Monday, January 30, 2012

North Carolina Ranks as One of the Worst in Tax Climate

Why do states offer taxpayer subsidized packages to companies so they will relocate to their cities? According to the Carolina Journal, it’s to mask their woeful business tax climate. And North Carolina is one of the worst offenders. A month doesn’t go by without Gov. Beverly Perdue throwing herself at a group of executives. I wouldn’t be surprised if she reeked of beer and cheap perfume.

How bad is North Carolina? You have to look at the Tax Foundation to see just how chaotic and hostile the Tar Heel state is to businesses. Currently, North Carolina ranks #44 just above: Minnesota, Rhode Island, Vermont, California, New York, and New Jersey.

How can a southern state rank amongst these liberal ****holes? I’ll tell you, decades upon decades of democratic rule. But more importantly, we have a form of double taxation that ranks us amongst the likes of California:

That’s because it allows localities to levy their own sales taxes on top of the statewide 4.75 percent. Local governments charge on average a little more than 2 percent, making the overall burden nearly 7 percent.

North Carolina also gets penalized for allowing local jurisdictions to define their own sales-tax base, meaning they get to decide what is and is not taxable.

“This creates two sales tax systems,” Robyn said. “You’ve got a state system with its own rate and its own list of things that are taxable, and you’ve got local tax systems — which can be different all around the state — each with their own rate and list of things that are taxable.”

“That adds a lot of complexity,” he said. “It’s a big compliance issue not only for brick-and-mortar stores, but especially for online stores.”

A state’s sales tax can hurt the business climate because as the rate climbs, customers make fewer purchases or seek out low-tax alternatives, Robyn writes in the report.

The effect of a higher sales tax rate is apparent when a traveler crosses city or state lines to go shopping, he continued. “Typically, a vast expanse of shopping malls spring up along the border in the low-tax jurisdiction.”

And if you pull up to a gas station in South Carolina, you’ll be sure to see lines of cars with “First in Flight” license plates.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Senator Marco Rubio Skewers Obama's Record

Senator Marco Rubio skewers Obama’s piss poor leadership and irresponsible spending in the above video. Florida republicans are providing some great leaders as of late. Rep. Allen West is another outspoken advocate of American values. The future looks bright from the sunshine state.

The Vote Pump

But according to all my liberal friends, it's the military and all the wars that is responsible for our huge debt; not entitlement spending. I wonder if this video will change their mind? I doubt it.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Obama's Luxury Liner Powered by Enslaving Future Generations

Don’t you care about the banks? Don’t you care about the 99%? Hats off to a Mark Oxner for Congress political advertisement. Who knew that slave ships still existed? The U.S.S. Obamaboat has brought a new style of subjugation. Future generations are being sold into a lifetime of debt and poverty to pay for the lifestyles of the rich and bureaucratic.

This luxury liner is predestined to a catastrophic end. And you know damn well this captain won’t go down with the ship.

Obama Thumbs Nose at a Georgia Court

Barack Obama has once again thumbed his nose at the American people, this time at a Georgia court. A state judge ordered Obama to appear in the hopes of settling questions about his eligibility to the office of president of the United States. His lawyer filed a motion to quash, which was denied. Hearings began on January 26, but there was only one problem: Obama and his lawyer didn’t show. Instead, they sent a complaint letter to Georgia’s Secretary of State.

The Democratic Party has learned a valuable lesson. If you want to control the electorate, you have to control their Secretary of State. Minnesota was the testing ground for a George Soros plot that paid huge dividends with the election of Al Franken to the U.S. Senate. Now, they’re trying to circumvent the legal process by appealing to Georgia’s Secretary of State.

The American Spectator wrote about this mischievous plan to corrupt our elections:

The vehicle for this planned hijacking of democracy is a below-the-radar non-federal "527" group called the Secretary of State Project. The entity can accept unlimited financial contributions and doesn't have to disclose them publicly until well after the election.

It was revealed during a panel discussion at the Democratic Party's convention last year that the
Democracy Alliance, a financial clearinghouse created by Soros and Progressive insurance magnate Peter B. Lewis, approved the Secretary of State Project as a grantee. The Democracy Alliance aspires to create a permanent political infrastructure of nonprofits, think tanks, media outlets, leadership schools, and activist groups -- a kind of "vast left-wing conspiracy" to compete with the conservative movement. It has brokered more than $100 million in grants to liberal nonprofits, including ACORN.

Let’s just hope that Georgia’s Secretary of State isn’t a George Soros lackey.

16 Scientists Defy Global Warming Establishment

The global warming scam is imploding, as more scientist bail from this world-wide hoax. A prominent physicist has just recently resigned from a prominent American guild in protest over their fraudulent position:

In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: 'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.' In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"

In the past, some scientists have been ostracized for questioning the global warming perpetuators. To not follow their orthodoxy is to kill the cash cow. Universities are dependent upon government grants; in turn, government bureaucrats and politicians us their research to subjugate the citizenry. It was a totalitarian marriage made in hell; a quid pro quo of greed and ambition.

The Wall Street Journal published an Op-Ed with sixteen signatories defying the establishment. Thank God there are still some scientists who follow the data, instead of consensus.

Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.


Obama Applauds Government Sanctioned Success

Where would the American people be without big government? According to Barack Obama, we are just a rudderless rabble without the guiding hand of a government bureaucrat:

President Obama tells a college audience that people don't get rich on their own. Obama's point that without government and paying your fair share, ultimately the successful wouldn't be able to get where they are.

"We do not begrudge wealth in this country. I want everybody here to do well. We aspire to financial success, but we also understand that we're not successful just by ourselves," President Obama said at a campaign event in Ann Arbor, Michigan on Friday morning.

"We're successful because somebody started the University of Michigan. We're successful because somebody made an investment in all the federal research labs that created the internet. We're successful because we have an outstanding military that costs money. We're successful because somebody built roads and bridges. And laid broadband lines and these things didn't just happen on their own. And if we all understand that we've got to pay for this stuff, it makes sense for those of us who've done best to do our fair share and to try to pass off that bill on to somebody else, that's not right. That's not who we are," he said.

Obama doesn’t begrudge success as long as its government sanctioned, and especially if you’re one of his green energy campaign bundlers.


NLRB Tramples on Employee's Right to Privacy

The National Labor Relations Board should be renamed the National Union Relations Board. This federal agency has become the strong arm of organized labor. First, they sued Boeing (a private company) for opening a factory in a right-to-work state; now, they’re mandating businesses give over private information of their employees to union thugs. How can this possibly be legal?

The Obama administration doesn’t give a hoot about laws, decency, or even a citizen’s privacy. Everything is politicized and on the table, including your phone number, address, and email.

Monday, January 23, 2012

Georgia Court to Hold Hearings on Obama's Presidential Eligibility

On January 26, 2012 a Georgia state judge will hold hearings on Barack Obama’s eligibility for president of the United States. WND reported the following:

Hearings have been scheduled for that date for three separate issues to be handled. They all are raised by Georgia residents who are challenging Obama’s name on the 2012 ballot for various reasons, which they are allowed to do under state law.

It is states, usually through the office of secretary of state, that run elections, not the federal government. The national election is simply a compilation of the results of the individual elections within states.

The schedule for the hearings was set by Judge Michael M. Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings. In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”

State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.

Three different plaintiffs’ groups are lined up for separate hearings, including one represented by California attorney Orly Taitz. She had the judge sign a subpoena for Obama’s testimony, and Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney for these cases, argued that he should be exempted.

Barack Obama’s father was a foreign national. According to Article II Section I of the United States Constitution this man does not qualify as a “natural born citizen”. His presidency is an affront to natural law, which is the basis of our founding principles. Only one Supreme Court case addresses a “natural born citizen”:

The U.S. Supreme Court opinion cited is Minor v. Happersett from 1875. It includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.

That case states:

“The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

That being said, the Wong Kim Ark case does not confer natural born status to aliens born on American soil. And a Supreme Court ruling is not the same as a constitutional amendment.


Obama's I Can't Wait to be a Dictator Video

Screw that antiquated constitution thing. Obama and his minions can't wait around for you and your elected representatives to come around to his totaltarian ambitions. He'll do it himself. He doesn't need a stinking Congress.

King Obama doesn't believe that the tea party people should hold him up. Why they're just a minority. And why should a miniority have a say in anything.

Arizona Congressman Proposes Constitutional Amendment to Check Government Spending

Finally, a backlash is beginning to develop against the outrageous spending by the Washington D.C. swamp monsters. An Arizona congressman has introduced a bill that would require majority approval by the states before the debt ceiling could be raised. Here is Rep. David Schweikert’s press release:

Washington, D.C. – On Tuesday, Congressman David Schweikert (R-AZ) introduced H.J.Res 99, the National Debt Relief Amendment (NDRA). This constitutional amendment would require approval from a majority of states before Washington increases the federal debt level:

“Our national debt is more than a mind-blowing $15 trillion, which breaks down to nearly $49,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country.

“Washington has demonstrated an inability to rein in its reliance on debt and continues to mortgage our future with more borrowing, spending, and bailouts.

“This constitutional amendment will change our bailout culture by curbing the growth of our federal debt, creating transparency, and enforcing budget discipline.

“I encourage my colleagues to pass this bipartisan amendment and soon.”

BACKGROUND: The NDRA will take away Congress’ authority to increase the debt limit by requiring approval from a majority of state legislatures to increase the national debt. This will give a voice to all 50 states and create a more accountable and transparent political process by getting Washington out of the way.

The NDRA is policy neutral and does not place any limits on how much the federal government can tax or spend. It allows Congress to request an increase in federal debt when necessary and does not prevent our country from responding to a national crisis.

North Dakota and Louisiana have already adopted the NDRA and 17 more states are poised to do so in their next legislative sessions.

At one time in our history, the states did have a say in federal spending. The progressives put an end to that by passing the 17th Amendment, which calls for direct elections of U.S senators; a task once decided by state legislators. Now, we have populism running amuck, and the states have become tools of the federal government; enslaving us in their socialist programs.

The progressive experiment has been a big failure. Their irresponsible behavior has put our country in peril. I applaud Rep. Schweickert’s efforts, but if the states are to ever shake the federal yoke, then we must repeal the 17th Amendment.

Friday, January 20, 2012

The Charlotte Observer's Class Warfare Attack on Mitt Romney's Finances

The Charlotte Observer should include “your daily dose of class warfare” in its masthead, because their editors are the quientessential purveyors of envy and greed. Just recently, they published an Op-Ed about Mitt Romney’s finances. Sure, they threw a bone to those of us who believe that success should be applauded, instead of despised; but their overall meme is the more “fortunate” aren’t paying their fair share to that black hole called the federal government.

Here is their “butt monkey”:

Mitt Romney is a rich man. He has made millions from investments and business ventures, most notably the private equity firm he co-founded, Bain Capital. He has made so much, in fact, that in South Carolina this week, he described the $374,327 he was paid in speaking fees last year as "not very much."

Good for him. Romney shouldn't feel shame - nor should voters reflexively be wary - at the heft of his financial portfolio. But on Tuesday, the Republican candidate for president also revealed that his effective tax rate is well below what many Americans pay - "probably closer to the 15 percent rate than anything," he said. It's an admission that'll intensify calls for Romney to release his income tax returns, but we don't need his paperwork to understand how some of the wealthiest Americans have found even more riches thanks to changes in federal tax policy.

The editors at the Disturber obviously failed to make the distinction of taxes on salaries and wages, and that of capital gains. It’s safe to assume that Romney paid the same amount of taxation – if not more – on his initial pay; now, the majority of his income comes from his savings and investments. The 15% is in truth a double taxation. The Disturber made a feeble attempt at trying to explain this:

Romney acknowledged this week that most of his income comes from investments, which are taxed at a rate significantly less than the top rate of 35 percent for individual wages. That's a product of decades of capital gains tax cuts, beginning with President Bill Clinton, who lowered that tax rate from 28 to 20 percent, followed by George W. Bush lowering it to 15 percent.

Many economists and most Republicans argue that capital gains tax cuts help rev the economy by putting more income in the pockets of people who make investments and create jobs. That's logical but disputed. Last year, a report from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service said that reducing capital gains tax rates does little to stimulate economic growth - and ultimately is a drag on federal revenues.

Of course the editors at the Disturber didn’t source this report. So, we can only speculate if they’re telling the truth. Experience has shown me that they can’t be trusted.

The CATO Institute has made an argument that capital gains should be abolished. Here are the top six reasons:

1) Less investment
2) Less risk taking
3) Less competitiveness
4) Less privacy
5) Less employment
6) Less fairness

And here is the video for those reasons:


Democrats Propose Another Windfall Tax on Oil Companies

The Wizard of Oz’s lost munchkin has once again proposed a windfall tax on oil companies. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (understudy to the lead lollipop kid) wants a government sponsored board to monitor gas prices, and determine what constitutes a just profit:

The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a "windfall profit tax" as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what constitutes a reasonable profit.

The Gas Price Spike Act,
H.R. 3784, would apply a windfall tax on the sale of oil and gas that ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent on all surplus earnings exceeding "a reasonable profit." It would set up a Reasonable Profits Board made up of three presidential nominees that will serve three-year terms. Unlike other bills setting up advisory boards, the Reasonable Profits Board would not be made up of any nominees from Congress.

I believe citizens in individual states should establish a council to determine a windfall tax on politicians and their beneficiaries who profit from taxpayer largess. Barack Obama and the Democratic Party have profited handsomely from campaign bundlers, who in turn have received federal government guaranteed loans.

Solyndra is a fine example of government sponsored venturism, and the graft known as green energy. The waste involved in this bankruptcy case is a testament to state sponsored coercion.

So why is a bankrupt company that owes a fortune to creditors, including American taxpayers, throwing away millions of dollars worth of assets?

Solyndra is not commenting. But court documents reveal the company received permission from the bankruptcy trustee to abandon the high grade glass, the court agreeing that it was of “inconsequential value” because the cost of storing them exceeds their value.

An employee for Heritage Global Partners, the company in charge of selling Solyndra’s assets, told CBS 5 they conducted an exhaustive search for buyers but no one wanted them.

But how exhaustive was that search? The tubes were never included on the list of Solyndra assets put up for sale at two auctions last year.

If they were, David Lucky told CBS 5 he would have bought them. “We certainly would have bid on them, yes,” Lucky said.

Lucky owns several large warehouses near Las Vegas. He buys and then resells manufacturing equipment and components all the time.

“Our company has bought a lot of stuff over the years. Truck loads and warehouses full of inventory that companies were just ready to send to the dump, because they don’t want to take the time to find markets for it,” he said.

We currently have over a dozen government sponsored green energy companies filing for bankruptcy. You’d think that would’ve been enough for Obama and the Democratic Party; but you would be wrong. They are now doubling down through the Department of Agriculture:

President Obama's Department of Agriculture (USDA) called for applicants to receive the $25.4 million in funding flagged for rural green energy loan guarantees and grants, even as Obama's campaign released an ad defending the Solyndra loan.

"This funding will assist rural farmers, ranchers and business owners to build renewable energy projects, providing opportunities for new technologies, create green jobs and help America become more energy self-sufficient," Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said today in a statement.

The $25 million available today comes through the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), and "will support at least $12.5 million in grant and approximately $48.5 million in guaranteed loan program level awards."

Since Barack Obama took office, gas prices have doubled. You’d think that would be a consideration for the implementation of the Keystone XL Pipeline; but apparently, it didn't even raise a blip on the radar. It makes you wonder what kind of an agenda this president has.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Unions Have Obama Spousal Abuse Syndrome

Barack Obama is on a roll. In just one week, he has managed to throw one insult after another to one of his party’s most loyal contributors and voting bloc: the labor unions. Take a bow Anointed One. Nothing says ingrate more than denying shovel ready jobs (Keystone XL pipeline) and at the same time rent a stadium that was made by non-union labor for his impending nomination.

Brett McMahon, president of the concrete construction firm Miller & Long DC and the spokesman for the anti-labor, pro-business group Halt the Assault, notes that the stadium where President Obama will formally accept the nomination was built by non-unionized workers.

"It is a great example of a grand monument that was built entirely union-free. Furthermore, unlike many sports facilities, there was very, very little public expenditure for the Panthers Stadium. It stands as an outstanding example of the free enterprise system at work. We are certain that the DNC will hold successful events there for their donors and delegates," McMahon said in a statement.

The unions must be experiencing spousal battery syndrome. Because they were clearly advocating for the pipeline project, as per this statement by the AFL/CIO’s Building Trades Council President, Mark Ayers:

[O]ur unions have been steadfast supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that is truly "shovel-ready" and a privately funded endeavor that would put significant numbers of American skilled craft professionals back to work under a project agreement that ensures safe and efficient construction. Regrettably, both of these issues have now been usurped and transformed into political pawns, where political posturing supersedes the need to create sound public policy that benefits working Americans.

….President Obama should immediately grant a presidential permit for the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, and congressional Republicans should craft and pass a 'clean' unemployment insurance extension; because partisan politics has never paid a mortgage or put food on anyone’s table.

And today Barack Hussein Obama announced from on high, that this project is denied. That has got to hurt. The unions might want to take some advice Bill Clinton gave to one of his victims: you might want to put some ice on that.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Valerie Jarrett's Shameless MLK Opportunism

Valerie Jarrett once again demonstrates the classlessness of a quintessential, democratic politician. On a day when Americans commemorate the MLK holiday, she used the platform to advance her bosses new era of slavery. And of course the sheep in attendance bleat:

"Teachers, and firefighters, and policemen, whose jobs are now in jeopardy because Congress--well let me be specific--because the Republicans in Congress," Jarrett told the crowd. According to the CBS affiliate in Atlanta, at this point, "Before she could finish her sentence, people in the congregation were laughing, and applauding."

Since when is the federal government responsible for funding municipal employees? Is it any wonder that this country has a $17 trillion debt with inane policies as this? And since when did King Obama need congressional approval for anything? He has stated and shown that he will act with or without their consent.

I can just imagine what Easter is going to be like. The Obamabots will have an “evil republican” bunny running around on the White House lawn, confiscating eggs and candy from the kiddies, while the Anointed One and his democratic lapdogs beat him with a stick.


Saturday, January 14, 2012

The Daily Show's "Parody" of the Civility Project

When I first watched this video, I thought it a parody. I seriously didn’t believe the Civility Project existed; and that Froma Harrop, a rabid liberal partisan, was a leading figure in this organization. I thought they were making fun. But I was wrong.

It’s amazing how many scams liberals pull. They must think we are a bunch of saps to believe their nonsense. I’ll give the Daily Show their props. They exposed Froma Harrop and the Civility Project for what it is: a sham.


Barack Obama Gives Pep Talk to EPA Apparatchiks

Barack Obama gave a pep talk to one of his favorite apparatchik organizations: the EPA. The Anointed One wanted to thank this oppressive organization for their work on behalf of the federal government and Democratic Party. He assured them that they are touching the lives of every American.

The president spoke to the EPA employees at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorim in Washington, D.C., to thank them for their work—which he said “touches the lives” of all Americans every day.

“The main reason I’m here is simple: I just want to say thank you,” Obama said. “I want to say thank you to each and every one of you, because the EPA touches on the lives of every single American every single day.”

And the Sackett’s of Idaho can sure as hell testify to that. They currently have a case in the Supreme Court. Fox News reported on how this family was touched by the benevolent EPA:

The Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps. of Engineers show up and accuse you of building on a “wetland”. The EPA issues what is known as a “compliance order”. You must stop all building. You must restore the land to its natural state. You must replace and plant trees. You must place a fence around the land and maintain the property in a pristine condition.

You have no right to a pre-enforcement challenge of the order. You must comply with the order or be sued by the EPA and face fines between 35-75 thousand dollars per day.

“Unlike other regulations and enforcement orders, the EPA under clean air and water laws can issue an order without giving the recipient a chance to challenge it in court before the agency initiates a lawsuit for noncompliance.” (IBT)

You are punished by being forced to spend money to correct an unproven accusation of a violation of the law- no probable cause or preponderance of the evidence. No way for you to prove or argue your case until the EPA decides to sue you.

This environmental hell hound organization is a direct threat to our liberty. If we are to restore natural law and property rights, the Supreme Court has to rule in favor of the Sacketts. Better yet, the America people must demand the abolition of this agency.


N.C. Teachers Union Sues State Over Republican "Midnight Rendezvous"

The North Carolina Teacher’s Union (NCAE) sued the state because they no longer have a free accounting service paid for by the taxpayers. Of course, that’s not what their contention is in their suit, but that’s exactly what it is. Their official stance is that the House republican’s “midnight rendezvous” violated the state’s constitution, and impairs their rights to freedom of association and speech.

The union says state lawmakers went much further than that, violating the state constitution in the process. Shortly after 11 p.m. on the closing night of the special session, the Legislature decided to raise the issue of when it would next formally convene. An amendment proposed that they reconvene at midnight that very night to "consider a legislative override of any bill vetoed by Governor Perdue."

At 1:12 a.m. that morning, the House voted 69 to 45 to override the governor's veto of Senate Bill 727. Because the Senate had previously voted to override the veto, the House vote had the effect of enacting it into law.

The union says the lawmakers violated the North Carolina Constitution on its face, and that the law violates their union members' rights to free expression and association.It seeks a restraining order, immediate declaratory relief that the General Assembly's actions violated the state constitution, an injunction and costs.

Let’s take a look at the NCAE’s choice of association and speech as reported by the Civitas Institute:

2010 Contributions:

NCAE contributed $172,950 to candidates. Democrats received $170,650 in contributions (98.6 percent); Republicans received $2,300 in contributions (1.3 percent).

2008 Contributions

NEA and NCAE contributed $1.8 million to help Bev Perdue win the 2008 Governor’s race.
NEA spent another $1.7 million on campaign ads for Bev Perdue.

I would say the NCAE’s speech and association is limited in scope. It’s no wonder Governor Beverly Perdue vetoed that bill. Hell, look at all the money she received from this union. It must be nice to have your own little collection agency inside the state government; and all at the expense of the taxpayers. Nice! Is it any wonder the House republicans held a little “midnight rendezvous,” so as to put an end to this racket?

Here is my tribute to North Carolina’s House republicans. May you be as bold in the future as you are now.

Should Democrats be Charged an Inheritance Tax Every Time They Blame Bush?

Is Debbie Wasserman-Schultz the best the Democratic Party can come up with? It seems every time I watch her in an interview, she spews the same old, tired talking points. I would be embarrassed if she represented my ideals and beliefs.

I’m sure it’s taxing for Debbie Downer to articulate an argument for big government programs, while trying to assure the citizens of this country that we’re not heading down the road to serfdom. It’s too bad we couldn’t impose an inheritance tax every time she and her party blamed George W. Bush for the failures of the Obama administration.

Tsar Obama Wants a More Streamlined Oprichniki

Barack Obama isn’t satisfied until he has all of his oprichnikis streamlined into a more consolidated pack. The angry Tsar wants to sic his salivating dogs on us villagers. And if Congress doesn’t give him the power, then he’ll just take it himself. The Anointed One has already demonstrated that he doesn’t give a wit about representative government. The appointment of Cordray and his Cerberus to the NLRB should be enough to disabuse us of the notion that we still have a constitution.

And if companies believe they can escape the long-arm of an Obama bureaucrat, they’d better think again. This power hungry bastard will make sure that you’re “committed” to his government. But at the same time assures everyone that he wouldn’t abuse his power. Yeah right!

The American Tsar wants a 21st century bureaucracy that will serve as a one-stop shop for small and large businesses. We will have a government that will be more efficient than the private sector. To qualify for a government subsidized guaranteed loan, all you have to do is become a campaign bundler for King Obama and the Democratic Party. After that, who cares if you succeed?

Thursday, January 12, 2012

North Carolina's General Assembly Tells Teacher's Union to Collect Their Own Damn Dues

Last week North Carolina’s House republicans overrode Governor Bev Perdue’s veto on SB 727, which ends the practice of the state collecting union dues for the teachers association by means of payroll deductions. Two democrats joined them as well. This “midnight” override caused a big stink amongst the statist. Many of them called the act unconstitutional. But not a one of them will admit that the North Carolina Association of Educators is an advocacy group for the Democratic Party. Only one organization has called this front group for what it is, and that is the Civitas Institute.

The reaction from NCAE members was swift. On the day the legislation was approved, NCAE President Sheri Strickland issued a statement, “The Association believes the passage of this legislation – an override of Governor Perdue’s veto — to be a retaliatory action against NCAE for standing up for public school students and educators. The message from the legislature is clear – if you stand against cuts to public education, we will teach you a lesson.”

NCAE has constructed this theme of Republican retribution for NCAE’s criticism of the majority party’s education policies. That explanation ignores relevant facts:

Dues check off was ended because the practice aided the radical policies of groups like the National Education Association (the parent group of NCAE) not the interests of children.

NCAE portrays itself as having members from both political parties and as supportive of both Republican and Democratic candidates. A look at NCAE’s contributions to political campaigns, however, reveals 99 percent of NCAE political contributions went to Democrats.

If NCAE is truly concerned about teacher salaries and securing more classroom funding, why has NCAE executive compensation increased 24 percent from 2006-2009 while, over the same time period, the salary of the average teacher in North Carolina only increased 12 percent?

The NCAE is no different than any other union. The bosses live high on the hog, while their members slave away; and many times their union’s advocacy is counter to the principles of their more conservative members. Again, Civitas addresses this issue as well:

NCAE is classified as a 501(c) 6 tax exempt organization. Among other things the designation allows for lobbying and contributions to political campaigns. NCAE joins hands with its parent organization National Education Association (NEA) to influence political campaigns. The NCAE Constitution requires NCAE members to be members of NEA, the largest teachers union in the nation.8 Membership in NEA requires even more membership dues. This fall teachers will pay an average of $237 to NCAE and $178 to NEA for annual dues.9

NCAE frequently criticizes the influence of powerful corporate interests in American politics. However the fact is NEA and its local affiliates like NCAE represent the largest political influence on American politics. Let’s look at the numbers:

In 2008, NEA spent $56.3 million on political campaign contributions.

NEA is largest political campaign spender in American politics. NEA’s contributions are larger than Wal-Mart, Microsoft, and Exxon combined

In 2009 NCAE made $710,716 in nondeductible lobbying and political expenditures11
2010 Contributions:

NCAE contributed $172,950 to candidates. Democrats received $170,650 in contributions (98.6 percent); Republicans received $2,300 in contributions (1.3 percent).

2008 Contributions

NEA and NCAE contributed $1.8 million to help Bev Perdue win the 2008 Governor’s race.
NEA spent another $1.7 million on campaign ads for Bev Perdue.

Such giving patterns would lead one to conclude all teachers are liberal. Are they?

A 2005 survey of NEA member political attitudes found NEA members “are slightly more conservative (50%) than liberal (43%) in political philosophy.”12

2009 Education Next –PEPG National Survey of public school teachers found 37 percent of public school teachers somewhat or completely support the formation of charter schools. When told President Obama supports charter schools, the figure increases to 43 percent

When told President Obama supports merit pay, 31 percent of public school teachers express support for such proposals

Why should North Carolinians provide a free service as dues collectors for an organization that is openly hostile to the majority of its citizens? Why can’t they collect their own damn money? The General Assembly addressed those questions in their “midnight" override.


The Dead Vote in South Carolina

Two weeks ago, the editors at the Charlotte Observer wrote an op-ed declaring voter fraud didn’t exist, and the only plausible motive of those who want ID requirements at the polls is to suppress the minority vote. They even distorted two stories in order to make their point. Here is the Disturber’s conclusion:

This is what happens when you try to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. That problem would be voter fraud, which is the reason Republicans frequently cite when they introduce and champion restrictive voting laws. Problem is, no one has shown that such an epidemic is real, and the sprinkling of fraud cases that do exist make up a tiny fraction of the voters who will be disenfranchised by laws such as South Carolina's.

Well get ready to eat crow Disturber.


State officials are calling for an investigation after records determined that more than 900 people listed as deceased also have recently voted, calling into question the integrity of the state's election system as South Carolina's first-in-the-South GOP presidential primary just 10 days away.

What's unclear from the analysis released Wednesday to a House Judiciary Committee panel from the state Department of Motor Vehicles is whether voter fraud was committed by people assuming the identities of the deceased or if poor record keeping has resulted in South Carolina residents being classified as deceased.

Kevin Shwedo, director of the Department of Motor Vehicles, did not have answers, saying that would be up to investigators. He based his testimony before lawmakers on state Election Commission records that included when people last voted and matched that with death records.

Granted there may be some “clerical errors” involved, but the overall system is ripe for corruption. New Hampshire doesn’t require voter ID. During the recent primary, Project Veritas exposed the flaws of a system that doesn’t protect the integrity of the vote:

You would think that after the number of documented cases of voter fraud, the editors at the Charlotte Observer would humble themselves, and admit there is a problem. But that would require a logical mind.


Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Oklahoma Loses 10th Amendment Right in Federal Court Power Grab

Once again we are witness to the transgressions of a federal court. Oklahoma passed a state law that forbade judges from considering international and Sharia law in their decisions. CAIR, a subversive Islamic organization, sued. The end result is another federal government power grab.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a ruling released Tuesday, affirmed an order by a district court judge in 2010 that halted the law from taking effect. The ruling also allows a Muslim community leader in Oklahoma City to continue his legal challenge of the law's constitutionality.

The measure, known as State Question 755, was approved with 70 percent of the vote in 2010. The law is an amendment to the state constitution and bars courts from considering the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. "Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law," the law reads.

The appellate court opinion pointed out that proponents of the law admitted to not knowing of a single instance in which an Oklahoma court applied Shariah law or the legal precepts of other countries.

"This serves as a reminder that these anti-Shariah laws are unconstitutional and that if politicians use fear-mongering and bigotry, the courts won't allow it to last for long," said Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. Awad sued to block the law, contending that it infringed on his First Amendment rights.

What is unconstitutional is a federal court interfering in state law. The federal government has no claims on the internal business of Oklahoma. Our federalist system, which promotes and celebrates self-governance, is slowly turning into despotic state. And predator organizations like CAIR are benefitting from this power grab.

We as a people once knew the limitations and prerogatives of federal and state governments. Alexis de Tocqueville when traveling the United State in the early 1800’s documented Americans knowledge of the differing roles of each body. He also wrote about the fate of countries who tried to replicate our style of government without understanding it. Here is an excerpt from his Democracy in America:

Once the general theory is well understood, the difficulties of applying it remain; these are countless because the sovereignty of the Union is so entwined in that of the states that it is impossible at first glance to see its limits. Everything in such a government is arbitrary and contrived and it can only suit a nation long accustomed to self-government and where political science reaches right down to the lowest rungs of society. Nothing has made me admire the good sense and practical intelligence of the Americans more than the way they evade the countless difficulties which derive from their federal constitution. I have scarcely ever encountered a single man of the common people in America who did not perceive with surprising ease the obligations entailed in the laws of Congress and those which owe their beginnings to the laws of his own state, nor who could not separate the matters belonging to the general prerogatives of the Union from those regulated by his local legislature and who could not point to where the competence of the federal courts begins and the limitation of the state tribunals ends.

Tocqueville further states what happens to those nations who replicate, but don’t follow the SPIRIT of our Constitution as understood by our founding fathers:

The Constitution of the United States is akin to those fine creations of human endeavor which crown their inventors with renown and wealth but remain sterile in others hands.
Contemporary Mexico has illustrated this very thing.

The Mexicans, aiming for a federal system, took the federal constitution of their neighbors, the Anglo-Americans, as their model and copied it almost exactly. But although they transported the letter of the law, they failed to transfer at the same time the spirit which gave it life. As a result, they became tangled endlessly in the machinery of the double system of government. The sovereignty of the states and Union entered into a collision course as they exceeded the sphere of influence assigned to them by the constitution. Even today Mexico veers constantly from anarchy to military despotism and back again.

Is this our fate? We have federal judges who don’t know the limitatations of their power; worse, we Americans have no understanding of our federalist system. Are we destined to be like Mexico? Are predators like CAIR setting up shadow governments in the United States just like their brethren in Great Britain? Will we become another third-world country like Mexico? According to Tocqueville’s analysis we are well on our way to serfdom.

Monday, January 9, 2012

North Carolina is Heavily Dependent on Federal Government Subsidies

North Carolina (much like other states) is heavily dependent on federal government subsidies. And with Congress’s inability to make cuts to the deficit, many programs that are funded by that behemoth on the Potomac River is about to get a rude awakening. The published the potential losses of revenue to N.C. state budget:

If federal deficit-reduction cuts take effect, exemptions would include pay for active-duty military personnel, veterans' benefits, highway funds, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits and welfare payments. But a range of other defense and non-defense programs would be affected. Here are some of the estimated funding losses for North Carolina in 2013, the first year of the mandated cuts:

Defense contractors
$351 million

Medicare providers/doctors, hospitals
$333 million

K-12 Title 1 funds for poor schools
$40 million

K-12 special-education programs
$35 million

Public housing
$27 million

Supplemental food program (WIC)
$20 million

Head Start
$16 million

Low-income home energy assistance
$12 million

That doesn’t include the funding losses to universities and other suspect programs via direct grants.

Unfortunately, the biggest loser is our military. The one mandate that our federal government is constitutionally obligated to enforce is slated for the chopping block. This should be an awakening of how far the United States has fallen from a federalist system to a welfare state. And starting 2013, you’ll hear the howling of state legislators when their biggest source of revenue gets cut.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; National Governors Association; Federal Funds Information for States; N.C. State Officials, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; Congressional Budget Office

Read more here:

Charlotte Observer Presents Their Baboon Butt Once Again to King Obama

How low can the Charlotte Observer go? All I have to say is the editors at this loathsome paper must have a beet-red, baboon butt from presenting themselves daily to King Obama. These hacks will go to any length to excuse the Anointed One’s unconstitutional power grabs. The latest offense is the appointment of Richard Cordray to the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau while the Senate was in session; also the three appointments to the NLRB. This is the same agency that sued Boeing because they were opening a factory in South Carolina, which is a right-to-work state.

Was Obama's maneuver illegal? The Constitution says neither chamber may take a break of more than three days without permission of the other, but it doesn't declare that anything less isn't a recess. A 2011 report prepared for Congress by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service says the Constitution doesn't specify how long the Senate should be in recess before an appointment can be made.

Protocol involving recess appointments is largely based on precedent, but precedent is a flimsy thing. Pro forma sessions, for example, broke precedent when they were first used by Democrats just four years ago. So essentially, Obama has decided to circumvent a relatively new tactic with a very old one - thumbing his nose at it.

The Disturber’s editors might want to put a little salve on that ass. One must wonder how many times they can take it for the team. Maybe we should send them a package of hemorrhoid cushions to ease their pain.

To demonstrate just how far on a limb the “presenters” have gone, the Heritage Foundation outlines just how grievous of a power grab this was:

Heritage’s Diane Katz has explained why that position should remain unfilled until the agency’s powers are modified, but the alleged recess appointment is outrageous no matter what position it would supposedly fill. What is shocking is that the Senate is not in a recess that would allow a recess appointment, and it can’t be under the Constitution, even if many Senators are not in D.C.

The Constitution, in Article I, section 5, plainly states that neither house of Congress can recess for more than three days without the consent of the other house. The House of Representatives did not consent to a Senate recess of more than three days at the end of last year, and so the Senate—consistent with the requirements of the Constitution—is having pro forma sessions every few days. In short, Congress is still in session, and no one in Congress is saying (or can reasonably say) otherwise. It does not matter a wit that most Members of Congress are not in town voting on legislation, because ending a session of Congress requires the passage of a formal resolution, which never occurred.

Under Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution, the President has the power to fill vacancies that may happen during Senate recesses. That power has been interpreted by scores of attorneys general and their designees in the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) for over 100 years to require an official, legal Senate recess of at least 10–25 days of duration. (There are a few outlier opinions, never sanctioned by the courts, that suggest a recess of six to seven days might be enough—but never less than that.)

The President’s purported recess appointment of Cordray would render the Senate’s advice and consent role to normal appointments almost meaningless. It is a grave constitutional wrong that Senator Mitch McConnell (R–KY) has already denounced. But it fits a pattern of extra-constitutional abuse by the White House that seems more interested in energizing a liberal base than safeguarding the office of the presidency.

The Disturber’s “monkey business” has been exposed once again.

Read more here:

Thursday, January 5, 2012

King Obama Bypasses Congress on American Jobs Act

His imperial majesty, Barack Hussein Obama has once again flipped the finger at the American people by decreeing from the mountaintop that he will enact a federal government program without the consent of our elected representatives in Congress.

The initiative, part of Obama’s “We Can’t Wait” campaign, is intended to replace a youth jobs fund that would have been enacted had Congress passed the president’s $447 billion jobs bill

“America’s young people face record unemployment, and we need to do everything we can to make sure they’ve got the opportunity to earn the skills and a work ethic that come with a job. It’s important for their future, and for America’s. That’s why I proposed a summer jobs program for youth in the American Jobs Act — a plan that Congress failed to pass. America’s youth can’t wait for Congress to act. This is an all-hands-on-deck moment,” Obama said in a written statement.

The new partnership between the federal government and the private sector commits to creating nearly 180,000 employment opportunities for low-income youth in the summer of 2012, with a goal of reaching 250,000 employment opportunities by the start of summer.

How is King Obama going to pay for this program? He doesn’t have the authority from Congress, who by the way is the only body constitutionally authorized to pass spending bills. Did we just witness a coup?

And if King Obama is so worried about joblessness among our youths, then why did he and his Department of Labor prohibit kids from working on farms. Here is an excerpt from their website:

The proposed updates include:

Strengthening current child labor prohibitions regarding agricultural work with animals in timber operations, manure pits, storage bins and pesticide handling.

Prohibiting hired farm workers under the age of 16 from employment in the cultivation, harvesting and curing of tobacco.

Prohibiting youth in both agricultural and nonagricultural employment from using electronic devices, including communication devices, while operating power-driven equipment.

Prohibiting hired farm workers under the age of 16 from operating almost all power-driven equipment. A similar prohibition has existed as part of the nonagricultural child labor provisions for more than 50 years. A limited exemption would permit some student-learners to operate certain farm implements and tractors (when equipped with proper rollover protection structures and seat belts) under specified conditions.

Preventing children under 18 years of age from being employed in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm-product raw materials. Prohibited places of employment would include country grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.

Just who in the hell does King Obama think he’s fooling? It’s not about job creation. It’s about politics and control over the populace.

Obama's Green Baron Scams Georgia on Range Fuels Boondoggle

One of Obama’s green energy barons strikes again! Just recently, an ethanol factory in Georgia went belly up, leaving the taxpayers high and dry. And of course, it was one of the Anointed One’s campaign bundlers who brokered the deal. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the following:

The failed Range Fuels wood-to-ethanol factory in southeastern Georgia that sucked up $65 million in federal and state tax dollars was sold Tuesday for pennies on the dollar to another bio-fuel maker with equally grand plans to transform the alternative energy world.

LanzaTech, a New Zealand-based biofuel company, paid $5.1 million for the plant in Soperton. Its main financial backer: Vinod Khosla, a California entrepreneur who also bankrolled Range Fuels, and helped secure its government loans, before Range went bust last year.

LanzaTech hasn't received the same type of loans, but the company has received $7million from the U.S. departments of Energy and Transportation to assist in the development of alternative fuels.

Isn’t that beautiful? Vinod Khosla screwed us twice on the same company. First he secures government backing for one company. It fails. Then he gets the taxpayers to help finance another venture of his; and uses that company to buy the other for pennies on the dollar! That’s amazing! And he’s going to get away with it! Congress should be investigating this. If this isn’t a crime, it sure as hell should be.

Peter Schweizer documented the machinations of Vinod Khosla in his book Throw Them All Out. Here is an excerpt:

Billionaire Vinod Khosla was also a big winner in the taxpayer-funded giveaway. Khosla had been the head of Obama’s India Policy Team during the 2008 election and contributed to Democratic candidates. He was a major investor in Coskata, a relatively new company whose goal is to make fuel out of waste. Coskata received a $250 million loan guarantee from the federal government. Company executives have been quite clear that one important measure of corporate success is the amount of “government money we attract.” Khosla’s Nordic Windpower was approved for another $16 million for a wind power manufacturing facility in Idaho. And his company AltaRock secured $25 million in stimulus money.

But that’s not the end of Vinod Khosla’s government sponsored venturism. As of January 1st, Congress allowed import tariffs on Brazilian ethanol to expire, along with domestic ethanol subsidies. And guess who is invested in Brazilian ethanol?

All good reasons why Reichstul was able to attract serious money. In addition to Case, he enlisted green-fuel advocate and Sun Microsystems (SUNW ) co-founder Vinod Khosla, supermarket magnate Ron Burkle, film producer Steve Bing, and former World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn to create Brazilian Renewable Energy Co., or Brenco. The Americans put a total of $31 million into the company, while Brazilians invested $20 million. In March, the group raised nearly $150 million more from U.S. and European investors. Brenco plans to spend $2.2 billion to plant 1.5 million acres of sugarcane, build 10 ethanol mills, and churn out 1 billion gallons a year by 2014, largely for export. Reichstul says he aims to "unlock demand" for the fuel across Europe, Asia, and the U.S

And unlock they did. In 2007, the federal government mandated the following:

In the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) mandates that we need to consume 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022. EISA also contains a mandate within the mandate for advanced biofuels, with the applicable volume of cellulosic ethanol set at 250 million gallons this year, 500 million gallons in 2012, and ultimately hitting 16 billion gallons in 2022.

The robber barons of the 19th century would stand aghast at the shamelessness of Obama and his green baron cronies.


Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Is George Soros Responsible for Ending Ethanol Subsidies and Brazilian Import Tariffs?

As of the beginning of this year, Congress allowed ethanol subsidies to expire. It’s amazing that a 30 year subsidy ended with a whimper, instead of a howl. You would’ve thought the recipients of this largess, along with their elected representatives, would be screaming bloody murder; but it didn’t happen. Why? I say we take a look at one of the biggest manipulators in the history of finance.

George Soros has huge influence in the Democratic Party and the White House. Peter Schweizer documented the shenanigans of this evil genius in his book Throw Them All Out, as outlined in

Mr. Soros met with Mr. Obama’s top economist on February 25, 2009 and twice more with senior officials in the Old Executive Office Building on March 24th and 25th as the stimulus plan was being crafted. Later, Mr. Soros also participated in discussions on financial reform.

Then, in the first quarter of 2009, Mr. Soros went on a stock buying spree in companies that ultimately benefited from the federal stimulus.

Soros doubled his holdings in medical manufacturer Hologic, a company that benefited from stimulus spending on medical systems

Soros tripled his holdings in fiber channel and software maker Emulus, a company that wound up scoring a large amount of federal funds going to infrastructure spending

Soros bought 210,000 shares in Cisco Systems, which came up big in the stimulus lottery

Soros also bought Extreme Networks, which, months later, said it was expanding broadband to rural America “as part of President Obama’s broadband strategy”

Soros bought 1.5 million shares in American Electric Power, a company Mr. Obama gave $1 billion to in June 2009
Soros bought shares in utility company Ameren, which bagged a $540 million Department of Energy loan

Soros bought 250,000 shares of Public Service Enterprise Group, 500,000 shares of NRG Energy, and almost a million shares of Entergy—all companies that came up winners in the Department of Energy taxpayer giveaway that produced the Solyndra debacle.

Soros bought into BioFuel Energy, a company that benefitted when the EPA announced a regulation on ethanol

Soros bought Powerspan in April 2009. Just weeks later, the clean-energy company landed $100 million from the Department of Energy

In the second quarter of 2009, Soros bought education technology giant Blackboard, which became a big recipient of education stimulus money

Soros also bought Burlington Northern Santa Fe and CSX, both beneficiaries of Mr. Obama’s plans for revitalizing the railroads

Soros bought Cognizant Technology Solutions, which scored stimulus funds in education and health care technology

Soros also bought 300,000 shares of Constellation Energy Group and 4.6 million shares of Covanta, both of which landed taxpayers’ money through the stimulus, the former of which bagged $200 million

So on the rare occasion that a government subsidy is allowed to expire, one must cast a suspect eye. And guess what? There is a connection. On the same day,Brazilian ethanol import tariffs also expired. And guess who is heavily invested in that industry? You guessed it: George Soros. Business Week reported the following in 2007:


A host of investors seem to think Brazil's ethanol bet is worth it. On June 3, billionaire George Soros visited a Brazilian ethanol mill owned by Buenos Aires food and energy group Adecoagro. Soros is the leading shareholder in the company, which plans to invest $1 billion in four more Brazilian fuel projects by 2015. "We expect the returns to be highly attractive," says Adecoagro President Alan Boyce. In March, private equity firms Carlyle Group and Riverstone Holdings raised $240 million to fund Brazilian partners operating four ethanol mills. "We think ethanol will be a permanent part of the [global] fuel mix," says Riverstone Managing Director Michael B. Hoffman.

And Congress made damn sure of that. They passed a law in 2007 mandating the following ethanol consumption standards, as reported by the Heritage Foundation:

In the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) mandates that we need to consume 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022. EISA also contains a mandate within the mandate for advanced biofuels, with the applicable volume of cellulosic ethanol set at 250 million gallons this year, 500 million gallons in 2012, and ultimately hitting 16 billion gallons in 2022.

How propitious is that? If I didn’t know better, I would say George Soros had a hand in this. But that would be crazy. Wouldn’t it?


Il Duce Barack Obama Knows What's Best for the American People

Il Duce Barack Obama once again has shown his contempt for the Constitution and our representative republic. Our future president-for-life openly flaunted the advise and consent clause in Article II Section II of our Constitution by making “recess” appointments, when the Senate is still in pro forma session.

The Anointed One presumes he is working for the American people by circumventing our elected officials and that tiny little document that isn’t worth the ink it is written on. Why our Dear Leader can’t be hampered with such trivialities like mere politicians and a constitution. The omniscient … the magnificent Barack Hussein Obama knows what’s good for us. He doesn’t need a stinking legislature telling him what to do. Advise and Consent? Phooey!

And Obama will make damn sure we know what is good for us. One of his recess appointments is Richard Cordray. That statist will crack the commerce clause whip to make sure we all fall in line. Why there is no business transaction that doesn’t fall under the scope of the federal government. And let’s not forget the three appointments to the National Labor Board. We all remember them. They were the ones who sued Boeing for opening a plant in South Carolina. How dare any business open operations without the approval of the NLRB.

Any president who has shown such contempt and violations of our laws would be impeached. But this is no ordinary president. This is Barack Hussein Obama our lord and master. Who would think of ever questioning the motives of our Dear Leader? Why he knows what’s best for us all.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

American Taxpayers Fund Half of U.N. Rogue Agency: The IPCC

Many Americans are going to be surprised that we are funding nearly half of the United Nations IPCC’s budget. These scoundrels have been dependent on the American taxpayers for years, and worse, they used our own money to try and subjugate us through their global governance machinations via the global warming scam.

How is it that we’re just now finding out about the funding of this disreputable organization?

How it is that Congress (who is constitutionally mandated to control the purse strings) had no idea how much money was going to this organization? CNS reported the following:

After facing “key challenges” in determining the amount of funding to the IPCC, the GAO now recommends that U.S. funding be reported annually to Congress with “accurate and consistent information.”

The report said documents on U.S. financing for the IPCC were “not available in budget documents or on the websites of the relevant federal agencies, and the agencies are generally not required to report this information to Congress.”

Conflicting State Department numbers also made it more difficult for the GAO to assemble the data. The GAO “reviewed documents and interviewed officials from federal agencies and IPCC” to reach its findings.

A 2005 GAO report entitled “Federal Reports on Climate Change Funding Should Be Clearer and More Complete” found that federal funding for climate change was not adequately accountable. “Congress and the public cannot consistently track federal climate change funding or spending over time,” the report concluded.

This is absolutely shameful. No one knows exactly how much money is going to this grand hoax; not even the GAO. This should be an indicator that the federal government is too damn big.

And to add circumspection about the IPCC, here is a brief description of its chairman:

No one in the world exercised more influence on the events leading up to the Copenhagen conference on global warming than Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and mastermind of its latest report in 2007.

Although Dr Pachauri is often presented as a scientist (he was even once described by the BBC as “the world’s top climate scientist”), as a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics he has no qualifications in climate science at all.

What has also almost entirely escaped attention, however, is how Dr Pachauri has established an astonishing worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCC’s policy recommendations.

These outfits include banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds heavily involved in ‘carbon trading’ and ‘sustainable technologies’, which together make up the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.

Today, in addition to his role as chairman of the IPCC, Dr Pachauri occupies more than a score of such posts, acting as director or adviser to many of the bodies which play a leading role in what has become known as the international ‘climate industry’.

The chairman of the IPCC should be an indicator of what kind of organization this is. And rest assured it has nothing to do do with the climate.