Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘ideology’

More From The “Thousand Words” Files


waving flag anyone who supports abortion atheism Bills-Speech defaced defend the rights of conscious fascism fetus for everyone frank-m-davis-5901 freedom of speech fund Hypocrisy lion body parts my 23rd abortion Rush-FB1 Safe-Six Side-Deal-600-LI ticking Vid-Kid-590-cdn Why I stopped performing abortions In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Democrats label lazy welfare recipients as ‘working families’


CALIFORNIA VOTER ALERT
A guide to the 2014 California propositions

Welfare is often unpopular with the voters who fund it through their taxes. So California politicians and academics who support it are now redefining welfare recipients as “workers” even if they do almost no work, and as members of “working families” if they live in the same household as someone who does a tiny bit of work. By doing this, they hope to brand critics of welfare as “anti-worker.”

Fifty-six percent of welfare recipients are in “working families,” according to a misleading recent report by the University of California at Berkeley’s left-wing Center for Labor Research and Education. But the report reached that false conclusion by defining even very lazy people as “workers”: “We define working families as those that have at least one family member who works 27 or more weeks per year and 10 or more hours per week.”

But working just ten hours a week for only about half the weeks in the year doesn’t make you a typical worker, or show industriousness. As Breitbart notes, “If someone is only working ten hours a week, there is probably time to find a second job, rather than rely on government assistance.” The Center that put out this ridiculous “study” is funded not just by taxpayers, but also by government employee unions like AFSCME whose members are hired to administer such welfare programs.Liberalism a mental disorder 2

That slanted “study” coincides with a recent push by California’s governor to expand welfare for so-called “workers” who actually do very little work. The Associated Press reported that Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is

proposing a $380 million earned income tax credit” for “as many as 825,000 families and up to 2 million Californians. “It’s just a straight deliverance of funding to people who are working very hard and are earning very little money, so in that sense I think it does a lot of good things,” Brown said of the tax credit. The average tax credit would be $460 a year with a maximum credit of $2,653 for families with three or more children, to complement the federal tax credit program. It would be available to individuals with incomes of less than $6,580, or up to $13,870 for families with three or more dependents.Picture11

For an individual to have an income of less than $6,580 at the California minimum wage of $9 per hour (and thus qualify for this welfare), he would have to work no more than 731 hours per year, or 14 hours per week. That’s not “working very hard,” Governor Brown. The Associated Press story, which reads like a press release for the governor’s proposed budget, never even questions his strange claim about this being hard work. The AP wrongly calls this huge, record-setting budget “a cautious approach to spending” even though it does nothing about California’s massive unfunded pension problems, and is balanced only due to tax increases that are supposedly temporary but that most California Democrats now want to make permanent, such as those in Proposition 30.Picture7

As the Los Angeles Daily Newspoints out:

In 2013, California’s public-employee pension systems—including those for police, firefighters and teachers—were carrying an estimated aggregate of $198 billion in unfunded liability. That’s 31 times the unfunded liability 10 years earlier.Picture8

Governor Brown has largely turned a blind eye to pension-spiking by CALPERS that will explode California pension costs by billions of dollars, half-heartedly objecting to only one of the “ninety-nine categories used” in its “scheme.”

As profligate and irresponsible as his budget is, it could have been even worse: Jerry Brown is a model of responsibility and common sense compared to California’s money-wasting left-wing legislature and its big-spending Democratic leadership (the state legislature is two-thirds Democrat and only one-third Republican). The AP quotes Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles) demanding yet more “investments” (the trendy euphemism for government spending) and promising that “we can and will do more” to increase such spending.  State legislative leaders have sought to expand Medicaid and other government healthcare programs to cover illegal immigrants at a cost of at least $1.3 billion annually, which Brown has not yet fully endorsed, although his budget does earmark the more modest sum of “$62 million to begin enrolling low-income immigrants in Medi-Cal, California’s version of Medicaid, on the assumption that President Barack Obama will prevail in a court battle over his executive order.”burke

The relabeling of welfare recipients as “workers” even when they do little work echoes the approach of the progressive ideological guru George Lakoff, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, who advocates reframing the political debate in deceptive ways. As The Atlantic noted:

Lakoff offers no new policy ideas. Instead he suggests that the Democrats reposition the ones they already have, and spruce up some unpopular terminology while they’re at it. He advocates referring to ‘trial lawyers’ as ‘public-protection attorneys,’ replacing ‘taxes’ with ‘membership fees,’ and generally couching the entire Democratic message in palatable—even deceptive—language in order to simplify large ideas and disguise them behind innocent but powerful-sounding phrases.more evidence

The Associated Press sometimes follows the deceptive Lakoff ideological approach when it comes to government spending, labeling spending on education and social programs as an “investment” even when the money spent will not be recouped later through higher tax revenue, making the reference to “investment” misleading.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Hans Bader

Hans BaderHans Bader is Counsel at the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington. After studying economics and history at the University of Virginia and law at Harvard, he practiced civil-rights, international-trade, and constitutional law. Hans also writes for CNS News and has appeared on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal.”
OARLogo Picture6

5 questions to ask a liberal progressive


http://allenbwest.com/2014/06/five-questions-ask-liberal-progressive/#MwMGe9uRbEErSrpu.99

Written by Allen West on June 19, 2014

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Greetings from our nation’s Capitol where I am to speak this afternoon at the Faith and Trigger the VoteFreedom Coalition. And as always, I enjoyed a nice early morning 5-mile run from the bat cave over to the D.C. mall — doggone it is more humid up here than South Florida.

As I was pounding the pavement, I came up with a list of questions I’d like to pose to a liberal progressive. Well, for every mile it seems I came up with one — glad I didn’t try running 8 miles this morning!

 

 

Here you go:

1. If former President George W. Bush was un-American for adding $4 trillion to the national debt, then what is President Barack Hussein Obama who is on his way to adding $8 trillion — and still has two more years to go? Yep, under Obama the national debt has risen from $10.67 trillion to almost $17.5 trillion.

2. If as Obama states, “we leave no man behind,” then what of Marine Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi, Pastor Saeed Abedini and Kenneth Bae — not to mention still-imprisoned Meriam Yahia Ibrahim – who had her chains removed after giving birth to her daughter, Maya? (And by the way, she is still under a death sentence under Sharia law for marrying a Christian). Nah, those folks don’t help Obama’s political agenda and certainly aren’t as important as recognizing illegal immigrant children “dreamers” at the White House.

3. When the average price of gasoline hit $2.50 a gallon, liberals and their media accomplices went apoplectic (you may have to define that word to a liberal friend) on George W. Bush. Why so silent now, when it’s $3.67?

4. If the late and former President Richard Nixon resigned over a bad case of “breaking and entering” (and the liberal media made a big hoopla over that), what does it take for Barack Hussein Obama to consider the same? Or does the color of skin trump content of character in America now? By the way, I’m planning on my computer crashing next year around tax return time.

5. If it is racist to disagree with the proven failed policies of Barry Soetoro, oops, I mean Barack Hussein Obama, then Truth The New Hate Speechwhat is it when liberal progressives disrespect, dismiss, denigrate, demean, disparage, discredit and seek to destroy black conservative Republicans? Funny, all those “D” words come from the Democrat party. Don’t believe me, just look for the responses to this post from liberal progressives (so predictable).

Now, just so you’re aware, be careful when asking these questions to be outside the range of spittle and frothing of the mouth. As well, stand clear so as not to be struck by a liberal progressives wild arm-flinging tantrums as they throw themselves on the floor in a mad rage. These are the telltale symptoms of liberals exposed to the truth — similar to exposing vampires to light. But know that this reaction affirms you are right on the issues and confirms the liberal progressive inability to intellectually respond.

Never Argue Group
Article collective closing

American Gestapo?


Cleta Mitchell to Newsmax: IRS Scandal Reaches to White House

Tuesday, 14 May 2013 01:08 PM

By Melanie Batley and Kathleen Walter  http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/irs-obama-tea-party/2013/05/14/id/504419?s=al&promo_code=137DF-1

 

IRS-Target-590-LICleta Mitchell, one of Washington’s most respected elections attorneys, told Newsmax she has tangible proof that high-ranking IRS officials in Washington were fully aware of the agency’s campaign to target conservative groups for heightened scrutiny, despite their denials.

And she thinks the president knew about the practice, too. If proven, she said, it could be an impeachable offense.

Mitchell, in an interview with Newsmax TV on Tuesday, said she was told by a Cincinnati IRS agent that applications by two of her conservative clients were being processed by — and would ultimately be approved or denied in — Washington.

She said she also is aware of nearly 100 other conservative groups that were being targeted by Washington.

“There were nearly 100 groups across the country that got the very egregious set of letters from the IRS that were almost identical and they came from offices all over the country so I know of at least 85 to 90, maybe more, organizations,” said Mitchell, who represents six groups which say they have been targeted, including the King Street Patriots and True the Vote.

“If they had the name ‘tea party’ or they had the word ‘patriots’ or if their mission was smaller government or study the Constitution, believe it or not, that would cause the IRS to say, ‘Oh, we better investigate these groups.'”

View video; http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/irs-obama-tea-party/2013/05/14/id/504419?s=al&promo_code=137DF-1#ooid=JtMGxtYjrUf3-diAyxhdltjMeeu_tejc

She added she had two clients whose group’s purpose was to lobby against Obamacare, both of which received extra IRS scrutiny. And of the clients who have gone public with their claims, they received “incredible scrutiny, voluminous requests for information, documents, almost like having been audited before they even are an exempt organization.”

In the case of one such client, she and her family subsequently became targets for audits to their personal and business tax returns, and were even visited by three different government agencies. She also knows of other groups who had surprise visits from the FBI after they applied for IRS status.

Mitchell said she doesn’t believe the president or the White House was uninvolved in the IRS activities, as the administration has claimed.

“I’ve thought for some time that this is politically motivated and that’s the reason it was happening. And, as I said, I’ve been doing this for more than 20 years and I’ve never seen anything like this until 2009, 2010. And the only thing that changed was we had a different administration,” she said.

“We know the White House used the Department of Health and Human Services to try to silence critics about Obamacare. So if we know they used HHS, why wouldn’t they also use the IRS or other federal agencies to try to silence political critics?”

Mitchell credits Congress for investigating the matter but says they have had limited effectiveness because she believes the IRS has lied even to lawmakers during hearings last year.

“They’ve been very helpful but the fact is, the IRS has lied and covered up, even to the members of Congress,” she said. “The problem is they’ve had hearings — the IRS commissioner basically lied to Congress last year when he appeared before Congress and they asked him about this targeting conservative groups and he said it wasn’t true. Well, no, we find out yes, it was true.”

She added, “They may try to say it was low-level people. It was not low-level people. They weren’t in Cincinnati. It was being directed out of Washington, and I have them on record saying that.”

Mitchell said the IRS practices are in violation of federal law.

She said it’s “a criminal offense to misuse information submitted by a taxpayer or an entity, anybody who submits anything to the IRS. The IRS agents are limited in what they can do with it, the scope of what they can say and do with it. So, clearly, the federal law has been broken.”

Asked whether it would be an impeachable offense if it emerged that the president or his officials were behind the IRS’ practices, Mitchell said, “Well, it certainly was for Richard Nixon 40 years ago this week.”

She added, “Isn’t that ironic? The House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon 40 years ago this week on May 18, and one of those was misuse of the IRS to go after political enemies.”

© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Why is This Important? Read on for the answer


Ariel Castro, Cleveland Kidnapper, Is a Registered Democrat

By / 9 May 2013 / 147 Comments  http://clashdaily.com/2013/05/ariel-castro-cleveland-kidnapper-is-a-registered-democrat/

Screen Shot 2013-05-09 at 3.34.55 PMAccording to voter registration records, Ariel Castro, the Cleveland kidnapper, is a registered Democrat.  He was also the alleged leader among the three Castro brothers, who were arrested this week, and the owner of the house at 2207 Seymour Ave., where the three abducted local women had been kept in captivity for over a decade.

Why is this important?  Whenever a crime or a scandal captures national attention, the pattern in the mainstream media is to either identify the culprit as a Republican or hold silence — in which case we can rest assured that the culprit is a Democrat.

When the identity or the party affiliation is yet unknown, the pattern is to speculate publicly about the possibility of the criminal being a conservative, Christian, white, Republican, and a Tea Party member — and never that he could be a Hispanic Democrat voter playing bass in a meringue band.

In today’s divisive climate, the identity of a perpetrator is always a political issue, especially when a crime is committed by men against women.  According to the Daily News, “What the neighbors saw was terrifying and dehumanizing: Naked women on dog leashes, crawling in the dirt. A lady clutching an infant and pounding on a window for help.”

If any of the brothers were a Republican, this news would have been trumpeted by the mainstream media as tangible proof of the Republican War on Women — a narrative invented by Democrat strategists and maintained by the media in a successful effort to defeat Republican candidates in the 2012 election cycle.

Read more: americanthinker.com

Is This Man The Mastermind Behind The Benghazi Cover Up?


by

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/is-this-man-the-mastermind-behind-the-benghazi-cover-up/

 

National Security Council speechwriter B

I wrote yesterday about how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) knew that the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was a terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda operatives. We know the Obama White House put out the story for nearly a week that it was just Muslims upset over a benign YouTube video. In spite of knowing what was going on and having the ability to intervene, the Obama administration did nothing to stop or assist Americans who they knew were being attacked by Al-Qaeda. Instead, they chose to cover it up and intimidate witnesses. Stephen F. Hayes has an excellent piece at the Weekly Standard titled The Benghazi Talking Points, in which he fingers the man he believes is the main person behind the Benghazi cover-up, Ben Rhodes.

Of course, one would immediately have to wonder about those who would be around a man who has vowed to stand with the Muslims instead of America. If you recall, Barack Obama made a speech in Cairo, Egypt to an audience which included the Muslim Brotherhood, in which he distorted the Qur’an to put it in a good light and then attempted to make out like Islam had made great contributions to both America and the world. That speech was written by Ben Rhodes, Obama’s foreign policy speechwriter and now a part of a his National Security Council.

 

Hayes writes in his article about the talking points that were first put out to officials. He writes:

The talking points were first distributed to officials in the interagency vetting process at 6:52 p.m. on Friday. Less than an hour later, at 7:39 p.m., an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones—were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.” One official—Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy—further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.

hayestp.img_assist_custom-497x1400

There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points—148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests. 

Ed Lasky writes concerning Rhodes, “Ben Rhodes should be called to account for trying to divert blame away from Islamic terrorists and the Obama team members whose feckless negligence led to the Benghazi massacre.”

“I have previously written about Ben Rhodes and his role in the Obama White House,” writes Lasky. “It is shameful that this ‘kid’ (he is all of 35) has been given any responsibility at all in our government. In ‘Does it bother anyone that this person is the Deputy National Security Adviser?’ I noted his problematic background for someone given so much power by Obama. But then again he does specialize in fiction-writing. He earned a master’s degree in fiction-writing from New York University just a few years ago . He did not have a degree in government, diplomacy, national security; nor has he served in the CIA, or the military. He was toiling away not that long ago on a novel called ‘The Oasis of Love” about a mega church in Houston, a dog track, and a failed romance. ”

Lasky concludes that Ben Rhodes is the man that attempted to whitewash Islamists and the Obama administration, not only in the Cairo speech, but in the talking points promoted by the Obama White House in the days following the attack on Benghazi that left four Americans dead.

I guess we’ll wait and see if he is even called as a witness this by the House in this week’s hearings.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/is-this-man-the-mastermind-behind-the-benghazi-cover-up/#ixzz2SeesW6VP

 

 

Tyranny Continues to Grow


CA Governor Signs Law Allowing Confiscation of Firearms

On May 1, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation that allows law enforcement to confiscate handguns and assault rifles from Californians who bought the weapons legally but have since had a disqualifying “criminal conviction or serious mental illness.”

Legislators believe up to 20,000 Californians will fall under this law, which could mean up to 40,000 weapons need to be confiscated. The legislation “allocates $24 million in surplus funds” to hire “dozens of special agents” to help recover the weapons.

Since California keeps a database of gun owners, they know where every gun is–or where it’s supposed to be–and they’ll use that database to locate them.

Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said the money California has spent to maintain a “tracking program” on firearms has paid off and is now giving the lawmakers “the opportunity to confiscate [these guns].”

No word on when the confiscation will begin.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: