Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever

[ExiledInIllinois]

Can somebody name one of the only federal agencies withOUT a law enforcement entity?

 

Hint: Answer is ********* spoiler alerted out below. What would be the fun if I gave the answer. ;-) ;-)

 

Hint 2: A Federal agency that probably deals with the general public the most.

 

Hint 3:

 

"While the ********* does not take its visitor assistance responsibility lightly, we hire our personnel for a professional job of managing project resources, not to perform law enforcement duties. We will continue to train our personnel to assist the visitor in every way possible, but maintaining a low key law enforce-

ment image."

 

"It is the policy of the ********* to provide safe-and healthful recreation opportunities while protecting and enhancing the project resources.

In the original acquisition of land at civil works installations, ********* obtains proprietary interests only. Individual states and their political subdivisions retain the statutory authority and inherent responsibility to enforce state and local laws. Park managers and rangers do not have the legal authority to enforce state and local laws. Our authority is limited to issuance of citations for violation of Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations. Park managers and rangers do not have the legal authority to arrest, carry weapons, or other items such as mace, nightsticks, or other similar equipment normally associated with law enforcement. Park managers and rangers cannot search or seize under this authority. Personnel may stop, but not physically detain the public while implementing these regulations.

The citation authority used to implement Title 36 was enacted by Congress in 1970.

In 1976, Congress, recognizing the limited

authority of the ********* in law enforcement and also the burden that these projects had placed on local authorities, enacted Section 120 of the Water Resource Development Act of 1976. This authority provided that the ********* could enter into contracts with states or their political subdivisions to obtain increased law enforcement at Civil Works water resource development projects. It is not intended that this authority diminish or otherwise limit the existing law enforcement responsibilities of the

state or local law enforcement agencies.

We have found that this program has created better cooperation and rapport between local law enforcement officers and ********* project personnel, reduced incidents of vandalism and other disturbances, increased public's sense of security and reduced the ********* personnel's exposure to high risk situations affecting their safety and that of the public."

Edited February 22, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois

[ExiledInIllinois]

Hint 4:

 

Did you know?

********* hosts 370 million visits annually to its recreation areas. *********-managed waters provide 33 percent of all U.S. freshwater fishing.

47,956 volunteers work 1.4 million hours annually at ********* projects--providing $33 million in value of service.

Seven of the top 10 migratory bird flyways in the U.S. crossover *********-managed waters.

******** manages 12 million acres of public lands and waters nationwide.

A visitor to ********* recreation areas can find 55,390 miles of shoreline; 11,211 miles of trails; 90,610 campsites and 3,672 boat ramps nationally."

 

"********* is the largest provider of water-based outdoor recreation in the nation. Its 403 lakes and river projects in 43 states provide a diverse range of recreational opportunities. Visitors of all ages can enjoy traditional activities like hiking, boating, fishing, camping and hunting, and for those slightly more adventurous there is snorkeling, windsurfing, whitewater rafting, mountain biking and geo-caching. Regardless of your favorite outdoor activity one thing is certain, recreation enriches people's lives. A visit to a ********* recreation area can strengthen family ties and friendships; create unforgettable memories and connect people to nature that will last a lifetime.

With 90 percent of our recreation areas located within 50 miles of a major metropolitan center, there is a *********site near you. We invite you to visit us!"

 

 

SideBar (w/answer) ALSO: From 1933-1942 people slammed and "hated" the CCC as being too "socialist"...

 

"The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was a public work relief program that operated from 1933 to 1942 in the United States for unemployed, unmarried men from relief families as part of the New Deal."

 

Guess when the general public starting liking it? One of the most popular programs in American history...

 

ANSWER: When the CCC rolled into their town!!!

 

:-/ :-/... Go figure!

Edited February 22, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois

[B-Man]

ALOE VERA NOW CAUSES CANCER IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA: For those of you not familiar with California’s Proposition 65, this 2009 L.A. Times article is a reasonable introduction:

 

Whether you are pumping gas or buying a fillet of salmon, your eyes have no doubt landed on an ominous sign documenting the presence of “chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.”

Such alarming notices began appearing in the state in 1986 thanks to Proposition 65, otherwise known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, which prohibits businesses from discharging potentially harmful chemicals in drinking water and requires them to disclose the presence of such chemicals on their premises. The 19-page list of hundreds of potentially dangerous chemicals kept by the state is updated annually.

Today, the warnings are everywhere: parking lots, hardware stores, hospitals and just about any decent-sized business including, as of May, those of medical marijuana suppliers — because marijuana smoke is now on the list of known carcinogens.

 

 

 

Flash-forward to 2016, when as the California Political Review notes, Aloe Vera has been added to the state’s Prop. 65 List:

 

You read that correctly: Aloe vera. In December of last year, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) published its intent to list Aloe vera, whole leave extract to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer. Despite the widely accepted extensive health benefits of Aloe vera, an unelected regulator in Sacramento can now tell you and all consumers it will cause cancer, even if no cases of cancer from Aloe vera exposure exist.

The problem is that the 800+ chemicals listed in Proposition 65 are not devised to protect consumers, but rather

serve as a cash cow for private trial lawyers to sue small business and reap the hefty settlement payout.

Since 1986, nearly 20,000 lawsuits have been filed, adding up to over half a billion dollars in settlement payments by business owners.

Unfortunately, the most profitable thing regulators give to trial lawyers at the expense of job creators is confusion.

Recent Proposition 65 proposed regulatory revisions create compliance difficulties, increase frivolous litigation, and add consumer confusion.

 

 

 

Which for trial lawyers, is a feature, not a bug.

 

Or as Ayn Rand wrote a half century ago in Atlas Shrugged, “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for me to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt.”

 

.

Edited February 22, 2016 by B-Man

[DC Tom]

ALOE VERA NOW CAUSES CANCER IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA: For those of you not familiar with California’s Proposition 65, this 2009 L.A. Times article is a reasonable introduction:

 

Whether you are pumping gas or buying a fillet of salmon, your eyes have no doubt landed on an ominous sign documenting the presence of “chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.”

Such alarming notices began appearing in the state in 1986 thanks to Proposition 65, otherwise known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, which prohibits businesses from discharging potentially harmful chemicals in drinking water and requires them to disclose the presence of such chemicals on their premises. The 19-page list of hundreds of potentially dangerous chemicals kept by the state is updated annually.

Today, the warnings are everywhere: parking lots, hardware stores, hospitals and just about any decent-sized business including, as of May, those of medical marijuana suppliers — because marijuana smoke is now on the list of known carcinogens.

 

 

 

Flash-forward to 2016, when as the California Political Review notes, Aloe Vera has been added to the state’s Prop. 65 List:

 

You read that correctly: Aloe vera. In December of last year, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) published its intent to list Aloe vera, whole leave extract to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer. Despite the widely accepted extensive health benefits of Aloe vera, an unelected regulator in Sacramento can now tell you and all consumers it will cause cancer, even if no cases of cancer from Aloe vera exposure exist.

The problem is that the 800+ chemicals listed in Proposition 65 are not devised to protect consumers, but rather

serve as a cash cow for private trial lawyers to sue small business and reap the hefty settlement payout.

Since 1986, nearly 20,000 lawsuits have been filed, adding up to over half a billion dollars in settlement payments by business owners.

Unfortunately, the most profitable thing regulators give to trial lawyers at the expense of job creators is confusion.

Recent Proposition 65 proposed regulatory revisions create compliance difficulties, increase frivolous litigation, and add consumer confusion.

 

 

 

Which for trial lawyers, is a feature, not a bug.

 

Or as Ayn Rand wrote a half century ago in Atlas Shrugged, “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for me to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt.”

 

.

 

I'm always amused when I buy something like a hand plane, and it comes with a Prop 65 warning "This product contains chemicals than are known to to cause cancer in the state of California "

 

What's that, again? It's a !@#$ing hand plane. It's cast-iron. I'm not gonna eat it. How's it causing cancer again? Oh, wait...it only causes cancer in California. Good thing I'm in Maryland.

 

I could never live in CA. Everything there causes cancer.

[3rdnlng]

ALOE VERA NOW CAUSES CANCER IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA: For those of you not familiar with California’s Proposition 65, this 2009 L.A. Times article is a reasonable introduction:

 

 

Whether you are pumping gas or buying a fillet of salmon, your eyes have no doubt landed on an ominous sign documenting the presence of “chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.”

Such alarming notices began appearing in the state in 1986 thanks to Proposition 65, otherwise known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, which prohibits businesses from discharging potentially harmful chemicals in drinking water and requires them to disclose the presence of such chemicals on their premises. The 19-page list of hundreds of potentially dangerous chemicals kept by the state is updated annually.

Today, the warnings are everywhere: parking lots, hardware stores, hospitals and just about any decent-sized business including, as of May, those of medical marijuana suppliers — because marijuana smoke is now on the list of known carcinogens.

 

 

Flash-forward to 2016, when as the California Political Review notes, Aloe Vera has been added to the state’s Prop. 65 List:

 

 

You read that correctly: Aloe vera. In December of last year, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) published its intent to list Aloe vera, whole leave extract to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer. Despite the widely accepted extensive health benefits of Aloe vera, an unelected regulator in Sacramento can now tell you and all consumers it will cause cancer, even if no cases of cancer from Aloe vera exposure exist.

The problem is that the 800+ chemicals listed in Proposition 65 are not devised to protect consumers, but rather serve as a cash cow for private trial lawyers to sue small business and reap the hefty settlement payout. Since 1986, nearly 20,000 lawsuits have been filed, adding up to over half a billion dollars in settlement payments by business owners. Unfortunately, the most profitable thing regulators give to trial lawyers at the expense of job creators is confusion.

Recent Proposition 65 proposed regulatory revisions create compliance difficulties, increase frivolous litigation, and add consumer confusion.

 

 

Which for trial lawyers, is a feature, not a bug.

 

Or as Ayn Rand wrote a half century ago in Atlas Shrugged, “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for me to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt.”

 

.

I just want to say right now guys, it's been fun and if you don't hear from me again it's because I've been drinking Aloe Vera juice every day for the last 3 years.

[Chef Jim]

 

I'm always amused when I buy something like a hand plane, and it comes with a Prop 65 warning "This product contains chemicals than are known to to cause cancer in the state of California "

 

What's that, again? It's a !@#$ing hand plane. It's cast-iron. I'm not gonna eat it. How's it causing cancer again? Oh, wait...it only causes cancer in California. Good thing I'm in Maryland.

 

I could never live in CA. Everything there causes cancer.

 

Everything causes cancer here but because of all these warnings cancer in CA is at an all time low. At least you would assume it was right?

[IDBillzFan]

I could never live in CA. Everything there causes cancer.

 

This state truly is the epitome of SoProg idiocy.

 

All we hear about is 'green' technology. Save everything. Stop wasting stuff. Re-purpose. Re-cycle. Re-use.

 

Meanwhile, the state also mandated that every health insurance company send a 6-page letter to all of their corporate customers, every month, which essentially starts with 'This is not a bill, and you're not late on your payment, but California state law requires us to send you this notice every month to ensure you know that if you fail to pay your bill within 30 days, we can not cancel your insurance."

 

Every corporate customer. Every month. The same notice. You're not late, but if you were, you'd be okay.

[DC Tom]

 

This state truly is the epitome of SoProg idiocy.

 

All we hear about is 'green' technology. Save everything. Stop wasting stuff. Re-purpose. Re-cycle. Re-use.

 

Meanwhile, the state also mandated that every health insurance company send a 6-page letter to all of their corporate customers, every month, which essentially starts with 'This is not a bill, and you're not late on your payment, but California state law requires us to send you this notice every month to ensure you know that if you fail to pay your bill within 30 days, we can not cancel your insurance."

 

Every corporate customer. Every month. The same notice. You're not late, but if you were, you'd be okay.

 

And at the bottom of every page, it probably says "This paper contains chemicals that are known to cause cancer in the state of California."

 

In fact...if it doesn't, you should report it to the state government. I'm damn near positive the chemistry of paper making requires chemicals that are in some form or to some degree carcinogenic.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Speaking of cancer...Hope many don't have laminate flooring. Probably a risk too, but we opted for the real deal hardwood... Glad we did, but the will probably find something wrong with that too! :-(

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/cdc-revises-lumber-liquidators-flooring-cancer-risk-n523471

[B-Man]

Federal Government Tells Parents: “We Are Your Equals”

William A. Estrada

 

Last December, the United States Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services released a draft policy document outlining how the federal government can better “help” children and families. On page one, the federal agencies made this stunning declaration:

 

“It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.” (emphasis added)

 

 

This one sentence unmasks the federal government’s true philosophy behind decades of federal involvement in welfare, kindergarten through 12th grade education spending and policies, programs like Head Start, and now the push to create universal early education for young children from birth through age 5: the federal government believes that its role is equal with the role of parents.

 

A redefinition of the family

 

Not only does this draft document expose the federal government’s breathtaking arrogance, a footnote at the bottom of page one goes so far as to redefine the family:

 

The term “family” is used to include

all the people who play a role in a child’s life

and interact with a child’s early childhood program or school. This may include fathers, mothers, grandparents, foster parents, formal and informal guardians, and siblings,

among others.

 

 

“All the people who play a role in a child’s life.” All those who “interact with a child’s early childhood program or school.” “Informal guardians.” According to this footnote, a close family friend (an “informal guardian”) could be considered part of a child’s family. This could include a parent’s boyfriend or girlfriend, even if the relationship is temporary or uncommitted. There have already been cases in which custody of a child was granted to the parent’s former lover, against the parent’s wishes. And a child’s siblings are also important to family, but siblings shouldn’t have the legal authority to make parenting decisions.

 

Having a relaxed definition of family is fine at Thanksgiving and Christmas, but parents, not the government, should be the sole decisionmakers where their children are concerned. This casual and open-ended (“among others”) definition of family sets up a slippery slope for parental rights and family freedom.

 

 

More at the link: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/2016/201603010.asp

Edited March 1, 2016 by B-Man

[Tiberius]

Federal Government Tells Parents: “We Are Your Equals”

William A. Estrada

 

Last December, the United States Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services released a draft policy document outlining how the federal government can better “help” children and families. On page one, the federal agencies made this stunning declaration:

 

“It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.” (emphasis added)

 

 

This one sentence unmasks the federal government’s true philosophy behind decades of federal involvement in welfare, kindergarten through 12th grade education spending and policies, programs like Head Start, and now the push to create universal early education for young children from birth through age 5: the federal government believes that its role is equal with the role of parents.

 

A redefinition of the family

 

Not only does this draft document expose the federal government’s breathtaking arrogance, a footnote at the bottom of page one goes so far as to redefine the family:

 

The term “family” is used to include

all the people who play a role in a child’s life

and interact with a child’s early childhood program or school. This may include fathers, mothers, grandparents, foster parents, formal and informal guardians, and siblings,

among others.

 

 

“All the people who play a role in a child’s life.” All those who “interact with a child’s early childhood program or school.” “Informal guardians.” According to this footnote, a close family friend (an “informal guardian”) could be considered part of a child’s family. This could include a parent’s boyfriend or girlfriend, even if the relationship is temporary or uncommitted. There have already been cases in which custody of a child was granted to the parent’s former lover, against the parent’s wishes. And a child’s siblings are also important to family, but siblings shouldn’t have the legal authority to make parenting decisions.

 

Having a relaxed definition of family is fine at Thanksgiving and Christmas, but parents, not the government, should be the sole decisionmakers where their children are concerned. This casual and open-ended (“among others”) definition of family sets up a slippery slope for parental rights and family freedom.

 

 

More at the link: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/2016/201603010.asp

Oh brother

 

You read whatever you want into anything.

 

"Have a good day"

 

Gatorman is telling us what type of day to have, authoritarian waaaa cry cry

[Deranged Rhino]

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

DR, a little off topic, but do you have any interesting theories on why Obama has fired so many high ranking military officers, and in particular seems to have it out for submarine commanders?

[Deranged Rhino]

DR, a little off topic, but do you have any interesting theories on why Obama has fired so many high ranking military officers, and in particular seems to have it out for submarine commanders?

 

Sadly I don't. But I can look into it some more.

[Tiberius]

DR, a little off topic, but do you have any interesting theories on why Obama has fired so many high ranking military officers, and in particular seems to have it out for submarine commanders?

Give him time, he will find some wacko dog crap eating theory as soon as his opiates wear off

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Give him time, he will find some wacko dog crap eating theory as soon as his opiates wear off

Let the hate flow through you

[Deranged Rhino]

Let the hate flow through you

He's more hateful and ignorant than he claims republican voters are.

 

I'd point out the irony to him, but it'd go over his head.

[TPS]

 

I'm always amused when I buy something like a hand plane, and it comes with a Prop 65 warning "This product contains chemicals than are known to to cause cancer in the state of California "

 

What's that, again? It's a !@#$ing hand plane. It's cast-iron. I'm not gonna eat it. How's it causing cancer again? Oh, wait...it only causes cancer in California. Good thing I'm in Maryland.

 

I could never live in CA. Everything there causes cancer.

Maybe you misunderstand the warning? When you use the plane, the air born particles eventually make their way to California, causing cancer for some poor legal immigrant's child...

[DC Tom]

DR, a little off topic, but do you have any interesting theories on why Obama has fired so many high ranking military officers, and in particular seems to have it out for submarine commanders?

 

I did some digging. There's a pattern of slightly ticky-tack discipline that's technically against the rules but usually not thought of as a problem (e.g. "Someone said a bad word at movie night, which is conduct unbecoming an officer and prejudicial to discipline.") Quite a few of them were quite warranted, though...e.g. the carrier commander who tried to drive his ship through congested shipping lanes by the seat of his pants, as though his 100,000 ton carrier were an attack jet.

 

But so far, this one's a real gem...

 

 

Cmdr. Mike Varney, commander, USS Connecticut. Relieved June 6 after investigation found he obstructed an inquiry into the mishandling of classified material.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

I did some digging. There's a pattern of slightly ticky-tack discipline that's technically against the rules but usually not thought of as a problem (e.g. "Someone said a bad word at movie night, which is conduct unbecoming an officer and prejudicial to discipline.") Quite a few of them were quite warranted, though...e.g. the carrier commander who tried to drive his ship through congested shipping lanes by the seat of his pants, as though his 100,000 ton carrier were an attack jet.

 

But so far, this one's a real gem...

 

 

D'oh!