He ought to Ė the racist organization is engaged in constant hate speech directed at principled men and women like Congressman West.
After watching several video clips on Wednesday of fellow black lawmakers attack the tea party, Rep. Allen West, Florida Republican, told Fox and Friends host Steve Doocy, ďI think Iím re-considering my membership in the Congressional Black Caucus.Ē
This remark came from Rep. West, a popular lawmaker among tea party activists, happened after a clip was played of Rep. Andre. Carson, Indiana Democrat, told an audience in Miami that tea-party supporting members of Congress look at African Americans as ďsecond-class citizensĒ and would like to see them ďhanging on a tree.Ē
Congressman West immediately defended the tea party and called Rep. Carsonís statements ďreprehensible.Ē Rep. West is the only Republican who is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Iíll say it flat out Ė for the CBC, a racially exclusive organization, to identify any other group as racist is offensive. And given the gang of corrupt, dishonest, and incompetent figures who are members of the CBC, why would West want to sully his name by association?
After all, the CEO probably adds value, while the federal government is often a net drain on profits Ė especially under this administration.
At least 25 top United States companies paid more to their chief executives in 2010 than they did to the federal government in taxes, according to a study released on Wednesday.
The companies ó which include household names like eBay, Boeing, General Electric and Verizon ó averaged $1.9 billion each in profits, according to the study by the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal-leaning research group. But a variety of shelters, loopholes and tax reduction strategies allowed the companies to average more than $400 million each in tax benefits ó which can be taken as a refund or used as write-off against earnings in future years.
In other words, these companies followed the law as written by Congress. And these ďshelters, loopholes and tax reduction strategiesĒ include little things like tax credits for creating new jobs, write-offs for equipment depreciation, deductions for research and development, and a host of other standard business deductions that the article here conveniently fails to detail. But in the end, Iím not bothered if these companies do pay their executives more than they pay in taxes Ė because the government does not have first claim on a companyís profits, nor does government have any place setting a maximum pay scale for the private sector. At most, this simply shows how screwed up our tax code really is.
I chose my words carefully -- and I think you'll understand why.
Francesca Rice no longer serves in her countryís armed forces, but she brought a piece of the action back home with her.
It seems the Lakewood vet had stockpiled her Edgewater Towers condo with a home arsenal including handguns, shotguns, a sniper rifle ó plus a Thompson sub-machine gun, just in case the pizza guy got fresh.
Her cache somehow caught the attention of Lakewood Police, who paid a visit last September. When they found Rice wasnít home, they asked an obliging employee of the complex to open up the apartment without her consent. Once inside, they raided the gun rack, making off with 13 firearms worth around $15,000. The only problem: They had no apparent reason to.
When Rice kindly asked to have her toys returned, the cops acknowledged that the weapons were legally owned. But they refused to return them without a court order. And so Rice has filed suit in Lakewood Municipal Court.
Let's look at this.
Under color of law, the local cops coerced apartment employees to let them into an apartment to which they had no legal right to enter. They lacked a warrant, any indication that a crime was in progress, or exigent circumstances that would allow for entry. Indeed, if they had any of the above they would have entered the apartment by busting the door down. They then seized items without a warrant, and refused to return them.
What you have there is theft -- and a violation of a little statute passed about 140 years ago that is still known as the Ku Klux Klan Act. If the Obama Regime still had a Justice Department that cared about the Constitution and the laws of the United States being faithfully enforced, we would have already seen indictments handed down and cops perp-walked out of the police headquarters.
You know -- "guidelines" about what to say and how to view the evil terrorist assault on America ten years ago.
The guidelines list what themes to underscore ó and, just as important, what tone to set. Officials are instructed to memorialize those who died in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and thank those in the military, law enforcement, intelligence or homeland security for their contributions since.
ďA chief goal of our communications is to present a positive, forward-looking narrative,Ē the foreign guidelines state.
Oh, yes -- Americans are also supposed to be reminded that 9/11 isn't just about us.
With all due respect, Barack Hussein Obama can blow it out of his Muslim-descended ass.
The events of 9/11 were very much about us -- and the only "forward-looking" agenda that is needed is one which is focused upon wiping out each and every Islamist who believes in the attack upon the freedoms embodied in Western Culture. What we don't need is any more of Obama's "hug-a-Muslim" Kumbayah-ism that is designed to obscure the reality that there exists in Islam a malignancy that will attack and kill liberty -- for non-Muslims and the vast majority of decent, peaceful Muslims -- wherever it is found.
Shots fired at the office of Rep. Gene Green in north Houston today likely came from a pellet or BB gun, police said.
The shots hit the windows of Green's office at 256 North Sam Houston Parkway East, Suite 29, as well as other nearby properties, according to the congressman's staff.
The damage occurred between 8 and 10:45 a.m., after which it was reported to authorities, Houston Police Department spokesman John Cannon said. No one in the office heard the shots, he said.
"It's not gunshots fired from a semiautomatic," Cannon said. "It's a BB gun or a pellet gun most likely."
Let's note some things.
1) This does not appear to be targeted at Green, making it appear that someone with a pellet gun was shooting at windows randomly.
2) This is a pellet gun, which makes it look more like simple vandalism rather than an assault.
3) This location isn't far from some of the Houston areas "less exclusive" neighborhoods.
In other words, there just isn't much meat to this story to make it into anything really serious. I'll be glad to correct that assessment when and if the evidence contradicts that initial judgment, but not until then.
And let me add, parenthetically, that I'm glad that the facts as they are now reported make that the most obvious conclusion to draw and that there are no actual injuries that would warrant giving more weight to the story. I wouldn't wish anything serious on any of our local pols, and certainly not on Gene Green.
Would you believe hot enough to buckle an off-ramp on a major highway?
Intense heat caused pavement on a 610 West Loop off-ramp to buckle on Sunday, a Texas Department of Transportation official said.
TxDOT crews closed the northbound off-ramp at Bellaire Boulevard and hoped to repair the damage by 5 a.m. today.
Temperatures on Sunday reached 106 degrees at Bush Intercontinental Airport, according to the National
We've had only one day this month when the mercury didn't hit 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Not only did it reach 106 degrees on Sunday, but on Saturday we were treated to 109 degrees. Pray for rain -- pray for cooling.
ďI donít see Islam as our enemy,Ē Paul said. ďI see that motivation is occupation and those who hate us and would like to kill us, they are motivated by our invasion of their land, the support of their dictators that they hate.Ē
Regarding 9/11, Paul said that attacks against the U.S. from Middle Eastern groups at home and abroad can be traced to the foreign presence of U.S. troops, as well as Americaís relationships with dictator regimes.
Paul referred to a military base in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam, as a key motivator in the Sept. 11th attacks. Osama bin Laden viewed it as an American desecration of holy land.
ďAfter 9/11, (people said) ĎOh yeah, itís those very bad people who hate us,í but 15 of (the hijackers) came from Saudi Arabia,Ē said Paul. ďOne of the reasons they attacked us, is we propped up this Sharia government and the fundamentalists hated us for it.Ē
May I just say that Ron Paul needs to pull his head out of his ass there? What he overlooks is that those 9/11 hijackers weren't out to get rid of sharia law in Saudi Arabia. They objected to the Saudi regime because it wasn't Islamist enough -- and argued that the House of Saud had allowed a society to flourish that was too Westernized and too corrupt.
Of course, Ron paul has long surrounded himself with anti-Semites, apologiest for terrorism, and 9/11 truthers, so I guess we shoudl not be surprised that he yet again belches forth this sort of inanity.
But do we in the GOP have to keep him? Can't the House GOP Caucus expel him and strip him of his committee assignments? And while I'm certain that there is generally no way to keep him off of primary ballots, can't the RNC and various state party heads unite to declare that Ron Paul is not a Republican, and urging that primary voters reject him and his foul, anti-American, pro-terrorist message?
NOTE TO PAULBOTS -- Bite me.
Unfortunately, state law in New Jersey makes this illegal.
Attorney General Paula T. Dow and the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs today warned gasoline retailers, grocers, and other merchants that price gouging is prohibited during the State of Emergency declared in advance of Hurricane Irene.
* * *
The law makes it illegal to sell merchandise at excessive price increases during a State of Emergency or within 30 days of the termination of the State of Emergency.
* * *
The law deems price increases excessive if they are more than 10 percent higher than the price at which a good or service was sold in the usual course of business prior to the State of Emergency; or, if additional costs are imposed by suppliers or certain logistical concerns during the State of Emergency, the increase is more than 10 percent of the amount of markup from cost, compared with the markup ordinarily applied.
Violations are punishable by civil penalties of up to $10,000 for the first offense and $20,000 for the second and subsequent offenses. Each individual sale of merchandise is considered a separate and distinct event.
I hope anyone who got taken by the folks at Best Buy will report the violation.
H/T Doug Ross
Three legislatures in New England are considering legislation to require micro-stamping on gun firing pins to help trace the guns used in crimes. There are some good arguments for the idea -- but, as the Boston Globe points out, some pretty good arguments against the requirement, too. In an editorial on the matter, the paper piously intones that "this is a balancing decision that should be left to the legislatures, not gunmakers."
Now this statement is arguably true -- certainly the legislature, rather than an industry to be regulated, should be making decisions on regulations. But that isn't what the editorial board of the Boston Globe really means, as we see in the paragraph that comes next.
While firearms manufacturers have a right to lobby against this legislation and explain their objections to it, it is inappropriate to wield the jobs of hundreds of workers as a weapon. Micro-stamping does not place any significant burden on the sale or manufacture of guns. It is not a ban or an arduous tax. It merely requires the engraving of a serial number in one more place on the weapon. If a state legislature decides micro-stamping is appropriate, it should not be forced to choose between citizensí lives and citizensí livelihood.
Excuse me? Is the Boston Globe taking upon itself the right to define what lobbying methods are legitimate? Are the members of the editorial board really claiming the right to determine what business decisions may be made by business owners in response to legislative proposals and enactments that they find find burdensome, even if the legislature and the local media do not? What's more, isn't this effectively a claim that business owners should not be free to relocate to places they believe have a better regulatory and business climate? Sounds to me like the Boston Globe is using its freedom of the press to advocate against the freedom of every other business in the state.
Set aside that the micro-stamping technology in question has been determined to be flawed, that it is encumbered by a patent that would constitute a licensing fee windfall for one company (in effect creating a tax paid to a private entity rather than the government), and it will likely increase the price of the average gun significantly (I've seen the figure $200, but won't stand by it because I don't know how it was determined). Set aside the fact that the technology can be thwarted and the actual value as a law enforcement tool is questionable. It is an undeniably American principle that those unhappy with the laws of one state or one region are free to pick up and move to another where they find the laws more to their liking, free from government interference with that right.
So in the end, the assertion of the Boston Globe that a state legislature "should not be forced to choose between citizensí lives and citizensí livelihood" is a false proposition. Every proposed law considered by a legislative body must ultimately face a cost/benefit test. In this case, one of the questions to be considered is whether or not the law provides enough protection to citizens to justify the loss of jobs and tax revenues of the states (Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts) where such legislation is under consideration. Not only should that choice be made, but it must be made. And while I will not take a position in this post regarding which side the legislature should come down on, let me just say that there is no way that government in a free society can operate without making such choices.
And let me add -- we down here in Texas would love to see Colt relocate to our state. We are business-friendly, gun-friendly, and freedom-friendly. Why wouldn't you want your base of operations here?
What the heck is it with these guys? Who takes naked pictures of themselves in the mirror? And more to the point, why on earth would anyone in public life (not in public life, for that matter) put such a picture out there into the internet?
Senator Roberto Arango of Puerto Rico has been accused of posting naked pictures of himself on mobile gay hookup site Grindr.
The Puerto Rican TV show Dando Candela presented the conservative lawmaker with a photograph of a man, naked except for a pendant necklace, whose face was obscured by an iPhone as he snapped a photo of his reflection in a mirror.
Arango didn't exactly deny he was the subject in the photograph: ďYou know I've been losing weight. As I shed that weight, I've been taking pictures. I don't remember taking this particular picture but I'm not gonna say I didn't take it. I'd tell you if I remembered taking the picture but I don't.Ē
ďIt would be my pleasure to tell you I'm the person in this photograph, but honestly I don't remember,Ē he said with a big smile.
Haven't seen an uncensored version of the photo in question, but let's just say that it doesn't appear that the pic is from an angle that you can see that smile -- or the rest of the face.
I'm sorry -- that Senator Roberto Arango takes enough pictures of himself naked that he cannot remember if he took this particular one is indicative of a problem in my book. And that he obviously will not say that he didn't post the picture online (never mind that it is at a gay dating site -- that really doesn't matter in this equation) says everything about his judgment. He needs to resign -- even though, unlike Anthony Weiner's notorious self-portraits, this particular snapshot was only shared with consenting adults.
Right next to that sign that is being mandated by Barack Obamaís union cheerleaders at the NLRB, I encourage all S.C. employers to put up another sign: in our state, every worker has the freedom to reject the efforts to form unions and keep their paychecks for themselves and their families instead of paying dues to union bosses in Washington.
That's right in line with what I observed the other day, regarding the sort of additional notice that ought to be required in the workplace to provide balance and neutrality to the newly prescribed signage.
Business groups claim that the requirement has the effect of government taking the side of the unions. I agree -- especially since there is not a requirement that employees be told that they have a right to refuse to join a union, a right to request a refund of political assessments, and the right to seek decertification of a union free from reprisal by organized labor thugs. Government neutrality would seem to require that both sides be presented -- but since the Obama Regime is a wholly owned subsidiary of the labor unions, I guess neutrality is too much to expect.
But somehow, I expect that the national media will try to present Gov. Nikki Haley as an extremist for suggesting that employees be told of all their rights regarding unions -- assuming that her on-point suggestion gets covered at all.
Here's their headline.
Honesty really ought to require it be changed to the following.
Sha' Vonne Ironche's husband called her Tuesday afternoon from inside the Houston immigration detention center, saying an officer told him to have a bag packed and ready by 5 p.m. for his deportation flight back to Spain.
She blacked out. The other teachers at her Houston-area school had to call her mother to come and pick her up.
Just days earlier, she and her husband, Esterny Ironche, a 55-year-old Spanish teacher, had high hopes he would be spared from deportation. Obama administration officials last week announced a case-by-case review of pending immigration cases, saying they planned to dismiss "low-priority" cases involving non-criminals to better target dangerous criminals.
Esterny Ironche had no criminal history, and he was married to a U.S. citizen. He had overstayed a visa 15 years ago, but had paid his taxes and had legal work authorization from the government. He had a case pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals. And he was in remission for prostate cancer and participating in a clinical trial in Houston.
All of those factors, the lives that had carefully constructed together here, would surely count in his favor, they figured.
But the government did not spare Ironche, who was loaded onto a flight from Houston to Dallas with the suitcase his wife had packed for him. He arrived in Madrid early Thursday.
Fifteen years of lawbreaking -- and on the government payroll at that, doing a job that an American citizen would have been glad to do.
Now is would I have objected to a waiver for this guy? Probably not -- but that is a grant of mercy, not a right. And given that there were thousands of teachers laid off here in Texas in the last few months, it isn't like there aren't Americans available today to fill Ironche's teaching job.
In most school districts, convocation is a pep talk for teachers and a waste of several hours that could be better spent preparing for the first day of school. My district did away with it a few years ago, after our former superintendent engaged in such stunts as riding in to a school gym on a Harley and skydiving onto the district football field. That said, convocation is generally a pretty harmless event Ė but hereís an exception.
They've tried letters, emails, and lobbyists. But this month, a local school superintendent and his administrators found another way of expressing their feelings on funding cuts and standardized testing.
They dressed up like actors from the classic comedy show "Hee Haw," and performed a sharp-witted satirical song aimed straight at Gov. Rick Perry.
It was Sanger ISD's convocation - a kind of comedy skit/pep-rally for staffers. No students are included. The past year had been a beating for educators, according to assistant superintendent Jackie McBroom.
ďTeachers are tired, principals are tired,Ē McBroom said.
United Educators Association executive director Larry Shaw agreed.
ďOur schools just got cut by $4 billion, and the governor just left town,Ē Shaw said.
With that in mind, McBroom along with superintendent Kent Crutsinger, IT director Chris Miller and deputy superintendent Eric Beam took to the stage to perform a song McBroom wrote.
ďI did not intend for it to be a political statement,Ē said McBroom.
This was the chorus of the song:
"Where, Rick Perry, are you tonight? Why did you leave us here all alone? You promised us funding for all Texas children; but then you heard 'White House' and -- pfft -- you were gone."
Now mind you, this was a mandatory event for school employees. Non-attendance was not an option, nor was walking out before it is complete. That leads me to make the following observations.
When the top officials of a school district corral all the employees into a room and require them to view what is nothing less than a political commercial against a statewide elected official and presidential candidate, something is wrong.
When these same top administrators then coerce the employees to engage in political speech against that statewide elected official and presidential candidate, there is something even more rotten.
When they are unrepentant and seek to justify their actions, they are clearly unprofessional and need to be given their walking papers by the school board Ė or else the school board needs to be voted out at the next election.
Now please understand Ė Iím taking this position not because I am a Republican or a Perry supporter. Iíve made it clear around here that Iíve got problems with the governor and his candidacy for president Ė and Iíve also made clear that I didnít agree with every education related proposal that made it through the legislature. Whatís more, I would not object to a frank and fact-based presentation of those changes to teachers and a clear projection of what they will mean for them and the district Ė that is professional conduct. Unfortunately, professional conduct is apparently far beyond these four district supervisors.
The state of Arizona filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging the federal governmentís authority to enforce part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, becoming the first state to challenge the constitutionality of sections of the federal law that bars states from denying or limiting a personís right to vote based on their race or color.
A provision in the law that requires several states including Arizona to get approval from the Justice Department for changes in voting procedures is unconstitutional, state Attorney General Tom Horne argues in the suit, which was filed in District of Columbia District Court.
ďThe portions of the Voting Rights Act requiring preclearance of all voting changes are either archaic, not based in fact, or subject to completely subjective enforcement based on the whim of federal authorities,Ē Horne said in a statement as the suit was filed.
You really do need to read Horneís statement Ė it rather masterfully explains the absurdity of the provisions for determining coverage under the preclearance provisions for language minorities.
Of course, I dealt with the silliness of this extension of the entire preclearance scheme back in 2006, when I pointed out that the statute continues to use minority voting totals from the 1964 presidential election as the baseline for determining if preclearance is required. Such a standard is arbitrary, capricious, and illogical in the extreme. It is my profound hope that Arizona wins this suit, and that such a result leads to the imposition of preclearance in all 50 states or, alternatively, the use of the statistical data on more recent elections to move states on and off the list of states required to receive federal approval if there is to be preclearance at all. After all, why must we solve the problems of the 1964 election until 2032.