The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for November, 2010

Dem Sen. Bennett On Lame Duck Session: “It’s All Rigged” – GOP Rep. Buyer Blasts Acting Dem Speaker: “This is why the People have Thrown You Out”

Posted by iusbvision on November 30, 2010

Real Clear Politics:

A hot microphone caught a conversation between a male and female Senator.

“Because — because, it’s all rigged. I mean, the whole conversation is rigged. The fact that we don’t get to discussion before the break about what we’re going to do in the lame duck is just rigged. This stuff’s rigged,” the Senator said.

UPDATE (1:32 ET): Washington Examiner reports the speaker was Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO).

UPDATE (1:41 ET): The Daily Caller confirms.


Indiana’s own Steve Buyer blasts the Democrats flagrant violation of the process rules in Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives.

Good job Steve, we are so proud of you ! 


Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Post 2010 | 1 Comment »

More Tea Party Philosophy: American Exceptionalism, Why America Works

Posted by iusbvision on November 26, 2010

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101 | 1 Comment »

IRS Targets Jewish Groups That Support Existence of Israel

Posted by iusbvision on November 25, 2010

Well this very web site warned you that virulent far left anti-semites were being courted by the Obama Administration and now we are seeing more of the fruits.

Samantha Power and the Obama Administration

Obama Caught in Another Deception: Radical Anti-Semite Back On as Advisor After Campaign Vowed Never to Work With Him Again

Via our friend Gateway Pundit:

Do you remember when Jesse Jackson said that under Obama Jews would lose all of their clout?
…He was right.

The IRS is now asking Jewish organizations if they support the existence of Israel.

(Politico Document)

The IRS is targeting American Jewish groups that support the existence of Israel.
Ben Smith at The Politico reported:

A Pennsylvania Jewish group that has claimed the Internal Revenue Service is targeting pro-Israel groups introduced in federal court today a letter from an IRS agent to another, unnamed organization that tax experts said was likely outside the usual or appropriate scope of an IRS inquiry.

“Does your organization support the existence of the land of Israel?” IRS agent Tracy Dornette wrote the organization, according to this week’s court filing, as part of its consideration of the organizations application for tax exempt status. “Describe your organization’s religious belief sytem toward the land of Israel.”

The document emerged in the course of a lawsuit filed in August by Z Street, a hawkish group that casts itself as the Zionist answer to the liberal J Street. Z Street claims that a different IRS agent reviewing its application for tax exempt status said the agency is “carefully scrutinizing organizations that are in any way connected with Israel” and that “a special unit” is determining whether its activities “contradict the Administration’s public policies.’”

The IRS can deny tax exempt status to groups that work against “established public policy,” a precedent established in its denial of a tax exemption to Bob Jones University over racial discrimination, and Z Street is suggesting that the IRS has begun applying some such policy to pro-Israel groups.


Democrat Web Advertisement – Eric Cantor is a JEW!!@!@!

JPOST: Only 6% of Israelis see US gov’t as pro-Israel – UPDATED!

Jews Protesting Against Obama for Interfering in Domestic Policy. Say Obama is Racist Against Jews

Obama Uses Iranian Nuclear Threat Against Israel: Do what we say or we let Iran have nukes….

After Suffering Dozens of Rocket Attacks Every Day Only 31% of Democrats Support Israeli Military Action

Dennis Prager lecture at UC Berkeley: How universities teach anti-semitism and moral obscenity. Why universities should be celebrating Israel’s 60th birthday.

Anti-Israel Propaganda at the University of California Santa Barbara

VIDEO: David Horowitz outs genocidal Muslim Student Association member. UPDATED!

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Israel, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Six reasons why Tom DeLay’s conviction will be reversed on appeal.

Posted by iusbvision on November 25, 2010

Why the DeLay conviction will not stand:

1 – In the first place a six year investigation into Delay’s fund raising by the Justice Department yielded in no violations of federal elections law or charges being filed (keep this in mind when we get to reasons 4 and 5).

Tom DeLay Cleared — N.Y. Times Puts the Story on Page A-18 (Behind Organic Golf Courses)

2 – Ronnie Earle, the Texas prosecutor in the case, has a long history of partisan proprietorial misconduct. For example: Earle went after Kay Baily Hutchinson with bogus charges filing indictments against Hutchinson three times all of which failed. One judge was so disgusted by Ronnie Earle’s behavior that he empaneled a new jury in one indictment and directed them to return with an ruling of not guilty.

3 – Ronnie Earle spoke at partisan fund raising events bragging about how he was going to “Take Tom Delay down.” Before the charges were even announced Prosecutor Earle had a film crew follow him around so they could document on how to take down a member of Congress. Earle brought the charges in the county with the highest Democrat vote registration.  Earle also had big press conferences filled with accusations in what were obvious attempts by the prosecution to further taint any possible jury pool. It is precisely for this reason, press tainting of the public, that “a change of venue” is often granted in cases involving high profile people and cases. The defense motion for a change of venue was denied, which again, is a rather obvious constitutional violation in light of the circumstances; especially when considering that none of the acts Delay was accused of happened in that district. Remember Prosecutor Nifong and the Duke rape case? Similar reasoning applies.

The appellate case for getting the conviction overturned for lack of a fair trial is a pretty fat one which is why the defense, as well as other lawyers are pessimistic that the conviction can withstand appellate review.

4 – The conviction also stands four square in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s “Supremacy Clause”. In areas where state law and federal law conflict the federal law applies. Keep this in mind as we go to reason five.

5 – Delay is accused of money laundering for the following reasons. Texas law forbids corporations from donating to directly to candidates for Texas state legislative office. Corporations, PACS, and other interests from around the country  donate to the Republican National Committee (RNC). The RNC donates to the campaigns of candidates for state office all around the country including Texas. This is nothing new and has been done for ages. Ronnie Earle managed to convince a likely tainted jury that since some of those interests were close to Delay’s interests that it was all a scam to get around Texas Law.  Federal law allows those types of donations.

Political Action Committee’s (PACS) do this all the time as well for both parties. The PACs hold fund raisers, take donations, rune events, sell merchandise etc and take that money and “bundle” it and give it to candidates and other partisan groups. “Bundling” is perfectly legal and is done by interests who support both political parties. When I took a political science class on federal election law we were shown that this is how it is done.

6 – Both parties have done this before and have continued to do this to this day in Texas and everywhere else. The American Spectator reports some examples of this same thing being done by Democrats repeatedly:

At stake in 2002 was control of the Texas legislature, which was to redraw congressional district lines. Corporate contributions to legislative candidates are illegal in Texas. The DeLay aides stand accused of violating that prohibition, along with eight companies like Sears Roebuck that provided the funds. The corporate money, however, never went to the candidates. Instead, it went to a much larger fund for state elections controlled by the Republican National Committee in Washington. That committee made contributions to Texas legislative candidates, constituting what Earle now charges is “money laundering.”

The only problem is that similar transactions are conducted by both parties in many states, including Texas. In fact, on October 31, 2002, the Texas Democratic Party sent the Democratic National Committee (DNC) $75,000, and on the same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $75,000. On July 19, 2001, the Texas Democratic Party sent the DNC $50,000 and, again on the same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $60,000. On June 8, 2001, the Texas Democratic Party sent the DNC $50,000. That very same day, the DNC sent the Texas Democratic Party $60,000.

In essence this conviction, if it is allowed to stand, could serve to prohibit any corporation in Texas from giving money to PAC’s or the Republican National Committee, and would endanger any candidate who took money from the Republican National Committee. It is preposterous. It would also set precedent to allow a similarly minded local Republican prosecutor to do the same to any Democrat legislative candidate in the state and their fund raisers.

It is important to keep in mind that political donations are covered under the 1st Amendment (political speech), which is why the Supreme Court favors fewer restrictions on donations and has shot down many campaign finance restrictions. The 14th Amendment binds the First Amendment and the Court’s rulings on it to the states (this is called incorporation of the Bill of Rights). It is because of “incorporation” that state laws in areas covered by incorporation are as restricted as the federal laws.

These are going to be other reasons that the appellate court will have to overturn the conviction as well; as these glaring constitutional violations are merely the most obvious ones. I am confident that the defense team will recognize others. Even the AP says in it’s report that the odds will turn in Delay’s favor in the appeals round, which was so obvious even they felt compelled to state it prominently in the article.


AUSTIN, Texas – Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay argued throughout his trial that the deck was stacked against him by a politically motivated prosecutor and a jury from the most Democratic city in one of the most Republican states.

But following DeLay’s conviction Wednesday on money laundering and conspiracy charges, some legal experts say the edge may now shift to the Republican who represented a conservative Houston suburb for 22 years.

Before DeLay’s inevitable appeal, which his lawyers predict will be a far friendlier process than his trial, he faces sentencing next month from Senior Judge Pat Priest. While technically the money laundering charge carries a punishment of up to life in prison, the judge has wide latitude and could end up just giving him probation.

“It is absolutely impossible he would get anywhere near life,” said Philip Hilder, a Houston criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor. “It would be a period of a few years, if he gets prison.”

Barry Pollack, a Washington-based lawyer who represents clients in white-collar and government corruption cases, said the judge may not feel the need to throw the book at DeLay, figuring the conviction itself is severe punishment for someone who once ascended to the No. 2 post in the House of Representatives.

For example, as a convicted felon, DeLay won’t be able to run again for public office or even be able to cast a vote until he completes his sentence.

“I think in a lot of cases a judge wants to make an example, but I don’t see that happening here,” Pollack said. [For obvious reasons – Editor]

Prosecutors accused DeLay of conspiring with two associates to use his Texas-based political action committee to send $190,000 in corporate money to an arm of the Washington-based Republican National Committee. The RNC then sent the same amount to seven Texas statehouse candidates. Under Texas law, corporate money can’t go directly to political campaigns.

The money helped Republicans take control of the Texas House in 2002, and once there, they were able to push through a DeLay-engineered congressional redistricting plan that sent more Texas Republicans to Congress in 2004, strengthening DeLay’s political power.

While the string of alleged events may have been difficult for jurors to follow, outside legal observers said prosecutors were able to prove that DeLay had an undeniable motive for breaking the law. [The motive was to win elections using the same process that both parties have used and still continue to use. By that reasoning everyone elected official stands guilty of money laundering – Editor]

Phillip Turner, a Chicago attorney who focused on criminal tax and public corruption cases as a federal prosecutor in the 1980s, said jurors always want clear evidence that the defendant stood to personally gain through his alleged misdeeds.

Turner contrasts the DeLay case with the federal corruption trial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted only on a lesser charge of lying to the FBI, with the jury deadlocking on 23 other charges — including the most serious ones.

Although prosecutors argued Blagojevich wanted to enrich himself by trying to sell the Senate seat that once belonged to President Barack Obama, Turner said a “corrupt motive” was tougher to prove in that case. Blagojevich didn’t seem to receive any reward, either in money or power, and it was unclear whether he ever really intended to, Turner said.

“Those are the sorts of facts that make a difference in a jury’s mind and lead to a conviction in one case and a hung jury in another,” Turner said.

DeLay opted to be sentenced by Priest, a Democrat, rather than a jury in heavily Democratic Austin. Hilder said that was a wise move, particularly if DeLay thinks he might be able to get by with just a probation sentence.

“The judge may be more receptive than a jury,” Hilder said. “He obviously thinks he will get a fairer shake with the judge. The jury more likely would sentence him to prison time.”

The sentencing hearing, which is set to begin Dec. 20, will feature “numerous witnesses who will talk about the other acts of corruption that Tom DeLay has committed,” lead prosecutor Gary Cobb said. The defense, which called only five witnesses during the trial compared to 30 for the prosecution, also could present testimony in the penalty phase.

But even with sentencing nearly a month away, DeLay’s lawyers expressed confidence they could overturn the conviction rather than just minimize the punishment.

Although they haven’t named the specific areas of the case they intend to appeal, their denied change of venue request is almost certainly to be among them. DeLay also long contended the charges against him were a political vendetta by Ronnie Earle, the former Democratic Travis County district attorney who originally brought the case and is now retired.

“This is a terrible miscarriage of justice,” said Dick DeGuerin, DeLay’s lead attorney. “… This will never stand up on appeal.”

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Leftist Hate in Action, True Talking Points | 2 Comments »

George Soros Has ‘Fun’ Subversively & Adversely Affecting Societies; Lays Out His Plan For America

Posted by iusbvision on November 25, 2010

Notice that Soros makes it clear in his books that he considers the United States to be a repressive regime because of capitalism, freedom, individual states and national sovereignty. This video touches on this some but in his books Soros really elaborates upon it. For those of you who do not know, Soros is sugar daddy number one for the Democratic Party and its various organizations.

Thanks to The Blaze for posting the video link.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Gov. Bobby Jindal talks oil and how Brown University administrators & faculty tried to undermine Christian Faith & Western Civilization.

Posted by iusbvision on November 25, 2010

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal talks the oil crisis and how the federal government is in the way with some of the most foolish regulations one can imagine. Wasn’t the Department of Homeland Security reorganization supposed to fix this problem? Looks like it didn’t work.

At 7:00 the governor talks about how subversive public education has become.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Dick Morris: Public schools are an obvious failure. School choice is cheaper and better.

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

Brigitte Gabriel: Thanksgiving Message 2010

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Brigitte Gabriel: As a child born in Lebanon I lost my childhood and country of birth to Muslim extremists during the Lebanese Civil War. America is my home now and I refuse to sit on the sidelines while those same extremists seek to destroy this great country and our Western culture.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

TSA Parody Videos

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Obviously the humor is a tad adult. I love satire because it can be used to so creatively raise very valid substantive concerns.

Always remember the TSA motto, “Security is Freedom”.

“The TSA wishes to remind you to explain to your children that there is no such thing as a ‘bad touch’ as long as it is done by a government employee”.

“Tell your friends how you showed your patriotism by getting ‘Freedom Frisked'”.

“Remember that the government is only doing these TSA groin checks to find dangerous contraband like bottled water”.


Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

Eliana Sutherland: TSA Agents Singled Me Out For My Breasts

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Channel 6 Orlando:

ORLANDO, Fla. — The head of the Transportation Security Administration said the agency will look further into allegations that two male TSA workers picked a woman for additional screening because of her breasts.Eliana Sutherland recently flew from Orlando International Airport and told Local 6 she felt the two male TSA workers were staring at her breasts and chose her for additional screening because of their size.”It was pretty obvious. One of the guys that was staring me up and down was the one who pulled me over,” said Sutherland. “Not a comfortable feeling.”Experiences like Sutherland’s have been reported across the country, leaving many people to join a group planning to boycott the TSA’s new full body scan in an effort to clog security lines on the day before Thanksgiving. Whether it’s pat-downs or full-body scans, the changes are making some people question who gets chosen and why.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

TSA Protests: Man wears speedo to airport, girl wears bikini.

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Man wears speedo with the words on his back “Screw Big Sis”.

Women comes to airport in a Bikini – LINK


Thousands of passengers were expected Wednesday at LAX, but only one left little to the imagination.

“I’m wearing my bikini,” Corinne Theile said as she unbuttoned her overcoat outside the terminal to reveal a black two-piece. “It’s not that I’m concerned, it’s that I feel like the TSA is making travelers feel uncomfortable, and I feel like we can have security measures that don’t make people feel uncomfortable.

“Every time I go through security I always say, ‘I don’t even know why I got dressed this morning.’ I end up taking off belts, jewelry and everything else off anyway,” Theile said.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | 2 Comments »

Brit Hume: How Democrats Undermined Business Confidence. Federal Reserve Revises Economic Forcast Downward

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

Keep a massive tax increase looming on small business, raise capital gains and payroll taxes, put in massive new health care taxes, more regulations, talk about new energy taxes etc and surprise people aren’t hiring….

Hume says that this is the difference between looking at the economy from academia or in the White House, it is pretty removed from reality.

How are Uncertainties About Taxes Affecting Employers?

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet? | Leave a Comment »

Why Unhappy People Become Liberals

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

This is a great article by Dennis Prager who actually wrote a book on the subject of happiness.


According to polls — Pew Research Center, the National Science Foundation — and studies such as Arthur Brooks’s Gross National Happiness, conservative Americans are happier than liberal Americans.

Liberals respond this way: “If we’re unhappier, it’s because we are more upset than conservatives over the plight of those less fortunate than ourselves.”

But common sense and data suggest other explanations.

For one thing, conservatives on the same socioeconomic level as liberals give more charity and volunteer more time than do liberals. And as regards the suffering of non-Americans, for at least half a century conservatives have been far more willing to sacrifice American treasure and American blood (often their own) for other nations’ liberty.

Both of these facts refute the liberals-are-more-concerned-about-others explanation for liberal unhappiness.

So, let’s look at other explanations.

Perhaps we are posing the question backwards when we ask why liberals are less happy than conservatives. The question implies that liberalism causes unhappiness. And while this is true, it may be equally correct to say that unhappy people are more likely to adopt leftist positions.

Take black Americans, for example. It makes perfect sense that a black American who is essentially happy is going to be less attracted to the Left. Anyone who has interacted with black conservatives rarely encounters an angry, unhappy person.


Because the liberal view on race is that America is a racist society. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, a black American must abandon liberalism in order to be a happy individual. It is very hard, if not impossible, to be a happy person while believing that society is out to hurt you. So, the unhappy black person will gravitate to liberalism and liberalism will in turn make him more unhappy by reinforcing his view that he is a victim.

The unhappy gravitate toward the Left for a second reason. Life is hard for liberals and life is hard for conservatives. But conservatives assume that life will always be hard. Liberals, on the other hand, have utopian dreams. At his brother Robert’s funeral, the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy recalled his brother saying: “Some men see things as they are and say, ‘Why?’ I dream things that never were and say, ‘Why not?’”

Utopians will always be less happy than those who know that suffering is inherent to human existence. The utopian compares America to utopia and finds it terribly wanting. The conservative compares America to every other civilization that has ever existed and walks around wondering how he got so lucky as to be born or naturalized an American.

Third, imagine two Americans living in essentially identical socioeconomic conditions. They earn $45,000 a year, they have the same amount of debt on their homes, and both have the same number of dependents. One seeks governmental assistance wherever possible; the other eschews any governmental help. Which one is likely to be the liberal and which one is likely to be the happier individual?

This is not a question only an oracle can answer. The one who yearns for governmental help is the one who is likely to be both liberal and less happy. Conservatism, which demands self-reliance, makes one happier. The more a man or woman feels like captain of his or her ship (as poor as that ship may be), the happier he or she will be.

A fourth explanation for greater unhappiness among liberals is that the more people allow feelings to govern them, the less happy they will be. And the further left one goes, the more importance one attaches to feelings.

It is liberal educators and liberal parents who have clamored for protecting young people from the pain of losing games. The liberal world came up with the idea of giving trophies to kids who lose; they don’t want their children feeling bad. Conservatives, on the other hand, teach their kids how to lose well. They are less worried about their children feeling bad.

A couple of years ago, I gave a speech on happiness to the students and faculty of a prestigious high school in the Los Angeles area. The subject was the need to act happy even when one isn’t feeling happy — because it is unfair to others to inflict our bad moods on them and because we will never be happy if we allow our feelings to dictate our happiness.

From what I experienced that day and learned later, liberal students and faculty generally loathed my speech; conservative students generally loved it (there were no conservative faculty to speak of). Why? Because conservatives are far more likely to be comfortable with the idea that feelings are not as important as behavior.

Those who know that feelings must not govern us, but that we must govern our feelings, are far more likely to be happy people.

The upshot of all this? There is an amazingly simple way to defeat the Left: Raise children who are grateful to be American, who don’t complain, who can handle losing, and who are guided by values, not feelings. In other words, teach them how to be happy adults.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

48 Out of 50 States Have Lost Jobs since Democrats’ Stimulus Law. Washington DC Gains Jobs!

Posted by iusbvision on November 24, 2010

House Ways & Means Committee:

While Democrats promised stimulus would create 3.7 million jobs, the reality is far different. To date, 48 out of 50 states have lost jobs, while the unemployment rate has remained at or above 9.5% for 15 consecutive months. As the nation nears the end of 2010 — when final statistics will be available to compare actual outcomes with the Administration’s pre-stimulus projections — Washington, D.C. remains the only place in America where those job-creation projections actually have been met.  Meanwhile, the rest of the nation is left asking “Where are the jobs?”

State Administration Projection of Change in Jobs Through December 2010 Actual Change in Jobs Through October 2010
Alabama +52,000 -43,500
Alaska +8,000 -1,200
Arizona +70,000 -73,800
Arkansas +31,000 -5,100
California +396,000 -543,400
Colorado +59,000 -83,200
Connecticut +41,000 -39,200
Delaware +11,000 -10,300
District of Columbia +12,000 +21,100
Florida +206,000 -169,200
Georgia +106,000 -126,200
Hawaii +15,000 -8,900
Idaho +17,000 -16,100
Illinois +148,000 -160,900
Indiana +75,000 -40,200
Iowa +37,000 -20,200
Kansas +33,000 -32,800
Kentucky +48,000 -7,700
Louisiana +50,000 -15,600
Maine +15,000 -9,900
Maryland +66,000 -13,900
Massachusetts +79,000 -33,500
Michigan +109,000 -105,900
Minnesota +66,000 -24,700
Mississippi +30,000 -23,900
Missouri +69,000 -66,500
Montana +11,000 -8,600
Nebraska +23,000 -11,400
Nevada +34,000 -79,000
New Hampshire +16,000 +5,200
New Jersey +100,000 -104,600
New Mexico +22,000 -13,300
New York +215,000 -127,700
North Carolina +105,000 -81,900
North Dakota +8,000 +6,600
Ohio +133,000 -157,500
Oklahoma +40,000 -24,400
Oregon +44,000 -41,300
Pennsylvania +143,000 -71,900
Rhode Island +12,000 -15,600
South Carolina +50,000 -22,900
South Dakota +10,000 -2,500
Tennessee +70,000 -53,700
Texas +269,000 -54,100
Utah +32,000 -15,000
Vermont +8,000 -5,200
Virginia +93,000 -44,500
Washington +75,000 -70,900
West Virginia +20,000 -10,600
Wisconsin +70,000 -69,100
Wyoming +8,000 -7,800

Source: Administration February 13, 2009 projection and actual U.S. Department of Labor data.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Obama misleads my neighbors in Kokomo.

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

We are all glad that the plant in Kokomo was prevented from closing due to a large taxpayer bailout. The concerns with the bailout plan remains the same.  The bond holders were illegally hosed including Indiana retirement funds. That was real economic damage. The other problem with government rushing in to prevent loss to a highly inefficient corporation is that the reforms are done for political reasons and not economic ones. This can result in reforms that do not go far enough. The bailout was done in such a way where the union that had clearly over reached did not have to take its fair share of the shared sacrifice that the taxpayer and the rest of the private sector has taken. The result is that even after the reforms the labor costs are still excessively high when compared to foreign automakers that are making cars in Indiana, Kentucky and Tennessee.

I am by no means saying that people should not be paid well, but many of these union workers, much like many government union employees are paid beyond well, especially when it comes to Cadillac benefits that they contribute very little towards. The result is a company that may get along in the short term, but still faces a real disadvantage. These shortcomings are well known and have been covered by journalists, commentators, and blogs for a long time.

The problem I have with President Obama today is the dishonest narrative that he keeps repeating. If he gets his way it will cost Indiana even more jobs than the 40,000 plus that have left since the stimulus.

Fox News:

PERU, Ind. — President Obama used part of his appearance at a Chrysler factory on Tuesday to hammer home his argument that the country cannot afford to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans — even though his speech was advertised by the White House as a celebration of the auto bailouts.

The tax cuts apparently are weighing heavily on Obama’s mind as he prepares for a meeting with GOP leaders at the White House on Nov. 30, the first one since his party was punished by voters in this month’s midterm elections.

Newly empowered Republicans, who captured the House and increased their presence in the Senate, are pushing to extend the Bush tax cuts to all Americans, saying that the economy is too fragile for a tax hike on anyone.

But Obama told the crowd at the Chrysler transmission plant that the country cannot afford the $700 billion cost for extending tax cuts to individuals making $200,000 and above or families making $250,000 and above.

“I don’t think that we can afford it right now, not when we are going to have to make some tough decisions to rein in our deficits,” he said.


This is coming from the man who signed budgets that increased yearly deficit spending over the Republicans by a factor of seven. Obama went on to say that we should not be giving tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires, but here is the problem. Even if the tax cuts all expire and we tax rates increase in January, the super rich will hardly be effected, but small businesses will get creamed and Obama knows it.


I – The super rich benefit from a 16,000 page tax code is not just filled with exceptions and shelters for those with influence, the code defines much of the super rich’s income as non taxable, or it is defined as income that is covered under a different rate than “taxable wages”. For Example: John Kerry made $5,072,000 in 2003 and his total combined federal tax burden was 12.34%. If all the Bush era tax cuts expired Kerry would have still only paid a fraction over 13%.

II – The truth is that there are not many people who make taxable wages over $200,000. The vast majority who pay that tax at what will be the 39.9% rate are small business “S-corporations”, not the John Kerrys of the world.  While these small businesses bring in that much money on paper, most of their income goes back into the business. These are not “millionaires and billionaires”, they are people who have a roofing business, or own a couple of pizza shops, or a small manufacturing company.  These are the businesses that do 75% of the hiring in this country.

III – Google is a multi-billion dollar company and they paid a federal tax of 2.4%. They gave $800,000 to Obama and the Democrat leadership and throw gala events for Obama, yet where is Obama’s class warfare rhetoric when Google skips out in many millions of taxes?  Obama has no problem attacking the Chamber of Commerce, who by the way represents most small business.

This brings us to Norton’s First Law: Big business loves big government, because big government taxes and regulates small and medium sized business, out of the competition.

Video: Government Strangling Small Business With Red Tape

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes | Leave a Comment »

TSA pulls pants off 71 y/o man with knee implant. TSA Supervisor yells at man “I have the power”

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Video: Iran, North Korea, Cuba indict U.S. for human rights abuses. Obama Administration apologetic…

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

A UN watchdog group posted this video and it is typical of what a complete farce the UN has become. In this video the worlds worst human rights abusers indict the United States as the worlds big human rights violator. Obama Administration officials comments legitimize the nonsense coming from these regimes.

AP from comments:

Via Powerline, a case study in degenerate autocracies using the UN for cheap propaganda in the name of “human rights.” The occasion here is the U.S. having submitted its first-ever universal periodic review of its human rights record, which it’s now required to do every four years per the same UN resolution that created the Orwellian body we know as the UN Human Rights Council. That’s the same Human Rights Council that includes China, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia as members, and which counts among its accomplishments a proposed international ban on “religious defamation.” Iran, North Korea, and Cuba aren’t on the Council, but luckily for them, the universal periodic review process doesn’t limit comment to members. It’s first come, first served, to all UN participants. These three came early, and boy, did they serve:

According to the Council’s procedure, all U.N. members are given carte blanche to comment and make recommendations to the state in the docket. But since only three hours are allotted per state, the practice has emerged of allowing approximately only the first sixty to speak.

This morning fifty-six countries lined-up for the opportunity to have at the U.S. representatives, many standing in line overnight a day ago in order to be near the top of the list. Making it to the head of the line were Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and North Korea…

Iran – currently poised to stone an Iranian woman for adultery – told the U.S. “effectively to combat violence against women.”

North Korea – which systematically starves a captive population – told the U.S. “to address inequalities in housing, employment and education” and “prohibit brutality…by law enforcement officials.”

The temptation here is to frame this as an Obama problem, part of his world apology tour, etc, but that’s only half the equation. His deputies could have and should have treated this “critique” with the utter contempt it deserved, but as I noted above, we’re now obliged by resolution to account for our sins periodically to vastly worse offenders.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

Popular Mechanics: New TSA scanners and procedures won’t catch anyone. UPDATE: CNN says body scanners don’t work

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

It is rather obvious to those of us who have looked at this issue, but it is nice to have the science speaking up.

UPDATE – CNN: Body scanners don’t work. 

UPDATE II – Scientists write White House with concerns over X-Ray Exposure of body scanners –

Popular Mechanics:

Q – What is really being seen by these machines?

A – Bruce Schneier: In theory, it sees stuff that isn’t part of the body. So if you’ve got a stapler in your pocket, it will show up. The thought is that it will see stuff that a metal detector won’t detect, like a ceramic knife. But this doesn’t seem to be borne out by reality.

Q – The machines have shown up in the wake of the so-called underwear bomber, who tried to blow up a plane with chemicals stored in his briefs. Would this technology have stopped him?

A – The guys who make the machines have said, “We wouldn’t have caught that.”

Q – So what kind of attack will this prevent, that otherwise might be successful?

A – There are two kinds of hijackers. There’s the lone nutcase, like someone who will bring a gun onto a plane because, dammit, they’re going to take the whole plane down with them. Any pre-9-11 airport security would catch a person like that. The second kind is the well-planned, well-financed Al Qaeda-like plot. And nothing can be done to stop someone like that.

Q – Has there been a case since 9/11 of an attempted hijacker being thwarted by airport security?

A – None that we’ve heard of. The TSA will say, “Oh, we’re not allowed to talk about successes.” That’s actually bullsh*t. They talk about successes all the time. If they did catch someone, especially during the Bush years, you could be damned sure we’d know about it. And the fact that we didn’t means that there weren’t any. Because the threat was imaginary. It’s not much of a threat. As excess deaths go, it’s just way down in the noise. More than 40,000 people die each year in car crashes. It’s 9/11 every month. The threat is really overblown.

Q – Do you think there’s been an over-reaction, on the part of the government and the press, to the underwear bomber?

A – That case was really instructive. Nobody was injured, and the plane landed safely. It was a success! And it was pre 9-11 security that made it a success. Because we screen for superficial guns and bombs, he had to resort to a syringe and 90 minutes in the bathroom with a bomb that didn’t work. This is what success looks like. Stop bellyaching!

Q – What’s the motive behind introducing this new level of security?

A – It’s politics. You have to be seen as doing something, even if nothing is the smart thing to do. You can’t be seen as doing nothing.

Q – Does it surprise you that at last, after several escalations in the TSA’s level of intrusiveness, the public seems to have finally rebelled?

A – Back in 2005, when this full-body scanner technology was first being proposed, I wrote that I thought this would be the straw that broke the camel’s back, because it would unite conservatives and liberals. Nobody wants their daughter groped or shown naked.

Q – Is privacy being violated, in your estimation?

A – You go get groped and you tell me.

Q – Have you had a pat-down?

A – Yes, actually, just a couple of days ago.

Q – Is this security theater?

A – 100 percent. It won’t catch anybody.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Corporatism | Leave a Comment »

How Media Bias Works: The Miami Herald Undermines Marco Rubio

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

How is it that the big networks and many large newspapers always quote “experts” that constantly reinforce false elite media narratives?

The answer is, because that is exactly what most journalists are trained to do in J-school. “What is that Chuck, are you saying that most journalists are taught to manipulate the public instead of making the public as best informed as they can”? That is exactly what I am saying and I know this all too well as I just finished my communications degree from Indiana University. I graduated with honors.

The journalistic philosophy taught in most J-schools is the “Walter Lippmann Objective Method”, but there is nothing objective about it. Lippmann’s method was to have the media use an elite technical class of “experts” to tell the public what they needed to hear in order to vote the “right way”. Anyone who has read Walter Lippmann’s book Public Opinion comes to understand very quickly the contempt he has for popular sovereignty and self auto-determination. Fortunately I had one communications professor who thought that Lippmann’s philosophy was nonsense, I had an English professor who thought so as well. Not every student is so lucky.

The method used to present you these experts is dishonest from the get-go. The journalist has an idea of the storyline or narrative he wishes to present. So he goes through his Rolodex and finds a person that can be portrayed as an expert who will (big time scare quotes here)independently verify and present the point of view the reporter intended to present in the first place.

Often times a reporter will run across a “man on the street” who just happens to totally and convincingly reinforce the narrative you usually see in the elite media. The implication was that the reporter just started talking to people on the street and wow isn’t the media in touch with “regular folks”. The truth is that the “independent regular person found on the street” knows the reporter would be there well in advance. I remember one study I saw a few years ago where the same person was in a dozen random man on the street interviews.

CNN was caught doing just this in a presidential debate where every “random audience person” ended up being a Democrat campaign operative, several of  whom had previously appeared on CNN – LINK.

The media bias in this example is from the Miami Herald. Of course the “Republican” who can always be counted on to trash conservatives in the elite media, David Frum, picked up on this right away as it goes along with his “conservatives are knuckle dragging neanderthals” narrative:

WASHINGTON — When a French TV station set out to understand the American phenomenon known as the tea party, it sent a reporter to Florida, down a dusty country road, past a bug-swarmed pond, and into a Pasco County pasture filled with people waving American flags.

It was Oct. 30, three days before Election Day. The crowd had come to Hallelujah Acres Ranch to hear Republican Senate nominee Marco Rubio, frequently hailed — and claimed — as one of the tea party’s biggest success stories.

But the typically unflappable candidate seemed uncomfortable with the French reporter’s questions about his tea party ties, as he did when an admirer asked him to autograph a tea party banner.

If the tea party is expecting Rubio to plant its yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” flag in the hallowed Senate chamber, it’s in for a letdown. This career politician who once carried the state party’s American Express card defines himself first and foremost as a Republican.

Rubio’s pollster, Whit Ayers, tactfully put it this way: “I think he’ll carry the banner for hopeful and optimistic conservatism and whoever wants to follow that banner is welcome to join.”


Rubio has already made it clear that he will not be a rogue senator. One day after the election, he declared his support for the GOP establishment when he said he looked forward to serving under Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. He didn’t mention Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, viewed as the more ideologically pure conservative and alternative power center, who championed Rubio’s campaign early on.

Two days later, McConnell tapped Rubio to deliver the weekly GOP address.

Rubio, 39, struck a pragmatic tone at the post-election news conference held in Miami, saying Republicans and Democrats have to work together to tackle big, immediate problems like the national debt and the war in Afghanistan. He did not launch salvos at President Barack Obama, as he usually does, and said he would reach out to Florida’s Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson.

“Early on in the primary, a conservative group of passionate, well-intentioned people coincided with his beliefs and somehow he got this tea party label, which I don’t think is totally representative,” said Republican fundraiser Jorge Arrizurieta.

“Did he embrace and receive the support of the tea party? Absolutely,” Arrizurieta said. “But will he move away from being a real Republican candidate? No way.”

Tea party leaders still claim Rubio as their own. Among Florida voters, 39 percent said they supported the tea party movement. Rubio got 86 percent of that group.

What you see used here are classic advertising association techniques to try and drive a wedge between Rubio and voters. As you will see the Miami Herald creates this narrative using no real information to imply that Rubio was all talk and he is just another country club Republican that got tossed out of office in 2006.

If the tea party is expecting Rubio to plant its yellow “Don’t Tread on Me” flag in the hallowed Senate chamber, it’s in for a letdown. This career politician who once carried the state party’s American Express card defines himself first and foremost as a Republican.

While the old “Don’t tread on me” flag from the American Revolution can be seen at some Tea Party events; neither Jim DeMint, Dick Army or Michele Bachmann keep that flag in their office. They fly the American flag just like everyone else.The American Express card crack is another advertising associative technique. We see the commercial on TV and they give the impression that if you have an AMEX card you are “somebody”; well the Marlboro man does the same thing but just from another cultural angle. Heck I am dirt poor and I have had a big corporate AMEX card before. It means nothing. Over half of the country supports the Tea Party movement, are we to think that none of them have an American Express?

Rubio has already made it clear that he will not be a rogue senator. One day after the election, he declared his support for the GOP establishment when he said he looked forward to serving under Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. He didn’t mention Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, viewed as the more ideologically pure conservative and alternative power center, who championed Rubio’s campaign early on.

Again this narrative is pure nonsense. DeMint is not in the official leadership so Rubio saying that he would anticipate serving under DeMint would be unnecessarily divisive. That is not how things are done in Washington and that is not how DeMint and the Tea Party want things done. DeMint and the Tea Party have made an effective Tea Party Caucus that can effectively control the GOP with shear numbers. Do we see Marco Rubio moving to the old 2006 GOP positions that got the party kicked out of power or do we see Senator McConnell changing his positions to conform with DeMint, Rubio, Johnson, Kirk, Coats , Toomey etc. The few who are left in the old GOP leadership are racing to get in line with DeMint and his new freshman Senators.

“Early on in the primary, a conservative group of passionate, well-intentioned people coincided with his beliefs and somehow he got this tea party label, which I don’t think is totally representative,” said Republican fundraiser Jorge Arrizurieta.

Ohh it just happened that some of Rubio’s beliefs coincided with some in the Tea Party…. umm no. Rubio was in peoples face with the same narrative of the Tea Party and made it very clear that the GOP is been given a second chance, but is on probation and had better start governing as they campaign. In fact, Rubio was so eloquent in presenting the Tea Party narrative that the Democrat Party tried to get the Democrat in the race to drop out and support the big government RINO Charlie Crist. Here is a small sample of why the Democrats are scared to death of Marco and why we can expect more dishonest propaganda from the Miami Herald:

Last but not least, the talking head Jorge Arrizurieta. Who is this guy? Well he is a corporate lobbyist and minor fund raiser for the early Bush machine including Jeb Bush in Florida, so you can be sure he is in reporter’s rolodex.   Arrizurieta now supports Mitt Romney who the Tea Party doesn’t trust because of the failure of “RomneyCare” in Massachusetts, and his election year flip flops on abortion and other key issues. It seems that Romney has grown up some since losing the primary against John McCain, but we will see.

So as you can see, the Miami Herald made an emotionally convincing narrative out of nothing but cracks about flags, AMEX cards, not trying to run DeMint for party leader and a crack from a minor lobbyist. They started in just a few days after the election and such the Miami Herald’s push to get Obama re-elected has begun. The best way to combat this nonsense is to get in the media’s face with a little New Jersey style attitude and a little teaching like you have found in this post.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Dirty Tricks, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Post 2010, True Talking Points | Leave a Comment »

Video: Government Strangling Small Business With Red Tape

Posted by iusbvision on November 23, 2010

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »

TSA Computer Screen: Cartoon of six year old boy about to get cavity search

Posted by iusbvision on November 22, 2010

Via a commenter at The Blaze:

As I was walking to baggage claim at IND, I passed by the TSA booth near security check-in. I was surprised to see what was the desktop/background image on this TSA computer: It is a cover for a fake children’s book called “My First Cavity Search”.

[Click to Enlarge]

TSA Cavity Search

TSA Cavity Search - Click to Enlarge


You can see a bigger version of the cover here:

My First Cavity Search



Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

Col. Allen West: John Lewis is a hypocrite

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

While Democrat Ron Kline was accusing Col. West of being a part of a racist gang, accusing him of being a drug dealer (the old “all blacks are drug dealers” narrative), slandering his military service, mailing out his social security number to 60,000 people, slandering his wife and the list goes on and on. John Lewis came to Florida to support Kline.

John Lewis is portrayed as some great civil rights hero and his book is all over IUSB. The same John Lewis that compared John McCain to George Wallace in October 2008. The same John Lewis that lied through when he claimed that Tea Party protesters in DC chanted the N-word at him 15 times, except oops, hey John dozens of people filmed the event from multiple angles and guess what, no N-word. Andrew Breitbart offered $100,000 for proof that it happened. No Takers.

Here is an idea, if you are going to make up a lie about a mass event, don’t do it in front of a sea of new media video cameras.

Now even Juan Williams is saying that Lewis is exploiting black people and racism for political purposes. They say John Lewis is a hero, well true heroes don’t sell out.

Allen West has had enough of this nonsense and enough of John Lewis. You can be sure that it is not over between these two men. After what Kline, Lewis and the rest of these liars and cronies did to Col. West’s family it is now personal.

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »

It is time to dismantle the TSA – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

I have avoided posting on this issue for the simple reason that the media and countless bloggers have done a good job in covering this story.

The TSA tells us that they do not do pat downs in kids under 13, they tell us that they are not exposing or touching private parts and yet, we know that they took the top off of a woman, exposed her breasts while some made fun of her, we saw the video of the tiny little girl being groped by a TSA, we saw the famed video of the “crotch check”, we have seen other pictures of  of hard crotch checks, we know how the TSA made one person remove her breast prosthetic (mastectomy), we know how former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura has to go through the “enhanced pat down” every time because the metal in his hip sets off the metal detector.

We know how disabled lady was picked up off the ground by her crotch by a TSA. We are aware that the pilots union and flight attendants union are up in arms, and now we know that one pilot is suing the TSA because they wanted him to show his penis. Again all of this has been well reported. Citizens are posting Youtube of incidents daily, complaints are rising daily.

Well that rule about not doing “enhanced” pat downs on little kids that the head of the TSA said in sworn testimony to Congress a few days ago… someone forgot to tell this group of agents as the shirt was removed from this child during the enhanced pat down to prove that the little boy wasn’t hiding any bombs.

UPDATE – The TSA and many in the elite media have stated that it was the boys father who took the boys short off to show that he wasn’t carrying a bomb, nut what the TSA didn’t volunteer is that the boy is autistic and they told the father that the child’s short would have to be removed or the autistic child would have to go through the aggressive pat down process. Then TSA agents tried to intimidate the person recording the video into erasing it, but obviously the victim held his ground. Via The Blaze. [redlasso id=”cfc16f68-7de9-4c32-86c5-dd2364b9aedd”]

1 – It is now clear that TSA is simply incapable of following its own rules.

2 – The Secret Service does not even do this kind of groping and they are second to none when it comes to security.

3 – The full body nude scan machines cannot detect many kinds of explosives.

4 – These enhanced searches have stopped no terrorists or found any bomb making materials.

5 – Better equipment such as bomb sniffing dogs and electronic sniffers are not being used in favor of what is going on now.

6 – No court has ever allowed these kind of invasive searches without a warrant or probable cause.

7 – It is the job of the government to protect and safeguard our rights, not look for excuses to violate them.

8 – Doing these searches on old women, nuns and little children actually makes us less safe. By spending resources on people who are clearly innocent that is less resources used going after terrorists.

9 – As the Israelis have told us, looking for objects is a waste of resources, looking for people who are out to cause trouble is much more effective.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

National Assoc. of Scholars on Campus “Diversity Babble”

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

This is very fun to read, but it also shows a real problem. It shows how university administrators talk about tolerance and diversity but selectively enforce the rules to shut diversity down.

National Association of Scholars:

The headline of the local Chico, California newspaper was “Chico State planning for greater diversity”1. The front page story was about the now infamous California State University, Chico (CSU Chico) Diversity Action Plan that has been accurately described in Attack of the Giant Plethora, $600 for “Teaching to Diversity” at CSU Chico and from Diversity to Sustainability: How Campus Ideology Is Born. As I read the comments of the CSU Chico’s administrators, I noted how representative they were of the sloppy thinking and cynical dishonesty of many so-called diversity advocates.

According to the newspaper article, Gayle Hutchinson, Dean of the College of Behavioral and Social Sciences at CSU Chico, had enthusiastically explained that the university’s goal was “to increase the presence and impact of a variety of groups that may be inadequately represented” and “to create greater diversity at Chico State.” She also said that at CSU Chico diversity meant “ability, age, culture, race/ethnicity, gender identity and expression, sexuality, regional and national origin, political orientation, religion and socio-economic background.” This unusual list of variables immediately struck me as unrealistic and perhaps illegal to track. The article also reported that CSU Chico would have a “Chief Diversity Officer” whose job would be to “measure progress at increasing diversity.”

Let us consider how CSU Chico’s Chief Diversity Officer might go about measuring and tracking the demographic, behavioral and belief variables that Dean Hutchinson listed. Will CSU Chico survey student and faculty applicants concerning their political orientation or religion? Will the Chief Diversity Officer someday say, “We don’t have enough students who are Republican or Evangelical Christian,” or “we have too many progressive Democrats”? Will a student or faculty applicant someday be rejected because their religion is overrepresented? Just how might the Chief Diversity Officer determine whether CSU Chico has the requisite diversity of “gender expression”? Perhaps by asking applicants, “Do you ever cross-dress?” Maybe to determine “sexuality” they will ask students about the quality and frequency of sexual relations, or perhaps ask them to rate their interest in sexual activity on a scale of 1 to 10. Perhaps Dean Hutchinson meant sexual orientation instead of sexuality, but is CSU Chico planning on asking student and faculty applicants about their private sexual preferences? Maybe they will take a more underhanded approach by requiring every applicant to submit a photo and write an essay on how they would contribute to diversity at CSU Chico. Then if an applicant doesn’t reveal enough personal information or doesn’t look like a minority, they can be safely rejected using the charade of the “whole person” concept. If you think this last option might be a bit farfetched then please read College Application Essays: Going Beyond “How Would You Contribute to Diversity?”.5

What exactly did Dean Hutchinson mean by increasing the diversity of ages and abilities? Is Dean Hutchinson expecting to increase the number of middle-aged adults and seniors in undergraduate classes? What abilities was she specifically referring to? Mental, physical? Or was it to some restrictions in those abilities that she was referring? What exactly are those “abilities” that are so important and “may be inadequately represented” that CSU Chico is willing to spend precious funds to locate and recruit people with them? Is Dean Hutchinson implying that people of color or of a specific ethnicity have special abilities not found in the white population? What exactly did Dean Hutchinson mean, by “regional and national” origin, considering that CSU Chico is a state university with a mission of providing higher education opportunities to the sons and daughters of California burdened tax payers?

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

FIRE President Greg Lukianoff on Campus Censorship

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

Greg Lukianoff discusses his essay on campus censorship from the book New Threats to Freedom. Are there circumstances under which a person’s right to not be offended supersedes a person’s right to free speech? Based on the actions of several public universities, it seems that this may be a dangerously common attitude within academia.

Here is another example of just how loony many of our taxpayer funded college administrators have become. This is SEIU thug tactics.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War | Leave a Comment »

Syracuse University Chancellor Nancy Cantor goes off the deep end: sends university police to go after student’s Halloween costumes

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

I am well aware of the Stalinist streak that goes up the spine of too many university administrators and far left academics, but rarely do we see the lust for totalitarian control of others taken to such an extreme. Chancellor Cantor’s actions are so extreme and ludicrous that it forces reasonable people to question her stability and of a few in her inner circle.

By the way, she pays herself nearly $1.4 million a year to go after those Halloween costumes…

Syracuse U. Chancellor Nancy Cantor

Syracuse U. Chancellor Nancy Cantor

Of course this outrageous behavior by Syracuse University provoked a fast response from Harvard grad Adam Kissel, who is also a Vice President at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.  I have seen Kissel’s work, and while he is a much nicer fellow than I am, I can assure any college administrator with a totalitarian streak that the last thing you want is his complete and undivided attention.

November 18, 2010

Nancy Cantor, Chancellor
Syracuse University
300 Tolley Administration Building
Syracuse, New York 13244

Sent via U.S. Mail and Facsimile (315-443-3073)

Dear Chancellor Cantor:

While FIRE awaits the resolution of Syracuse University College of Law’s chilling investigation of law student Leonard Audaer-now in its second month-for his alleged publication of clearly protected satire, we sadly must write to you regarding another violation of Syracuse University’s promises of free speech. FIRE is gravely concerned by the threat to free speech posed by Department of Public Safety (DPS) Director Anthony Callisto’s public assertion that he would use DPS police power to censor “offensive” Halloween costumes on campus.

This is our understanding of the facts. Please inform us if you believe we are in error.

On October 11, 2010, Thomas V. Wolfe, Syracuse’s Senior Vice President and Dean of Student Affairs, e-mailed all Syracuse students encouraging them to “be thoughtful and sensitive when choosing [their] costume[s],” lest their costumes “threaten [their] safety or that of others”:

Before you go out, please consider how your portrayal of ethnicity and race, gender, class, religion, culture, sexual orientation, or disability might affect others.

In the past, even well-intentioned (but un-thoughtful) costume choices created significant bias-related tensions in our community. To avoid this, consider a thoughtful conversation with others about how Halloween celebrations can build a spirit of community, in which no one is mocked, stereotyped, or inappropriately represented. Take this opportunity to protect yourself and your peers by choosing not to engage in behaviors that threaten your safety or that of others.

Syracuse’s Division of Student Affairs, which includes DPS, was listed as one of the many administrative bodies at Syracuse that endorsed the statement.

Then, on October 14, The Daily Orange reported on Wolfe’s e-mail and quoted Callisto:

If DPS patrol officers see a biased costume during Halloween weekend, they will act on it, Callisto said.

If we detect that there’s a person with an offensive costume, we’d likely require them to remove it, and we would file a judicial complaint,” Callisto said. “There are costumes that could be very offensive to members of protected class communities.” [Emphasis added.]

Callisto also reportedly said:

Students need to remember that what you see on Comedy Central or on other cable comedy stations doesn’t make it right here at Syracuse University … What’s difficult for people to remember, sometimes, is what might be appropriate for a cable television outlet is not going to be appropriate in a place like Syracuse University, a place that really celebrates diversity. [“DPS to crack down on insensitive Halloween costumes,” available at

These statements violate Syracuse’s promises of free expression, which it is legally and morally bound to uphold. While Syracuse University may legitimately encourage its students not to “mock[],” “stereotype[],” or “inappropriately represent[]” others through Halloween costumes, Syracuse may not require students to refrain from such expression under pain of punishment or investigation. DPS may not threaten students with “a judicial complaint” simply for wearing a costume that “could be very offensive to members of protected class communities,” nor may DPS force students to remove such costumes.

As a private institution, Syracuse has chosen to promise freedom of speech to its students. For instance, Syracuse asserts that it is “committed to the principle that freedom of expression is essential to the search for truth, and consequently welcomes and encourages the expression of different and varied opinions, and of dissent.” Syracuse’s harassment policy also explicitly does not apply to expression within “the bounds of protected free speech.” Under such promises, students do not have to ensure that their expression is consistent with “a place that really celebrates diversity.” In Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 414 (1989), the U.S. Supreme Court wisely noted that “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Under such principles and Syracuse’s own promises, there can be no question that an “offensive” Halloween costume is protected expression at Syracuse and out of the reach of Syracuse’s police.

It also cannot be credibly asserted that wearing a Halloween costume, in itself, can be a threat to campus safety. Does Wolfe really believe that Syracuse students will be unable to control their violent impulses if they see a Halloween costume that they believe is offensive? Even if this is indeed what Wolfe believes about Syracuse students, by putting the power to censor in the hands of the most sensitive and violent people in the community, Syracuse effectively enacts a “heckler’s veto,” which is anathema to free speech on campus.

Nor is the threat to free speech posed by Wolfe and Callisto confined to Halloween. Students are now on notice that the university’s police will intervene if students wear anything that might be seen as offensive by any of their peers. T-shirts with controversial or satirical statements are apparently out of bounds and subject to police action at Syracuse. Students are likely to decide not to wear these items out of fear that a DPS officer may determine them to be “very offensive to members of protected class communities.”

I hope you understand how disrespectfully Syracuse has acted toward its own students, diminishing their rights and disparaging their self-control: expression that is allowed on a public sidewalk bordering Syracuse’s campus has been declared so offensive that it could provoke violence among members of the Syracuse University community.

FIRE asks that Syracuse University disavow the claim that it will ever use the university’s police force to patrol the protected expression of Syracuse students. Syracuse must notify its students that they will not be investigated or prosecuted for wearing “offensive” costumes or apparel. Please spare Syracuse the embarrassment of another fight against students’ rights.

We ask for a response to this letter by December 7, 2010.


Adam Kissel
Vice President of Programs


Thomas V. Wolfe, Senior Vice President and Dean of Student Affairs
Anthony Callisto, Director of Public Safety
Gerald M. Martin, Director, Office of Judicial Affairs
James K. Duah-Agyeman, Director, Office of Multicultural Affairs
Chase Catalano, Director, LGBT Resource Center
Terra Peckskamp, Director, Office of Residence Life
Roy S. Gutterman, Director, The Tully Center for Free Speech

Now did you all catch the last name there? Syracuse U. has an educational center for free speech. So are the faculty and the director of the Tully Center for Free Speech going to stand up to this immoral and illegal censorship? Don’t hold your breath, but hey guys, if you show some backbone I will be thrilled to post it here. As for me, I contend that while many communications and journalism academics pay lip service for free speech, few are willing to take some risk in standing up for it.

I examined the facebook page and the twitter page for the Tully Center for Free Speech….nothing….

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action | 2 Comments »

Pro-Life student group banned by Carlton University sues

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

You remember our friend Ruth Lobo?

Well welcome to lawsuit number two that Carleton University is likely to lose. The rub here is that like in Canada, it will not be the lawbreaking, totalitarian administrators who pay the fines when they lose, it will be the taxpayers. This is why there needs to be real changes made to sovereign immunity laws.  Here in the United States I intend to push the new Congress for those laws after it is seated January 20th.

James Shaw and Ruth Lobo

James Shaw and Ruth Lobo

National Post:

The lawyer for an anti-abortion group just decertified at Carleton University said Friday he will take the school’s student association to court unless the ban is reversed. Albertos Polizogopoulos called the decision to decertify Carleton Lifeline by the Carleton University Student Association (CUSA) “totalitarian”  and “ludicrous.”

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association, meanwhile, has sent a letter to CUSA asking it to behave more responsibly and protect minority opinion.

“You can be pro-choice and for free speech,’’ said Nathalie DesRosiers, general counsel of the civil liberties group. ‘‘Student governments must act like a government and represent all students, not just the ones who think like them. They have a duty to protect minority views. We have told them that what they are doing is not proper and they should respect the right of dissent.”

The student association says it banned Carleton Lifeline because its anti-abortion stance violates CUSA’s anti-discrimination policy, which “respects and affirms a woman’s right to choose her options in case of pregnancy.”

Mr. Polizogopoulos wants the Ontario Superior Court to decide whether CUSA acted in accord with its own constitution.

“Their own constitution states they will not discriminate on the basis of political affiliation or belief,” Mr. Polizogopoulos said. “They’ve enacted a policy that is clearly in violation of their own constitution. And just the fact they would attempt to enact such a policy is ludicrous.”

Mr. Polizogopoulos’s said CUSA’s constitution trumps all policies and bylaws and so the anti-abortion group should be allowed to stay.

The club was officially decertified Thursday by CUSA. Carleton Life line had been told earlier in the week that to avoid being kicked off campus they would have to adopt a pro-abortion policy, something that would be anathema to the group.

That’s right folks, in violation of the law, and their own rules, they actually put in their non-discrimination policy that all student groups must have a written pro-abortion position to be recognized for status and student funding. How delightfully Stalinist of them.

To examine the legal nastygrams and to donate to their legal defense fund please visit –

Donate today!

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action, Student Government | Leave a Comment »

Gov. Christie describes apology from teachers union president over death threat.

Posted by iusbvision on November 21, 2010

If my chief of staff had sent out that email, praying for your death, there would have been 5000 teachers on the front steps of the state house screaming and yelling for him to be fired, and you would have been too late, because I would’ve already fired him. If a student sent out that email praying for the death of his teacher, he would’ve been suspended from school and sent to mandatory counseling. Yet, if a Teachers’ Union leader does it, it’s no big deal… That double standard doesn’t exist anymore.


Via Breitbart

Posted in 2012, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Leftist Hate in Action, Violence | 1 Comment »

Defeated Iowa Governor gives state union employees $100 million raise on the way out

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

And of course the government employee union is the largest contributor to the Democrats.  Defeated New Jersey Governor Bob Corzine tried to do this as well, but was stopped by Governor Christie on  inauguration day. UPDATE – Wisconsin too LINK (via Kyle Carroll).

Des Moines Register:

Gov. Chet Culver’s administration agreed Friday to offer pay increases for state employees that will cost taxpayers more than $100 million, despite Republican requests that the decisions be delayed until Terry Branstad becomes governor in January.

A Branstad spokesman called the deal “reckless,” and House Republican Leader Kraig Paulsen said it would likely lead to layoffs.

But Culver defended the decision, noting that most state employees took at least five unpaid days in the past year along with suspension of employer deferred compensation contributions.

“These people are on the front lines of delivering vital services and information to the people of Iowa and deserve to be paid in accordance with their qualifications and efforts,” Culver said in a statement.

Union members will formally meet to accept or reject the state’s offer later this month, but Danny Homan, president of Council 61 for AFSCME, said: “In my mind, this is done.”

The wage hike plan would give members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, better known as AFSCME, a 2 percent across-the-board increase for the fiscal year that begins July 1 and another 1 percent raise the following calendar year on Jan. 1, which is what the group had requested. This 2- and 1- percent increase, under the contract, would be given in each of the next two contract years.

In addition, many union members who are not at the top of their pay grade would receive an additional 4.5 percent raise, known as a step increase, for certain professional milestones or for job longevity and other career advancements.

“The state accepted the union’s proposal,” said Homan. “I believe that probably ends this process.”

But wait there’s more!

A review last year by The Des Moines Register showed that Iowa is one of only six states to offer free health insurance to state government employees and their families.

Iowa’s state employees also pay substantially lower out-of-pocket health costs, such as deductibles and office co-payments, than private-sector workers, according to an independent study of nearly 900 businesses and government employers conducted this year by David P. Lind & Associates of Clive.

The Iowa Department of Management, in previous years, has released a statement showing how much the union concessions would cost taxpayers.

That wasn’t immediately available Friday. However, in 2009, each percentage point increase in state employee salary cost taxpayers $32.2 million.

“Taxpayers are the losers in this backroom deal,” said Jeff Boeyink, Branstad’s chief of staff. “Governor Culver’s decision to rush through a collective bargaining deal with state employee unions before he leaves office is reckless and irresponsible. This will cost Iowa taxpayers $103.5 million the first year alone, and hundreds of millions in subsequent fiscal years.”

Work for the government, kick back money to the party and you’re livin’ fat.

How many of you don’t have to contribute to your benefits and healthcare at no cost or on the mega cheap? Wow I am so glad that we have these rich government unions to protect our state employees who are obviously so underpaid and exploited……

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »

Milford Connecticut Police Destroy Cruiser Tapes in Vehicular Manslaughter Cover Up

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

We do report police misconduct here, but not because we are anti-police. On the contrary good policing is vital to any civil society.

With that said, we always have to keep in mind that as society has a spiritual, philosophical and educational break down, these problems manifest themselves everywhere. They especially manifest themselves with politicians and judges who do not respect the limits of their office or the idea of limited government.

CT Post:

MILFORD — If the dashboard video from city police cars was erased after a Freedom of Information Act request was filed for it, the city could face a big legal headache, experts said Tuesday.

The video was being sought by Bart Halloran, the lawyer for the family of one of teens killed when their car was broadsided by a Milford police cruiser last year. Halloran said that he hoped to use it to establish a pattern of Milford police officers using excessive speed on routine business.

New Haven attorney John Williams said that the claim by Milford police that a records clerk was “inadvertently” ordered to destroy thousands of hours of video files that were the subject of Halloran’s FOI request, “sounds like espoiliation of evidence. All he has to show is that it was there, that he asked for it, and that it was relevant to his case.”

Tom Hennick, spokesman for the state Freedom of Information Commission, agreed that if the video files existed when Halloran requested them but were later destroyed, “that could be a problem for the city. On the other hand, if they were gone when the complaint came in, we can’t order the creation of records.”

Mayor James L. Richetelli Jr. said that he couldn’t comment on the situation because it involves pending litigation. “Really, all I can say is that I believe that the chief has handled this matter properly. Now it is up to the FOI (Commission) to decide.”

Chief Keith Mello said Monday that the video files that were destroyed were being reviewed in relation to the FOI request, and that he had ordered that they be preserved until the matter was resolved. Mello said that he suspended Lt. Dan Bothwell, who oversees the records division, for one day without pay over the incident.

The chief did not respond Tuesday to a reporter’s questions, and it isn’t known exactly when the erasure was discovered or whether any more video files that Halloran is seeking still exist. The lawyer said that he received about seven hours of video several months ago.

An FOI hearing officer is scheduled to meet with Halloran, Mello and attorney James Tallberg, who represents the city, on Oct. 18 in Hartford to discuss whether the video files must be turned over. It is far from a moot point; the commission can levy fines of up to $1,000 per violation for noncompliance — and if the relevant files were destroyed the city can’t comply.

Halloran represents the parents of David Servin, who was killed June 13, 2009, along with his girlfriend, Ashlie Krakowski. The couple, both 19, were returning to Servin’s home in Orange when their car was T-boned by a Milford police cruiser being driven by Officer Jason Anderson.


So one man was suspended for one day and the city may have to pay a few thousands dollars in fines, but this much cheaper than defending against civil lawsuits stemming from in speeding and other violations that would/could have been found on those deleted tapes. The case could have been made that there was a pattern of reckless/bad behavior in the department so therefore the city is liable. As a result of such a suit some in the brass would have been the “fall guys” and heads would have rolled.

The brass won’t be paying the FOIA fines, the taxpayers of Connecticut will.

This is another example of why sovereign immunity laws need to be reformed so that public officials (and yes even college administrators) who violate the law can be held personally liable.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild | Leave a Comment »

One year of economics and poli-sci in a single post

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

These video’s are very funny. While I do not agree with every point it is still very interesting and educational. I promise you won’t be disappointed!

Quantitative Easing Explained (Federal Reserve monetizing the debt).

This video is brilliant. The deflation is only in a few markets. The truth is that in the early 1990’s the government changed the way that it measures inflation. If they measured it the way they did when Carter and Reagan were president the rate would be about 10%.

Interesting thing about how the Fed did not see the market bubble. The Fed uses static Keynesian models. They do not seriously consider the effects that game theory and they do not differentiate between currency and wealth. They do not understand that you cannot have endless consumption without the creation of wealth on the production side.

Dr. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for his work on market bubbles, but most economists are taught Keynesian-ism not Hayek.

Economics II – The more the planner’s plans fail the more the planners plan – Global Warming Alarmism

Central planing doesn’t work. For example, lets take the 10 smartest men in the world and have them plan our economy. My first question: Which one of you wants to be the planer in charge of tampons and maxi-pads?

Economics III – Corporatism – Campaign Rhetoric – Global Warming Alarmism

Warning adult language –

Hi, I’m a Liberal Democrat – The Left Demonstrates that their charity mostly extends to spending other people’s money.

Multiple studies have shown that conservative Christians by far donate the most to charity

How Liberals Argue

While this is a mild exaggeration it is only a mild one when it comes to the leftists who commonly comment on message boards and troll on blogs. Our experience on this very blog shows this type of behavior time and time again.


Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Culture War, Economics 101, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »

Kristi Noem (R-SD) and Tim Scott (R-SC): GOP Freshmen in leadership positions

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

Noem and Scott ran great campaigns (with very smart and Socratic communications strategies by the way).

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Post 2010 | Leave a Comment »

Congressman Steve King Discusses Ending Birthright Citizenship on Fox News, America’s Newsroom

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

This is an interesting question. The USA is the only major country that has birthright citizenship. It was instituted to protect the citizenship of former slaves who chose to stay here. Of course that function has long since passed.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

700,000 Seniors Forced out of Medicare Advantage Plans – Cavuto: Was this the plan all along?

Posted by iusbvision on November 20, 2010

It is just like we said:

Real Clear Politics Confirms IUSB Vision Analysis: Latest Health Care Bill Designed to Wreck Private Insurance & Make People Cry Out for a Public Option

And we stated again and again and again….

Wall Street Journal:

Seniors enrolling in private Medicare policies starting this week are finding fewer options, as health insurers close down certain types of plans due to legislative changes and looming cuts to federal funding.

Cigna Corp., Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, several Blue Cross Blue Shield plans and others aren’t renewing hundreds of Medicare Advantage plans, which are Medicare policies administered by private insurers. The moves will displace some 700,000 beneficiaries who must find new policies, according to Humana Inc., a large seller of Advantage plans.

For 2011, the Kaiser Family Foundation said there will be a 13% decline in the number of Medicare Advantage plans.

The pullback is largely due to a 2008 law that required the plans to have networks of preferred doctors, with the idea that managed care could be less costly and aggressive marketing could be curbed. Some providers of traditional fee-for-service policies decided to close the plans rather than invest in networks. But some insurers say the federal health-care overhaul, which includes $140 billion in cuts to reimbursements for Advantage plans over 10 years, is a factor as well.


Speaker Pelosi used IUSB Vision writer Chuck Norton’s exact words “make them cry out for a public option” on C-Span. Video at bottom of post HERE.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Ask a Democrat: Was Patrick Henry the Original “Bitter Clinger”?

Posted by iusbvision on November 19, 2010

We know how Obama would answer.


Patrick Henry

Patrick Henry

“This book [the Bible] is worth all the books that ever were printed, and it has been my misfortune that I have never found time to read it with the proper attention and feeling till lately. I trust in the mercy of Heaven that it is not yet too late.”

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?”

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Leftist Hate in Action | Leave a Comment »