November 25, 2012

This one’s brief but well stated

From Francis Marion and Last Resistance:

What makes the head of a crime family happier than a witch in a broom factory? Finding out that he will be keeping his job another 4 years and knowing that virtually no one can touch him. His chief enforcer is also happy as he is keeping his job, at least for another four years.

In 1789, Edmund Jennings Randolph became the first US Attorney General under President George Washington. Randolph, an attorney had previously served as Governor of Virginia before accepting the position as the top legal advisor for the newly formed nation where he would represent the US government in cases before the Supreme Court.

Since Randolph’s time, the role of US Attorney General has expanded to head the Department of Justice, created in 1870, where he/she is considered to be the chief lawyer and law enforcement officer of the US government. As such, the US Attorney General is expected to be the archetype law abiding citizen in the nation.

Today’s US Attorney General, Eric Holder has proven to be anything but the archetype model law abiding citizen. In fact, it seems more like the chief enforcer for the nation’s top crime boss, Barack Obama. Together, the two of them have repeatedly broken one law after another along with committing multiple violations of the US Constitution. Since Holder is the top cop and prosecutor in the country, he’s virtually untouchable.

Yes, the US House of Representatives can impeach Holder, but that would leave the actual conviction up to the Democratic controlled Senate, which we all know won’t happen.

Several of Obama’s Cabinet leaders have informed him that they will be resigning soon. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta are among those that are jumping ship. It seems that Obama has tried to keep Holder in place, but there are rumors that he will only stay for another year.

While that is good news in some ways, one can only wonder who the next top crooked cop will be. Within the halls of Capital Hill, names such as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano have been floating around as a possible replacement for Holder. From a conservative point of view, that would be like replacing one liberal lawbreaker with another. A few other names have wafted on the winds of rumor which include Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Gov. Deval Patrick of MA.

I honestly believe that Napolitano could be worse than Holder. As for the other three, I don’t think any of them could be much worse than Holder, and perhaps could even be better, but I won’t hold my breath. I’ll just be glad if and when Holder is gone.

Hear, Hear, Mr. Marion!

by @ 10:26 am. Filed under Criminals, Great Commentary, The Attorney General

April 11, 2012

Back To This One, With Another Two Cents To Put In

From CSN News:

A Florida advocacy group spearheading protests over the racially-charged Trayvon Martin shooting has welcomed the intervention of the United Nations’ human rights chief, who has called for the shooter to be put on trial and “reparations for the victims concerned.”

“We believe that the United Nations involvement can help prevent another Trayvon Martin situation in other counties across the world,” J. Willie David, president of the Florida Civil Rights Association, said in a statement provided to on Monday.

“The shooting death of Trayvon Martin and Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law have created a worldwide movement that calls into question how justice is delivered to victims of color,” he said.

Cent 1: How is this the U.N.’s business? Between trying to get involved in monitoring our last election, attempting to enact a special U.N. payroll tax on all working Americans and let’s not forget their endeavors at becoming involved in efforts to take away our Second Amendment rights, the people in this corrupt, inept global organization most definitely became much too big for their britches some time ago and are very much in need of a slapping down.

If only we had a few politicians, naturally they’d have to be Republicans or perhaps Independents since Democrats are all for U.N. interference in our national business on every level, who had the cojones to smack the United Nations into its place…

Cent 2: It’s amazing how when a young black man beats down a non-black senior citizen and robs him/her and the victim is paralyzed or dies, it’s not a “racial incident” and in fact seems almost to be a non-incident, but when the same young black man, even one with a criminal record (narcotics, assault, robbery, gang-banging, CCW, whatever) is shot down in the process of assaulting or robbing someone, it’s automatically a racial incident and the same professional race activists are suddenly in the spotlight shouting “racism!!!!” and demanding justice.

I don’t know about you, but I believe that when a mugger or violent victimizing type gets shot, no matter what color he is, justice has already been done!

So what’s everybody getting so worked up about?

June 29, 2010

“Planned Parenthood”

I’ve always thought that a strange title for an organization that’s more a Murder Incorporated for defenseless unborn, but very much alive, babies.

Naturally, since baby murder goes well, somehow, with the doctrine that’s become popular among our intellectual elite and the “progressive” politicians they elect, it is also supported by the mainstream media who, as we know, have a habit of reporting only what is convenient for the public to know in order to press their political agendas. As often as not, there are a few twists, spins and, to those who actively seek the truth, some profoundly loud omissions.

Fortunately, there are a few honest journalists out there, including those who write for the Culture and Media Institute.

Speaking of which…

Media Ignore Planned Parenthood’s $1.3 Billion Federal Funding Discrepancy

Networks and newspapers silent on government report contradicting abortion group’s taxpayer funding figures.

If $1.3 billion is unaccounted for and the media don’t report it, did it really happen?

According to an American Life League review of Planned Parenthood’s annual reports, the organization received more than $2 billion in federal grants and contracts between 2002 and 2008. A June 16 Government Accountability Report, however, found that the organization spent just $657.1 million of taxpayer money in the same time period.

The $1.3 billion discrepancy failed to catch the attention of the nation’s major media outlets. None of the networks (ABC, CBS and NBC) or major newspapers (Los Angeles times, The New York Times, USA Today and The Washington Post) reported it.

A Culture and Media Institute review of coverage found that only one newspaper listed among Nexis’ “major newspapers” – The Houston Chronicle – even mentioned the GAO report. The Chronicle’s June 16 article noted that Planned Parenthood spent $657 million of federal money over seven years, but did not mention the income/outlay discrepancy.

Amazing, here are all these media institutions in whom the public place their (I would say “our”, except I don’t trust those leftist turds, not me) trust for news, and only one of them even seems to “know” about a “discrepancy” on the part of an organization that our government siphons hundreds of millions of our hard earned tax dollars to.

Don’t Follow the Money

The media have made Planned Parenthood a go-to source for several stories over the last six months, including debate over abortion language in health care reform legislation, the trial of the activist who killed abortionist Dr. George Tiller, and the 50th anniversary of the Pill.

From Dec. 28, 2009, to June 28, 2010, the broadcast networks and the “Big 4” newspapers mentioned Planned Parenthood 56 times in news stories. None of those stories mentioned the GAO report, and only one article reported the amount of federal money going to Planned Parenthood.

The February 27 article in The New York Times mentioned an investigative operation by pro-life activist Lila Rose which found Planned Parenthood clinics willing to accept donations from people who wanted African American babies aborted. A separate New York Times report on January 28 characterized the investigation as “prank calls” to Planned Parenthood.

Four reports referred to state funding of Planned Parenthood, but did not mention federal resources granted to the organization.

Planned Parenthood’s 2008 Annual Report says $349.6 million in taxpayer-funded grants and contracts accounted for more than a third (36 percent) of the organization’s income that year, second only to health center revenue. Federal funding for Planned Parenthood has increased by 45 percent since 2001-2002, when it received a reported $240.9 million from taxpayers.

While federal orders mandate that government money not be used directly for abortions, pro-life advocates point out that federal money used to cover non-abortion costs frees up private money to pay for abortions.

Frees it up.”

Favorite Experts

Planned Parenthood is by far the most cited pro-abortion group when it comes to national media coverage. In the last six months, 30 broadcast and print reports have quoted Planned Parenthood representatives and another 26 have mentioned the organization.

The 56 mentions of Planned Parenthood dwarf other pro-abortion groups, including the National Organization for Women (30) and NARAL Pro-Choice America (15).

When abortion was a major focus of health care reform debates, the media turned to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards and other affiliated representatives to statements and analysis. When the media celebrated the 50th anniversary of “the Pill,” the media commemorated Planned Parenthood’s role in making it possible.

A February 26 profile in The Washington Post painted a glowing picture of abortion doctor Carol Ball. The article described a “difficult time” for Ball and other doctors who perform late term abortions in South Dakota.

When Planned Parenthood produced an ad in response to Focus on the Family’s pro-life Super Bowl ad, the media praised it. USA Today noted it “defend[ed] abortion rights,” although the Focus on the Family ad did not target abortion “rights.”

The New York Times on January 27 turned to Richards on the increase in teen pregnancy rates, and she used the opportunity bash abstinence education. “This new study makes it crystal clear that abstinence-only sex education for teenagers does not work,” Richards said.

In addition to news reports related to Planned Parenthood, newspapers published five letters to the editor from readers mentioning the organization and fives letters to the editor from Planned Parenthood executives.

Another seven op-eds and entertainment reviews mentioned Planned Parenthood, as well as 15 death notices, and a couple of comedians’ jokes. All told, the networks and newspapers mentioned Planned Parenthood more than 80 times in the last six months.

But when someone noticed a $1.3 billion discrepancy in Planned Parenthood’s handling of federal money – crickets.

See what I mean about the mainstream media?

The Sound of Silence

One letter to the editor in the Los Angeles Times February 7 illustrated the effect the media blackout has had on public perceptions of Planned Parenthood.

Responding to the media-manufactured controversy over Focus on the Family’s pro-life Super Bowl ad, a reader wrote, “If I had it, I would give millions to Planned Parenthood to advertise on CBS during the Super Bowl.”

Well, dear reader, your wish has already come true. You might not know it from reading the Times, but Planned Parenthood already receives more than $350 million every year from you and every other American taxpayer, with no oversight from the “watchdogs” in the media.

$350 million every year!!!!

Of yours and my tax dollars, monies we could find much better uses for than having a bunch of “progressive” politicians give it to Planned Parenthood.

More than enough in any reasonable man’s book to justify giving every politician involved his or her just desserts.

April 28, 2010

Liberal Trial Lawyers (Spit!)…

…make even the French (Spit!) look respectable. The cottage industry those parasites sleazed upon us a few years ago, that of victimizing the innocent in order to make a few bucks even less honestly than con men practicing the Bible scam does nothing more than make it impossible for many companies and individuals to protect their homes, families, merchandise and possessions.

What these scumbags (and this particular brand of lawyer should take the term “scumbag” as a compliment as he/she stuffs his/her maggot-ridden pockets with the lucre stolen from honest citizens) don’t give a damn about is decency, morality or any other quality that requires a soul.

They sue the innocent on behalf of other human feces who, like them, are nothing more than opportunists who are too lazy to try and earn a living like anybody else.

Here, we have a prime example of a couple of people losing their jobs because their employers’ attorneys advised them, rightly, that the flotsam known as a liberal trial lawyer is always waiting in the wings to transform a victim into a victimizer and make a victimizer into a victim.

Here’s the story.

Two retail employees say they were fired last week after they chased down a suspected shoplifter.

Wait: The tale gets even loopier. The men – Paul Shoemaker and Mike McGee – apparently were on their break and chasing an alleged store shoplifter not in their store, but in an adjacent Apple Store.

The pair were heading out of the Sprint store where they used to work in Denver’s Cherry Creek Mall when they came upon a frantic security guard in the hall. “[He] came right basically in front of us, and was like, ‘Help me, Help me.’ Out of breath. You could totally hear he was distraught,” Shoemaker told Denver’s 7News.

The pair pitched in to help capture the alleged shoplifter.

“It’s the way I was raised as a kid,” McGee said. “You see something that’s going on wrong you step in and try to help whatever way you can.”

In other words, the young man simply wanted to do the right thing, like any decent person. So…

The trouble started after the suspect was carted off. Sprint’s corporate policy states that employees should not chase shoplifters, though the men argue they were on break and it wasn’t even Sprint’s merchandise they were seeking to retrieve. Sprint declined to comment, citing privacy concerns.

The firing isn’t without precedent. In October Walmart fired an Ocala branch’s loss prevention officer for chasing a man allegedly trying to steal golf balls. And in August 2009, two college-age Best Buy employees were fired from a Broomfield, Colorado Best Buy after tackling an alleged shoplifter. A Best Buy spokeswoman said all employees “are aware, and trained, on the standard operating procedures for dealing with shoplifting or theft – which includes ceasing pursuit of a suspected shoplifter once they exit the store.” This, she said, was for the safety of employees.

So should you fire an employee for pursuing a thief? Only you can decide the “should,” but legally you are able to do so.

Employment lawyer Frank Steinberg blogged about the Walmart case that the chain “was clearly within its rights to set a policy on how shoplifting incidents were to be handled and to decide that the guard’s violation of that policy warranted termination.”

In fact, having a policy about how employees should handle shoplifting or any crime they witness on the job is seen as a smart move legally, because it can protect you from liability in the event someone is hurt. Judgments in these cases are rare, but can reach into the hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.

In Texas, for example, a shoplifter – his lawyer says he admits to the crime – is suing Walmart for $100,000 over the dislocated shoulder he claims employees inflicted on him.
Separately, the Houston Chronicle reported the company paid nearly $750,000 as part of a settlement to the family of a 30-year-old alleged shoplifter who died of a heart attack as employees tried to stop him. (The items he was accused of stealing: a package of diapers, a pair of sunglasses, a BB gun, and a package of BBs.)

Whether the good Samaritans in Denver deserved to be terminated is another question; how you train your staff to handle loss prevention is one of those tricky matters you probably never considered when you first started your business.

These two people were on break, which means they were on their own time, yet companies have become so paranoid about lawsuits that this didn’t matter to Sprint.

However, while the excuse used was that their concern was the safety of the two employees, face it: The larger worry was a lawsuit by the criminal. That’s right, criminal, the perpetrator of the crime of shoplifting.

I have seen this before. Security chases a thief out the door and the dirtbag runs into traffic attempting to escape, gets hit by a car, and it’s no longer his fault that he was running in the commission of a crime, because some derriere creeping, toilet cake liberal trial lawyer turns things around and makes it the pursuers’, and therefore their employers’ fault, that the anal cavity ran out into traffic.

Look at the other examples in the linked article.

In Texas, for example, a shoplifter – his lawyer says he admits to the crime – is suing Walmart for $100,000 over the dislocated shoulder he claims employees inflicted on him.

Separately, the Houston Chronicle reported the company paid nearly $750,000 as part of a settlement to the family of a 30-year-old alleged shoplifter who died of a heart attack as employees tried to stop him. (The items he was accused of stealing: a package of diapers, a pair of sunglasses, a BB gun, and a package of BBs.)

Whose fault was either the dislocated shoulder or the heart attack?

The employess were simply, as the late Louis L’Amour used to say, “riding for the brand”, trying to recover their employers’ merchandise, so the business wouldn’t have to take a loss on something it had paid for.

Shrinkage control, or loss prevention, is an integral part of running any business where there is any sort of inventory involved, whether it’s equipment for performing services or it’s merchandise.

In the course of my own consulting work, I’ve had to counsel clients along the same lines their attorneys have had to — advising them to incorporate the same policies of non-pursuit (except in the case of clients wherein security officers have such concerns as national security or certain kinds of public safety issues that will protect them in instances of litigation) while silently cursing those walking, talking used prophylactics who dare think of themselves as anything other than the thin film of scum that floats atop the cesspool of humanity. Unfortunately, coaching clients in the avoidance of fraudulent, frivolous or overstated lawsuits is often part of my job.

In my opinion, sustaining crime related injuries, whether superficial, disabling or fatal, should be written off as “If you mess around with the bandwagon, you have to expect to get hit with the horn. Live with it.”

Some divorce lawyers (that’s a brand of lawyer who milks his lucre out of another kind of misery) are as septic tank qualified as the ones described above. I’ve never had any truck with any of those critters, but one day last year, as I was strolling by a divorce lawyers’ office in Santa Monica, an older lawyer walked out with a younger one, and he was telling the rookie, “You’re gonna call the broad, and you’re gonna kiss her ass. Promise her anything you have to, the pension…” and then they were too far away to hear any more.

These turds should be taken out and either boiled or drowned very slowly on national television…

by @ 8:18 pm. Filed under Assholes, Criminals, Good People Punished, Parasites, Weasels

March 27, 2010

Does ObamaCare?

Depends upon what you mean by “care”, here.

Wolf here.

I ran across an interesting article by retired constitutional attorney Michael Connelly, who writes:

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

I hope all the mulletheads who voted in both the lefty congressional majority and Obama, the traitor and enemy of the state in POTUS’ clothing, read and enjoy reading herein what they are responsible for.

The entire article is here.

March 26, 2010

At This Point…

…what if there was a revolution? I mean, what if Americans flatly refused to acknowledge laws stemming from the ObamaCare debacle and started cleaning their weapons, so to speak?

How could anyone call it treason, or otherwise condemn it, when all that these rebels would be doing was emulating our nation’s founders?

The American Revolution was fought, after all, to gain freedom from a kind of tyranny that, in truth, was not much different from what we are experiencing now under the Obama regime — yes, I said regime, not administration.

We, The People, are being ruled by officials elected, according to the Constitution, to govern according to the will of the people, not the other way around.

Yet here we are, having come full circle, so in the spirit of America, it seems to me that if there were a revolution, it should ideally be a short one — it would be an act of treason, in my opinion, for any U.S. serviceman, Law Enforcement officer or other American citizen in a position to do so to take up arms against the people if we got it into our heads to do exactly as our founding fathers did in the 1770s, taking our country away from those who would tax us into oblivion and dictate to us.

These politicians have violated the Constitution which is, given their oaths of office and the nature of their jobs, a federal crime in itself.

So, the Obama Administration and the Democrats in the House and Senate, those who voted for the “HealthCare” bill, are technically all felons, no matter what they and their sycophantic arse creepers of the lefty media say about it.

Doesn’t that make the President and his congressional majority a “renegade” criminal government, anyway, and certainly even less valid than that of the late King George?

July 24, 2009

Let’s Call This Post…

Organizations Liberals Love

The liberal activist organization ACORN filed a lawsuit Wednesday that aims to strike down a Pennsylvania law that authorities are currently using to prosecute several of the group’s former employees on charges related to voter-registration fraud.

That’s our left wingers for you. Break whatever laws they have to in order to bring about the political results they require, and when they get caught… Well, in this case, since they’re guilty as always hell, rather than try and mount a defense, they go for the gusto and try to change the law.

Imagine getting caught at and arrested for fraud and, rather than trying to prove you didn’t do it, trying to get the law changed so fraud becomes legal. That’s exactly what these G-dless liberal sleazeballs are doing. These are among the primary supporters of the Democratic Party, whom you’d assume, were they men and women of honor, would disassociate themselves from such blatant practitioners of the unctuous.

But whoever said, with a straight face, anyway, that today’s Democrats are any more honorable than the extremist liberals who pull their strings? Obviously, as incidents like this demonstrate, whatever honor was left in the Democratic Party before they allowed a Nancy Pelosi and a Harry Reid to head up the houses of Congress, or an Obama to be their nominee, is, as they say in Madagascar, long gone.

The suit, filed in federal court in Pennsylvania, seeks to have a state law known as solicitation of registration declared unconstitutional. The law makes it illegal to pay an employee for soliciting voter registrations based on the number of registrations the employee obtains.

Five former employees of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) were charged in May with various voter-registration-fraud crimes, including solicitation of donations. Those charges, which authorities say included ACORN employees submitting registration forms for “Mickey Mouse,” are still pending.

Is that a mockery of our electoral system, or what?

The episode in Pennsylvania was one of several in battleground states that saw ACORN come under fire during last year’s presidential election. At least 14 lawsuits have been filed against ACORN after the 2008 election, including a suit brought by former ACORN employees under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a law more commonly associated with mobsters than community organizations.

Emphasis mine.

Republicans on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plan to release Thursday the results of an investigation that concluded ACORN “has repeatedly and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud.”

“Both structurally and operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate,” according to the executive summary of the report obtained Wednesday by The Washington Times.

…to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate…

Long, long ago I grew up in a Democrat family, among honorable people. Even though I said “farewell” to that side of the aisle ‘way back in 1980, it makes me ashamed to see what our Democratic Party has come down to.

The report is unlikely to result in any action from a Democrat-controlled Congress that has shown little interest in investigating ACORN.

What do you expect? That would be like Hillary Clinton trying to prosecute the Communist Chinese for participating in bundling schemes.

If the Democrats still had even an iota of respect for America, for We, The People and for the Constitution, they would make like squirrels and bury that ACORN deep.

But I’ll bet they won’t…

by @ 1:06 pm. Filed under Criminals

April 1, 2008

The High Priest And Major Profiteer Of Global Warming Politics…

…and his retinue are apparently encountering some degree of resistance, at long last.

British environmental analyst Christopher Monckton says Al Gore’s latest attack on global warming skeptics shows the former vice president and other climate alarmists are “panicking.”

And well they should be.

On Sunday, CBS News correspondent Leslie Stahl asked Al Gore on the television show 60 Minutes what he thinks of people like Vice President Dick Cheney who doubt that global warming is caused by human activity.

“I think that those people are in such a tiny, tiny minority now with their point of view, they’re almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, and those who believe the earth is flat,” replied Gore. “That demeans them a little bit, but it’s not that far off.”

However, Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy advisor for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during the 1980s, says the former vice president can enjoy his “flat earth fantasies” for a few months, but in the end, the world will be laughing at him.

“The alarmists are alarmed, the panic mongers are panicking, the scare mongers are scared; the Gores are gored. Why? Because global warming stopped ten years ago; it hasn’t got warmer since 1998,” he points out. “And in fact in the last seven years, there has been a downturn in global temperatures equivalent on average to about [or] very close to one degree Fahrenheit per decade. We’re actually in a period … of global cooling.”


Mr. Monckton, my hat is off to you!

Monckton contends Gore is now “panicking” because he has staked his reputation as a former American VP on “telling the world that we’re all doomed unless we shut down 90 percent of the Western economies.” He also contends that Gore is the largest “global-warming profiteer.”

It’s pitiful that Algore, a typical modern Democrat, is willing to screw the rest of us, using a typical liberal agenda, in order to make megabucks for himself. Nancy Pelosi, another leftist hypocrite, is probably foaming at the mouth in anger that she didn’t think of this racket first.

Gore’s group The Alliance for Climate Protection is currently launching a new $300 million ad campaign that demands reforms in environmental law to help reduce the supposed “climate crisis.” But Monckton points out that in the U.K., Gore is not allowed to speak in public about his “green investment company” because to do so would violate racketeering laws by “peddling a false prospectus.” He says that fact came about after a British high court found Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, riddled with errors.

Emphasis mine, and speaking of emphasis, bravo, U.K.!

It’s good to see that someone, somewhere, has exposed Algore for the opportunitic fraud he really is. Now let’s see some prosecution for same: After all, an individual who commits fraud on a bank or other business to the tune of a few hundred bucks gets a felony sentence. Gore has swindled the world at large for millions, yet he’s still walking around free.

What’s wrong with this picture?

June 5, 2007

Birds Of A Feather

This one makes me chuckle, three of the most offensive liberal politicians in the history of the universe and the offspring of one, connected all but intimately to a majorly rich scammer of senior citizens — and not sweating any publicity because they are Democrats, and as such immune to any Congressional actions. That particular precedent was pointedly established in a recent affair involving Representative John Murtha.

Forget the Democrat Who’s Who, I want to see the What’s Next!

Anyway, back from the unavoidable (for me, at least) realm of digression, I suppose it would be best if I first hit you with the bona fides.

According to the The New York Times, InfoUSA compiled and sold lists that disclosed the names of elderly men and women who would be likely to respond to unscrupulous scams. The lists left no doubt about the vulnerability of the elderly targets. The Times reported, for example, that InfoUSA advertised lists of “Elderly Opportunity Seekers,” 3.3 million older people “looking for ways to make money,” and “Suffering Seniors,” 4.7 million people with cancer or Alzheimer’s disease. “Oldies but Goodies” contained 500,000 gamblers over 55 years old, for 8.5 cents apiece. One list said: “These people are gullible. They want to believe that their luck can change.”

InfoUSA sold lists to companies that were under investigation or closed down by courts because of their criminal activity. The company’s internal emails show that employees were aware that the investigation for elderly fraud involved their customers, but sold the lists anyway.
The Times profiled one unfortunate 92 year old man who entered a sweepstake sponsored by InfoUSA. The information that he innocently provided was then sold to the predator marketers.

After responding to their telemarketing calls seeking financial information, his entire life savings was stolen from his bank account at Wachovia Bank. These practices, using lists supplied by InfoUSA were repeated all over the country.

I can’t help but scratch up something from deep in my memory and a lot of really serious information imparted by Ann Coulter in her first book, High Crimes And Misdemeanors.

Okay, the former President and first-lady-cum-senator see no problem butt-bumpin’ with a criminal, so Speaker Of The House, third in line to be Boss of America Nancy Pelosi sees no reason not to get in on the fun.

One benefit is a lucrative boost to her son’s career.

Why not, right? Why shouldn’t Pelosi enjoy some attention from the same godfather the Clintons do?

These folks are so like monkeys that fit in a teacup, LOL. The fantasy land they live in is on a par with a kindergarten class. Fortunately for them, their constituent flocks are as naive as the likes of Pelosi and the Clintons want them to be.

But let’s try to get past all that, leave Nancy & Son to it, give ‘em some room, as it were…

Let’s move on, try to forget at least some of the Clinton-Gupta connection, or “allegations thereof”, and look at cold, practical facts.

From time to time, an innocent person is officially or consensus inspiredly (gotta be a Seth creation in the world of words) accused of wrongdoing. At the end of the day, they are either vindicated or condemned.

Bill & Hill, on the other hand, seem to lead a spectacular parade of suppressed criminal background.

My pernt bein’, if you’re accused of a crime and get off, okay. If you’re accused of a whole bunch of crimes and get off, you’re one lucky or well represented S.O.B., but guilty as hell.

Like Bill & Hill

by @ 9:48 pm. Filed under Criminals, Democrats, Is There Corruption Afoot?, Weasels

January 7, 2006

The Abramoff “Circus”

The major reason I haven’t posted anything about the Abramoff debacle is that I don’t view it as a political issue. Pure and simple, it is a criminal justice affair — the man is a crook, he’s going down for it and that’s the way of things.

It is no surprise to me, given their desperation to discredit Bush, that the Angry Left has been doing their best to spin this into a Bush-bashing event.

What connections there are to any politicians on either side of the aisle(Harry reid’s name has, it seems, been mentioned briefly in connection with an Abramoff associate) will be unlikely to have any significant impact upon their respective political careers or incur any criminal charges, though Representative Robert W. Ney(R, Ohio) would seem to have been a smidgeon more receptive than most of his colleagues to Abramoff’s largesse, and may or may not encounter the roosting of his proverbial chickens as a result.

That said, Jack Abramoff is a criminal, a lobbyist gone bad(at least, gone bad and been caught at it), not a politician. His actions are just that: His actions, and can only be laid at the feet of the administration by political opposition for political purposes, without any honorable or even remotely respectable foundation for any accusations levelled. In short, only leftist hacks need apply.

In fact, a well thought out column appeared in Review & Outlook in yesterday’s WSJ Opinion Journal with which I tend to agree, and that, friends, is the last I have to say about the reprehensible Mr. Abramoff and his well publicized legal problems.

As for Bush Administration involvement?

…it’s worth pointing out that Mr. Abramoff and his coterie aren’t getting off easy. His plea deal includes a likely 10-year sentence, which is the same as the one handed to Enron’s Andy Fastow. Co-conspirator Michael Scanlon has also copped to a felony, and others are expected to follow. No one can accuse the Bush Justice Department of giving these GOP scoundrels a pass, in contrast to the way Janet Reno’s Department went soft on Harold Ickes and others after the 1996 campaign-finance shenanigans.

Note: Emphasis mine.

It’s also notable how few Members of Congress so far have truly been implicated, beyond accepting entirely legal campaign contributions. The most culpable is Ohio’s Bob Ney, who has been cited in a “criminal information” for receiving trips and other favors in return for statements entered into the Congressional Record. Mr. Ney says that he too was duped, but there’s no question he was willing to tap dance on cue for Mr. Scanlon, and that alone is sleaze-by-willing-association. If the House Ethics Committee serves any useful purpose, sanctioning Mr. Ney ought to be it.

Here is the entire column.

by @ 5:14 am. Filed under Criminals