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
Technorati is indexing me again! They had to make a code change to fix the problem with my blog getting stuck in their queue. Kudos to Eric M. and the guys at GetSatisfaction.com where they have "community powered support for Technorati".
Well, they're "sorta, kinda" indexing me anyway. It's on a 24 hour tape delay or something. So I never get picked up by Memeorandum because they pull from Technorati and Technorati has stuff I posted yesterday listed as my latest blog entry. And that's old news to Memeorandum.
"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 Twitter feed:
It's being billed as the first "mass transit" Super Bowl. "Mass hassle" is more like it.
Super Bowl fans who take the train to the big game might confuse the rail station with an airport.
The Transportation Security Administration will be screening all bags for explosives at the Secaucus Junction Station in New Jersey before passengers are permitted on the one rail line serving MetLife Stadium.
TSA officers also will be using radiological detection devices.
NJ Transit estimates 12 to 15 thousand fans will pass through Secaucus Junction on game day. And one at a time they'll get felt-up by the TSA.
But if all this security kabuki makes you late for the game, you can always catch the kickoff on your mobile phone, right?
Uh, no. The NFL plans to block live streams of the game on the cellular networks serving East Rutherford. "Not enough bandwidth" is their lame-ass excuse.
I sure am glad I'll be watching the game from the comfort of my couch.
When a bureaucrat thinks he can order private companies to do his bidding, freedom dies. So how is this decree even constitutional?
The Port Authority on Tuesday ordered an immediate pay hike for airport workers toiling in jobs at or near the minimum wage.
Patrick Foye, executive director of the bistate agency, sent a letter Tuesday night to major airlines demanding that workers making $9 an hour or less receive an immediate $1-per-hour increase in their base wages, with an eventual phase-in to $10.10 an hour.
He also directed the airlines to make Martin Luther King Jr. Day a paid holiday for airport workers, and grant the benefit retroactive to this year's MLK Day, which fell on Jan. 20.
"Providing an improved wage and benefits package to the thousands of hardworking men and women that make our airport systems the largest in the country is something that cannot wait," Foye, an appointee of Gov. Cuomo's, wrote the CEOs of Delta, JetBlue, American and United airlines.
The directive covers 8,000 workers at Kennedy and LaGuardia airports. It does not cover 4,000 employees at Newark Airport.
Foye acted as President Obama used his State of the Union Address Tuesday night to announce an executive order boosting the $7.25 minimum wage paid to federal contractors to $10.10 an hour.
Look, I'm not here to debate whether or not these workers deserve a raise. That's between them and their employers. Who, incidentally, aren't the airlines.
I'm asking what gives some Port Authority political hack the right to order a private company to arbitrarily raise wages. Maybe I missed that part of the Constitution?
The government is arrogating far too much power to itself. And this reeks of fascism. Unlike Obama, who at least pretends he cares what the voters think, this knucklehead isn't an elected official. He's not answerable to anyone!
What's next? Ordering tenants in Port Authority buildings (like the new Freedom Tower) to increase their employees' wages too? I'll bet the PA wouldn't be too pleased if a tenants' association decided to demand a cut in rent payments to offset such a decree! But really, somebody has to pay the bill. And Patrick Foye isn't that someone.
My guess is a not-insignificant number of those low wage workers will find themselves unemployed as a result of this idiocy. Because contrary to what many do-gooder liberals might believe, money does not grow on trees. And the companies which employee these folks aren't sitting on piles of extra cash.
Here's the math. 8,000 workers earning $9 per hour equates to 7,128 workers
earning $10.10 per hour. So Mr. Foye, what will you say to the 872 people
you just put out of a job?
If you need help with your taxes, don't call the IRS.
As tax day looms, an annual watchdog report to Congress finds that the agency is falling short when it comes to answering Americans' questions about the convoluted tax code.
The National Taxpayer Advocate found only 61 percent of people seeking to speak with a customer service representative last year got through to anybody -- leaving nearly 20 million calls unanswered.
"At the risk of vast understatement, it is a sad state of affairs when the government writes tax laws as complex as ours -- and then is unable to answer any questions beyond 'basic' ones from baffled citizens who are doing their best to comply," the report from National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson said.
The study detailed how customer service has steadily declined over the past several years, including at its 400 "walk-in sites." In fiscal 2014, the office said, the IRS will only answer "basic" questions at those sites during filing season. And it will not answer any questions, "even basic ones," after April, even for filers who got extensions.
"In addition, the IRS will discontinue its longstanding practice of preparing tax returns for low income, elderly and disabled taxpayers who seek help," the report said.
With the erosion in services, wait times have gone up. In fiscal 2004, callers were left on hold for just 2.6 minutes. Today, the average wait time is nearly 18 minutes.
Some taxpayers resort to writing letters to the IRS with their questions. The agency received 8.4 million such letters last year, but more than half were not answered by the end of fiscal 2013, the report said.
They blame "budget cuts."
Uh huh. Maybe if they weren't putting so much effort into persecuting the Tea Party they'd have time to assist the people they're supposed to be serving.
Obama doesn't want the IRS to help you. He wants the IRS to punish his enemies.
So Sarah Palin's brother gets audited 6 times in five years. But your 87 year old Aunt Mildred is out of luck when she calls the IRS for help.
A group of Hollywood conservatives (yes, they exist!) gets the full IRS protocology experience. But Obama's brother's "charity" was walked through all the necessary paperwork hoops by Lois Lerner herself.
Curiously the IRS didn't find it necessary to scrutinize Malik Obama's ties to Hamas. You only evoke their ire if you care about the Constitution.
All of that political gamesmanship leaves them with no resources to handle their actual mission — fairly administering the tax code. Because even though the IRS won't answer your questions, you can be damn sure they'll haul your ass in for an audit if you forget to dot even one "i" or cross a single "t."
Unless, of course, the NSA tells 'em you're a Democrat.
You'd think the guy screaming about income inequality would pay his own employees an actual income.
You'd be wrong.
Obama's White House interns earn nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. I guess basking in Dear Leader's munificence is its own reward. So long as you can eat rainbows.
Is the White House Internship a paid position?
No. White House Internships are unpaid positions. Applicants may contact educational and other non-profit organizations to apply for funding or housing assistance.
That is, you may beg. And if your groveling is sufficiently noteworthy, you may work you ass off licking Dear Leader's boots. Presumably they taste like chicken.
Is Congress any better? Hell no. The sponsors of Dear Leader's minimum wage legislation don't pay their interns either.
According to a new study by the Employment Policies Insitute (EPI), only four percent of the 210 lawmakers who pledged their allegiance to a bill raising the minimum wage pay their interns.
The Fair Minimum Wage Act would increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour. EPI found that 96 percent of its House and Senate supporters give their interns a minimum wage of zero.
This includes the authors of the bill, Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin and California Democratic Rep. George Miller. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is another strong supporter of the legislation who doesn't pay her interns.
How do you spell hypocrite? Because I spell it D-e-m-o-c-r-a-t.
See also Booker, Cory.
U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) has invited an unemployed 50-year-old Frenchtown resident to be his guest to the State of the Union address Tuesday night, as he continues to rail against the loss of federal emergency benefits that once provided aid to nearly 90,000 New Jersey residents who are out of work.
Gerri Battista, 50, was one 1.3 million Americans whose federal unemployment benefits lapsed on Dec. 28 when Congress declined to renew the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program.
"Congress's failure to extend unemployment insurance is hurting people like Gerri — Americans who lost their jobs by no fault of their own and are eager to get back to work," Booker said in a statement. "For eight months, Gerri has been navigating today's still-challenging job market while also going back to school. Without unemployment insurance, she could not have stayed afloat as she looked for work."
Am I the only guy who sees the obvious solution here? Get Gerri a job as a
White House intern!
Valerie Jarrett is
cackling with glee — Dear Leader is going to act unilaterally again,
ruling by decree tonight during his State of the
On Tuesday, White House Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that Americans are "hungry" for Obama to take unilateral action, bypassing Congress wherever he can to get things done, CNS News reported.
"People around our country are hungry for action," she said. "And what you'll hear from the president tonight is going to be all about action -- creating opportunity -- and it's going to be a very optimistic speech."
According to Jarrett, Obama will "set forth very specific, concrete proposals that he things will move our country forward -- create opportunity for hard-working Americans who want to succeed."
Although Obama will prod Congress to act on his agenda, Jarrett said Obama "will make clear tonight that he will take action on his own," bypassing Congress when he sees fit.
Liberals love their dictators. Well, their left-wing, commie dictators anyway.
Imagine Jarrett's reaction if President Palin used the same executive power to build Keystone XL, restore incandescent light bulbs, means-test and privatize Social Security, restrict what slackers can buy with food stamps, order all Americans to purchase an AR-15, and with the strike of a drone or 2 make working for the New York Times punishable by death.
Yeah, I'll bet Libtard Val would fall in love with the Constitution again before I could say "hypocrite."
Oh, and Americans are "hungry" alright. Mainly because Obama's economic policies mean a whole lot of us are unemployed and can't afford food.
Nothing he says or does tonight will change that.
Msgr. Desmond noted that unpleasant statistic during yesterday's homily. He was speaking, of course, about the Obama Administration's single-minded war on the Catholic Church, and their recent attacks on the Little Sisters of the Poor.
Surely the government can't wipe out the Church, he asked rhetorically, before citing the French Revolution as an example of how yes, yes it can.
And my mind whirled, because this president is certainly as sinister as Robespierre and the Jacobins. Perhaps moreso.
They had the guillotine, Obama has the IRS. It's only a matter of time before he uses the taxman to force us into performing gay "marriages." How could a man who demands that nuns pay for birth control resist the urge to bend Catholic priests to his will?
And so, thinking about Msgr. Desmond's homily, this description of the French Revolution sounds like it could have come right out of a DNC press release:
The new rational state, whose primary ideological plank was that the sovereignty of "the people" is unlimited, attempted to eliminate French traditions, norms, and religious beliefs.
The revolutionary governing bodies were particularly determined to destroy every vestige of the Roman Catholic Church because France was hailed by Rome as the Church's "eldest daughter" and the monarch had dedicated "our person, our state, our crown and our subjects" to the Blessed Virgin.
The Constituent Assembly began the campaign against the Church by stating in the Declaration of the Rights of Man, "no body or individual may exercise any authority which does not proceed directly from the nation." In other words the Church could no longer have any say in public matters. The secular state would now have the final word over every aspect of human and social life.
Cradle to grave statism, Obama-style!
The government will redefine family, and malevolently put the Catholic Church out of the adoption business because it won't go along.
The government will dictate the terms of your health care, and more importantly suppress any attempt by the Church to influence your choices. They'll even trot out misguided catholics to reassure you that open schism with Rome is The American Way.
Who will be the first Catholic priest Obama locks up?
Don't say it's an unthinkable prospect. The Reign of Terror was unthinkable
too. Until it wasn't.
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court (temporarily, at least) sided with the Little Sisters of the Poor and against the Obama Administration.
Despite the best efforts of the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court of the United States decided on Friday afternoon to temporarily block enforcement of the Affordable Care Act on behalf of the Little Sisters of the Poor. The new ruling allows the religious order to avoid the crushing penalties of failing to adhere to the mandate while their legal challenge proceeds by informing the HHS in writing that they are a non-profit group "that hold themselves out as religious and have religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services."
The ruling comes after lawyers for the nuns pointed out that in order to claim their exemption, the administration is requiring the nuns to sign a "permission slip" that would allow their insurance company to offer coverage of contraception, abortion-inducing drugs, and sterilization over the nuns' objections.
The Sisters argue that participating in the process in any way would make them party to mortal sin. Even the fact that the government would pay the insurer for the coverage, and so costs would not fall on the Sisters, fails to address this concern, they say.
An earlier ruling by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor allowing the Little Sisters protection from enforcement of the mandate was challenged by the Obama Administration.
Forcing nuns to purchase birth control and abortion services is evil.
Reiterating that demand in legal challenges is malevolent and cruel.
But it's typical of the Obama Administration's war on religion, and on Catholics specifically. They need to crush our faith, and replace it with their secularized worldview, because we stand in silent rejoinder of their sinfulness.
Contrary to feminut hysteria, we have no intention of forcing anyone to abide by our rules. Birth control is widely available, and inexpensively priced. It's none of our business if a woman chooses to purchase it with her own money. We will, of course, pray that she does not. But alas, she is free to ignore our prayers.
All we ask is that we remain free to exercise our religion and live our
faith without endangering our immortal souls. I don't think that's an
unreasonable request. And I'm heartened to hear that the Supreme Court
is inclined to agree with us.
When Dear Leader steps up to the podium next week to deliver his annual State
Party Union speech he'll emphasize class warfare and
wealth redistribution, aka "income inequality."
You know, the idea that rich CEO's (but not Hollywood celebs or big-time sports stars) need to earn less so burger flippers can be paid $15 per hour.
It's what I call Marxism for Morons. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" wrapped up in a flag and touted as "fairness." And his sycophants fall for it, because our nation is full of public school automatons spoon-fed grievance-mongering and an inflated sense of self-esteem in place of basic economics and common sense.
Just to emphasize how silly the whole thing is, Obama's henchmen at the DCCC plan to "study" the problem next month. At the post St. Regis Hotel in NYC. Where room rates start at $695 per night. And where the maids don't make that much in a week.
But please don't ask rich Democrats to spread their wealth around. Some people are more equal than others dontcha know. When Barack Obama took office in 2007 his net worth stood at around $1.3 million. Today it's 10 times that.
I think he needs a pay cut, don't you?
Nah, the Democratic Party's motto seems to be "hard work never killed anyone, but why take the chance?" So they pass out entitlements like candy and then rail against the "unfairness" of anyone who dares to think for himself and build something the government didn't tell him to build.
America stands for Equality of Opportunity. When Obama says "income inequality" what he's really saying is "Equality of Outcome."
Or as Janis Joplin might have sung, Obama won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz… Throw in a big screen TV and a night on the town while you're at it too.
Bottom line? If you want Income Equality, move to North Korea.
In truth, North Korea represents the ideal for those who fight for income equality with its one man at the top worth tens of billions of dollars while the entire civilian population starves, largely impoverished.
America could not succeed without income inequality. Why? Because it forces us to seek out new opportunities, new inventions, new directions, and in the process advance science, engineering, culture, and society as a whole.
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."
— Robert A. Heinlein
Of course in Obama's world it's know as "Bush's Fault."
And the only cure is another government program. To counter all the existing government programs, regulations, and crony capitalism which screwed up everything in the first place. It never occurs to these statists that the simplest solution is to just get government the hell out of the way. Because then they won't have Control.
You know who the GOP should get to deliver their SOTU response?
Mitch McConnell gave Dear Leader a blank check, and he blew through $500 Billion in just three months.
President Barack Obama has blown through more than $500 billion in deficit spending in the three months since passage of the deal proposed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on easing the debt ceiling battles that gave Obama virtually unlimited borrowing authority from October 17, 2013 through this February 7th.
So naturally, his henchmen are demanding to borrow even more.
US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew urged Congress Thursday to quickly raise the country's borrowing ceiling to avert yet another political showdown over debt that could unnerve capital markets.
"We have, you know, a deadline looming in February. February 7th our borrowing authority runs out again. At that point, Congress has to act," he said.
Under current law the Treasury can borrow what it needs to cover the US budget deficit until February 7, when a fresh cap is set at the level of that day.
The Treasury has special accounting measures it can take to cover the deficit for several weeks.
But if the borrowing ceiling is not raised after that, either the government will have to slash spending or it could be forced into default on the debt.
Normal people would cut spending. Hey, it's what you'd have to do after you called Visa for the 14th time begging for a credit limit increase. Sooner or later they're gonna say "no."
Somebody has got to make Obama cut up his credit cards and get him into one of those debt counseling services. Pronto.
But I'm not counting on Congress to do that. They're just as addicted to deficit spending as he is.
Hey, does anybody here remember this guy?
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies… America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
I'll give you a hint. He used to be a Senator. And he ran for president. Twice.
"Leadership failure" indeed.
Should a mother who cares for her disabled adult son be forced to join a union and pay dues out of her meager Medicaid stipend?
The state of Michigan, and the SEIU, say "absolutely."
Yesterday a lawyer for that mother asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let her be free.
William Messenger of the National Right to Work Committee asked the Supreme Court today to hold that public employee unions are unconstitutional.
"This is—I'm just going to use the word here, it is a radical argument. It would radically restructure the way workplaces across this country are—are run," Justice Elena Kagan said from the bench. Since 1948, she pointed out, states have had the power to enact "right-to-work" laws that limit union power. Was Messenger arguing that "a right-to-work law is constitutionally compelled?"
Messenger didn't back off. "In the public sector, yes," he replied.
His clients, home-care providers paid by the state of Illinois with federal-state Medicaid funds, had started out arguing only that they were not "employees" for purposes of coverage by the Court's previous labor precedents. (Though they get state paychecks, they are selected and supervised by the families they serve.) But after cert was granted, their lawyers, the NRTWC's legal-defense fund, decided instead to go for the kill shot. They want the court to hold that permitting the unions to collect fees for representing non-members—the so-called "agency fee"—violates the First Amendment.
At least four members of the Court seemed ready to reach that "radical" result. The fate of public employee unionism in the nation seemed, by the end of the argument, to lie in the hands of Justice Antonin Scalia.
It's high time for Mr. Justice Scalia to deliver the coup de grace and free us from the tyranny of public employee unions.
The argument against public-sector agency fees is this: Since public employees work for government, everything they bargain about is political. Higher wages, better benefits, new work rules—all affect the state budget. Assessing fees from non-members thus requires them to pay for political speech.
Yes. Public employee unions are by their very nature inherently political. And it's an incestuous relationship. The union collects dues from its members, which it then uses to lobby government officials and contribute to their election campaigns. Those government officials in turn, not wanting to bite the hand that feeds them, always ensure the union's contract demands are easily ratified.
In many cases, like for instance when a recently retired teacher is elected to the school board (with her union's backing), the union ends up negotiating with itself. That's hardly a formula for fiscal restraint. But it does keep the union in clover.
You know who else hated public employee unions? No less a liberal icon than Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Roosevelt openly opposed bargaining rights for government unions.
"The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, "I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place" in the public sector. "A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."
And if you're the kind of guy who capitalizes "government," woe betide such obstructionists.
FDR wasn't alone among Democrats, either.
It was orthodoxy among Democrats through the '50s that unions didn't belong in government work. Things began changing when, in 1959, Wisconsin's then-Gov. Gaylord Nelson signed collective bargaining into law for state workers. Other states followed, and gradually, municipal workers and teachers were unionized, too.
Even as that happened, the future was visible. Frank Zeidler, Milwaukee's mayor in the 1950s and the last card-carrying Socialist to head a major U.S. city, supported labor. But in 1969, the progressive icon wrote that rise of unions in government work put a competing power in charge of public business next to elected officials. Government unions "can mean considerable loss of control over the budget, and hence over tax rates," he warned.
Which of course is the reason New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation. Our public employee unions own the government. And they don't care one whit about the taxpayers. We've seen the result. Overly generous union contracts awarded by career politicians who live large on union dues funneled into their campaign coffers while the cities and towns they supposedly represent fall into disgrace.
The Supreme Court now has a chance to level the playing field and wrest control
of our government back into the hands of "We The People." Let's hope they don't
let us down.
If you're wondering why the media keeps hyping Bridgegate, wonder no more. Chris Christie's short-lived stint as the 2016 presidential front-runner is now over, and Hillary Clinton is once again safely back on top in the polls.
A national Quinnipiac University poll released today found Governor Christie trailing Hillary Clinton by 8 percentage points in a hypothetical 2016 presidential matchup just a month after the two were virtually tied with the former first lady.
"Christie's 2016 presidential drive is stuck in traffic, sideswiped by Bridgegate," said Tim Malloy, the assistant director of the polling institute.
Christie, a Republican, was supported by 38 percent of voters, while 46 percent supported Clinton, a Democrat.
CNN reported on Monday that Christie told supporters at gathered by a billionaire supporter in Florida over the weekend he was going to pause any effort to look at the White House this year.
Even so, Christie does better against Clinton than other potential Republican nominees.
The media created Barack Obama, and shepherded him into the White House. Now they're working overtime to ensure Hillary Clinton succeeds him. Chris Christie was their darling while he trailed her, because who doesn't like a moderate Republican sacrificial lamb. But as soon as he drew even with Hillary the long knives had to come out.
Nevermind that Christie has denied knowledge of, or direct involvement in, Bridgegate. Nope, he's gotta be lying, mostly because liberals can't believe a Republican would tell the truth. And it carries no weight that he immediately sacked the people responsible, even as the media ignores the fact that no one has been held to account for any of Obama or Clinton's myriad scandals.
The only thing that matters to the mainstream media is advancing the
Progressive (aka Marxist) cause. Chris Christie stood in their way,
and so he had to be neutralized. That's really all you needs to know
We all know the Post Office is hemorrhaging money. So cutting costs is now Job One. And what better way to cut costs, and enhance service in the process, than by outsourcing their retail operations?
Naturally, the unionistas are teed off.
The opening of Postal Service retail centers in dozens of Staples stores around the country is being met with threats of protests and boycotts by the agency's unions.
The new outlets are staffed by Staples employees, not postal workers, and labor officials say that move replaces good-paying union jobs with low-wage, nonunion workers.
"It's a direct assault on our jobs and on public postal services," said Mark Dimondstein, president of the 200,000-member American Postal Workers Union.The dispute comes as the financially struggling Postal Service continues to form partnerships with private companies, and looks to cut costs and boost revenues. The deal with Staples began as a pilot program in November at 84 stores in California, Georgia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania as a way make it easier for customers to buy stamps, send packages or use Priority and certified mail.
Union leaders fear that if the Staples program is successful, the Postal Service will want to expand it to more than 1,500 of the company's other stores. That could siphon work and customers away from nearby brick-and-mortar post offices, taking jobs from postal workers and even leading traditional post offices to close.
The union says it's not asking to shut down the program. It wants the counters to be run by postal employees, not workers hired by Staples. The average postal clerk earns about $25 an hour, according to the union, plus a generous package of health and retirement benefits. The Staples post office counters are run by nonunion workers often making little more than the minimum wage.
It doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to sell stamps. That job just isn't worth $25 an hour. It never was. Which is why the Post Office loses money. And raising their prices to cover their labor costs would inevitably send their customers elsewhere.
The postal workers union did what unions always do, inflated their self-worth until they priced themselves out of their jobs. So like every other unionized behemoth before them the Post Office can collapse under the weight of its labor costs, or it can adapt to reality.
Selling stamps at Staples is Reality.
Believing that job is worth $25 an hour is Fantasy.
Oh, by the way, the folks who work at Amazon understand Reality too. They overwhelmingly rejected unionization.
Last month I wrote about an attempt by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers to unionize technical workers at an Amazon.com Inc. warehouse in Delaware. This was my take back then: "I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that if unions manage to make substantial inroads at Amazon, it will be the greatest advance that the labor movement has experienced in decades."
Well, on Wednesday night, workers voted to reject the union. So far, the citadel of the new economy remains unbreached. The vote wasn't even close: 21 to 6.
Take note Mr. Dimondstein. Unions are going the way of the dinosaur. And not a
moment too soon.
In other words, the Democratic Party's core constituency. All the rest of us are too "extreme" for Andy's libtard paradise.
Forty-eight percent of Americans and all priests and nuns are no longer welcome in the Empire State, according to its governor. Delivering a monologue on Republicans with all the hyperbole of an MSNBC anchor and none of the charm, Cuomo offered this:
You have a schism within the Republican Party. … They're searching to define their soul, that's what's going on. Is the Republican party in this state a moderate party or is it an extreme conservative party? That's what they're trying to figure out. It's a mirror of what's going on in Washington. The gridlock in Washington is less about Democrats and Republicans. It's more about extreme Republicans versus moderate Republicans.
… You're seeing that play out in New York. … The Republican Party candidates are running against the SAFE Act … it was voted for by moderate Republicans who run the Senate! Their problem is not me and the Democrats; their problem is themselves. Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that's who they are and they're the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that's not who New Yorkers are.
He at least uses the liberal pejoratives for those who are pro-2nd Amendment and oppose gay marriage. "Right to life" he uses as if it's offensive on its face. As Life News notes, he leans heavily on the President Barack tactic to simply declare everyone who disagrees with your positions in the slightest "extreme," even if many of those people are your constituents.
Well the idiots voted for him. And they voted for that commie De Blasio. So we pretty much know what kind of people live in New York. And if they don't want me to visit, well that's fine. There are, after all, 49 other states (56, if you're Barack Obama!), and most of them are run by more tolerant folks.
New York State, where restricting the Second Amendment is "common sense," but restricting abortion is "extreme." So you can't murder someone (good!), unless that someone is an unborn child. Then you have a duty to ensure the kid never has a chance.
Unless he's gonna grow up to be gay. Then he has the right to get married while still in the womb.
This Wednesday is the 41st anniversary of Roe v Wade.
Fifty-seven million babies
have been murdered in that time. That's 3 times the population of Andrew
Cuomo's empire of liberalism. Given the chance, I wonder if they would
have voted for him.
Really, there's no reason on God's green earth for Sallie Mae to care if your parents are homosexuals. Unless, they're giving you points for that.
Oh, who am I kidding, of course they're giving you points for that.
College students filling out their Free Application for Federal Student Aid — or FAFSA — will find a series of new questions about their parents' martial status this year, according to Sallie Mae, the nation's largest company handling student debt.
The new form, released Jan. 1, includes new questions about the gender and marital status of a student's legal parents, providing options for the children of unmarried or same-sex couples.
Man, I miss Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
To Barack Obama, the pen is mightier than the Constitution.
"We're not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we're providing Americans the kind of help they need. I've got a pen and I've got a phone," Obama said Tuesday as he convened his first Cabinet meeting of the year.
Obama continued: "And I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward in helping to make sure our kids are getting the best education possible, making sure that our businesses getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance, to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating."
Obama rules by decree. Because he can.
Separation of powers? Such a quaint, anachronistic concept.
Yup, they're spinning so fast, I'm getting dizzy.
What Chris Christie bridge scandal? Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi: Editorial
Somehow, the right's response to Chris Christie's still-breaking Bridgegate scandal has devolved into this: Why are you writing about New Jersey traffic jams, because Benghazi!
In letters to newspapers and online comments, in phone calls to their favorite conservative radio and TV pundits, conservatives are in a state of collective denial: They refuse to acknowledge there's anything to Gov. Chris Christie and the George Washington Bridge scandal until President Obama and the consular attack in Benghazi get equal time.
Whack that straw-man! I know these are merely journalists, so reading comprehension might not be their strong suit, but let's try explaining this one more time.
Bridgegate is getting more than 17 times the media coverage Benghazi ever got.
That's our beef. Do your jobs fellas. Do it impartially.
What's that? Oh, right, you've got excuses.
What's the difference? Here are three reasons the unrelated Bridgegate and Benghazi stories aren't getting equal time — and shouldn't.
Intent: America's press corps has looked at Benghazi, the IRS scandal and the other Obama-related scandals tossed around last weekend. In each case, the facts dampened the early cries of conspiracy and cover-up. In Benghazi, neither congressional investigators nor the New York Times found evidence to support the idea of a concerted executive branch failure or cover-up. In the IRS fiasco, an investigation found both conservative and liberal political groups were subject to review — and everyone got what they wanted, anyway.
Hoo boy, there's so much BS in there it's scary.
But if you still think the New York Times has any credibility when it comes to assiduously reporting on the evils of socialist government, I've got 14 million dead Ukrainians who'll vigorously disagree with you.
The bottom line? We still don't know what Obama was doing that night. We still don't know why a rescue wasn't mounted, or authorized. And unlike Bridgegate, Obama hasn't held a single person accountable.
As for the IRS scandal, timing is everything. And in the run-up to the 2012 election, the IRS doggedly pursued every Conservative group in America, diverting these groups' limited resources into fighting a partisan bureaucracy. Which of course prevented them from working to defeat Barack Obama. OK, sure, the IRS eventually relented and granted tax esempt status to everybody, after the election, when it didn't matter anymore.
A study by The American Enterprise Institute found that those IRS witch hunts suppressed conservative / Republican turnout by between 5 and 8.5 million voters. Obama won by about 5 million votes. Do the math.
So, what about Excuse #2?
Coverage: It's hard to argue that Benghazi, the IRS scandal or Obamacare's glitchy website weren't covered in full. Each story was subject to intense coverage when it broke — just as Bridgegate is breaking now. To expect coverage of old stories to increase because of an uncomfortable new story is silly.
Oh, c'mon. The liberal media hasn't assigned this many reporters to a story since the time they staked out Sarah Palin's garbage cans.
And at the risk of repeating myself, in one week Bridgegate has garnered 17 times more coverage than Benghazi has gotten, ever. Why? Because the media is Obama. They're 2 sides of the same coin. Believing that Obama is capable of duplicity is like believing they themselves are crooked.
In other words, they can't see the forest for the trees.
But Chris Christie? He's a Republican! He's evil! All their friends say so!
Onward to Excuse #3.
Cover-ups: Each scandal resuscitated by the right last week began with cover-up allegations that have faded under the bright lights of media coverage and federal investigation.
Meanwhile, new evidence that Christie's aides tried to cover their tracks is surfacing as thousands of newly released documents and e-mails are made public. None of the evidence suggests the governor was involved at that level, but there are a lot of questions about the GWB lane closures that still haven't been answered.
Obama promised us "the most transparent administration in history." How's that workin' out for you guys?
Here are 6 unanswered questions on Benghazi.
And 5 unanswered questions about the IRS scandal. Lois Lerner still hasn't testified. But the Ledger is more interested in how many times David Wildstein took the Fifth? Puh-lease.
You guys want coverups? How about Eric Holder's ridiculous "executive privilege" assertion over Congressional inquiries into Fast And Furious? And not for nothing, but if assigning one of your own campaign donors to investigate the IRS scandal isn't a coverup, I don't know what is.
Here are 20 scandals involving Democrats that are still unresolved.
Still gonna tell me Bridgegate is more important?
All the other papers have moved on.
Alex Rodriguez is today's headline fodder. It's time for the Star-Ledger
to stop flogging this dead horse.
Or at least indict Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder. Jarrett probably gave the "stand-down" order while 4 Americans died in Benghazi. And Holder's Fast and Furious fiasco got Border Agent Brian Terry killed.
Gov. Chris Christie would face possible impeachment if evidence emerges showing he knew more about the George Washington Bridge scandal, the New Jersey lawmaker leading a legislative inquiry said this morning.
Appearing on "Face the Nation," Assemblyman John Wisniewski (D-Middlesex) said the Assembly could move to impeach Christie if something comes to light revealing a direct link between the Republican governor and the September closure of local access lanes leading to the bridge in Fort Lee. Wisniewski, who chairs the Assembly transportation committee, said those closures clearly constituted a crime because public property was used for political purposes.
Public property used for political purposes? You mean like when
Obama Valerie Jarrett closed national parks and barricaded the World
War II Memorial to spite Congressional Republicans? Their road closures
cut off an entire town, and the media yawned.
"If it becomes known that the governor was involved and he knew about it and he knew about the cover-up, and he was approving the actions taken by his senior staff, that raises serious questions that the assembly ought to look at," Wisniewski said. "And that ought to be considered in light of what our responsibility is. The Assembly has the ability to do articles of impeachment."
Get off your high horse Wiz. Why don't you "consider" Steve Sweeney's blatant partisan hackery in blocking Christie's state supreme court nominations? Wanna tell me with a straight face that Sweeney isn't playing "payback?"
This is bare-knuckle politics, Jersey style.
And it's no better (or worse) than the Chicago politics of your president.
Impeach Chris Christe? Fine. Impeach Barack Obama first. Because
people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
From the "I told you so" department: Humana just released their Obamacare enrollment mix, and the numbers aren't pretty. The only people who signed up for Obamacare were those who really had to. That is, the really sick, and the really old. This is known as "adverse selection," and it's the insurance industry's biggest nightmare, because it's gonna cost them a fortune.
Health insurer Humana Inc said on Thursday that it projected its enrollment mix in private plans through the exchanges created by President Barack Obama's healthcare law will be, "more adverse than previously expected."
Humana attributed the enrollment trend to regulatory changes allowing people to remain in previously existing plans not sold on the exchanges. Obama proposed allowing insurers to keep selling plans that did not comply with the Affordable Care Act after political fallout that he was not keeping his promise that people can keep insurance plans if they like them.
Where are all the young, healthy people Obama counted on to subsidize this pool of costly consumers? On their parents' plan! Or sitting Obamacare out, no matter what Pajama Boy told them to do.
And it doesn't help that he had to backtrack on his individual mandate by actually making good on his promise.
In short, people who prefer not to enroll in ObamaCare because they preferred the options they had are now availing themselves of the opportunity to evade this monstrosity, at least for the moment. That leaves the pool even more dominated than it already would have been to people who are enrolling only because they have no other choice - mainly older people or those with pre-existing conditions. When that's your pool, you're in trouble. That was the idea of the individual mandate in the first place. Democrats did understand, in spite of what they said, that many people wouldn't voluntarily sign up and they would have to be forced. So force them they would, because that would be the only way to get the premium dollars that would be necessary to provide coverage for the old and the already-sick.
The whole time Obama was assuring people that if they liked their plan they could keep their plan, he knew perfectly well that if it actually played out that way, it would drive the health insurance industry to financial ruin. But when faced with political consequences for breaking the promise, he threw the insurers under the bus and sacrificed a crucial element of his grand scheme in the service of saving his own political ass. The consequence? Exactly what you see. The mix is terrible, even worse than insurers first feared, and without repeal they're headed for the lovely experience of coming hat-in-hand to the government for a bailout.
Well, isn't that special?
Obamacare is health insurance for the sick and the dying.
Wanna know the Really Good News? You're still gonna pay for their insurance, even if you don't sign up. Because the taxpayers are on the hook for that bailout.
"There is essentially no risk of a 'death spiral,'" says MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who helped design the ACA as well as the Massachusetts law on which it was modeled. "There are substantial risk mitigation mechanisms as well as subsidies that will attract in healthy enrollees." Most important, say Gruber and Zirkelbach, is a section of the ACA under which the federal government will pick up a substantial portion of the losses for the next three years, if the program goes sour for insurers.
The subsidies thing has, of course, gone swimmingly. So it's on to the bailout! Because when these clowns say "federal government" they mean "you and me." We'll get taxed, or more likely our grandchildren will get taxed, to keep this abomination afloat.
The only way out is repeal.
You finally got all the way through healthcare.gov. You enrolled in a plan. You even gave them your bank account info for payment. You sit back and think, I'm insured!
Alas, you're probably not. Insured, that is. Chances are you're one of the "orphans," lost in bureaucratic limbo in the bowels of an HHS sub-basement.
Record-keeping snags could complicate the start of insurance coverage this month as millions of people begin using policies they purchased under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
Insurance companies are still trying to sort out cases of so-called health insurance orphans, customers for whom the government has a record that they enrolled, but the insurer does not. They are worried the process will grow more cumbersome as they deal with the flood of new customers who signed up in December as enrollment deadlines neared.
The companies also are seeing cases in which the government has assigned the same identification number to more than one person, as well as so-called "ghost" files in which the insurer has an enrollment record but the government does not.
But orphaned files — when the insurer has no record of enrollment — are particularly concerning because the companies have no automated way to identify the presumed policyholder. They say they have to manually compare the lists of enrollees the government sends them with their own records because the government never built an automated system that would do the work much faster.
"It's an ongoing concern," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for the industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans. "Health plans can't process enrollments they haven't received from the exchange."
Insurers use the term "orphan" for the problematic files because they are referring to customers who have yet to find a home with the carrier they selected. The files have cropped up since enrollment began last fall through HealthCare.gov. The site was down an estimated 60 percent of the time in October.
Gee, if only there was a way to blame Chris Christie for this!
The good news is, it only takes a week to straighten out each orphan policy, after you convince the media to look into your case.
Among those who got lost in the paperwork confusion was cancer survivor Sharon Van Daele of Tucson, Ariz., who went back and forth between her insurer and the federal government for more than a week after her confirmation failed to arrive. Unable to get answers, she said it felt as if she had fallen into a black hole.
She started the year worried she was uninsured even though the HealthCare.gov website told her on Dec. 22 that she had successfully enrolled.
"I made all the deadlines, and then I tried to make my payment, but they wouldn't take it," said Van Daele.
Her case was finally resolved after an official from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services contacted Van Daele directly, following an Associated Press inquiry to the agency's Washington press office.
Remember when you called your insurance agent if you had a problem? Now you have to call the Associated Press!
Meanwhile the media is fixated on Chris Christie's traffic jam. Which of course is a much bigger scandal than millions of Americans stuck in health insurance limbo. Because, he's a Republican!
The Obamacare rollout is an unmitigated disaster, affecting way more people for more harshly than any bogus "traffic study." Yet no one has been fired. There are no federal investigations. Not a single class action lawsuit has been filed.
The media sees nothing wrong, because they don't want to make Dear Leader
look bad. But eventually the truth will come out. It has to. Or America
really is doomed.
This just in: Chris Christie is a bully!
Not A Scandal: Your petty and vindictive president padlocks the World War II Memorial and removes the handles from drinking fountains in National Parks. After he gets re-elected by using the IRS and the NSA to harass and hogtie his political enemies.
Scandal: New Jersey's petty and vindictive governor arranges a traffic jam on the George Washington Bridge. Again, after he gets re-elected in a landslide by convincing a plethora of leading Democrats to cross the aisle and endorse him.
Both are examples of supposed leaders abusing their power. Both are products of rabidly partisan political machinations. Curiously, only one of them is newsworthy.
But hey, since the media has rediscovered their investigative journalism skills, perhaps they could finally get incensed about a few other Non-Scandals like Fast and Furious or Benghazi. You know, before hanging Christie out to dry and proclaiming his presidential ambitions DOA.
Because nobody is writing editorials hanging Benghazi around Hillary's neck. Which is where it belongs, of course. She left 4 Americans to die, and lied about it while standing in front of their caskets.
The media can't wait for her to succeed Barack Obama as president. So they won't dare do anything to hinder her ambitions. And since Christie is slightly ahead of her in the polls, it's time for the long knives to get pointed in his direction.
I'm no Christie for President fan. But c'mon, Bridge-Gate is small beer. And really, at this point, what difference does it make?
Unlike, say, a certain president some of you around here continue to worship.
Chris Christie knows how to pander. And boy oh boy was he pandering today, sucking up to the La Raza racists in their quest for the United States of Aztlan, as he ceremonially signed New Jersey's DREAM Act.
Gov. Chris Christie today urged the children of immigrants who came to this country illegally to "make the most of the opportunity" to pay in-state tuition at the state's colleges and universities under the Dream Act.
The Republican governor officially signed the legislation in private weeks ago. Today, photographers crowded around him as he signed a reproduction of the bill, flanked by lawmakers instrumental in passing it.
"You're an inspiration to us because in you we see all that our country can be," Christie told hundreds of students in the American flag-draped gym at Colin Powell Elementary School. "In you we see, most importantly, infinite possibilities of the human spirit."
What Christie sees, and what inspires him, are votes. The votes of immigration amnesty advocates clamoring for open borders. Whom he'll reward just as soon as he hoodwinks the rest of us into handing him the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.
Christie said even those who are "cold hearted" about the issue, can't argue with the economic benefit of extending in-state tuition to students in whom the state already invests tens of thousands of public education dollars.
Oh, I see. I'm "cold hearted." Because I don't think rewarding lawbreakers is what we ought to be doing. And not for nothing, but after they graduate college, these kids can't legally work in the U.S. So exactly what "economic benefit" is heading our way?
Yeah, I'm sure he'll trumpet some bogus bipartisan "solution" to that one too. Amnesty by another name. Because for all his supposed political savvy, Chris Christie still hasn't figured out that when a Democrat says "bipartisan," it means "do what I want."
And what they want is unfettered amnesty via the vaunted "path to citizenship." It's their Holy Grail, a guaranteed way for Democrats to shift the electoral landscape in their favor for generations to come. Ten to 12 million newly minted citizens, all ready to vote themselves Free Stuff on the backs of hard-working Americans like you and me, and the whole country slides into socialism that much faster.
So here's one thing I know. Chris Christie is no Conservative. And he won't
be getting my vote for president.
Introducing the internet-connected toothbrush.
Brush smarter. That's the message from the makers of what is billed as the world's first Internet-connected toothbrush.
Unveiled Sunday at a preview event for the Consumer Electronics Show, the device from French-based startup Kolibree aims "to reinvent oral care," according to co-founder Loic Cessot.
"The technology in the industry has not evolved for years," Cessot told AFP.
"The idea is not to brush stronger, but smarter."
The Kolibree toothbrush includes a sensor which detects how much tartar is being removed in a brushing. It also records brushing activity so users can maintain a consistent cleaning each time.
The device conveys the information wirelessly to a smartphone app -- a particularly useful aid for parents who want to monitor the teeth cleaning efforts of small children, according to Cessot.
The app, which is open for developers to add on other programs, aims to increase motivation and make the experience more fun, said Cessot.
If you go to bed without brushing your teeth does it tell your phone to nag you mercilessly like your dentist would? Or does it just rat you out to your dentist via email? And do your Facebook friends really need to know how often you brush your teeth?
I suppose if you don't score at least a 90 your friends will mock you. At least my friends would.
Frankly, it seems a little bit silly to me. But what do you expect from something invented in France?
So listen. If we're gonna internet-enable various home-health and grooming appliances, let's go all the way. Embed a camera in a nose-hair trimmer. C'mon, you know it'd be a huge hit, especially if the video is live-streamed to YouTube.
Just please, no internet toilets.
What happens when a state's governor stands up to an activist judge? The Supreme Court says, let's take another look.
The Supreme Court on Monday put gay marriage on hold in Utah, giving the state time to appeal a federal judge's ruling against Utah's same-sex marriage ban.
The court issued a brief order Monday blocking any new same-sex unions in the state. The ruling comes after a Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay and lesbian couples' constitutional rights.
The decision, in one of the country's most conservative states, touched off a flurry of court filings as some jurisdictions started issuing marriage licenses.
The state's request to the Supreme Court was filed with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who handles emergency appeals from Utah and the five other states in the 10th Circuit. Sotomayor turned the matter over to the entire court.
The decision to stay the ruling was unanimous.
This is no surprise. Recognizing a constitutional right to same sex marriage is a big deal, which requires thought, consideration and preparation in the public if this is going to happen through the courts. In Utah, one of the most conservative states in the union, we went all of a sudden overnight from no gay marriage to gay marriage. There was little indication for those not following developments it would happen.
Hello, Chris Christie, feel like a chump yet?
New Jersey didn't have to roll over and dance to the homofascist tune. But Christie refused to fight for what's right, bowing to expediency by waving his hands and effectively saying "whaddaya gonna do?"
What you do is fight. If you have principles, that is.
Speaking of standing up for principles, I want to give a shout-out to Trestin Meacham. Trestin's been fasting since December 20th to protest Judge Shelby's unconscionable ruling. And the vitriol spewed his way by the homofascist forces of tolerance tell me all I need to know about the true nature of homosexuality and what it does to men's souls.
"God did this."
January 6, 2014
Yes He did.
If you like your new baby, you can't insure your new baby.
There's another quirk in the Obama administration's new health insurance system: It lacks a way for consumers to quickly and easily update their coverage for the birth of a baby and other common life changes.
With regular private insurance, parents just notify the health plan. Insurers will still cover new babies, the administration says, but parents will also have to contact the government at some point later on.
Right now the HealthCare.gov website can't handle such updates.
The cynic in me says they assumed all pregnant women would jump at the chance to get a (now free) abortion.
But it's probably just another shining example of Obama's unparalleled competence. He'll have one of his lackeys order the insurance companies to cover your new baby, and they'll listen, because he's The King.
Uh, ok, good luck with that.
Paperwork? Payments? Feh, he can't concern himself with such trifles. Not when there are vacations to be taken and golf courses to be conquered.
Besides, I'm sure MSNBC is already blaming this latest "glitch" on Republicans.
Or a YouTube video. And Hillary will fix everything when she's elected president.
It said so in The New York Times.
2014 is shaping up to be the year scouting divorces itself from morality.
First, the Boy Scouts agreed to start admitting openly homosexual members and scoutmasters, making their new name The Boy Toy Scouts. Be prepared!
Amd now I read that the Girl Scouts, of which my very own daughter is a member in good standing, have nominated Texas gubernatorial candidate and infanticide activist Wendy Davis as their Woman Of The Year.
On December 18, 2013, Girl Scouts USA tweeted: "Incredible Ladies Who Should Be Women of the Year for 2013" and asking if anyone should be added to the list.
The link goes to a column by the liberal Huffington Post, which promotes Davis and pro-abortion activist Gloria Steinem as potential women of the year.
Really. The Girl Scouts say our daughters should strive to emulate women who believes in the "right" to murder their own children. What's next, an abortion "try-it" patch?
Perhaps next year they'll nominate Susan Smith.
But perhaps I shouldn't give them any ideas.
So, who should be the Girl Scouts' Woman of the Year?
Malala Yousafzai. She's got more courage in her pinky toe than Wendy Davis or Gloria Steinem could ever pretend to have.
Malala's message of hope, her steadfast determination and dedication to education, and her unwavering commitment to simple human dignity, that's what our daughters need to emulate. She knows firsthand the depredations forced upon truly oppressed women. And she rose above them to become a symbol of Freedom, a lightning rod for Liberty.
Education empowers women. Abortion destroys a woman's soul. GSUSA needs to
quickly re-evaluate their priorities. Because an organization that embraces
infanticide cannot in all honesty claim to prepare young women as shepherds
of our future.
Last year our knee-jerk liberal fascists reacted predictably to the Newtown, CT school shooting by enacting some of the strictest gun control legislation in the nation.
Also last year the murder rate in our fine state soared to a seven-year high.
Coincidence? I mean really, how can criminals so easily acquire guns when New Jersey makes it so hard to buy and own them?
Oh, right, criminals don't follow the law.
So naturally the solution is more gun control legislation!
[Newark Police Director Samuel] DeMaio said .45-caliber handguns — far more powerful than the 9 mm weapons once common in Newark — and the proliferation of assault weapons led to the city's increased number of killings.
"If the federal government is really serious about gun control and the violence that's taking place, not just in Newark, but in every city throughout this country, they will get strict and do the right thing with the gun laws," he said. "Make them consistent. … Take the guns out of the criminals' hands."
What he really means, of course, is confiscate guns from the law-abiding citizenry. Because once again, this time with feeling, criminals don't follow the law.
It's like when you geniuses banned drugs. Everything from opium to marijuana to oxycontin is illegal. How's that workin' out for ya?
So what makes you believe banning guns is gonna be any different?