Obama Hearts Occupiers

You'll love this.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch confirm that somebody in the White House told officials with the General Services Administration (GSA) to "stand down" and not arrest Occupy Portland protestors who may have broken the law last year.

Former GSA Public Buildings Service Commissioner Robert Peck told a senior Department of Homeland Security official that the federal housekeeping agency had been instructed by the Obama White House to go easy on the Occupy protestors.

In a Nov. 6, 2011, DHS/National Protection and Programs Directorate Chief of Staff Caitlin Durkovich asked GSA's Peck if it was true that his agency had asked Federal Protective Service officials not to take action against the Occupy Portland protestors.
"Yes, that is our position," Peck responded. "It's been vetted with our Administrator and Michael Robertson, our chief of staff, and we have communicated with the WH [White House], which has afforded us the discretion to fashion our approach to Occupy issues...The arrests last week were carried out despite our request that the protesters [sic] be allowed to remain and to camp overnight..."

 How many more days before we get to kick this administration out of office?

(h/t Drudge Report)

My God, it’s Full of Waivers

Remember this statement by former progressive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi?



Well, here we are a year or so later and we’re finding out what’s in it. As we conservatives suspected, it contains many things, all of them bad.

In the era immediately preceding the passage of the government takeover of one-sixth of our economy, we knew we had a problem; health care costs were rising at a rapid rate. This came as a surprise to absolutely no one.

If you’re a Baby Boomer, you know it. You’ve been reminded of it ever since you were small. You’ve been analyzed and demographed since before you were born, and subjected to every form and nuance of advertising known to man. Certain folk who are Paid to Know Things probably know more about you than you do.

We were young and hip before being young and hip was cool. We were rebellious and raucous. We wanted Free Love and freedom from The Man. Our heroes were transmogrified from real life people who did real heroic-type things in real life to celluloid anti-heroes with some dark angst simmering underneath, ala James Dean.

“Do what you feel” became our mantra. The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers proudly trucked their way across the pages of Rolling Stone Magazine, where the classified ads largely consisted of people who were trying to get one million other people to send them just one dollar. The Woodstock Nation was a unified block of free-spirited individuals who chose to separate themselves from the stodginess of their parents’ straight world and do their own thing by dressing, speaking, and acting alike.

We were oh so different from out parents except for one teeny, tiny little thing: we got old. And there were a lot of us that did that at the same time. Now, we’re starting to retire in record numbers, just as we did everything else in record numbers. And somehow, the government entitlements that were put in place before us, that we were told would always be there for us, like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, weren’t prepared for us. It’s almost like there were no Boomers elected to office anywhere.

How could anyone not have anticipated that health care costs would rise in proportion to the population of said Boomers? Did someone repeal the law of supply and demand and did I miss the memo?

This national event (the retirement of vast numbers of Baby Boomers) gave certain politicians of the far-left, control-freak variety a golden opportunity to implement one of their fondest desires – Universal Health Care. While that’s a noble sounding goal, that everyone should have access to quality health care for free, as soon as that idea becomes more than printed words on a page, it self-destructs like the tape at the beginning of Mission Impossible.

Ask someone from Britain or Canada how their government-sponsored and massively expensive health care system works and you’ll hear tales heretofore unheard of here in America. Long waits to see doctors, inefficient, sleepy-eyed, bureaucrats deciding who gets what treatment when and unnecessary deaths due to a myriad of conflagrations unique to a large and unmanageable government program, many times peopled by union members.

The fact that foreign dignitaries from these lands that boast of free health care for all come here to America for their treatment speaks volumes.

And the volumes say, “It’s a nice idea, but it doesn’t work.”

But that little fact of political and medical life didn’t dissuade the progressives in Congress from rubbing their little paws together with glee upon the immaculation of Barack Obama. They knew the time was at hand to move forward with their Grand Plan to control the American people through their health.

Ignoring such national trivialities as a housing market meltdown and the rapidly rising unemployment rate, they gathered behind closed doors without their Republican counterparts to discuss their plans. In the dead of night and against the will of a clear majority of the country, ObamaCare became law.

Over two thousand pages of legalistic mumbo-jumbo that no one bothered to read was passed over the protestations of a nation. One progressive legislator after another was questioned about the bill. Not one of them could give a clear-cut answer. Deals were cut with representatives in smoke-filled rooms (we’re left to guess as to the origin of that smoke, since little in the bill makes sense, Baby Boomers and all that).

Fast-forward to today and we get a better picture of what’s in it.

Waivers. Lots of them. Distributed to many groups who supported the bill and have since discovered how much it costs them.

Over 1300 waivers to date, with more on the way. And lots of them in Nancy Pelosi’s district.

If you don’t see anything wrong with the issuance of waivers (read exemptions) for a new law in America, then it’s time to introduce you to something you may have heard about: The Constitution.

This mysterious document speaks in an ancient language about obscure ideas. One of these arcane notions is that a law applies to everyone equally. Amazingly, this apparently outdated concept even has a name – The Equal Protection Clause.

Just think of a law that everyone must follow. I laugh in its general direction.

It’s not the Chicago Way.

The Chicago Way of Politics is to pick and choose winners and losers based on your loyalty to those in power. Support me and I’ll grant you a favor. All you need do is kiss my ring, or my ass, either one will do. Cross me and I’ll make you an offer you can’t refuse.

Thank you, Godfather, for only cutting off one of my fingers. I’ll never speak ill of you, your family, your pets or your taste in fashion again.

Far be it from me to expect all the lawyers in Washington who write these laws to be familiar with the country’s legal foundational document, much less any restrictions that could be placed on them. They can certainly do as they please.



Nancy Pelosi’s word’s return, “We have to pass the bill so that you can, uh, find out what’s in it.”

To which Dave Bowman in 2001 replies, “The thing's hollow, it goes on forever, and, oh my God, it's full of waivers!"

You’re About to Lose Another Right – DUI Checkpoints Can Now Draw Your Blood, Even If You've Done Nothing Wrong

Just in time for the Holidays, Florida is primed to join a few other states in violating your Constitutional rights, namely the Fourth Amendment. Here’s the text:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

OK, that seems to be pretty straightforward and easy to understand. You cannot be accused of a crime unless there is reasonable suspicion that you’ve done something illegal. That evidence must be presented to a judge in order to issue an arrest warrant.

At least that’s how it used to work.

However, there’s this story (via the Drudge Report). Tampa, Florida is to begin setting up DUI roadblocks where you can’t refuse a breathalyzer test. If you do, then police can forcibly draw blood from you for an alcohol test.

Now, before you say I’m in favor of drinking and driving, let me say for the record, I’m not. Common sense should prevail, and if you’ve had a few too many, then you shouldn’t be behind the wheel.

But that’s not what this is about. This is about your rights and how your government is failing its sworn duty to protect them, and you.

Here’s the scenario: You’re driving down the road, obeying the speed limit, all your vehicles’ lights are in good working order, and you’re complying with all the laws. You’re not weaving or driving in an erratic way. In other words, you’re doing what you are expected to do, driving safely. You come upon a police checkpoint where you’re compelled to submit to a breathalyzer test with no evidence that you’ve violated the law.

You’ve just had an unconstitutional act performed on you by someone who has sworn an oath to defend your Constitutional rights.

This is legal insanity of the first order.

Now, there will be a few folks, and I’ve had more than one conversation with a few of them, who will say that driving is a privilege, not a right. However, when I cite the facts as outlined above, their argument dissolves. This is exactly the type of abuse that our Fourth Amendment was designed to prevent, namely the arbitrary and capricious use of legal force.

If you’re driving safely, even after a couple of drinks, you should not be subject to any type of police action against you, period. This logic, however, seems to have escaped the courts, even when they say that safety is their prime concern. Note the discrepancy: you’re driving safely, yet you’re confronted with a police checkpoint where you must prove your innocence despite any evidence that you’ve done anything illegal.

We’ve sat by idly and watched a legal racket be set up before our very eyes in the name of public safety. What started out with the best of intentions has become something far more onerous and deadly to our legal rights as citizens. If you’ve ever been drawn into the DUI Racket, you know what I mean. Blood Alcohol Content requirements are now set so artificially low that two drinks, hardly an impairment to anyone I know, is now sufficient cause for you to be subject to legal extortion in the form of arrest and restitution. Naturally, the lawyers’ lobby and Mothers Against Drunk Driving are all for this, since they stand to make a great deal of money in the process.

Even the founder of MADD, Candy Lightner, left the organization she founded when she saw what it had devolved into.

This madness must stop. We’re already sliding down the hill towards totalitarianism, and our own court system is complicit. Imagine yourself in this situation, being forced from your vehicle at gunpoint and having a needle forced into your arm. I’m quite certain that the first question you’ll have is, “What happened to my rights?”

And you’d be quite correct to think that you had just lost them.

Hopefully, Florida’s incoming Attorney General Pam Biondi will address this very serious problem as soon as possible. Although case law (there’s that legal beast again) will support this most illegal action, as it has in the use of checkpoints, the plain language in our Constitution forbids it.

Either we have rights or we don’t.

In this case, we clearly don’t. It's time to start correcting the fuzzy legal thinking that substitutes for the plain language of our Constitutional foundation.