Chicago mayor and former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel repeatedly claimed he had no memory of the Obama administration’s controversial $535 million loan to failed solar company Solyndra, but White House emails released Thursday say it was Emanuel’s idea for the administration to tout the doomed firm.
In a batch of White House emails released in a report on Solyndra by the House Energy and Commerce Committee Thursday, White House aide Aditya Kumar wrote to Jacob Levine of the Office of Energy and Climate Change: “Feels like Rahm wants this too (barring any concerns) — POTUS involvement was Rahm’s idea.”
However, speaking to Chicago radio station WLS 890AM at a news conference in September, 2011, Emanuel saidhe did not remember anything about the failed investment loan by the Department of Energy, which critics say was fast-tracked to fit the White House’s political agenda.
“Ya know, I’m focusing on a major announcement today for the City Of Chicago,” Emanuel said. “I don’t actually remember that or know about it.”
Four weeks later, Emanuel again claimed he did not remember anything about the Solyndra loan.
Earlier emails revealed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee hinted at Emanuel’s involvement.
An assistant to Emanuel wrote on Aug. 31, 2009, to the Office of Management and Budget about the administration’s upcoming Solyndra announcement, and asked whether “there is anything we can help speed along on OMB side.”
The director of the OMB at the time was Jack Lew, now White House Chief of Staff. The Washington Postreported Thursday that Lew allowed the Solyndra loan to be restructured despite warnings from his staff.
Let me be CLEAR! This issue is not about gays, it is about freedom. The “gay” issue is just the crutch being used today to disguise an attack on capitalism and freedom. Next time it will be some other crutch, but the attack will be the same. The gay people on my friends list support capitalism and freedom as well as anyone can and in that cause they have my support!
No matter the charge when the left cries wolf:
GAYS! (insert leftist cause here – this time it is let politicians punish freedom of religion)…
RIGHTS FOR WOMEN! (government forces the church and all private enterprises to pay for your birth control)…
RACE! (let government regulate all sorts of things that violate property rights)…
DISABLED VETS! (let government micromanage all sorts of aspects to private business including how high your mirrors are and how the steps to your door are built) …
ENVIRONMENT! (allow government to regulate all forms of production and virtually take over the energy industry picking winners and losers)…
DRUG GANGS! (Efforts to take away guns specifically from the law abiding – LINK)….
GLOBAL COOLING! (Solution is centralized control of the economy, the expansion of the state and abandoning of limited government and capitalism)…
GLOBAL WARMING! (Solution is centralized control of the economy, the expansion of the state and abandoning of limited government and capitalism)…
The waving left hand is the wedge issue, the right hand is doing what they want to accomplish. This is the modus operandi of the far left. The headline from the Huffington Post below is merely an example of this truth”
An association of black church leaders has come out against the attempt to redefine marriage and has spoken out against the Democrat Party leadership. You will notice that the so called “gay groups” have nothing to say about it. Why? Because the leadership of groups such as GLAAD could give a rip about gays and are functioning as a leftist radical group of pure ideology, much like the NAACP whose leadership constantly acts against the interests of inner city black families to support teachers unions and a far left political agenda. If this is about principle why aren’t these same “gay advocacy groups” doing “kiss off” protests at black inner city churches? [Answer – because it could chase away votes from Democrats].
Please enjoy this slideshow from Chick-Fil-A at South Bend and Mishawaka, Indiana
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Radicalized homosexual groups problem is not that they are homosexual, that is just the wedge issue they are using as a distraction, the problem with them is that they are radicalized leftist groups that use the claim that they speak for homosexuals as just another vehicle to attack capitalism and their pro-capitalist political enemies which is their true objective.
The case of MN Forward is another example of this truth – “radicalized homosexual activists” called MN Forward a hate group using all the same rhetoric. MN Forward is a group that supports business in Minnesota, their “crime” is that they gave a small donation to a Republican candidate who supports small business and happens to support traditional marriage. MN Forward is a small group that few had heard of that has no stake in the culture war, but they are effective at lobbying state government in Minnesota in preserving an free economic environment that is favorable for creating wealth and jobs. The average voter didn’t know that MN Forward even existed.
When people act on principle they have no need to lie and in fact have a vested interest in telling the truth to support their cause. GLAAD had this to say about actor Kirk Cameron:
“Saying that gay people are ‘detrimental to civilization’ might be ‘loving’ in Kirk Cameron’s mind, but it’s gay youth and victims of bullying who truly suffer from adults like Cameron who espouse these ideas. Cameron used his platform to attack gay Americans and is now attempting to play victim in an effort to sell his upcoming movie. That Cameron would risk the health and safety of young people in order to do so speaks for itself.
There is one problem, Cameron did not say that. Actually there are two problems, GLAAD changed what Cameron said, and then used the false accusation to paint him as an accessory to violence. GLAAD is making a bogus case that Cameron engaged in some kind of crime, or at least what should be considered a crime. By tying Cameron to violence falsely they are inciting others to do violence to him.
Radicalized leftist groups such as GLAAD falsely accuse the political enemies of the left of being tied to violence, and are, in turn trying to incite others to do violence against them, in this case Christians. It is the worst form of bigotry imaginable. The leadership of GLAAD does this because Christians are more likely to vote for free market Republican candidates and as we pointed out above, you won’t see GLAAD attacking associations of black churches who oppose gay marriage. Why? Because they tend to vote for Democrats who oppose free markets and favor government control of the economy. Such leftist groups are not even the slightest bit interested in protecting the freedom of religion, conscience, speech and association of those with whom they disagree.
While NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lashed out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme.
In a story ignored by the national media, in April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee.
Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing.
“This crime cuts against the fabric of our free society,” Judge Webster said.
Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross.
The GOP needs to get the message out that the tax the Democrats wish to raise does not have much impact on millionaires and billionaires, because most of their income is defined as “unearned”; rather it will impact the small businesses who actually employ people the most.
President Barack Obama blamed Republicans on Saturday for a stalemate that could increase taxes on Americans next year while a leading Senate Republican cast Obama and his Democratic Party as obstructionists who want to place the tax burden on businesses during an economic slowdown.
In his weekly radio and online address, Obama pressed the Republican-controlled House to extend Bush-era tax cuts for households making $250,000 or less while letting lower rates on wealthier taxpayers expire and go up. The Democratic-controlled Senate narrowly passed such a measure earlier in the week, but the House is not expected to follow suit.
“Instead of doing what’s right for middle-class families and small-business owners, Republicans in Congress are holding these tax cuts hostage until we extend tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans,” Obama said.
Responding on behalf of the congressional GOP, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said Obama’s plan would do more harm to the economy and criticized him with almost identical language. He called for extending current tax rates for all taxpayers and spending 2013 overhauling and simplifying the tax code.
“Raising taxes as our economy continues to struggle is not a solution, and the majority of Americans and businesses understand that,” Hatch said. “The president and his Washington allies need to stop holding America’s economy hostage in order to raise taxes on those trying to lead our economic recovery.”
Related: Obama Advisor Valerie Jerrett’s Cook County Luxury Towers Assessed at 25% of Value – LINK
by Chuck Norton
Who gets damaged when journalists pining for access allow themselves to be the tools of political corruption?
Access is king for journalists and all too often journalists will do most anything to secure it. Just as CNN was forced to admit that it not only whitewashed the atrocities of Iraqi regime, but it also published and disseminated Saddam Hussien’s propaganda for over a decade in exchange for access. Such actions are not without consequences. The suffering associated with such corruption is very real.
Yesterday the Chicago Sun Times reported that, “two analysts working for Cook County’s tax appeals board were arrested and charged Wednesday with accepting a $1,500 bribe in exchange for greasing the wheels to slash property taxes to the tune of $14,000 on three properties”. According to federal prosecutors the two employees for the Chicago Board of Review (BOR), “discussed scheming with others to make property tax reductions in exchange for bribes” and “The two men worked for Cook County Board of Review Commissioner Larry Rogers Jr. when the bribe was allegedly paid in 2008 …”.
Dane Placko, A MyFox Chicago Reporter Who Traded In His Ethics For Access
Enter MyFox Chicago News reporter Dane Placko. Larry Rogers at the Chicago Board of Review (BOR) hands Placko a ready made, seemingly picture perfect scandal accusation. Members of the BOR accuse former employee Victor Santana of using his access to the BOR office and his former employee relationship with BOR member and Cook County Democratic Chairman Joe Berrios to peddle influence for the purpose of getting tax appeals greased for friends of the Democratic Party. The BOR, using Placko, very publicly assails Santana, singles him out and bans him from the BOR office premises; thus destroying his tax consulting business.
Placko even goes so far as to include the spin that Santana must have acted inappropriately because only attorneys are allowed to represent clients in front of the BOR and Santana is not an attorney; thus implying that Santana is somehow acting illegally. Of course this leaves out the fact that many such tax appeals are done without an attorney by private citizens acting on their own behalf. Santana, along with other tax consultants, merely aid their clients up to the point of the actual hearing in front of the BOR. Similarly, when one goes to a local H&R Block to have taxes prepared it is expected that each person in the office is not a tax attorney, but merely a trained consultant. But when a story is just too juicy to check, critical truths end up unreported.
Members of the BOR were aware that they were under investigation, so in order to present themselves as crusaders for justice, they invent the allegation against Victor Santana, who was a safe pick because he never made campaign donations to Rogers, Berrios, or his cronies. Santana was also friends with former Illinois 56th District Representative Paul Froehlich. Froehlich, who was an active member of the Republican Party, wished to continue to serve after his district had been redrawn to be a majority Democratic district, switched parties. Believing that he could represent constituents better than a hand picked machine candidate Froehlich defeated was victorious in the Democratic primary and went on to with the election. Froehlich became a targeted man, elements in the GOP wanted revenge and the Democratic machine didn’t trust him.
[See the RICO filing against the Chicago BOR HERE. The RICO complaint charges the Commissioners on the Board of Tax Appeals and their staff with extortion and bribery. It states that the Commissioners, powerful members of the Cook County Democratic Party and the Machine, grant tax reductions based upon the campaign contributions made by property tax law firms and lawyers who practice before the Board of Review. Institutionalizing “bribery and quid pro quo as the mandatory means for the adjudication of tax appeals” in Chicago.
I would like to see the property tax appeal success rate for Micheal Madigan’s property tax law firm that donates to the campaigns of all elected members of the BOR. Shall we ask Dane Placko to report it? In either case, the civil RICO filing is just the beginning as now it is known that the state and federal authorities have been investigating since 2008 – Political Arena Editor]
The Berrios machine now had their way to kill three birds with one stone and MyFox Chicago reporter Dane Placko, reveling in his access, became their willing tool. How?
It is no secret that after the mortgage bubble collapsed that millions of Illinois residents and businesses were left with tax assessments that were based on highly inflated values that required adjustment. Froehlich, having formerly been a township assessor, reached out to these constituents to help them get their tax assessments brought in line with post collapse market values as allowed by law, in some cases even going door to door. In short, Froehlich was doing what any concerned representative would do for his constituents.
Of course, since there were thousands of people that needed to have their assessments adjusted after the collapse, some of Froehlich’s constituents were willing to have a sign placed in their yard and some were campaign contributors.
Along comes Dane Placko to paint Froehlich as a corrupt politician who was trading tax assessments quid pro quo’s for donations and/or permission to place yard signs. It gets even better for the Berrios machine, because after Placko’s irresponsible reporting the BOR used that as an excuse to reverse the previously approved post mortgage collapse tax adjustments for Froehlich campaign contributors such as Sharad and Harish Dani who own a hotel in Schaumburg.
Perfect.
Victor Santana’s livelihood is destroyed because he wouldn’t pay to play, Froehlich’s career in politics is destroyed because he made the mistake of putting his constituents ahead of the political machines, those who would donate to candidates not entrenched in the machine are made an example of with inflated property tax bills, the corrupt party bosses at BOR appear as those who helped “root out this corruption”, and the icing on the cake; all of the genuine victims of this political corruption had their reputations trashed on MyFox Chicago courtesy of Dane Placko.
Paul Froehlich, A Man Falsely Accused
Placko’s “proof” – 94% of property tax adjustment Froehlich assisted with were approved, which is higher than the “traditional” number of approvals, but when have property values precipitously fallen for the length of time we are experiencing? Have not the number of property tax appeals and approvals gone up since the mortgage collapse? Is there anything traditional about this mortgage crisis?
Some of those whose reputations were trashed by Dane Placko such as Sharad and Harish Dani sued MyFox Chicago claiming defamation and false light regarding the stories that ran on MyFox Chicago News and subsequently by the blog Illinois Review, alleging the statements published and posted on the website were false and defamatory, and assumed criminal wrongdoing, but the plaintiffs will have to appeal all the way to federal court because a state law called the Illinois Citizen Participation Act is written in such a way that it gives news organizations near absolute libel immunity which stands at odds with Supreme Court precedent on libel law. How convenient. In short, the political machine in exchange for access, can use feed stories to reporters destroying the reputations of anyone they like until the law is challenged in federal court; an expensive proposition. The Illinois Citizen Participation Act is sold on the basis that it protects the little guy who speaks out, in practice it creates a David & Goliath scenario that favors media corporations and the state.
Is it any surprise that Dane Placko was the only reporter invited to a virtually closed hearing of the BOR on this matter? Attorney R. Tamara deSilva, who is representing some of the victims of this travesty tells us that Dane Placko demanded an exclusive interview with her clients or he would use (read edit in) the worst parts of his footage on the air just as he did in the following video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Nrq_nuDdc8] trashing Paul Froehlich. DeSilva’s answer to Placko’s threat is not suitable for publication.
Now that the cat is out of the bag and there are federal charges against employees of the BOR where is Dane Placko with a carefully edited video and big expose? Where is MyFox Chicago? All they have isthis automated line story from the Associated Press on their web site with no local followup [and I head to use a search tool to find it].
No charges were ever filed against former Rep. Froehlich and the investigation resulted in no wrongdoing on his part. Froehlich said in a letter to Dane Placko:
Yet I still have the perpetual stigma of “under criminal investigation.” As the public record now stands, my obituary some day will repeat he “under investigation” accusation. It doesn’t matter that I’ve never been officially charged, much less indicted, I’m still guilty in the minds of Fox Chicago News viewers who translate repeated reports of “under criminal investigation” into “another crooked Illinois politician.” In other words, I get pretty much the same stigma as if I had been indicted and convicted — but without the due process.
When the news media public identifies someone as the target of criminal investigation, nothing ever comes of it, and there’s some doubt he ever was the target, who does he see to get his reputation back? Do journalists have any professional responsibility to update, if not to correct, the record? Or does the person whose reputation was sullied simply have to live with an indelible blot that follows him to the grave while the reporter keeps his award?
In a statement forwarded to us from Paul Froehlich:
I don’t agree with much that Rush Limbaugh has to say. I ran across this quote that hit home:
“The drive-by media. It’s like a drive-by shooter except the microphones are the guns, and they drive into groups of people, they report a bunch of totally wrong libelous stuff about people. Sometimes people get really harmed. They go out and try to destroy people’s careers.”
Were truer words ever spoken?
UPDATE – R. Tamara deSilva, attorney for the plaintiffs, will be in oral arguments in federal court this Tuesday July 24, 2012. Please examine the press release at the link below.
UPDATE II– Interesting link shows how the machine uses access as a weapon: Washington Times reporter files battery charges against Rahm Emmanuel’s staff – LINK
The reason for this is clear, to pressure families of those considering running as Republicans to decide against it. What the elite media did to Sarah Palin and her children is the main reason why Indiana Governor Mitch Daniel’s family forbade him from running for higher office.
While most serious campaigns on both sides use campaign trackers — staffers whose job is to record on video every public appearance and statement by an opponent — House Democrats are taking it to another level. They’re now recording video of the homes of GOP congressmen and candidates and posting the raw footage on the Internet for all to see.
That ratcheting up of the video surveillance game is unnerving Republicans who insist that even by political standards, it’s a gross invasion of privacy. Worse, they say, it creates a safety risk for members of Congress and their families at a time when they are already on edge after a deranged gunman shot former Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords 18 months ago.
Wisconsin GOP Rep. Reid Ribble, who said he’s also been followed by a cameraman when shopping for groceries, said the home videos cross a line.
“I feel it’s totally inappropriate,” said Ribble, a freshman facing a competitive race for reelection. “It was disturbing to me that they would put that online. I don’t understand any political benefit that can be achieved with that.”
In Ribble’s case, a clip of his northeastern Wisconsin home appeared online June 18. The soundless video — which lasts 38 seconds — is taken from a car sitting just outside the house. The shot pans across the large home, showing it from several different angles.
DeaNa Ribble, the congressman’s wife, said it is deeply unsettling.
“I’m more creeped out about this than Reid is, just because I’m home more,” she said. “If they so much as put a foot on private property, I will be the first person to call the police.”
In light of the fact that five pinheads on the Supreme Court has said that government can compel you to do or buy virtually anything and call it a tax and government is now shutting down kid’s lemonade stands and church picnics for not having “proper food licensing”; this picture hits close to home.
And some people are still foolish enough to believe that adding such a bureaucratic overhead will eventually lower healthcare costs and premiums, of course the CBO and the Medicare Actuary have already said that ObamaCare makes the problem worse.
With the Supreme Court giving President Obama’s new health care law a green light, federal and state officials are turning to implementation of the law — a lengthy and massive undertaking still in its early stages, but already costing money and expanding the government.
The Health and Human Services Department “was given a billion dollars implementation money,” Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg of Montana said. “That money is gone already on additional bureaucrats and IT programs, computerization for the implementation.”
“Oh boy,” Stan Dorn of the Urban Institute said. “HHS has a huge amount of work to do and the states do, too. There will be new health insurance marketplaces in every state in the country, places you can go online, compare health plans.”
The IRS, Health and Human Services and many other agencies will now write thousands of pages of regulations — an effort well under way:
“There’s already 13,000 pages of regulations, and they’re not even done yet,” Rehberg said.
“It’s a delegation of extensive authority from Congress to the Department of Health and Human Services and a lot of boards and commissions and bureaus throughout the bureaucracy,” Matt Spalding of the Heritage Foundation said. “We counted about 180 or so.”
There has been much focus on the mandate that all Americans obtain health insurance, but analysts say that’s just a small part of the law — covering only a few pages out of the law’s 2700.
“The fact of the matter is the mandate is about two percent of the whole piece of the legislation,” Spalding said. “It’s a minor part.”
Much bigger than the mandate itself are the insurance exchanges that will administer $681 billion in subsidies over 10 years, which will require a lot of new federal workers at the IRS and health department.
“They are asking for several hundred new employees,” Dorn said. “You have rules you need to write and you need lawyers, so there are lots of things you need to do when you are standing up a new enterprise.”
For some, though, the bottom line is clear and troubling: The federal government is about to assume massive new powers.
According to James Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, federal powers will include designing insurance plans, telling people where they can go for coverage and how much insurers are allowed to charge.
“Really, how doctors and hospitals are supposed to practice medicine,” he said.
Philip Morris does not like competition, even if it is small time boutique competition that really is no competition at all. In this case a big business and its lobbyists say “JUMP!” in an effort to stick it to a tiny small time competitor and the Congress and the President ask Philip-Morris “How high?” Don’t you wish that your Member of Congress was this responsive to you and our problems? This is why we need new leadership in BOTH parties. Prepare to be made ill by what you are about to read.
They say it is about tax revenues, suuuure, and Philip Morris paid big money to buy off politicians and engage in a massive lobbying effort because, you know, they just can’t stand to see the government maybe miss out on the statistically insignificant lower taxes from roll your own boutique tobacco? Gimme a break. What this is about is a big wealthy company snuffing out a tiny boutique one because the tiny one cannot afford a huge lobbying effort. Anyone who claims that “it’s about taxes” is insulting your intelligence.
There should be a concerted effort to see to it that Boehner is not re-elected Speaker.
Roll-your-own cigarette operations to be snuffed out.
A tiny amendment buried in the federal transportation bill to be signed today by President Barack Obama will put operators of roll-your-own cigarette operations in Las Vegas and nationwide out of business at midnight.
Robert Weissen, with his brothers and other partners, own nine Sin City Cigarette Factory locations in Southern Nevada, including six in Las Vegas, and one in Hawaii. He said when the bill is signed their only choice is to turn off their 20 RYO Filling Station machines and lay off more than 40 employees.
“We’ll stay open for about another week to sell tubes and tobacco just to get through our inventory, but without the use of the RYO machines, we won’t be staying open,” he said.
The machines are used by customers who buy loose tobacco and paper tubes from the shop and then turn out a carton of finished cigarettes in as little as 10 minutes, often varying the blend to suit their taste. Savings are substantial – at $23 per carton, half the cost of a name-brand smoke – in part because loose tobacco is taxed at a lower rate.
“These cigarettes are different because there are benefits in saving money and in how they make you feel,” said Amy Hinds, a partner who operates the Sin City Cigarette Factory at Craig and Decatur.
“These cigarettes don’t have any of the chemicals in them, and the papers are chemical-free, unlike the cartons people buy from Philip Morris.”
But a few paragraphs added to the transportation bill changed the definition of a cigarette manufacturer to cover thousands of roll-your-own operations nationwide. The move, backed by major tobacco companies, is aimed at boosting tax revenues.
Faced with regulation costs that could run to hundreds of thousands of dollars, RYO machine owners nationwide are shutting down more than 1,000 of the $36,000 machines.
“I feel it’s kind of shaky,” Wiessen said. “The man who pushed for this bill is Sen. (Max) Baucus from Montana, and he received donations from Altria, a parent company of Philip Morris. Interestingly enough, there are also no RYO machines in the state of Montana. It really makes me question the morals and values of our elected speakers.”
Sierra Bawden, a single mom with two kids who started rolling her own smokes at Hind’s shop three months ago, said cost is only one factor.
“It saves me time and money, and in the end I feel better because I don’t get all of the chemicals that the other cigarettes have,” Bawden said. “With the brand-name cigarettes, we pay for the chemicals and the name, and I don’t want any of that, so I don’t even know what I’ll do when the shop closes down.”
Lawmakers are working to block an unprecedented power grab by the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Water Act (CWA) and control land alongside ditches, gullies and other ephemeral spots by claiming the sources are part of navigable waterways.
These temporary water sources are often created by rain or snowmelt, and would make it harder for private property owners to build in their own backyards, grow crops, raise livestock and conduct other activities on their own land, lawmakers say.
“Never in the history of the CWA has federal regulation defined ditches and other upland features as ‘waters of the United States,’” said Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), the ranking committee member, and Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
“This is without a doubt an expansion of federal jurisdiction,” the lawmakers said in a May 31 letter to House colleagues.
The unusual alliance of the powerful House Republicans and Democrat to jointly sponsor legislation to overturn the new guidelines signals a willingness on Capitol Hill to rein in the formidable agency.
“The Obama administration is doing everything in its power to increase costs and regulatory burdens for American businesses, farmers and individual property owners,” Mica said in a statement to Human Events. “This federal jurisdiction grab has been opposed by Congress for years, and now the administration and its agencies are ignoring law and rulemaking procedures in order to tighten their regulatory grip over every water body in the country.”
“But this administration needs to realize it is not above the law,” Mica said.
The House measure carries 64 Republican and Democratic cosponsors and was passed in committee last week. A companion piece of legislation is already gathering steam in the Senate and is cosponsored by 26 Republicans.
“President Obama’s EPA continues to act as if it is above the law. It is using this overreaching guidance to pre-empt state and local governments, farmers and ranchers, small business owners and homeowners from making local land and water use decisions,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said in announcing their measure in March. “Our bill will stop this unprecedented Washington power grab and restore Americans’ property rights.”
“It’s time to get EPA lawyers out of Americans’ backyards,” Barrasso said.
President Obama’s Food and Drug Administration has caused “a public health crisis” — a prescription drug shortage over the past two years — by increasing the number of threats issued to raid and close drug manufacturing plants, according to House investigators.
“This shortage appears to be a direct result of over-aggressive and excessive regulatory action,” House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said in a statement. “These drugs can save lives and keep people who need them living healthy lives. The FDA is failing to ensure the availability of quality products.”
President Obama signed an executive order last year to help the FDA anticipate drug shortages while knocking Congress for failing to pass his preferred legislation on the issue. “Congress has been trying since February to do something about this,” Obama said in November. “It has not yet been able to get it done . . . we can’t wait.”
The committee report concluded that a significant portion of the drug shortage is a problem of the Obama administration’s making. “Among shuttered manufacturing lines that occurred over the previous two years, the committee’s review did not find any instances where the shutdown was associated with reports of drugs harming customers,” the report says, noting a 30 percent drop in the manufacture of certain prescription drugs at the largest manufacturers in the country.
Instead, the drug shortage crisis began in 2010 after the FDA began sending letters to companies found to be in violation of a given rule, in which the company was warned that “failure to promptly correct these violations may result in legal action without further notice including, without limitation, seizure and injunction.”
The FDA sent just 474 such letters in 2009, but that number spiked to 1720 in 2011. “A common sense approach to regulations must be restored at the FDA,” the committee report advised, calling for more targeted measures to induce company compliance with regulations. “Agency protocols should be revised so that the agency is required to consider the implications of its actions on the nation’s supply of critical drugs.”
There has been an alarming rise in the number of times governments attempted to censor the internet in last six months, according to a report from Google.
Since the search engine last published its bi-annual transparency report, it said it had seen a troubling increase in requests to remove political content. Many of these requests came from western democracies not typically associated with censorship.
It said Spanish regulators asked Google to remove 270 links to blogs and newspaper articles critical of public figures. It did not comply. In Poland, it was asked to remove an article critical of the Polish agency for enterprise development and eight other results that linked to the article. Again, the company did not comply.
Google was asked by Canadian officials to remove a YouTube video of a citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet. It refused.
Thai authorities asked Google to remove 149 YouTube videos for allegedly insulting the monarchy, a violation of Thailand’s lèse-majesté law. The company complied with 70% of the requests.
Pakistan asked Google to remove six YouTube videos that satirised its army and senior politicians. Google refused.
UK police asked the company to remove five YouTube accounts for allegedly promoting terrorism. Google agreed. In the US most requests related to alleged harassment of people on YouTube. The authorities asked for 187 pieces to be removed. Google complied with 42% of them.
In a blog post, Dorothy Chou, Google’s senior policy analyst, wrote: “Unfortunately, what we’ve seen over the past couple years has been troubling, and today is no different. When we started releasing this data, in 2010, we noticed that government agencies from different countries would sometimes ask us to remove political content that our users had posted on our services. We hoped this was an aberration. But now we know it’s not.
“This is the fifth data set that we’ve released. Just like every other time, we’ve been asked to take down political speech. It’s alarming not only because free expression is at risk, but because some of these requests come from countries you might not suspect – western democracies not typically associated with censorship.”
Over the six months covered by the latest report, Google complied with an average of 65% of court orders, as opposed to 47% of more informal requests.
In an effort to punish Arizona for winning the core of the battle in the Supreme Court against the Obama Administration the administration is now going to punish Arizona, Chicago style.
The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.
Administration officials, speaking on condition they not be named, told reporters they expect to see an increase in the number of calls they get from Arizona police — but that won’t change President Obama’s decision to limit whom the government actually tries to detain and deport.
“We will not be issuing detainers on individuals unless they clearly meet our defined priorities,” one official said in a telephone briefing.
The official said that despite the increased number of calls, which presumably means more illegal immigrants being reported, the Homeland Security Department is unlikely to detain a significantly higher number of people and won’t be boosting personnel to handle the new calls.
When I was in college finishing my latest degree I wrote a series of articles on the mortgage crisis (mid 2008). This is a good summary of this section of the scandal and what led to the collapse. This is by no means the whole story but as I said, a good summary of this layer of what gave us this mess.
The Obama Record: The Obama camp’s running a new ad reminding African-Americans of all he’s done for them as they weather an economic crisis he “inherited.” Left out is his own role in their predicament.
The press has never questioned the president about his involvement. But his fingerprints are there.
Before the crisis, Obama pushed thousands of credit-poor blacks into homes they couldn’t afford. As a civil-rights attorney, he sued banks to rubberstamp mortgages for urban residents.
Many are now in foreclosure. In fact, the lead client in one of his class-action suits has since lost her home and filed bankruptcy.
First some background: Obama focused on “housing rights” when he worked as a lawyer-activist and community organizer in South Side Chicago. His mentor — the man who placed him in his first job there — was the father of the anti-redlining movement: John McKnight. He coined the term “redlining” to describe the mapping off of minority neighborhoods from home loans.
McKnight wrote a letter for Obama that helped him get into Harvard. After he graduated, he worked for a Chicago civil-rights law firm that worked closely with McKnight’s radical Gamaliel Foundation and National People’s Action, as well as Acorn, to solicit lending-discrimination cases.
At the time, NPA and Acorn were lobbying the Clinton administration to tighten enforcement of anti-redlining laws.
They also dispatched bus loads of goons trained by Obama to the doorsteps of bankers to demand more home loans for minorities. Acorn even crashed the lobby of Citibank’s headquarters in New York and accused it of discriminating against blacks.
The pressure worked. In 1994, Clinton’s top bank regulators signed a landmark anti-redlining policy that declared traditional mortgage underwriting standards racist and mandated banks apply easier lending rules for minorities.
Also that year, Attorney General Janet Reno and her aide Eric Holder filed a mortgage discrimination case against a Washington-area bank that forced it to target minority neighborhoods for subprime loans.
Reno and Holder also encouraged civil-rights lawyers like Obama to file local lending-bias cases against banks.
The next year, Obama led a class-action suit against Citibank on behalf of several Chicago minorities who claimed they were rejected for home loans because of the color of their skin. It was one of 11 such suits filed against the financial giant in Chicago and New York in the 1990s.
As first reported in Paul Sperry’s “The Great American Bank Robbery,” the plaintiffs’ claim lacked merit. Factors other than race figured in the bank’s decision to turn them down for loans.
One of Obama’s clients had “inadequate collateral” and “an incomplete application,” while another had “delinquent credit obligations and other adverse credit history.”
Obama argued such facts miss the point: that Citibank’s neutral underwriting criteria may have adversely impacted his clients as a class of people. He demanded it turn over loan files from the entire Chicago metro area to prove it regularly engaged in a pattern of discrimination.
The court didn’t award him the files. But Citibank eventually settled, despite the weak case. Under the 1998 settlement, Citibank vowed to pay the alleged victims $1.4 million and launch a program to boost home lending to poor blacks in the metro area.
In the run-up to the crisis, Citibank underwrote thousands of shaky subprime mortgages to satisfy the court in Obama’s case. Defaults were common. When home prices collapsed, most of the loans went bust.
His lead African-American client, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who was denied a loan due to bad credit and low income, got her mortgage only to default on it years later.
She got a foreclosure notice in 2008, according to The Daily Caller website, along with many of her Chicago neighbors.
By putting them on the hook for loans they couldn’t pay, Obama did them no favors. Blacks have been hit hardest by foreclosures. But what does Obama care? The Caller reports he pocketed at least $23,000 from the Citibank case.
Today, he blames the devastating wealth drain in black communities on subprime mortgages. He says “greedy,” “predatory” lenders tricked poor minorities into paying higher fees and interest rates.
But Obama was for subprime loans before he was against them. “Subprime loans started off as a good idea,” he said as those loans began to sour in 2007.
His closest economic advisers also promoted subprime lending. Several months earlier, Chicago pal Austan Goolsbee, who later became his top economist, sang the praises of subprime loans in a New York Times column. He argued they allowed poor blacks “access to mortgages.”
One of Obama’s top bank regulators, Gary Gensler, once bragged that thanks to subprime mortgages, banks made home loans to minorities at “twice the rate” they made to other borrowers, according to “Bank Robbery.” “A subprime loan is a good option when the alternative is no access to credit,” he said years before the crisis.
Obama hasn’t learned from his mistakes.
Far from it, IBD has learned the mammoth credit watchdog agency he created (with input from NPA radicals) will dust off Clinton’s 1994 minority lending guidelines to crack down on stingy lenders. And he’s ordered Holder, now acting as his attorney general, to prosecute banks that don’t open branches in blighted urban areas.
Not only has Obama scapegoated banks for the crisis he helped cause, he’s exploited minority suffering to continue reckless policies that hurt those he claims to champion.
Florida had lots of illegals and dead people on it’s voter rolls so the state did an audit to remove the ineligible listings. Of course Obama’s Department of Social Justice ran by Eric Holder, who also isn’t enforcing federal vote fraud laws, tried to stop Florida from trying to maintain accurate voter records.
The latest nonsense from the Democrat leadership is that the Fast & Furious investigation is just retaliation for this, but the Fast & Furious investigation started a year before the vote cleanup effort.
Today a federal judge rejected a Department of Justice request to issue a temporary restraining order blocking Florida from removing non-citizens from the voter rolls and rejected DOJ’s argument that the National Voter Registration Act prohibits removal of non-citizens from the voter rolls. The court also said that permitting known non-citizens to vote would result in “irreparable harm” to eligible voters.
Florida Governor Rick Scott was pleased with the decision, which is consistent with his position that Florida has an obligation to remove non-citizens from the voter rolls.
“The court made a common-sense decision consistent with what I’ve been saying all along: that irreparable harm will result if non-citizens are allowed to vote. Today’s ruling puts the burden on the federal government to provide Florida with access to the Department of Homeland Security’s citizenship database. We know from just a small sample that an alarming number of non-citizens are on the voter rolls and many of them have illegally voted in past elections. The federal government has the power to prevent such irreparable harm from continuing, and Florida once again implores them to grant access to the SAVE database.”
Nearly a year ago, the state requested access to a citizenship database, maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, called the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, that would allow Florida to more accurately identify non-citizens who are registered to vote. To date, the federal government continues to block access, thereby preventing Florida’s efforts to ensure fair elections.
The Heritage Foundation has a piece out that explains just a sampling of the blatant violation of Separation of Powers committed by the Obama Administration.
Even though the Democrat-controlled Senate rejected the President’s cap-and-trade plan, his Environmental Protection Agency classified carbon dioxide, the compound that sustains vegetative life, as a pollutant so that it could regulate it under the Clean Air Act.
After the Employee Free Choice Act—designed to bolster labor unions’ dwindling membership rolls—was defeated by Congress, the National Labor Relations Board announced a rule that would implement “snap elections” for union representation, limiting employers’ abilities to make their case to workers and virtually guaranteeing a higher rate of unionization at the expense of workplace democracy.
After an Internet regulation proposal failed to make it through Congress, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it would regulate the Web anyway, even despite a federal court’s ruling that it had no authority to do so.
Although Congress consistently has barred the Department of Education from getting involved in curriculum matters, the Administration has offered waivers for the No Child Left Behind law in exchange for states adopting national education standards, all without congressional authorization.
Likewise, the Administration has often simply refused to enforce laws duly enacted by Congress:
Since it objects to existing federal immigration laws, the Administration has decided to apply those laws selectively and actively prevent the state (like Arizona) from enforcing those laws themselves.
Rather than push Congress to repeal federal laws against marijuana use, the Department of Justice (DOJ) simply decided it would no longer enforce those laws.
DOJ also has announced that it would stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act or defending it from legal challenge rather than seeking legislative recourse.
On Tuesday, the President invoked executive privilege to avoid handing over some 1,300 documents in an ongoing Congressional investigation. The Supreme Court has held that executive privilege cannot be invoked to shield wrongdoing. Is that what’s happening in this case? “Congress needs to get to the bottom of that question to prevent an illegal invocation of executive privilege and further abuses of power. That will require an index of the withheld documents and an explanation of why each of them is covered by executive privilege—and more,” Heritage legal scholar Todd Gaziano writes.
Earlier this year the President crossed the threshold of constitutionality when he gave “recess appointments” to four officials who were subject to Senate confirmation, even though the Senate wasn’t in recess. Gaziano wrote at the time that such appointments “would render the Senate’s advice and consent role to normal appointments almost meaningless. It is a grave constitutional wrong.”
There is no telling where such disregard may go next, but the trend is clear, and it leads further and further away from the constitutional rule of law.
This is just a few small excerpts from the speech which can be seen in it’s entirety HERE. Most people who are not engaged in such battles have no idea how almost universal the left’s contempt for free speech is from the Whit House all the way to college campuses and classrooms.
On campus the left moves to silence conservatives, libertarians, Christians and Jews every day. Many groups are set up to help put an end to such censorship such as the Student Press Law Center, The ACLJ, the Rutherford Institute, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, the Alliance Defense Fund, Campus Watch, Campus Reform, Students for Academic Freedom etc. All of them have one thing in common; more cases and complaints than they have the resources to deal with.
Senator McConnell (excerpts):
You’ve all heard about the Idaho businessman who’s become a personal target of the President for speaking out on behalf of candidates and causes the President opposes. Shortly after being publicly singled out by the President’s campaign, people were digging through his divorce records, cable television hosts were going after him on air, and bloggers were harassing his kids.
Charles and David Koch have become household names, not for the tens of thousands of people they employ, not for their generosity to charity, and not for building up one of the most successful private corporations on the planet; but because of their forceful and unapologetic promotion and defense of capitalism.
In return for their decades of work, one of the President’s top aides exposed them to public scrutiny by insinuating that they’d done something shady on their taxes. And earlier this year, the President’s own campaign manager sent a mass email to the campaign’s supporters, notifying them of a Koch-backed event, presumably to incite just the kind of mob that showed up.
The results have been predictable. The Koch brothers, along with Koch employees, have had their lives threatened, received hundreds of obscenity-laced hate messages, and been harassed by left-wing groups. One e-mail carried a typical message. It read: “Choose your expiration date.”
If the President of the United States opposed these kinds of tactics, all he’d have to do is condemn them. Instead, he’s joined the effort.
President Obama has publicly accused the Kochs of being part of a, quote, “corporate takeover of our Democracy,” whatever that means. And not only did his campaign publish a list of eight private citizens it regards as enemies — an actual old-school enemies list — it recently doubled down on the effort when some began to call these thuggish tactics into question.
None of this should be surprising for a former community organizer who told a radio audience shortly before the 2010 mid-term election that Latino voters should vote with the idea of punishing their enemies and rewarding their friends. But all of it should be surprising to a former community organizer who happens to be President.
What’s more, the tactics I’m describing extend well beyond the campaign headquarters in Chicago. To an extent not seen since the Nixon administration, they extend deep into the administration itself.
News reports suggest that top White House officials have long participated in a weekly conference call with a left-wing organization in Washington whose stated purpose is to track conservative media voices, seize on potentially offensive content, and then use it to mount corporate intimidation campaigns aimed at driving these voices clear out of the public square.
Earlier this year, dozens of Tea Party-affiliated groups across the country learned what it was like to draw the attention of the speech police when they received a lengthy questionnaire from the IRS demanding attendance lists, meeting transcripts, and donor information. One of the group’s leaders described the situation this way: “[groups like ours] either drown … in unnecessary paper work … or you survive, and give them everything they want, only to be hung.”
~
Among others examples, Justice Thomas cites the case of a Los Angeles woman who was forced to resign from a job she’d held for 26 years managing a family-owned restaurant because protesters kept showing up at the restaurant shouting “shame on you” at customers. According to press reports, the police had to show up in riot gear one night just to quell the mob.
The woman’s supposed crime: writing a $100 check in support of California’s Prop 8.
~
Over at the White House, the President’s lawyers recently circulated a draft executive order that would have required anyone bidding for a government contract to disclose political donations, including those of affiliates and subsidiaries, officers and directors in excess of $5,000. The message of the order was clear: if you want a government contract, you better support our causes, or at least keep your mouth shut when it comes to the causes we oppose.
~
It should go without saying that the political Left has always faced an uphill climb in a country in which there are two self-identified conservatives for every self-identified liberal. America is not Western Europe. In order to succeed in this environment, liberals have generally resorted to one of the three tactics I’ve already identified: obscuring their true intent, pursuing through regulation and the courts what they can’t through legislation, or muzzling their critics.
Under the Bush Administration this program was called “Wide Receiver”, but in that program the guns were stopped at the border and the “straw man” gun runners were arrested. Under the Obama Administration the guns were allowed to go into Mexico so that the administration could say we needed new gun laws to stop it.
Hillary Clinton early on tried to make an issue out of American guns going to drug cartels, but when the media and others investigated only a small percentage of American guns were being smuggled to the cartels; the vast majority of guns that cartels use are from the Mexican military, Colombian FARC communist rebels, etc.
So, according to whistle blowers in the ATF and recovered documents the administration sought to make the issue about American guns and the result was over 200 Mexicans killed and an American border agent gunned down.
TheRightScoop.com gets credit for keeping this piece of video archived.
To those of us who have been paying attention to the antics of the EPA under this administration this is no surprise. By the rational currently being used by the EPA they could ban all cars and justify it by saying that if cars put just one life at risk they must be strictly regulated or banned. The same can be said of anything. Of course, just like health care and other regs, Obama donors get a waiver.
For the last three years, the Environmental Protection Agency has justified new air quality regulations — unprecedented in stringency and cost — on the assumption that even trace levels of particulate matter can cause early death.
A recent EPA report states that by 2020, the EPA’s rules “will prevent 230,000 early deaths.” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has gone so far as to testify before Congress that the new regulations would provide health benefits as valuable as a cure for cancer. If true, this is compelling. Unfortunately, such rhetoric is built on implausible assumptions, biased models, statistical manipulations and two cherry-picked studies.
Unwinding this tangled web is tedious but necessary to prevent the EPA from becoming a national economic planning agency that transforms our economy and undermines our form of democratic government, in which elected representatives — not federal technocrats — have the authority to make the country’s major policy decisions.
On Wednesday, a U.S. House subcommittee will conduct a hearing to examine the real costs and benefits of the EPA’s environmental regulations, with invited testimony from one of my former colleagues at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
As I noted in my latest report for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, “EPA’s Pretense of Science,” the EPA now justifies almost every major new air quality rule on the basis of models indicating implausibly exaggerated health risks from fine particulate matter, rarely considered a killer by physicians or toxicologists.
Extrapolating from assumptions, the EPA in 2009 decided that no risk is too low, improbable or uncertain that it is not worth responding to with regulation. With a straight face, the EPA’s leadership now maintains that there is no safe level of ambient fine particulate matter — however near to zero — at which risk of “early” death ceases. Statisticians call this analytic approach a “no threshold linear regression to zero.”
The Clean Air Act requires that national air quality standards be set at levels adequate to protect human health with a margin of safety and regardless of cost. That’s a very cautious rubric. But through the no-safe-threshold assumption, the current EPA goes further: to zero risk. This methodological change leads the EPA to the implausible finding that mortal risks increase to the extent that ambient levels of fine particulates exceed natural background levels of 1 microgram per cubic meter. The current federal standard is 15 micrograms per cubic meter.
by Ann Coulter, based on the book Negroes With Guns by civil rights hero Robert F. Williams:
Gun control laws were originally promulgated by Democrats to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. This allowed the Democratic policy of slavery to proceed with fewer bumps and, after the Civil War, allowed the Democratic Ku Klux Klan to menace and murder black Americans with little resistance.
(Contrary to what illiterates believe, the KKK was an outgrowth of the Democratic Party, with overlapping membership rolls. The Klan was to the Democrats what the American Civil Liberties Union is today: Not every Democrat is an ACLU’er, but every ACLU’er is a Democrat. Same with the Klan.)
In 1640, the very first gun control law ever enacted on these shores was passed in Virginia. It provided that blacks — even freemen — could not own guns.
Chief Justice Roger Taney’s infamous opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford circularly argued that blacks could not be citizens because if they were citizens, they would have the right to own guns: “[I]t would give them the full liberty,” he said, “to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”
With logic like that, Republicans eventually had to fight a Civil War to get the Democrats to give up slavery.
Alas, they were Democrats, so they cheated.
After the war, Democratic legislatures enacted “Black Codes,” denying black Americans the right of citizenship — such as the rather crucial one of bearing arms — while other Democrats (sometimes the same Democrats) founded the Ku Klux Klan.
For more than a hundred years, Republicans have aggressively supported arming blacks, so they could defend themselves against Democrats.
The original draft of the Anti-Klan Act of 1871 — passed at the urging of Republican president Ulysses S. Grant — made it a federal felony to “deprive any citizen of the United States of any arms or weapons he may have in his house or possession for the defense of his person, family, or property.” This section was deleted from the final bill only because it was deemed both beyond Congress’ authority and superfluous, inasmuch as the rights of citizenship included the right to bear arms.
Under authority of the Anti-Klan Act, President Grant deployed the U.S. military to destroy the Klan, and pretty nearly completed the job.
But the Klan had a few resurgences in the early and mid-20th century. Curiously, wherever the Klan became a political force, gun control laws would suddenly appear on the books.
This will give you an idea of how gun control laws worked. Following the firebombing of his house in 1956, Dr. Martin Luther King, who was, among other things, a Christian minister, applied for a gun permit, but the Alabama authorities found him unsuitable. A decade later, he won a Nobel Peace Prize.
How’s that “may issue” gun permit policy working for you?
The NRA opposed these discretionary gun permit laws and proceeded to grant NRA charters to blacks who sought to defend themselves from Klan violence — including the great civil rights hero Robert F. Williams.
A World War II Marine veteran, Williams returned home to Monroe, N.C., to find the Klan riding high — beating, lynching and murdering blacks at will. No one would join the NAACP for fear of Klan reprisals. Williams became president of the local chapter and increased membership from six to more than 200.
But it was not until he got a charter from the NRA in 1957 and founded the Black Armed Guard that the Klan got their comeuppance in Monroe.
Williams’ repeated thwarting of violent Klan attacks is described in his stirring book, “Negroes With Guns.” In one crucial battle, the Klan sieged the home of a black physician and his wife, but Williams and his Black Armed Guard stood sentry and repelled the larger, cowardly force. And that was the end of it.
As the Klan found out, it’s not so much fun when the rabbit’s got the gun.
The NRA’s proud history of fighting the Klan has been airbrushed out of the record by those who were complicit with the KKK, Jim Crow and racial terror, to wit: the Democrats.
In the preface to “Negroes With Guns,” Williams writes: “I have asserted the right of Negroes to meet the violence of the Ku Klux Klan by armed self-defense — and have acted on it. It has always been an accepted right of Americans, as the history of our Western states proves, that where the law is unable, or unwilling, to enforce order, the citizens can, and must act in self-defense against lawless violence.”
Contrary to MSNBC hosts, I do not believe the shooting in Florida is evidence of a resurgent KKK. But wherever the truth lies in that case, gun control is always a scheme of the powerful to deprive the powerless of the right to self-defense.
Creepy. The camera in the nose costs $2.3 million and has infrared and ultraviolet capabilities that allow it to see into structures as well as tell if you have narcotics in your pocket from nine miles away. Coming to a city near you….
Federal judges approve about 30,000 secret warrants to spy on people in the USA every year, and the innocent probably will never know they were watched, says a U.S. jurist involved in issuing the orders.
The secret orders are authorized by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, known as ECPA. Smith writes that the volume of such cases “is greater than the combined yearly total of all antitrust, employment discrimination, environmental, copyright, patent, trademark and securities cases filed in federal court.”
The warrants and the court’s proceedings are not open to public scrutiny. A three-judge panel reviews denials of applications for the warrants, but the court is not adversarial or open, and many orders are never unsealed.
So typical. It is a story we have heard time and time again. The bullying is reported over and over and the school refuses to lift a finger to stop it. Finally either a hero or the victim raises a big enough stink about it, so the school bureaucrats rush in to punish and silence the victim or the one reporting it. After all if no one reports it than technically they have a bully free school!
This is why school administrators have protected bullies for years and continue to do so. Occasionally a victim snaps and kills the bully or kills themselves, and that is when the school starts scrubbing records and labels everyone who new the bullying was happening a liar.
Stormy Rich, hero who stood up to bullies.
We have said it many, many times, by and large it seems that only the most incompetent people manage to get jobs as school administrators. This story is example 2, 348, 812 of why this is true.
“Caution: This campus is 100 percent against bullying. Speak out,” reads a sign outside Umatilla High School, and one senior said she did speak out and has been punished for doing so.
Stormy Rich, 18, thought she was doing the right thing in reporting bullying incidents she witnessed against a mentally-challenged middle school girl by a group of girls on morning bus rides to school.
“I’m a very outspoken person,” Rich said. “I stick up for what I feel is right. In the school code of conduct handbook, it is clearly stated that bullying is a non-tolerable offense.”
Rich was riding that middle school bus because she earned enough credits to avoid having to take a first-period high school class and an earlier high school bus. The two schools are only a few blocks away.
Rich — who said she felt compelled to speak out because the girl couldn’t even comprehend she was being pick on — first complained to the bus driver but the bullying continued. She then complained to a high school official, who said he would contact the middle school, but nothing changed.
“I would sit on the bus every single day and see the bullying was still going on and nothing was being done,” Rich said. “It was aggravating.”
The senior demanded the bullies stop, which worked for a while. She said they then began threatening her, even though she complained about this to school personnel on almost a daily basis for about two weeks. The mother and daughter even contacted police.
“Enough is enough,” Rich said in her written complaint. “Something should be done.”
That something was a letter sent to Rich’s mother, Brenda, on May 4, saying her daughter was kicked off the middle school bus. A district school official said Rich displayed bullying behavior in her comments.
“She said what I did made me the bully, with me telling the kids that if they didn’t stop, and if the school didn’t do anything, that I would have to handle it,” Rich said. “To me, it was just going too far.”
According to Christopher Patton, communications officer for Lake County Schools, a courtesy had been extended to Rich to ride the middle school bus.
“Due to circumstances on the bus, the privileges were revoked,” he said.
Patton said he could not discuss the bullying complaints filed by Rich or her mother. He also could not say if any action was taken about those complaints.
“I can’t comment about student discipline, unfortunately,” Patton said. “I think you’re heading down a dangerous path because you’ve got one side of the story. … There are other parents that are involved in this.”
Asked if the district had additional complaints on the issue, Patton replied: “Just this one parent.”
“My daughter was punished incorrectly,” said Brenda Rich. “Stormy was standing up for a child with emotionally challenged disabilities that should not have been bullied. The district’s policy clearly states that anybody in good faith files a report on bullying will not face any repercussions and she is.”
Brenda Rich said she has met the bullied student and the young girl does not comprehend sarcasm or even understand what “hate” means. She views everybody as her “friend.”
“Just because she doesn’t understand what people are doing to her is wrong, it doesn’t mean its OK,” said Brenda Rich, who questions if the schools’ anti-bullying policies are really working.
“…This child doesn’t have the ability to stand up for herself, she has no voice. Stormy was her voice, even more so than the girl herself.”
Her daughter won’t have school transportation issues much longer.
Stormy Rich will graduate next week with a 3.67 GPA and has been awarded scholarships. She strives to continue to help others and plans to start nursing studies at Daytona State College.
A Catholic university in Ohio said Tuesday it is being forced to end a student health insurance program over the Obama administration’s contraception mandate and costs associated with other provisions of the health care overhaul.
Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, said it has so far excluded contraceptive services and products from its health insurance policy for students and will not participate in a plan that “requires us to violate the consistent teachings of the Catholic Church on the sacredness of human life.”
In its decision to drop coverage, the school cited the contraception mandate, but also a requirement that the maximum coverage amount be increased to $100,000 for policyholders — claiming that would have made premiums skyrocket. A university official told Fox News Radio the students’ basic $600 policy was going to double in cost in the fall and triple next year and that the school’s insurance provider said the increases were the result of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
OK is government out of control yet? In our budget conscious times is this what we really need to be paying for? Someone is voting for this kind of idiotic government. Make sure it isn’t you.
CARLISLE — Looking to hit the spot with a savory ice cream at Great Brook Farm State Park this week?
You may be out of luck.
The park’s popular ice-cream stand was unexpectedly shut down by state officials over the weekend, after the stand’s operator made building improvements at the site without getting permission first.
Mark Duffy, who has operated the dairy farm at the state-owned park for 26 years and has a lease with the state to run the stand, said armed Environmental Police officers showed up at stand on Friday evening and stood guard throughout the weekend, turning away customers craving delectable sundaes and frappes.
To make matters worse, said Duffy, the shutdown happened right before the sunny Mother’s Day weekend.
Edward Lambert, commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, said the stand was closed after it was discovered construction had been done without local or state permits. The work, which expanded the stand, included construction on a barn built in 1910 that is adjacent to the stand, he said.
Lambert said he is trying to protect the public’s health and safety while tests are conducted at the site.
“I like ice cream as much as anybody, so it pains us to even temporarily close what is an iconic property, but we have to make sure people eating ice cream there are safe,” said Lambert.
Duffy said he has made countless improvements to the farm over the years without permission.
“The reason I’m here and the purpose of having me here is to improve the facility and operate a commercial dairy farm,” said Duffy, 57, who lives on the farm with his wife. “I make improvements every single day and have for 26 years.”
Calls to George Mansfield, the administrator of the Carlisle Planning Board, were not returned regarding local permits.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded a $5.9 million grant to a University of Chicago Medical Center program run by one of President Barack Obama’s closest friends.
Obama’s longtime friend, Eric Whitaker, runs the Urban Health Initiative (UHI), which was founded as a means of connecting low-income patients with health clinics in their own communities.
The UHI was one of only 26 programs — out of 3,000 applications — to receive a slice of the $1 billion in taxpayer money from the executive’s “We Can’t Wait” initiative, which is aimed at spurring job growth via executive action, reported Keith Koffler at White House Dossier.
HHS has denied any White House involvement in the decision, but the president will have a tough time feigning surprise given his deep ties to the UHI:
Eric Whitaker runs the UHI, has known the president since his days at Harvard Law and occasionally vacations with the Obamas.
Michelle Obama launched the UHI while working as an executive at the University of Chicago Medical Center, which runs the program.
Valerie Jarrett, the president’s senior adviser, was the chairman of the University of Chicago Medical Center board of trustees until she resigned her post to join the White House.
David Axelrod, now-communications director for the Obama campaign, provided public relations services to the UHI after Michelle Obama recommended that he be hired in 2006.
Despite those deep ties, HHS stands by its process, describing the decision making as free from White House influence.
“If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X
Political Arena 