Archive for the ‘Economics’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

New York: Imitating California, as in going full blown stupid..?

October 18, 2010

 

Andrew Cuomo and the Gunmaker Litigation

Posted by Walter Olson

There are many reasons to be glum about the impending coronation of dynastic heir Andrew Cuomo, now leading in the New York governor’s race against a GOP opponent (Carl Paladino) who at first polled decently but has since stumbled. Some fret about the Democrat’s reputation for political hardball: former governor Eliot Spitzer (Eliot Spitzer!) last month called Cuomo the “dirtiest, nastiest political player out there,” which is like being called overdressed by Lady Gaga. Others find Cuomo too much of a camera-chaser as attorney general in Albany, and almost everyone is queasy over his role (as Clinton-era housing secretary) in encouraging risk-taking by federally backed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, leading by direct steps to today’s ongoing mortgage crisis. (For background, see Wayne Barrett’s famous 2008 Village Voice article.)

I have a different reason for cringing at the idea that voters would ever elevate Andrew Cuomo to higher office, and it’s also based on memories of his tenure as housing secretary. Not the Fannie-Freddie-subprime end of it, although I concede that in a strictly economic sense those were the most damaging things he did. No, what I find permanently hard to forgive is the way Cuomo threw himself into the role of chief national cheerleader for the municipal anti-gun litigation of the 1990s and early 2000s.

Because that litigation mostly fizzled out, it is now only half remembered and doesn’t much feature in Cuomo profiles. At the time, though, it was a close-fought battle and a big story. More than 30 cities and counties sued firearms makers, alleging that courts should hold them financially responsible for the costs of urban shootings. The cry was to make guns the “next tobacco,” following the successful litigation campaign against tobacco companies that extracted hundreds of billions of dollars for the benefit of state coffers (and private lawyers).

Of course there are enormous differences between the tobacco and gun businesses. One is that while major tobacco makers had billion-dollar revenue streams to share as part of a settlement, most gunmakers are smallish enterprises, often family-owned. And this in fact was a conscious element of the strategy for the lawyers who promoted the suits: because gunmakers were too thinly capitalized to withstand the costs of years of legal defense, it was thought they’d fold their hands and yield to “gun control through litigation” (explicitly couched as an end run against a then-Republican Congress resistant to gun control proposals). Smith and Wesson actually did yield to a settlement on this rationale, which soon collapsed following a public outcry from gun owners and others outraged by the use of extortive litigation to achieve gun control objectives. The gamble having failed, the suits eventually reached judges and were generally thrown out, but not before imposing huge and uncompensated costs on many small companies that had violated no laws. Some were bankrupted.

Mindful of traditional tenets of legal ethics that forbid lawyers from using the cost of legal process as a bludgeon, most backers of the suits prudently refrained from any hint that imposing unsustainable legal costs was part of the plan. One exception was Cuomo, who warned gunmakers that unless they cooperated, they’d suffer “death by a thousand cuts.” And another was then-New-York-AG Spitzer, who reportedly warned an executive of holdout Glock: “If you do not sign, your bankruptcy lawyers will be knocking at your door.”

I think Spitzer and Cuomo deserve each other, really. What I can’t figure out is why the good citizens of New York would want either of them.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

Colorado Election : Positions concerning 2010 Statewide Ballot Initiatives

October 16, 2010

As directed by the Libertarian Party of Colorado Constitution, the Board of Directors has reviewed the 2010 amendments and propositions on the ballot for voter consideration.  There are seven proposed amendments to the Colorado Constitution and two propositions to change the Revised Statutes.

For the 2010 election, the Colorado “Blue Book” contains succinct summaries of each of these.  There are also pro and con websites and other information being provided in numerous information media outlets.
The Libertarian Party of Colorado consists of free thinkers and responsible voters who seek as much information as possible about the pros and cons of every voting decision they will make.  We believe every libertarian and other voters will make up their own minds based on their careful review of the issues.
The following are the Libertarian Party of Colorado positions concerning each of the 2010 Colorado initiatives.
Amendment P –Regulation of Games of Chance. The LPCO takes no position either way on this amendment.
Moves bingo and raffle licensing from Sec State to Dept of Revenue (or other designated by the state legislature).  In addition to time, energy, and money already expended on this change to existing law, there will be a onetime $116,000 expenditure from bingo and raffle license fees.
The amendment makes no significant changes to the Colorado Constitution or the long term financial situation of the State Government-
Amendment Q –Temp Location of State Seat of Government.  The LPCO recommends Yes on this amendment.
Currently there is no provision in the Colorado Constitution for convening of the State Government if a major disaster emergency were to make Denver unusable.  This amendment provides direction for the Governor and the Legislature to designate a temporary location for the seat of government.
Amendment R –Exempt Possessory Interests in Real Property.  The LPCO recommends Yes on this amendment.
Eliminates property taxes for individuals and businesses that use government-owned property for a private benefit worth $6,000 or less in market value.
The fiscal effects of this amendment are relatively minor, but should increase the efficiency of local governments by reducing the costs of assessing and collecting minor amounts of property taxes from numerous small assessments.
Ammendment 60 –Concerning Property Taxes. The LPCO recommends a YES vote on this amendment.
Strengthens TABOR by adding a new section (10) to Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution.
-Requires audit and enforcement of this section.
-All owners of real property would be entitled to vote on all proposed property taxes affecting their property.
-Voters may petition to lower property taxes
-Property tax issues shall have November election notices separate from debt issues
-Property Tax bills list only property taxes and late charges
-Enterprise and authorities shall pay property taxes.  Lower mil-levy rates to offset income to taxing dist
-10 year expiration on property tax rate increases
-Extending expiring property taxes, is a tax increase
-Prior actions to keep excess property tax revenue are expired; future actions are tax increases expiring in 4 years.  Local governments and enterprises will have to make serious adjustments to their budgets and seek direct voter approval of property taxes on at least a four-year cycle.
-by 2020, non-college school districts phase out ½ of their 2011 property tax rate for operating expenses.  State aid replaces the revenue.  Shifts school operating costs to State general fund from local resources.
Amendment 61 –Limit State and Local Government Borrowing. The LPCO recommends YES on this amendment.
-Repeals existing Article XI Section 3 and re-enacts the original 1876 version of this section to read, “The state shall not contract any debt in any form.”
-Repeals Article XI Sections 4, 5, 6(2), and 6(3) as obsolete and superceded.
-Repeals and re-enacts Article XI Section 6(1) to require voter approval for local governments to contract debt.  Also requires ballot title to be specific.
-Adds further specific requirements concerning debt to Article X section 20(4)
–November Ballot approval
–10 year limit on new local debt
–borrowing can’t exceed 10% of assessed valuation
–Tax Rates must be reduced when borrowing is repaid
Amendment 62 Application of Term Person. The LPCO recommends NO on this amendment.
Would define person as at the beginning of biological development and entitled to full protection of Colorado law.
This is an effort to insert the State into the intensely personal decisions concerning the beginning of human life.  It would only further complicate already difficult decisions.
Amendment 63 -Health Care Choice. The LPCO recommends Yes on this amendment.
Adds Article II section 32 to make health care choice a constitutional right.  Prohibits the state from requiring a person to participate in health plans.  Restricts the state from limiting a person’s ability to make or receive direct payments for health services.  Exempts emergency treatment and Workers’ Compensation from this new right.
This is in response to the recently enacted Federal health care decrees.  It is unfortunately now necessary for Colorado to take a stand to protect individual and state rights associated with US Constitution Article I and Amendments 9 and 10.
Proposition 101 -Income, Vehicle, and Telecommunication Taxes and Fees.  The LPCO recommends YES on this Proposition.
-Reduces state income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.5% in 2011 and then over time to 3.5%.
-reduces and eliminates vehicle taxes and fees over next 4 years.
-eliminates all state and local taxes on telecommunications service, except 911 fees
-requires voter approval to for future vehicle and telecomm fees.
–Proposition 102 –Criteria for Release to Pretrial Services Programs.  The LPCO recommends NO on this proposition.
Adds requirements to Colorado Statutes to prohibit release of a defendant on an unsecured bond to pretrial services program unless it is a first offense and is nonviolent misdemeanor.
If passed this measure will reduce the ability of Judges to release those accused of crimes while awaiting trial.  Those unable to afford additional bonding expenses would remain in custody.  Additional total costs to the State are estimated at $2.8 million.
Retention of Colorado Supreme Court Judges.
For the 2010 November election, voters are asked to consider retention/non-retention of a number of Judges.  The LPCO encourages all voters to carefully consider each judge.
Several of the Citizen initiated amendments on the 2010 November Ballot are in response to Supreme Court decisions contrary to the intent of existing constitutional provisions.  The activist nature of the recent Colorado Supreme Court and it’s decisions appears to be more focused on predetermined outcomes rather than the Rule of Law.
-The LPCO recommends NO on each of the 3 Supreme Court Judges to be considered.
SOURCE:
Date: 12 Oct 10
From: LPCO Board of Directors
To:   Colorado Libertarians and interested Voters
Subj:  Libertarian Party of Colorado Positions concerning 2010 Statewide Ballot Initiatives.

Perhaps the LPCO has regained some semblance of sanity? Time will tell.

Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Hoplophobia, Law, Local Politics Colorado, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Colorado Election : Positions concerning 2010 Statewide Ballot Initiatives

When orders from HQ change… Enviro whacko’s and Texas fights back!

October 16, 2010

Texas is firing back after the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would apply the 1970s clean air laws to carbon regulation and effectively seize permitting authority from states that don’t comply quickly enough. The Wall Street Journal reports, “Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA’s national office chooses priorities, but state regulators run the relevant programs and issue the necessary permits. When orders from HQ change, as with carbon over the last year, states get three years to revise their ‘implementation plans.’ But in August, [EPA Administrator Lisa] Jackson decided that the law posed too long a climate wait and decreed that if these plans aren’t updated by an arbitrary January 2011 deadline, her office will override the states and run the carbon permitting process itself.”

Given the EPA’s current lack of permitting resources, the Journal notes that this decision “is tantamount to a ban on major construction or building expansion — not merely Texan refineries but any kind of carbon-heavy utility, industrial production, manufacturing plant or even large office buildings.” Indeed, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality projects that the new regulations will end 167 current projects in 2011 alone. In response to Jackson’s fiat, the Lone Star State has filed a lawsuit with the DC appeals circuit, arguing the EPA went “beyond [its] powers” and is asking for an emergency stay of the new regulations.

The EPA itself admits that its actions “may have adverse consequences for the economy.” Of course, we’ve seen how little “adverse consequences” mean to an administration convinced that when it comes to federal bureaucracy, bigger is always better.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, States Rights, Stupid is as Stupid Does, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on When orders from HQ change… Enviro whacko’s and Texas fights back!

Follow the money! : Professor Emeritus agrees

October 14, 2010

The man made global warming fiasco took one heck of a shot from a real scientist.

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

~SNIP~

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

Full story HERE

This entire scam was, and is, nothing more than a money making fraud committed on a world wide scale, and yet there still are people here trying to pass laws, taxes etc. That would choke an already battered economy based upon this criminal foolishness. Be sure to read the entire article.

Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Follow the money! : Professor Emeritus agrees

NRA Endorsements: Single issue organization fallacy

October 12, 2010

The National Rifle Association recently released it’s political endorsements for the upcoming elections. There is an excellent discussion about this HERE. Be sure to read through the comments as they are a bot more than enlightening. I had planned on an in depth posting on the subject, however Dave Kopel really beat me to it! 🙂

Now, speaking as a Life Member I have one thing to say about the NRA being a “single issue” organization. BOVINE FECES Mister Cox and Mister LaPierre. I seem to remember something about “It’s not about hunting ducks.” Yet, the NRA has an entire division devoted to hunting. Let’s not forget about the various marksmanship  and safety programs that are offered. Single issue? Hardly! Stop the hypocrisy, please!

Then we have the NRA rolling over time and time again; The NRA supported ex post facto law. The NRA has supported so-called “reasonable” restrictions on your Second Amendment rights on so many occasions that I won’t bother with citation.

Now, I happen to like many of the programs noted above, and believe that they are quite valuable resources. Just stop playing the game that, for all appearances, looks to simply be more pandering to high dollar donors. While at the same time going into damage control mode when the membership decides to take you to the wood shed over yet another action that is so clearly against their (the membership’s) wishes. And or dealing in appeasement politics.

Who will truly protect your rights on a national level? Gun Owners of America does. As does the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Association for Gun Rights. There are also regional and state organizations that refuse to kow tow to along the lines of the NRA. Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, and Wyoming Gun Owners come to mind, and there are others out there that I am not familiar with.

Sure, vote freedom first! Just make sure that is actually what you are doing, and support those organizations that truly defend your rights!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Domestic Violence, Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Immigration, Law, Local Politics Colorado, Local Politics Wyoming, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, States Rights, Uncategorized, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Income Redistribution: A Stimulating Look at Utopian Economics

October 9, 2010

Albert Einstein purportedly stated, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Apparently, the Obama administration disagrees, especially in light of its new report claiming that the spending-upon-spending “stimulus” plan is on-time, under budget and relatively fraud- and abuse-free — other than sending $18 million to dead people, anyway. Moreover, the measure worked as planned, and the economy is back on track. No doubt it’ll be even more robust after even more government spending.

Silly us for believing that double-digit unemployment, depressed markets and unprecedented budget deficits are all indicators of an economy nowhere close to being “back on track.” Our mistake, it seems, was neglecting to use the “jobs-saved” new math that has been the hallmark of the Chosen Administration since its inception. White House officials touted the relatively small number of complaints — less than 2 percent in over 200,000 contract awards — as evidence of the success of the drunken-sailor spending program. We would like to offer a different explanation as to the paucity of complaints, namely, that few complain when a gift horse (read: big government) is throwing billions of dollars at them. Independent of the degree to which spending is “fraud-free,” it’s still spending.

On a completely unrelated note, tens of thousands of workers have just been shown the door, courtesy of the termination of stimulus-subsidized employment programs. A $5 billion program, “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,” is drawing to an end, and with it approximately 250,000 more will hit the streets and unemployment lines, highlighting yet again that government does not produce jobs. Any jobs it claims to “produce” will both cost more and be less sustainable than would otherwise be true in the free market. Meanwhile, in September, another 95,000 jobs were lost.

In contrast, Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden’s Pollyanna-ish chief economist, stated that the report on stimulus spending affirms that “the recovery act has accomplished much of what it set out to do.” Sadly, we must agree: Hamstringing the free market while redistributing wealth to Democrat constituency groups? Check. Helping the economy to actually recover? Not so much.

And then we have;

The Transportation Department and Environmental Protection Agency announced last Friday that they are considering regulating fuel mileage for vehicles even further — to an eye-popping 62 mpg by 2025 — so that CO2 emissions per mile might possibly be reduced by 3 to 6 percent. The Associated Press reports, “The government envisions gas-electric hybrids making up about half the lineup of new vehicles under the most aggressive standards, while electrics and plug-ins would comprise about 10 percent of the fleet.” These changes would add about $3,500 to the price of every vehicle, though the government claims owners would save $7,400 over the vehicle’s lifetime.

Meanwhile, in the government’s version of Wile E. Coyote trying to catch the Roadrunner, the Obama administration appears to be simultaneously trying to “stimulate” interest in higher mileage vehicles by choking off oil supplies through dragging out its offshore drilling ban, which artificially drives up gas prices. We can only hope this scheme will blow up in the their face too. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is “reviewing” the moratorium just as Europe’s energy chief is considering putting a ban in place.

In other oil news, the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling released a report on the federal response to April’s oil spill and, not surprisingly, the administration comes in for criticism. The report said, “The federal government created the impression that it was either not fully competent to handle the spill or not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem.” That, in a nutshell, is the essence of Hope ‘n’ Change.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Czar Wars, Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

New & Notable Legislation

October 9, 2010

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) introduced legislation for the lame-duck session that would repeal right-to-work laws in 22 states. Currently, workers in those states employed in unionized companies can choose whether to join the union and pay dues. In the other 28 states, known as “forced dues” states, it’s legal for unions to mandate that all workers pay union dues and to fire workers who don’t comply. This is a blatantly obvious power grab by unions and their minions in the Democrat Party. Sherman disguises it as an attempt to level the playing field for “forced dues” states like his native California that “have to compete with the race to the bottom as our companies have to compete with those where the workers would like better wages, working conditions and benefits but are unable to organize to get them.”

Sherman is either incorrect or just plain lying about the fact that workers in right-to-work states don’t have the right to unionize. Nothing prevents unionizing in these states other than workers’ votes. Furthermore, while he’s correct that California businesses are losing out to right-to-work states, that’s because unions have put such a squeeze on companies to enrich their own bank accounts that many choose not to set up shop there. Others have simply moved to other states.

Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) introduced legislation that would require the president to deploy a minimum of 10,000 National Guard troops to the southern border in an effort to stem the tide of illegal immigration. “The uniqueness of this,” said Poe, is that the troops “would be paid by the federal government, because everybody says it is the responsibility of the federal government to protect the border. So the federal government will use the resources it already has to pay for those 10,000 National Guard troops, but they will be supervised by the governors of the four states on the border.”

In other news, the House is waiting on the Senate to take action on some 420 bills it has passed since January 2009. We never thought we’d say it, but we’re thankful for the 111th Senate.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Immigration, Law, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

ObamaCare — Would You Like Fries With That Exemption?

October 9, 2010

A silver lining of the Democrat hegemony in Washington has been the massive resurgence of conservative thinking and action among the general public. It certainly would have been nice two or four years sooner, but better late than never.

Given that Republicans can’t possibly win a veto-proof majority in the Senate, the job of cleaning up government will take more than one election cycle. One of the biggest messes is ObamaCare. It remains to be seen whether the GOP has the fortitude to follow through on their pledge to “repeal and replace,” but the resounding defeats this primary season of several incumbent RINOs certainly serve as a motivation.

Democrats up for re-election in three weeks are running from the issue like the plague, and little wonder. This week, it was revealed that 30 companies and organizations received exemptions from the federal requirement to increase the minimum annual benefits for low-cost health plans. Unless they were granted exemptions, McDonald’s and other companies that offer so-called mini-med plans threatened to drop their health plans altogether — leaving employees on the government dole. The biggest waiver was granted to the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, which is a union in New York City that provides health coverage for city teachers.

According to USA Today, “Without waivers, [these] companies would have had to provide a minimum of $750,000 in [medical insurance] coverage next year, increasing to $1.25 million in 2012, $2 million in 2013 and unlimited in 2014.” Of course, all this was predicted by those of us who understand basic free-market economics.

Meanwhile, in keeping with the “radical” notion that the federal government cannot force people to purchase things, voters in three states will decide this fall whether to tell the federal government to stay out of their health care decisions. If passed, the initiatives in Arizona, Colorado and Oklahoma will allow those states to opt out of ObamaCare. A similar initiative already passed in Missouri with an impressive 71 percent of the vote.

Naysayers, such as Oklahoma’s Democrat Gov. Brad Henry, call the initiative fruitless, saying that even if it “passes by 100 percent,” the feds could overturn it because federal law trumps state law. In effect, the governor is saying that ObamaCare is inevitable, so we shouldn’t even bother to fight. But this isn’t true. According to what Jon Caldara of Colorado’s Independence Institute calls that “pesky 10th Amendment,” there are several instances in which the federal government is required to yield to the will of the sovereign states. The attorneys general of 20 other states are suing on that principle.

Other opponents of the initiative argue that this collective lawsuit makes the ballots redundant and not worth the costly legal battle that’s sure to follow. However, Caldara and others fighting for health care choice point out that even if this multi-state lawsuit is successful, the federal government could then pressure states to adopt programs similar to the one in Massachusetts. The problems with that system, and its parallels with ObamaCare, are well documented.

The road to repeal hit another major roadblock Thursday when U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh, a Clinton appointee, rejected the argument that the individual mandate to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. According to Steeh, the interstate commerce clause really does cover everything.

Quote of the Week

“[ObamaCare’s] march to the sea is only beginning and the trail of destruction will grow. The last six months have seen 2011 premium increases as high as 9% due to ObamaCare; multibillion-dollar corporate writedowns by Verizon, AT&T, Caterpillar and others; disruption in the insurance markets leading to the erasure of child-only policies and other types of specialty coverage as shown in the McDonald’s imbroglio; the Administration beginning to impose price controls on premiums; insurers withdrawing private options from Medicare Advantage; and Democratic protection of a 1099 tax reporting mandate that will slam small businesses. Republicans should be repeating all of these tangible harms in a litany, while predicting the damage to come.” —The Wall Street Journal

SOURCE

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on ObamaCare — Would You Like Fries With That Exemption?

Epic Fail obama: American Civilian Gunned Down In Cold Blood On Mexican Border

October 8, 2010

Obama has still not responded to the heartbreaking and shocking news of last week’s murder of American civilian David Hartley. “How many more American citizens have to die?” said Texas Governor Rick Perry as he challenged Washington to get its act together.

Hartley and his wife Tiffany were jet skiing on Falcon Lake, which straddles the Texas border between the U.S. and Mexico. While they were sight-seeing they were savagely ambushed and attacked without provocation by Mexican pirates. The pirates swooped in mercilessly on speed boats and gunned down David Hartley in cold blood. Tiffany was unable to recover her husband’s body after he was shot in the head, and she fled the attackers back to the U.S side of the lake in order to get help.

Tell The Congress No Amnesty – Secure the Border NOW!
SELECT HERE – Stop Amnesty – Defend Arizona

The pirates are believed to be a part of Mexican drug cartels which are notoriously active in the area. Cartel violence and the entire U.S.-Mexico border are so out of control now that the Mexican government has finally dispatched its military to deal with the gangs. However, the Mexican military seems to have no effect on the brutal cartels.

What has Obama done about escalating U.S. losses? Nothing but post signs telling Americans to stay away from border areas on U.S. soil and RUN AWAY from killers in our own backyard!!! Well, I guess even a jet ski is just not fast enough.

This savage killing is just another tragic result of the Obama administration not securing the border and leaving U.S. citizens defenseless to completely unacceptable and totally avoidable murders known to be perpetrated by ruthless Mexican drug runners.

Just last spring Rancher Robert Krentz was killed by an illegal alien believed to have ties to the drug cartels on his own land. Krentz’ murder was the flashpoint which ignited the controversial Arizona immigration enforcement legislation signed into law by the Governor of AZ and promptly stayed by the Obama Justice Department. The outrage over the open border has only grown since then. Americans want the border sealed and the flow of illegal criminals, thugs and drugs pouring over the border stopped!

However, the Obama administration has done nothing to combat this crisis. The safety of American citizens relies on signs posted 70 miles inside the border saying that American soil is no longer safe and AMERICAN CITIZENS are not allowed on their own land. This is an unprecedented act of cowardice, ceding sovereign U.S. territory to alien banditry, and Obama is the first American President to ever passively and preemptively concede American land to foreign terrorists.

Governor Perry is right to be outraged! He is doing everything he can to make sure the body of David Hartley is recovered. Mexican authorities aren’t allowing U.S. officials to enter the Mexican waters of Falcon Lake to aid the search. Mexico City district attorney Marco Antonio Guerrero Carrixales said recently that they, “are not certain that incident happened the way that they are telling us.” Tiffany Hartley is convinced, as are many others, that Obama could bring more pressure on the Mexican government to exert itself against the cartels to recover the body. Governor Perry responded by saying, “I find it really reprehensible for anyone, U.S. or Mexican, to speak otherwise” about Tiffany’s claims.

Perry has again beseeched Washington for more troops and support on the border. He spoke to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s chief of staff on Tuesday and made a request for 1,000 National Guard troops for the Texan-Mexican border — a request that was promptly denied.

Washington cares more about its political standing with a country that can’t even police itself than for the safety and security of its own citizens. They should be ashamed of themselves. How many innocent Americans have to be murdered before Obama acts? In any other time these killings and invasions would constitute an act of war. All American citizens ask for is a closed and secure border, so we can safeguard the people of this country.

Obama and the Democrats have already put the Amnesty wheels in motion as orders are out to scuttle ICE raids of companies hiring illegal workers, remove key elements of 287G policies that give local law enforcement the ability to arrest illegal aliens, and to set the stage for the in-take processing of millions of illegal aliens so as to grant mass AMNESTY TO ILLEGALS.

Obama lied to Governor Jan Brewer of AZ in the Oval Office. Obama committed to present details within two weeks of meeting Gov. Brewer, regarding his plans for sending National Guard troops to the Arizona border and spending $500 million on border security.

Well, time’s been up for MONTHS, Obama did nothing, and CONGRESS in fear of facing their constituents at home passed a head-fake border security “beef-up” bill that will wallow in bureaucratic limbo. Gov. Brewer is not waiting for Obama to do the job. And neither are the rank-and-file officers and employees of ICE Enforcement and Removal — who have passed a unanimous “Vote of No Confidence” in their Obama- appointed Director, John Morton! Obama’s biggest action has been in retreat — in surrender to the Mexican Invasion he put up new Federal border signs warning Americans to stay away, as he cannot protect them if they travel within southern Arizona. More signs will no doubt be shipping into Texas, next!

AZ and TX need your help – do not leave them to defend the border alone!

Gov. Brewer has stated, “We need action from the federal government, not signs ceding sovereign U.S. territory to international drug cartels and human smugglers.” Brewer sent a letter to Obama outlining her Four-Point Border Action Surge Strategy. This strategy contains most actions advised in the 2005 Norwood Minuteman Report, and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps Project has been calling for these vital actions to be implemented for 5 years — and whole-heartedly supports them TODAY. As Gov. Brewer enumerated in her Four-Point Strategy to Obama:

  1. National Guard Personnel and Aviation
  2. Border Fence
  3. Enforce Federal Law and Appropriately Fund the Effort
  4. Reimburse States for the Additional Burden of Illegal Immigration

We Say, “Defend AMERICA” — Obama And Feds Do Nothing but Sue AZ!

The tragedy is that the escalating violence in our southern sector could have been prevented years ago, and countless innocent American lives saved, if the federal government had responded to our warnings and recommendations, and had acted decisively for a secure border patrolled by the National Guard and a border fence! The level of accelerating violence and social chaos that has the President of the United States now ceding our territory to international bandits is the direct responsibility of the United States Government, and its gross dereliction of its duty under the U.S. Constitution.

The Obama Administration was and still is grossly negligent in their sworn oaths of office to protect the sovereignty of the United States. The government did not do its job and was complicit in the act when foreign nationals invade American soil and killed innocent U.S. citizens! And now the situation only worsens, as Obama plays politics with border security, and his Justice Department STOPS Arizona for acting to save American lives, property and sovereignty!

Why is Washington’s response to try to SUPPRESS Arizona’s proper and Constitutional defense of our people and lands from foreign invasion? The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps sounded the alarm 5 years ago and this border crisis could have been prevented if the federal government had done its job!

Support Brewer – DO NOT LET Obama Put More Americans at Risk.

Obama lied to Governor Jan Brewer of AZ in the Oval Office. Obama committed to present details within two weeks of meeting Gov. Brewer, regarding his plans for sending National Guard troops to the Arizona border and spending $500 million on border security.

Well, time’s been up for MONTHS, Obama did nothing, and CONGRESS in fear of facing their constituents at home passed a head-fake border security “beef-up” bill that will wallow in bureaucratic limbo. Gov. Brewer is not waiting for Obama to do the job. And neither are the rank-and-file officers and employees of ICE Enforcement and Removal — who have passed a unanimous “Vote of No Confidence” in their Obama- appointed Director, John Morton! Obama’s biggest action has been in retreat — in surrender to the Mexican Invasion he put up new Federal border signs warning Americans to stay away, as he cannot protect them if they travel within southern Arizona. More signs will no doubt be shipping into Texas, next!

AZ and TX need your help – do not leave them to defend the border alone!

Gov. Brewer has stated, “We need action from the federal government, not signs ceding sovereign U.S. territory to international drug cartels and human smugglers.” Brewer sent a letter to Obama outlining her Four-Point Border Action Surge Strategy. This strategy contains most actions advised in the 2005 Norwood Minuteman Report, and the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps Project has been calling for these vital actions to be implemented for 5 years — and whole-heartedly supports them TODAY. As Gov. Brewer enumerated in her Four-Point Strategy to Obama:

  1. National Guard Personnel and Aviation
  2. Border Fence
  3. Enforce Federal Law and Appropriately Fund the Effort
  4. Reimburse States for the Additional Burden of Illegal Immigration

We Say, “Defend AMERICA” — Obama And Feds Do Nothing but Sue AZ!

The tragedy is that the escalating violence in our southern sector could have been prevented years ago, and countless innocent American lives saved, if the federal government had responded to our warnings and recommendations, and had acted decisively for a secure border patrolled by the National Guard and a border fence! The level of accelerating violence and social chaos that has the President of the United States now ceding our territory to international bandits is the direct responsibility of the United States Government, and its gross dereliction of its duty under the U.S. Constitution.

The Obama Administration was and still is grossly negligent in their sworn oaths of office to protect the sovereignty of the United States. The government did not do its job and was complicit in the act when foreign nationals invade American soil and killed innocent U.S. citizens! And now the situation only worsens, as Obama plays politics with border security, and his Justice Department STOPS Arizona for acting to save American lives, property and sovereignty!

Why is Washington’s response to try to SUPPRESS Arizona’s proper and Constitutional defense of our people and lands from foreign invasion? The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps sounded the alarm 5 years ago and this border crisis could have been prevented if the federal government had done its job!

Support Brewer – DO NOT LET Obama Put More Americans at Risk.

But please, remember what is at stake — the security, the safety, the sovereignty — very possibly the very survival of not just Americans, but America herself.

For more information go to www.MinutemanHQ.com

Edited to cut out the spam, and constant begging for bucks. Which made up for a lot of the story!

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Immigration, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, States Rights, War, Wordpress Political Blogs | 6 Comments »

On liberal ideology, and more

October 7, 2010

“What [Harry] Reid and his counterpart in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are hoping is that Democrats who lose their seats in the election will be willing to pass legislation in a lame duck session that they know the voting public doesn’t support. In Reid’s logic, they will be free to vote their liberal ideology. And it won’t matter because they will have already lost their jobs. But it is precisely this kind of arrogance that has Democrats in such poor shape heading into the mid-term elections.” –columnist Linda Chavez

“American presidents have advanced redistributionist policies before, but none has used Marxist class-war rhetoric as routinely as Barack Obama. Obama has used the words ‘millionaire’ and ‘billionaire’ in just about every political speech he has made since August — and although Obama himself is a millionaire, he never uses those words except pejoratively. ‘Millionaires and billionaires’ in Obama’s lexicon are people who should be taxed more and held up as objects for public antipathy.” –columnist Terrence Jeffrey

“What about the politician who tells us that he’s not going to raise taxes on the middle class; instead, he’s going to raise corporate income taxes as means to get rich corporations to pay their rightful share of government? If a tax is levied on a corporation, and if it is to survive, it will have one of three responses, or some combination thereof. One response is to raise the price of its product, so who bears the burden? Another response is to lower dividends; again, who bears the burden? Yet another response is to lay off workers. In each case, it is people, not some legal fiction called a corporation, who bear the burden of the tax.” –economist Walter E. Williams

“The Obama administration has fewer people with real world experience in the private sector than any other administration in years. Maybe if they had more people with practical experience in the economy, we wouldn’t be in the mess that politicians created.” –economist Thomas Sowell

“If more politicians were faithful to the Constitution, the government would be restrained. And restraining government is ‘weird,’ ‘wacky’ and ‘dangerous’ to so many liberals today.” –columnist Jonah Goldberg

SOURCE

Tags:, ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »