Arizona governor signs immigration law; foes promise fight
Arizona governor signs immigration law; foes promise fight
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer today signed into law an immigration bill that gives the state toughest law in the nation, making it a state crime to be in the country illegally and requiring local police to enforce federal immigration laws.
Brewer said she signed the bill in response to "the crisis the federal government has refused to fix.''
Look out Texas! They will head for our hills to avoid the arrests in Arizona! Flow flow flow over the borders. Poor, poor illegals for being caught for being illegal.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Henry Waxman and the New American Way
Henry Waxman and the New American Way
Depressing article if you believe it:
One of the dirty little secrets of Capitol Hill is that most politicians – even the ones the horserace-focused media depicts as irredeemably ideologically divided – actually have no coherent driving ideology. The secret is revealed only occasionally. If powerful oversight chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) hadn’t reconsidered his plans this week to call the CEOs of major companies into committee chambers for his version of Beltway blackmail, the American people might have had an opportunity to witness it being revealed.
Waxman originally called the hearing in a characteristic fit of pique. After more than nine months of labor, the House of Representatives had finally given birth to the gargantuan ogre of Obamacare. Yet before the Democratic leadership could finish tousling the hair of the prop children at their signing ceremonies, corporate America started following the law, in the most inconvenient manner possible: they reported to their investors and employees the effects the new legislation would have on their benefit plans.
In each case, the analysts employed by major companies like AT&T, Verizon Communications, Caterpillar, Deere & Co. and others did their job: they delivered reports detailing the ramifications – higher premiums, dropped drug coverage, and forcing their employees into taxpayer-funded plans – thanks to the new bill. Waxman, infuriated, demanded the CEOs of these troublesome companies turn over all internal communications about the predicted results, as if he thought they would reveal some devious Republican plot, instead of the simple mathematical calculations of the green eyeshades and the diligent efforts of company lawyers to ensure that the companies complied with federal disclosure laws.
The inconvenient truth for Waxman – something he would know if he weren’t a dogmatic partisan – is that he’s seeing a feature of Obamacare, not a bug. The ideological basis of the health reform package was never about lowering insurance premiums for the American people, increasing the quality of care, or decreasing the burden of health costs on corporate America. Quite the contrary; it was designed to advance a long-term agenda to cede massive authority to government, and to achieve a permanent social change in the path to prosperity. And, yes, to use increased costs to limit the options open to large corporations.
The aims of socialism are often misunderstood by most Americans, as the only socialist most know of is that harmless disheveled professor on the local campus. It’s a word which can hardly be considered insulting when an elected Senator of the Socialist party caucuses with the Democrats. While socialism is sold as a way to elevate the underclass, the actual result of its application isn’t to increase the prosperity of the poor – it’s a method of achieving permanent stratification by allowing the more productive members of society to pass any losses onto others.
The reason socialism fails, as my colleague Francis Cianfrocca describes it, is that it socializes losses, not gains. It is an application of the “too big to fail” policy across all levels of society – because the losers no longer face consequences for their mistakes, businessmen are happy to make more of them, morphing into the oligarchs of the Soviet era. The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor, and the classless society becomes one where the boundaries of class are nigh impossible to break.
President Obama has drawn many comparisons to Jimmy Carter and Woodrow Wilson, but his agenda is, in its all-encompassing approach, far more ambitious. As Josh Trevino has pointed out, where liberal projects once consisted of focused attacks on either end of the economic continuum – punitive taxes on the wealthy, union enabling, the minimum wage, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty – Obama’s agenda is designed to destroy the ability to transit from one end of the continuum to the other. Every new cushion, apparently designed to ease the pain of losses, means new barriers obstructing individual freedom of action and the expected rewards of risk-taking, resulting in an immovable class society.
What is unprecedented about this agenda is that it fundamentally alters the traditional pathways to prosperity in American life. Social mobility is a distinctive, near-unique feature of America throughout its history. But if you are going to achieve financial success in Obama’s America, you will do so by following the path of these CEOs: passing the costs of benefits onto the taxpayers, spreading the burden of your losses to others, and, ideally, selling something to the government – the customer who never stops buying.
This is our future, designed by the leftist philosophers who inform President Obama’s views, and shepherded into law by partisan politicians like Henry Waxman. Welcome to the new American way.
Depressing article if you believe it:
One of the dirty little secrets of Capitol Hill is that most politicians – even the ones the horserace-focused media depicts as irredeemably ideologically divided – actually have no coherent driving ideology. The secret is revealed only occasionally. If powerful oversight chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) hadn’t reconsidered his plans this week to call the CEOs of major companies into committee chambers for his version of Beltway blackmail, the American people might have had an opportunity to witness it being revealed.
Waxman originally called the hearing in a characteristic fit of pique. After more than nine months of labor, the House of Representatives had finally given birth to the gargantuan ogre of Obamacare. Yet before the Democratic leadership could finish tousling the hair of the prop children at their signing ceremonies, corporate America started following the law, in the most inconvenient manner possible: they reported to their investors and employees the effects the new legislation would have on their benefit plans.
In each case, the analysts employed by major companies like AT&T, Verizon Communications, Caterpillar, Deere & Co. and others did their job: they delivered reports detailing the ramifications – higher premiums, dropped drug coverage, and forcing their employees into taxpayer-funded plans – thanks to the new bill. Waxman, infuriated, demanded the CEOs of these troublesome companies turn over all internal communications about the predicted results, as if he thought they would reveal some devious Republican plot, instead of the simple mathematical calculations of the green eyeshades and the diligent efforts of company lawyers to ensure that the companies complied with federal disclosure laws.
The inconvenient truth for Waxman – something he would know if he weren’t a dogmatic partisan – is that he’s seeing a feature of Obamacare, not a bug. The ideological basis of the health reform package was never about lowering insurance premiums for the American people, increasing the quality of care, or decreasing the burden of health costs on corporate America. Quite the contrary; it was designed to advance a long-term agenda to cede massive authority to government, and to achieve a permanent social change in the path to prosperity. And, yes, to use increased costs to limit the options open to large corporations.
The aims of socialism are often misunderstood by most Americans, as the only socialist most know of is that harmless disheveled professor on the local campus. It’s a word which can hardly be considered insulting when an elected Senator of the Socialist party caucuses with the Democrats. While socialism is sold as a way to elevate the underclass, the actual result of its application isn’t to increase the prosperity of the poor – it’s a method of achieving permanent stratification by allowing the more productive members of society to pass any losses onto others.
The reason socialism fails, as my colleague Francis Cianfrocca describes it, is that it socializes losses, not gains. It is an application of the “too big to fail” policy across all levels of society – because the losers no longer face consequences for their mistakes, businessmen are happy to make more of them, morphing into the oligarchs of the Soviet era. The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor, and the classless society becomes one where the boundaries of class are nigh impossible to break.
President Obama has drawn many comparisons to Jimmy Carter and Woodrow Wilson, but his agenda is, in its all-encompassing approach, far more ambitious. As Josh Trevino has pointed out, where liberal projects once consisted of focused attacks on either end of the economic continuum – punitive taxes on the wealthy, union enabling, the minimum wage, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty – Obama’s agenda is designed to destroy the ability to transit from one end of the continuum to the other. Every new cushion, apparently designed to ease the pain of losses, means new barriers obstructing individual freedom of action and the expected rewards of risk-taking, resulting in an immovable class society.
What is unprecedented about this agenda is that it fundamentally alters the traditional pathways to prosperity in American life. Social mobility is a distinctive, near-unique feature of America throughout its history. But if you are going to achieve financial success in Obama’s America, you will do so by following the path of these CEOs: passing the costs of benefits onto the taxpayers, spreading the burden of your losses to others, and, ideally, selling something to the government – the customer who never stops buying.
This is our future, designed by the leftist philosophers who inform President Obama’s views, and shepherded into law by partisan politicians like Henry Waxman. Welcome to the new American way.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
National Day of Prayer declared unconstitutional, But Don't Ask Don't Tell still exists
Hmmmmmm.
Mr. President, I know you are agnostic and don't give a crap about religion, but get off your high horse and do what you said you were going to do...
Woops, forgot he's a liar and was only elected because his Chicago cronies made sure he would see to their needs.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Representation Without Taxation
Representation Without Taxation
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/09/representation-without-taxation/
"Let’s explore the idea as a thought experiment. If taxation without representation was an outrage that sparked the Revolution, why is representation without taxation acceptable? It’s logical to suggest that only those who pay for government benefits should have a vote in selecting our representatives. Allowing net tax consumers to vote seems like an inherently dangerous practice, given their numbers – we’ve reached the point where 47% of American households pay no income tax – and their strong motivation to support politicians who promise endlessly increasing benefits. When politicians loaded with vast public funds to purchase votes meet up with a population eager to sell its votes for benefits, a grim marketplace will inevitably develop."
Friday, April 9, 2010
Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - The Defects of Obamacare
Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - The Defects of Obamacare
There are four constitutional defects in the healthcare law recently signed by President Obama.
The statute has many odd parts to it that are also subject to challenge, like the federal takeover of student loans, the creation of a healthcare army, which includes members of the states’ National Guard, and the hiring of 16,000 new IRS agents. But the main constitutional violations address what the Congress has ordered the States to do and what it has ordered individuals to do. These unconstitutional and troubling provisions are:
- Order the States to increase state taxes and spend the monies collected on healthcare.
- Order individuals to acquire health insurance that provides coverage acceptable to the federal government.
- Transfer regulation of healthcare from the States to the federal government.
- Put a federal bureaucrat between patients and physicians.
Can the federal government tell the States how to spend state generated tax dollars? In a word, NO.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
According to Frank Rich, I'm a Racist; Zo Reads Some Hate Mail
I'm not even linking to the idiocy of his OPED in the NYT a week ago. If you support the Tea Party, or if you don't support Obama, you are a racist, homophobic, misogynistic hate monger.
By the way here is Peggy Noonan's WSJ column about how scary this could get. I honestly believe the left is pushing pushing poking the right to get a nutjob reaction. they were the anarchists first, right? BTW, Breitbart has offered a $100,000 donation to for anyone with video or sound with racist taunts from the tea party. Nothing. everyone has a camera these days. Jesse Jackson, Jr. followed the black caucus and Pelussi with two camera phones just looking for evidence. nothing.
Click here for the subscriber version: http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Heat+Is+On.+We+May+Get+Burned.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a (firefox)
Finally the Tea Party is getting mileage - it's 4 out of 10 identified as Dem or independent. Since I'm female, I guess I hate myself for not supporting the healthcare takeover? Cause it ain't no reform, that's for sure...
I linked this guy before...he's a ahem "black conservative". Shocker, he must hate himself too.
By the way here is Peggy Noonan's WSJ column about how scary this could get. I honestly believe the left is pushing pushing poking the right to get a nutjob reaction. they were the anarchists first, right? BTW, Breitbart has offered a $100,000 donation to for anyone with video or sound with racist taunts from the tea party. Nothing. everyone has a camera these days. Jesse Jackson, Jr. followed the black caucus and Pelussi with two camera phones just looking for evidence. nothing.
Click here for the subscriber version: http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Heat+Is+On.+We+May+Get+Burned.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a (firefox)
Finally the Tea Party is getting mileage - it's 4 out of 10 identified as Dem or independent. Since I'm female, I guess I hate myself for not supporting the healthcare takeover? Cause it ain't no reform, that's for sure...
I linked this guy before...he's a ahem "black conservative". Shocker, he must hate himself too.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Why the SEIU Wants Health Reform
"What's the connection? The SEIU needs more new dues-paying members to pay for the retirement of current members if it is to rescue its pension plans from subpar performance. It's a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud. With many of its members employed in health care, the union believes - not illogically - that if more Americans have health insurance, the demand for health care will expand and so will employment in the health sector.
The SEIU, driven by the need to prop up its weak financial organization, is using the hard-earned dues of its low-income members, all of whom receive health insurance, to lobby Congress to pass the health reform bill. No wonder that Americans are cynical."
Why the SEIU Wants Health Reform
The SEIU, driven by the need to prop up its weak financial organization, is using the hard-earned dues of its low-income members, all of whom receive health insurance, to lobby Congress to pass the health reform bill. No wonder that Americans are cynical."
Why the SEIU Wants Health Reform
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Lady Gaga v. Beyonce "Telephone" Video...hmm
Just a deranged lesbian pipe dream that is 9 minutes long featuring the Pussy Wagon from "Kill Bill". It would have been better if Tarantino actually directed. Bad
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Update on the Water Leak: It get Stranger...
This is the after post of the last two days of City, ATT, and Gas Company for whatever reason digging around my leak. My home warranty fixed it. Why did the company's have to tag my sidewalk and fence?
still after, not sure if I like the water meter sitting so high, but oh well
what did the tree stump ever do to you?
I will make them pay for tagging my fence. For real I called and they said I can file a complaint.
tagging the street, for what, why? Because I called in a water leak?
When all colors collide: orange plus yellow
more tagging, they tagged the stump. I wish I took a picture of the mud with paint on it!:
sidewalk:
I got the leak fixed. it was covered under warranty. That was the easy part...
Yesterday when the city came, they told me it was my leak. But remember the orange flag? That was ATT marking their lines.
Today when the plumber came, the Gas company had marked the whole strip to my side gate with yellow paint and flags. They even tried to painted the muddy water!
So of course the plumber was all, what are you planning? What are you digging?
I said I don't know! I called the city, there was a blue flag. Yesterday there was an Orange ATT flag. Today there is a yellow Gas flag. All because I called 311?
I called gas company and they had no records. I figured once I called the City, they decided to order a "diagnosis" of the pipes in the area in case it was their responsibility? But that is so costly. Anyway, here are more pictures, and I will make the gas company fix the yellow paint they tagged on my sidewalk, driveway and fence!
So I will post pics in a minute. However as I talk through this logic, yesterday City said my problem. Today Gas company did a survey. Was that a courtesy? I'm confused.
still after, not sure if I like the water meter sitting so high, but oh well
what did the tree stump ever do to you?
I will make them pay for tagging my fence. For real I called and they said I can file a complaint.
tagging the street, for what, why? Because I called in a water leak?
When all colors collide: orange plus yellow
more tagging, they tagged the stump. I wish I took a picture of the mud with paint on it!:
sidewalk:
I got the leak fixed. it was covered under warranty. That was the easy part...
Yesterday when the city came, they told me it was my leak. But remember the orange flag? That was ATT marking their lines.
Today when the plumber came, the Gas company had marked the whole strip to my side gate with yellow paint and flags. They even tried to painted the muddy water!
So of course the plumber was all, what are you planning? What are you digging?
I said I don't know! I called the city, there was a blue flag. Yesterday there was an Orange ATT flag. Today there is a yellow Gas flag. All because I called 311?
I called gas company and they had no records. I figured once I called the City, they decided to order a "diagnosis" of the pipes in the area in case it was their responsibility? But that is so costly. Anyway, here are more pictures, and I will make the gas company fix the yellow paint they tagged on my sidewalk, driveway and fence!
So I will post pics in a minute. However as I talk through this logic, yesterday City said my problem. Today Gas company did a survey. Was that a courtesy? I'm confused.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Leak at the Water Meter: City says it is My Responsibility
Okay, I live in a 18 month year old house, and this happens. I noticed the water on the driveway and assumed the neighbor (the crazy hippy) was watering. But still there on Monday, so I called the 311 City of Houston line. They sent a crew out, they dug it up, and left a note saying it is not their leak but my leak. What the crap am I supposed to do with that?
I have asked the builder for the original plumber to take a look, at my dime obviously. My question is, I'm about to go on 7 days vacation. Can I turn the water off and it not affect the air condition? Does it need water? I can leave a couple of gallons for the cat, so that is not an issue.
Is it okay to turn the water off until I return to stop it and save money until I can fix it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
