SUBSCRIBE

I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.

TWITTER
SEARCH
Thursday
Jul312014

CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY DEPLOYED ON BORDER

Special Contribution courtesy of the TROUSERED APES blog, a smart, thoughtful site by a very talented blogger, Ross A. (I prefer not giving his full name since he's gainfully employed and expressing what might be deemed dissenting views mandated by political correctness could cause some issue). Look for more in the future! 

 The United States border continues to buckle under the weight of Central American illegals (we say 'illegals' around here, not 'undocumented' or 'unaccompanied'). Tens of thousands continue to flood the border each month in hopes of getting through - news got out south of the border that 'now is the time to cross' due to recently relaxed immigrant-friendly policies, along with the perception that if border jumpers say they have family here, they can be granted temporary status with the *promise* to check in within 30 days for re-evaluation. Cause honor system always works here. Combine that with drug cartels chasing these families north to the border and you can see why this is such a chaotic state of affairs. Let me establish some context, because the mainstream networks are doing a great job of confusing everybody and covering up 'their guy's' tracks. 

Many in the media will be quick to point to the oft-talked about William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 signed under George Bush that basically granted asylum to any child believed to be victim of assorted types of trafficking. Now Bush did nothing substantial to defend the border in his eight years in office (which disgusts me), but this law is HARDLY the reason why in 2014 we would see a spike from an 6,800/year average from 2004-2011 to 100,000+ this year and an incremental climb of 25-50% in subsequent years. That's a problem we can't blame on George Bush. Sorry Obamabots. Liberals are obviously using a form of Common Core math to equate 6,800=150,000=Bush! This is all manufactured to play on people's emotions. Check out the links below - they knew this was coming, and DHS even advertised jobs based on November 2013 reports of the influx: 

http://www.usccb.org/about/migration-policy/upload/Mission-To-Central-America-FINAL-2.pdf

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/stunning-dhs-solicited-bids-for-vendor-to-handle-65000-unaccompanied-minors-in-january_062014

Anyway, as mentioned in a prior post, this is all aimed at achieving the Hegelian Dialectic of 'Problem- Reaction-Solution'. Flood the border with unaccompanied minors (80% are males in their late teens, it's not like a bunch of pudgy legged toddlers in saturated diapers are waddling up from Guatemala). Relocate illegals across the United States against the will of the citizens. Have the mainstream non-Fox media in your back pocket to sell the idea that it's 'all about the children'. Guilt law-abiding Christians into adopting these children, and question their religious faith if they don't automatically agree to adopt them. Infuriate the general public so that 'something needs to be done.' Whip out pen and phone and sign an executive order to grant official amnesty to millions of illegals. Game. Set. Match. 

Democrats win general elections for life, the country collapses, and government replaces rugged individualism and capitalism with socialism. This is what's going to happen. But it's not the brainchild of Barack Hussein Obama - it's the liberal wet dream of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

 

Click to read more ...

Wednesday
Jul302014

HE THINKS LIBERALS ARE THE STUPIDEST PEOPLE ON EARTH!

and he could very well be right!

Monday
Jul282014

THE HALBIG CASE AND OBAMACARE

Last week's new smack down of President Obama's overreach, Halbig v. Burwell, is a very interesting and surprising turn-of-events. In its simplest form, the case turns on the clear language of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In order to induce States to establish their own health exchanges, the law provides that tax credits and subsidies will only go to persons who enroll through a State-run exchange. 

Wisely, 36 of the States chose NOT to establish their own exchanges. The Administration knew this would effectively cripple the ACA by excluding most of the country from the incentives needed to entice the uninsured in to coverage. So, the IRS effectively ignored the clear language of the law and held that even those States which did NOT establish exchanges would get the subsidies and credits. 

Democrats never took seriously the challenge from Halbig. They contended it was an obvious "mistake". They chose to ignore both the rationale for the language in the law and the totally unambiguous language.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals took what seems to me to be the obvious conclusion. The law is the law, and it is NOT the purview of the Executive branch to effectively step into the role of the Legislative to "fix" it. The proper way to correct a mistake is to return to the Legislative branch of government to correct that mistake.  

Notwithstanding the evidence that this language was deliberate and considered, even the more liberal U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, found in favor of the IRS position. So, this issue is far from settled, and likely will eventually get to the Supreme Court.

Michael Cannon of The Cato Institute was one of the first to early on highlight the problem with the language used in ACA. He understands it in the way only a true expert can. He saw the problem early and was, in large part, responsible for the legal challenges which followed. He stands as the best voice of the "the law as written is clear" position so it is worth hearing it directly:

The contrary position--that the "State exchange" language was simply a drafting mistake--ignores that it has rationale consistent with that used elsewhere in legislation, and that at least one of its "architects" acknowledged that rationale. Jonathan Gruber is an MIT economist who helped design and even draft ACA. In fact, he was paid $400,000 for that assistance. He knows what ACA intended. And in 2012 he very clearly articulated that rationale publicly. When confronted with that irrefutable evidence he responded that it was "like a typo, but it was a speak-o"; now he claims what he said was a mistake.

Peter Suderman in the Hit-and-Run Blog in Reason.com discusses Gruber's "speak-o" at some length; Watch Obamacare Architect Jonathan Gruber Admit in 2012 That Subsidies Were Limited to State-run Exchanges (Updated With Another Admission).

On the other side of the controversy is ilya Solmin, law professor at George Mason Law School, in the Washington Post's Volokh Conspiracy blog. Solmin makes the point, in   Why the D.C. Circuit's Interpretation of the ACA in Halbig v. Burwell is Far From Absurd (Updated with a Response to Abbe Gluck relies upon the notion of "cooperative federalism" in which the federal and state governments work collaboratively to achieve particular ends.

Under the DC Circuit ruling, a state’s residents can only get ACA tax credits for purchasing health insurance if their state decides to establish and operate an insurance exchange. This creates a strong incentive for state governments to create such exchanges, thereby participating in the administration of Obamacare. If they do as the federal government wants, their residents get millions of dollars in tax credits, and their insurance companies and health care providers get lots of new business. By contrast, states would have far less incentive to create their own exchanges if they can rely on the federal government to do all the administrative heavy lifting without imperiling their residents’ eligibility for federal tax credits. 

What is quite interesting about this ruling is the manner in which it has been misrepresented by mainstream media as being little more than nitpicking, a simply error in drafting. That it not consistent with the facts. But it is consistent with a single party ramming through a major piece of legislation, with very little actual review, costing or thoughtful consideration. This is the the price a party pays when it plays fast-and-loose with our Constitutional processes and their own ethics.

Sunday
Jul272014

AND ARE YOU SURE ABOUT OBAMA'S RESPONSE?

(From Heritage.org) 


Sunday
Jul272014

ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THIS GLOBAL WARMING THING?

(From Tony Heller's REAL SCIENCE Blog, 07/26/14)

The frequency of 90 degree days in the US has been plummeting for 80 years, and 2014 has had the lowest frequency of 90 degree days through July 23 on record. The only other year which came close was 1992, and that was due to dust in the atmosphere from Mt Pinatubo.