Many of us undoubtedly knew by yesterday that Twinkies© are on the cusp of extinction (is nothing sacred anymore!?)

Occupy Wall Street should be rejoicing. They want to “end corporate greed” and, yesterday, they ended it. It was only a one source of corporate greed among many, but I’m sure there will be more successes in spreading virtue (and poverty) in the near future. Reuters reports that Hostess Brands is going bankrupt. This is not the “let’s reschedule our payments” kind of bankruptcy, but the “sell every piece of hardware we have to whoever will bid for it” kind of bankruptcy.

So the corporate greed of Hostess Brands is now ending. No longer will they want to make money. No longer will they heartlessly buy ingredients at the lowest price they can get to make sugar snacks and white bread at a price point where consumers will buy them. No longer will they fight with their unionized workers to get them to accept lower pay or lower benefits.

Yes, here’s that link again.

Let’s read it all

This disaster shows that saying there is no more “greed” is another way of saying there is no longer anything to attract a profit motive. Which is another way of saying, consumers will have to go elsewhere to get what they want. Unjustifiable pensions and other burdens have led to the point that the company can no longer make a profit. As a result, there is no Hostess Brands to hire people or buy from suppliers to provide bread to consumers. Are the unionized workers better off now?

What people need to understand is that this is not just something that happened due to union greed and stupidity. This is also our current administration’s plan. The reason we had an auto bailout is that GM had become virtually a healthcare provider that made a few automobiles for sale. And GM and others are undoubtedly going to do it all over again—only to be bailed out again. That is how the totalitarians want it. They want corporations to be arms of the welfare state. Bailing out companies that go bankrupt from bestowing benefits means that the taxpayers are the ones bestowing benefits. It is just Blackwater for the welfare state—handing out freebies in Detroit rather than shooting people in Iraq.

The state wants a few giant corporations that can be controlled and that can do social experiments to pave the way for “gay” “marriage” benefits and other politically correct dreams. This gives us a few token CEOs to go about the country styling as capitalists who can publicly promote higher taxes or other things as ways to make “the wealthy pay their fair share.” But these things will never hurt them because they are in a protected club. Since the state is currently at war with calories, Hostess Brand is not welcome into that club.

What about those more than eighteen thousand workers who are now facing unemployment? That too is a win for the government. They will now be able to pose as the rescuers, putting new families on welfare and boasting about how they are helping these people. In a great economy this might not work. But we are living in the new normal and, as Rahm Emanuel said, the government never wants to let an emergency go to waste.

Obamacare is a great example of how the government “outsources” welfare to corporations but is happy to take direct control over it when it can. Some see Obamacare (not without reason) as a huge piece of corporate welfare to insurance companies, forcing us all to sign up with them, and helping the big companies gobble up the small ones. Others see Obamacare as designed to make private healthcare untenable so that we are forced to become directly dependent on government—a “single-payer system” as all the cool people call socialized medicine.

Either way, the state wins and consumers lose. Doing without Twinkies will be easy. Much more important products of “corporate greed” will soon also be disappearing.

That, friends, is spot-on.

Then there’s the aforementioned Obamamath.

From Godfather Politics…

Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter is in trouble with the Left because, like several business owners since the re-election of the Man Who Would Be King, he has said he must reduce employee hours and possibly lay off workers to deal with the costs of Obamacare and the increasing number of regulations coming out of the Obama Administration.

The Left’s knee-jerk response has been to call for a boycott because Schnatter is wealthy and therefore he should just absorb any increase costs. Or the other analysis floating around the leftist blogs and places like Forbes is that Obamacare would only mean an increase of 14 cents per pizza, therefore Schnatter is just being evil, conservative and political.

Schnatter has said Obamacare could cost up to $8 million per year. The Left’s argument goes that $8 million is just a “drop in the bucket” for a company with total operating expenses of $1.131 billion last year.

A little analysis of the numbers published by Forbes, however, reveals a slightly different picture.

Papa John’s had total revenue of $1.218 billion last year, according to Forbes. That means a total profit of $87 million. Sounds pretty good, right?

According to Forbes, Papa John’s has more than 4,000 stores worldwide. Divide that $87 million by 4,000 and you get a per-store average profit of only $21,750.

Now, assuming Obamacare only applies to U.S. stores, then if we knew Papa John’s total U.S. stores (which Forbes doesn’t mention), we should be able to figure out per-store additional cost to U.S. franchisees.

Just for the sake of argument, let’s guess that half the franchises are in the U.S. Let’s also assume the upper estimate of $8 million by Schnatter is correct, then that would be an additional $4,000 cost per store on average, bringing average per-store profit annually down to $17,750.

I’m not familiar with all the ins and outs of owning a franchise, but I assume that $17,750 profit gets divided between Papa Schnatter, shareholders and the actual franchise owner.

That’s not enough money to feed a family, and that’s why Obamacare hurts small businesses and the middle class.

That’s what the Left doesn’t get. And that’s why re-electing Obama is going to kill this country.

Amen!

Well, I certainly hope that all those stupid, stupid people who helped to reelect Obama are pleased with themselves and that they don’t have the collossal moxi to complain when the fruits of their applied mulletheadedness come back around to bite them where the moon doesn’t shine.

Let’s see, now, where to begin.

How about here?

A Las Vegas business owner with 114 employees fired 22 workers today, apparently as a direct result of President Obama’s re-election.

“David” (he asked to remain anonymous for obvious reasons) told Host Kevin Wall on 100.5 KXNT that “elections have consequences” and that “at the end of the day, I need to survive.”

Here’s an excerpt from the interview. Click the audio tab below to hear even more from this compelling conversation:

“I’ve done my share of educating my employees. I never tell them which way to vote. I believe in the free system we have, I believe in the right to choose who they want to be president, but I did explain as a business owner that I have always put my employees first. I always made sure that when I went without a paycheck that [I] made sure they were paid. And I explained that I always put them first and unfortunately I’m at a point where I’m being forced to have to worry about me and my family now and a business that I built from just me to 114 employees.

“I explained to them a month ago that if Obama gets in office that the regulations for Obamacare are gonna hurt our business, and I’m gonna have to make provisions to make sure I have enough money to cover the payroll taxes, the additional health care I’m gonna have to do, and I explained that to them and I said you do what you feel like in your heart you need to do, but I’m just letting you know as a warning this is things I have to think of as a business owner.

“Well unfortunately, and most of my employees are Hispanic — I’m not gonna go into what kind of company I have, but I have mostly Hispanic employees — well unfortunately we know what happened and I can’t wait around anymore, I have to be proactive. I had to lay off 22 people today to make sure that my business is gonna thrive and I’m gonna be around for years to come. I have to build up that nest egg now for the taxes and regulations that are coming my way. Elections do have consequences, but so do choices. A choice you make every day has consequences and you know what, I’ve always put my employees first, but unfortunately today I have to put me and my family first, and you watch what’s gonna happen. I’m just one guy with 114 employees — well was 114 employees — watch what happens in the next six months. The Dow alone lost 314 points today. There’s a tsunami coming and if you didn’t think this election had consequences, just wait.”

As the employer says, his is just one small company…

And from Michelle Malkin

President Obama promises to move the country forward with his recycled pledge of five million green jobs. But in the real world, small businesses are struggling to stay afloat as they deal with the fiscal wreckage of this administration’s disastrous venture socialism. Here’s the tale of just one Colorado company victimized by the Obama Department of Energy (DOE).

Colorado Distribution Group is a privately held storage and shipping company based in Denver. Thanks to hope-a-nomics, its warehouse is saddled with nearly 7,000 pallets of federally subsidized solar panels (one-third of which are completely spoiled and unsalable), along with related detritus such as broken glass and stray module parts.

While $22,000/month in storage costs go unpaid, the panels consume up to a third of the company’s warehouse space. Legal costs have forced CDG to slash payroll and lay off at least three employees. A source with knowledge of CDG’s woes told me this week the company is facing pressure by the Department of Energy to drop its petition to recoup those costs. The feds want CDG to swallow a $1.4 million tab to dispose of the bum solar panels.

In July, according to Dow Jones, CDG asked a Delaware bankruptcy court “for permission either to sell or collect rent on the property Abound Solar Inc. has at its facility, saying the situation is threatening its ability to stay in business.” Like many private enterprises in the Age of Obama’s Brass-Knuckled Politics of Revenge, fear of retribution holds back many from coming forward publicly about such attempted shakedowns.

CDG serves industries ranging from automotive to food and beverage, electronic, medical, furniture, clothing, sporting goods and telecommunications. Founded in 2005, CDG handles distribution, fulfillment, transportation, logistics and inventory management using a high-tech data system. For the past three years, the company warehoused solar panels manufactured by Fort Collins-based Abound Solar.

Yes, Abound Solar. Also known as: Colorado’s own Solyndra.

In June, less than a year after fellow Obama green boondoggle Solyndra went belly up, Abound filed for bankruptcy. As I reported in March, the financial outlook of the $400 million DOE loan guarantee recipient was based on false hope and imaginary change. Obama’s envirocrats ignored bright red flags from Fitch Ratings about Abound’s substandard technology and failures to meet basic efficiency targets.

Abound borrowed $70 million against its $400 million Obama DOE loan guarantee; taxpayers will lose up to $60 million on the loan after the bankruptcy proceedings are complete. Nearly 125 Abound Solar employees lost their jobs. Screwed-over companies like CDG that did business with Abound are not alone. At least one other warehouse in Colorado is storing the costly panels. And an untold number of related contractors and businesses have been stiffed. “I did a lot of machining for Abound,” one business owner told me this summer, “and they went under owing me a fair amount.”

Recently released internal documents show that customers demanded replacements for the panels after experiencing “low performance,” “under performance” and “catastrophic failures.” Credit and technical advisers at DOE complained about having “major issues” with the Abound Solar deal and expressed concern over the “transaction pressure under which we are all now operating.” The documents fly in the face of Obama’s denial — just days before Election Day — that his White House played any role in this fiscal disaster.

The investigative work of Colorado’s Todd Shepherd at CompleteColorado.com, Amy Oliver at the Independence Institute and Michael Sandoval now of the Heritage Foundation exposed Abound’s crony ties to the Obama administration. Like Solyndra, Abound had a deep-pocketed bundler with ties to the White House. Progressive activist and billionaire heiress Pat Stryker, a repeat visitor to the Obama White House, owns an investment firm that invested considerably in Abound and donated nearly $500 million to the Democrats between 2008 and 2012.

Criminal and civil probes into Abound Solar’s alleged malfeasance — there are reports that the firm knowingly sold faulty goods — have been launched in both Colorado and on Capitol Hill. The stench of pay-for-play abounds. While Obama giddily promises his cronies and sycophants that “the best is yet to come,” small-business owners are fighting for their lives. Where’s their “fair share”?

And in the tax arena…

The Congressional Budget Office officially reported on Wednesday that the federal budget deficit in fiscal 2012 (which ended on Sept. 30) topped a trillion dollars for the fourth straight year even though federal taxes paid by individuals increased by 4 percent during the year and federal income taxes paid by corporation increased by about 34 percent.

The increase in corporate federal income tax payments was largely due to changes in the tax rules that corporations were required to follow.

“The federal government incurred a budget deficit of $1.1 trillion in fiscal year 2012, the fourth consecutive year with a deficit above $1.0 trillion,” said the CBO.

“Revenues from all major sources increased in 2012,” CBO reported. “Corporate income taxes accounted for about 40 percent of the increase in total revenues, rising by $61 billion (or 34 percent) and increasing from 1.2 percent to 1.6 percent of GDP. The growth in corporate receipts resulted largely from changes in tax rules in recent years, particularly those that dictate how quickly firms may deduct the cost of their investments in equipment.”

Individuals also paid more taxes in 2012, according to CBO. “Receipts from individual income taxes grew by $41 billion (or 4 percent), and remained at 7.3 percent of GDP in 2012. More than half of the increase came from withheld taxes, which rose by $27 billion (or3 percent).”

At the same time, defense spending declined in 2012. “Defense outlays fell by $19 billion (or 3 percent) in 2012 after rising at an average annual rate of 6 percent over the past five years. Most ($17 billion) of that decline was attributable to the reduction in the number of U.S. Army personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq. Defense spending was 4.2 percent of GDP, down from 4.5 percent in 2011.”

At the same time corporate income taxes were increasing by about 34 percent, economic growth was lagging. In the fourth quarter of 2011, real GDP grew at 4.1 percent, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. But in the first three quarters of 2012, it grew by 2.0 percent, 1.3 percent and 2.0 percent.

The national unemployment rate in October was 7.9 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In January 2009, when President Barack Obama was inaugurated to his first term, it was 7.8 percent.

When calculated as a share of GDP, the last four fiscal years have seen the four highest deficits since the end of World War II in fiscal 1946. (Prior to 1974, federal fiscal years ran from July 1 to June 30.)

“As a share of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP), the deficit declined—from

8.7 percent in 2011 to 7.0 percent in 2012—but it was still the fourth highest as a share of GDP since 1946,” said CBO.

And…AHEM!…On the Second Amendment front…

The United Nations Small Arms Treaty passed in its second session. The Media was silent over its passage.
According to the UN’s press release,

Concluding its two-week session today, the second United Nations conference to review the 2001 Programme of Action on trafficking in small arms and light weapons adopted a consensus outcome document that highlighted the international community’s renewed commitment to preventing, combating and eradicating the illicit trade.

The document’s adoption represented a major achievement for delegations, who had failed to agree on a final outcome at the first review conference, held in 2006. “We accomplished something great today,” said U. Joy Ogwu ( Nigeria), President of the Conference, formally known as the United Nations Conference to Review Progress Made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects.

According to the text, Member States renewed their pledge to rid the world of the scourge brought upon it by the illicit manufacture, transfer and circulation of small arms and light weapons, and their excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread in many parts of the world. They also committed to mobilizing the necessary political will and resources to implement the Programme of Action and the International Tracing Instrument, with the aim of achieving clear and tangible results over the next six years, through 2018.

Further by the text, States emphasized that the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons continued to sustain conflicts, exacerbate armed violence, undermine respect for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, aid terrorism and illegal armed groups, and facilitate increasing levels of transnational organized crime, as well as trafficking in humans, drugs and certain natural resources.

Ahhh yes, the cries of terrorism and drugs and boogey men for the passage of the treaty. This comes from member nations who knowingly promote these kinds of things. Even the United States is now in the midst of a scandal involving gunwalking, known as Fast and Furious, and at least one man arrested has come forward and said that Fast and Furious was all about arming drug cartels in Mexico, never about tracking them.

All countries signed the declaration and further documentation can be found here.

Read the entire article and, if you cherish the rights given us by the Second Amendment, understand that what is happening in the U.N. Smallarms Treaty talks is the Obama Administration conspiring — yeah, that’s exactly the right word, conspiring — with that incompetent, blundering, corrupt international agency… to allow them to reach into our homes and gun cabinets and take away our right to keep and bear what they find in them.

The language used purports to be concerned solely with criminals and terrorists, but the reality is that once they’ve got us on this “slippery slope”, the abounding interpretations will favor the far left, those people who would prefer that the government holds all weapons, effectively controlling the rest of us. Every liberal agenda begins with this same kind of language and ends with extremities we certainly wouldn’t have countenanced had we known where it all was really heading.

Thanks again to all the anti-America, politically ignorant/reality challenged and all others who have now given Obama a “mandate” to continue bringing this great country down the road to ruin…

Yes, Obama has another four years as Saboteur President of the United States.

Knowing that the Democrats have a track record for monkeying around with elections, everything from registering their dogs and dead relatives to vote to pushing for illegal aliens’ voting rights (just don’t make it mandatory for the people manning the polls to check ID, etc), there will always be those stories about the rigged voting booths where Romney-Ryan votes somehow came out marking the Obama-Biden column, and stories like this one.

Forest Park is a city of about 19,000 residents in the northern suburbs of Cincinnati, Ohio, in Hamilton County. In 2008, Hamilton County voted for Barack Obama while most of the surrounding counties in Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana voted Republican.

With so many eyes on Ohio in yesterday’s election, it was no surprise to see this news story on the local news.

A couple from Forest Park showed up yesterday at the polls to vote just like they have ever since they turned 18. When it was their turn, they were both told that they had already voted via absentee ballot. The couple said that they have never voted absentee and wanted to know how this could happen.

Precinct officials told them that they could fill out a provisional ballot, which they did.

Before long, a number of other voters in the same precinct were told the same thing, that they had already voted via absentee ballots and that they also needed to fill out a provisional ballot. Eventually, voting officials said that the mistake was due to ‘human error’ and that anyone else in the same situation would likewise have to cast a provisional ballot. In Ohio, provisional ballots are not counted until 10 days after the election.

Be that as it may, of course, there won’t be any further investigation of such events as any kind of official matter, there never is when the Democrats profit from anything.

That said, there was an article in today’s inbox that is pretty on-point where discussing the future of our country is concerned based on a historical observation, and that is here.

We’ve reached the tipping point, folks. This election was the last hope for the American republic. We are now brazenly running toward Greece. How that will manifest in the coming years remains to be seen. We will certainly see our healthcare quality crumble, while costs soar–which has already begun; we will see spending continue to skyrocket; we will see entitlement programs expand, and we will see our country fall.

This reminds me of something Professor Alexander Tyler wrote in 1787. Tyler was a Scottish lawyer and writer. He came up with what I refer to as The Seven Steps of Democracy. Each step follows a sequence that begins with bondage and ultimately ends right back where it started.

Frightening, but applicable:

1. From Bondage to spiritual faith: The English colonists of the United States felt they were being oppressed, and began to inspire a spiritual and political awakening.

2. From spiritual faith to great courage: The religiously and politically oppressed colonists finally decided to rebel against England and take their independence.

3. From courage to liberty: The courage to start a rebellion led to a revolution against England, and ultimately a victory.

4. From liberty to abundance: After victory, we grew as a nation. We experienced an industrial revolution, and soon our country sat in abundance.

5. From abundance to complacency: As a country, we became complacent in our wealth and comfort.

6. From complacency to apathy: Following that, we began to lose our ability to care about what happened in the country, particularly in politics. We began to accept larger government in our lives, without much thought as to how it would later effect us.

7. From apathy to dependence: As the government grew, we began to rely on the government to take care of us and provide for us. We began to rely on social security, welfare, food-stamps, and other programs.

8. From dependence back into bondage: Out of this growing dependency, we will fall farther and farther down the rabbit hole, and find ourselves in Greece. Financial collapse, riots, social decline, and ultimately bondage. Then we are back where we started.

Right back where we started from?

Not!

More like this!

Unfortunately, with the dialogue of communist style totalitarianism having been introduced into the mix and seemingly riding like a pilot fish alongside today’s Democrats as the remora does beside the shark, what we considered unacceptable on the part of the British back in colonial times might just be a drop in the bucket compared to what could well lay in store for us.

A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

Now THAT sounds like an Obama style future, and should we reach that juncture, we can rightfully blame every last ignorant soul that voted to reelect this president even after they had four years’ worth of opportunity to see the lies, the disregard for the Constitution and the contempt for everything else American.

I mean, I mean, are we going to have to go through something like this to get things right again?

These reports really grabbed my attention.

From World Net Daily:

Dozens of people have already been arrested over the weekend for kneeling and praying in front of the White House.

ActsFive29, a group of like-minded, pro-life defenders launched the D.C. prayer rally knowing their members could indeed be arrested, but asserting it’s worth it, because, “The future of religious freedom in America is at risk.”

been arrested… for… praying in front of the White House.

…knowing their members could indeed be arrested…

Is this America, or is it a communist country or, for that matter, a Muslim country, where Christians know they can be arrested for praying?

Or is this Obama’s America?

How does this grab you?

A retired Army chaplain says homosexual sailors have been able to choose their bunkmates on board Navy ships as a consequence of the repeal of the ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military.

Col. Ron Crews (USA-Ret.) served as an Army chaplain for 28 years and now serves as a spokesman for the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. When asked by The Washington Times to write an op-ed on the consequences of the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” he was quick to point out that “toleration does not cut both ways.”

“The Department of Defense is continually bringing forth homosexual soldiers and military personnel to do press conferences and talk about how wonderful it is,” Col. Crews notes. “And then they allow military personnel to march in a gay pride parade in San Diego. But yet those who hold biblical values are silenced.”

The Chaplain Alliance spokesman adds that homosexuals are now demanding and receiving special privileges in the military, including one egregious example aboard Navy ships.

From a Washington Times article linked in the above report:

The American armed forces exist to defend our nation, not to conduct social science lab experiments in which our troops serve as human subjects. Try telling that to this administration.

The first anniversary of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Sept. 20, has come and gone. Now, there is mounting evidence that proves our warnings were not idle chatter. The threat to freedom posed by this radical sexual experiment on our military is real: It is grave and it is growing.

Activists inside and outside our government who pushed the repeal have deployed a smoke screen around the fact that once the military was forced to exalt homosexuality in the ranks, the all-too-foreseen consequence reared its ugly head.

Senior military officials have allowed personnel in favor of repeal to speak to media while those who have concerns have been ordered to be silent. Two airmen were publicly harassed in a Post Exchange food court as they were privately discussing their concerns about the impact of repeal. A chaplain was encouraged by military officials to resign his commission unless he could “get in line with the new policy,” demonstrating no tolerance for that chaplain’s religious viewpoint. Another chaplain was threatened with early retirement, and then reassigned to be more “closely supervised” because he had expressed concerns with the policy change, again demonstrating no tolerance for that chaplain’s religious viewpoint.

At an officer training service school, a male serviceman sexually harassed another male serviceman through text messages, emails, phone calls and in-person confrontations. The harassing male insisted the two would “make a great couple.” The harassed serviceman reported the harassment, but the command failed to take disciplinary action.

Service members engaged in homosexual behavior protested a service school’s open-door policy for all students that prohibited the closing of room doors for the purpose of hiding sexual behavior. The protesters claimed that they had a right to participate in sexual behavior with their same-sex roommates.

A senior chaplain was stripped of his authority over the chapel under his charge because, in accordance with federal law, he proclaimed the chapel to be a “sacred space” where marriage ceremonies would only be between one man and one woman.

The Navy has allowed sailors openly engaged in homosexual behavior to choose their bunkmates. Imagine in this new age of “tolerance” if a sailor asked to be moved from a close-quarters berthing area because of his concern about another sailor’s sexual appetites. We already know what would happen, because tolerance has never been a two-way street.

Obviously, the recent “study” (aka propaganda) claiming that the repeal went off without a hitch should be shredded post-haste. It has no connection to reality.

This is just the first wave in the first year of the assault on the constitutionally protected freedom of our service members. Remember, the groups that forced their sexual experiment on the armed forces represent the lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and transgender community. It’s only a matter of time before a man who claims to be transgender demands to be placed with women during training, in the showers and in the barracks. The women in the units will have no recourse, especially if their objection to living, changing, bathing and bunking with a man is based on sincerely held religious beliefs. They would have two choices: Either accept this outrageous imposition silently or be charged with bigotry, hatred, intolerance and every other name the advocates of this agenda can throw at them. Neither choice is acceptable. When “sensitivity training” is in full force, these women just might face discipline and punitive separation merely for speaking up and requesting a reasonable measure of privacy and protection of their religious freedom.

Yes, friends, welcome to Obama’s America…

It seems that no matter what we do, what we expect, how we vote, who gets on the Supreme Court… no matter what, the liberals continue pressing onward toward the day they and their agendas sound a final death knell for America as it was intended to be by our founding fathers and for our beloved Constitution.

Their latest victory comes courtesy of the Court.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the insurance mandate in President Obama’s healthcare law, a stinging defeat for conservatives who had insisted the law is unconstitutional.

The decision vindicates Obama and congressional Democrats, who maintained throughout the legal challenge that even this court, with its conservative majority, would have to break with decades of precedent to overturn the healthcare law.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court in the 5-4 decision on the mandate, ruling that Congress has the authority to enforce the healthcare law’s individual mandate, which will require most U.S. taxpayers to buy insurance or pay a penalty.

The emphasis in the last paragraph is mine (unbelievable!).

SNIP!

Roberts tacitly acknowledged the passionate opposition to the healthcare law, but he said policy decisions belong to the elected branches of government, not the court.

“It is not our job to save the people from the consequences of their political decisions,” he said.

The decision allows Roberts — whose legacy will depend in large part on this case — to avoid the severe repercussions that both sides of the case had feared. The court did not strike down the signature domestic achievement of a sitting president, nor did it give its approval to an expansion of Congress’s powers to regulate commerce.

House Republicans, in reaction, announced they would vote on repealing the full law on July 11.

Roberts joined liberals on the court in upholding the mandate at the heart of the underlying law. Obama voted against Roberts’s nomination in 2005 as an Illinois senator, but 22 Democrats backed the chief justice, including Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Not one Republican voted against Roberts, who was nominated by former President George W. Bush.

More emphasis by yours truly, there.

So.

We will attempt to be “mature” about this, though inside we’re kind of angry and not a little amazed, because it does feel just a little, given that Justice Roberts took the lead on what is certainly a travesty, like betrayal.

After all, we don’t want to be Obamalike (with his tantrumesque reaction to the Court’s ruling on the Arizona immigration law, in which he simply ordered his enforcement agencies to ignore the ruling). What we will do is bide our time — if there’s even an iota of justice drifting around somewhere in the universe, Obama will be voted out in November, along with all his Bolsheviks and other corrupt minions and the newly elected president can get with Congress and try to make a few adjustments.

After all, as Justice Roberts put it: …policy decisions belong to the elected branches of government, not the court.

“It is not our job to save the people from the consequences of their political decisions,”

Having said that, the only thing I can say is by way of reprising the title of this post.

What can you do, right?

*********UPDATE*********

On another note, of course, there’s this.

‘Incredible Irony’: Court Has ‘Declared Obama to Be a Monumental Liar’

(CNSNews.com) - “The incredible irony here is that in upholding Obamacare, Roberts et. al. have formally also declared Obama to be a monumental liar,” said L. Brent Bozell III, president of the conservative Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com. “And in the most bizarre twist of them all, they upheld the lie by declaring this to be a tax.

“Conservatives — Republicans — can now campaign on the line of attack that a) this is the greatest expansion of power in history; b) this is the greatest tax increase in history; and c) this is the greatest presidential deception in history.

“From now til Election Day the GOP should simply run clips of Obama insisting this wasn’t a tax,” Bozell said.

NOT a tax, Obama insisted in 2009

Wellll, we already knew Obama’s a liar, but still….

The Left: If it moves, regulate it. If it doesn’t move, regulate it anyway. Control, micromanage, apply every dollar of taxpayer funds available (or not, just keep the spending going!)

There’s an informative Op-Ed in today’s Washington Times on-line by Representative Jeb Hensarling (R, Texas) about the Dodd Frank Act and what it means in the Real World as opposed to the one occupied by today’s Democrats and their liberal mentors.

The news of J.P. Morgan Chase’s recent trading loss has raised the cry of “I told you so” from proponents of the almost 2-year-old Dodd-Frank Act. They say the law’s Volcker rule would have prevented such a loss and that without more regulation, financial institutions will continue to make poor investment decisions.

As an opponent of Dodd-Frank and one of many who have warned against the politicization of our economy, the threat of future bailouts and attempts by the government to eliminaterisks, I also wish to say, “I told you so.”

Within Dodd-Frank’s 2,300 pages are provisions allowing the government to designate certain financial firms “systemically important financial institutions” - otherwise known as “too big to fail” (TBTF). The law then empowers the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) to seize a troubled TBTF firm for the purpose of winding it down. In doing so, the FDIC can borrow up to the book value of the institution from taxpayers, an amount that could be astounding, as Bank of America, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan are all $2 trillion institutions.

Because private financial firms such as J.P. Morgan inevitably will blunder regardless of their size or sophistication, designating any firm TBTF is bad policy and worse economics. It causes erosion of market discipline and risks further bailouts paid in full by hardworking Americans. It also becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, helping make firms bigger and riskier than they otherwise would be. Look no further than Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their taxpayer-funded bailout to the tune of nearly $200 billion.

Unfortunately, Dodd-Frank codifies TBTF into federal law. Since its passage, the big banks have become larger and the small banks have become fewer. As a nation, we would do well to rethink TBTF’s fundamental premise before it’s too late.

Even if some conclude that certain financial firms are indeed TBTF, it begs the question whether Washington is even competent to manage their risk. A review of the federal government’s track record in this area does not inspire confidence. The Federal Housing Administration’s poor risk management has left it severely undercapitalized. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. has an unfunded obligation of $26 billion. Even the National Flood Insurance Program is $18 billion underwater (pun intended). Then we have Fannie and Freddie.

Yes, then we do.

We have said here before that one of the greatest shortcomings of “progressives” is that they never learn from mistakes: “It failed the first ninety nine times, so it’s got to work the hundredth!”

Of course, as most of us already realize, regulating, along with its partner, taxing, are hand in glove activities for the left, and any mishap of any kind, even one caused by them, provides them with an excuse to pass legislation applying more rules, thereby creating more bureaucracy as people must be brought in as permanent staff to monitor compliance and churn out additional idiocy in order to justify their stuffed salaries, pensions and overblown benefits.

Anyway, the entire Op-Ed is here.

Kalifornia.

Yes, that big state on the left coast.

From infowars.com:

Once upon a time, millions upon millions of young people dreamed of moving to California. Nearly endless sunshine, pristine beaches and a booming economy made it seem like paradise to many.

But now those days are long gone. Unemployment is rampant, home prices have fallen like a rock, violent crime and gang activity are on the rise, local governments all over California are facing horrible financial problems, millions of illegal immigrants have poured into the state, traffic around the big cities is nightmarish and tax rates are absolutely outrageous. Plus there is the constant threat that your home could be destroyed by an earthquake, a wildfire or a mudslide. In recent years, hordes of hard working families have decided that they have had enough and have decided to move away from California. In fact, since the year 2000 more than 1.6 million people have moved away from the state of California.

There are still a few pockets of the state that are still very beautiful and that have been sheltered from the economic nightmare that is sweeping the rest of the state.

But in general, most cities in California are rapidly becoming giant hellholes.

Without a doubt, the “California Dream” has now become a “California Nightmare” for most residents of the state.

Do you live in California? If so, perhaps now is the time to move. The following are 16 really good reasons to move away from California…

A few of these are: California Is Run By Elitist Control Freaks That Have No Common Sense At All; Political Correctness Runs Rampant In California; California Has One Of The Worst Health Care Systems In America; California Has Some Of The Worst Schools In The Nation; California Has Some Of The Highest Tax Rates In The Nation; Poverty Is Absolutely Exploding In California…

Anyway, there are a whopping 16 reasons “to move away from california” listed and explained, right here.

What got me interested in posting about this, since Wolf and I have absolutely no interest in ever living out there in Liberal “Progressive” Never Never Land, is Seth’s long former residential ties to the state, in L.A. and San Francisco, as well as my big, bad Wolf’s sojourns, during his Navy career, at Coronado, when I read a Wall Street Journal article the other day by Allysia Finley, titled Joel Kotkin: The Great California Exodus.

‘California is God’s best moment,” says Joel Kotkin. “It’s the best place in the world to live.” Or at least it used to be.

Mr. Kotkin, one of the nation’s premier demographers, left his native New York City in 1971 to enroll at the University of California, Berkeley. The state was a far-out paradise for hipsters who had grown up listening to the Mamas & the Papas’ iconic “California Dreamin’” and the Beach Boys’ “California Girls.” But it also attracted young, ambitious people “who had a lot of dreams, wanted to build big companies.” Think Intel, Apple and Hewlett-Packard.

Now, however, the Golden State’s fastest-growing entity is government and its biggest product is red tape. The first thing that comes to many American minds when you mention California isn’t Hollywood or tanned girls on a beach, but Greece. Many progressives in California take that as a compliment since Greeks are ostensibly happier. But as Mr. Kotkin notes, Californians are increasingly pursuing happiness elsewhere.

Nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states. This is a sharp reversal from the 1980s, when 100,000 more Americans were settling in California each year than were leaving. According to Mr. Kotkin, most of those leaving are between the ages of 5 and 14 or 34 to 45. In other words, young families.

The scruffy-looking urban studies professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif., has been studying and writing on demographic and geographic trends for 30 years. Part of California’s dysfunction, he says, stems from state and local government restrictions on development. These policies have artificially limited housing supply and put a premium on real estate in coastal regions.

“Basically, if you don’t own a piece of Facebook or Google and you haven’t robbed a bank and don’t have rich parents, then your chances of being able to buy a house or raise a family in the Bay Area or in most of coastal California is pretty weak,” says Mr. Kotkin.

Above emboldening emphasis mine.

Read the article here.

Yes… Kalifornia, where every liberal’s dream has become reality.