state, or lose the right to the basic state pension (but still have an obligation to pay contributions for it). In this extortionate way, the government wants to gain control over $14bn of individual retirement savings.
The Bulgarian government has come up with a similar idea. $300m of private early retirement savings was supposed to be transferred to the state pension scheme. The government gave way after trade unions protested and finally only about 20% of the original plans were implemented.
A slightly less drastic situation is developing in Poland. The government wants to transfer of 1/3 of future contributions from individual retirement accounts to the state-run social security system. Since this system does not back its liabilities with stocks or even bonds, the money taken away from the savers will go directly to the state treasury and savers will lose about $2.3bn a year. The Polish government is more generous than the Hungarian one, but only because it wants to seize just 1/3 of the future savings and also allows the citizens to keep the money accumulated so far.
The fourth example is Ireland. In 2001, the National Pension Reserve Fund was brought into existence for the purpose of supporting pensions of the Irish people in the years 2025-2050. The scheme was also supposed to provide for the pensions of some public sector employees (mainly university staff). However, in March 2009, the Irish government earmarked €4bn from this fund for rescuing banks. In November 2010, the remaining savings of €2.5bn was seized to support the bailout of the rest of the country.
The final example is France. In November, the French parliament decided to earmark €33bn from the national reserve pension fund FRR to reduce the short-term pension scheme deficit. In this way, the retirement savings intended for the years 2020-2040 will be used earlier, that is in the years 2011-2024, and the government will spend the saved up resources on other purposes.
It looks like although the governments are able to enforce general participation in pension schemes, they do not seem to be the best guardians of the money accumulated there.
The table below is a summary of the discussed fiscal-retirement situations (source):
*These figures do not include the costs of higher taxes, price inflation and low interest rates, which additionally devaluate retirement savings.
Posted by iusbvision on January 26, 2011
The Obama Culture of Corruption won’t be the same without her. But the question is: While lying, eco-radical czar Carol Browner may be stepping down (Politico has the scoop), does it really mean she’s stepping out of the inner circle?
Word has it she may have lost out to health care czar Nancy DeParle for the coveted deputy chief of staff position (As I’ve previously reported, DeParle’s got her own set of baggage).
In any case, it’s a Pyrrhic victory unless the Republicans are able to hold her accountable for all her dirty green deeds.
My archives are stuffed with Browner’s power-grabbing, transparency-undermining, science-distorting antics that stretch across two Democratic administrations. She and her energy lobbyist husband Thomas Downey are immovable Beltway fixtures — and it looks like she has no plans to leave D.C.
More via NYT:
Carol Browner, who has served as President Obama’s top environmental adviser in the White House, will leave the administration soon, a senior White House official said Monday night. Carol Browner, White House director of energy and climate change policy, in December.Alex Wong/Getty Images Carol Browner, White House director of energy and climate change policy, in December.
Ms. Browner had been viewed as a close adviser to Mr. Obama in the White House. A veteran who was administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Clinton, her name was floated as a possible candidate for a deputy chief of staff when Rahm Emanuel departed to run for mayor of Chicago.
But that talk faded after Mr. Emanuel’s job went to William Daley, another cabinet secretary under Mr. Clinton. And Ms. Browner’s chief portfolio — climate change — appears headed toward the back burner in the wake of the Republican gains last fall.
In a news conference just days after the November elections, Mr. Obama all but conceded defeat on his efforts — led by Ms. Browner — to get a comprehensive energy bill through the Congress.
Proving they live in Bizarro World, the Times performs this nifty bit of P.R. work on Browner’s behalf:
Ms. Browner was praised for her work during the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last summer, a performance that was said to have increased her stature in Mr. Obama’s White House.
WHO praised her — other than the NYTimes, I mean?
An increasing number of Democrats have raised their voices against Browner’s War on Carbon.
She infamously bullied auto execs to never put down anything in writing ever.
Obama’s own oil spill commission singled out Browner for misleading the public and “contributing to the perception that the government’s findings were more exact than they actually were.”
And her BP data doctoring was under fire by both Senate and House Republicans.
The GOP must not let her slip out the door quietly without answering for her abuse of power under oath and in the full light of public hearings.
I’ll withhold my usual “DLTDHYOTWO” until such time.
Posted by iusbvision on January 25, 2011
This is neo-corporatist corruption in its Chicago style glory.
GE, which owned NBC and MSNBC, benefited with its relationship with the Democratic Leadership. GE has also had other ethical problems which are pointed out in the video. Of course noth NBC and MSNBC abandoned serious news reporting long ago and chose a path of highly biased and unfair reporting on one side, to nightly lies and character assassination on the other.
This leads us to another opportunity to remind you all of Norton’s First Law:
Big business loves big government, which is why big business loves domestic taxes and regulation because it keeps the small and medium sized competition out of the competition. It also causes inflation, so ultimately it is you who pays and the poor who are hardest hit. (Big business often gets loopholes written in the laws for themselves such as Nancy Pelosi trying to get a part of the tuna industry exempted from the minimum wage law).
Posted by iusbvision on January 24, 2011
So much for equal justice unde rthe law. More picking of winners and losers. Welcome to Chicago….
Three SEIU Locals–Including Chicago Chapter–Waived From Obamacare Requirement
Monday, January 24, 2011
Three local chapters of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), whose political action committee spent $27 million supporting Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, have received temporary waivers from a provision in the Obamacare law.
The three SEIU chapters include the Local 25 in Obama’s hometown of Chicago.
The waivers allow health insurance plans to limit how much they will spend on a policy holder’s medical coverage for a given year. Under the new health care law, however, such annual limits are phased out by the year 2014. (Under HHS regulations, annual limits can be no less than $750,000 for 2011, no less than $1.25 million in 2012 and no less than $2 million in 2013.)
The SEIU, with more than 2 million members nationally, includes health care workers, janitors, security guards, and state and local government workers.
The three SEIU locals, covering a total of 36,064 enrollees, are covered by the federal waivers, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
HHS gave a waiver to Local 25 SEIU in Chicago with 31,000 enrollees on Oct. 1, 2010; to Local 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund with 4,544 enrollees on Oct. 10, 2010; and to the SEIU Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund with 520 enrollees on Nov. 15, 2010.
So far, the Obama administration has issued waivers to 222 entities, including businesses, unions and charitable organizations. Of that total, 45 were labor organizations.
A total of 1,507,418 enrollees are now included in the waivers. More than one-third — 512,315 – of the enrollees affected were insured by union health plans.
SEIU Local 1199’s health plan put a $50,000 cap on medical expenses for its New Jersey nursing home workers, according to 1199 SEIU spokeswoman Leah Gonzalez. That’s $700,000 under the 2011 limit stipulated by HHS regulations.
In September, HHS announced it would grant waivers to employers to prevent some workers from losing their benefits if the insurer could not meet new health care law’s requirements on annual limits. The waivers are granted by HHS if the department determines “compliance with the interim final regulations would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums,” according to a Sept. 3 memo by Steve L. Larson, director of the HHS Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight.
Local 1199, SEIU’s Greater New York Benefit Fund, requested the waiver specifically with respect to its separate plan for New Jersey members, according to Gonzalez. This waiver primarily affects low-wage New Jersey nursing home workers whose health care plan provides medical, hospital, prescription, dental and vision benefits.
The New Jersey members now have an annual maximum health care benefit of $50,000. Gonzalez said fewer than 1 percent of members have ever reached that cap, and that those members who did received additional help.
“The members’ health benefits are paid for by the employer and are negotiated through collective bargaining,” Gonzalez said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. “Several years ago, facing limited dollars from the employers for this small group, the members themselves chose how to shape their health plan to get the most out of their coverage.”
Gonzalez added that prescriptions are excluded from the cap. “For example, if a member maxes out from a hospital stay, she/he can continue to get their life-saving medications throughout the year while accessing alternative coverage at low-cost community clinics.”
Neither SEIU Local 25 nor Local 1, nor the national organization responded to CNSNews.com’s request for comment.
The SEIU’s Committee on Political Education made $27,829,845.91 in independent expenditures on Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008. SEIU-affiliated groups in Illinois have long supported Obama’s campaigns and endorsed him for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in 2004. In 2008, the national union backed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination. (See earlier story.)
Posted by iusbvision on January 19, 2011
So where are all of the alleged privacy activists now? You have proved yourself to be nothing but mere partisan attack dogs.
I would like to remind my leftist readers that I only supported the Patriot Act after the Supreme Court trimmed it and only as long as the sunset provisions were in place. The Democrats have made the Patriot Act permanent and have expanded domestic spying; they have also argued in the courts to expand it even more.
Glenn Greenwald at Solon.com:
I genuinely believe Obama and the Democratic Party owe a heartfelt, public apology to Bush, Cheney and the GOP for all the harsh insults they spewed about them for years based on policies they are now themselves aggressively continuing. Obama has won the War on Terror debate — for the American Right. And as Cheney demonstrates, they’re every bit as appreciative as they should be.
In the early months of Obama’s presidency, the American Right did to him what they do to every Democratic politician: they accused him of being soft on defense (specifically “soft on Terror”) and leaving the nation weak and vulnerable to attack. But that tactic quickly became untenable as everyone (other than his hardest-core followers) was forced to acknowledge that Obama was embracing and even expanding — rather than reversing — the core Bush/Cheney approach to Terrorism. As a result, leading right-wing figures began lavishing Obama with praise — and claiming vindication — based on Obama’s switch from harsh critic of those policies (as a candidate) to their leading advocate (once in power).
As early as May, 2009, former Bush OLC lawyer Jack Goldsmith wrote inThe New Republic that Obama was not only continuing Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies, but was strengthening them — both because he was causing them to be codified in law and, more important, converting those policies from right-wing dogma into harmonious bipartisan consensus. Obama’s decision “to continue core Bush terrorism policies is like Nixon going to China,” Goldsmith wrote. Last October, former Bush NSA and CIA Director Michael Hayden — one of the most ideological Bush officials, whose confirmation as CIA chief was opposed by then-Sen. Obama on the ground he had overseen the illegal NSA spying program – gushed with praise for Obama: “there’s been a powerful continuity between the 43rd and the 44th president.” James Jay Carafano, a homeland-security expert at the Heritage Foundation, told The New York Times‘ Peter Baker last January: “I don’t think it’s even fair to call it Bush Lite. It’s Bush. It’s really, really hard to find a difference that’s meaningful and not atmospheric.“
Those are the nation’s most extreme conservatives praising Obama’s Terrorism policies. And now Dick Cheney himself — who once led the “soft on Terror” attacks — is sounding the same theme. In an interview last night with NBC News, Cheney praised Obama for continuing his and Bush’s core approach to Terrorism:
He obviously has been through the fires of becoming President and having to make decisions and live with the consequences. And it’s different than being a candidate. When he was candidate he was all for closing Gitmo. He was very critical of what we’d done on the counterterrorism area to protect America from further attack and so forth. . . .
I think he’s – in terms of a lot of the terrorism policies — the early talk, for example, about prosecuting people in the CIA who’ve been carrying out our policies — all of that’s fallen by the wayside. I think he’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate. So I think he’s learned from experience.
Cheney was then specifically asked whether he stood by his early attacks on Obama’s national security policies — “You said you believe President Obama has made America less safe. That he’s actually raised the risk of attack. Do you still feel that way?” — and Cheney, not exactly known for changing his mind, essentially said that, thanks to Obama’s continuity, he now does not:
Well, when I made that comment, I was concerned that the counterterrorism policies that we’d put in place after 9/11 that had kept the nation safe for over seven years were being sort of rapidly discarded. Or he was going to attempt to discard them. . . . As I say, I think he’s found it necessary to be more sympathetic to the kinds of things we did.
It overstates the case to say there are no differences. There were some: Obama formally ended the “enhanced interrogation program” (the authorization for which had been withdrawn when he took office); banned CIA black sites (which were empty when he took office); and has not invoked the Article II lawbreaking theories of Bush’s first term (Bush largely abandoned them as well in his second term as Congress began legalizing his programs). And there is a more conciliatory tone, and some greater technocratic efficiency, in some foreign policy pronouncements. But the crux of Bush/Cheney radicalism — the mindset and policies that caused much of the controversy — continues and has even been strengthened. Gen. Hayden put it best, as quoted byThe Washington Times:
“You’ve got state secrets, targeted killings, indefinite detention, renditions, the opposition to extending the right of habeas corpus to prisoners at Bagram [in Afghanistan],” Mr. Hayden said, listing the continuities. “And although it is slightly different, Obama has been as aggressive as President Bush in defending prerogatives about who he has to inform in Congress for executive covert action.”
And that list, impressive though it is, doesn’t even include the due-process-free assassination hit lists of American citizens, the sweeping executive power and secrecy theories used to justify it, the multi-tiered, “state-always-wins” justice system the Obama DOJ concocted for detainees, the vastly more aggressive war on whistleblowers and press freedoms, or the new presidential immunity doctrines his DOJ has invented. Critically, this continuity extends beyond specific policies into the underlying sloganeering mentality in which they’re based: we’re in a Global War; the whole Earth is the Battlefield; the Terrorists want to kill us because they’re intrinsically Evil (not in reaction to anything we do); we’re justified in doing anything and everything to eradicate Them; the President’s overarching obligation (contrary to his Constitutional oath) is to keep us Safe; this should all be kept secret from us; we can’t be bothered with obsolete dogma like Due Process and Warrants, etc. etc.
Posted by iusbvision on January 6, 2011
Judge Napolitano – Police and prosecutors take the position that the average citizen needs to know the nuances of every law perfectly or face arrest and jail-time, but cops and prosecutors who get the law wrong that damage the lives and savings of citizens victimized get away with it.
Academic Misconduct by Faculty and Administrators is a Shameful Epidemic: Announcing our New Academic Misconduct Category
Posted by iusbvision on January 5, 2011
With this post we are announcing a new category called Academic Misconduct. While this may seem redundant with our Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship category the new Academic Misconduct category will focus on instances where those in authority actively conspire to violate the rights of, or smear, or suppress a student, faculty member, or citizen.
This is NOT about conspiracy theories so lets make that clear at the get go. This category is about cases, for example, where multiple members of the faculty and/or administration actively work together to engage in the type of misconduct described above and got caught.
But why make an entire category about something that just happens from time to time? That is the problem, it just not just happen from time to time. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has actively fought countless cases of just such behavior at universities both large and small scattered across the country. So has the Alliance Defense Fund, the Student Press Law Center, the ACLU and the Rutherford Institute. Even here at IUSB we have reported multiple cases of just such behavior and as I type this a faculty member is having his academic freedom violated in flagrant violation of the IU Academic Handbook. Which likely we will be reporting on soon.
Indeed several new cases a week almost very week become known. These are also just a tiny fraction of the violations because so many students either do not know their rights, do not know that thereis help out there, or a faculty member/student is successfully intimidated.
This new category has been long overdue, but the catalyst to create it came from a challenge from a global warming alarmist when he told me (in spite of the ClimateGate emails that demonstrate just such behavior as large as life) that he does not believe that academics would conspire in such a way. The truth is that not only does it happen, but it is a fairly common occurrence (and these are just the examples that get exposed). There so many fully documented examples of just such behavior that when given such an objection again I will merely need to point them to this category.
The video’s below are just a few examples. To examine our other categories please scroll down on the left hand bar of the page.
“No responsible public official could possibly have gone overboard as they appeared to do at Voldosta State”
Girls defeat US Border fence in under 18 seconds. Napolitano: Obama Administration’s Security of Border is Unprecedented
Posted by iusbvision on January 4, 2011
We have heard Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano say it many times that the resources put into border enforcement is unprecedented. The reality is the border is a joke, they know its a joke, so they hire a few more border agents and say “See we have unprecedented effort” when in reality the enforcement is not even close to being serious.
In the mean time while anyone can cross our borders with ease, you have to face breast, crotch and underwear checks, nude scanners and God help you if you are an amputee or use a colostomy bag and retaliation from the government if you complain.
Via The Blaze:
Remember Homeland Security Secretary Jane Napalitano’s mantra from last year the border is “as secure now as it has ever been”? (See here and here.) No one better show her the following video, which claims to show two young girls tackling, and conquering, the U.S./Mexico immigration fence in under 18 seconds — by hand:
The video comes from the creator of a film called “The Other Side of Immigration.” Interestingly, the goal of that film and the above video is not meant as a statement on the necessity of increased border security. Rather, the film bills itself as a documentary purporting to show the plight of Mexicans, why they are flocking to the U.S., and an alternative theory on how to stop illegal immigration.
Posted by iusbvision on January 4, 2011
Now some of you will watch this and think he is being over the top. But is he?
Allen West he defines tyranny as the Founders did. Think about the situation, what would the Founders think of the following:
All three branches of government are now legislating on their own and against the will of the people. We have a breakdown of separation of powers. Federalism is all but eliminated. Government is infringing on private property rights more and more, government owns most of the land west of the Mississippi to prevent us from using our own resources, Congress banned the Thomas Edison light bulb, government uses the tax code and other regulations to pick winners and losers and funnel money to their allies, judges and other office holders do not respect the limits of their office or the Constitution. The government is becoming so big that it is becoming ungovernable.
Congress spent almost $4 trillion last year with $2.08 trillion of that being new deficit spending which is 10 times higher than the yearly deficit the last year the Republicans had budgetary control.
Does anyone doubt for a minute that George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, James Madison, Jon Jay, Ben Rush, George Mason, Gouverneur Morris, Sam Adams, or Alexander Hamilton would say otherwise? Would Abe Lincoln, Frederick Douglass or Joseph Story?
Posted by iusbvision on January 3, 2011
But wait, I thought global warming was about open dialogue, tolerance for scientific skepticism, and all those cosey academic principles that are taught in science classes? Save the world, kumbaya …or not. It seems that the government is using outrageous pressure tactics to gain consensus, just like far left climate scientists do.
Embassy dispatches show America used spying, threats and promises of aid to get support for Copenhagen accord
Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.
The US diplomatic cables reveal how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm opposition to the controversial “Copenhagen accord“, the unofficial document that emerged from the ruins of the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009.
Negotiating a climate treaty is a high-stakes game, not just because of the danger warming poses to civilisation but also because re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.
Seeking negotiating chips, the US state department sent a secret cable on 31 July 2009 seeking human intelligence from UN diplomats across a range of issues, including climate change. The request originated with the CIA. As well as countries’ negotiating positions for Copenhagen, diplomats were asked to provide evidence of UN environmental “treaty circumvention” and deals between nations.
But intelligence gathering was not just one way. On 19 June 2009, the state department sent a cable detailing a “spear phishing” attack on the office of the US climate change envoy, Todd Stern, while talks with China on emissions took place in Beijing. Five people received emails, personalised to look as though they came from the National Journal. An attached file contained malicious code that would give complete control of the recipient’s computer to a hacker. While the attack was unsuccessful, the department’s cyber threat analysis division noted: “It is probable intrusion attempts such as this will persist.”
• Read more about how the US cajolled other countries into supporting the Copenhagen Accord.
Posted in 2012, Alarmism, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Energy & Taxes, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, True Talking Points | 1 Comment »
Ken Blackwell confirms IUSB Vision analysis of Obama’s plan to violate the Constitution and legislate by decree.
Posted by iusbvision on January 2, 2011
The Obama Administration has announced that it plans to enact Cap & Tax (energy taxes) and the so called “death panel” and other provisions into the health care law by abusing the power of regulation given to him. Congress denied him these laws, so he is going to do it anyways. Congress and the courts denied him the “Net Neutrality” regulations of the internet.
It is just as we told you HERE:
This is the problem that occurs when Congress grants federal bureaucracy such wide regulatory power to enact as they see fit. The bureaucrats get such wide power to enact law through regulation that they in effect become, as Justice Scalia once described as, “a junior varsity Congress” that can pass laws that are even against the will of Congress and the people. This action takes the entire purpose of Separation of Powers in the Constitution and tosses it right out the window. While Congress does have some minor delegable authority under the Necessary and Proper clause in no way did the Founders ever intend to have a situation where all three branches of government are legislating on their own and against the will of the people.
This action shows that the Obama administration and some of the Democratic leadership have nothing but utter contempt for the overwhelming expressed will of the American people.
Imagine what would happen in the elite if George Bush did something so extreme, or Sarah Palin?
Posted by iusbvision on January 2, 2011
You just gotta love public sector unions…
To hear them talk one might think they are all underpaid victims, like missionaries working in the third world…. so sad…./sniff.
The truth is that public sector unions are usually paid more then there private sector counterparts. They also get Cadillac level benefits that they pay little or nothing for and get pensions that are so fat that states have no idea how they can possibly pay them. So far what are the results, snow that doesn’t get cleared in New York, a federal government that spent $2.08 trillion more than it took in and we have little to show for it, and public schools that range from sub-par to unsafe failures. [Even the best American public schoolers do not measure well against other top 30 industrialized nations. So if you think "our public schools are really good" you are deluding yourself - Editor]
American Federation of Teachers president Rhonda “Randi” Weingarten has issued a statement slamming proposed cuts from the congressional deficit commission for not pushing shared sacrifice among the wealthy, but an AFT spokesman has told The Examiner that Weingarten will not be taking a paycut from the total $428,284 she received in salary and benefits during fiscal year 2010.
Weingarten wrote of the proposed budget cuts from the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform:
While we’re grateful the commission’s chairmen understood the need to hold education investment sacrosanct, count on a vigorous fight from us over proposed cuts to Social Security and Medicare that would hurt an already-ailing middle class. Shared sacrifice means holding millionaires responsible for their fair share of taxes and ending truly wasteful spending, not sawing off essential lifelines for the middle class, who desperately are trying to keep their heads above water in these precarious economic times. We can help solve the financial future of Social Security and Medicare by investing in putting our people back to work, so they can pay into these programs. Nothing is more important to the future solvency of the country.
Filings from the Department of Labor reveal that the American Federation of Teachers has disbursed $428,284 to Weingarten. Her gross salary is $342,552, but benefits and other disbursements raise that number to almost half a million dollars. She also earned a six-figure salary when she was president of Local 2 in 2009, during which she received $202,319. Neither of these sums, by the way, include her expenses.
When The Examiner called the AFT to ask whether Weingarten was planning on taking a paycut to demonstrate her belief in shared sacrifice, the spokesman said no. “No, absolutely not. She works 24/7 on behalf of union members and the people we serve. Making sure that people get a great education in public schools in America. She works to the bottom of her soul. You can’t put a price tag on that.”
I joked that, well, there is a price tag on that, and it’s apparently $428,284, but got no response.
The spokesman also asked whether The Examiner was equally critical of Goldman Sachs “who has received taxpayer dollars” (we have been), though it’s a bit odd that a spokesman for a teachers union that lobbies to funnel more taxpayer dollars toward its members would be so critical of Goldman Sachs for taking taxpayer dollars.
The lesson from the teachers union is clear: Shared sacrifice for thee and not for me.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2010/11/teachers-union-boss-takes-428k-demands-shared-sacrifice#ixzz19v9L6V70
Posted by iusbvision on December 31, 2010
The cops pull everyone over at a checkpoint and demand that you take a breathalyser. Breathalyzers are unreliable so a citizen can demand to be taken to a hospital and get a more accurate blood test. Many take that option. To get around this police are setting up a checkpoint and they have a judge right there who signs a warrant to have medics give you the blood test on the spot.
Talk about taking the Constitution and the 4th and 5th Amendments and turning them on their head. The due process right is blown because the judge is acting as an agent for the police. He is not impartial at all. This also brings up a big fat Separation of Powers argument. The constitution is clear that the state cannot take the guarantee of refusal of consent of an illegal search as probable cause.
The stats that 50% of accident related deaths involve alcohol is misleading as that number also includes sober people who hit legally intoxicated drivers. Some say that texting, lack of sleep, and arguing with your spouse make a driver more impaired than a driver who has had .08 BAC.
More – LINK.
Posted by iusbvision on December 28, 2010
According to the Innocence Project, who uses DNA and other forensic methods to check convictions:
The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are filled with evidence of negligence, fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.
DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation.
Common forms of misconduct by law enforcement officials include:
• Employing suggestion when conducting identification procedures
• Coercing false confessions
• Lying or intentionally misleading jurors about their observations
• Failing to turn over exculpatory evidence to prosecutors
• Providing incentives to secure unreliable evidence from informants
Common forms of misconduct by prosecutors include:
• Withholding exculpatory evidence from defense
• Deliberately mishandling, mistreating or destroying evidence
• Allowing witnesses they know or should know are not truthful to testify
• Pressuring defense witnesses not to testify
• Relying on fraudulent forensic experts
• Making misleading arguments that overstate the probative value of testimony
In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.
These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences.
Why do innocent people confess? A variety of factors can contribute to a false confession during a police interrogation. Many cases have included a combination of several of these causes. They include:
•ignorance of the law
•fear of violence
•the actual infliction of harm
•the threat of a harsh sentence
•Misunderstanding the situation
Eddie Joe LLoyd - Lloyd was convicted of the 1984 murder of a 16-year-old girl in Detroit after he wrote to police with suggestions on how to solve various recent crimes. During several interviews, police fed details of the crime to Lloyd, who was mentally ill, and convinced him that by confessing he was helping them “smoke out” the real killer. Lloyd eventually signed a confession and gave a tape-recorded statement. The jury deliberated less than an hour before convicting him and the judge said at sentencing that execution, which had been outlawed in Michigan, would have been the “only justifiable sentence” if it were available. In 2002, DNA testing proved that Lloyd was innocent and he was exonerated.
In more than 15% of cases of wrongful conviction overturned by DNA testing, an informant or jailhouse snitch testified against the defendant. Often, statements from people with incentives to testify – particularly incentives that are not disclosed to the jury – are the central evidence in convicting an innocent person.
People have been wrongfully convicted in cases in which snitches:
- Have been paid to testify
- Have testified in exchange for their release from prison.
- Have testified in multiple distinct cases that they have evidence of guilt, through overhearing a confession or witnessing the crime.
DNA exonerations have shown that snitches lie on the stand. To many, this news isn’t a surprise. Testifying falsely in exchange for an incentive – either money or a sentence reduction – is often the last resort for a desperate inmate. For someone who is not in prison already, but who wants to avoid being charged with a crime, providing snitch testimony may be the only option.
UPDATE – Another false snitch allegation with the details hidden from the jury -
An interesting story in USA Today talking about the misconduct by federal prosecutors to help get people convicted. These are just a sample of the ones who got caught and that USA Today could find.
James Strode hid his face with a scarf the evening he walked behind a counter in a Seattle Rite Aid pharmacy, grabbed a clerk by the throat and threatened to stab her or other workers who heard her call for help on an intercom.
“Give me all the money,” he barked. “Somebody better give me some money or someone is going to get stabbed.”
The November 2006 robbery, detailed in a police report, was one of the most menacing episodes in a criminal career that spanned two decades and four states. Strode’s record includes convictions for at least three burglaries, one robbery, a theft, an attack on a public safety officer and a bank robbery tried in federal court.
Strode might well have been in federal prison at the time of the Rite Aid robbery. But the bank robbery conviction and sentence that could have kept him there were wiped out in 2000, when an appeals court concluded that the federal prosecutor in charge of Strode’s trial had “crossed the line” by making improper arguments to the jury.
So instead of keeping Strode behind bars for a decade, the U.S. Justice Department agreed he could be released in less than half that time. About 13 months after he got out, Strode held up the Seattle pharmacy.
What happened to Strode underscores one of the least recognized consequences of misconduct by Justice Department attorneys in charge of enforcing the nation’s laws. Although those abuses have put innocent people in prison, misconduct also has set guilty people free by significantly shortening their prison sentences.
In some cases, they served no additional time. New crimes sometimes followed.
A USA TODAY investigation has documented 201 cases since 1997 in which federal courts found that prosecutors violated laws or ethics rules. Each was so serious that judges overturned convictions, threw out charges or rebuked the prosecutors. And although the violations tainted no more than a small fraction of the tens of thousands of cases filed in federal courts each year, legal specialists who reviewed the newspaper’s work said misconduct is not always uncovered, so the true extent of the problem might never be known.