WyBlog, the best thing about New Jersey since the invention of the 24 hour diner.
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan
CH 2.0 Info Center
The Jersey Report
Labor Union Report
Net Right Nation
The Patriot Post Newsletter
Victor Davis Hanson
J! E! T! S! Jets! Jets! Jets!
NJ.com Caldwell Forum
The Caldwells Patch
The Jersey Tomato Press
"This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, social issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes."
#VRWC RSS feed:News Ticker Widget
No taxation without representation. It's the essence of modern liberty. It's the foundation of America's government. And it's about to be put to the test by the European Union, where a draft proposal would force robots to pay taxes.
Europe's growing army of robot workers could be classed as "electronic persons" and their owners liable to paying social security for them if the European Union adopts a draft plan to address the realities of a new industrial revolution.
Robots are being deployed in ever-greater numbers in factories and also taking on tasks such as personal care or surgery, raising fears over unemployment, wealth inequality and alienation.
Their growing intelligence, pervasiveness and autonomy requires rethinking everything from taxation to legal liability, a draft European Parliament motion, dated May 31, suggests.
The draft motion called on the European Commission to consider "that at least the most sophisticated autonomous robots could be established as having the status of electronic persons with specific rights and obligations".
Isaac Asimov, please call your office.
If robots pay taxes, shouldn't they be allowed to vote? Hold office? Can an "electronic person" own property or exercise civil rights?
These aren't silly questions.
And no, I don't have the answers. I'm pretty sure the Euroweenies don't have the answers either. They're just trolling for revenue to prop up their bloated social welfare state and robots are this week's easy target.
But someone ought to put some thought into this Real Soon Now or the
EU just might find themselves on the receiving end of a robot revolution.
Yesterday Chris Christie proposed a statewide school aid plan that's so sensible, so fair, and so simple, it probably has zero chance of passing our rabidly partisan Democrat-controlled legislature.
The plan calls for equalizing state aid per pupil across the board. Every kid in every district gets the same amount. The current court-imposed formula sanctifies 30 "Abbott" districts, giving them the lion's share of state aid while leaving crumbs for the other 534. How this could be considered "fair" is beyond me, but then I'm not a liberal socialist. So expect the Democrats and their NJEA unionista buddies to oppose this plan tooth and nail.
But man-oh-man, if it did pass, I'd see my school tax bill shrink, by a lot.
Because according to this Star-Ledger analysis, Caldwell's state aid would rise from a measly $400.20 to $6,599 per pupil, an increase of 1524%!
Given that the CWCBOE spends about $14,000 per kid, and pretty much all of that comes out of property taxes, I could potentially see my school tax bill go down by about $4,000 a year.
That's almost better than winning the lottery!
Of course I'm only dreaming. Not because the Democrats won't pass Christie's plan. But because even if they did, the spendthrifts on Caldwell's board of education would never surrender that property tax revenue. These guys have a wishlist a mile long and an extra 6 grand per kid in state aid would get vacuumed up into lavish pie-in-the-sky ostensibly "educational" spending projects in a New York minute. The gold-plated water fountains in their Performing Arts Center or the state-of-the-art locker room facilities they're currently building in Met Life Stadium Junior (formerly known as Bonnell Field) would pale in comparison to the stuff they'd throw money at given the chance.
Christie's plan is only half of the solution. The other half is spending
control, something that's even more lacking in these parts than state aid.
Between the teachers union and the BOE the taxpayers don't have a prayer. And
until that situation changes it doesn't matter what Chris Christie or any future
governor does, because in the end we're still gonna get hosed.
Electric cars, still limited in how far they can go before needing to plug in for more juice, will soon be getting a jump start from New Jersey.
The state has launched a $725,000 grant program aimed at encouraging the installation of more electric vehicle charging stations.
Hey, remember back in the early 1900s when the state passed out grants to "encourage" the building of more gas stations?
Yeah, me neither.
According to the state Board of Public Utilities, there are currently 398 charging outlets at 181 locations in New Jersey, based on data kept by the federal Department of Energy's Alternative Fuels Data Center. BPU President Richard Mroz said the grant program will encourage greater use of electric vehicles as well as plug-in hybrids, by expanding the infrastructure network needed to keep alternative-fueled vehicles on the road in New Jersey.
398 charging stations doesn't sound like a lot. Except there probably aren't 398 electric cars in all of New Jersey.
Remember when the people who needed and wanted a service paid for that service? Ah, but then we couldn't have socialism, and use Other People's Money to buy votes and preen for favorable press.
Under the first phase of the New Jersey program, reimbursement grants of up to $250 will be offered on a first-come basis for each Level 1 charging station installed, and up to $5,000 for each Level 2 charging station.
Level 1 charging stations provide power through 120 volt lines, but take longer to charge. They add about 2 to 5 miles of range to a plugged-in electric vehicle per hour. Eight hours of charging at 120V can provide about 40 miles of range.
Level 2 stations, which offer more mileage range in a shorter period of time, are connected to 240 or 208 volt dedicated circuits, and can recharge a typical electric vehicle battery overnight.
Proving once again just how impractical electric cars really are. Plug in for an hour while twiddling your thumbs, and presto! you're good for another 2, maybe 5 miles. Lather, rinse, repeat!
Wait 8 hours (maybe take a nap?) and go a whopping 40 miles! Just don't turn on the air conditioning…
Or you could, oh I don't know, spend 8 minutes at the corner gas station and go upwards of 400 miles on a single tank. That is if you're smart enough to buy a Real Car instead of a glorified golf cart.
But then how would smug virtue-signaling liberals be able to feel good about
themselves at our expense?
That whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing? Yeah, it's so 17th century.
People whose names appear on a federal terror watch list or no-fly list shouldn't be presumed innocent until proven guilty for purposes of buying a firearm, according to Democratic lawmakers.
Congressional Democrats, in the wake of the Orlando, Fla., terrorist attack on Saturday, have renewed their call to ban individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing weapons. Most Republicans maintain that such a law would restrict peoples Second Amendment rights without due process of law.
Liberty, it's so outdated dontcha know. And guns are scary!
So yesterday, to the applause of pretty much every liberal on my Facebook friends list, Senate Democrats waged a 15 hour filibuster to force a vote on suspending the Constitution for gun owners.
A Democratic senator who mourned the loss of 20 children in his home state of Connecticut waged a roughly 15-hour filibuster into the early hours Thursday, asserting as he yielded the floor that Republican leaders had committed to hold votes on expanded gun background checks and a ban on gun sales to suspected terrorists.
Who is a "suspected terrorist?"
Anyone on the government's secret terrorism watch list or the airlines' no-fly list. Lists that you can't find out if you're on, and can't get off of if you are.
Sounds legit, right? Because remember, guns are scary!
Meanwhile, the New York Times wants the government to go even further, by convening a secret Star Chamber to suspend the Second Amendment.
A New York Times editorial advocates for a new law allowing a secret court to take away citizens right to own a gun at the discretion of the federal government.
Citing the Orlando terror attack that left 50 dead including the shooter and 53 wounded at a gay nightclub, the piece advocates for a "no-buy" list similar to "no-fly" lists. Under the law, suspected terrorists would not be able to buy a gun. In an attempt to ensure the integrity of the lists and preserve due process, the author proposes people only be added to this no-buy list after a secret court rules they are ineligible, similar to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court hearings where the federal government obtains permission to wiretap. Under this proposal, an American who has never been convicted of a crime could be denied their right to buy a gun simply because a secret court decided it should be that way.
Hey remember the Good Old Days when Democrats opposed the FISA courts?
Oh, right, that was back when that evil Booosch guy was using them to spy on library records and other important stuff. This is like totally different! Because guns are scary!
But, OK, let's suppose a bunch of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats really do have everyone's best interests at heart. They're paragons of integrity and they'll never put their political enemies on a "no-buy" list out of spite, unlike say, their buddies at the IRS. Honest!
So then riddle me this Batman. Because I'm confused about something. See, a day earlier Newt Gingrich floated the idea of resurrecting the House Un-American Activities Committee. Which of course would meet in the open, in front of TV cameras.
Newt Gingrich said resurrecting the House Un-American Activities Committee could help defeat radical Islam.
"We originally created the House Un-American Activities Committee to go after the Nazis", he said Monday on Fox News's "Fox & Friends."
"We passed several laws in 1938 and 1939 to go after the Nazis", the former GOP House Speaker added. "We made it illegal to help the Nazis. We are presently going to have to take similar steps here. We're going to take much tougher positions."
"We're going to ultimately declare war on Islamic supremacists, and we're going to say, 'If you pledge allegiance to [the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria], you are a traitor and you've lost your citizenship.'"
And liberals flipped out.
When it comes to Muslims, Due Process is the only thing that matters. And their Constitutional rights are sacrosanct. And, McCarthyism!
"In the fifties, the most effective sanction was terror", The Harvard Crimson wrote of the committee's style in a February 1964 op-ed.
"Almost any publicity from HUAC meant the 'blacklist.' Without a chance to clear his name, a witness would suddenly find himself without friends and without a job."
I'm reveling in the irony. "Blacklist." "No-buy" list. Po-tay-to. Po-tah-to.
Here's an idea. Let's call the whole thing off.
Because even with all their lists, the Democrats still wouldn't have stopped the Orlando shooter. He deliberately wasn't put on any watch lists.
If you're asking yourself "why not?," that's easy.
The answer is, because under this Administration, accusations of "Islamophobia" are career-ending, whereas letting people be killed by the dozens is just an unfortunate bit of government work.
It's almost as if they're just using this shooting as pretext for advancing their totalitarian ideology. Never let a crisis go to waste. And disarming the population is Step One toward controlling the population.
And, Chris Christie sells us out once again. Or folds like cheap suit. Take your pick.
NJ Democrats want to raise our state's gas tax by a whopping 23 cents a gallon to pay for more transportation boondoggles like Camden's light rail to nowhere and a new rail tunnel for people who work in Manhattan. Er, "to fix our crumbling roads and bridges," at the low, low price of $27.3 million dollars per mile. Or, so I'm told.
In exchange, they're going to "phase out" the Estate Tax. In theory, anyway.
And today Chris Christie signaled he's OK with that plan, if the tax-and-spend party pinky-swears they'll phase out the estate tax "faster."
State lawmakers have "got work to do" on a pair of transportation funding plans if they expect approval by Governor Christie, he said Monday.
Having spent the weekend reviewing the proposals, Christie determined there is "not nearly enough" of what he calls tax fairness — reductions in exchange for an increase in the gasoline tax. Both legislative plans call for increases of up to 23 cents per gallon likely to be passed on to motorists.
"Tax fairness!" Because tacking 23 cents a gallon onto the price of gas is "fair!"
Oh, but, we're going to get rid of one of our dueling death taxes. Maybe.
Both plans propose raising $2 billion a year for the Transportation Trust Fund over the next 10 years. A critical component to achieve tax fairness, Christie said, is the elimination of the estate tax, one of the two so-called "death taxes" that many critics say make New Jersey uncompetitive with other states and unpopular for retirees. But the legislative proposals would phase out the estate tax over four years. Christie wants it eliminated by the time he leaves office in two years because, he said, "I don't trust them."
Yeah, well, we don't trust you either Chief.
And we certainly don't trust your bureaucratic brain trust to wisely spend that new $2 billion in annual revenue you're squeezing out of us. Because their track record stinks. Where else but New Jersey could you find a 3½ mile roadway reconstruction project costing north of one billion dollars? I must be the only guy in the state whose palm isn't getting greased on that one…
If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times. We don't have a revenue problem, we have spending problem. And Chris Christie's "solution" is to look the other way.
Thanks governor. Thanks a lot.
I'm coming out of the closet.
Donald Trump wasn't my first choice for the GOP presidential nomination. That distinction goes to Scott Walker.
He wasn't my second choice either. Or my third.
Hell, he wasn't my 17th choice, OK? Happy now?
But he's gonna be the nominee. And not for nothing, anyone is better than Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The nation can probably survive 4, or even 8 years of President Trump.
America as we know it won't last six months after the Dowager Empress of Chappaqua is inaugurated.
Why? Because she'll finish what Obama started, erasing the Bill of Rights, trampling the Constitution, coddling our enemies, ruining the economy, and opening our borders to the Mohammedan hordes and Mexican drug lords. Oh, not to mention the enshrinement of Pay-to-Play as the only way to get anything done in her White House.
Her daughter spilled the beans, say goodbye to the Second Amendment. Hillary will confiscate our guns.
Donald Trump won't.
Hillary will appoint at least 2, and probably 3 radical left-wing justices to the Supreme Court. Justices who'll make Sonya "Wise Latina" Sotomayor look like Oliver Wendall Holmes by comparison. Justices who won't think twice about rewriting the Constitution to suit their social justice whims.
Donald Trump won't.
Hillary will irrevocably send our nation down the rathole of green energy, bankrupting the coal, oil, and gas companies as she pours trillions of tax dollars into pie-in-the-sky renewable generation fantasies.
Donald Trump won't.
Hillary will enhance and prop-up Obamacare, or barring that, replace it with Cuban / Venezuelan style single-payer health care.
Donald Trump won't.
Hillary will bury all the misdeeds of the Obama administration like Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Benghazi, Lois Lerner's weaponized IRS, EPA overreach, State Department stonewalling, the disastrous Iran "deal," and the stench at the VA. And of course if she's president we'll never know the extent of the corruption at the Clinton Foundation or where all the money they supposedly raised for Haiti actually ended up.
Donald Trump will pour some much needed disinfectant on all that's rotten in the Democratic Party. Can you imagine how much fun Attorney General Chris Christie is going to have prosecuting everyone who ever worked for BHO and HRC? And Valerie Jarrett will probably defect to Iran the day after Trump is elected.
And of course, speaking of misdeeds, Hillary Clinton is under investigation by the FBI for serious breaches of national security.
Donald Trump isn't.
The presidency must be denied to Hillary Clinton. Of that there can
be no doubt. Donald Trump is the last person standing in her way. Ergo, it's
time to man up and endorse Donald Trump for president of the United States.
When I decry the indoctrination occuring in the government schools I'm often chastised by my liberal friends for over-reacting. Well, it turns out that ideas do have consequences, and one such consequence is the elevation of Gaia worship over traditional morality.
When asked to rank a series of action statements (lying, over-eating, stealing, etc) according to a five-point scale: "always OK," "usually OK," "neither wrong nor OK," "usually wrong" and "always wrong," teens and young adults rank "not recycling" as more immoral than viewing pornographic images. Combining the percentages of those who chose always and usually wrong for each statement, theft (taking something that belongs to someone else) ranked #1 at almost nine in 10 (88%). Not recycling ranked #4 at 56 percent, and porn was all the way down at #9 with only a third (32%) of teens and young adults ranking it as morally wrong. [Emphasis mine]
We are at a point where our teens consider viewing porn less of a moral issue than over-eating, energy consumption and not recycling.
Because "over-eating, energy consumption, and not recycling" are three issues the progressive left insists on emphasizing, over and over, brainwashing our children with apocalyptic visions of rising sea levels washing away a population of overweight sloths. Absent a sense of perspective, of course.
And naturally too, downplaying the detrimental effects of viewing porn is another deliberate decision. Porn desensitizes children to the spiratuality of sexual relations. Porn shows them that it's "normal" to engage in immoral activities. And the generation that came of age on "free love" is now teaching our kids that sexually, anything goes.
This is what comes of moral relativism, the belief that there are no absolutes, only shades of gray. It's a belief that "good" and "evil" are merely 2 sides of the same coin, and one is not inherently better than the other. Absolute morality, of the kind espoused by the likes of organized religion, has become verboten, replacing relativity with relativism.
Which is why our educators do not provide perspective when expounding on the perils of Climate Change, or racism, or homophobia, or Islamophobia, or in fact any of their radical pronouncements. When all ideas are "equal," nothing has value. Or rather, everything has the same value, and that value is defined by the person espousing it.
Alas, men need something or someone to worship. It's human nature. If God is taken out of the equation, then another deity, the State or the planet or the self, rushes in to fill the void. So we begat a generation of kids whose morality is skewed. A generation that will rearrange bathrooms across America to accommodate a single transgender individual and doesn't blink an eye at depictions of group sex on television. And of course a generation which delights in persecuting Christians and Jews who stand up in objection to the skewering of absolute truth.
In such an environment, how could recyclling not be more important
than resisting temptation?
When was the last time a political candidate was called a "moneygrubber?"
Let's ask Elizabeth Warren, who lobbed that label against Donald Trump today.
Donald Trump is an "insecure moneygrubber," Sen. Elizabeth Warren told the assembled Democrats of Massachusetts at the state's party convention Saturday.
Good grief. Did she break out a caricature of him with a hooked nose too?
Because in the fever swamps of the Left, "moneygrubber" == "Jew".
And according to Warren, Donald Trump, like stereotypical Jews, is "all about money."
From there, Warren launched into a laundry list of Trump's policies, highlighting where the GOP nominee's views differed from that of her own and her party's. She said he is "all about money."
The casual anti-Semitism inherent in that comments is astounding.
"These are the values we fight for," Warren said.
Donald Trump's daughter converted to Judaism.
And Elizabeth Warren's "values," the values she will "fight for," denigrate Ivanka Trump's religion.
Did you know Warren is on Hillary's short list for VP? Imagine a raging anti-Semite, a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Welcome to today's Democratic Party.
UPDATE 05 Jun 2016 13:28:
Adding insult to injury, Bernie Sanders and the DNC platform committee go full-on anti-Semite.
Sanders got to appoint two people to the Democratic Party's platform committee. Here's who he chose:
Professor Cornel West not only has called the Israeli prime minister a war criminal but openly supports the BDS movement (boycott, divestment, and sanctions), the most important attempt in the world to ostracize and delegitimize Israel.
West is joined on the committee by the longtime pro-Palestinian activist James Zogby. Together, reported the New York Times, they "vowed to upend what they see as the party's lopsided support of Israel."
Like I said above, the farther left you go, the more virulant is the Jew-hatred.
Reince Priebus couldn't do it. Paul Ryan won't do it. Mitt Romney doesn't want anyone to do it. Bill Kristol is urgently trying to prevent it. And John McCain forgot what "it" is.
But somebody has to step up and unite the GOP, and from somewhere beyond left field we get ... Mitch McConnell?
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, widely acknowledged as one of the GOP Establishment's leading voices — who himself has little positive to say about Trump — is also deeply disconcerted by Kristol's apparent desire to see the GOP lose just because its presumptive nominee isn't a Weekly Standard-reading neoconservative who wishes to gallivant across the globe building democracies.
He's talking about Kristol's cockamamie idea of drafting NRO's David French to run as a third party candidate. Which, unless he also enlists Indiana State Representative Randy Frye as his running mate, is doomed to failure.
Oh, sure. "French - Frye 2016" is also doomed to fail, but it'll at least be good for a few laughs on late night TV.
Kristol's scheme "can only help elect Hillary Clinton," McConnell told Fox News on Tuesday. "Donald Trump won this thing in a good, old-fashioned way and I think we ought to respect the wishes of the Republican voters," he continued.
"Anything that divides this sort of right-of-center world is not helpful, and I don't think it's a good idea to do anything that helps us elect Hillary Clinton," he said.
In other words, keep your eye on the prize guys. Hillary Clinton and whatever radical progressive nutjob she cajoles into being her running mate are the real problem. They must be defeated. And like it or not, the only guy who can defeat them is Donald Trump.
Not Gary Johnson. Not David French. Not Mitt Romney The Sequel.
Which isn't to say that Trump is perfect. Far from it. So I was pleased to see that McConnell isn't letting Trump off the hook either.
During a Tuesday interview with Business Insider to promote his newly released memoir, " The Long Game," the Senate majority leader said it was time for Trump, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, to stop focusing on "score settling."
"Well it's pretty clear he's going to be the nominee, and I would think the better path to take would be to unify the party rather than settling grudges or old scores," he said. "I hope Trump will go in a different direction."
"He's not a dumb guy, he's a smart guy," McConnell continued. "He's earned the nomination. Now's the time to put the party together, and I would put aside all the score settling with people who competed with him for the nomination or said things."
Now of course some of McConnell's sudden penchant for unity comes from a sense of self-preservation. Trump The Destroyer could very well send him back to obscurity as the GOP moves in a whole new direction. And I for one wouldn't lose too much sleep if McConnell and his cronies were deposed.
But McConnell's been around for a long time and he knows how to cut a deal. Trump likes deals. And a deal that keeps the House and Senate in GOP hands while crushing Hillary Clinton sounds like the best deal we can get at this point.
Of course part of Trump's appeal is he says things that are outrageous. He lambastes the establishment. He doesn't do nuance. He can't, and shouldn't turn that off. But he's also got to realize that he needs the GOP more than they need him. These establishment guys, their sinecure is set, even if Hillary gets elected. Bob Dole lost in 1996 and he's still hanging around collecting a paycheck.
So McConnell's olive branch is a good sign. Trump should take it, and together they should figure out a way to make peace with the #NeverTrumpers before it's too late.
That list of potential SCOTUS nominees was a good first step by the way. The NRA endorsement, especially given how Hillary is ratcheting up the anti-gun rhetoric, is also a positive development. (Yes, I know he's been all over the map on guns prior to his presidential run. But Constitutional Carry was one of his first big position statements, and he's repeatedly come out for gun permit reciprocity in a manner equivalent to how states recognize drivers licenses. So let's say he's "evolved," or something.)
If Mitch McConnell wants to bring both sides together I'll do what I can
to help. Bizarro World here we come. Because, #NeverHillary.
It's not exactly a smoking gun. And it's certainly not a stinging rebuke. But at least it's not a total whitewash either. The State Department's Inspector General has finally issued a report on Hillary Clinton's private email server, and yes, it says she broke the rules.
The State Department's independent watchdog has issued a highly critical analysis of Hillary Clinton's email practices while running the department, concluding that she failed to seek legal approval for her use of a private email server and that department staff would not have given its blessing because of the "security risks in doing so."
The inspector general, in a long awaited review obtained Wednesday by The Washington Post in advance of its publication, found that Clinton's use of private email for public business was "not an appropriate method" of preserving documents and that her practices failed to comply with department policies meant to ensure that federal record laws are followed.
The report says Clinton, who is the Democratic presidential front-runner, should have printed and saved her emails during her four years in office or surrendered her work-related correspondence immediately upon stepping down in February 2013. Instead, Clinton provided those records in December 2014, nearly two years after leaving office.
The report found that a top Clinton aide was warned in 2010 that the system may not properly preserve records but dismissed those worries, indicating that the system passed legal muster. But the inspector general said it could not show evidence of a review by legal counsel.
So far so good, right?
Here comes the "but."
The 83-page report reviews email practices by five secretaries of state and generally concludes that record keeping has been spotty for years.
It was particularly critical of former secretary of state Colin Powell — who has acknowledged publicly that he used a personal email account to conduct business — concluding that he too failed to follow department policy designed to comply with public-record laws.
And there you have it. The "everybody else was doing it" defense.
It's a smokescreen big enough to hide all of her transgressions.
You watch. The FBI will say they can't recommend indicting Hillary because they didn't indict Colin Powell way-back-when.
And then all the way to November, no matter what Trump says about Crooked Hillary, her media sycophants will keep spinning the lack of an indictment as "proving" she was "cleared."
I told you guys the fix was in.
Damn, I hate being right all the time.
Remember back in March when I noted that Obama bypassed Congress to send $500 million to a UN climate slush fund?
Congress didn't appropriate any money for his green dreams, so he took the $500 million from "somewhere else."
Well, Thanks to Senator James Lankford (R-OK) now we know where that money was supposed to go. Zika prevention.
I've said several times on the Senate floor, over the last two weeks, that the Zika virus is a serious threat and should be dealt with responsibly by funding immediate vaccine research and aggressive mosquito population control.
In a floor speech last week, I also shed light on the fact that Congress last December provided the Obama administration with authority to pull money from bilateral economic assistance to foreign countries.
They can use those funds to combat infectious diseases, if the administration believed there is an infectious disease emergency. In the middle of the Zika epidemic, the administration did use their authority to pull money from foreign aid and spend it, but they didn't use it for Zika.
You might ask — so what did the administration spend the infectious disease money on earlier this year?
You guessed it… climate change.
In March, President Obama gave the United Nations $500 million out of an account under bilateral economic assistance to fund the U.N.'s Green Climate Fund.
Congress refused to allocate funding for the U.N. Climate Change Fund last year, so the president used this account designated for international infectious diseases to pay for his priority.
Sorry pregnant women, Mother Gaia takes priority over you.
While I understand that intelligent people can disagree on the human effects on the global climate, it is hard to imagine a reason why the administration would prioritize the U.N. Green Climate Fund over protecting the American people, especially pregnant women, from the Zika virus.
Oh c'mon Senator, of course you can imagine why this president would prioritize climate change over human suffering. It's his legacy. It's how he collects accolades from preening liberals like Leonardo DiCaprio. And face it, what Leo thinks is far more important to Mr. Obama than the suffering of some nameless, faceless children.
It's called Virtue Signaling.
Combating Climate Change gets him invited to all the best parties and fawning coverage from the New York Times. Fighting Zika is harder, prone to possible failure, and not something limousine liberals care about because if it affects them at all, it's only because the maid or the gardener is prattling on about it instead of doing what they're paid to do.
Climate Change is the cause du jour.
Zika is somebody else's problem.
Fortunately Senator there is another arrow in your quiver. Introduce legislation
to bring back DDT. If nothing else, hilarity will ensue.
Choices? You now have fewer.
The number of insurance companies offering health coverage via the Affordable Care Act marketplace in New Jersey will dip to four next year when Oxford Health Plans, a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare, pulls out.
UnitedHealthcare, the nation's largest insurer, announced in April that it would leave the Obamacare marketplaces next year in most of the 34 states in which it offered coverage. High health costs for the small number of people who signed up in those markets led it to project $650 million in losses this year, the company reported. The company did not reveal its plans for New Jersey at that time.
A state insurance official notified the company on Tuesday 5/17 that the withdrawal of its HMO offerings was approved, to take effect on Jan. 1. The HMO will no longer be offered either on healthcare.gov or in the state's unsubsidized individual market.
There goes my plan.
I liked it. But, I can't keep it.
Of course I liked my pre-Obamacare plan better, but I couldn't keep that either.
Oxford customers affected by this move are to receive notification letters in late June. They will be able to shop for replacement coverage during the open enrollment period that begins on Nov. 1.
Yippee Kai Ay.
The insurers currently approved to sell coverage through the Affordable Care Act in New Jersey are Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, AmeriHealth of New Jersey, Health Republic of New Jersey, and Oscar Health Insurance, which is available in nine counties, including Bergen and Passaic.
With competition decreasing, watch for rate hikes. Big rate hikes. Because anyone who thought "affordable care" meant lower prices is an idiot. Or a Democrat. But I repeat myself.
Donald Trump says he'll shut Obamacare down.
I think I'm ready to vote for that.
Verizon's unionized workers voluntarily walked off the job, to demand higher pay and more lavish benefits. Now they're earning zero, and crying poverty. So naturally New Jersey Democrats want to bail them out with our tax dollars.
Striking workers could be eligible to collect unemployment benefits in New Jersey under a bill approved by the state Senate Labor Committee on Monday.
The bill is aimed at assisting Verizon workers who've been on strike for a month, but would change the rules for receiving unemployment insurance for all during labor disputes.
The committee approved the bill (S2160) 3-1.
I wanna shake the hand of the person who voted "no."
"This legislation we obviously think is important for the thousands of workers who have really almost (been) forced to be off the job, walked off their job, because of the contract dispute and the way in which Verizon has negotiated this contract and what Verizon has asked their employees to do in order to maintain their employment," state Sen. Joe Vitale (D-Middlesex), who sponsored the bill along with state Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester).
Um, OK. Except Verizon didn't lock them out. They could be working right now, earning a paycheck, which as it happens, is already bigger than current telecom industry norms.
The unionistas voluntarily walked off the job.
Actions have consequences. And one consequence of walking off the job is that you no longer get paid.
Nicholas Sheola, a chief steward for CWA Local 1000, said that while CWA has a strike relief fund that pays out about $300 a week, IBEW members don't have the same benefit. To get by, he said, they're borrowing money from family and friends or "they're robbing Peter to pay Paul."
The IBEW doesn't have a strike fund?
Don't their members pay union dues? Where does that money go?
Oh, right, it goes toward campaign contributions to Democrats.
Which, of course, is why the Democrats are so eager to pander to them with our money.
"We don't know when we're going back to work. It's a big hit," he said. "A lot of us have families. We don't have medical anymore, so we may have to pay for Cobra or something like that. So another source of income would be good to have."
Yo, Chief, I know when you can go back to work.
Show up. Do your job. And amazingly Verizon will pay you!
But that's harder than taking a taxpayer-funded vacation, so it's obviously a non-starter with you wannabe socialists.
Fortunately Governor Chris Christie is almost certain to veto this insanity.
So it's merely grandstanding by bought-and-paid-for Democrats for their
gullible unionista donors. Vote Democrat, it's easier than showing up for
That man in the girls' locker room? You're gonna pay to put him there.
Right behind his coed bathroom mandate, General Secretary Obama also decreed that health insurance companies participating in Obamacare must now cover sex change operations.
The Department of Health and Human Services issued a final regulation Friday that will pressure health insurers to cover sex change operations, which could then be subsidized by taxpayers through Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare.
The regulation "prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability; enhances language assistance for individuals with limited English proficiency; and protects individuals with disabilities," the agency said in a release.
Doctors and health insurers also cannot deny "health care or health coverage based on an individual's sex, including discrimination based on pregnancy, gender identity, and sex stereotyping."
In a fact sheet on the portion of the rule regarding sex discrimination, the government explains that health care providers cannot refuse to cover all services related to a sex change — such as hormone therapy, breast implants, and the surgery itself — as a matter of policy.
Let's tack on another expensive mandate! Because our premiums aren't high enough already, right?
Meanwhile, the folks who pioneered sex change surgery no longer offer that form of treatment. Here's why:
At Johns Hopkins, after pioneering sex-change surgery, we demonstrated that the practice brought no important benefits. As a result, we stopped offering that form of treatment in the 1970s. Our efforts, though, had little influence on the emergence of this new idea about sex, or upon the expansion of the number of "transgendered" among young and old....
I am ever trying to be the boy among the bystanders who points to what's real. I do so not only because truth matters, but also because overlooked amid the hoopla — enhanced now by Bruce Jenner's celebrity and Annie Leibovitz's photography — stand many victims. Think, for example, of the parents whom no one — not doctors, schools, nor even churches — will help to rescue their children from these strange notions of being transgendered and the problematic lives these notions herald. These youngsters now far outnumber the Bruce Jenner type of transgender [autogynephilia]. Although they may be encouraged by his public reception, these children generally come to their ideas about their sex not through erotic interests but through a variety of youthful psychosocial conflicts and concerns....
When "the tumult and shouting dies," it proves not easy nor wise to live in a counterfeit sexual garb. The most thorough follow-up of sex-reassigned people — extending over thirty years and conducted in Sweden, where the culture is strongly supportive of the transgendered — documents their lifelong mental unrest. Ten to fifteen years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to twenty times that of comparable peers.
Speaking of Bruce Jenner, word is that he's going to "de-transition." So had this regulation been in place when he invented "Caitlyn," Obama would have us paying for both sex changes.
At least he's an adult, and if he wants to screw around with his plumbing and his hormones, well that's why we have tabloids and celebrity gossip columnists.
But when kids decide to reconfigure their biology, it's a whole lot more consequential.
Transgender people descend into despair when even all the medicine and medical advances that everyone encouraged can't change their biological reality. In fact, the medicine used on younger individuals prior to surgeries causes its own harms.
As gender dysphoria becomes more accepted as normal for children, "supportive" adults lead children to "helpful" doctors who use various "treatments" to block puberty. Some can merely delay puberty for a few years. But the blockers lock the child into sterility and health risks in their tweens and early teens.
For what other issue would any parent accept an increasing risk of cancer and suicide? We obsessively control our kids' diets and activities for far less dire outcomes based on far flimsier research.
According to Obama, a school that can't legally give a child an aspirin, can, and indeed must, honor that child's "perceived gender" with nary a question or raised eyebrow. And doctors who would cringe at seeing a teenage girl enter a tanning booth or smoke a cigarette won't hesitate to give her life-altering drugs that radically revise her transition into puberty.
Not only that, but according to Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist in chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital, it's "impossible" too.
He went on to write that changing sexes is impossible and that what transgendered people actually do is become "feminized men or masculinized women."
Hmm. Now we're on to something. "Feminized men" and "masculinized women." That's the goal of Third-Wave Feminism, isn't it? Erasure of gender norms, leading to a society ruled by militant lesbians, with heterosexual men marginalized or eradicated altogether.
It's just one more way for cultural Marxists to
fundamentally transform America.
He's got a pen and a phone, and he's fundamentally transforming every corner of America. Your child's school is now in the crosshairs of his social justice warriors, and with it any expectations of privacy and decency.
(Cue Yul Brynner voice… So let it be written. So let it be done!)
The Obama administration is sending out an edict today to every school district in the country, insisting they open bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers to all children, regardless of sex, or risk federal discrimination lawsuits and yanked federal funds. Schools must treat children as transgender and thus entitled to open facilities access as soon as parents say they are, not after a medical diagnosis or birth certificate change. Schools may, however, give all the other kids with healthy gender identities curtains to hide behind or license to use toilet stalls to change.
Because in topsy-turvy SJW world, no one should feel "unwelcome," except, you know, all the normal kids.
"No student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus," [Education Secretary John B.] King said. "We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are or wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence."
The only "harassment" here is coming from the LGBT bullies. They've already shoved a redefinition of marriage down our throats, and this is the next front in their all-out war on morality, decency, and common sense. To accommodate their radical agenda the vast majority of us must be inconvenienced, and of course irritated into mindless acceptance of their distorted worldview.
So if every girl in your school now feels "unwelcome" in the locker room when there's a boy showering with her, that's not a Real Problem. Because, "tolerance!" And the onus is on parents to seek "additional privacy" for our daughters, instead of quite reasonably creating a gender-neutral facility for the allegedly transgender child.
Do the rights of boys who identify as girls trump the rights of girls who are born girls?
That question is at the heart of a lawsuit filed by dozens of Illinois parents after the Obama administration's Department of Education strong-armed their school district into allowing a transgender student the right to use all girls' locker rooms.
"The girls are mortified," said Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Jeremy Tedesco, a religious liberty law firm representing some 50 families. "They are in a constant state of fear that their bodies are going to be exposed to a male in these settings. It's a constant state of stress and anxiety for them."
At least one of the plaintiffs, a female student at the high school, was harassed and bullied because she is uncomfortable changing in the same locker room with a biological boy.
While she was in the changing stall, other girls who were in the locker room began calling her names, including "transphobic" and "homophobic," the lawsuit states.
But that's not "bullying," right SJWs? Because to them it's "education." It's "awareness." It's "empowerment."
Which of course is nonsense on stilts.
Our daughters have Rights. And their rights are just as inviolate as the newly-minted rights of the confused teenage boy pretending to be a girl.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced he will stand up for our daughters' rights by filing a lawsuit against the Department of Education over the mandate.
God bless Texas. And North Carolina.
I can't wait to see Hillary Clinton try to defend this policy on the campaign trail. It's gonna make her awkward encounter with a West Virginia coal miner look like a walk in the park in comparison.
Republicans could have a field day with this in the general election. Except we've managed to put forth a candidate who agrees with the bathroom bullies.
And down the rabbit hole we go.
Remember when President Bill Clinton rented out the Lincoln Bedroom?
That was just the warm-up act.
He and She Who Would Be Empress have collected at least $100 million dollars from Arab sheikhs and their autocratic and anti-Semetic regimes.
A Daily Caller News Foundation investigation reveals that Bill and Hillary Clinton received at least $100 million from autocratic Persian Gulf states and their leaders, potentially undermining Democratic presidential candidate Hillary's claim she can carry out independent Middle East policies.
As a presidential candidate, the amount of foreign cash the Clintons have amassed from the Persian Gulf states is "simply unprecedented," says national security analyst Patrick Poole.
"These regimes are buying access. You've got the Saudis. You've got the Kuwaitis, Oman, Qatar and the UAE. There are massive conflicts of interest. It's beyond comprehension," Poole told TheDCNF in an interview.
Overall, the Clinton Foundation has received upwards of $85 million in donations from five Persian Gulf states and their monarchs, according to the foundation's website.
The Clinton Foundation's ties go beyond support from governments. Four billionaire Saudis, along with groups the Dubai Foundation and Friends of Saudi Arabia, contributed another $30 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the foundation's website.
Those governments are some of the most horrific abusers of human rights in the world.
For years, the accusations have centered on the Persian Gulf practice of importing hundreds of thousands of poor foreign laborers who work for low wages, including hundreds of thousands of female "domestic workers" who have no labor rights and often face exploitation and sexual abuse.
I wonder how all the Clinton supporters wailing about North Carolina's "bathroom law" feel about that? Oh, right, it's a non-story, because Hillary has a vagina.
And money in politics is only bad when it comes from the Koch Brothers. Pure-as-the-driven-snow Hillary would never let a donor influence her stance on an important issue. Honest!
Yet as secretary of state, Clinton consciously and actively sought to legitimize the sheikdoms through many new Department of State programs.
It's unclear what kind of promises or concessions the Clintons may have given the monarchs in return for their lavish financial support over the years, but last month the candidate reversed her long-standing support for fracking.
Hillary's new position, unveiled last month at a CNN presidential debate with Democratic opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders, put her in alignment with the Gulf State policy that opposes North American oil and gas fracking.
Imagine that. Purely coincidental!
So, to ask this question, is to answer it.
How would the American people ever know with any certainty that a decision by President Hillary Clinton was made to advance the best interests of the U.S. or to make the Clintons even richer?
Hillary's presidency is For Sale.
Eva Peron, eat your heart out.
New York City councilman Brad Lander (D-Brooklyn) is largely responsible for the plastic bag fee about to hit the Big Apple. And why is he so gung-ho about it? Because he wants the government to "irritate" you.
"It works by irritating us into changing our behavior," Lander said of the bag tax.
It works by irritating us. There can be some debate about the accuracy of one of those verbs, but not the other. Government, when it's being honest, acknowledges it isn't your buddy, your helper, your protector, your go-to source for inspiration and dreams.
Nope, the government is now proudly proclaiming itself your irritant. Let me suggest a very slight rewording of Lander's remark: "Our work is irritating you." And let it be inscribed in granite in public places.
This is the Progressive Democrats' raison d'etra, to irritate you.
And of course to signal how virtuous they are.
Do they care if their irritants cause real hardships for real people?
Don't make me laugh.
It's a display of self-love by upscale liberals. The Emmas and Sebastians of New York are already gaga about their nifty canvas tote bags and their virtue-signaling designs (NPR, Ready for Hillary, whatever) — and are crazily obsessed with getting the poor to act more like eco-conscious social-justice warriors.
But being poor is so stressful, so saturated with worry, that remembering to bring a reusable shopping bag stands to be more difficult for many of those with lower incomes (though those who buy with food stamps will be exempted). The same goes for old people. It can take a lot of bags to bring your groceries home. For some, 50 cents is a significant expense. Forcing the grandmothers of New York to pay up to teach them a lesson is an exercise in cruelty.
Hey, they bankrupted an entire industry (coal), putting millions of people out of work, devolving vast swaths of West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Ohio into soul-crushing poverty. Do you really think they care about some old lady in Queens living on Social Security? Her electricity rates have already "necessarily skyrocketed." What's another 50 cents?
Think of how many Democratic party policies have at their core the propensity to irritate us. Which they always manage to say is for our own good, of course.
It's dictatorship of the nanny state.
Progressives always know what's good for us better than we do. Just ask them. It's necessary for them to control us, because then we're busy complying with their mandates and we don't have time to get our own ideas. Once in a while they throw us a bone and we lap it up like good little automatons, because making choices is hard and making good choices is harder still.
Several years ago I actually had a person tell me in response to some new bureaucratic diktat or another, "why should I worry about that when the government has already decided the best way to handle it?"
Then in the next breath she complained about the Iraq war, but the disconnect in those two statements was completely lost on her. The government is only omnipotent when it's doing things Progressives believe in, I guess.
Oh, by the way, those reusable cloth bags come with their own problems. So get ready for an "unexpected" jump in e. coli infections, disproportionally affecting the elderly and the poor, that all the progressive media outlets will dutifully report on but dare not connect with Councilman Lander's plastic bag ban.
And then the progressive virtue signalers will mandate cloth bag testing
stations, manned by unionized government workers, who'll issue Certificates
Of Cleanliness that must be exchanged for your groceries. Sure that'll cost
a lot, but it'll save lives and you didn't think the government
wasn't going to protect you, right?
The bald eagle. A majestic symbol of America. Proud. Unafraid.
And, protected by the Endangered Species Act.
Unless you're the owner of an Obama-approved Wind Farm.
Then, let the killing begin!
In support of President Obama's renewable energy plans, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are pushing for giving 30-year permits to wind farms that would forgive them for thousands of eagle deaths expected within that frame of time.
Under the plan announced Wednesday, companies would be allowed to accidentally kill up to 4,200 bald eagles anually via their wind turbines without repercussion — nearly four times the current limit.
Bald Eagle sushi! It's "conservation."
"The permitting system gives us access to eagles and eagle mortalities that we wouldn't otherwise have," an unnamed source told ABC News. "It's a great mechanism for us to work proactively to prevent eagle deaths."
Eagle chop suey prevents eagle deaths!
Also work makes you free.
If even one bald eagle got coated in oil, you can bet your bottom dollar Obama's ecowarriors would be screaming from the ramparts, and fighting tooth and nail to shut that oil company down.
But "green energy" boondoggles trump ecology every time in Obamaville.
He'll throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the failure that was Solyndra, but pledge to bankrupt tried and true coal producers.
Sneeze in the direction of a piping plover, and New Jersey will put your in prison. But slaughter thousands of bald eagles and Obama will praise your dedication to combating "climate change."
Nevermind that more than 14,000 abandoned wind turbines dot the landscape, monuments to the stupidity of "green energy."
The good news is they aren't killing any more bald eagles.
The bad news is we wasted billions of tax dollars creating these eyesores.
You know what never killed a single eagle? Or for that matter, any piping plovers?
And nuclear energy.
So ask yourself this. Why do the econuts oppose both?
I'll help you out.
It's because at the end of the day they aren't pro-environment.
Much hay is being made today about how sanctimonious Obama administration "foreign policy advisor without any actual foreign policy experience" Ben Rhodes snookered Americans into supporting the disastrous Iran nuclear deal.
And this Rhodes fellow surely is a piece of work. He created a panoply of astroturf "experts" and fake Twitter feeds to disseminate a plethora of fabrications supporting his boss's policy. How did he get away with it?
Because the people he was feeding it to are a bunch of naive know-nothings.
"All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus," Rhodes said. "Now they don't. They call us to explain to them what's happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That's a sea change. They literally know nothing."
We literally have a media that doesn't know what it doesn't know.
And worse, an American public that by and large doesn't care.
These know-nothings are given the power to shape our policy discussions and sway public opinion because they're educated, having graduated from Ivy League bastions of liberal indoctrination.
Harvard and its academic siblings, American culture's spoiled institutional trust fund children, fully intend to safeguard their position as the conformity factories manufacturing America's leadership class. They are an assembly line of indoctrination that bolts together elitists out of socialism, amorality and entitlement, and then sets them loose on American society reeking of that new snob smell.
When I grew up in the 1970s the mantra was "question authority."
Today's kids are force-fed appeals to authority. From "climate change" to "tolerance" they are being told what to think and no one is teaching them how to think. Is it any wonder then that our politics are so polarized?
As traditionally conceived, liberal education would temper the all-too-common tendency to demonize those fellow citizens with whom we disagree. In no small measure, the value of a liberal education — to the individual and to the public — stems from the ability it cultivates to explore moral and political questions from a variety of viewpoints. This virtue entails putting oneself in another's shoes. It promotes toleration, civility, and mutual respect. In "On Liberty," John Stuart Mill called this the virtue of "many-sidedness."
Ben Rhodes and his ilk are the antithesis of John Stuart Mill.
However, as currently practiced at our leading colleges and universities — through which a disproportionate percentage of our elites pass — liberal education cultivates single-sidedness and reinforces the polarization of our politics. The campus assault on free speech, the abandonment of the fundamental requirements of due process in university disciplinary procedures regarding accusations of sexual misconduct, and the hollowing and politicizing of the curriculum have become distressingly entrenched features of academic life. Their toxic effects are harming the country.
Those who have failed to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
We now live in an age where all ideas are considered equally valid. Why? Because, feelings. "I feel" has replaced "I think."
I feel, therefore I am, uh, valid, or something, said Voltaire, in a Common Core history lesson detailing the French revolution's disparate impact on transgender people of color.
It's impossible to have a rational discussion if the other person equates disagreement with hurting their feelings.
So my opposition to Obama's policies is automatically racism. Investigating potential terrorists is de facto evidence of Islamophobia. My support for traditional marriage and living my Catholic faith must be due to my hatred of homosexuals. End of discussion. There can be no other reason, because, feelings.
Feelings begat Bernie Sanders. And coed bathrooms. The right to not be
offended trumps the Constitution now. Give me
liberty a Safe
Space, or give me, well, certainly not death. Extra cookies perhaps.
Meanwhile the perpetually aggrieved willingly submit to authority, because authority pays lip service to all those things that make them feel good about themselves. Hard truths make people uncomfortable, and look!, it's Kim Kardashian!
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Bruce Jenner is a woman.
This image was recently posted to Facebook, seen as one of those "a friend of a friend liked this" things that oftentimes pop up, tagged "I'm proud of my political ignorance."
I didn't know whether to laugh, or cry.
This person votes.
And she is, of course, hardly unique.
She is also Ben Rhodes', and his media sycophants', target audience.
I'm sure all her friends consider her to be a Model Citizen too.
The problem with our nation isn't that either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will succeed Barack Obama as our next president.
The problem with our nation is an education system that produced a citizenry willing to elect Barack Obama and then accept Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton as our next president.
They don't know what they don't know. Which is exactly how the pupppet masters
A North Carolina law limiting protections to LGBT people violates federal civil rights protections and can't be enforced, the U.S. Justice Department said Wednesday, putting the state on notice that it is in danger of being sued and losing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding.
The law, which also requires transgender people to use public bathrooms that conform to the sex on their birth certificate, has been broadly condemned by gay-rights groups, businesses and entertainers, some of whom have relocated offices or canceled shows in the state. Several other states have proposed similar laws limiting LGBT protections in recent months.
In a letter to Gov. Pat McCrory, the Justice Department said federal officials view the state law as violating federal Civil Rights Act protections barring workplace discrimination based on sex. Provisions of the state law directed at transgender state employees violate their anti-discrimination protections, the letter said.
Men, including genetically identifiable men, can use the men's room.
Women, including genetically identifiable women, can use the ladies room.
That's science. And reality.
But reality has no bearing on how the Obama Administration operates. They'll withhold federal education dollars unless North Carolina let's men pee with women.
"To use our children and their educational futures as pawns to advance an agenda that will ultimately open those same children up to exploitation at the hands of sexual predators is by far, the sickest example of the depths the Obama Administration will stoop to 'fundamentally transform our nation.'"
A few molested kids is a small price to pay for transgender "equality," depths of depravity be damned.
The important thing here is that sexual deviants and mentally ill children "feel good" about themselves.
Nevermind that those same children cannot ingest an aspirin, get a tattoo, pierce their belly button, or lay in a tanning bed. But by golly they can pretend they're "transgender!"
This is what the Obama administration is defending.
Children, deciding to reject their bodies, because "civil rights."
You know what? I was a fat, dorky kid in high school. Perhaps I should have "identified" as a linebacker. Where's my varsity letter?
North Carolina is well within their rights to define the extent of their laws.
No law in North Carolina will prevent a woman from doing anything all other women do. And no law in North Carolina will prevent a man from doing what all other men in North Carolina do.
But I suppose Obama's transgender deviants have never met the Tenth Amendment.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
In North Carolina, the "people" have spoken.
But Obama hates federalism.
He demands obeisance, because that's how he fundamentally transforms America.
So go ahead Obama. Punish the children of North Carolina. Show their parents just how petty and vindictive you really are. Withhold your federal education dollars. Close the national parks and shut down highway construction too. Make it clear that the citizens must acquiesce to deviancy just to recoup their own tax dollars.
Just remember that the Boston Tea Party arose for a comparatively lesser
tyranny. And be advised accordingly.
|Previous: Thanks Trumpalumpas, you just guaranteed Hitlery will be the next president|