Posts Made By: Dave Snope
March 7, 2013 06:41 PM
Forum:
Politics
March 8, 2013 05:14 PM
Forum:
Politics
Americans Not In Labor Force Reaches Record HighPosted By Dave Snope |
I surfed around the prominent liberal newspapers and media sites and they all had good news about the unemployment rate going down. Some even reported it as a record.
In the meantime in the real world, another 300K people aren't working. An all time record.
(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans designated as "not in the labor force" in February was 89,304,000, a record high, up from 89,008,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This means that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased 296,000 between January and February.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/record-89304000-americans-not-labor-force-296000-fewer-employed-january
Here is the Bureau Labor Statistics Feb. Report. 8th line in the table on page 4 is the "not in labor force" number.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
In the meantime in the real world, another 300K people aren't working. An all time record.
(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans designated as "not in the labor force" in February was 89,304,000, a record high, up from 89,008,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This means that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased 296,000 between January and February.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/record-89304000-americans-not-labor-force-296000-fewer-employed-january
Here is the Bureau Labor Statistics Feb. Report. 8th line in the table on page 4 is the "not in labor force" number.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
March 8, 2013 11:17 PM
Forum:
Politics
On Compromise, Spending, and RednecksPosted By Dave Snope |
Well said:
It is not the case that the average of right and wrong is always or even usually a good outcome. And the bias of such averaging always seems to be a bigger role for government.
…
We need to decide if we will continue moving toward ‘social democracy’ or back toward American constitutional limited government. Little else matters.
…
Compromise has almost exclusively ratcheted up the size and intrusion of the state, with few historical counterexamples, and there are powerful forces that will likely make it so going forward.
…
Compromise is a wonderful thing at times, but a disastrous thing at other times. For example, “Johnny, you split that last cookie with your sister Sally,” is often a good compromise. Munich (I’m thinking 1938 but really any compromise related to Munich) was a bad compromise. Sometimes arguing and fighting is a more wonderful thing than compromise and “getting something done.” Here are six examples of the things I think require more fighting and less compromise:
1) We do not need to compromise on spending; we need to spend less.
2) We do not need to compromise on taxation; we need to tax less and tax with less complication.
3) We do not need to compromise on regulation; we need to regulate less and with less political correctness and nannyism. We need to end the giant, super-powerful government bureaucracies that are not only costly but get “captured” by special interests and then add to cronyism; such bureaucracies are, in their essence, anti-liberty in their wide powers.
4) We do not need to compromise on the amount of crony capital that goes to politicians’ friends and to politically correct industries; we need to let everyone stand or fall on merit.
5) We do not need to compromise on how much of the people’s personal judgment we replace with government authority; we need to let grownups purchase whatever soda size they want and let parents be in charge of their own children. If that leads to imperfect outcomes for some, well, nobody ever said freedom was sugar-free.
6) We do not need to compromise on the Second Amendment (or any enumerated right of any citizen). We need to retain it not only to protect ourselves and our families, and certainly not only for “hunting” (an epic straw man), but most importantly as a hopefully never-used bulwark against tyranny. We may differ on what would constitute such unbearable tyranny, but surely every American has some limit. Leftists may feel horror when they see rednecks armed with AR-15s — horror they feel at the existence of both rednecks and AR-15s — but they need those armed rednecks on that wall. Of course, this right to arms has to be limited at some point, as my needed rednecks on that wall don’t need nukes (there’s a “Nukes of Hazzard” quip in here somewhere), but I fear any compromise today would explicitly ignore the prime purpose of this, and other, enumerated rights, a particular danger of compromise at times of great emotional trauma.
http://american.com/archive/2013/march/yes-labels
It is not the case that the average of right and wrong is always or even usually a good outcome. And the bias of such averaging always seems to be a bigger role for government.
…
We need to decide if we will continue moving toward ‘social democracy’ or back toward American constitutional limited government. Little else matters.
…
Compromise has almost exclusively ratcheted up the size and intrusion of the state, with few historical counterexamples, and there are powerful forces that will likely make it so going forward.
…
Compromise is a wonderful thing at times, but a disastrous thing at other times. For example, “Johnny, you split that last cookie with your sister Sally,” is often a good compromise. Munich (I’m thinking 1938 but really any compromise related to Munich) was a bad compromise. Sometimes arguing and fighting is a more wonderful thing than compromise and “getting something done.” Here are six examples of the things I think require more fighting and less compromise:
1) We do not need to compromise on spending; we need to spend less.
2) We do not need to compromise on taxation; we need to tax less and tax with less complication.
3) We do not need to compromise on regulation; we need to regulate less and with less political correctness and nannyism. We need to end the giant, super-powerful government bureaucracies that are not only costly but get “captured” by special interests and then add to cronyism; such bureaucracies are, in their essence, anti-liberty in their wide powers.
4) We do not need to compromise on the amount of crony capital that goes to politicians’ friends and to politically correct industries; we need to let everyone stand or fall on merit.
5) We do not need to compromise on how much of the people’s personal judgment we replace with government authority; we need to let grownups purchase whatever soda size they want and let parents be in charge of their own children. If that leads to imperfect outcomes for some, well, nobody ever said freedom was sugar-free.
6) We do not need to compromise on the Second Amendment (or any enumerated right of any citizen). We need to retain it not only to protect ourselves and our families, and certainly not only for “hunting” (an epic straw man), but most importantly as a hopefully never-used bulwark against tyranny. We may differ on what would constitute such unbearable tyranny, but surely every American has some limit. Leftists may feel horror when they see rednecks armed with AR-15s — horror they feel at the existence of both rednecks and AR-15s — but they need those armed rednecks on that wall. Of course, this right to arms has to be limited at some point, as my needed rednecks on that wall don’t need nukes (there’s a “Nukes of Hazzard” quip in here somewhere), but I fear any compromise today would explicitly ignore the prime purpose of this, and other, enumerated rights, a particular danger of compromise at times of great emotional trauma.
http://american.com/archive/2013/march/yes-labels
March 9, 2013 09:03 PM
Forum:
Politics
SI Names Obama One Of Most Powerful In SportsPosted By Dave Snope |
I'm trying to figure out which award he was more deserving of: the sports award or the Nobel Peace Prize.
Sports Illustrated has put together a list of the 50 most powerful people in sports and President Obama comes in at — No. 44:
44 BARACK OBAMA
POTUS might be the ultimate global power player, but he also wields significant influence in the Republic of Sports. One relevant riff-on his NCAA tourney picks, on his desire for a college football playoff, on his concern over permitting the sons that he doesn’t have to play football-and the sports world takes notice. Plus, the 51-year-old can shoot the J.
Sports Illustrated has put together a list of the 50 most powerful people in sports and President Obama comes in at — No. 44:
44 BARACK OBAMA
POTUS might be the ultimate global power player, but he also wields significant influence in the Republic of Sports. One relevant riff-on his NCAA tourney picks, on his desire for a college football playoff, on his concern over permitting the sons that he doesn’t have to play football-and the sports world takes notice. Plus, the 51-year-old can shoot the J.
March 10, 2013 07:12 AM
Forum:
Politics
In Washington State They Are Taxing BreathingPosted By Dave Snope |
I was going to post this in the global warming section but felt it should be shared with a wider audience. In Washington state they have begun taxing breathing. And you must generate taxes with every human activity. And of course they throw in a little class warfare by only taxing the expensive bicycles.
Washington state Senate Democrats recently produced a $10 billion transportation package which supports a raise on gas taxes, car tabs, and even a $25 tax on bicycles that cost more than $500.
In an email to Dale Carlson, owner of Bike Tech in Tacoma, Washington Rep. Ed Orcutt (R), a member of the State Transportation Committee, defended the idea of a bike tax by saying, “Sorry, but I do think that bicyclists need to start paying for the roads they ride on rather than make motorists pay.”
“When you are riding your bicycle, tell me what taxes are being generated by the act of riding your bicycle,” Orcutt said to the Seattle Bike Blog.
Yet Orcutt’s main support for the tax comes from his belief that riding a bicycle is worse than driving a car for the environment.
“A cyclists [sic] has an increased heart rate and respiration. That means that the act of riding a bike results in greater emissions of carbon dioxide from the rider. Since CO2 is deemed to be a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclists are actually polluting when they ride,” he said.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsnorthwest/files/2013/02/Package-Fact-Sheet-v4.pdf
Washington state Senate Democrats recently produced a $10 billion transportation package which supports a raise on gas taxes, car tabs, and even a $25 tax on bicycles that cost more than $500.
In an email to Dale Carlson, owner of Bike Tech in Tacoma, Washington Rep. Ed Orcutt (R), a member of the State Transportation Committee, defended the idea of a bike tax by saying, “Sorry, but I do think that bicyclists need to start paying for the roads they ride on rather than make motorists pay.”
“When you are riding your bicycle, tell me what taxes are being generated by the act of riding your bicycle,” Orcutt said to the Seattle Bike Blog.
Yet Orcutt’s main support for the tax comes from his belief that riding a bicycle is worse than driving a car for the environment.
“A cyclists [sic] has an increased heart rate and respiration. That means that the act of riding a bike results in greater emissions of carbon dioxide from the rider. Since CO2 is deemed to be a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclists are actually polluting when they ride,” he said.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsnorthwest/files/2013/02/Package-Fact-Sheet-v4.pdf
March 10, 2013 07:17 PM
Forum:
Politics
The 5th Largest Organization In The WorldPosted By Dave Snope |
And a lesson for Americans about Obama's plans.
David Nicholson, of whom nobody may have previously heard, ran the fifth largest organization in the world. It is far bigger than the British Army, larger than the Indian Railways and the Chinese state-owned energy network. Sir David Nicholson’s fiefdom is actually exceeded only by McDonald’s, Walmart, the US Armed Forces, the Chinese Army and the Chinese railway and may have inflicted more deaths than all of these organizations combined.
Nicholson is a man who never held a job in his life outside of government and activism. “Nicholson joined (the organization) on graduation, and then the Communist Party of Great Britain”. Nor was he just a casual, student Red. Nicholson, according to the Guardian, was a “tankie”, a “term referring to those members of the Communist Party of Great Britain that followed the Kremlin line, agreeing with the crushing of revolts in Hungary and later Czechoslovakia by Soviet tanks; or more broadly, those who followed a traditional pro-Soviet position.” And rung by rung this compassionate man climbed the ladder of (the organization) until he reached its pinnacle.
Care to venture a guess at this point as to what organization he runs?
Although it didn’t make much news in the United States, Britain’s National Health Service (“the envy of the world“) has been rocked by the discovery that it is killing patients needlessly at a rate of knots. According to the NHS’s own bulletins, 40,000 patients needlessly die per year in its hospitals....
In other words a lot of deaths. Not that management didn’t know. The NHS spent 15 million pounds in taxpayer money to prosecute and gag 600 whistleblowers who thought things had gone too far. The man at the center of the scandal was Sir David Nicholson, the Chief Executive of the NHS....
Even the investigative report makes stomach-churning watching principally because the analysis consists of almost a series of cliches. It faults a lack of ‘care’, ‘compassion’, ‘patient centeredness’ and a failure in ‘transparency’ as if it were referring to a breakdown in table manners at a dinner party.
But when report touches on what actually happened to the patients it is the stuff of war-crimes. It is not an exaggeration to say that nothing suggested by the most rabid critics of Guantanamo is half so bad. Baldly put what really happened in the hospital was that thousands of old Britons were left to starve, die of thirst, stew in their waste for extended periods, lie neglected and unmedicated or cast out of the wards at the slightest opportunity.
...
The definition of a faceless bureaucracy is where the individual finds himself at the mercy of a complete non-entity; before a strange man whose only skill was to worm his way up the towers of Byzantium deciding your fate with the Clipboard of Destiny in his hand. But enough of that. When Obamacare finally gets going it bids fair to become far larger than the NHS and supplant it as the new “envy of the world”.
http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/03/06/the-hospital-of-death/#more-27714
David Nicholson, of whom nobody may have previously heard, ran the fifth largest organization in the world. It is far bigger than the British Army, larger than the Indian Railways and the Chinese state-owned energy network. Sir David Nicholson’s fiefdom is actually exceeded only by McDonald’s, Walmart, the US Armed Forces, the Chinese Army and the Chinese railway and may have inflicted more deaths than all of these organizations combined.
Nicholson is a man who never held a job in his life outside of government and activism. “Nicholson joined (the organization) on graduation, and then the Communist Party of Great Britain”. Nor was he just a casual, student Red. Nicholson, according to the Guardian, was a “tankie”, a “term referring to those members of the Communist Party of Great Britain that followed the Kremlin line, agreeing with the crushing of revolts in Hungary and later Czechoslovakia by Soviet tanks; or more broadly, those who followed a traditional pro-Soviet position.” And rung by rung this compassionate man climbed the ladder of (the organization) until he reached its pinnacle.
Care to venture a guess at this point as to what organization he runs?
Although it didn’t make much news in the United States, Britain’s National Health Service (“the envy of the world“) has been rocked by the discovery that it is killing patients needlessly at a rate of knots. According to the NHS’s own bulletins, 40,000 patients needlessly die per year in its hospitals....
In other words a lot of deaths. Not that management didn’t know. The NHS spent 15 million pounds in taxpayer money to prosecute and gag 600 whistleblowers who thought things had gone too far. The man at the center of the scandal was Sir David Nicholson, the Chief Executive of the NHS....
Even the investigative report makes stomach-churning watching principally because the analysis consists of almost a series of cliches. It faults a lack of ‘care’, ‘compassion’, ‘patient centeredness’ and a failure in ‘transparency’ as if it were referring to a breakdown in table manners at a dinner party.
But when report touches on what actually happened to the patients it is the stuff of war-crimes. It is not an exaggeration to say that nothing suggested by the most rabid critics of Guantanamo is half so bad. Baldly put what really happened in the hospital was that thousands of old Britons were left to starve, die of thirst, stew in their waste for extended periods, lie neglected and unmedicated or cast out of the wards at the slightest opportunity.
...
The definition of a faceless bureaucracy is where the individual finds himself at the mercy of a complete non-entity; before a strange man whose only skill was to worm his way up the towers of Byzantium deciding your fate with the Clipboard of Destiny in his hand. But enough of that. When Obamacare finally gets going it bids fair to become far larger than the NHS and supplant it as the new “envy of the world”.
http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/03/06/the-hospital-of-death/#more-27714
March 16, 2013 01:06 AM
Forum:
Politics
Every Dem Senator Votes No On Balanced BudgetPosted By Dave Snope |
They've never had any intention of having a balanced budget. The Dem proposal is all smoke and mirrors, double-counting, and vague claims of unnamed, undefined savings. Repubs rightfully calling them out as liars.
Their own plan doesn't even come close to balancing, of course, and they're not interested in other ideas to get there. The first Republican amendment they torpedoed yesterday called for increasing federal spending at a clip of "only" 3.4 percent per year over the next decade, rather than the major acceleration that Democrats have advanced. The second proposed making it more procedurally difficult to pass a budget that does not balance with ten years. Watch as each Democrat-aligned committee member votes in lockstep against these provisions. Make no mistake, they are explicitly rejecting a balanced federal budget (the roll call begins at the 1:15 mark):
...
The Hill and other news organizations have confirmed that Democrats' budget numbers register at most $800 billion in deficit reductions over ten years, even setting aside its accelerated spending course. Their exploitation of the unrealistic CBO baseline -- which we explained yesterday -- renders a number of their "cut" claims even more dubious. Especially dishonest was Murray's statement (not included the shortened version of the video), er, "in rebut" to Sessions' amendment, in which she claimed that the new budget, plus previous savings, add up to the Simpson-Bowles recommended level of $4 trillion in deficit relief. Between phony gimmicks and double-counting, she's not even in the ballpark of $4 trillion, which is probably why Sessions felt compelled to use words like "lie" throughout the hearing.
...
This isn't merely an unbalanced tax-and-spend document, it's a uselessly vague, unbalanced tax-and-spend document. We waited four years for this? Yup. It was advanced out of committee last night on a party-line, 12-10 vote.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/03/15/video-every-senate-budget-committee-democrat-votes-no-on-balancing-the-budget-n1534679
Their own plan doesn't even come close to balancing, of course, and they're not interested in other ideas to get there. The first Republican amendment they torpedoed yesterday called for increasing federal spending at a clip of "only" 3.4 percent per year over the next decade, rather than the major acceleration that Democrats have advanced. The second proposed making it more procedurally difficult to pass a budget that does not balance with ten years. Watch as each Democrat-aligned committee member votes in lockstep against these provisions. Make no mistake, they are explicitly rejecting a balanced federal budget (the roll call begins at the 1:15 mark):
...
The Hill and other news organizations have confirmed that Democrats' budget numbers register at most $800 billion in deficit reductions over ten years, even setting aside its accelerated spending course. Their exploitation of the unrealistic CBO baseline -- which we explained yesterday -- renders a number of their "cut" claims even more dubious. Especially dishonest was Murray's statement (not included the shortened version of the video), er, "in rebut" to Sessions' amendment, in which she claimed that the new budget, plus previous savings, add up to the Simpson-Bowles recommended level of $4 trillion in deficit relief. Between phony gimmicks and double-counting, she's not even in the ballpark of $4 trillion, which is probably why Sessions felt compelled to use words like "lie" throughout the hearing.
...
This isn't merely an unbalanced tax-and-spend document, it's a uselessly vague, unbalanced tax-and-spend document. We waited four years for this? Yup. It was advanced out of committee last night on a party-line, 12-10 vote.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/03/15/video-every-senate-budget-committee-democrat-votes-no-on-balancing-the-budget-n1534679
March 16, 2013 03:41 AM
Forum:
Politics
Republican Food Unsafe For Dear LeaderPosted By Dave Snope |
He's such a good little boy, turning away from delicious lobster that isn't allowed. And after they went to all the trouble to make sure the food complied with Queen Michelle's standards. How did he ever eat all those burgers and waffles and fries when he was out? Who gets to be his taster, anyway? Is there a special school for that?
Following President Obama’s lunch meeting with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill, Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins described the food served and said the president was not able to eat since his “taster” was not present.
“Unfortunately, you know, the president can’t,” said Collins when asked if Obama ate at the lunch meeting.
“He looked longingly at it,” Collins continued. “He honestly did look longingly at it, but apparently he has to have essentially a taster, and I pointed out to him that we were all tasters for him, that if the food had been poisoned all of us would have keeled over so, but he did look longingly at it and he remarked that we have far better food than the Democrats do, and I said that was because I was hosting.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/14/obama-couldnt-eat-at-hill-meeting-without-taster-audio/#ixzz2Nfchd6VK
I know other prez have been known to use tasters at times, but really, he can't eat the same food the Repubs are eating?
Following President Obama’s lunch meeting with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill, Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins described the food served and said the president was not able to eat since his “taster” was not present.
“Unfortunately, you know, the president can’t,” said Collins when asked if Obama ate at the lunch meeting.
“He looked longingly at it,” Collins continued. “He honestly did look longingly at it, but apparently he has to have essentially a taster, and I pointed out to him that we were all tasters for him, that if the food had been poisoned all of us would have keeled over so, but he did look longingly at it and he remarked that we have far better food than the Democrats do, and I said that was because I was hosting.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/14/obama-couldnt-eat-at-hill-meeting-without-taster-audio/#ixzz2Nfchd6VK
I know other prez have been known to use tasters at times, but really, he can't eat the same food the Repubs are eating?
March 16, 2013 06:04 PM
Forum:
Politics
Eurozone Grabs Money From Private Bank AccountsPosted By Dave Snope |
Can you imaging having been frugal, worked overtime, and saved your post-tax money all your life, putting it a country known for it's excellent banking system; you've saved $100,000 Euros for your retirement nest egg, and all of a sudden some dang leftist bureaucrats from another country sweep in and take E10,000 of it? Can you imagine the feeling of being robbed to support the ruling class of socialist bureaucrats and the government workers who are spared any cuts? Imagine the feeling of being punished because you sacrificed all of your life? Was your life purpose merely to support the pensions of those who devoted their lives to the misery of others by handing out parking tickets or processing fines for zoning laws?
Listen to the Eurocrats use the language of liberal authoritarianism to justify their theft:
what officials say is a bloated Cypriot banking sector
Mario Draghi, said the "upfront, one-off" tax (yeah sure, then they added a deposit tax)
"In order to have burden-sharing, you extend the tax base,"
"As it is a contribution to the financial stability of Cyprus, it seems 'just' to ask a contribution of all deposit-holders"
his government "avoided salary and pension cuts" for public sector workers, he said.
If you ever hear Obama and Krew start calling your personal business segment "bloated", get out and run. They've found your money and want to confiscate it. Europe is the model.
http://www.businessinsider.com/cyprus-bailout-deal-2013-3
Listen to the Eurocrats use the language of liberal authoritarianism to justify their theft:
what officials say is a bloated Cypriot banking sector
Mario Draghi, said the "upfront, one-off" tax (yeah sure, then they added a deposit tax)
"In order to have burden-sharing, you extend the tax base,"
"As it is a contribution to the financial stability of Cyprus, it seems 'just' to ask a contribution of all deposit-holders"
his government "avoided salary and pension cuts" for public sector workers, he said.
If you ever hear Obama and Krew start calling your personal business segment "bloated", get out and run. They've found your money and want to confiscate it. Europe is the model.
http://www.businessinsider.com/cyprus-bailout-deal-2013-3
March 18, 2013 09:27 PM
Forum:
No Holds Barred
Muslims Destroy 50 of 52 Churches in BornoPosted By Dave Snope |
It seemed like they were burning about one church per week over the last year, based on news reports filtering in. I guess that was about right. How many dead Cristians? Untold, but seems like thousands upon thousands based on the regularity of mass killings reported in Nigeria.
MAIDUGURI, Nigeria, March 18 (UPI) – Boko Haram militants in Nigeria destroyed 50 of Borno state’s Catholic churches, a priest charged.
The Rev. Jerome Ituah of Christ the King Catholic Parish in Kurudu, a populated area of the Abuja Capital Territory, made the accusation Saturday, saying he witnessed the destruction, Leadership Newspapers reported.
“Out of the 52 Catholic churches in Maiduguri diocese, 50 of them have been destroyed by Boko Haram. Yet the faithful are not discouraged of their faith. You would always see them worshiping under rain and sun in open places at the site of their destroyed places of worship,” Ituah said.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/03/18/Priest-Boko-Haram-destroyed-50-churches/UPI-46881363613632/?spt=hs&or=tn
MAIDUGURI, Nigeria, March 18 (UPI) – Boko Haram militants in Nigeria destroyed 50 of Borno state’s Catholic churches, a priest charged.
The Rev. Jerome Ituah of Christ the King Catholic Parish in Kurudu, a populated area of the Abuja Capital Territory, made the accusation Saturday, saying he witnessed the destruction, Leadership Newspapers reported.
“Out of the 52 Catholic churches in Maiduguri diocese, 50 of them have been destroyed by Boko Haram. Yet the faithful are not discouraged of their faith. You would always see them worshiping under rain and sun in open places at the site of their destroyed places of worship,” Ituah said.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/03/18/Priest-Boko-Haram-destroyed-50-churches/UPI-46881363613632/?spt=hs&or=tn
Funding Member
