Friday, June 28, 2013
Too Late to Apologize: A Declaration
Ben Franklin on the lead guitar. Now that's something you don't see everyday.
Our Amnesty Mess
Bill Whittle nails it straight on. Mexico – and Latin American in general – are
dysfunctional. They have been ever since
the beginning of the Western Hemisphere.
We can expect to have immigration problems with our southern neighbors
until we ourselves become as dysfunctional as they. And considering the mass invasion from the
Third-World, it could possibly happen within my lifetime.
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about Mexico when he
toured the United States in the 1800’s.
His observations are as true today as they were in the 19th
century.
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.
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.
We are on the same collision course. Most Americans cannot distinguish our double
system of government. Our federalist system
is lost upon them. It took many years
for the Progressives to destroy our heritage.
We now have congressmen who state they aren’t constitutional scholars
when confronted about their acts. And
these people are supposed to the best and brightest amongst us.
Alexis de Tocqueville marveled at how well the
common man understood our dual system. And they weren't constitutional scholars.
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.
H/T: NC Renegade
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Black Women Can't Possibly Be Racist
A dialogue of sorts on race relations is permeating through our national discourse. It seems that black women have a license to discriminate against white men and call us all sorts of racist names, because according to them their not racist.
A Mecklenburg County commissioner is
under fire for making statements with racial overtones that have some people
calling for removal – or at least a reprimand.
This time, it’s not Bill James, the
longtime Republican commissioner who’s been known to utter divisive remarks.
It’s Kim Ratliff, the board’s
Democratic vice chairwoman, who told WBTV that she’d prefer commissioners not
choose a “white male” to be the next county manager.
In the first story, aired Friday,
Ratliff, who is black, said the county needs a manager who is “a nonwhite male
who can have good working relations with all people.”
A second story, aired Monday, had
Ratliff standing by her statement, though she said she may not have used the
right choice of words.
On Wednesday, Ratliff told the
Observer that her remarks were “taken out of context” and that her intentions
weren’t to cut white men out of the application process.
“I was saying I want all types of
people to apply, not just white men. And black men,” she said. “We know they
are going to apply. I want women to take a shot at it. We have a lot of women
in leadership roles across the country. But a lot of times when positions come
open, women are apprehensive about stepping up.
It looks like the best applicant for
a job at Mecklenburg County is anyone but a white male. And to emphasize this double standard is the
circus, also known as the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin trial.
The Republican Establishment is "The Jerk"
I swear, the Republican establishment reminds me of Steve Martin in the movie, “The Jerk.” All we need is to pass immigration reform, and that’s all we need. And, we need to let the “Bush tax cuts” expire and that’s all we need. Or, we need to get past gay marriage, and that’s all we need. Or, pander to this or that group and that’s all we need.
The Republican establishment has no core
principles. They are just as pathetic as
Navin R. Johnson as he waddles down the sidewalk with his pants around his
ankles holding the few possessions he claims is all he needs. If they keep betraying their base they’ll
find themselves homeless without a party.
But I’m sure their liberal buddies are all they need.
Here are the names of the republican senators who
betrayed their constituents by passing this poor excuse of an immigration bill:
Republican
Sens. John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Jeff
Flake (Ariz.) — the four GOP authors of the legislation — and Sens. Bob Corker
(Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Jeffery Chiesa (N.J.), Susan Collins (Maine),
Orrin Hatch (Utah), Dean Heller (Nev.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), John Hoeven (N.D.),
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) voted for the 1,200-page
bill.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Justice Scalia's Blistering Dissent on Repeal of DOMA Provision
The Blaze.com published the highlights of Justice
Antonin Scalia’s dissent on the majority opinion that struck down section 3 of
DOMA. This pretty much sums up what is
happening in Washington D.C.
The Court is eager—hungry—to tell everyone its view of the legal
question at the heart of this case. Standing in the way is an obstacle, a
technicality of little interest to anyone but the people of We the People, who
created it as a barrier against judges’ intrusion into their lives. They gave
judges, in Article III, only the “judicial Power,” a power to decide not
abstract questions but real, concrete “Cases” and “Controversies.” Yet the
plaintiff and the Government agree entirely on what should happen in this
lawsuit. They agree that the court below got it right; and they agreed in the
court below that the court below that one got it right as well. What, then, are
we doing here?
• That is jaw-dropping. It is an assertion of
judicial supremacy over the people’s Representatives in Congress and the
Executive. It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the
apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always
and everywhere “primary” in its role.
• There is, in the words of Marbury, no “necessity
[to] expound and interpret” the law in this case; just a desire to place this
Court at the center of the Nation’s life.
Placing the Constitution’s entirely anticipated political arm wrestling into permanent judicial receivership does not do the system a favor. And by the way, if the President loses the lawsuit but does not faith- fully implement the Court’s decree, just as he did not faithfully implement Congress’s statute, what then? Only Congress can bring him to heel by . . . what do you think? Yes: a direct confrontation with the President.
• There are many remarkable things about the
majority’s merits holding. The first is how rootless and shifting its
justifications are. For example, the opinion starts with seven full pages about
the traditional power of States to define domestic relations—initially fooling
many readers, I am sure, into thinking that this is a federalism opinion. But
we are eventually told that “it is unnecessary to decide whether this federal
intrusion on state power is a violation of the Constitution,” and that “[t]he
State’s power in defining the marital relation is of central relevance in this
case quite apart from principles of federalism” because “the State’s decision
to give this class of persons the right to marry conferred upon them a dignity
and status of immense import.”
• My guess is that the majority, while reluctant to
suggest that defining the meaning of “marriage” in federal statutes is
unsupported by any of the Federal Government’s enumerated powers, nonetheless
needs some rhetorical basis to support its pretense that today’s prohibition of
laws excluding same-sex marriage is confined to the Federal Government (leaving
the second, state-law shoe to be dropped later, maybe next Term). But I am only
guessing.
• Some might conclude that this loaf could have
used a while longer in the oven. But that would be wrong; it is already
overcooked. The most expert care in preparation cannot redeem a bad recipe. The
sum of all the Court’s nonspecific hand-waving is that this law is invalid
(maybe on equal-protection grounds, maybe on substantive-due- process grounds,
and perhaps with some amorphous federalism component playing a role) because it
is motivated by a “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’ ” couples in same-sex
marriages.
• To be sure (as the majority points out), the
legislation is called the Defense of Marriage Act. But to defend traditional
marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other
arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is
to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions.
• It takes real cheek for today’s majority to
assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to
give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has
preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral
judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral
judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the
Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.
• By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex
marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to
a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition.
• In the majority’s telling, this story is
black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more
complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not
monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end
proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad. A reminder that
disagreement over something so fundamental as marriage can still be politically
legitimate would have been a fit task for what in earlier times was called the
judicial temperament. We might have covered ourselves with honor today, by
promising all sides of this debate that it was theirs to settle and that we
would respect their resolution. We might have let the People decide.
• Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some
will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to
so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest
victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed
both of them better
H/T: NC
Renegade
Obama: I Won't Force Churches to Perform Gay Marriage
Eighteen months ago Barack Obama proclaimed before God and country that he was against same-sex marriage. And he was elected. Now, he applauds the Supreme Court decision striking down parts of DOMA. Adding insult to injury, he asserts that he won’t force religious institutions to conduct gay marriages. This despite Obamacare’s assault on the Catholic Church and persons of faith.
Here is the
White House’s official statement:
I
applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage
Act. This was discrimination enshrined in law. It treated loving, committed gay
and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people. The Supreme Court
has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it. We are a people
who declared that we are all created equal — and the love we commit to one
another must be equal as well.
This
ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under
the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly,
as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and
protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing
more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to
persuade their nation to change for the better.
So
we welcome today’s decision, and I’ve directed the Attorney General to work
with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to
ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and
obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.
On
an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of
views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to
religious freedom is also vital. How religious institutions define and
consecrate marriage has always been up to those institutions. Nothing
about this decision – which applies only to civil marriages – changes that.
The laws of our land are catching up to the
fundamental truth that millions of Americans hold in our hearts: when all
Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we
are all more free.
Does anyone truly believe this bastard?
Source: http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-i-wont-make-churches-conduct-gay-marriages/article/2532418
U.S. Economy is Chasing the Great White Whale
The Commerce Department made its final revision for the last quarter, and it isn’t good. The only factor that seems to be keeping the U.S. economy afloat is the flooding of dollars by the Federal Reserve. And sooner or later that whale is going to have to be harpooned.
Gross
domestic product -- the broadest measure of economic activity -- rose at a mere
1.8% annual pace between January and March, marking a sharp downward revision
from the 2.4% pace
reported by the Commerce Department last month.
The
government revises its GDP figures several times, but economists weren't
expecting such a dramatic change from the third estimate.
"This
was certainly unexpected and, I believe, rare," said Jennifer Lee, senior
economist with BMO Capital Markets, referring to the revision.
The
weaker figures came primarily from revisions to consumer spending, exports and
commercial real estate.
The longer the Obama’s are on vacation, the better
off we are.
Fox News Poll: There is Still Hope for the Country
There is some good news. A Fox News poll has determined that the people of this country are not completely lost:
Most voters -- 82 percent -- think the Founding Fathers would disapprove of how things are going in Washington these days, and 77 percent believe the United States would be a better country if we followed the ideas of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution more closely.
We are
not going to get that from the crowd that infest Washington D.C. The States are going to have to step up and
put a stop to this.
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/fox-news-poll-obama-ratings-suffer-as-scandals-continue/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29#ixzz2XNdITTN1
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/fox-news-poll-obama-ratings-suffer-as-scandals-continue/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29#ixzz2XNdITTN1
Sen. Kay Hagan Will Vote for Amnesty Bill
Senator Kay Hagan announced that she will stab the
citizens of North Carolina in the back.
She will vote for Simpson-Mazzoli II.
According to this amnesty maven,
the Senate bill will be an economic boon for the country and helps strengthen
our borders.
“I’m ready to support a common-sense
bill that’s going to fix our broken immigration system so that everybody plays
by the same rules today,” the first-term Democrat said. “After listening to a
wide variety of stakeholders throughout North Carolina, it’s clear to me
supporting bill is the right decision for North Carolina.”
The immigration bill was introduced
by a so-called Gang of Eight Republican and Democratic senators who were trying
to find a solution to the nation’s immigration problems. It’s expected to pass
the Senate on Thursday and has White House support. But it faces obstacles in
the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where many GOP lawmakers
oppose it.
Hagan said an amendment the Senate
passed 69-29 on Wednesday to strengthen border security was an important part
of what persuaded her to support the bill. It spends $46 billion for 20,000
additional border agents and 700 miles more of fence on the U.S.-Mexico border.
The plan also pays for additional cameras, drones and other surveillance
equipment.
What is really astonishing is she
believes amnesty is going to help the economy.
How does saturating the country with low-skilled workers in an economy where
the real unemployment rate is over 11% going to help? These people won’t make enough money to pay
federal income taxes. If anything they’ll
be on the public dole.
What’s that? The bill specifically states that illegals
aren’t eligible for public assistance.
Well, that’s exactly what Simpson-Mazzoli stated in 1986. How did that work out? Not too good!
I have come to the point, where I do
not trust this government, or those who supposedly represent us. We have to fundamentally change this country. We need a decentralization of power from
Washington D.C. We have to get back to our founding principles.
Celebrating Diversity Through Homogenization
Ask a liberal what makes this country great, and they will tell you diversity is what makes this country great. Our constitution and federalist principles don’t even register with these people. Liberals are so accepting of diversity that they will use the federal bureaucracy to target tea partiers and constitutionalist. If they don’t put you in your place by an unelected bureaucrat, the Supreme Court will step in and strike down laws passed by our elected representatives, and lecture us on how awful of a people we are. Liberals celebrate diversity all right. They celebrate diversity through homogenization.
The Supreme Court’s ruling striking down section 3
of the Defense of Marriage Act is another example of a judicial smack down. Our
elected representatives passed a law stating that the federal government only
recognized a marriage between one woman and one man. Well, no longer. Here is an excerpt from American Progress:
Section
3 of DOMA—a
federal law passed in 1996 that defined marriage as a union between one man
and one woman for the purpose of federal administrative policies—denied LGBT
couples access to more
than 1,000 federal programs and benefits available to opposite-sex married
couples. And because the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS,
incorporated Section 3’s definition of marriage in immigration law and
policies, one of the benefits denied to approximately
24,700 LGBT couples was the ability to sponsor a foreign-born spouse for
family-based immigration. As a result, either some LGBT spouses of U.S.
citizens and lawful permanent residents were deported or LGBT Americans were
forced to choose between the people they love and the country they love. This
practice violated a basic principle of American immigration policy: family
reunification. Since the Obama administration is on record favoring same-sex
marriage, USCIS should immediately begin processing LGBT spousal immigrant-visa
applications the same way it processes applications for opposite-sex couples.
So now we have a bastardization of a federal law
that recognizes same-sex marriage in only the states that allow this
abomination. You can damn well bet this
is just the beginning. Those who value
traditional marriage will be harassed.
Religious organizations will be sued for not sanctifying gay unions. Anyone who speaks out against the LGBT
community will lose their jobs or their businesses. Doubt me?
It’s already happening.
Washington state Attorney
General Bob
Ferguson has filed a suit against a florist who refused to serve as the
flower supplier for a same-sex wedding.
Gay marriage was
legalized and went into effect in 2012, and hundreds of gay couples have filed
for marriage licenses. The law is now being tested in a case
that pits the state against Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts owner Barronelle
Stutzman of Richland, Wash.
that pits the state against Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts owner Barronelle
Stutzman of Richland, Wash.
Ms. Stutzman
said in a March interview with KEPR that she turned down a customer’s
request to supply his same-sex wedding ceremony with flowers because of
religious reasons. The man, Robert Ingersoll,
was a 10-year customer of the shop, she told KEPR.
request to supply his same-sex wedding ceremony with flowers because of
religious reasons. The man, Robert Ingersoll,
was a 10-year customer of the shop, she told KEPR.
“[Mr. Ingersoll]
said he decided to get married and before he got through, I grabbed his hand
and said, ‘I am sorry. I can’t do your wedding because of my relationship with Jesus Christ.’
We hugged each other and he left, and I assumed it was the end of the story,”
she said to KEPR.
But it wasn’t. Mr. Ingersoll
and partner
Curt Reed took to the online community to tell their flower-shop refusal — and
that’s when the attorney general’s office got involved, Raw Story reported.
Curt Reed took to the online community to tell their flower-shop refusal — and
that’s when the attorney general’s office got involved, Raw Story reported.Monday, June 24, 2013
The Eternal Sunshine of an Eclipsed Liberal Mind
A famous radio talk show host has frequently stated
that it’s easy being a liberal. You don’t
have to defend your policies when it’s based on feelings. Occasionally, one will come up with
solutions, but as usual, their thought processes are flawed. The Charlotte Observer frequently
demonstrates this sunshine of the eclipsed mind.
Last Friday, the Disturber featured a special by a
volunteer at an agency that helps homeless families. His article was filled with stories of the unfortunate,
and of course we can all commiserate, but the solutions he proposed are
contributing factors to poverty and a declining middle class. Here is an excerpt:
What can be done?
Key factors of homelessness are lack
of education, lack of skills training, lack of affordable healthcare,
unmanageable family size, a limited network of friends/ family, too much debt
and a low minimum wage. We need to continue and increase funding in our
community college programs to enable homeless adults to get GEDs, develop
skills and go to college. We need to identify and keep homeless kids in
schools.
We need to increase the minimum
wage; low-wage jobs perpetuate poverty. A living wage for one person in
Charlotte is $9.67 an hour and the living wage for a mother with one child is
$17.68 an hour. We need to connect people with better job opportunities. We
need to continue forward with the Affordable Care Act, and the states who have
not expanded Medicaid need to do so. And, we need to make birth control and
education more accessible to manage family sizes.
We need to help people climb the
ladders out of poverty. Don’t do for them what they can do for themselves,
unless it is truly an emergency such as the family has been evicted. Once the
emergency subsides, help them climb a ladder.
Alright, let’s address each one of his
proposals. Yes, education and experience
is a factor in success. You can obtain
as many degrees as your heart desires, but it doesn’t guarantee a job,
especially when federal and state governments are openly hostile to businesses. The consequence is a bunker mentality. And
the end result is a highly educated, unemployed person.
The Affordable Care Act, otherwise
known as Obamacare, is also responsible for unemployment. How many times have we read or heard of
businesses cutting back on hours of employees, or halting expansion because of
this abomination. This law is anything
but affordable. Repealing this
monstrosity would greatly improve the economy.
As a matter of fact, government regulations cost businesses about $2
trillion annually. Is that not a
regressive tax that hurts the poor?
Good intentions and government
regulations don’t provide jobs, or a “living wage.” Entrepreneurs don’t create businesses because
Johnny is unemployed. They do it because
they see a need for their services or product.
Hiring is a byproduct of their success.
Yes, we all must do something about
poverty. But let’s keep things in
perspective. Feelings never provided a
job, or prosperity for a family. And neither
will burdensome government regulations and failed policies.
Friday, June 21, 2013
Data Collection to Mold Behavior Patterns
Here is the future. The collection of data on all of us is leading to the Orwellian state, as demonstrated by the NSA.
Health Care surcharges and Climate Change penalties will mold our consumption patterns. Because it's good for the collective.
IRS Sent Over $46 Million in Refunds to Illegals at Atlanta Residence
Here
is another reason to abolish the IRS.
(CNSNews.com)
- The Internal Revenue Service sent 23,994 tax refunds worth a combined
$46,378,040 to “unauthorized” alien workers who all used the same address in
Atlanta, Ga., in 2011, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration (TIGTA).
That
was not the only Atlanta address theoretically occupied by thousands of
“unauthorized” alien workers receiving millions in federal tax refunds in 2011.
In fact, according to a TIGTA audit report published last year, four of the top
ten addresses to which the IRS sent thousands of tax refunds to “unauthorized”
aliens were in Atlanta.
The
IRS sent 11,284 refunds worth a combined $2,164,976 to unauthorized alien
workers at a second Atlanta address; 3,608 worth $2,691,448 to a third; and
2,386 worth $1,232,943 to a fourth.
H/T: Weasel Zippers
Source: http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/06/21/report-irs-sent-46m-refunds-23994-%E2%80%98unauthorized%E2%80%99-aliens-one-atlanta-address#ixzz2WuSiqtwK
North Carolina's Shadowland Teat Squawkers
If you want to see the difficulty in trying to
implement tax reform and a decentralization of power, look at North
Carolina. I can’t even imagine trying
this at the national level. Every
special interest group is fighting tooth and nail to keep the status quo. If the states’ republicans aren’t successful
at beating back the teat squawkers, at least the exercise has been insightful.
What surprised me is how powerful nonprofit
organizations are in this state.
Hospitals, which have higher profit margins than Exxon, are complaining
about the loss of revenue because the General Assembly refused to expand
Medicaid. They are also bitching about
proposals that would eliminate exemptions from collecting sales taxes and subsequent
refunds. Yet, Carolina’s HealthCare
System’s CEO’s 2012 compensation was $4.7 million, which included bonuses over
$2 million. And this is a nonprofit?
Another band of teat squawkers that operate under
the radar are cities and townships. To
get a good idea of how involved the State is in funding everyday operations,
here is an excerpt from the Charlotte Observer:
In the Senate plan, the biggest hit
for the city in the tax bill would be the repeal of the privilege license tax
that cities impose on certain businesses. The loss of this levy would cost
between $17 million and $18 million a year when fully implemented.
The business privilege tax is levied
on all businesses, trades and professions operating inside Mecklenburg County.
The minimum tax is $50. The maximum is $10,000.
The city could also lose $15 million
per year if it loses refunds on sales taxes that it pays to the state, plus an
additional $10 million from the elimination of the local sales tax on food. The
lost revenue would be partially offset by an additional $11 million in revenues
from additional taxes that nonprofits such as hospitals would pay.
Berger spokeswoman Amy Auth said the
Senate’s tax reform plan incorporated feedback from people across the state,
including constituents, businesspeople, other legislators and the governor. In
particular, a vast majority said the state should not tax food, she said.
Local governments have other options
for raising money for local services and infrastructure, including impact fees,
water fees and other local taxes, Auth said. Governments could make up for lost
sales tax by reinstating the food tax, or they could reduce spending, she said.
As for privilege taxes, Auth called
them a disincentive for business to move to and create jobs in North Carolina
and noted municipalities will have five years to prepare for the change.
According to the League of
Municipalities analysis, Charlotte would lose the largest amount of revenue in
the state, but other communities would face steeper tax increases. The
Edgecombe County town of Leggett, for example, would need to raise property tax
bills by 849 percent to make up for $83,584 in lost revenue.
Among Charlotte-area communities,
Monroe would take a $2.2 million hit, Gastonia would lose about $2 million and
Mooresville would come up $1.1 million short.
Cities like Charlotte have been double
dipping. Besides imposing their own
taxes, they use the state to confiscate wealth from their citizens through taxing
services and items like food. They then get
the rebates, all the while scrubbing their hands of the dirty political
process. In the meantime, we have sprawling
unaccountable bureaucracies that perform duplicate, and without a doubt,
substandard service.
A famous Democrat once said all
politics is local. That’s the way taxation
should be as well. All forms of revenue
should be transparent and the politicians of that community held
accountable. But as we’ve seen, it’s
better to operate in the shadows.
PTR Industries Relocates to South Carolina
A gun manufacturer, which has had a presence in New England since the Revolutionary War, has uprooted its operations from Connecticut and relocated in South Carolina. The libtards that infest that state have outlawed the product line of PTR Industries. Other manufacturers in that region are looking for a refuge as well, most likely south of the Mason-Dixon Line.
BRISTOL,
Conn. (AP) — Less than a week after Connecticut Gov.
Dannel P. Malloy signed gun restrictions into law in April, gun manufacturer
PTR Industries said it intended to leave the state to avoid the damage it
expected to be inflicted on its business
On Wednesday, the rifle manufacturer kept its
promise, announcing it will move to Aynor, S.C.
“One hundred percent of our product line is
now illegal in Connecticut due to that law,” said John McNamara, the company’s
vice president for sales.
He offered few details of the relocation,
saying that a formal announcement and ribbon-cutting are scheduled for Monday
at the new site. Most of the company’s 41 workers will relocate and the labor
force is expected to expand to 100 within a year, McNamara said.
“It will be as fast a transition as we can
without interrupting production,” he said
H/T: I Own the World
Source: http://charlotte.cbslocal.com/2013/06/20/gun-manufacturer-moving-to-sc-due-to-conn-gun-control-laws/#commentsTuesday, June 18, 2013
Since When Did Poverty Become a Virtue?
Democrats and their enablers in the mainstream media
would have us believe poverty is a virtue that needs to be culled and caressed. Productive citizens are to be shamed. Businesses are to be blamed. Somehow, it’s everyone else’s fault that we have
generational welfare, except of course the Democratic Party’s failed policies
and their teat squawking constituents, whom dangle from the government udder.
Welfare should not be an ambition. It should be a last resort; not a
lifestyle. There are many forms of
graft. Scamming government programs is
one. Enslaving a portion of the
citizenry to a life of subservience is another.
This symbiotic relationship of the poor and the Democratic Party is a contagion
that consumes prosperity and a good work ethic.
They are dependent on the goodwill of others. And those who refuse to accommodate their voracious
greed will fall prey to their enforcers through legalized theft.
President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society is a
perfect example of a big government lie.
Poverty was already in decline when he made his proposals. But an end to poverty was not the goal. No, it was to establish a Democratic
apparatus that would become “problem solvers” for a multi-layered constituency dependent
upon centralized planning and concentration of power. A Democrat’s wet dream.
The War on Poverty is a great fraud. Trillions of dollars of confiscated wealth
have gotten us nowhere. Poverty is just
as prevalent today as it was in the 60’s.
Some would say it’s just as bad.
And still we have poverty pimps wanting to expand the dependency class. And somehow they consider this a “Christian”
thing to do.
There is hope. Recently, a Louisiana state senator renounced his Democratic affiliation, and became a Republican. Here is his testimonial:
Amen to that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)