Thursday, March 14, 2013

Rick Perry Slams McCain, Romney At CPAC, Says They Aren't Conservative!

Real Clear Politics ^ | March 14, 2013 | none stated

"The popular media narrative is that this country has shifted away from conservative ideals, as evidenced by the last two presidential elections. That’s what they think. That’s what say. That might be true if Republicans had actually nominated conservative candidates in 2008 and 2012," Gov. Rick Perry (R-Texas) said in his address at CPAC this afternoon. Perry also slammed President Obama for undocumented illegal immigration being released from detention centers due to sequestration cuts. "This president's posture, it'd be laughable if he hadn't taken it one step too far, dangerously releasing criminals onto our streets to make a political point," Perry told the crowd at CPAC. "When you have a federally-sponsored jailbreak, and don't get confused, that's exactly what that is -- when you've had a federally-sponsored jailbreak, you've crossed the line from politics of spin to politics as a craven form of cynicism."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...

Dominos Pizza Founder Wins Court Order Stopping HHS Abortion Mandate!

LN ^ | Steven Ertelt

The founder of Dominos Pizza won his bid for a court order to prevent enforcement of the mandate while the lawsuit it filed against the Obama administration over the HHS mandate that forces religious employers to purchase drugs that may cause abortions for their employees continues.
Tom Monaghan calls requiring businesses, schools and other religious places to pay for such drugs a “gravely immoral” practice and filed suit earlier this month in federal court for Domino’s Farms, a business development complex he owns.
Monaghan says he currently offers his employees health insurance that does not pay for abortions or birth control drugs that may cause early abortions and he has asked a judge to strike down the mandate, saying it violates his First Amendment religious rights.
Today, the Thomas More Law Center, a pro-life legal group, informed LifeNews that Federal District Court Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff of the Eastern District of Michigan granted a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction against enforcement of the HHS Mandate it filed for Monaghan and his property management company, Domino’s Farm Corporation.
Judge Zatkoff previously ruled in favor of granting an emergency temporary restraining order in January. The preliminary injunction extends the previous ruling to protect the plaintiffs for the entire pendency of the case.
Erin Mersino, an attorney with Thomas More, told LifeNews, “The HHS Mandate forces our clients to provide abortion causing drugs to their employees when doing so is a direct violation of the teachings of the Catholic Church and our clients’ sincerely held religious beliefs. The Court’s decision today upholds everyone’s freedom of religion and rights protected by the Constitution.”
Mersino said Judge Zatkoff’s decision protects our freedoms granted under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Obama administration argued against the preliminary injunction by claiming that once a business owner chooses to enter into the marketplace, he surrenders his right to exercise his religious beliefs.
Mersino TMLC’s lead counsel on the case, provided for the Court in briefing the quotation from President Ronald Reagan, “To those who cite the First Amendment as reason for excluding God from more and more of our institutions and everyday life, may I just say: The First Amendment of the Constitution was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny.”
For purposes of the preliminary injunction, Judge Zatkoff focused only on the unconstitutional nature of the HHS Mandate due its infringement on Mr. Monaghan’s exercise of religion. Judge Zatkoff held that he did not need to engage in a separate discussion of Plaintiffs’ Constitutional right to the Free Exercise of Religion since both theories seek to protect the same liberty interest — the free practice of one’s religion.
The Obama administration is expected to appeal Judge Zatkoff’s ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Judge Zatkoff’s ruling halts enforcement of the HHS mandate against Monaghan and his property management company, Domino’s Farms Corporation of which he is the owner and sole shareholder. Domino’s Farms Corporation manages an Office Complex owned by Monaghan and is not to be confused with Domino’s Pizza. Monaghan sold the Pizza company in 1998 and has no active affiliation with it at this time.
The most recent poll shows a plurality of Americans oppose the mandate.
The Supreme Court has ordered a federal appeals court to take a new look at the controversial Obamacare law and whether it unconstitutionally forces taxpayers to fund abortions and birth control, violating religious freedoms. The high court is ultimately expected to resolve the debate over the HHS mandate.
Before Thanksgiving, a federal district court judge in Chicago issued a preliminary injunction requested by the religious publisher Tyndale House in its challenge to the mandate. HHS has denied Tyndale House’s request for an exemption, saying that it didn’t meet the government’s definition of a “religious employer” because it operates as a “for-profit” business.

Is youth the answer for the Republicans in 2016?

World Outline ^ | 4th March 2013 | Michael Foley

To give the Republicans a new lease of life requires an injection of youth to mix with experience.
With Mitt Romney following his nominee predecessor John McCain’s fate in losing to President Obama back in November, the Republicans have another four years of soul-searching ahead of the next war for the White House in 2016.
Many challenges face the party running up to the election. The inter-party divisions between the moderates, social conservatives and the Tea Party movement remain very much alive, they face a long four years of an emboldened Obama administration following its election victory, and the quest to find a candidate to face a new Democratic challenger begins in earnest. The formula for electoral success remains simple: appeal to the party faithful, yet be broad enough to steal votes from the centre and independent blocs. The catch-all party strategy.
Selecting a face for the party would kill both birds with one stone. An effective leader not only unites the party faithful, but also appeals to swing voters, particularly in battleground states. This is not exactly complex stuff for political analysts or electoral strategists; rather, the challenge is finding another Abraham Lincoln, another Theodore Roosevelt, another Ronald Reagan. Who can appeal to the working, middle and upper classes? Who can attract both males and females? Who captures the needs of a person voting for the first time, to a person who has been voting for as long as he or she can remember? What about race politics – the Asian vote, the Latino vote, the African-American vote, the white vote – who can appeal across the multicultural spectrum?
(Excerpt) Read more at world-outline.com ...

You thought it couldn't get worse?

Cruz Urges Conservatives to Stick to Core Beliefs!

Newsmax ^ | Thursday, 14 Mar 2013 02:37 PM | Lisa Barron

Invoking Ronald Reagan’s legacy, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz urged Republicans on Wednesday night to stick to their conservative principles no matter what in a keynote speech kicking off the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. …

“I think 2014 has the potential to be a very, very good year at the ballot box,” he said, adding, “The number one way we could screw it up is if Republicans fail to stand for principle.”

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...

Rand Paul Steals Show From Marco Rubio at CPAC

http://swampland.time.com/2013/03/14/rand-paul-steals-show-from-marco-rubio-at-cpac/ ^ | 03-14-2013 | Zeke Miller

Libertarian Sen. Rand Paul stole the show from under Sen. Marco Rubio’s nose at the opening session of the Conservative Political Action Conference, criticizing a “stale and moss-covered” GOP and calling for a new focus on liberty.
The back-to-back pairing of Rubio and Rand was seen as the most significant matchup of the annual conference, pitting two likely 2016 Republican contenders before the party’s conservative base. The result pointed to the growing schism in the Republican Party between resurgent libertarians and more traditional Republicans.
The two men -Paul age 50, Rubio just 41- laid out divergent visions of an inclusive Republican Party. Rubio called for a focus on economic opportunity and a muscular role overseas. Paul called for a reduction in the size of the U.S. government at home and abroad.
Speaking first, Rubio railed against China in a case for continued American leadership in the world, warning of anti-democratic and anti-dissident actions, including cutting off access to the Internet and forced sterilizations.
“This is what they do to their own people,” Rubio said. “We want that to be the leading country in the world? …That’s what’s at stake in America’s greatness.”
Minutes later, and with hundreds standing attentively listening to his every word, Paul echoed his warnings about drone strikes that earned him national fame last week for his 13-hour filibuster.
But Paul, whose supporters flooded the standing-room-only ballroom audience with thousands of “Stand with Rand” posters and stickers, went further, calling for the Republican Party to shift away from neoconservative foreign policy. He warned that the Republican Party is “encumbered by an inconsistent approach to freedom.
“The GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered — I don’t think we need to name any names, do we?” he said, though the target, Sen. John McCain, was clear.
(Excerpt) Read more at swampland.time.com ...

Who Is Poor?

NY Times Opinion Pages ^ | 3-13-2013 | Tom Edsall

There are three ways of defining poverty in America: the official Census Bureau method, which uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition; an experimental income-based method called the Supplemental Poverty Measure that factors in government programs designed to help people with low incomes; and a consumption-based method that measures what households actually spend.

By defining poverty according to different criteria, these three methods capture surprisingly different populations of men, women and children. In a perfect world, these three methods would all tell us to do the same thing to alleviate poverty, but it’s not like that. Each method suggests a different approach toward how our government should direct its poverty-fighting resources.
According to the two income-based methods of calculation, poverty is increasing; according to the consumption-based method, it is decreasing. Confusingly, I am afraid, both the official method and the consumption method of defining poverty suggest that we should shift benefits away from the elderly and increase programs serving poor children and their families, but the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which is also income-based, does exactly the opposite.
Needless to say, these three methods and their distinct outcomes have led to substantial disagreement among policy experts and social scientists. The lack of definition in our definition of poverty is part of the problem; it helps to answer the question of how the richest country in the history of the world could have so many people living in a state of deprivation.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com ...

Detroit's Decline

Townhall.com ^ | March 14, 2013 | Cal Thomas

Since the Motown sound went silent -- except on oldies stations -- and General Motors and Chrysler (but not Ford) required life support from Washington, there has been little to recommend Detroit, Mich., to visitors, much less its residents.

The recent conviction of Kwame Kilpatrick, the former mayor of Detroit, on multiple charges, including racketeering, fraud and extortion, adds another insult to the city's injury, increasing its misery.
During the mid-20th century, Detroit was a vibrant city with a population of almost 2 million. Today, it stands near ruin. The number of residents has now been estimated at just over 700,000. According to the Chicago Tribune, "The city has a crushing debt of $14 billion, and a budget deficit of as much as $327 million. The pay and benefit structure of public employees can't be sustained. ... The city could run out of cash in a matter of weeks." And yet the city's main courthouse reports having $280 million worth of uncollected fines and fees.

The state plans to send in an emergency manager to try and repair Detroit's finances. It might take an exorcist or faith healer.
The initial response to all of this sad news was denial. Some tried to change the subject by playing the race card. The majority of those who live in Detroit are African American. Michigan's governor, Rick Snyder, is white, as are a majority of the state's residents. But crime, corruption, malfeasance and misfeasance are not exclusive to a single race. Ask New Jersey. The problem for Detroit is something no one wants to address: one-party rule. And that would be the Democratic Party.
While the road to Hell may be paved with good intentions, the road to corruption and municipal failure seems to have been paved by Detroit's Democratic monopoly. Political monopolies invite bribes, kickbacks, misuse of funds, cronyism and a sense of entitlement.
Many businesses have fled Detroit for the usual reasons, including crime. In 2009, Time Magazine reported the city's functional literacy rate was near 50 percent and its unsolved murder rate was nearly 70 percent.
The Detroit News reported last month that nearly half of the city's 305,000 properties failed to pay their 2012 tax bills. "Some $246.5 million in taxes and fees went uncollected," reports the News, "about half of which was due Detroit..." (The other half went to county, schools and other public entities.)
Michigan law provides for an emergency manager with the authority to prevent local elected officials from making financial decisions. That person also would be granted the power to alter labor contracts, shut or privatize departments and, reports The New York Times, "...even recommend that Detroit enter bankruptcy proceedings, a possibility that experts say raises the prospect of the largest municipal bankruptcy in the nation's history, at $14 billion worth of long-term obligations."
Altering labor contracts caused quite the controversy in neighboring Wisconsin, but it had to be done. Democrats there (and in Detroit) had given away too much of the store in exchange for votes.
Shrinking government and encouraging personal responsibility can be a win-win and not only for Detroit. "We can't go on like this," is starting, however slowly, to become clear to more and more people.
In contrast to the city government, the private sector in Detroit is doing well. "Booming" is the word used in a March 5 New York Times front-page story. That, too, has accentuated in some minds the city's racial divisions because the young entrepreneurs and artists moving back into the city are mostly white. They have revived parts of downtown, but that revival has not spilled over into blighted African-American neighborhoods.
Some years back, Detroit leaders announced a "Renaissance" for the city. There's a hotel there by that name, but that's about it. Detroit needs more than a Renaissance. It needs a revival, but that is not likely to happen as long as Democrats maintain their political stranglehold.

Note to Union Teachers: If You Want to be Treated Like Professionals, Act Like It

Townhall.com ^ | March 14, 2013 | Kyle Olson

I was deeply troubled when video surfaced last week of striking Strongsville, Ohio teachers heckling substitute teachers who were applying to be their temporary replacements.


Over 300 teachers are on strike because the school board is refusing to give them automatic raises, and the school board undercut their mass temper tantrum by hiring substitutes to keep schools open.

The substitutes, complete with police escorts, had to endure heckling and jeering by the strikers. The unionists often followed alongside the substitutes, berating them and yelling in their faces as they headed to the local police department for mandatory background checks.

The entire scene had that 1957 Little Rock/school integration “walk of shame” feel to it.

Ironically, one striker yelled at a black substitute, “Rosa Parks would be ashamed!” (See the video here.)

Perhaps, but her shame probably would have been aimed at the obnoxious striker.

It marked a bottom-of-the-barrel moment for me as a five-year education reform activist. Are these people on the picket lines steel workers or degreed professionals? The irony of the American Federation of Teachers’ slogan – “A Union of Professionals” – could not be more profound.

Sadly, many of today’s public school teachers have embraced a hard-core mentality and defiant attitude toward anyone who disagrees with their demands or tactics. They have the influence of their union leaders to blame for that.

The unions carefully arrange adversarial environments, pitting teachers against administrators. They constantly remind everyone that teacher “morale is low,” and complain that realistic salary offers from cash-strapped school boards are a sign that teachers aren’t “valued.”
That often leads to childish behavior, like having “votes of no-confidence” on a superintendent or school board, picketing outside board members’ homes and workplaces, or wearing all black clothing to school to display their displeasure.

Grow up. Let the kids be the kids. You be the adults.
Sadly, unionized teachers throughout the nation have made sure the debate over public schools is centered on their desires rather than student needs. Does anyone really think the striking Strongsville teachers were yelling at the substitutes on behalf of the students?

Collective bullying
But asking the adults to act like adults may be too much. The examples of teacher union pettiness and intimidation – dare I say bullying – are all too frequent.

In 2012, in the midst of a fight with the Chicago Board of Education over a plan to close failing schools, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey held a bullhorn in front of the TV cameras and declared his union would “expose” the billionaires pushing for school reform in the city, then told school board members, “We’re coming after you!”

Earlier that year, teachers in the Eagle Point, Oregon school district went on strike and heckled replacement teachers. The protesters did their best to disrupt classes by shouting from the nearby sidewalk.


In the fall of 2011, CTU President Karen Lewis gave a speech to a group of “social justice” teachers in which she mocked –in a bullying fashion – U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s lisp. She was forced to apologize.

That same year, members of the Michigan Education Association protested outside the insurance business of then-State Rep. Marty Knollenberg because he supported Gov. Rick Snyder’s education reform agenda.

Three months ago in Lansing, Michigan, a group of union members at the state capitol protesting Snyder’s “right to work” legislation violently tore down the tent of an organization that supports right-to-work, trapping some people inside.

At a California “Tax the Rich” protest, a teacher said she thought the home addresses of billionaires should be made public. She didn’t say why, but presumably it wasn’t to add them to her “holiday card” list.

Earlier this week in Strongsville, a teacher was arrested after allegedly swerving his vehicle at another vehicle filled with replacement teachers. Fliers were also passed out in the neighborhoods of replacement teachers, asking residents if they knew that a “scab” lived among them.

And let’s not forget the ugliest mass temper tantrum of all, which occurred in Madison, Wisconsin two years ago this month. Union protesters banged drums, issued death threats, tried to tip over buses full of legislative staffers and climbed through the state capitol windows, all in an effort to preserve union power.


We should be able to expect more

The late author and activist Saul Alinsky always insisted that the ends justify the means.

If protesting outside a board member’s house, and frightening his children in the process, means securing a bigger raise, then do it. If scoring better contract terms means tracking board members to their health clubs – to make them “feel the same stresses we have” – then what are you waiting for?

Ethics be damned; bring on the victory. Decency is for suckers.

The sick part is that our nation’s largest teachers unions have been embracing Alinsky and his temper-tantrum approach for years.

The National Education Association has Alinsky’s books on its “recommended reading” page. Union groups teach his tactics and put them into practice virtually every day.

The tactics are frequently effective, but they don’t impress anyone. Do union leaders ever worry about public relations? Do they realize that their tactics often leave taxpayers and parents shaking their heads in disgust? Do they really think making public fools of themselves will strengthen the labor movement in the long-term?

But somehow that type of logical thinking never occurs to them. Like a spoiled child in a grocery store, they throw themselves on the floor and kick and scream until their humiliated parents buy the candy bar. Mission accomplished. That’s all that matters.

But pride should come into play at some point. Why would self-described “professionals” conduct themselves in such an unprofessional manner? And what are their actions teaching their students?

The situation is undoubtedly worsened by school boards across the nation that routinely give in to the labor tantrums. That means the unions can be counted on to apply the same tactics when their new contracts expire.

I’m the parent of three young children. Like many parents, I know that rewarding a child’s temper tantrum or other bad behavior is sending a very bad message.

The worst thing anyone can do is reward the behavior. It’s reinforcing the idea that continued application of the obnoxious behavior will lead to the desired outcome for the child.

This isn’t some complicated psychological study – it’s common sense.

Maybe I am expecting too much from the union “professionals” who are contracted to deliver services in our schools. After all, they organize themselves in industrial-style unions, just like blue-collar workers. The irony is that many blue-collar union workers conduct themselves with more dignity, even when they’re on strike.

But I still can’t shake the nagging feeling that we, as taxpayers, should be able to expect something more from people who earn their living from tax dollars and have so much influence over our children every day.

Scariest Chart You Ever Laid Eyes On!


Via Doug Ross:
Scariest Chart

The Saddest Chart in America (via Doug Ross) tells us that the line on the (St Louis Fed) chart above that resembles El Capitan is basically the amount of money being printed by America's first Cloward-Piven administration. You can see Bush-Clinton-Bush increased the money supply, but get a load of what Obama's got Bernanke up to- good grief, man.

Although US debt held by the public is now roughly equivalent to when Obama first took office, MASSIVE Obama deficit spending is simply being financed by the US Treasury bonds being sold to Bernanke's own Fed(!).

This means that we are just printing new money -backed by nothing- to 'pay' for 42 cents of each and every dollar the federal government is spending... while Dear Leader says 'WHAT debt crisis?' and Senate Dems submit a budget that puts the pedal-to-the-metal on spending, +62% over the next ten years...



Senate Democrat budget plan has $400-600 billion deficits!

Reuters ^ | 3/13/13 | David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Annual deficits under a new plan from Senate Democrats would be in the $400-600 billion range for much of the next decade, a level they say would allow stronger near-term job growth than Republicans' balanced-budget vision.
Full details of the plan released by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray on Wednesday showed that deficits would average 2.4 percent of U.S. economic output through 2023, a rate many economists view as sustainable.
Deficits have exceeded $1 trillion during each of the past four years due largely to economic damage from the recent financial crisis. Under the assumptions used in Murray's budget, the fiscal 2013 deficit is forecast at $891 billion, or 5.6 percent of gross domestic product.
The Democratic plan would add $5.2 trillion to public debt over the decade, pushing it above $18 trillion in 2023. As a share of a growing economy, however, the debt would decline gradually to 70.4 percent from 76.6 percent now.
The plan, given to Budget Committee members only after the panel opened debate on it, aims to shrink deficits by $1.85 billion over 10 years - including the replacement of about $960 billion in automatic spending cuts known as the sequester.
It adds $100 billion in new spending to rebuild roads, bridges, schools and workers' job skills and prescribes $975 billion in spending cuts and $975 billion in new revenues from the elimination of tax deductions and loopholes that benefit the wealthy.
"The highest priority of our budget is to create the conditions for job creation, economic growth, and prosperity built from the middle out, not the top down," Murray told the committee.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

Obama 'declares war' on U.S. military (Take a look at alarming slough of presidential actions)

WND ^ | March 13, 2013 | Chelsea Schilling

Is Obama declaring war on U.S. military?

Obama has made no secret of his plans for deep military cuts that would downsize the Pentagon. In 2010, he cut $487 billion from the defense budget. In 2011, he signed into law a budget process intended to cut an additional $492 billion over 10 years.
The New York Times recently reported:
“On the list are not only base closings but also an additional reduction in deployed nuclear weapons and stockpiles and a restructuring of the military medical insurance program that costs more than America spends on all of its diplomacy and foreign aid around the world. Also being considered is yet another scaling back in next-generation warplanes, starting with the F-35, the most expensive weapons program in United States history.”
According to the report, some senior Pentagon officials have argued that massive cuts could leave room to increase funding for “building drones, developing offensive and defensive cyberweapons and focusing on Special Operations forces.”
But retired Army Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, a national security and foreign affairs analyst, warned, “These cuts leave America with a military inventory of ancient and broken equipment. Our tanker aircraft are on average 47 years old and our strategic bombers 34 years old, and besides, their numbers are totally insufficient for America’s global missions. For example, our air force shrank from 82 fighter squadrons at the end of the Cold War to 39 today and our Navy is in worse shape. We have a naval fleet of 284 ships and shrinking even though naval planners indicate we need at least 328 ships.”
In 2012, Obama declared that the “tide of war is receding” and called for shrinking the U.S. Army and Marines. The Los Angeles Times reported that Obama vowed to “ensure our security with smaller conventional
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

White Smoke

Long Walk

Oldest Living RINO

Big Boy Pants

Waiting

Socialism

Wake Up!

Could've

Stealing

Strange