12th NC PATCON October 4th - Octob...
11th NC PATCON May 31st - June 5th...
AAR & Pictures X NC PATCON +
10th NC PATCON September 28 - October 3rd 2016
Pictures: 9th NC PATCON
9th NC PATCON June 1 - June 6th 2016
PICTURES: NC PATCON VIII
8th NC PATCON September 30 - October 5th 2015
7th NC PATCON May 6th - 11th 2015
Pictures: 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
AAR - 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
Saturday, June 30, 2012
A growing chorus understands.
Conservatives are scrambling to salvage something from the decision of their once-great judicial hero….
All this is a hollow hope. The outer limit on the Commerce Clause in Sebelius does not put any other federal law in jeopardy and is undermined by its ruling on the tax power…. The limits on congressional coercion in the case of Medicaid may apply only because the amount of federal funds at risk in that program’s expansion … was so great. If Congress threatens to cut off 5%-10% to force states to obey future federal mandates, will the court strike that down too? Doubtful.
Outside the court, the conservatives who thought they knew Roberts seemed baffled. “For whatever reason, and you’ll have to ask Justice Roberts, he re-wrote the statute,” said Mike Carvin, who argued against Obamacare in the case. “I’m glad he re-wrote the statute rather than the Constitution, but none of it can pass rational scrutiny.”
…the Court is tasked with protecting the Constitution and clearly failed to do so here. A key pillar upholding limited government has been kicked away. If the practical result is to energize opposition to President Obama’s reelection, it may turn out to a proverbial blessing in disguise. But there is no point in denying the damage.
… even the five votes limiting Congress under the Commerce Clause pale against the Chief Justice’s infinitely elastic and dangerous interpretation of the taxing power. Nancy Pelosi famously said we need to pass ObamaCare to find out what’s in it. It turns out we also needed John Roberts to write his appendix.
The dissent acknowledges that if an ambiguous law can be read in a way that renders it constitutional, it should be. It distinguishes, though, between construing a law charitably and rewriting it. The latter is what Chief Justice John Roberts has done. If Roberts believes that this tactic avoids damage to the Constitution because it does not stretch the Commerce Clause to justify a mandate, he is mistaken.
Armendariz stepped down as EPA’s Region 6 administrator in April after a video surfaced of him comparing his work enforcing of environmental laws to the way ancient Roman conquerors used terror to keep order.
“It is kind of like how the Romans used to conquer the villages in the Mediterranean — they’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere and they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them. Then that town was really easy to manage for the next few years,” Armendariz said during a 2010 meeting in Texas.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who released the video of the meeting, mockingly offered his congratulations to Armendariz on Friday.
“Dr. Armendariz follows numerous Obama administration officials who have come from or moved to radical left and green groups,” Inhofe said in a statement. “It's as if there is a revolving door between the White House and organizations such as the Sierra Club.”
"At least at the Sierra Club he won't get into so much trouble for telling the truth that their true agenda is to kill oil, gas and coal,” he added.
More @ The Hill
In an official policy statement the White House wrote,
“The Administration is disappointed that the Congress did not incorporate the requested TRICARE fee initiatives into either the appropriation or authorization legislation.”
In the most recent budget proposal by the Obama administration (no budget has been in effect the entire time Obama has been in office), billions of dollars worth of higher fees for members of TRICARE were proposed. It’s one of the administration’s means of cutting $500 billion from the Pentagon’s budget.
More @ Freedom Outpost
Eric Golub recommends kicking Ron Paul's supporters out of the Republican Convention:
The following words accurately describe the overwhelming majority of Ron Paul supporters.That's perfectly fine with me. Kick them out, by all means. I'll just make one request. After putting on your magic underwear and getting down at your Mitt Romney convention, don't come crying back to those Ron Paul supporters begging for their votes in late October because it is THE MOSTEST IMPORTANTEST ELECTION EVAHHHHH!!!!
"I will not vote for anybody other than Ron Paul. Mitt Romney is the same as Barack Obama. No to Obamney. Ron Paul or nobody. Maybe Gary Johnson, but not Mitt Romney under any circumstances."
Ron Paul supporters have decided to hold a Libertarian lovefest in Tampa, Florida, on the days directly preceding the GOP Convention. They have every right to do this, and Republicans should have zero objections to them expressing themselves in the equivalent of the town square. This is what democracy is all about. If they have the permits in order, let them protest. If the GOP tries to shut this event down, well that would be morally wrong.
However, their event ends on August 26th. The GOP Convention begins on August 27th. The GOP Convention is a Republican Convention. It is a Mitt Romney Convention. It is not a Ron Paul or Libertarian Convention. Therefore, it is perfectly acceptable at this point to ban Ron Paul supporters from the GOP Convention.
That's right. An outright ban on their presence is the only way to prevent the event from turning into a debacle. There is no legitimate reason at this point for them to be there.
I could not possibly care less if Obama wins or if Romney wins. Based on the last three years, I would guess that Obama would actually do less damage since the Republicans in Congress will at least put up the occasional show of resistance to his leftward moves, whereas they will support Romney's. I have to seriously question the intelligence of any conservative who intends to vote for Romney, as the only argument that made even a remote amount of sense, the Supreme Court Appointment argument, has been permanently destroyed by Chief Justice Roberts.
By all means, the Republicans should kick out the libertarians, the constitutionalists, the nationalists, and the fiscally sane. I think it would be fantastic. It's long past time they joined a party genuinely devoted to freedom, the principles of the Founding Fathers, and the American national interest anyhow.
But what is it with neocons and their obsession with playing ideological police and kicking people out of organizations, movements, and political parties? Buckley did it, Lowry did it, and here this Golub is calling for it. It is increasingly apparent that permitting people who have ideologically "seen the light" at some point in their lives to assume positions of influence in their new party is a tremendously bad idea. If you were ever a Democrat, or worse, a Trotskyite or Socialist, that's great if you eventually came to your senses and moved rightward. But you should not be permitted any leadership position or provided a voice in the right-wing media. After all, why on Earth should anyone else on the Right, who was never dumb enough to fall for any left-wing nonsense in the first place, pay your belatedly sane opinion any attention whatsoever?
At gas station in east Texas yesterday:
Clerk was older guy (50s), owner of the station.
clerk: What can I do for ya?
ME (putting my drink and candy bar on counter and fishing out FRNs): Well, you can start by getting me a new Supreme Court.
clerk: Better yet we oughta just pack the capitol to Austin and to hell with those bastards in DC. We'd do a lot better on our own not even being part of the United States. All they do is bring us down. Texas oughta just be our own republic.
This was a guy who is a long time local business owner, friends with all the local politicians, upstanding community member, etc.
Oh, next guy waiting in line heard conversation and threw in a 'hell yeah, screw them bastards, we oughta be independent!'
Kind of heartwarming.
Editor and Publisher John H. WalkerTARBORO — Did you hear about the Boston area teacher who, while addressing a graduating class, told them there was nothing special about them?
The furor over his hurting the feelings of little Susie and Billy by telling them the truth was amazing, but was buried under the avalanche of support for his words from around the world.
What he said was true, just as it was in whatever year you graduated and just as it was for the Class of 1968 of Greenville (Miss.) High School.
But over the years, we’ve progressed as a nation to where we give feel good awards, ribbons for participation and jobs to persons who can’t even fill out a job application or make correct change at a drive-thru when the cash register tells you how much to give to the customer.
I guess it could be that even though the register tells you to give the customer a certain amount of change, you’re still required to be able to count coins to get to that point.
As we’ve progressed through a recently completed search for a reporter, we even had one would-be candidate ask what a resume was — and that was after sending an email professing all of their strengths!
Yes, little Billy and little Susie are special to their parents and family, just like most of us — but they face what is perhaps the longest row to hoe than anyone ever before them other than during the Great Depression.
Times are tough — despite the fact the President seems to think the “private sector is doing fine” — and there are college graduates from two years ago still looking for employment.
One of the old standards, a summer job for teens, is a rarity these days and, in fact, there have been instances where an 18-year-old was competing with a 50-year-old for the same minimum wage jobs.
No, there’s nothing special about this year’s class of graduating seniors. However, for those who survive and thrive, there may well be.
Contrary to popular opinion, Republicans don’t need a 60-vote majority to ram through an Obamacare repeal – as Ken Klukowski pointed out yesterday, “The only way to stop Obamacare now is with a one-page repeal bill that must be passed by the House and Senate. Because it would reduce the deficit you can pass it with 51 votes as a reconciliation bill in the Senate; you don’t need 60 votes.”
Republicans currently have 47 seats in the Senate. They only have 10 Senate seats up for re-election, as opposed to Democrats’ 23. Essentially, Republicans need to shift three seats from the Democrats and hold their own in order to win repeal, since the VP is the tiebreaker – although that assumes homogenous Senate Republican support for repeal.
Republicans essentially have four vulnerable seats; Democrats have up to ten. The question is how the Obamacare decision will play into these races – if Obamacare is unpopular in these states, that will certainly cut in Republicans’ favor. One thing is clear: swing-state voters do not like Obamacare. First, the Republican toss-up races:
More @ Breitbart
Yes, alas, it is true. Oh, I am a poor sinner, and have offended against the Lord, and lived in the dark night of racism, and it presses hard upon my soul. Oh, how it does. But now, having seen the light of goodness, I repent and will own like a man to my transgressions. Yes, I will say it here, before God and man:
I have believed that things should be done without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or national origin.
The shame, the shame.
I will make a clean breast of yet more. I have been against all discrimination by race or sex, against affirmative action, racial set-asides, special treatment for women, quotas, and favoritism by the government and the media. Oh the guilt I feel! I have been a beast, worse even than the Grand Flagon of the Invisible Umpire of the Ku Klux Klan.
There is still more. I have read, and believed, and steeped myself in the pernicious theories of known racists, such as Martin Luther King, who once said openly, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
Yes, yes, I too thought this and—oh, woe—was even proud of thinking it. I believed that behavior counted, not race—tthat if a mob of teenagers gang-robbed a convenience store, they should be horse-whipped, regardless of their race. I thought they should be judged by the content of their characters. I could not see the injustice of equal justice. I did not yet grasp that being against racism was proof positive of racism.
Understanding was not yet upon me. I thought before my salvation that people should take responsibility for their actions. If jack-booted Nazis beat a black unconscious because of, well, pretty much anything, I figured the newspapers should publish their names and photographs, and the courts should give them a minimum of thirty years, no parole, in which to ponder the wisdom of doing it again. Crimes should not be hidden, I believed, nor the criminals protected, according to race.Or anything else. The same laws for everyone, I told myself. Oh, fool that I was.
I was wrong. I now see that a belief in equal treatment under the law is the foulest form of racism. It discriminates unfairly against criminals. All I can say in defense of myself is that other racists, such as Thomas Sowell, led me into these moral swamps.
More @ Fred's
“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison, and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.”
America’s Catholic Bishops rejected the Supreme Court’s ruling that Obamacare is constitutional, saying the court did not resolve the question of the law’s violation of religious rights.
The bishops earlier in June led 43 Catholic institutions to file lawsuits against the Obama Administration, which under Obamacare is forcing Catholic and other religious institutions to provide health insurance to employees that covers contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion-inducing drugs against the Church’s moral teachings.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius — a Catholic who has been ordered by her archbishop not to take Communion until she repents of her pro-abortion stance and goes to confession — has ordered most employers to begin complying with the order on Aug. 1. In a nod to the churches, and probably a bid to help Obama’s re-election chances among Catholics, Sebelius has agreed to give religious nonprofits an additional year to comply.
On the archbishops’ website, they list several reasons they oppose the Affordable Care Act:
- ACA allows use of federal funds to pay for elective abortions and for plans that cover such abortions, contradicting longstanding federal policy.
- The Act fails to include necessary language to provide essential conscience protection, both within and beyond the abortion context. … The lack of statutory conscience protections applicable to ACA’s new mandates has been illustrated in dramatic fashion by HHS’s “preventive services” mandate, which forces religious and other employers to cover sterilization and contraception, including abortifacient drugs.
- ACA fails to treat immigrant workers and their families fairly. ACA leaves them worse off by not allowing them to purchase health coverage in the new exchanges created under the law, even if they use their own money. This undermines the Act’s stated goal of promoting access to basic life-affirming health care for everyone, especially for those most in need.
In their unanimous declaration against the HHS mandate, the bishops said that Obamacare falsely defines institutions such as schools, hospitals and charities as not religious, and it violates the personal civil rights of individual Catholics and members of other denominations and religions that share the same moral convictions.
More @ Godfather Politics
So—why am I even THINKING about secession today? Well, as an American who was born free and just days ago was enslaved by—and to—the federal government, secession is beginning to appear as a viable alternative to slavery. You can bet, if this lowly commentator is thinking it, a whole lot of Americans are beginning to consider whether it is worth a shot—to preserve, at least, SOME freedom from the state.
INDIANAPOLIS | Indiana plans to bill the federal government $130,953,979, the estimated cost of state services used by illegal immigrants since July 1, 2011.
A 2011 law, sponsored by state Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, requires state budget officials to determine how much Indiana spends annually to support illegal immigrants.
The estimate includes $111 million for education, $8 million for health care and $12 million for prisons.
"The federal government is to blame for not controlling our borders," Delph said. "I am requesting Congress to pay back what is owed to us, the hard-working, law-abiding, legal residents of the state of Indiana."
Many more @ Lord K's Garage
An Epidemic of "Isolated Incidents"
"If a widespread pattern of [knock-and-announce] violations were shown . . . there would be reason for grave concern."
—Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Hudson v. Michigan, June 15, 2006.
An interactive map of botched SWAT and paramilitary police raids, released in conjunction with the Cato policy paper "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids," by Radley Balko.
More @ The CATO Institute
Sixty-eight years ago today, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower gave the final order for the allied invasion of Normandy. It was the eve of D-Day.
Among the Americans who fought to liberate France in the months ahead was 1st Lt. Billie Harris. CBS News went "On the Road," to tell Harris' story -- part mystery, part romance.
Peggy Harris of Vernon, Tex. never got a knock at the door, never got a telegram, never got anything definitive explaining what happened to her husband Billie during World War II. And so, in the absence of answers, she has remained dutiful to this day.
"Billie was married to me all of his life, and I choose to be married to him all of my life," Harris said.
Peggy and Billie got married just six weeks before he got shipped off to war. A fighter pilot -- his last mission was July 17, 1944 over Nazi-occupied northern France. He never returned from that mission.At first Billie he was reported as missing. Then he was reported as alive and coming home. Then Peggy got a letter saying actually he'd been killed and buried at one cemetery -- then another letter saying he was buried at a different cemetery. Then she was told maybe those aren't his remains at all.
I miss Charles Kuralt
As I often do when a significant story pops, I stated my position on the SCOTUS decision, then I looked inward to the III to see where we were as a group.
On this blog and elsewhere in our Community many, many folks were outraged by the decision.
The overwhelming majority of those who blog and comment in our Community take the position that voting will not make a difference, government has failed, the republic is dead, the Constitution either rendered impotent by our current politics or impotent by some grand design.
So, why the passion in the Community? Why the heat? One who is truly separated from a thing will rarely react with passion, especially if you look at the SCOTUS action as do I: It is simply one more in our long train of abuses.
I gave Roberts props for what I consider to be slick political manuevers that will have an impact for many years to come...if we have years to come. But intellectually I know that no matter what SCOTUS did, nothing would change. No decision on Thursday could have staved off our imminent Implosion. No decision would make anyone begin to respect the Constitutional boundaries of power. I still think if SCOTUS had killed ObamaCare outright, the Obama Administration was fully prepared to ignore the Court and execute the law. I can hear the President now: How many divisions does Roberts have? He has taken his decision, now let's see him enforce it.
But you folks who reacted with such intensity revealed something to me that I do find genuinely heartening: Most of you are still fond of the Constitution and the ideal that it offers. You may say differently at times. You may deny it.
But your emotion reveals that you want the Constitution to be respected, and you find those who ignore it, injure it, scoff at it, to be repugnant.
I like that.
A man does not get jealous when an ex-girlfriend gets a new boyfriend, if he is truly over her.
You're not over the Constitution.
Friday, June 29, 2012
The story disingenuously ends with this statement: "The finders and the landowner have said that they want the hoard to go to the island and be put on display for the people of Jersey to enjoy." They sound oh-so philanthropic and egalitarian. What the article doesn't mention is that they don't have any choice. Under the modern UK law, buried precious metal treasure troves do not belong to landowners or the finders--they belong to the government.=========
A massive hoard of Celtic coins worth millions of pounds has been found on the island of Jersey.
The hoard comprises 30,000 to 50,000 coins and is thought to have been buried to protect it from the advancing armies of Julius Caesar.
The coins were discovered in a farmer's field in the parish of Grouville in the east of the island by local metal detector enthusiasts Reg Mead and Richard Miles.
Mr Mead had been investigating the field for 30 years since he heard a report that coins scattered on the ground when a tree was uprooted.
The coins are thought to be worth between £100 and £200 each, giving a potential value of between £3 million and £10 million.
Jersey Heritage said the coins are in one solid mass weighing about three quarters of a tonne.
They are of Armorican origin (modern day Brittany and Normandy) from a tribe called the Coriosolitae, who were based around Rance in the area of modern-day St Malo and Dinan.
More @ The Independent
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
Abolitionist Hands Drenched in Blood:
“In the job of molding public opinion, [William Lloyd] Garrison needed help. The need of a platform personality to carry the cause directly to the people was answered, unsolicited, by Wendell Phillips. At a meeting in 1837, young Phillips rose from the audience, denounced the murderers of Elijah Lovejoy, the antislavery editor, of Alton, Illinois…..A Bostonian once reported that during a Phillips speech he had heard a man in the audience applauding, stamping his feet, and exclaiming enthusiastically, “The damned old liar! The damned old liar!
Phillips strove to foster a public opinion hostile to slaveholding…..Phillips battleground was the Northern mind. His eye was on the North, though his shots appeared to be aimed at the South. To arouse Northern awareness of danger, Phillips emphasized the political threat of the South by pointing to its wealth and its continued success in Washington.
For all practical purposes, Phillips said, the slave power was the South; there could be no other South until the North created one. The image of the South which Phillips labored to evoke in the Northern mind embodied deformities that were designed to call up repugnance, anger and fear. It violated the cherished ideals of the North. He conjured up a land of whipping posts and auction blocks, a feudal society in which newspapermen, politicians, and clergymen were vassals. “The South is the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.”
Phillips….often spoke of the possibility of armed rebellion in the South. “I can imagine the scenes of blood through which a rebellious slave-population must march to their rights.”
The agitator must continually intensify his attack if he is to maintain the appearance of vitality. With the years, Phillips grew more vitriolic. In 1853, surveying the achievements of the abolition movement, he said: “To startle the South to madness, so that every step she takes in her blindness, is one more step toward ruin, is much. This we have done.”
Nothing shows more clearly that Phillips had become a victim of his own program. By this time he could summarize his view of the South in one image: the South was “one great brothel where half a million women are flogged to prostitution, or, worse still, are degraded to believe it honorable.”
By the time of the [John Brown] Harpers Ferry incident, Phillips was able to say that Brown had more right to hang [Virginia] Governor Wise than the Governor had to hang Brown. As Phillips grew more outspoken, some of his listeners became indignant, and the abolitionists were forced to form bodyguards.”
(The South in Northern Eyes, 1831 to 1861, Howard R. Floan, McGraw-Hill, 1958, pp. 11-14)
Abolitionist Hands Drenched in Blood
Perhaps the biggest waste of Charles Koch's (and others') money by the beltwaytarians has been the Cato Institute's giving away of tens of thousands of little "pocket constitutions" over the past twenty years or so. Their strategy was apparently to get people to read them, and then somehow magically "force" the government to obey the document. Yesterday's majority opinion, written by the conniving little totalitarian left winger John Roberts, proves once again what I have been saying for years: Ever since 1865, Americans have lived under the "Hamiltonian constitution" whereby the document is used as a rubber stamp of approval for virtually anything the politicians in Washington can dream up. This is how government lawyers with lifetime tenure (our "black-robed deities") like John Roberts view their jobs. This was Alexander Hamilton's take on how the Constitution should be used. It eclipsed the Jeffersonian vision of a government "bound by the chains of the Constitution" many generations ago.
The beltwaytarians will never admit this, for to do so is to dispute the state's false version of the "Civil War" and its consequences, and they are far too politically correct to do so. It was Woodrow Wilson who, in his book, Constitutional Government in the United States (p. 178), celebrated the fact that the North's victory in the "Civil War" brought about the practice of the Supreme Court being the sole arbiter of the constitutionality of federal legislation. "The War between the States established . . . this principle, that the federal government is, through its courts, the final judge of its own powers," Wilson wrote.
The Jeffersonians never believed that a written constitution alone would be sufficient to restrain the tyrannical proclivities of the state. That's why Jefferson himself championed the rights of secession and nullification until his dying days. Read John C. Calhoun's Disquisition on Government if you are interested in an adult analysis of "constitutional government" and are not a cowardly beltway-area "libertarian" whose primary goal in life is to be "accepted" by the Washington establishment and the politically-correct totalitarian leftists in academe.
I have expressed my frustration with those who see some salvation in the supposed advancement of constitutional federalism in the ruling by Chief Justice Roberts and the four conservative dissenters that the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses did not justify forcing people into commerce.
Those rulings arguably were not essential to the decision. Once the Court (the Chief Justice and the four liberal Justices) found that the mandate was justified under the power of Congress to tax, the Court could have stopped right there, declined to address the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clause arguments, and the result would have been the same. Indeed, the four liberal Justices in the majority on the tax issue were in the dissent on the other issues.
The Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clause holdings may be deemed limited by some future composition of the Court to the unique facts of the Obamacare mandate, or worse, considered mere dicta, meaning opining by the Court which while informative is not binding on inferior or future Courts because not essential to the ruling.
Ilya Somin makes this point as well:
More @ Legal Insurrection
About 2,200 people flocked to the rolling hills of Pittsboro, N.C., last week for second annual Wild Goose Festival, held outdoors at the Shakori Hills Community Arts Center from June 21-24.
Inspired by the Greenbelt Festival in the United Kingdom and rooted in the Christian tradition, the event brought together activists, artists and believers for four days of creativity, social justice and theological discussion.
The "Wild Goose" is a Celtic metaphor that signifies the Holy Spirit. See a slideshow of the festivities below.
Footage of a Miami Beach police shooting was preserved when a witness hid his phone's memory card in his mouth.
An eyewitness to a fatal police shooting in Miami Beach last week claims police officers attempted to confiscate the video he filmed of the incident, and even crushed his phone underfoot in an attempt to destroy the recording.
Narces Benoit says he just happened to be in the area driving with his girlfriend when police fatally shot an erratic driver early Memorial Day morning.
He said after the disturbance started, he pulled over his truck, and started recording with his cell phone camera capturing the shooting.
"When he noticed me recording, one of the officers jumped in the truck, put a pistol to my head," he said. "My phone was smashed - he stepped on it, handcuffed me."
Juan Sanchez a detective with Miami Beach Police Department said he could not comment on how officers that night handled eyewitnesses who may have filmed the incident, because the matter could become the subject of an internal investigation or a civil lawsuit.
But Sanchez added that after the shooting, the site was an active crime scene and the police were looking for additional suspects.
Benoit's girlfriend, Ericka Davis, was also in the truck at the time.
"They handled us like we were criminals," she said. "The officer came over to the driver's side, on my left, and just put the gun to my head."
"They took everyone's phones and smashed them," she said.
Benoit says the only reason he still has the footage is because it was saved on a tiny memory card, which he removed and hid from the officers, despite being told to hand over his video.
"I took the chip out and put it in my mouth," he said, and kept it there the whole time he was interviewed by police at a nearby mobile command post.
More @ CNN
Amen.Let’s be clear: No one has a right to enter Chriscoe’s business in the first place. If he asks you to leave, then leave. Whether it’s because you’re black, because you’re wearing stupid sandals, or for no reason at all, what the owner says goes.
About two months ago I mentioned my disappointment that Raleigh, NC lacked Southern culture, only to be informed in the comment section that true sweet-tea-drinking Southerners don’t even consider the city to be part of the South. The longer I stay in this godforsaken place the better I understand why real Southerners share the sentiment.
Last week I couldn’t take a single step without hearing a television pundit cry about rampant racism in North Carolina. One would almost assume the Black Panthers and Aryan Brotherhood were fighting in the streets immediately outside the UNC campus. Turns out the only thing that happened is that businessman Todd Chriscoe didn’t let a black guy eat at his sports bar, a phenomenon I refer to as “private property, get over it.”
More @ Taki's
The following is excerpted from an article written by Kate Hicks at Townhall.com:
Over, and over, and over, President Obama assured us that this was not a tax. He was not raising taxes on the middle class (that’s what the Republicans were doing, remember?). Nope, . . you raised our taxes [and on the people who can’t afford it. You did it on the backs of the poor.] Politically, that’s going to prove troublesome for Obama this fall, and in a much more substantial way than having his “signature legislative accomplishment” overturned altogether.
For one, Roberts took away Obama’s ability to campaign against the Court. They upheld his law; he can’t do as he did after Citizens United and construe the ACA ruling as a massively political attack on the little guy and his uninsured plight. He has nothing to blame on the Justices. All they did was recharacterize the “penalty” as constitutional under the taxing power. Roberts robbed Obama of a scapegoat, and stuck Obama with an unpopular law in an election year. Ouch.
Second, Roberts has literally forced Obama to acknowledge that he broke a promise, and raised taxes. And tax increases don’t resonate well with the voters. Now, it’s doubtful Obama will assume responsibility for raising taxes – note that in his speech today, he didn’t acknowledge the Court’s reasoning for the ruling, only that they ruled in his favor. But the GOP has just added a major weapon to its arsenal: want to lower taxes? Then don’t reelect Obama.
This third observation is one that isn’t immediately evident, but nonetheless just as important as those prior two, if not more so. Roberts has made it substantially easier to repeal Obamacare and substantially harder to pass anything like it in the future. As noted above, Americans don’t like taxes. And thanks to the fact that many will opt to pay the tax rather than buy insurance (as that will cost less), the insurance problem in this country hasn’t been solved. The fact that we’ve settled the question of the mandate’s constitutionality means we can turn to the rest of the law, and address the flaws contained therein, and perhaps find a real solution to the healthcare crisis. As for future laws, Democrats lost the ability to hide behind “penalty” language. Roberts saw that the mandate waddled and quacked, and gave it the appropriate name. (He also forbade Congress from actually “mandating” anything, so that name isn’t even correct anymore.) The ACA barely passed the first time; future iterations of this theory are destined to fail, because Congress will have to stand up and say, “We propose to enact a new tax so as to influence your behavior.” If that isn’t the proverbial lead balloon, I don’t know what is.
So there you have it: it’s really not all bad. It’s not what we wanted, but then – as I suspect Obama will learn in the coming months – we must remember to be careful what we wish for.
Gov. Beverly Perdue announced today her intention to veto the General Assembly’s bipartisan $20.2 billion budget adjustment that invests in many key priorities after we refused several unreasonable demands to hike taxes by nearly a billion dollars, raid critical dollars for Medicaid, or use budgetary gimmicks that would result in a massive revenue shortfall for the next governor and General Assembly to address.
Gov. Perdue used apocalyptic language to explain her veto, and yet the difference between the dollars she demanded and what we budgeted is a fraction of one percent of the total budget. The fact that she would reject hundreds of millions in additional state funding for public schools and Medicaid, a cut to the state gas tax and a raise for teachers and state employees proves she’s more interested in winning a political battle than in doing what’s right. She turned her back on North Carolina’s children today, and I will work to override this irresponsible veto.
The governor’s desperate attempt to score political points with her liberal base will have real consequences if the House of Representatives cannot muster enough votes to override her veto. Should that happen, the two-year budget enacted last year will remain in place. The consequences of Perdue’s veto will be:
· $255 million in additional state funds will not go to public K-12 education. This includes $126.9 million to fill in the discretionary cut for the 2012-2013 fiscal year, $16.4 million in lottery funds, a $27 million education reform program to strengthen student literacy and improve graduation rates, and $85 million for a 1.2 percent raise for public school teachers.
· In addition to public school teachers, state employees will lose a 1.2 percent raise. This will be the fifth consecutive year they go without a salary increase. State retirees will lose a 1 percent cost of living adjustment increase.
· The state’s Medicaid program will run out of money during the fiscal year, causing doctors to go unpaid and patient care to suffer.
· Programs for needy families and the state’s at-risk population will not receive $900 million in federal block grants.
· The state’s gas tax will not be cut.
· North Carolina’s college students will lose $18.6 million in additional money for need-based scholarships and financial aid.
· Regional Economic Development Commissions will not receive the additional $1.3 million they need to continue to recruit new employers to North Carolina.
· More than a dozen state programs under continuation review – including UNC-TV and family courts – will not have their funding restored and will be eliminated.
· The Division of Employment Security will lose the ability to transfer $20 million to operate offices around the state, creating greater hardships for the unemployed.
· Tens of millions of dollars in mortgage settlement and Tennessee Valley Authority settlement funds will be left unspent.
· Dozens of state buildings, representing hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure investment, will either be closed or unable to open, including libraries, research facilities, and hospitals.
Given the potential consequences of her veto, it is clear Gov. Perdue knowingly turned her back on the children of our state and rejected a step towards a brighter future for all North Carolinians. Our state deserves better.
Senator Phil Berger
Raleigh, N.C. – Gov. Beverly Perdue today threatened to jeopardize North Carolina’s future financial stability by attempting to use tax over-collections and other one-time funds on recurring priorities. The unexpected increase in collections is largely the result of taxpayers failing to make adjustments to their estimated payments after the General Assembly passed a tax credit for job-creating businesses last year.
Below is a joint statement from Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) and House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg).
“Gov. Perdue is pulling a fast one on North Carolina. The truth is our state does not have an additional $117 million to spend now. The governor is using an accounting gimmick to spend next year’s money this year, which would create a massive revenue shortfall for the next governor and General Assembly to address. This is the equivalent of going on a spending spree with your credit card – it creates the illusion of prosperity in the short run, but you’re left with a huge bill when the interest payment comes due. This stunt may seem acceptable to a lame duck governor who won’t have to deal with the consequences of her actions, but we are committed to creating long-term solutions.”
MANY THANKS TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT: THE OBAMACARE DECISION
28 JUNE 2012
Many thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, indeed!
The editorials today are full of lamentations: “The Republic is destroyed!” “Supreme Court rules against the American People!” “Nullify ObamaCare now!”
And our phones in The League of the South office are ringing off the hook. Our e-mail is jammed with inquiries. It is as if a tsunami has stuck the people of the country—north, South, east, and west—and everyone suddenly realizes that the DC regime really is all powerful! And what they’ve been calling a free country is no such thing.
All we in The League can say is “Welcome to reality. We told you so. Now here’s your application to join us.”
As our first new member after the decision came down this morning wrote: “With the Obamacare decision, I can no longer pretend we live in a constitutional republic as envisioned by the founders. So, with the burden of pretending it is so (even with the evidence to the contrary) off my chest, I’ve applied for membership in the League of the South and have also submitted an additional donation.”
From the start, The League has called the regime in DC “an organized criminal enterprise.” We have been looking for ways to bring to the attention of the average citizen the fact that this “Union” is not worth the price we’re asked to pay. What we want people to understand is that secession and Southern independence (as well as independence for other historic regions) ought to be a viable option. If not secession and independence from DC, then what? Going down with the sinking ship? We don’t think so! Remember this: If you can’t leave, then you’re not free!
Today, the “conservative” Chief Justice, John Roberts, and four other Justices have given us a big helping hand! Now the mask is off the monster and everyone can see what we’re up against—a huge government, controlled by socialists and fascists, that consumes our rights and substance by defining the limits of its own power!
I’ll tell you what. You send to the League office your own personalized Thank You card (see our address below), with a note to Mr. Chief Justice Roberts, and be sure to include a crisp picture of that infamous Yankee General, U.S. Grant, and I will personally see that:
1. Your card is forwarded to the SCOTUS for his attention;
2. You will received 10 copies of our Free Magnolia tabloid for recruiting purposes;
3. You will receive 10 applications for membership for like-minded friends, and;
4. You will be enrolled as a League member in good standing for the next 12 months.
Your task will be to tell ten friends: “Look, instead of just complaining, how about you support the one organization that can bring a real, viable solution to the table: Southern Nationalism, Secession, and Independence! You will be putting your money where your mouth is. Here’s an application, and this is something positive and proactive you can do to change our future and get us out from under the tyrants in DC. I’ve joined and I think you should, too.”
Relieved of the burden of pretense, let us now move forward toward a future of liberty and prosperity in a free and independent South!
Michael Hill, President
League of the South, P.O. Box 760, Killen, Alabama 3564
11 Months, 3000 pictures and a lot of coffee.
Then I realised it'd be quite cool to make it an animation. found some suitable music, rekindled my ancient knowledge of Premiere, storyboarded it, shot it as I worked on the engine (my poor DSLR got covered in engine oil), this was the result.
The music is "In The Hall Of The Mountain King" from Edvard Griegs "Peer Gynt Suite"
I own a suitable license for this piece of music, supplied by Chris Worth Productions
Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare’s health insurance mandate is in fact a tax levied on those who do not purchase insurance, Senate Republicans will look to repeal the full law through the budget reconciliation process.
Reconciliation was used to push Obamacare through the Senate in 2009. Generally reserved strictly for budget-related measures, it eliminates the possibility of a filibuster, meaning Republicans would only need 51 votes to repeal that portion of the law – or even the full law itself.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) seemed open to that approach during a speech at The Heritage Foundation shortly after the Supreme Court handed down its decision. The court’s ruling “does present some options for us” to pursue more unconventional options for repeal, DeMint said. He mentioned reconciliation as a potential avenue.
A senior Senate Republican aide involved in the repeal effort later confirmed to Scribe that the GOP will use the budget reconciliation process in an attempt to repeal the full law, not just the portion requiring all Americans purchase health insurance.
While a repeal effort via reconciliation would only require a majority of senators to pass, Republicans will likely wait until next year to employ the tactic.
Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said he expects Republicans to use reconciliation in the repeal effort during the 113th Congress. Kyl is not running for reelection.
Mike Franc, Heritage’s Vice President of Government Studies, explained the details of reconciliation’s applicability thusly:
More @ The Foundry
Just a quickie post to debunk an argument that we’re already seeing in threads and e-mails: Namely, doesn’t Article I, section 7 of the Constitution say that all bills that raise revenue must originate in the House? And didn’t ObamaCare pass the Senate before it passed the House? And doesn’t that in turn mean that our nifty new health care “tax” was passed according to unconstitutional procedures?
Unless I’m missing something, no. The bill that passed the Senate wasn’t technically a Senate bill. Reid took a bill that had already passed the House, stripped out the provisions to turn it into a “shell bill,” and then inserted the text of ObamaCare to get around this requirement. The bill that passed the Senate was H.R.3590, which initially had to do with tax breaks for military homeowners. And yes, they’ve used the “shell bill” strategy before. In fact, the conservative opinion today specifically mentioned Article I, section 7 at one point while raising no objection to Reid’s sleight of hand. Quote:
Let me explain.
First, the ambiguity of federal HIPAA legislation was already a problem for parental rights. It is an open door that lets states infringe a parent’s fundamental liberty to make informed medical decisions for their child. Under the health care law, this gap is only going to get worse.
Second, the health care bill allows the government to spend millions on home visitation programs in which government officials enter your home to monitor and instruct how you raise your kids.
Third, the decision has made explicit a disturbing legal doctrine long implicit in the Supreme Court: that Congress has unlimited power to tax for any purpose, even beyond its enumerated powers. This provides one more tool the government can use to control what happens in your home.
Whether it's been Constitutional or not has not mattered to our elected. I think it might have been Lew Rockwell who said "our federal government now is but one political body with two heads". Any new party would just be bought-off likewise, and just become another head. Liberty is embellished in the mind and soul, not in a political banner.
You've fought federal gun control, federal education, the unlawful income tax and the 16th Amendment, federal land grabs, state national guards in undeclared conflicts, abortion, Social Security, Federal Reserve, United Nations treaties, and many, many more liberty-robbing oppressions from Washington too numerous to mention. And now we've got federal health care to zap us again for more energy drain.
If "only congress shall make laws" why is it we have permitted congress, the Supreme Court and Executive Branches, and not to be left out, our hundreds of federal agencies to make their own rules ("statutes")? You know the answer to that question. Because they were bought out from under us. Washington is corrupted through and through in every fiber by a Corporatist state.
If you remain a 'single issue patriot' , we're not going to make it. Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda won't cut it as an afterthought. Look at the big picture by avoiding societal conflicts engineered by Washington.
Please join our golf tournament!
We desperately need to raise funds for the restoration and preservation of this wonderful piece of history and its artifacts.
Lots of items donated from family collections need to be preserved.
If you cannot come...please consider making a donation. None to big or too small!
We are a 501(c)3 organization and your donation is tax deductible!
Enter a team ... Sponsor a hole...Become an Event Sponsor
$60/player & $200/team
Singles welcome & will be paired
Format - 4 Person/Captains Choice
Contest Prizes for Longest Drive & Closest to Pins
Exciting Events/Door Prizes & 50/50 Raffle
Visit The Historic Vance House FaceBook page.
Please email NC_rebel@msn.com or send a private message for details or for registration packet/mailing address.
Thank you for helping us to preserve our history for generation to come!
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Google sent out an email to Google Adwords customers saying that they are going to pull all Google Shopping results for guns, ammunition, gun optics and gun accessories (Shopping results, not general search results).
More @ The Firearm Blog
I hate to disagree with Rick Oliver, but I think he is too optimistic about John Roberts. What Roberts' decision today tells us is that he is unlikely to ever cast a decisive vote against the consensus of the Washington elite. This means that the Roberts court will never overturn Roe v. Wade, because such a decision would create even more controversy than overturning Obamacare would have. And it also means that Roberts is unlikely to resist the strong political pressure that exists in elite circles to create a constitutional right to gay marriage.
Do I hear echoes of children sacrificed to the god Moloch in Tophet? "Tophet" is the term used to describe the place where children were sacrificed and burned to Moloch. It is said that loud drums were beat to drown out the cries. It is this concept that is used to describe a sort of hell, or divine judgment in Isaiah 30:33 (hold your cursor on the reference to read the verse).
Something like 54-55 million babies (is that "just a statistic", yet, Mr. Stalin?) have been killed since the Roe v Wade decision.
Do you understand?
No, really. Do you understand?
In the Holocaust, six million or so Jews were purported to have been killed.
The American Holocaust is over nine times as big. No memorials.
If every citizen in Israel died right now...
...Our American Holocaust is seven times larger. No tears.
If every Jew on the face of the earth died right now...
OUR AMERICAN HOLOCAUST IS FOUR TIMES LARGER. No memorial tours of the places of execution.
And many people claim it is a "right".
After all, it's legal. And we wouldn't want people to have to act as if actions have consequences, or as if there's anything outside of the self.
It is understandable why President Obama has no interest in framing this election as a referendum on Obamacare. His party already suffered perhaps its worst defeat since the 19th century thanks to his centerpiece legislation. With the Supreme Court’s ruling now behind him, he will have even less incentive to remind voters about Obamacare going forward. As far as he’s concerned, the less the American people think about it, the better.
More @ The Weekly Standard