Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Company Recieved a $1.4 Billion Bailout

Related – Also from Big Government, documents show Sen. John Kerry’s insider trading in big pharma – LINK

 

Via Big Government:

President John F. Kennedy’s nephew, Robert Kennedy, Jr., netted a $1.4 billion bailout for his company, BrightSource, through a loan guarantee issued by a former employee-turned Department of Energy official.

It’s just one more in a string of eye-opening revelations by investigative journalist and Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer in his explosive new book, Throw Them All Out.

The details of how BrightSource managed to land its ten-figure taxpayer bailout have yet to emerge fully. However, one clue might be found in the person of Sanjay Wagle.

Wagle was one of the principals in Kennedy’s firm who raised money for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. When Obama won the White House, Wagle was installed at the Department of Energy (DOE), advising on energy grants.

From an objective vantage point, investing taxpayer monies in BrightSource was a risky proposition at the time. In 2010, BrightSource, whose largest shareholder is Kennedy’s VantagePoint Partners, was up to its eyes in $1.8 billion of debt obligations and had lost $71.6 million on its paltry $13.5 million of revenue.

Even before BrightSource rattled its tin cup in front of Obama’s DOE, the company made it known publicly that its survival hinged on successfully completing the Ivanpah Solar Electrical System, which would become the largest solar plant in the world, on federal lands in California.

In its Securities and Exchange Commission filings, BrightSource further underscored the risky nature of the Ivanpah venture and, more broadly, the company’s viability:

Our future success depends on our ability to construct Ivanpah, our first utility-scale solar thermal power project, in a cost-effective and timely manner… Our ability to complete Ivanpah and the planning, development and construction of all three phases are subject to significant risk and uncertainty.

Ironically, in 2008, Kennedy wrote a CNN article praising Obama as reminiscent of his famous father and uncle.  The article, titled “Obama’s Energy Plan Would Create a Green Gold Rush,” proved prophetic. However, the “green gold rush” came in the form of $1.4 billion of taxpayers’ money flowing into the pet projects of rich venture capital investors like Kennedy, not average citizens.

More details HERE.

‘Patriotic millionaires’ demand higher taxes, but unwilling to pay up!

This video is remarkable to see for those who are not trained in how Washington works. The first millionaire in the video says that their group got rich because of the deficit spending done in Washington, so lets raise taxes [so that the government can do more spending and you same greedy bastards can get even wealthier by sucking at the government tit while donating some of that money back to Obama]. The people at Solyndra and these other green energy companies that donated heavily to Obama took our money, paid themselves, donated to Democrats and promptly went out of business.

The Daily Caller:

Washington — Two dozen “patriotic millionaires” traveled to the Capitol on Wednesday to demand that Congress raise taxes on wealthy Americans.

The Daily Caller attended their press conference with an iPad, which displayed the Treasury Department’s donation page, to find out if any of the “patriotic millionaires” were willing to put their money where their mouth is.

See the video with Michelle Fields HERE

Ann Barnhardt: Lindsey Graham You Jack-Ass!

Ann Barnhardt is a commodities trader and ran a successful business. She has a take no prisoners attitude to what sees as “dhimmitude”. We at Political Arena are not saying that you have to agree with her point of view, but she does make a highly spirited and substantive argument. And like it says at the top of the page, this is an arena and Ann Barnhardt, like her point of view or not, is a rhetorical gladiator if there ever was one. Hold on to your seat and secure your hat.

Ann Barnhardt: Lindsey Graham – If you want to pick a fight with me bring it on player….but the only way it ends is with you sobbing in the men’s room.

After this video she takes a heavily dog eared Koran and reads every quote telling people to beat their wives, engage in prostitution, kill Christians and Jews etc and burns the pages. You can see that video HERE.

GE Filed 57,000-Page Tax Return, Paid No Taxes on $14 Billion in Profits (Again)

And indeed it is perfectly legal. This is what you get when you have a 60,000 page tax code filled with loopholes (some justified some not), favors, cronyism and every incentive there can be to make money overseas instead of at home because we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. So how can we have the highest rate in the world and this still happens? You are about to find out and it involves putting Americans out of work to do it.

Weekly Standard:

General Electric, one of the largest corporations in America, filed a whopping 57,000-page federal tax return earlier this year but didn’t pay taxes on $14 billion in profits. The return, which was filed electronically, would have been 19 feet high if printed out and stacked.

The fact that GE paid no taxes in 2010 was widely reported earlier this year, but the size of its tax return first came to light when House budget committee chairman Paul Ryan (R, Wisc.) made the case for corporate tax reform at a recent townhall meeting. “GE was able to utilize all of these various loopholes, all of these various deductions–it’s legal,” Ryan said. Nine billion dollars of GE’s profits came overseas, outside the jurisdiction of U.S. tax law. GE wasn’t taxed on $5 billion in U.S. profits because it utilized numerous deductions and tax credits, including tax breaks for investments in low-income housing, green energy, research and development, as well as depreciation of property.

“I asked the GE tax officer, ‘How long was your tax form?'” Ryan said. “He said, ‘Well, we file electronically, we don’t measure in pages.'” Ryan asked for an estimate, which came back at a stunning 57,000 pages. When Ryan relayed the story at the townhall meeting in Janesville, there were audible gasps from the crowd.

Ken Kies, a tax lawyer who represents GE, confirmed to THE WEEKLY STANDARD the tax return would have been 57,000 pages had it been filed on paper. The size of GE’s tax return has more than doubled in the last five years.

Ryan used the data point to underscore the irrationality of the corporate income tax code. He also contrasted GE with UPS to make the point that the corporate income tax code doesn’t make sense. “UPS paid a 34 percent effective tax rate,” while its biggest foreign competitor, DHL, paid a 24 percent tax rate, Ryan said.

The problems with the corporate taxes occur because “Republicans and Democrats, both parties, sit in Congress and they’re picking winners and losers,” Ryan said. The solution, according to the Wisconsin congressman: “Get rid of those loopholes and lower tax rates by a corresponding amount. Don’t lose revenue, but for every loophole you pull out, and deny a company from being able to get this little carveout, you can lower the rates so we can be more competitive with our competitors overseas. We want to stem the bleeding of jobs going overseas, of foreign companies buying U.S. companies and taking headquarters overseas.”

18 Iconic Products That America Doesn’t Make Anymore

Yahoo Finance:


Rawlings baseballs

Last production date: 1969

Rawlings is the official supplier of baseballs to Major League Baseball. The St. Louis shop was founded in 1887 by George and Alfred Rawlings. In 1969 the brothers moved the baseball-manufacturing plant from Puerto Rico to Haiti and then later to Costa Rica.

Etch a Sketch

Last production date: 2000

Etch A Sketch, an iconic American toy since the 1960s, used to be produced in Bryan, Ohio, a small town of 8,000. Then in Dec. 2000, toymaker Ohio Art decided to move production to Shenzhen, China.

Converse shoes

Last production date: 2001

Marquis M. Converse opened Converse Rubber Show Company in Massachusetts in 1908. Chuck Taylors– named after All American high school basketball player Chuck Taylor– began selling in 1918 as the show eventually produced an industry record of over 550 million pairs by 1997. But in 2001 sales were on the decline and the U.S. factory closed. Now Chuck Taylors are made in Indonesia.

Stainless steel rebar

Last production date: circa 2001

Many forms of this basic steel product are not available domestically. Multiple waivers to the Buy America Act have allowed purchase of rebar internationally.

Note: The Buy America Act requires government mass transportation spending to use American products.

Dress shirts*

Last production date: Oct. 2002

The last major shirt factory in America closed in October 2002, according to NYT. C.F. Hathaway’s Maine factory had been producing shirts since 1837.

*We know there are other shirt manufacturers in America. They do not produce in large quantities or supply major brands.

Mattel toys

Last production date: 2002

The largest toy company in the world closed their last American factory in 2002. Mattel, headquartered in California, produces 65 percent of their products in China as of August 2007.

Minivans

Last production date: circa 2003

A waiver to the Buy America Act permitted an American producer of wheel-chair accessible minivans to purchase Canadian chassis for use in government contracts, because no chassis were available from the United States. The waiver specified: “General Motors and Chrysler minivan chassis, including those used on the Chevrolet Uplander, Pontiac Montana, Buick Terraza, Saturn Relay, Chrysler Town & Country, and Dodge Grand Caravan, are no longer manufactured in the United States.”

Note: The Buy America Act requires government mass transportation spending to use American products.

Vending machines

Last production date: circa 2003

You know that thing you put bills into on a vending machine? It isn’t made in America, according to a waiver to the Buy America Act.

Neither is the coin dispenser, according to this federal waiver.

Note: The Buy America Act requires government mass transportation spending to use American products.

Levi jeans

Last production date: Dec. 2003

Levi Strauss & Co. shut down all its American operations and outsourced  production to Latin America and Asia in Dec. 2003. The company’s denim products have been an iconic American product for 150 years.

Radio Flyer’s Red Wagon

Last production date: March 2004

The little red wagon has been an iconic image of America for years. But once Radio Flyer decided its Chicago plant was too expensive, it began producing most products, including the red wagon, in China.

Televisions

Last production date: Oct. 2004

Five Rivers Electronic Innovations was the last American owned TV color maker in the US. The Tennessee company used LCoS (liquid crystal on silicon) technology to produce televisions for Philips Electronics. But after Philips decided to stop selling TVs with LCoS, Five Rivers eventually filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Oct. 2004. As part of its reorganization plan, the company stopped manufacturing TVs.

Now there are ZERO televisions made in America, according to Business Week.

Cell phones

Last production date: circa 2007

Of the 1.2 billion cell phones sold worldwide in 2008, NOT ONE was made in America, according to Manufacturing & Technology publisher Richard McCormick.

After studying the websites of cell phone companies, we could not identify a single phone that was not manufactured primarily overseas.

Railroads (parts including manganese turnout castings, U69 guard bars, LV braces and weld kits)

Last production date: circa 2008

Here’s another standout from dozens of waivers to the Buy America Act: railroad turnouts and weld kits.

Manganese turnout castings are used to widen railroad tracks, and they were used to build our once-great railroad system. U69 guard bars, LV braces and Weld Kits, along with 22 mm Industrial steel chain are basic items that were certifiably not available in the US.

Note: The Buy America Act requires government mass transportation spending to use American products.

Dell computers

Last production date: Jan. 2010

In January 2010, Dell closed its North Carolina PC factory, its last large U.S. plant. Analysts said Dell would be outsourcing work to Asian manufacturers in an attempt to catch up with the rest of the industry, said analyst Ashok Kumar.

Canned sardines

Last production date: April 2010

Stinson Seafood plant, the last sardine cannery in Maine and the U.S., shut down in April. The first U.S. sardine cannery opened in Maine in 1875, but since the demand for the small, oily fish declined, more canneries closed shop.

Pontiac cars

Last production date: May 2010

The last Pontiac was produced last May. The brand was formally killed on Halloween, as GM contracts Pontiac dealerships expired.

The 84-year-old GM brand was famous for muscle cars.

Forks, spoons, and knives

Last production date: June 2010

The last flatware factory in the US closed last summer. Sherrill Manufacturing bought Oneida Ltd. in 2005, but shut down its fork & knife operations due to the tough economy. CEO Greg Owens says his company may resume production “when the general economic climate improves and as Sherrill Manufacturing is able to put itself back on its feet and recapitalize and regroup.”

Incandescent light bulb

Last production date: Sept. 2010

The incandescent light bulb (invented by Thomas Edison) has been phased out.

Our last major factory that made incandescent light bulbs closed in September 2010. In 2007, Congress passed a measure that will ban incandescents by 2014, prompting GE to close its domestic factory.

Note: A reader pointed out that the Osram/Sylvania Plant in St. Mary’s, Penn. is still producing light bulbs to fill old and international contracts. However, the plant has announced plans to wind down incandescent production.

MRC: ABC Hypes Gingrich Connection to Freddie Mac, Ignores New Fannie/Freddie CEO Bonuses

And just who was it that made sure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could get those fat bonuses? Why it was Chris Dodd the former Democratic Chair of the Senate Finance Committee (be sure to watch the videos in that link), who just happened to be the number one recipient of their money. In fact Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have funneled over $200 million of your money to Democratic Party interests and that was just as of 2008. The same people that protected those bonuses for AIG are the same ones who did this.

Related:

Boehner goes nuclear when he finds out that language was illegally inserted into the bill giving the AIG execs big bonuses with our money. This goes all the way back to the language in the failed Stimulus Bill.

This is the speech that Leader Boehner was referencing in the beginning of the video above

Related:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paying $210 million in bonuses with your money and no outrage why…..

The Fannie Mae/Goldman Sachs lobbyists revolving door in the White House continues.

Top 20 Industry Money Recipients This Election Cycle – Who is in the back pocket of Wall Street?

Reminder: Big Business Loves Big Government (especially Democrats)

Big Business Buying Influence With Democrats: Google Pays 2.4% Federal Taxes

CBS news decided not to mention the Dodd Amendment in its coverage…is anyone surprised? – LINK

Media Research Center:

Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich

ABC’s World News on Wednesday and Good Morning America on Thursday both reported on the revelation that Newt Gingrich received almost $2 million while consulting for Freddie Mac over an eight year span.

Yet, the network ignored the fact that the company (with a Democratic President) is still giving massive bonuses and will now be asking the federal government for an additional $6 billion.

On World News, Jon Karl highlighted only the Gingrich connection, highlighting attacks by Michele Bachmann.

Yet, while ABC focused on this, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell explained, “So, here’s what set off the latest round of outrage. $13 million in bonuses for the two mortgage giants that had to be bailed out by taxpayers. Now these bonuses come after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac actually lost $4 billion last quarter.”

So, while NBC’s Andrea Mitchell offered snarky comments, such as insisting that Gingrich is “trying to explain his gold platted, insider status,” at least NBC allowed that the company still had issues, separate from their relation to GOP presidential candidates.

On CBS’s Evening News, Wyatt Andrews noted the “bipartisan anger” from Republicans and Democrats over the latest news.

Speaking of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae CEOs, Andrews added, “Fannie’s Michael Williams and Freddie’s Charles Haldeman, earned $9.3 million and $7.8 million over two years, which gives them, Republican Darrell Issa said, the best taxpayer-financed jobs ever.”

On Thursday’s Early Show, Jan Crawford mentioned the congressional investigation during a Gingrich segment. GMA only focused on the Republican presidential candidate. NBC’s Today did the same.

A transcript of the Evening News segment can be found HERE

George Soros Spending Over $48 Million Influencing Media Organizations

[Today we have featured some of the illuminating work by Dan Gainor from the Media Research Center. Be sure to scroll down and read the three part series showing how some in the elite media abuse their positions to behave as Democratic Party operatives. In today’s piece Gainor shows how the problem goes far beyond rank and file journalists. George Soros, who has stated that he wants a new centrally planned economic order, is the single largest contributor to far left political   causes.  – Editor]

George Soros
George Soros

Part I: Why Don’t We Hear About Soros’ Ties to Over 30 Major News Organizations?

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

This information is part of an upcoming report by the Media Research Centers Business & Media Institute which has been looking into George Soros and his influence on the media.

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press.

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Partyextreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features:

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Part II: Why Is Soros Spending Over $48 Million Funding Media Organizations?

It’s a scene journalists dream about – a group of coworkers toasting a Pulitzer Prize. For the team at investigative start-up ProPublica, it was the second time their fellow professionals recognized their work for journalism’s top honor.

For George Soros and ProPublica’s other liberal backers, it was again proof that a strategy of funding journalism was a powerful way to influence the American public.

It’s a strategy that Soros has been deploying extensively in media both in the United States and abroad. Since 2003, Soros has spent more than $48 million funding media properties, including the infrastructure of news – journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations.

And that number is an understatement. It is gleaned from tax forms, news stories and reporting. But Soros funds foundations that fund other foundations in turn, like the Tides Foundation, which then make their own donations. A complete accounting is almost impossible because a media component is part of so many Soros-funded operations.
This information is part of an upcoming report by the Media Research Centers Business & Media Institute which has been looking into George Soros and his influence on the media.

It turns out that Soros’ influence doesn’t just include connections to top mainstream news organizations such as NBC, ABC, The New York Times and Washington Post. It’s bought him connections to the underpinnings of the news business. The Columbia Journalism Review, which bills itself as “a watchdog and a friend of the press in all its forms,” lists several investigative reporting projects funded by one of Soros foundations.

The “News Frontier Database” includes seven different investigative reporting projects funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute. Along with ProPublica, there are the Center for Public Integrity, the Center for Investigative Reporting and New Orleans’ The Lens. The Columbia School of Journalism, which operates CJR, has received at least $600,000 from Soros, as well.

Imagine if conservative media punching bags David and Charles Koch had this many connections to journalists. Even if the Kochs could find journalists willing to support conservative media (doubtful), they would be skewered by the left.

For Soros, it’s news, but it nothing new. According to “Soros: The Life and Times of a Messianic Billionaire,” he has been fascinated by media from when he was a boy where early career interests included “history or journalism or some form of writing.” He served as “editor-in-chief, publisher, and news vendor of” his own paper, “The Lupa News” and wrote a wall newspaper in his native Hungary before leaving, wrote author Michael T. Kaufman, a 40-year New York Times veteran. The Communist Party “encouraged” such papers.

Now as one of the world’s richest men (No. 46 on Forbes’ list), he gets to indulge his dreams. Since those dreams seem to involve controlling media from the ground up, Soros naturally started with Columbia University’s School of Journalism. Columbia is headed by President Lee Bollinger, who also sits on the Pulitzer Prize board and the board of directors of The Washington Post.

Bollinger, like some of Soros’ other funding recipients, is pushing for journalism to find a new sugar daddy or at least an uncle – Uncle Sam. Bollinger wrote in his book “Uninhibited, Robust, and Wide-Open: A Free Press for a New Centurythat government should fund media. A 2009 study by Columbia’s journalism program came to the same conclusion, calling for “a national fund for local news.”

Conveniently, Len Downie, the lead author of that piece, is on both the Post’s board and the board of the Center for Investigative Reporting, also funded by Soros.

Soros funds more than just the most famous journalism school in the nation. There are journalism industry associations like:

• The National Federation of Community Broadcasters;
• The National Association of Hispanic Journalists;
• And the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Readers unhappy with Soros’ media influence might be tempted to voice concerns to the Organization of News Ombudsmen – a professional group devoted to “monitoring accuracy, fairness and balance.” Perhaps they might consider a direct complaint to one such as NPR’s Alicia Shepard or PBS’s Michael Getler, both directors of the organization. Unfortunately, that group is also funded by Soros. At the bottom of the Organization of News Ombudsmen’s website front page is the line: “Supported by the Open Society Institute,” a Soros foundation. It is the only organization so listed.

The group’s membership page lists 57 members from around globe and features:

• Deirdre Edgar, readers’ representative of The Los Angeles Times;
• Brent Jones, standards editor, USA Today;
• Kelly McBride, ombudsman, ESPN;
• Patrick Pexton, ombudsman, The Washington Post.

The site doesn’t address whether the OSI money creates a conflict of interest. But then, who could readers complain to anyway?

There’s more. The Open Society Institute is one of several foundations funding the Investigative News Network (INN), a collaboration of 32 non-profit news organizations producing what they claim is “non-partisan investigative news.” The James L. Knight Foundation also backs the network and is possibly the most-well-known journalism foundation. Knight President and CEO Alberto Ibargüen is on the board of directors for ProPublica.

INN includes the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University, the liberal web start-up MinnPost, National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting, National Public Radio, and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. The network had included the liberal Huffington Post investigative operation among its grants, but HuffPo investigations merged with the possibly even more left-wing Center for Public Integrity, on whose board Arianna Huffington sits.

Liberal academic programs, left-wing investigative journalism and even supposedly neutral news organizations all paid for by a man who spends tens of millions of dollars openly attacking the right. George Soros is teaching journalists that their industry has a future as long as he opens his wallet.

Part III: The difference between an elite media journalist and a Democrat Party operative is often non-existant.

Dan Gainor op-ed at Fox News:

Mainstream Media Pushing Hard to Defeat the Tea Party, Raise Taxes

The Politico headline read: “Conservative elites pine for 2012 hero.” They could have shortened that sentence to “Elites pine” or more likely to “Elites freak the heck out.” Because it’s not just the conservative cognoscenti, it’s all of them. The folks in charge of the mainstream media equation miss the good old days when they ran everything and ordinary American voters and taxpayers did as they were told.

Those days are gone and the in-crowd is afraid it is on the way out, too. Congress’s favorability rating is down to 13 percent and even the lefties at Mother Jones are whining that both political parties are cancelling town hall meetings to hide from angry voters.

The era when elite Washington – of all three major parties: Republicans, Democrats and the Media – could just raise our taxes or cut deals behind closed doors has gone bye-bye. And the Powers That Be are determined to turn back the clock.

They blame the Tea Party and rightly so. A combination of a grassroots movement and a sophisticated technology now able to actually inform Americans has successfully taken away some power from politicians and the media. The logical solution would be for both groups to reflect more what the public actually wants from them – a saner, more affordable government and a media that is fair to someone other than just liberals.

Instead, the elites have declared war on the Tea Party.

That in itself is nothing new. Since the first spot of tea a couple years ago, anti-tax, anti-Big Government protesters have been called bigots, violent and a dangerous fringe element. The recent debt battle took it to a far worse level as those in power sought to blame Tea Partiers on our nation’s unwillingness to spend itself into the grave.

The result of that battle was, seemingly, a toss-up. The debt ceiling was raised and a super committee established to discuss ways to solve the budget crunch. But the design of the committee makes tax hikes likely. The deck is stacked as everyone from President Obama and Vice President Biden to Speaker Boehner and almost every generic pundit is now pushing to do just that. And the clock is ticking as a Dec. 23 deadline looms.

At least a few admit they want to use the chance to raise taxes. Obama, most Dems and even loud-mouthed billionaire Warren Buffett are begging for a tax hike.

On Sunday, Aug. 21, the major media chimed in. The Washington Post ran two huge pieces skewering the Tea Party on the economy and more. Columnist Allan Sloan led off the business section claiming “the Tea Party types bear primary responsibility.” Over in the opinion section (as if the first piece wasn’t opinion), they ran a pro-spending, pro-Keynsian economics piece complaining that critics of such policies “almost surely have it wrong.” The critics are, of course, the Tea Party and politicians who are friendly toward it like Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

The very same day, The New York Times produced an editorial urging “business leaders to change the minds of the Tea Party lawmakers” and back a “grand bargain that cut spending and raised tax revenue.”

The push to raise taxes is near universal across the media for two reasons. First, it boosts the size of the burgeoning Nanny State. The journalistic elite always support more government. Even when politicians trim the size of growth in government, reporters bemoan such “draconian” cuts. Journalists have never met a draconian increase in the size of government that they didn’t like, but taxpayers sure have.

Secondly, a tax hike would require squashing the Tea Party. And the elites have joined in the hunt.

Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. has claimed GOP politicians are “subservient” to the Tea Party. Dionne’s columnist at the Post, Richard Cohen, concurs and said Perry “occupies the cultural and intellectually empty heartland of the Republican Party” because he “vows to diminish Washington’s influence.” Cohen calls that a “moronic policy,” instead claiming “what America desperately needs is more, not less, Washington.”

The network news shows use the same strategy with just a dash more subtlety. When local Tea Party leaders confronted Obama in Iowa, they were put down on air. On NBC, Chuck Toddnoted the “bitter taste of the energy and confrontational style of the Tea Party” and their “in-your-face tactics.” ABC’s Jake Tapper referred to it the “unruly Tea Party style.”

Politicians took the same view. “Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson, who co-chaired the deficit commission, said the American people are rightly disgusted, and he’s personally bothered by Republicans undermining any chance of Speaker Boehner compromising,” explained Tapper July 12. That’s a Republican argument supporting Obama’s “shared sacrifice” plan where the elites control more of your money.

They were mirroring the elitist anti-Tea Party talking points, such as the one from Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod who called the downgrade of U.S. debt “a Tea Party downgrade.” That, despite the fact that Tea Partiers were the only ones willing to cut enough government to prevent the downgrade in the first place.

Wherever you look, elites are moving to crush resistance.

The West does it the democratic way of course. In Syria and Libya, they use tanks and guns and SCUD missiles. Here in America, elites use the more dangerous weapon of the media to hang on to power over everything we do. Their bosses envy the power of their counterparts elsewhere. France , for example, just “announced $16 billion in new taxes to ensure it reaches its deficit-reduction targets,” rather than cut its massive welfare state.

In the U.S., Democrats and Republicans alike embrace the tax-and-spend approach, so the Tea Party threatens them all.

Naturally, it must be stopped. Rep. Frederica Wilson, (D-Fla.), made it all clear in a recent speech. “Let us all remember who the real enemy is. The real enemy is the Tea Party – the Tea Party holds the Congress hostage.”

Like most politicians, she’s wrong. If the Tea Party really had that much sway in Congress, our economy and our nation would be in much better shape.

 

Part II: The difference between an elite media journalist and a Democrat Party operative is often non-existant.

Dan Gainor op-ed at Fox News:

Conservatives are crazy. Sometimes they’re stupid, racist or even evil. On creative occasions they’re all four – at least that’s how they’re portrayed by the American media. All that reflects the typical lefty view that right-wingers are “son of bitches” who need to be taken out, as Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa so sweetly explained. Hoffa envisions a “good fight” because his opponents must be the opposite – evil.

This election season, journalists have partnered fully with the left to depict conservatives in the most vile ways they can muster. While it’s nothing new, the sheer volume of attacks is noteworthy. What’s worse is that many are coming from supposedly legitimate news operations. . (It is fun to note this nasty attack comes just days before Obama pushes his latest “bipartisan” legislative effort.)

Every national conservative politician battles these media characterizations.

Ronald Reagan was crazy or stupid, depending on the lefty arguing it or the phases of the moon. Nancy Reagan was allegedly the power behind the throne, so she was crazy and evil.

President George H.W. Bush once ran the CIA – evil.

His son, President George W. Bush, managed to be crazy, stupid and evil. (Lefties liked to depict him in Nazi regalia or as a chimp, or both. Conservatives who use identical phrasing or images for Obama are, of course, category four – racists.) Vice President Dick Cheney got the Nancy Reagan treatment – crazy and evil.

It’s almost a party game to list the top conservatives and describe how the media and left are depicting them. But it’s no game to candidates. Prominent media outlets are trying to sabotage every viable conservative opponent to Obama.

Rep. Michele Bachman, (R-Wis.), is called crazy for her gas price predictions or for just being her. Newsweek’s Aug. 15 cover story on Bachmann was called “The Queen of Rage,” complete with a cover photo of a crazy-eyed candidate. “In Iowa, where she was raised, Bachmann has become the living embodiment of the Tea Party. She and her allies have been called a maniacal gang of knife-wielding ideologues. That’s hyperbole, of course,” wrote Lois Romano. When reporters write something that vile and follow it with “that’s hyperbole,” what they really mean is “no, it’s not.”

Then there’s ESPN’s L.Z. Granderson, also a CNN contributor, who called Bachmann “crazy.” Granderson said that “the people aren’t going to vote for crazy. And she [Bachmann] still registers as crazy with a lot of independents.” But those attacks were repurposing the lefty theme that has been around for years. Crazy Mother Jones magazine called her “Bachmann (R-Crazy)” in a 2008 headline.

With Bachmann now running for president, Matt Taibbi resurrected that assault in Rolling Stone’s June 22 issue. “Bachmann is a religious zealot whose brain is a raging electrical storm of divine visions and paranoid delusions.” Taibbi summed it up by saying she’s “exactly the right kind of completely batshit crazy. Not medically crazy, not talking-to-herself-on-the-subway crazy, but grandiose crazy, late-stage Kim Jong-Il crazy.”

Then there’s stupid, a subject the old school media know all too well. Politico, the lefty publication that caters to Washington insiders, ran an Aug. 29 cover story with the headline: “Is Rick Perry dumb?” This sterling bit of journalism began with the premise that Perry is “confronting an unavoidable question: is he dumb – or just misunderestimated?” (That last bit is a dig at Bush the Younger, of course.)

This theme has been everywhere for years, enshrined even in T-shirt form as a red-white-and-blue elephant with the slogan: “Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Numbers.”

Tune into MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” and there’s co-host Mika Brzezinski bashing the right for not hiking taxes in the debt limit negotiations. “I think the Republicans look stupid and mean. I’m sorry, this is stupid.”

It’s a common theme over at MSNBC: conservatives are stupid. “Sarah Palin Has Proven Herself To Be Profoundly Stupid,” whined “Hardball” host Chris Matthews.

If it’s evil you want, Matthews throws that term around like beads at Mardi Gras. Let’s see: Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are evil: “These people are evil in what they’re doing.” All because he thinks they’re wrong about climate change. Then Matthews bashed former Speaker Newt Gingrich as “evil” and looking “like the devil.”

The media pile on Perry as the front runner. ABC’s Jim Avila called out conservative Texans as evil, even if you didn’t quite use the word. “Some argue that, deep in the heart of Rick Perry’s Texas, there is little heart.” “Some.” That’s another journalist weasel word, allowing Avila to say what he actually feels without owning up. It’s the same theme over on the left, typically blasting the Koch brothers with the term. A 2010 Gawker headline explained it only a bit tongue-in-cheek: “Republican Billionaires Arrange Secret Meeting to Plot Evil.”

Those attacks are awful, but the scarlet letter attack in today’s world earns the “R” for racism. Matthews is good at that one too, saying Perry “could be Bull Connor with a smile.” Matthews gave the Bull Connor comparison to Perry twice. (Connor was a civil rights era racist who unleashed police dogs and turned fire hoses on protesters. He was also a Democrat.)

If you’re white, even a bogus claim of racism is almost impossible to defend against. It’s the favorite of charlatans and media hounds, and a persistent media theme since Obama first announced for president. Everybody who’s anybody – the Tea Party, Fox, the GOP and more – are all racists for daring to oppose Obama.

Donald Trump’s request to see Obama’s grades? “That’s just code for saying he got into law school because he was black,” explained CBS’s Bob Schieffer.

MSNBC’s lefty religious expert Frank Schaeffer tells viewers about “a racist white bloc in the Republican Party that has come dressed as the Tea Party.”

Even black GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain gets abused as “racist.” TV nutball pundits from foul-mouthed comedian Bill Maher to massively inked, one-time comedienne Janeane Garofalo have criticized his candidacy – supposedly designed to deflect “the racism that is inherent in the Republican Party, the conservative movement, the tea party certainly.” Garofalo actually claimed Cain was being paid to fend off charges of racism against the GOP. Of course, you can’t fend off such disgusting charges. Even a lunatic like Garofalo knows that.

Because such charges get repeated dozens, hundreds or thousands of times. The examples above are just scratching the surface. We could fill newspapers with these outlandish claims, if any bothered to print such truth. Crazy, stupid, evil and racist. The four horsemen of the liberal media apocalypse this election. And every one of them has already been set loose.

Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture.

Part I: The difference between an elite media journalist and a Democrat Party operative is often non-existant.

Normally we make it a practice to not republish an entire piece, but this is so important for readers to understand and share in this case we are making an exception. Read carefully.

Dan Gainor op-ed at Fox News:

If you’ve been following the news this week, you’d get the impression that America is a scandal-plagued nation. Scandals to the right of us, scandals to the left of us.

Take your pick. There’s the media assault on GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, the deadly “Fast and Furious” federal gun-running case, the Solyndra solar loan fiasco, the collapse of MF Global, led by former Democratic N.J. Gov. Jon Corzine and, of course, the deeply disturbing allegations of child sexual abuse at Penn State.

But the real scandal isn’t any one of those. It’s how journalists pick and choose which controversies to play up and which to play down. They are so inconsistent, you’d think they studied ethics at Penn State under Joe Paterno.

Heck, maybe he studied under them.

Take the allegations against Cain. We are watching ABC’s George Stephanopoulos attack Herman Cain on how he deals with women. This is the same George Stephanopoulos who worked for Bill Clinton and did his best to undermine attacks against him. Remember, Clinton was charged with a variety of women-unfriendly incidents including rape. Yes, rape. Not that the networks made a big deal of it at the time.

Here’s Stephanopoulos, on page 267 of his autobiography “All Too Human,” “Most important, I wanted to keep reports of Paula [Jones’] press conference off television … It wasn’t a hard sell.” His book goes on to say how he tried to discredit her. Yes, this openly Democratic operative is a “newsman” now.

Don’t believe it for a second. The different between “journalist” and Democratic Party operative is often non-existent.

It shows in everything they do. We aren’t even two weeks into CainFest 2011 and the broadcast networks have done 117 stories on him. One-hundred and seventeen? That’s more than a small war would get.

Actually, it’s 58 times more than a small war has gotten. Obama ordered troops into Uganda in October, before the Cain allegations came out. CBS and NBC have each mentioned it once since then. ABC hasn’t mentioned it at all.

But the networks don’t care about American soldiers at risk. They are more concerned that Obama’s presidency is at risk.

That’s the only explanation for how they’ve covered, or not covered, the “Fast and Furious” scandal. You’ve had to look hard to find consistent coverage of this corrupt government program that cost the life of at least one law enforcement officer. Allegedly the goal was to track U.S. guns to drug cartels and arrest gun runners.

But the program was poorly run and it cost the life of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. A good leader would take responsibility for that. A moral leader would have called the family to talk to them or meet with them in person. Attorney General Eric Holder didn’t do either. All he did do was lie to Congress about it.

According to Holder, the program was furiously “flawed in its concept and flawed in its execution.” That skips any blame for when he told Congress he had heard of the program only weeks before. Now we know that’s just not true. In any other city than Washington, D.C., what Holder did was a boldfaced lie.

Not that you’d know it from most network news. While CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson has shown her top-flight skills as a journalist, and been abused by the Obama administration for it, her competing networks have abandoned their responsibility to their viewers. Both NBC and ABC skipped the House Republican roasting Holder received on Capitol Hill.

It’s been much the same in the Solyndra scandal. There only ABC has shown any semblance of journalistic skill covering Obama’s failed green program. It’s a $500-million scandal involving an Obama fundraiser, a solar panel company that had a dot.com era idea on how to make a profit (none) and it’s gotten nowhere near the media coverage a Republican scandal might have gotten. (Just ask Herman Cain.)

A recent Media Research Center analysis found “just 15 stories mentioning the Solyndra scandal since its August 31 bankruptcy filing.” For those who find math difficult – like many journalists – that’s about one eighth of the stories the Cain controversy has gotten.

But hey, Solyndra wasn’t run by a former governor considered as a possible Treasury Secretary and hailed by news outlets as an economic expert. That would be a real scandal. Or not, if he had the infamous “D” after his name.

The former governor is Jon Corzine, who has the reverse Midas touch. He’s run Goldman Sachs, New Jersey and, most recently, MF Global, which just collapsed amidst a $2-billion bankruptcy. MF Global fell apart in what CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin called a “mini Ponzi scheme.”

But not one story on ABC, CBS or NBC has mentioned that Corzine is a Democrat, was considered an Obama adviser and possible pick for a top spot in his administration.

Every time there’s a controversial story, media types are making these choices. They love the Occupy Wall Street crowd, so they play up the good from those protests, despite rapes, vandalism, arson, assaults on police and more. But they hate the Tea Parties, so everything they do is somehow nefarious.

It’s time the media covered their own scandals. They have plenty.

Study: Leftist Academics Skew History Against Republican Presidents

Washington Times:

Call it history’s conservative curse.

According to a University of Miami study, those historical rankings of American presidents that pop up every year or so are significantly weighted in favor of Democrats, thanks to the liberal leanings of academia.

Political science professor Joseph E. Uscinski, one of the study’s authors, said the new analysis shows that the overwhelmingly liberal academic community consistently ranks Republican presidents about 10 spots lower than the public would.

“I don’t think anyone is surprised,” Mr. Uscinski told The Washington Times. “Among the political scientists and historians that I work with, Democrats outnumber Republicans 8 to 1.”

What was eye-opening, he said, was the stark difference between the historians’ assessments of Republicans and the grades given by the public.

“On average, all the Republicans get the short end of the stick,” he said. “But the one it impacts the most is [Ronald] Reagan. It’s often difficult for people to fathom why he’s ranked as low as he is.”

The University of Miami report, to be published in the scholarly journal White House Studies, looks at presidential rankings from historian Arthur Schlesinger’s seminal 1948 survey through more recent polls, including the Wall Street Journal’s 2005 list and C-SPAN’s 2009 survey.

In the C-SPAN rankings – the focus of much of the University of Miami analysis – Reagan in 2009 broke into the Top Ten, behind Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Franklin Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Thomas Jefferson, Dwight Eisenhower and Woodrow Wilson.

NBC shows flagrant bias in ObamaCare story

Political Arena Editorial by Chuck Norton

 

A textbook example of media bias. The subtext of the story “smart conservatives agree with Obama” and they push that bias by presenting a partisan view as “the expert’s view”

You might be thinking “Now wait a minute, it was fair because they had Jay Sekulow on”. That sounds good but look at the story again. NBC has Jay Sekulow on for the 29 states opposing ObamaCare, but then they have the Maryland politician who advocates the Obama point of view which is that the commerce clause gives the government unlimited power to control our lives, err I mean the economy [because you cannot control the economy with out controlling people /wink wink, nod nod].

So we have one advocate from each side, OK that is fair so far, but then the “expert” is brought in. We know this because NBC put the word “expert” right under Tom Goldstein’s name. Of course Tom Goldstein has experience covering the court, but he is no more of an expert than Jay Sekulow or Mark Levin.  What they don’t tell you is that Tom Goldstein was a lawyer for Al Gore.

When NBC or an elite media outfit looks for a talking head they wish to present as “the experts”, they do not pick an expert at random and ask him “What do you think?”. They find a person they can present as an expert who will say exactly what they want said. This is a very common practice in news rooms all across the country.

Of course ObamaCare is unconstitutional. The Maryland politician says that everyone uses health care so the Commerce Clause covers it. Well everyone eats too, and everyone needs shelter, everyone needs clothes. So was it the intent of the Founding Fathers to have a government that is totally unlimited?  ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it takes the entire idea of limited government and tosses it right out the window. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, addressed the idea of reinterpreting a clause in the Constitution to give the federal Government total power.

James Madison on the General Welfare Clause and limited government:

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.

So where did this crazy idea of a nearly unlimited Commerce Clause come from? Shortly before WWII FDR was not able to advance parts of his socialist progressive plan because the Supreme Court kept striking down laws his party was passing. So FDR threatened to add members to the Supreme Court using Article II of the Constitution to add perhaps a dozen seats to the Supreme Court all filled with cronies. In fear of this the Supreme Court capitulated ” and expanded the Commerce Clause in a way that had never been intended to please FDR. This became known as FDR’s court packing threat.

James Madison on the General Welfare Clause

James Madison
James Madison

 

Prophetic!

Federalist Papers:

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands;they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.

VIDEO: CSU students sign petition to ban Beck and Limbaugh from Radio and TV while proclaiming their support for free speech

Here are your California public school university students in action!

KMPH TV:

A video shot on Fresno State’s campus shows students signing a petition to ban conservatives like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh from radio and television.

One student can be heard saying he believes in free speech but then admits he has no idea what the First Amendment is.

Over and over students say they believe in free speech but think they can actually ban someone from saying something they don’t like.

 

If you thought that video was priceless, wait till you see this one…

American Left Acting as Apologists for Sharia Law

Update – American Thinker has a great post called Obama’s Revisionist History when it comes to our Middle-East policy. It corrects the record while providing a great history lesson.

Via Stephen Gele at  American Thinker:

Daniel Mach, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, and Jamil Dakwar, director of the ACLU’s Human Rights program, recently co-authored an article on the Huffington Post attacking legislative efforts to prohibit the application of foreign laws inconsistent with the rights granted by the U.S. and state constitutions or state public policy.

The article posits a series of disjointed, hypothetical misapplications of the legislative efforts to prevent sharia from encroaching into our legal system. Yet, the authors cite no actual examples of misapplications of laws already passed and in force, in Tennessee, Louisiana, and Arizona. The authors fail to distinguish this American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) legislation from other legislative efforts, such as the Oklahoma constitutional amendment, which do not explicitly reference the protection of constitutional rights and public policy in prohibiting application of sharia or foreign law.

Further, the authors contend that these laws, explicitly protecting established constitutional rights, are superfluous because the First Amendment already protects these rights, and then allege that these laws violate the religious freedom granted by the First Amendment. The authors thereby dangerously conflate the judiciary’s interpretation and enforcement of secular law with interpretation and enforcement of religious doctrine. The freedom of religion and establishment clauses of the First Amendment do not address the application of foreign law, including sharia, in American courts, and, as demonstrated below, have not been applied to prevent such application.

Additionally, American courts have repeatedly held that freedom of religion does not require the judiciary to void secular laws which may incidentally conflict with religious doctrine, and that the First Amendment prohibits the judiciary from interpreting or enforcing religious doctrine. For example, in the case of S.D. v. M.J.R., the New Jersey Superior Court of Appeal reversed a trial court judge who did not find sexual assault to have been proven when a husband admitted forcing his wife to engage in sex, because the husband lacked criminal intent as he was a Muslim, and sharia, as described by an imam, mandated that a wife submit to her husband’s sexual advances. The New Jersey appellate court cited several U.S. Supreme Court decisions that held that freedom of religion does not include violating criminal laws, including Reynolds v. United States and Cleveland v. United States regarding polygamy, and Employment Div., Dep’t of Human Res. of Oregon v. Smith regarding smoking peyote, even when religious doctrine permits or mandates the prohibited practice. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Presbyterian Church in the United States v. Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial Presbyterian Church and its progeny, have also consistently held that deciding disputes over religious doctrine violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

Most egregiously, the title of the article, “Anti-Sharia Law: A Solution In Search Of A Problem,” suggests that the enforcement of sharia law in the United States is simply not a problem worth addressing. The authors completely ignore dozens of published state appellate decisions in which American courts addressed litigants who demanded the enforcement of sharia, and on many occasions succeeded.

A recent study entitled “Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases,” released by The Center for Security Policy, identifies 50 such appellate court cases from 23 states. Many of these cases involve blatant violations of constitutional rights, usually to the detriment of women and children, including the enforcement of foreign custody orders to wrest children from their mothers.

For example, a Maryland appellate court in Hosain v. Malik enforced a Pakistani custody order, issued under a sharia rule granting sole custody to the father when the child reaches age seven, handing a little girl brought to America by her mother over to the father. The Maryland court bowed to the Pakistani court order even though the mother did not appear for the Pakistani proceedings, because, although she may have been arrested for adultery if she returned to Pakistan for the hearing, and been subject to “public whipping or death by stoning,” the court found such punishments were “extremely unlikely.” The judges explicitly proclaimed that the best interest of the child should not be “determined based on Maryland law, i.e., American cultures and mores,” but rather “by applying relevant Pakistani customs, culture and mores.” The court, explaining that “in the Pakistani culture, the well being of the child … is thought to be facilitated by adherence to Islamic teachings,” intentionally applied Islamic, rather than American, cultural and legal precepts.

77,000 federal workers paid more than governors

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley $106,078 /yr

Washington Times:

More than 77,000 federal government employees throughout the country — including computer operators, more than 5,000 air traffic controllers, 22 librarians and one interior designer — earned more than the governors of the states in which they work.

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels $95,000 /yr

The findings, from a Congressional Research Service report requested by Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, were released at a time when public workers’ salaries and benefits are under scrutiny across the country as governments try to streamline.

CRS reviewed 2009 salary figures, the most recent available, and found 77,057 employees who earned more in annual pay than their respective governors. Of those workers, 18,351 were doctors — the highest percentage. The second-highest total was for 5,170 air traffic controllers — likely both front-line controllers and their supervisors.

In Maryland, 7,283 federal employees — about 7 percent of all full-time federal employees in the state — earned more than Gov. Martin O’Malley’s $150,000 salary. Maryland was topped by Colorado, which in 2009 had 10,875 employees who made more than the $90,000 salary of the governor, Bill Ritter.

“Across America, governors are being asked to do more with less, often at lower pay than federal employees in their states. The pay gap between governors and federal employees should prompt Congress to take a closer look at federal salaries,” Mr. Coburn said. “With our debt and deficits spiraling out of control, now is the time to ask agencies — not just governors — to do more with less.”

The Federal Government Rabbit Police

I wish I was kidding. The next time the government wants to raise your taxes, here is just one more place where a budget cut is in order.

Via Big Government.com:

What happens when your photo is taken for the newspaper with your fluffy little bunny rabbit? Great publicity, right? Well, not if a U.S Department of Agriculture agent buys a copy of that paper! Enter the Rabbit Police!

Yes, you read correctly, the RABBIT POLICE, and the above story is how my buddy Gary Maurer in Hilton Head Island, S.C., was “busted” in the summer of 2006!

Gary is a full-time performer working heavily during the tourist season at numerous resort areas and tourist attractions on the island. One day, the local newspaper showed up at the show and took some photos to accompany a short blurb about the tourist area. The photo that ran included one of Gary’s beautiful Angora Rabbits.

Imagine Gary’s surprise when, a couple of weeks later, a field inspector from the USDA contacted him explaining that he needed to have a license to use the rabbits in his show. He was so surprised, in fact, that he though it was a joke! He was quickly informed it was indeed no joke.

They made arrangements for the inspector to make the three-hour trek from Columbia, S.C., to Hilton Head and Gary went through the process to become licensed.

More (you just cannot make this stuff up):

Just a few weeks ago, Mark called and asked me to write this as an article rather than a post on the board, because he’d heard of yet another instance of the Rabbit Police striking in another state! He put me onto the trail of Brad Machette, one of the busiest fair and festival workers on the East Coast. Before I had a chance to call Brad to interview him, Mark called back and said, “You’ve got to talk to Marty Hahne of Dazzling Magic, too. He has an incredible story.” Since I have so much free time, I called both of them.

First, Brad’s bust: While working an agricultural fair in North Carolina, Brad discovered an issue which required local veterinarians to examine his livestock which include a rabbit and a chicken.Yes, Brad uses a chicken. We won’t get too deep in this issue other than to say if you are in North Carolina (and possibly other states) and use livestock that is handled or petted by the public (i.e. the people watching your show), you have to have a hand-washing station within sight of where you display the animals.

Brad didn’t have a hand-washing station. So, being the professional he is, Brad improvised and made what he called the “Redneck Handwashing Station.” He even called it that in his show.

The regulation required Brad to actually stop his show at the “point of petting” for he and the audience member to go over to the Redneck Handwashing Station to wash their hands. This improvised sanitation facility consisted of a few bales of hay, a longneck garden sprayer, a garden hose, a plastic container, soap and paper towels. Before you ask, no, hand sanitizer is not an acceptable substitute.

After Brad thought he’d satisfied all the regulations, along came the RP (Rabbit Police), N.C. Division!

They informed Brad of the law and told him they could have fined him on the spot for not having a license, even if he didn’t know about it. I’d guess that comes down to the “ignorance of the law is no excuse” clause. As I understand the law, you cannot use your rabbit legally even after you’ve applied for the license until you actually receive the documents, which have to be with you at all times.

Fortunately for Brad, they inspected and licensed him “on the spot” and gave him his license number even though he didn’t physically have his license. Interestingly enough, Brad was told his rabbit had to have at least as much off stage time as it did on stage time. Now THAT’S funny. Apparently, there is a rabbit union out there as well!

Marty’s story dates back to the summer of 2005 and has some really interesting moments in it. If you know Marty, you realize he has a very lively sense of humor. Keep that in mind as we proceed.

Marty was busted at a library show. He was working a library system he’d never worked before. He was all set up for his show, rabbit loaded and just about ready to start. Suddenly, the librarian came to him and said, “Marty, I need to see you in my office immediately” with a look of dread in her eyes. Marty couldn’t possibly imagine what was wrong.

Once they got in to her office, she informed him that there was an inspector from the USDA in the audience and that she would give him trouble about his rabbit. Marty, being quick on his feet, replied, “What rabbit?” “Exactly,” said the librarian, “Let’s hide him in my office until she leaves!” Sounded like a good plan.

Marty does the show, the whole thing, while scoping out the audience trying to figure out which person was the inspector. Then he spotted her. A burly-looking lady wearing boots, jeans and a denim shirt. He smoothly omitted the rabbit routine, and the show went fine. Afterwards, several moms were asking about his shows for schools, birthday parties, etc. Then, suddenly, the conversation was halted by a badge being shoved into the mix.

“I’m with the USDA, and I need to see the permit for your rabbit,” she said.

“There wasn’t a rabbit in the show,” Marty replied.

“I know, but there’s a rabbit with you in this photo from the show yesterday!” she countered. I forgot to mention that this was Marty’s second day of shows for this system.

Marty was able to put her off until she could come to his home for a proper inspection. Figuring he’d appeased the inspector, he planned on using his rabbit for the remainder of the shows. Upon getting to the second show that day, however, the librarian told him that she’d heard of the problems his rabbit had caused. Word traveled fast thanks to email! Every other librarian in the system — and even the entire county — had heard about the “problem” Marty’s rabbit had caused.

Finally, it was time for the inspection at the Hahne’s home. Marty decided to ask some questions.

“My friend has a snake,” he said. The inspector quickly told him they don’t regulate snakes.

“No,” Marty said, “I mean he feeds his snake rabbits. He breaks their necks and drops them in the cage for the snake’s food. Does he have to have a permit for that?” Again, she told him there’s no regulation for that.

“So I could break my rabbit’s neck and feed him to my friend’s snake and I wouldn’t need a license?” Marty asked.

“Correct,” she said, “But you need a license to use him in your magic show.”

Gabby Giffords & Mark Kelly: If Loughner received treatment, this probably never would have happened

Truer words could not be spoken.

gabby giffords
Cong. Giffords

Above is a photo of Congressman Giffords from her recent interview. She looks as lovely as ever. What a remarkable recovery she has had and indications are that she will continue to improve.

Everyone knows her story, but the key part of this story which consistently goes under reported is just how preventable the shooting was.

In short the college administration, members of the faculty, as the campus police knew Loughner was schizophrenic, or at least had serious mental issues severely impacting his ability to perceive reality correctly. The local sheriff’s department also knew it. Loughner’s mother is a supervisor in the county parks department and there have been reports that she used her contacts in county government to help keep Loughner out of serious trouble.

The State of Arizona has a toll free line that can be issued to have someone forcibly evaluated so that they are not a danger to themselves and others. The campus police, the sheriff’s department, parents, teachers etc could have called that number as there is no way (judging by police reports) that Loughner could have passed such an exam. One single examination saying he was unfit and properly reported would have prevented Loughner from being able to buy any kind of gun, but all the laws in the world do no good when the people on the ground do not do their duty. That may seem like a harsh indictment, but the trial will likely reveal the numerous contacts Loughner had with police agencies while he was having a psychiatric episode.

For the schizophrenic the senses do not perceive reality correctly and the cognitive skill center to the brain is compromised. While you are I or even a teenager could examine a modestly complex problem and easily come up with the same solution, the schizophrenic would come up with a solution that is beyond irrational and believe it as surely as 2+2=4. This is not easy for someone who has no experience in dealing with the mentally ill to grasp, but in short it is likely that Loughner did what he did because in his own very ill mind reason demanded it.

ABC:

The man arrested at the shooting, Jared Loughner has pleaded not guilty to 49 charges stemming from the Jan. 8 shooting. He’s being forcibly medicated with psychotropic drugs at a Missouri prison in an effort to make him mentally competent to stand trial.

In Monday’s broadcast, Giffords and Kelly both expressed their concern that Loughner did not get the help he needed.

“If he had received some treatment, this probably never would have happened,” Kelly said.

Carrie Fisher: Ted Kennedy asked me to have sex with Chris Dodd

Where is the outrage? Oh that’s right. I keep forgetting that Herman Cain is a Republican black man so in the eyes of the elite media that makes this double standard OK.

Carrie Fisher
Carrie Fisher

ABC News:

Chris Dodd
Chris Dodd

On a 1985 Washington, D.C., dinner with her date, the then single former Sen. Chris Dodd, and dining companion, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy:

“So, having recently graduated completely healed and normal from my first stint in a rehab, and appearing in an almost perfectly respectable piece of work, I found myself driving from Baltimore to Washington, D.C., to have dinner with Chris Dodd, this senator who I knew virtually nothing about. Nor did Senator Dodd — like most people, then, now and always — have any idea who I was in the wide, wide world beyond this cute little actress who’d played Princess Leia.”

“Suddenly, Senator Kennedy, seated directly across from me, looked at me with his alert, aristocratic eyes and asked me a most surprising question. ‘So,’ he said, clearly amused, ‘do you think you’ll be having sex with Chris at the end of your date?’ … To my left, Chris Dodd looked at me with an unusual grin hanging on his very flushed face.”

Her reply: “‘Funnily enough, I won’t be having sex with Chris tonight,’ I said, my face composed and calm. ‘No, that probably won’t happen.’ People blinked. ‘Thanks for asking, though.'”

His retort: “‘Would you have sex with Chris in a hot tub?’ Senator Kennedy asked me, perhaps as a way to say good night? ‘I’m no good in water,’ I told him.”