Obama plays with water gun while North Korea fires real missile

North Korea Fires Test Missile Into Ocean – White House Tweets a Water Fight

Posted by Jim Hoft
Friday, April 13, 2012, 6:55 AM
GatewayPundit.Com

Joe Biden tweeted about a White House water fight this week.

A photo of President Obama with a water gun, from Vice President Joe Biden’s Twitter feed

Meanwhile, in the real world, the North Koreans just shot off another rocket.
The New York Times reported:

For the new North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, who completed the last step in his hurried ascension to power in Pyongyang on Friday, his government’s failure to put a satellite into orbit is a $1 billion humiliation.

Mr. Kim wanted to mark his ascension to top political power — timed with the country’s biggest holiday in decades, the 100th birthday of his grandfather and North Korean founder, Kim Il-sung — with fireworks, real and symbolic. And the launching of its Kwangmyongsong, or “Bright Shinning Star,” satellite was the marquee event.

On Friday, the satellite disintegrated in a different kind of fireworks. The rocket carrying it exploded midair about one minute after the liftoff, according to American, South Korean and Japanese officials.

Mitt Romney warns NRA against an 'unrestrained' second-term Obama

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks at the National Rifle Assn. convention in St. Louis. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy / April 13, 2012)

By Mitchell Landsberg
April 13, 2012, 12:17 p.m.
Los Angeles Times

Reporting from St. Louis— Mitt Romney drew a warm reception from the National Rifle Assn. on Friday as he attacked President Obama for “employing every imaginable ruse and ploy” to restrict gun rights, which Romney pledged not to do if elected in November.

Although gun control groups have complained that Obama has done little to support their cause, Romney took a page from the NRA leadership, which has been saying that the president is waiting for a second term to crack down on firearms. He warned that Obama would “remake” the Supreme Court in a second term, threatening constitutional freedoms.

“In a second term, he would be unrestrained by the demands of re-election,” Romney told a crowd estimated at 6,000 in the cavernous Edward Jones Dome. “As he told the Russian president last month when he thought no one else was listening, after a re-election he’ll have a lot more, quote, 'flexibility' to do what he wants. I’m not exactly sure what he meant by that, but looking at his first three years, I have a very good idea.”

Referring specifically to the right to bear arms, Romney said: “If we are going to safeguard our 2nd Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes. I will.”

Romney’s speech came at the NRA’s Leadership Forum, which always draws top conservative speakers. Also expected to speak Friday were three of Romney’s former rivals for the GOP nomination, former Sen. Rick Santorum, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, as well as a panoply of other Republican stars, including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sens. Chuck Grassley and Roy Blunt, and Rep. Darrell Issa.

Most of the other speakers could claim a friendlier history with the NRA than Romney, who supported strict gun control measures as governor of Massachusetts and once said he didn’t “line up” with the gun rights group. But the NRA leadership has thrown its weight behind Romney, whom it sees as preferable to Obama, and Romney received several standing ovations during his speech.

Although Obama has not been responsible for any notable gun control measures, the organization has been sharply critical of some of his appointments, especially that of Eric Holder as attorney general.

Before Romney spoke, the NRA’s legislative director, Chris Cox, showed a video clip that he said depicted a Holder speech from 1995. In it, the future attorney general spoke about the need to "really brainwash people to think about guns in a vastly different way."

"So let's state this in very clear terms,” Cox said. “President Obama needs to fire Eric Holder, and in November, we need to fire the president."

Even before Romney’s speech, the Obama campaign hit back with a statement attacking the presumptive GOP nominee, along with a hefty file of news clippings intended to show that he had a checkered history on gun rights.

“The president's record makes clear the he supports and respects the 2nd amendment, and we'll fight back against any attempts to mislead voters,” said campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt. “Mitt Romney is going to have difficulty explaining why he quadrupled fees on gun owners in Massachusetts then lied about being a lifelong hunter in an act of shameless pandering. That varmint won't hunt.”

Outside the convention hall, a half-dozen or so soggy union-affiliated demonstrators stood in the rain holding signs that said: “Romney: 100% out of touch.”

“We’re basically here to expose Romney as a flip-flopper with the NRA,” said Ed McNees, president of UAW Local 282 in St. Louis. “In ’94, he was for the Brady bill and against assault weapons … and now he’s a newly found supporter of the NRA.”

With McNees was Steve Johnson, a local Teamsters organizer, who said Romney “doesn’t look like anybody who hangs out at any of the places I might hunt.” Leaders of the UAW and the Teamsters have pledged full support to Obama in the 2012 campaign, although both McNees and Johnson insisted that they were there as gun enthusiasts, not Obama supporters.

Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times

Shovel Ready in San Fran: $205,075 to ‘Translocate’ One Shrub from Path of Stimulus Project

Workers translocate a manzanita bush in San Francisco, at a cost of at least $205,075, to make way for a highway project. (Photo: Michael Chasse/National Park Service.)

(CNSNews.com) -- The government spent at least $205,075 in 2010 to “translocate” a single bush in San Francisco that stood in the path of a $1.045-billion highway-renovation project that was partially funded by the economic stimulus legislation President Barack Obama signed in 2009.

“In October 2009, an ecologist identified a plant growing in a concrete-bound median strip along Doyle Drive in the Presidio as Arctostaphylos franciscana,” the U.S. Department of Interior reported in the Aug. 10, 2010 edition of the Federal Register. “The plant’s location was directly in the footprint of a roadway improvement project designed to upgrade the seismic and structural integrity of the south access to the Golden Gate Bridge.

“The translocation of the Arctostaphylos franciscana plant to an active native plant management area of the Presidio was accomplished, apparently successfully and according to plan, on January 23, 2010,” the Interior Department reported.

The bush—a Franciscan manzanita—was a specimen of a commercially cultivated species of shrub that can be purchased from nurseries for as little as $15.98 per plant. The particular plant in question, however, was discovered in the midst of the City of San Francisco, in the median strip of a highway, and was deemed to be the last example of the species in the “wild.”

Prior to the discovery of this “wild” Franciscan manzanita, the plant had been considered extinct for as long as 62 years--extinct, that is, outside of people’s yards and botanical gardens.

Before that, the bush had grown in the “wild” in two cemeteries in San Francisco’s Richmond District as well as on Mount Davidson, a peak in the middle of San Francisco. The Department of Interior said that there had also been “unconfirmed sightings” of the shrub in the city’s Haight-Ashbury District—an area that became famous in the late 1960s as the epicenter of the psychedelic hippie movement.

The Haight-Ashbury population of the plant, the Interior Department said in the Federal Register, was believed to have been "lost to urbanization."

On Oct. 16, 2009, Dr. Daniel Gluesenkamp, a botanist who was then the director of Habitat Protection and Restoration for Audubon Canyon Ranch, noticed the manzanita when he was driving along Doyle Drive (the highway leading to the Golden Gate Bride that is now under renovation). The manzanita had been previously hidden by other vegetation but was uncovered as the area was being cleared in preparation for road construction.

With help from a biologist from the Presidio Trust (which oversees the Presidio) and an ecologist from the National Park Service, Gluesenkamp’s discovery was determined to be a Franciscan manzanita.

Shortly thereafter, the Presidio Trust, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish and Game developed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for saving this one bush from the highway project, for which ground had been broken in December 2009.

The agreement of Dec. 21, 2009 – Memorandum of Agreement Regarding Planning, Development, and Implementation of the Conservation Plan for Franciscan Manzanita – explains how, why, and when the bush would be moved and which agencies would be responsible for which aspects of the move. (MOA - Fran Man - 2009.pdf)

While the MOA did not detail all the costs for moving the bush, it did state that in addition to funding removal and transportation of the Franciscan manzanita, Caltrans agreed to transfer $79,470 to the Presidio Trust “to fund the establishment, nurturing, and monitoring of the Mother Plant in its new location for a period not to exceed ten (10) years following relocation and two (2) years for salvaged rooted layers and cuttings according to the activities outlined in the Conservation Plan.”

Furthermore, Presidio Parkway Project spokesperson Molly Graham told CNSNews.com that the “hard removal”—n.b. actually digging up the plant, putting it on a truck, driving it somewhere else and replanting it--cost $100,000.

The MOA also stated that Caltrans agreed to “Transfer $25,605.00 to the Trust to fund the costs of reporting requirements of the initial 10-year period as outlined in the Conservation Plan.”

The $100,000 to pay for the “hard removal,” the $79,470 to pay for the “establishment, nurturing and monitoring” of the plant for a decade after its “hard removal,” and the $25,605 to cover the “reporting requirements” for the decade after the “hard removal,” equaled a total cost of $205,075 for “translocating” this manzanita bush.

But those were not the only costs incurred by taxpayers on behalf of the bush. According to the MOA, other costs included:

--“Contract for and provide funding not to exceed $7,025.00 for initial genetic or chromosomal testing of the Mother Plant by a qualified expert to be selected at Caltrans’ sole discretion.” (MOA - Fran Man - 2009.pdf)

--“Contract for and fund the input, guidance, and advice of a qualified Manzanita expert on an as-needed basis to support the tending of the Mother Plant for a period not to exceed five (5) years, provided that said expert selection, retention and replacement at any point after hiring rests in the sole discretion of Caltrans.”

“Provide funding not to exceed $5,000.00 to each of 3 botanical gardens (Strybing, UC, and Tilden) to nurture salvaged rooted layers and to monitor and report findings as outlined in the Conservation Plan.”

--“Provide funding not to exceed $1,500.00 for the long-term seed storage of 300 seeds collected around the Mother Plant in November 2009 as outlined in the Conservation Plan.”

The plant is now protected by a fence and its location is kept secret, in part because the Presidio Trust and the National Park Service fear that nature-lovers seeking to see the rare wild Manzanita might trample it to death.

“[A] single trampling event could result in damage or the death of the wild plant,” the Interior Department noted in the Federal Register for Sept. 8, 2011. “As noted …, the Presidio Trust and NPS have made continuous efforts not to reveal the location of Arctostaphylos franciscana. They are concerned that public knowledge of the A. franciscana location would attract large numbers of plant enthusiasts who may damage the A. franciscana and compact the soil.”

The project to replace the Doyle Drive approach to the Golden Gate Bridge with a new road called the Presidio Parkway has an estimated total cost of $1.045 billion. The project has received a number of federal grants, including two under President Barack Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. These included $83.28 million in stimulus funds awarded to the project on Dec. 24, 2009 (about a month before the manzanita bush was “translocated”) and $46 million awarded on Dec. 30, 2010.

In a Feb. 17, 2010 statement about stimulus money going to the project, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described herself as “a long-time supporter of the Presidio Parkway project.”

“This badly deteriorated structure is designated a Post Disaster Recovery Route and is the only route between the San Francisco peninsula and northern California counties,” Pelosi’s statement said of project. “Unfortunately, the current roadway is reaching the end of its useful life. The Federal Highway Administration ranks Doyle Drive as the fifth worst bridge in the nation and the worst in California for structural sufficiency.

Construction on the new Presidio Parkway began in late 2009 and is scheduled to be completed in 2013.”

In September 2011, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed naming the Franciscan manzanita an endangered species.

Had the plant been moved to a botanical garden it would have remained “extinct in the wild.” According to the MOA “Such translocation would essentially render the plant extinct in the wild (once again); it would be unlikely that the plant could be moved a second time once reintroduced populations are established; the seed from the mother plant would not be usable due to likely genetic contamination from other garden species of manzanitas.”

The plant is still considered wild according to the 2011 Federal Register entry because it has been moved to an undeveloped area of the Presidio and “is not receiving the level of protection, water, and nutrients that plants in a botanical garden may receive.”

One California nursery currently allows customer to purchase Franciscan manzanitas online for $15.98 per bush. Another sells them for $18.00 per bush.

The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results

By JoshuaPundit
Apr 13 2012 at 4:14 am
WatcherOfWeasels.Org

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

As a number of commentators have said (including yours truly)if someone isn’t willing to look at tort reform, they’re not serious about controlling the riding costs of healthcare.

This week’s winner,The Razor’s Why There Are No Such Things As Unnecessary Tests examines this from a physician’s viewpoint. Here’s a slice:

My wife is a family doctor working in a small rural practice owned by a regional hospital. While she has not yet been sued for malpractice she knows many doctors who have, and while the vast majority of these suits never reach court they still inflicted many sleepless nights and higher malpractice premiums on the innocent doctors. She recognizes that everything she does may have to be justified someday so that if she is forced to testify she can explain the rationale of her treatment. This is the essence of defensive medicine.

The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation in partnership with Consumer Reports has announced Choose Wisely, an educational initiative recommending physicians avoid 45 unnecessary tests and procedures the group believes are performed unnecessarily. These include routine EKGs and Stress Tests as well as prescribing antibiotics for minor ailments such as mild sinusitis. Oncologists are also encouraged not to perform cancer screens on breast cancer and prostate cancer patients diagnosed with non-metastatic forms of these cancers.

But as the New York Times article states, these recommendations are controversial and there is fear among some patients and doctors that they will be applied too broadly. The newspaper quotes Dr. Eric Topol, chief academic officer of Scripps Health who says, “These all sound reasonable, but don’t forget that every person you’re looking after is unique…This kind of one-size-fits-all approach can be a real detriment to good care.”

As a resident of the great state that raised John Edwards to the heights of power on the backs of doctors he sued for malpractice, I’m skeptical over this recommendation for a number of reasons. Dr. Topol makes an excellent point. Those who aren’t health care practitioners may fail to understand that patients often do not present with clear cut symptoms. There is a finite number or reasons your car won’t start in the morning such as the battery is dead, the tank is empty or the ECM needs replacement. But the human body is infinitely more complex. What may present as back pain from too much Pilates can turn out to be bone cancer that had metastasized from the esophagus, as happened to my father-in-law. The chronic tickle in the back of the throat that drove my mother-in-law crazy for months, turned out to be an atypical and rare form of breast cancer. Both were dead within months of their initial complaints both were misdiagnosed by their primary care physicians, though it is unlikely in either case the proper diagnosis would have mattered much. But both cases of cancer could have been treated had they been detected early. Obviously doctors cannot perform these tests on everyone because it would take too much time and cost too much, but this decision should be left to the judgment of the doctor and not interfered with by the government, an insurance company or a non-elected body such as the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation.

These recommendations will no doubt be cheered by insurance companies and the government (since Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare make the government a de facto insurance company I’ll lump it together with the likes of Kaiser Permanente and Blue Cross for the rest of the article.) Insurance companies can now refuse to pay for these tests or at the least requiring doctors jump through time-consuming and money-losing hoops such as requiring pre-authorization to do them. The article claims that as much as 1/3 of the $2 trillion spent on health care in the USA is unnecessary, so imagine the savings to their bottom lines these companies will enjoy by cutting nearly $700 million from their payments. The problem with this figure is that it’s like the old saying about half of marketing dollars being wasted, but no one knows which half. Because it is impossible to accurately determine which person needs a test and which doesn’t it will be impossible to reap the savings hinted at in these recommendations.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Sultan Knish for One Hundred Broken Mirrors submitted by The Political Commentator, a fascinating look at how history repeats itself and how America looks to the countries we’re trying to ‘sell’ our brand of democracy to.

Here are this week’s full results. New Zeal, Gay Patriot and Simply Jews were unable to vote this week.

Council Winners

*First place with 2 1/3 votes! The Razor –Why There Are No Such Things As Unnecessary Tests

Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – The Noisy Room – A Wicked Financial Storm Descends On America

Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – The Right Planet – The Dialog About Race

Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Bookworm Room- Stockholm Syndrome, Victimization, and the media’s version of American men

Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – The Independent Sentinel-Nationalization of the United States Inches Closer to Reality

Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Gay Patriot- On the unrecognized(?) loneliness in the gay male community

Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – Rhymes With Right-A Study In Moral Obtuseness

Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – VA Right!-Holder’s Justice

Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Colossus of Rhodey – One BIG reason to be glad you live in the United States

Fifth place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Political Commentator – The New York Times: Purveyor of unbiased news or of artitorials masquerading as unbiased news?

Sixth place with 1/3 vote – GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD – Little Satan”s Strike Package

Non-Council Winners

First place with 3 votes! – Sultan Knish-One Hundred Broken Mirrors submitted by The Political Commentator

Second place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Pat Condell – Israel and the United Nations submitted by Joshuapundit

Second place *t* with 1 1/3 votes –The Blaze/Billy Hallowell –Rev. Wright Unleashed: ‘White Supremacy’ Drives ‘World Policy,’ Allah & Yahweh Are the ‘Same’…and Clarence Thomas Is Worshipping ‘Some Other God’ submitted by The Noisy Room

Third place *t* with 1 vote – Gatestone InstituteThe Silent Terrorists: Muslim Brotherhood’s Political Terrorism Strategy submitted by The Independent Sentinel

Third place *t* with 1 vote –Les Jones NBC fires editor for altering Zimmerman 911 call; when will MSNBC fire the writer who did the same? submitted by The Glittering Eye

Third Place *t* with 1 vote -The Troglodyte –When Does Socialism Begin? submitted by The Mellow Jihadi

Third place *t* with 1 vote - Melanie Phillips – A lethal game-changer for British politics? submitted by The Watcher

Third place *t* with 1 vote - Giulio Meotti/FrontPage –The Christian Era in the Middle East Is Over submitted by The Watcher

Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote -Pressure Points – Will Assad Return To Killing Lebanese Leaders? submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD

Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote -Via Meadia – Don’t Know Much About Theology submitted by The Razor

Fourth place *t* with 2/3 vote -Truth On The Market –My Professor, My Judge, and the Doctrine of Judicial Review submitted by Rhymes With Right

Fifth place with 1/3 vote -Yourish.Com –Your Easter media bias submitted by The Colossus of Rhodey

Race-Baiting in the Era of Obama

April 13, 2012
Race-Baiting in the Era of Obama
By Lauri B. Regan

On my train ride to work this week, a black man sat near me. He was listening to his music loud enough for anyone in the vicinity to hear. As I pointed out to him that he dropped his ticket, I asked him if he would please turn his volume down since I was trying to work. He refused, told me to move, and actually turned his music up. As the conductor came by, I asked for assistance. The music man started screaming irrationally that he had all sorts of rights, and then came the kicker. "You're complaining because I'm black." When the conductor walked away, the volume of the music went back up -- with a leer telling me to shut up, or else.

Alas, racial tension in this country is not new. What is new is having a president who, for political gain and selfish ideological reasons, is instigating a racial divide that has not been seen for decades. In order to ignite a passion in his base, Obama is intentionally taking this country back to the Civil Rights Era, when violence in the streets was commonplace. But a black person in America in 2012 has every civil right that a white person has -- and then some. Affirmative action has led to black people actually having an easier time accessing certain schools, jobs, and positions of higher authority. (The exception to this seems to be if you want to work on Obama's re-election campaign.)

In the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin shooting, this country is facing a shocking eruption of black hatred of white America. While we expect the likes of Al Sharpton to crawl out from under their rock and ramp up the hateful rhetoric whenever a race-baiting opportunity arises, we do not expect the attorney general to publicly praise Sharpton "for your partnership, your friendship, and your tireless efforts to speak out for the voiceless, to stand up for the powerless, and to shine a light on the problems we must solve, and the promises we must fulfill." In a healthy society, in which the president does not carry racial biases that impact his judgment and ability to function effectively, Obama would denounce Sharpton for the agitator that he is. Obama would take to the teleprompter and condemn all calls to violence, asking for rational minds to prevail.

But we are not a healthy society any longer, for our leaders revel in resentment, and our citizens are divided. We are divided because we have a president who is angry and hostile, juvenile and racist, ideological, narcissistic, and power-hungry. He would rather call police officers stupid when they arrest a black friend than call for civility and calm in the face of public servants doing their job regarding Trayvon Martin's death. The community organizer-in-chief knows well how to stoke racial tension, class warfare, and violence if they will lead to an extension of his power and the transformation of the beacon on the hill for all who strive to succeed in the land of opportunity.

The Obama administration's empowerment of black rebellion began at the very start of his presidency, has grown exponentially since then, and can be seen in all sorts of machinations across the country. The visceral reaction in the black community to the Martin case and the silence from the Justice Department in the face of bounties being placed on George Zimmerman's head, calls for violence by the New Black Panthers (who learned in 2009 that they are immune from prosecution when Holder dropped all charges against them), and mobs taking to the streets are all indicative of what this country will continue to face without the rule of law being enforced -- and encouraged -- by the government.

In the face of the NBP's threats of violence to Zimmerman, Zimmerman's family called on Holder to explain why these militants are getting away with rhetoric that likely constitutes a hate crime. Holder's response was the praising of Sharpton. The NBP's response to Holder's inaction has been to prepare for the next stages of the "race war," including plans to be "suited, booted and armed" and to announce that a "new reality" and "true revolution means some blood shed ... you'll have to cross the red sea ... cross some blood[,]" all in order "to lead to the destruction of the devil's society ... that blond-haired, blue-eyed, sometime brown-eyed Caucasian walking around[.]"

Holder's Justice Department was also MIA when the Sanford Police Department was forced to close due to protests calling for Zimmerman's arrest. "City officials and members of the U.S. Department of Justice observed the demonstration" and apparently did nothing to the students blocking the police department entrance for fear of a violent response. But this is not an isolated incident of police fearing black reprisals. AT reported on an unbelievably offensive incident in which the police told a white stabbing victim that they "don't mess" with a black motorcycle gang. Read the full story with all of the offensive details here.

It is not a far leap to question whether a president who has opted to throw himself into the ring when a black friend is arrested or a black teenager is killed, but who refuses to call for calm when black people beat, threaten, and intimidate innocent white people, may actually be condoning the violence through his silence and inaction. Where is this president's outrage that, in the words of Holder, some of "my people" are fomenting a race war? For while the days of "wilding" disappeared until recentlyi, the days of black leaders calling for violent revolution with a wink and nod from the president look like they are here to stay.

It is the job of the President to help ease the country's pains, not add salt to its wounds. Obama is the first black POTUS, and he is using his bully pulpit to damage the country, not heal it. He should be leading by example, and that means that he should speak to America and request calm and unity.

In response to accusations regarding his relationship with Jeremiah Wright, Candidate Obama took to the airwaves with his famous race speech. Perhaps there was some warning of what we could expect when one revisits his references to the struggles of the black people through "protests on the streets" and "civil war and civil disobedience." As he stated, "[t]his was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign - to continue the long march of those who came before us[.]" But Obama later stated that "I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together."

So where is that man today? Where is the uniter who stated that "race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now," that "[i]f we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges"? Apparently, Obama has determined that it is politically expedient to fan the flames and "walk away[,]" for the WH announced that Obama would not be speaking anymore on the Martin case. The leadership that the black community so desperately needs as an alternative to the Sharptons, Wrights, and Farrakhans of the world will not be coming from the president.

Lord knows what vision Obama had for the nation when he promised hope and change, but if Americans do not open their eyes to what is going on around them, we can rest assured that the race-baiting and radical divisions will continue to grow "Fast and Furious." As candidate Obama said:

... we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism[.] ... But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

In 2010, Mayor Bloomberg described a wilding rampage through Times Square in which 56 black youths were charged with various violent offenses with one official claiming it was something out of the late 1980s.

Most Americans back gun lobby, right to use deadly force - Reuters/Ipsos poll

By Deborah Charles - WASHINGTON
Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:06pm IST

(Reuters) - Most Americans support the right to use deadly force to protect themselves - even in public places - and have a favourable view of the National Rifle Association, the main gun-lobby group, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

The online survey showed that 68 percent, or two out of three respondents, had a favorable opinion of the NRA, which starts its annual convention in St. Louis, Missouri, on Friday.

Eighty-two percent of Republicans saw the gun lobbying group in a positive light as well as 55 percent of Democrats -- findings running counter to the image of supporters of the latter party being anti-NRA.

Most of the 1,922 people surveyed nationwide from April 9-12 said they supported laws that allow Americans to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in their own home, or in a public place.

"Americans do hold to this idea that people should be allowed to defend themselves and using deadly force is fine, in those circumstances," said pollster Chris Jackson. "In the theoretical ... there's a certain tolerance of vigilantism."

The poll was conducted amid a nationwide debate over gun rights and race following the shooting of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood crime watch volunteer who is white and Hispanic.

(Link to poll: http:// www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5586)

The poll results will be welcomed by the NRA, which hosts Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and likely nominee as a speaker at its convention on Friday.

Eighty-seven percent of respondents - with high numbers among both Republicans and Democrats - supported the use of deadly force to protect themselves from danger in their home.

Two-thirds said they backed laws permitting the use of deadly force to protect themselves in public.

STEP UP TO PREVENT CRIME

Nearly half of those surveyed felt crime rates were rising where they lived - even though Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics show that violent crime has declined for the past 4-1/2 years.

"People's perception of crime always over-represents reality," said Jackson. "I think that indicates the mind frame that the American public is in - there's always a constant low-level worrying about street crime."

As a result, 85 percent of those polled said they did not believe police could stop all crime and 77 percent felt regular people had to "step up" to help prevent crime from happening.

According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, nearly 100,000 people are shot every year in the United States in murders, suicides, accidents or police intervention.

Government statistics show that 31,347 people died in the United States in 2009 as a result of gunshots, including 11,493 in homicides.

Ninety-one percent of those who responded to the survey agreed on the need for background checks before a firearm can be sold. Only six percent said they thought gun ownership should require no, or very few restrictions.

Nearly three-quarters of respondents said they supported limiting the sale of automatic weapons, and 62 percent oppose bringing firearms into churches, workplaces or stores.

"A fairly large number of Americans support strong regulation, or at least moderate regulation of gun ownership," said Jackson. "Which is sort of counter to the narrative you often hear that legislators can't touch our guns or you'll have to pay."

The survey included 650 Republicans, 752 Democrats and 520 independents. The precision of the Reuters/Ipsos online poll is measured using a credibility interval and this poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points for all respondents.

(Editing by David Brunnstrom)

No Joke: HHS Secretary Sebelius Asks Al Sharpton To Help Defend Obamacare…

I can hear it now: “Listen up punk faggots this is Al Sharpton, support Obamacare. Resist we much.”

(Reuters) — A top U.S. administration official asked civil rights activists on Thursday to help defend President Barack Obama’s embattled healthcare law, saying the reform package faces an “enemy” determined to set American health policy back half a century.

The remarks in a charged election year come two months before the Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling that could make or break the law.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to cast the two-year-old reform law as a vital weapon against racial disparities that have long condemned U.S. minorities to higher infant mortality rates, shorter lifespans and limited access to medical services.

“The enemy is at the door and we know that they would like to dismantle these initiatives,” Sebelius told the annual convention of the National Action Network, a civil rights group led by the Rev. fat pig Al Sharpton.

“Healthcare inequalities have been one of the most persistent forms of injustice,” she said. “Now is not the time to turn back.”

Posted by ZIP on Thursday, April 12, 2012, at 10:16 pm @ Weasel Zippers

Culture of Corruption: Former Missouri Democrat Governor Indicted for Illegal Donations

Posted by Jim Hoft
Thursday, April 12, 2012, 7:42 PM
Gateway Pundit.Com

Former Democrat Governor Roger Wilson was indicted today. (HuffPo)

Culture of Corruption Update:
Former Missouri Democrat Governor Roger Wilson was indicted today for illegal donations. Wilson faces faces up to one year imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000.
St. Louis Today reported:

Former Missouri Gov. Roger Wilson has pleaded guilty this afternoon in connection with indictments late Wednesday on allegations of laundering campaign contributions to the Missouri Democratic Party through a St. Louis law firm.

Herzog Crebs partner Ed Griesedieck, indicted along with Wilson, also plans to plead guilty, said his attorney Matt Schelp.

The $8,000 in contributions originated with a state-created workers’ compensation company, Columbia-based Missouri Employers Mutual Insurance Co., and Wilson.

“I made a mistake. I have taken public responsibility for the mistake. I apologize to everyone. I will bear the consequences of my mistake and will have no comment other than that,” Wilson said outside the courtroom, reading from a prepared statement.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office said in a news release that Wilson faces up to one year imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000. Wilson’s lawyer, Robert Haar, said his client faces probation to six months in prison and the possibility of a fine.

Spokes-hack Jay Carney Beclowns Himself, Episode 828: "Hilary Who

Thursday, April 12, 2012
Spokes-hack Jay Carney Beclowns Himself, Episode 828: "Hilary Who?"

Great find by Red State's Moe Lane as White House spokes-idiot Jay Carney does his level best to weasel away from the disastrous Hilary Rosen implosion.

Rosen, of course, had pilloried mother-of-five, MS sufferer and breast cancer survivor Ann Romney as being out of touch and having "never worked a day in her life".

And, as Michelle Malkin reveals, Rosen had also visited the Obama White House a stunning 35 times.

First of all, I haven't seen the records, uh, I don't, uh, know that Hilary Rosen, I know three [holds up three fingers] personally -- women named Hilary Rosen -- and don't know those represent the person we're, uh, talking about. Necessarily.

So I really can't comment on the number of visits, 'cause I'm not sure that's accurate.

Rosen visited the White House 35 freaking times, including five visits to the president himself, one to David "Red Diaper Baby" Axelrod, three to Valerie "Grove Parc" Jarrett, and another to the Maoist Anita Dunn.

And Carney's never heard of her. I would give my Media Matters Kruggerand to Carney if he'd agree to an interview while strapped to a polygraph.

Arizona Governor Signs Bill Banning Abortions After 20 Weeks

4.12.12
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a pro-life bill into law today to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

House members passed the bill by a 37-22 vote and abortions after that time period would not be allowed except in very rare cases of medical emergency. The bill also requires abortion facilities to allow women to have an ultrasound of their unborn baby at least 24 hours prior to having the abortion. In many cases women change their minds about a planned abortion after seeing the images of their developing child.

Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest commended Brewer and called the bill “a life-protecting bill designed to ensure that women don’t suffer from the risks of a dangerous, late-term procedure.” She said Arizona is the first state in the country to enact a late-term ban based on concerns over protecting women’s health by demonstrating that abortion is not only bad for the unborn child, it is also bad for women.

“Arizona is leading the nation in enacting this new law that shows concern for both mother and child. The abortion industry’s war on women has left many injured people behind. This ban will protect women’s lives, despite the best efforts of the abortion industry to block reasonable limits on a procedure that becomes more dangerous with each passing week,” she said.

The Center for Arizona Policy, a pro-life group, also applauded Brewer.

“Governor Brewer has signed The Women’s Health and Safety Act into law! This critical bill (HB 2036) prohibits abortion beyond 20 weeks gestation, ensures women have an ultrasound at least 24 hours before an abortion, and makes improvements to abortion clinic safety regulations and informed consent,” it said.

This bill, called “The Mother’s Health and Safety Act”:

Prohibits abortion after 20 weeks because of the safety risks to the mother and the pain endured by the preborn child

Ensures women have an ultrasound at least 24 hours prior to an abortion

Establishes an informed consent website which details the facts about fetal development, risks of abortion, and services available.

Requires doctors performing surgical abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within thirty miles of the abortion facility.

Arizona Right to Life is also supportive of the legislation.

Yoest praised the Arizona House for approving the measure calling it “a life-protecting bill designed to ensure that women don’t suffer from the risks of a dangerous, late-term procedure.” She said Arizona is the first in the nation to pass a late-term ban based on concerns over protecting women’s health by demonstrating that abortion is not only bad for the unborn child, it is also bad for women.

“The abortion industry’s war on women has left many injured people behind. This ban will protect women’s lives, despite the best efforts of the abortion industry to block reasonable limits on a procedure that becomes more dangerous with each passing month,” said Dr. Yoest. “Medical evidence demonstrates that abortion can cause serious physical and psychological complications—and the risk of those complications raises dramatically later in pregnancy. By prohibiting abortion after 20 weeks, the Arizona Legislature has taken a vital step toward protecting the health of women in Arizona. I urge Governor Brewer to sign the bill into law.”

Yoest said the abortion industry commonly hides the sometimes deadly consequences of late-term abortions. She said the findings of fact included with the bill lay out some of the risks of late-term abortions, including higher medical risks and higher short-term and long-term physical and psychological complications.

Sen. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, is the main sponsor of HB 2036 and she cited testimony of a doctor who said that a 20-week fetus has sensory receptors all over its body. She also said there is evidence that the later along a pregnancy, the greater the chance of complications for the mother.

But Sen. Linda Lopez, D-Phoenix claimed the information is not correct and the bill was merely an attempt to make it more difficult for women to get abortions.

Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, detailed what happens at different stages of fetal development and said, “This debate is about life and it’s about a small, tiny, little life form that has no voice to speak for itself.”

NOW Prez: Ann Romney Lacks 'Life Experience' And 'Imagination'

By Mark Finkelstein
April 12, 2012 - 21:36
NewsBusters.Org

Back up the bus! After bouncing Hilary Rosen beneath the Greyhound, President Obama and friends might have to throw it in reverse again over the person of key Dem coalitioin member Terry O'Neill. The NOW president suggested to Ed Schultz tonight that Ann Romney, along with Mitt, lacks "life experience" and "imagination" needed to understand most Americans.

For good measure, in the very same segment Dem congresswoman Maxine Waters called the Republican candidate for president Mitt "Rot-ney." Classy bunch!


Watch O'Neill and Waters at work.

TERRY O'NEILL: What would we be saying if Hillary Clinton [sic] had said this: that Ann Romney has never, has not worked for pay outside the home a day in her life? That's my understanding that's an accurate statement, and that raises the exact issue that Hilary Rosen was trying to get to, which is do Mr. & Mrs. Romney have the kind of life experience and if not, the imagination, to really understand what most American families are going through right now? I think that that was what Hilary was getting out, and so she left out the words "for pay outside the home."

. . .

MAXINE WATERS: The Republicans have now raised this issue in this campaign in ways that young women now understand: oh my goodness, we're at risk! We have taken two steps forward, and this administration, under Mitt Rot-ney, would take us backwards.

Karl Marx Preached “Fairness” Too (American tax system, Fair Tax)

Alan Caruba
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Canadian Free Press

My father was a Certified Public Accountant and dinner time throughout my youth was filled with horror stories about the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as he struggled to keep up with a tax code that just kept growing.

According to Nina Olsen, the National Taxpayer Advocate for the IRS who heads a staff of 2,000, the American tax system is “a huge convoluted mess.” Despite efforts to determine its length, it is variously estimated to be between 65,000 and 70,000 pages. “We looked at how many changes in the tax law (that) had occurred in the last year alone,” said Olsen, “it was something like 579 changes.” No one can keep up with that volume of changes, not even Ms. Olsen’s office.

As this is being written, President Obama is dominating the news cycle with his message of tax “fairness”, attacking men like Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican candidate, for being wealthy and citing men like Warren Buffett and other millionaires and multi-millionaires who say they should pay more. It is a longtime populist, progressive message and it is a false message.

Chris Edwards who studies tax policy at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, says, “What happens when you raise taxes for higher-income people; they reduce their productive activities—like working and investing and starting businesses—and they increase their unproductive activities—like tax avoidance and tax evasion. So governments really shoot themselves in the foot if they raise rates too much.”

If it were not for “taxation without representation” Americans might still be “subjects” of the British Empire because, as any school child can tell you, the Revolution was fought over this issue and was kicked off in earnest by the Boston Tea Party when a tax on tea enraged the citizens of that time. There were, in fact, some ten other tea parties in the colonies.

The United States has the dubious honor of having the highest tax rate on corporations in the world. And some people still cannot understand why U.S. corporations are shipping jobs overseas and foreign corporations are reluctant to set up U.S. headquarters here.

In a recent opinion in The Wall Street Journal, Amity Shales, a former WSJ reporter and now the director of a George W. Bush Institute project on national economic growth, wrote that “The trouble is that lawmakers (especially at the federal level) insist on discussing fax reform in terms of fairness. Tax competition earns a mention from time to time, but only a mention.” She pointed out, as have others, that “states with no income tax grow faster than those with high income taxes.”

By framing the tax debate in terms of fairness and attacking Mitt Romney’s wealth, President Obama is pandering to his greatest constituency—the stupid among us. He was elected on the basis of a lot of gauzy, vague promises of hope and change, and with the adoring support of the mainstream media.

Obama’s problem is not about fairness or taxes. His problem is 13.9 million unemployed Americans, not counting those who are not looking for work or those working part-time jobs just to make ends meet. As a recent commentary on EconomicCollapse.com pointed out, “The number of unemployed Americans is larger than the entire population of Greece.”

The onerous, insane growth of the regulation industry at all levels of government is crushing the economy. “The U.S. national debt has increased by more than four trillion dollars since Barack Obama took office” and, with the aid of a Democrat-controlled Congress for the first two years of his term, he increased the national debt more than all the presidents combined from Washington to Clinton.

Believing that taxing rich people will close the gap is unbelievably stupid. As a Wall Street Journal editorial pointed out on April 10th, “The Obama Treasury’s own numbers confirm that the tax (on the wealthy) would raise at most $5 billion a year—or less than 0.5% of the $1.2 trillion fiscal 2012 budget deficit and over the next decade a mere 0.1% of the $45-43 trillion the federal government will spend.”

There is an alternative. It’s called the “Fair Tax” and you can learn more about it by visiting the website of the National Taxpayers Union.

By bleeding jobs through an insane tax system, a federal tax code filled with loopholes that even the IRS cannot keep up with, the highest corporate tax in the world, an idiotic immigration policy toward illegal aliens, and a burden on the fortunate few that still have jobs the United States is digging itself into financial collapse.

The federal government is broke. The states are broke. And with the advent of $4 and $5 gas pump prices—thanks to Obama’s anti-energy policies—the rest of us are getting more broke.

President Obama’s blather about “fairness” is straight out of Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital” and the Communist Manifesto with their emphasis the redistribution of wealth and the end of private property.

© Alan Caruba, 2012.

Biden: ‘War on Women’ is Real, Will Intensify

Apr 12, 2012 9:38pm
By Devin Dwyer
ABC News.Com

Vice President Joe Biden said tonight that what he called a Republican-led effort to rollback the rights of women is “real” and will “intensify.”

“I think the ‘war on women’ is real,” Biden told MSNBC’s “The Ed Show,” deploying the politically-charged phrase for the first time on the national stage.

“And look, I’ll tell you when it’s going to intensify – the next president of the United States is going to get to name one, possibly two or more, members to the Supreme Court,” he added.

Asked about Hilary Rosen’s controversial comments on Ann Romney, Biden said the Democratic strategist made an “outrageous assertion.”

“Look, I have fought my whole career – I’m no hero, I don’t want to make it like… — whether it’s the Violence Against Women Act or equal pay. My entire career as a senator and the vice president is to get to one point: when my daughter is able to make whatever choice she wants and no one question it,” he said.

“If my daughter wants to be able to say, ‘I’m staying home and raising my kids,’ no one should question that.”

As for the Romney Campaign’s claims that women have been disproportionally harmed under the Obama administration — with 92% of job losses being women — Biden dismissed it as bluster.

“Know what that reminds me of?” Biden said. “Who caused these jobs to be lost – all of them, men and women?” he said, referring to the economic crisis that took hold under Obama’s predecessor, former President George W. Bush.

Biden’s comments came on the heels of a campaign stop in Exeter, N.H., earlier Thursday, when he slammed likely GOP nominee Mitt Romney, amid an intensifying debate between Republicans and Democrats over who is more attuned to the needs of women voters.

Graphic: the True Size of Africa

Thursday, April 12, 2012
Graphic: the True Size of Africa

Very cool graphic from FlowingData.

Puts things in perspective.

Media Justice

By A.F. Branco
Apr 12, 2012
CDN:

Arizona Bans Most Abortions After 20 Weeks

April 12, 2012
Arizona Bans Most Abortions After 20 Weeks

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) "has signed a bill into law banning most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and making numerous other changes to abortion regulations," the Arizona Republic reports.

Daily Beast: "The stipulation likely to be most widely felt is what experts are calling an effective shutdown of medication abortions. These nonsurgical abortions are usually performed within the first nine weeks of pregnancy, and account for between 17 and 20 percent of all abortions."

Video: Obama Doesn’t Believe A Lot Of People Criticize First Family’s Non-Stop Vacationing, Defends It Anyway…

Shorter Obama: You commoners and your silly complaints.

KMOV-STL’s Larry Conners: “The economy is a big issue and concern for folks. I mean, the unemployment, trying to make ends meet, gas prices, food prices going up. Some of our viewers are complaining, they get frustrated, even angered, when they see the first family jetting around, different vacations and so forth, sometimes maybe they think under color of state business and that you’re out of touch, that you don’t really know what they’re experiencing right now.”

President Barack Obama: “Well, I don’t know how many viewers you’re talking about that say that.”

Conners: “We do hear from some.”

Obama: “I hear from all kinds of viewers about everything.”

Conners: “I’m sure you do.”

Obama: “But the fact of the matter is, I think if you look at my track record, I’m raising a family here. When we travel, we got to travel through Secret Service, and Air Force One, that’s not my choice. I think most folks understand how hard I work and how hard this administration is working on behalf of the American people.”

Conners: “Well, of course, with all due respect, the President side stepped that question. No one is questioning his need to travel on Air Force One or have security. The questions being raised are the first family taking so many vacations, when and where, at taxpayer expense.”

Is it me or is he trying to use a mid-west accent when he says the word “travel?” This interview was with a St. Louis station.

HT: greaterthepete

Posted by ZIP on Thursday, April 12, 2012, at 9:47 pm @ WeaselZippers.Com

Three New Rasmussen Polls That Should Frighten the Obama Campaign

Thursday, April 12, 2012

As James Carville once said, "it's the economy stupid!" and according to a just-released Rasmussen poll American voters trust Mitt Romney by a wide 49%-39% margin. In fact Romney topped Obama in four of the five issues;economy, health care, taxes, and (just barely energy policy). Obama leads in national security.

The last time Rasmussen asked the question (March), the American Public felt the economy was the number one issue, 20% higher than number two (health care).

Last month Romney and Obama were virtually tied when it came to voter trust on the economy. Perhaps the latest job slowdown and Obama's phony Buffett rule campaign are not boding well for Obama.

As one would suspect Romney wins with GOP voters on all issues and Obama wins with his fellow Democrats. The poll shows that Romney needs to do more with independents. With the unaffiliated voters the presumptive GOP nominee is slightly more trusted with the economy (40% to 37%) and with taxes (43% to 40%) but loses by a wide margin in the other three issues.

Eighty-three percent (83%) of Republicans have more faith in Romney on economic matters, while 74% of Democrats trust Obama more. But 20% of Democrats express more confidence in the likely Republican nominee, compared to only nine percent (9%) of GOP voters who like the president more in this area. Romney has a very slight edge in trust – 40% to 37% - among voters not affiliated with either of the major parties.

Another Rasmussen poll released today that shows 60% of independents rate the president's performance on the economy fair or poor and 52% give him bad grades on National Security. One released yesterday shows 64% of voters believe the country is on the wrong track.

When you put these together it is good news for Romney. While Obama is trusted more by independents, the Romney is more trusted on the number one issue, the economy. When judged by himself independent voters are not happy with the job Obama is doing.

Based on what was presented today, and the fact that the GOP circular firing squad is over and the Republican focus moves to Obama, I predict you will see an improvement when Rasmussen surveys these questions next month.

Posted by Jeff Dunetz at YidWithLid.Com

Boss ran health union like secret society: Jackson

Kate McClymont
April 13, 2012
smh.com

Health Services Union boss Michael Williamson has run the union like a "secret society", the union's national secretary Kathy Jackson told a news conference in Melbourne today.

Ms Jackson, who has called for Mr Williamson and the national executive to step down and face fresh elections, said that she would not be seeking Mr Williamson's job but would be happy to continue in her current role.

Following his decision to resign from the vice-presidency of Unions NSW yesterday, pressure is growing for Mr Williamson to resign from the union he heads as corruption allegations involving him continue to mount.

Ms Jackson has notified Mr Williamson and other HSU officials that she intends to move a resolution at the forthcoming HSU council meeting to have Mr Williamson removed from office for gross misconduct and neglect of duty.

She cited allegations raised this week in The Sydney Morning Herald as well as Mr Williamson's failure to co-operate with the union's own internal investigation.

"I, Kathy Jackson, Executive President HSUeast and HSU East Branch hereby charge you, Michael Alexander Williamson, General Secretary of HSUeast and HSU East Branch, with gross misbehaviour and/or gross neglect of duty pursuant to Rule 21 of the HSUeast Rules and Rule 66 of the federal Health Services Union Rules," Ms Jackson said in an email sent to Mr Williamson and other union officials late yesterday.

The three charges Ms Jackson is levelling against Mr Williamson include that Mr Williamson announced in a statement to the members on September 22, 2011, that he looked forward "to clearing my name".

However, in January, this year Ian Temby, QC, who has been appointed by the union to inquire into allegations of corruption and nepotism, notified union officials that Mr Williamson had refused to co-operate with his investigation.

Given Mr Williamson's "assertions of total innocence", his "refusal to co-operate with the Temby investigation involves a gross dereliction of duty to the members ... warranting removal from the office", Ms Jackson said in a formal complaint to the union's executive.

The second charge she has levelled against Mr Williamson relates to his failure to explain to members the $30,000 a month he has been spending on a secret credit card attached to the primary account of his close personal friend Cheryl McMillan, who is also the union's procurement officer.

The Herald revealed this week that Mr Williamson had been using a black Centurion American Express card, a titanium invitation-only card for customers who put more than $250,000 a year on American express cards.

"Given the obvious damage being done to the union" by the Herald's report, Ms Jackson claimed Mr Williamson was obliged "to provide such innocent explanation as is available to the members and to the council as soon as that report was published and that remains his continuing duty".

The third charge Ms Jackson, wished to bring against Mr Williamson relates to the $400,000 the union has paid to Canme Services, which is registered in the name of Mr Williamson's wife, Julieanne.

Ms Jackson said that Mr Williamson, when seeking approval for such payments, had never disclosed his family's interest in the company.

All the documents relating to payments to Canme have been requested by Ms Jackson.

The HSU's next council meeting is scheduled for April 30.

The union's acting secretary Peter Mylan congratulated Mr Williamson for resigning from the vice-presidency of Unions NSW yesterday.

He refused to say whether Mr Williamson would be forced to resign from his HSU positions, but signalled that further announcements in relation to the HSU would be made today.

At a press conference in Melbourne today, Ms Jackson said that, should Mr Williamson stand down, the NSW Labor Party should not do "a backroom deal" to replace him with one of its own.

The members need to decide on his replacement "not Sussex Street", she said.

Fending off criticisms about her role in airing the union's dirty laundry, Ms Jackson said that she had tried to sort out the matter internally, only to be told that Mr Williamson was "too powerful" and that it would be best to wait for him to resign before embarking on a plan to clean up the union.

She also accepted that her $270,000-a-year salary was "obscene" and blamed Mr Williamson for setting "vastly inflated" wages for union executives. Mr Williamson is on a $330,000 year salary plus $150,000 from his various government and union-related board positions.

Ms Jackson indicated she would be happy to take a substantial pay cut.

Police fired more than 90 rounds at man on 101 Freeway

April 12, 2012 - 3:34 pm
-- Andrew Blankstein
Los Angeles Times

Eight Los Angeles police officers fired more than 90 rounds at an unarmed 19-year-old man who had led them on a high speed freeway pursuit and called 911 to threaten them with a gun, authorities said.

The shooting played out on live television after Abdul Arian refused to pull over when police tried to stop him for erratic driving. He led police on a chase onto the 101 Freeway, where he stopped in dramatic fashion -- turning his car and stopping across eastbound lanes.

He jumped out of the car and ran. Then he turned and appeared to run backwards. Police said he assumed a "shooting stance" and appeared to raise his arms and appear to point a weapon, prompting them to open fire, killing him.

No gun was found at the scene, but police released statements Arian made to a 911 dispatcher in which he claims he has a weapon and makes it clear that he's not afraid to use it.

"I have a gun," Arian said.

"I've been arrested before for possession of destructive devices; I'm not afraid of the cops."

He also said: "If they pull their guns, I'm going to have to pull my gun out on them."

According to a news release, the dispatcher pleaded with Arian to surrender peacefully, saying, "I don't want you to hurt yourself."

Arian responded with expletives and a threat: "... these police, they're going to get hurt."

The department's force investigation division kept the freeway closed all night as they collected evidence and conducted interviews. Department officials will review several factors related to the incident, including communication tactics and whether the large number of rounds fired endangered other freeway motorists.

No breakdowns were available about how many shots each officer fired.

Photo: LAPD officers watch as a tow truck lifts Abdul Arian's Ford Crown Victoria from the 101 Freeway. Credit: Al Seib / Los Angeles Times

Joe Biden hears cries of baby; vows to save child from inheriting burden of tax cuts if Romney is elected

By Doug Powers
April 12, 2012 11:12 PM
MichelleMalkin.Com

**Written by Doug Powers

This week, Sheriff Joe made a campaign stop and empathized with the pain of an infant who was obviously concerned about the prospect of inheriting the burden of trillions in new spending possible future tax cuts:

“That’s another trillion dollars in tax cuts over the next ten years going to the top 1% of American taxpayers. [baby crying] I don’t blame her for crying. She is going to inherit it. She’s going to pay for it. That’s one smart baby,”

Biden later successfully convinced the baby to stop panicking about her future by instead focusing on things she won’t have to pay for if Obama and Biden are given another four years, such as the continued “spending of money to keep from going bankrupt.”

Personally I think the crying had nothing to do with tax cuts, but rather the baby had just learned that Al Franken is now considered a “leading legal scholar” in our government.

Click Here to roll the hilarity:

No, We Aren’t the Party of 1950s Gender Roles

By Joy McCann
April 12, 2012
The Conservatory

We’ve noted before that James Taranto is, on occasion, one of those conservatives who like to equate “feminism” with “radical feminism,” and paint the entire women’s movement with an extremely broad brush.

And we’re sorry to have to keep pointing this out, since we’re actually fangirls of Taranto’s column and have been crushing on him intellectually for years. Most of what he says on the subject of male-female roles is interesting and thought-provoking: there is plenty of real insight there, because the sea changes in sex mores over the past 50 years have been very expensive for a lot of households, and some of them have to be reevaluated in a very sober fashion.

At the very same time, Taranto is prone to an oversimplification—emphasizing the destructive side of feminism—that is really prevalent on the right, and can be dangerous, for three reasons. First off, many independents and moderates interpret the word “feminist” to be merely “anti-sexist.” To rail against feminism without noting that not all of it was radical can mark conservatives and Republicans as potentially, or even predominantly, sexist—which conveniently underscores a false liberal-left narrative about us.

Also, it’s just not true. We can say this, using the Tarantoian “we,” since we once tried to start a conciousness-raising group at the age of eight. (The other eight-year-old girls in the neighborhood were less interested in consciousness-rasing than in playing with their Barbie dolls, so we eventually went with the consensus choice: Barbies it was.) At the time, we pointed out to everyone assembled there, Barbies and little girls alike, that the answer wasn’t just to assume that boys were better, and to do what boys did for the sake of that. (Later on, we realized that guns and trains are Teh Awesome, and gave boys their props for having grasped that from a young age.) We thought then, and think now, that it’s possible to be feminine and to be ambitious, at the very same time.

To generalize about feminists based on its radicals, thirdly, has the effect of driving a wedge between working women and stay-at-home moms on the right, which is sub-optimal when an Obama ally, Hilary Rosen, has just made that very same unforced error on the left.

Conflating “gender feminism” (or radicalism) with “equity feminism” (the individualist, and—dare we say—conservative version) is to grant entirely too much ground to the left.

Consider: there were, famously, two threads within “third-wave feminism” (that of the 1960s and 1970s) with respect to sexual mores, and that resulted in contradictory schools of thought regarding such issues as erotica and sexual liberation, with one branch of the “women’s movement” acting as proponents of loosened codes of conduct—in practice, advocating a “let’s see if we can beat the men at their own game” sexual ethic—while another branch railed against the “objectification” of women, and men who might (and did) exploit them sexually. The rap on the women’s movement as being essentially prudish was fully developed by the 1980s, when sexual harassment laws began to get so stringent, at the behest of prude-school feminists, that normal workplace banter between women and men became increasingly off-limits. Eventually, some workplaces demanded that men refrain from displaying family pictures, if their wives were wearing bikinis. That’s how “sexually liberated” some feminists were.

Likewise, there have always been two schools of thought within the women’s movement regarding traditional gender roles. There has, from the beginning, been huge tension between those who wanted to simply increase the options that women had—such that females weren’t drafted into homemaking, but rather freely chose it, if they liked—versus those who wanted to fundamentally change the role of nearly all females within the larger economy. The radical version of feminism was related to that in the U.S.S.R., wherein women were expected to work full time outside the home, while still doing all the childcare and maintenance within it—this gave most Russian ladies the worst of both worlds, but the ultra-radicals here were certain that they could sever the connection between women and motherhood, if they just wished hard enough. Normal middle-class women weren’t having it: they wanted to have job skills as a hedge against controlling or abusive mates, but they still wanted to have children, and to raise them—though with more input from the fathers, who were no longer banished to a “discipline-only” role.

The number of feminists who wanted to actually remove the option of being a stay-at-home mother was always very small; it’s just that the group was particularly vocal. More usual was the advice I was given as a teenager by a family friend who considered herself a feminist: that as I thought about career options, I should make sure whatever I picked could be done part-time, and that I ought to consider jobs that could be done in many parts of the country (she was a biologist who worked in a specialized lab; there were only several of them in the entire nation at the time).

My mother, on the other hand, maintained that there were probably a number of men who would be happier if they could spend more time with their kids: her argument with the rigid 1950s roles was that men got short-changed out of fatherhood, when it was made out to be part of the “women’s sphere”—and that only.

One thing that is difficult to convey to people who didn’t spend the 1960s and 1970s sleeplessly devouring miscellaneous magazines, from my father’s copies of Playboy to my grandparents’ Readers’ Digests, is just how respectable it was to denigrate female competence and intelligence before the women’s movement gained a foothold—and before it was prevalent.

It is easy to fantasize that without third-wave feminists everything would be just as it is now, only without the marriage tax penalty, and without extremists such as Hilary Rosen denigrating stay-at-home mothers. No, no: Leaf through vintage magazines of the 1960s and 1970s to see how limited girls’ and women’s horizons were back then—how much we were equated with our bodies, and how secondary we were to the stars of the show, the males: so much of what the West dislikes about Sharia law is written all over advertisements from just half a century ago, in this country. The old guard didn’t just advocate a practical division of responsibilities between men and women: it went beyond that.

There is a sensible middle ground here for conservatives—one in which we regard third-wave feminists as having pointed out that women are equal to men in the sight of God, and worthy of equal wages for equal work for equal numbers of years—and yet free to stay at home and share our passion, talent, and brainpower with our kids, if we and our spouses so choose.

We can do that while rejecting the sexually abusive elements of the 1970s, and the bland “ideal” of a unisex world. We can also point out that there are real trade-offs to making motherhood a “second career,” and sometimes American women have erred on the side of postponing motherhood too long: getting married before 30 makes sense for many couples, and in a lot of instances it’s worth making real sacrifices for. So is having one person take the lead on many parenthood decisions.

At the same time, biology isn’t destiny.

The GOP is not the party of rigid sex roles. The GOP is the “come as you are party party”: we believe that individuals and families can make these decisions for themselves. We love women who work in the home, and those who work outside the home; we want to keep families’ tax burdens low so that they can make parenting and housework determinations for themselves. We love science. We love rational atheists, and people of faith. We love free markets.

That is conservative.

Further reading:

On the web—

The last time I chided my idol, it was over Rick Santorum, and birth control, and it went on more or less forever . . .

In convenient dead-tree format—

The Male Mystique: Men’s Magazine Ads from the 1960s and 70s—these are so quaint in retrospect, in an “isn’t that cute and I’m so glad we’re past that” sort of way
The Dream and the Nightmare: The Sixties’ Legacy to the Underclass—Myron Magnet discusses what happened in the 20th century that made it more difficult for poorer and working-class people to get by; this is one of the concerns that Taranto discusses in his columns. It is a real one, and yet feminism—even mainstream feminism, much less radical feminism—is only one piece in that huge puzzle. Read this book.

Dershowitz Slams Zimmerman Prosecutor Calls Arrest Unethical and Irresponsible

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz said that the Florida prosecutor "gave a campaign speech" yesterday and that she will "win popularity contests." Dershowitz concluded that "she has a lot of answering to do."

SOURCE: Breitbart News Service

Priorities: Obama Won't Spend 1/30th of 1% of Bloated Dept. of 'Education' Budget on Inner-City DC Kids

Thursday, April 12, 2012
Priorities: Obama Won't Spend 1/30th of 1% of Bloated Dept. of 'Education' Budget on Inner-City DC Kids

If you needed additional confirmation that President Obama doesn't give a damn about urban youth, please consider "President Obama’s Budget Priority: Eliminate the D.C. Voucher Program:

“Budgets are about choices,” stated President Obama in recent remarks to governors about his massive fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget request. Nothing more clearly demonstrates the Administration’s priorities than Obama’s decision to once again place the successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (DCOSP) on the chopping block while simultaneously growing the Department of Education’s (DOE) budget more than any other federal agency.

In so doing, President Obama is showing low-income D.C. families that his priority is maintaining the unacceptable status quo—at least when it comes to other programs—while bowing to special interest groups like the education unions to eliminate the DCOSP. The Washington Post editorialized yesterday:

Surely, it shouldn’t be among the president’s priorities to single out for attack a tiny federal program that not only works—in the judgment of federal evaluators—but also enjoys bipartisan support. If it is, we trust that [House Speaker John] Boehner [R–OH] would step in, as he did last year, to save a program that D.C.’s poorest families value for their children.

Boehner did in fact save the voucher program last year. The Speaker leveraged last year’s heated budget negotiations to secure a five-year reauthorization of the DCOSP. And as the Post notes today, families “welcomed the certainty.” But once again, poor families in the nation’s capital, home to some of the lowest-performing and least safe public schools in the country, are left to wonder why President Obama has singled out this small, yet effective, school choice program.

And the program actually saves money: "...at between $8,000 and $12,000, the vouchers are a fraction of the more than $18,000 spent per-pupil in D.C. public schools."

Barack Obama cares about one thing: votes.

He will throw anyone -- kids included -- under the bus in order to retain his white-knuckled grip on the reins of power. Teachers' unions send millions to his campaign coffers. Kids send nothing. Easy choice for a demagogue.

Which is why Obama won't even spend $20 million -- out of total of $69,800 million (or 1/30th of 1%) that goes to the bloated, unconstitutional, and irrationally named Department of "Education".

It Begins… Leftists Call Ann Romney a C*nt, B*tch, Wh*re for Being Stay-at-Home Mom

Posted by Jim Hoft
Thursday, April 12, 2012, 8:40 PM
Gateway Pundit

That didn’t take long.
Right on cue… After White House adviser Hilary Rosen attacked conservative stay-at-home mom last night on CNN the leftist minions chimed in.
This comes from O.G. Darby:

And here’s a tweet from Ho Hum:

There’s much more at Twitchy.

Boy, and to think, it took less than 24 hours from Hilary Rosen’s original comments to these vile tweets for the left to reveal their absolute hatred for conservative women.

Ken Shepherd at NewsBusters reported:

While most everyone in political circles has condemned Hilary Rosen’s slam of Ann Romney, rank-and-file liberals on Twitter apparently haven’t read the memo.

Twitchy has an excellent post documenting all the bile, complete with requisite leftist slams of Mrs. Romney as a c*nt, b*tch, and whore. As Michelle Malkin, no stranger to left-wing hate, tweeted, “Some are baptized by fire. On Twitter, outspoken conservative women are baptized by vile.”

Good News: Eric Holder Promoting Black vs. Hispanic Race War

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Good News: Eric Holder Promoting Black vs. Hispanic Race War

Every time you think Eric Holder has hit bottom -- as the most malignant and lawless attorney general in American history -- he starts digging a new sub-basement.

CNS News has found some interesting video of Attorney General Eric Holder praising controversial Rev. Al Sharpton during a speech at Sharpton’s National Action Network conference on Wednesday.

CNS has the quotes:

At the opening of NAN’s 14th annual convention in Washington, D.C., the attorney general first thanked MSNBC’s Rev. Sharpton “for your partnership, your friendship, and your tireless efforts to speak out for the voiceless, to stand up for the powerless, and to shine a light on the problems we must solve, and the promises we must fulfill.”

The glowing speech is curious considering Sharpton has been an advocate for Zimmerman’s guilt before he was even charged with a crime.

“MSNBC’s Sharpton has led several rallies, shouting Arrest Zimmerman Now!‘ and has called for civil disobedience and an “occupation” in Sanford, Fla., if an arrest is not made,” CNS notes.

Yesterday several callers to the Mark Levin radio show -- who self-identified as Hispanic/Latino -- were livid with Holder's endorsement of "Reverend Al". In the new media, Hispanic websites are tracking the case with what I interpret as a distinct sense of unease.

• "Why are they calling him a white Hispanic?’… That shows a lack of understanding about the Latino community"

• Zimmerman Case Ignites Dialogue on Latino Racial Identity

• Kelly Virella defends Zimmerman: "My son is Hispanic and not a racist"

• Latino Rebels is tracking George Zimmerman Incarceration Information

• Julie M. Rodriguez argues that "George Zimmerman Proves Latinos Can Be Racist, Too"

Racial animosities between the African-American and Latino communities are simmering, thanks to tacit encouragement by Eric Holder and Barack Obama. It's gotten so bad that the shadow arm of the Mexican government, the radical separatist group La Raza (literally: "The Race" or "The Master Race"), has ridden to the rescue of the White House.

Just in case tensions weren't high enough in the Trayvon Martin case, the head of a controversial Hispanic group appears happy to pour gasoline on the fire.

Calling for an African-American-Hispanic alliance against "common enemies", La Raza President Janet Murguia used Wednesday's Al Sharpton radio show to spread an incendiary message of hate. Happy to conveniently overlook George Zimmerman's Peruvian ancestry, Murguia made her divisive agenda abundantly clear...

JANET MURGUIA (PRESIDENT, LA RAZA) (36:39): I think for us it’s about understanding that we have common interests and we have to be able to understand that our demographics today, a lot of people want to pit who’s the largest minority vs. who’s taking over as the largest demographic and all that.

We need to understand that when you put those two demographics together you know when you put sixteen percent of the Latino population now in the US combined with fourteen percent of the African American population is what can we do together now to attack those common enemies? To attack the common barriers that present themselves for us.

When violence results, will these extremists take responsibility, or continue to deflect blame everywhere else? Who will be hurt or killed thanks to their reckless rhetoric?

I will vote for Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, or any other Republican in November to get rid of Barack Obama and his henchmen. These people must be thrown out of office and, if necessary, prosecuted by a real attorney general.