Jump to content

Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever


Recommended Posts

 

Milwaukee Public Schools explains why it allocated $470,000 to "Black Lives Matter"

 

http://www.newstalk1130.com/onair/common-sense-central-37717/mps-spending-471073-on-black-lives-14706589/ …

 

Maybe it's a slush fund for BLM to dip into to cover the cost of their riots.

 

"Hey...sorry we trashed your pharmacy and took all your narcotics. Here's a few century notes to ease the pain."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CiSDl7IUYAA-IAm.jpg

 

 

 

Milwaukee Public Schools explains why it allocated $470,000 to "Black Lives Matter"

 

http://www.newstalk1130.com/onair/common-sense-central-37717/mps-spending-471073-on-black-lives-14706589/ …

 

 

 

to develop a cultural studies curriculum and provide staff training on restorative practices to improve student attendance, academics, graduation rates and school culture through facilitation of meaningful dialogue and support on issues surrounding race and trauma faced in communities and schools.

 

Their plan is to talk about talking about being black.

 

I'll take "How to look like you're doing something without actually doing a damned thing" for half a million, Alex...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Their plan is to talk about talking about being black.

 

I'll take "How to look like you're doing something without actually doing a damned thing" for half a million, Alex...

 

I'm sure the curriculum they develop will focus on things like doing your best in school, not having children out of wedlock, developing character, abstaining from drugs and practicing American Patriotism.

Edited by keepthefaith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A must watch:

 

If you agree with the conclusion of that video, than you would also agree that it's a bad idea to give the government even more control of our lives, ie healthcare, entitlements, etc. right?

 

Why in the hell are liberals, who complain about the corrupt system, actively trying to give it more power?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you agree with the conclusion of that video, than you would also agree that it's a bad idea to give the government even more control of our lives, ie healthcare, entitlements, etc. right?

 

Why in the hell are liberals, who complain about the corrupt system, actively trying to give it more power?

 

Because government is corrupted by outside influence. Therefore, if the government is responsible for everything, it's not corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you agree with the conclusion of that video, than you would also agree that it's a bad idea to give the government even more control of our lives, ie healthcare, entitlements, etc. right?

 

Why in the hell are liberals, who complain about the corrupt system, actively trying to give it more power?

 

I'm not a liberal, nor am I a conservative. I'm agnostic politically. Frankly I think both monikers are just distractions used to foment tribalism within the electorate. A divided and constantly fighting electorate has no time or energy to look for the real source of the country's problems -- let alone tackle them. I do believe government has a role to play in people's lives, the protection of property and individual liberties not to mention general security and emergency services. And I do believe that as the world's strongest power we should be providing a safety net (including healthcare) for the most vulnerable and exposed portions of our population. We can only get stronger as a nation if we help each other -- and that's a notion that both conservatives and liberals would agree with if you asked them in a vacuum.

 

But that requires the government to be serving the people rather than a select few as it does now. Right now the system is broken because we've codified bribery into the political process and disguised it as a free speech issue. It's not about speech, it's about access. Those with the means have access the 99.999% do not. We're sliding down the slope into an authoritarian state that serves its corporate masters above all else, the signs are clear, but there's still time to adjust course if the people would wake up and get some unity in the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYC Mayor wants to fine businesses who don’t use transgender pronouns such as “ze” or “zir”

 

 

I’m no longer sure on any given day if I’m watching the actual news out of New York City or reading the summary of a William Gibson novel. Either way, the crazy train has well and truly pulling into the station in the Big Apple. We learned this week that Hizzonor Bill de Blasio has yet another plan to entrench the city in “transgender” warfare and make sure that business owners are made to toe the line on political correctness. Under this latest scheme, any business which greets someone using a pronoun not matching the gender (or lack thereof) the customer “identifies” as could face a stiff fine in court. No… I’m not even remotely kidding you. (Washington Times)

 

Greeting customers as “Mr.” or “Mrs.” — or even not using the pronoun “ze” or “zir” — could prove costly for New York City businesses under rules drafted by Mayor Bill de Blasio’s bureaucrats.

 

The Gotham mayor’s Commission on Human Rights says entities that fail to address customers by their preferred gender pronouns and titles are in violation of the law and could be subject to penalties of up to $250,000.

 

The commission issued a “legal enforcement guidance” for the New York City Human Rights Law, which now “requires employers and converted entities to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs.) regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification.”

 

 

 

So now New York City will regulate the speech of business owners and employees down to the level of punishing those who use standard, polite pronouns which have been accepted protocol for nearly as long as we’ve had language skills.

 

More at the link:

 

 

 

 

 

bugs4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every republican legislature should be doing this.

 

 

FRANK CAGLE ON CHANGES IN TENNESSEE:

 

During the long years of Democratic rule, the Government Operations committees in the Legislature were boring exercises in routine housekeeping legislation. They were often stacked with some of the party’s less than stellar members, because you have to put them somewhere, and they rubber-stamped whatever the leadership wanted.

Government Ops” under Republican rule has morphed into a very powerful operation, rivaling even the Rules Committee or Finance. The power to regulate state bureaucrats has always been there; it’s just not been exercised until now.

There has been a major revolution in the operation of state government that has occurred while everyone has been preoccupied with Bible bills, bathroom bills and other idiocy. State bureaucrats are no longer free to impose draconian regulations, increase fees or make rule changes without first getting a sign-off from the Legislature.

The House committee on Government Ops is led by state Rep. Jeremy Faison, R-Newport. Faison is a rising star in the House, and he has had his committee reviewing with a view to eliminating or keeping 182 boards and commissions. He has also led the effort to get control of unelected bureaucrats imposing regulations at will. He is working in tandem with state Sen. Mike Bell, R-Riceville. New rules and regulations must now come to their committees for approval before they can be implemented. It turns the usual practice on its head. This has been met with horror by special interest groups that benefit from the status quo.

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, it’s not like those rules and regulations are there for the benefit of citizens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only someone who's confident in not being fired for incompetence (or poor wait times) would ever say this.

 

 

At CSM breakfast VA Sec. McDonald says we don't measure Disney's success by wait times,

 

so why should we measure VA's?

 

CjJX0wZWEAAfRpw.jpg

 

 

.Are people—are people *dying* in lines at Disney?

 

Seems like that's a big story we've missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"With all the anti-one-percenter rhetoric and tax-evading-evil-doer narratives spewing forth from the mainstream media mouthpieces of the establishment since The Panama Papers were exposed for all to see, it may come as a surprise to some to find out which cohort of the elites are the most populous among the tax-haven-creating documents...

The Politicians!"

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-22/guess-what-occupation-most-frequently-cited-panama-papers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two big bank stories, both sides of the spectrum:

 

Bank of America $1.27 billion U.S. mortgage penalty is voided

 

A U.S. appeals court on Monday threw out a jury's finding that Bank of America Corp was liable for mortgage fraud leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, voiding a $1.27 billion penalty and dealing the U.S. Department of Justice a major setback.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York found insufficient proof under federal fraud statutes to establish Bank of America's liability over a mortgage program called "Hustle" run by the former Countrywide Financial Corp.

(snip)

The lawsuit was filed in 2012 following a whistleblower's complaint, and remains one of the biggest government enforcement cases to go to trial in connection with the U.S. housing meltdown and financial crisis.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bank-of-america-fraud-idUSKCN0YE20S

And:

Banks Must Defend Libor Lawsuits After Judges Warn of Impact

 

 

Sixteen of the world’s largest banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. must face antitrust lawsuits accusing them of hurting investors who bought securities tied to Libor by rigging an interest-rate benchmark, a ruling that an appeals court warned could devastate them.

The appellate judges reversed a lower-court ruling on one issue -- whether the investors had adequately claimed in their complaints to have been harmed -- while sending the cases back for the judge to consider another issue: whether the plaintiffs are the proper parties to sue, in part because their claims, if successful, provide for triple damages that could overwhelm the banks.

"Requiring the banks to pay treble damages to every plaintiff who ended up on the wrong side of an independent Libor‐denominated derivative swap would, if appellants’ allegations were proved at trial, not only bankrupt 16 of the world’s most important financial institutions, but also vastly extend the potential scope of antitrust liability in myriad markets where derivative instruments have proliferated," the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York said in the ruling.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-23/banks-are-ordered-by-court-to-defend-libor-antitrust-lawsuit

And one on reorganizing the Fed:

The right kind of reform

 

The most important job of a regional Fed is to oversee the banks in its district. As a result, Glass’s system comes perilously close to letting bankers serve as their own regulators—not so much a revolving door between Wall Street and government, as a shared executive suite. The bankers who sit on the boards of regional Feds are not directly responsible for regulation and they no longer vote for a regional Fed’s president, but banks appoint outside directors who do. And bankers can take part in a vote to dismiss a regional-Fed president.

This is all the more worrying since political gridlock has given the regional Feds growing representation on the FOMC. The system is designed so that the Washington board of governors, which is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, has a majority. But the White House has filled vacancies slowly, in part because of an unco-operative Senate—which in 2010, for instance, decided that Peter Diamond, a Nobel-prize-winning economist, was unqualified for the job. Hence, for most of Barack Obama’s presidency, regional Feds have matched governors in voting power. This matters because banks tend to profit from higher interest rates. Regional-Fed presidents tend to be the most hawkish members of the FOMC, as their dissenting opinions suggest (see chart).

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21699121-americas-next-president-should-modernise-federal-reserve-system-right-kind-reform

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hundreds of “dead voters” discovered in California

 

Cue the Monty Python references. Bring out yer dead!

 

Do you remember all those arguments from Democrats against voter ID laws and how it’s a solution in search of a problem because there’s no actual voter fraud going on? They might want to have a chat with the folks out in California who have now apparently taken a page from the playbooks of Chicago and New York City. There’s no sense discriminating against anyone when it comes to voting and we should obviously extend those rights to our citizens who may be suffering from the disadvantage of no longer being among the living. (CBS Local)

 

A comparison of records by David Goldstein, investigative reporter for CBS2/KCAL9, has revealed hundreds of so-called dead voters in Southern California, a vast majority of them in Los Angeles County.

“He took a lot of time choosing his candidates,” said Annette Givans of her father, John Cenkner.

Cenkner died in Palmdale in 2003. Despite this, records show that he somehow voted from the grave in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2010.

But he’s not the only one.

CBS2 compared millions of voting records from the California Secretary of State’s office with death records from the Social Security Administration and found hundreds of so-called dead voters.

 

 

 

First of all, hats off to David Goldstein for doing the long, hard, slogging work of actual journalism. It can’t have been much fun to go through miles upon miles of voter records and then create a database to match them up against Social Security’s death records, but he got the job done and it turned up an instructive treasure trove of data. The aforementioned Mr. Cenkner was far from the only person who seems to have miraculously risen from the grave like a vampire on election day for five out of seven years. There were nearly three dozen dearly departed who managed to vote in eight different elections during the period under review after they had reached room temperature. One incredibly patriotic woman managed to cast a ballot in 2014, a full 26 years after she was buried.

 

As the report indicates, these aren’t examples of simple administrative errors where someone with the same name voted elsewhere in the state. These were specific voters in known precincts who continued to cast ballots at the same location for years after they died. And the corruption in Los Angeles County wasn’t limited to just the Democrats. We need to be fair here and point out that while the majority were voting for the Party of the Donkey, they also dug up (sorry about that) 86 Republicans who were so active in our democratic process that they weren’t going to be stopped by a little thing like shuffling off this mortal coil.

 

{snip}

 

As I’ve long maintained, a lack of widespread convictions for voter fraud is not an indication that it’s not taking place. The fact is that we don’t devote any resources to identifying and prosecuting this particular crime. It’s so ridiculously easy to get away with and so difficult to detect that there’s very little stopping anyone from doing it. We can barely keep up with the number of people who are killed or go missing every year. We simply can’t be checking into every vote that’s cast. With that in mind, doesn’t it make sense to ensure that the people showing up to vote are actually who they say they are?

 

Or at least take a stab at making sure they’re still among the living?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...