It’s Tuesday, June 4th, 2013…but before we begin, we take a moment to mark a momentous occasion; the modern-day equivalent of the Manhattan Project Reunion Tour:
Fat Man Meets Little Boy, Part II
By the way, don’t be surprised if Fat Man appoints either a Dimocrat (or a GOP practical-equivalent) to Frank Lautenberg’s Senate seat. The appointment will be subject to a special election in November regardless, and is up again in 2014. And right now, Christie’s worried about one thing and one thing only: his own reelection.
And no; we’re not cheering Lautenberg’s demise…but neither are we shedding any tears. Any service he rendered to America as part of the Army Signal Corps in WWII was more than offset by the havoc he wreaked on the Republic while in the Senate.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
Since we’re on the subject of fat, here’s today’s Res Ipsa Loquitur segment, courtesy of Drudge and the New York Post:
Labor big a real heavy sleeper
Just another doze at the office for union’s ‘scarf-&-snore’ prez
Men who can’t see their genitalia…on the next Oprah!
Union fat cat Mark Rosenthal spends more time sleeping at his desk than organizing labor, a series of damning photos reveals. The 400-pound president of Local 983 of District Council 37 — the city’s largest blue-collar municipal-workers union — often downs a huge meal, then drops into dreamland in the early afternoon, members of the union’s executive board told The Post.
“He eats lunch when he arrives at work at 2 p.m. Then, like clockwork, he goes to sleep with a cup of soda on the table and the straw in it,” said Marvin Robbins, a union vice president. “Then he wakes up, looks at his watch and says, ‘I have to get out before the traffic gets bad.’ He’s usually out by 4 p.m. after being at the office two hours.”
Rosenthal is a former Parks Department employee who rose to power campaigning to rid the union of corruption in the late 1990s. He last made embarrassing headlines in 2009, when he inspired a City Council bill requiring jumbo-size ambulances for morbidly obese patients after he had a stroke at City Hall.
Since then, he hasn’t been making much of an effort to give the city’s ambulances a break and slim down. Union officials say he racks up $1,400 in monthly food bills on the union dime. Much of the 5-foot-7, 400-plus-pound Rosenthal’s food tabs are for catered union events and meals he writes off as “union business,” board members claim. They say he significantly overorders at eateries like Dallas BBQ, the Stage Door Deli and Pine Restaurant in The Bronx, a hangout for local politicians, and takes the extra food back to his Bronxdale apartment.“He’s always walking off with a doggie bag or extra boxes of food,” said another executive board member.
Rosenthal, who earns $156,000 annually, yesterday denied being a free spender— and insisted he works “12-to-14-hour days.” He says the allegations are “part of a smear campaign” by a faction trying to get another Local 983 vice president, Joseph Puleo, elected president in a June 5 showdown.
“A smear campaign”; no…seriously! I’m not sleeping; just…
…checking for cracks in my eyelids. Rosenthal must be from Oz. You know…he gets up at 12:00 and gets to work at 1:00, takes an hour for lunch and then at 2:00 he’s done; jolly old fun!
Next up, as the WSJ‘s Kimberly Strassel details, Team Tick-Tock’s harassment of political opponents predates the IRS scandal:
Conservatives Became Targets in 2008
The Obama campaign played a big role in a liberal onslaught that far pre-dated Citizens United.
The White House insists President Obama is “outraged” by the “inappropriate” targeting and harassment of conservative groups. If true, it’s a remarkable turnaround for a man who helped pioneer those tactics.
On Aug. 21, 2008, the conservative American Issues Project ran an ad highlighting ties between candidate Obama and Bill Ayers, formerly of the Weather Underground. The Obama campaign and supporters were furious, and they pressured TV stations to pull the ad—a common-enough tactic in such ad spats.
What came next was not common. Bob Bauer, general counsel for the campaign (and later general counsel for the White House), on the same day wrote to the criminal division of the Justice Department, demanding an investigation into AIP, “its officers and directors,” and its “anonymous donors.” Mr. Bauer claimed that the nonprofit, as a 501(c)(4), was committing a “knowing and willful violation” of election law, and wanted “action to enforce against criminal violations.”
AIP gave Justice a full explanation as to why it was not in violation. It said that it operated exactly as liberal groups like NARAL Pro-Choice did. It noted that it had disclosed its donor, Texas businessman Harold Simmons. Mr. Bauer’s response was a second letter to Justice calling for the prosecution of Mr. Simmons. He sent a third letter on Sept. 8, again smearing the “sham” AIP’s “illegal electoral purpose.”
Also on Sept. 8, Mr. Bauer complained to the Federal Election Commission about AIP and Mr. Simmons. He demanded that AIP turn over certain tax documents to his campaign (his right under IRS law), then sent a letter to AIP further hounding it for confidential information (to which he had no legal right).
The Bauer onslaught was a big part of a new liberal strategy to thwart the rise of conservative groups. In early August 2008, the New York Times trumpeted the creation of a left-wing group (a 501(c)4) called Accountable America. Founded by Obama supporter and liberal activist Tom Mattzie, the group—as the story explained—would start by sending “warning” letters to 10,000 GOP donors, “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.” The letters would alert “right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.” As Mr. Mattzie told Mother Jones: “We’re going to put them at risk.”
Shredding the Constitution is FUN!
The Bauer letters were the Obama campaign’s high-profile contribution to this effort—though earlier, in the spring of 2008, Mr. Bauer filed a complaint with the FEC against the American Leadership Project, a group backing Hillary Clinton in the primary. “There’s going to be a reckoning here,” he had warned publicly. “It’s going to be rough—it’s going to be rough on the officers, it’s going to be rough on the employees, it’s going to be rough on the donors. . . Whether it’s at the FEC or in a broader criminal inquiry, those donors will be asked questions.” The campaign similarly attacked a group supporting John Edwards.
American Leadership head (and Democrat) Jason Kinney would rail that Mr. Bauer had gone from “credible legal authority” to “political hatchet man”—but the damage was done. As Politico reported in August 2008, Mr. Bauer’s words had “the effect of scaring [Clinton and Edwards] donors and consultants,” even if they hadn’t yet “result[ed] in any prosecution.”
As general counsel to the Obama re-election campaign, Mr. Bauer used the same tactics on pro-Romney groups. The Obama campaign targeted private citizens who had donated to Romney groups. Democratic senators demanded that the IRS investigate these organizations.
None of this proves that Mr. Obama was involved in the IRS targeting of conservative nonprofits. (Yeah…just like Hitler can’t technically be directly tied to the Final Solution!) But it does help explain how we got an environment in which the IRS thought this was acceptable.
The rise of conservative organizations (to match liberal groups that had long played in politics), and their effectiveness in the 2004 election (derided broadly by liberals as “swift boating”), led to a new and organized campaign in 2008 to chill conservative donors and groups via the threat of government investigation and prosecution. The tone in any organization—a charity, a corporation, the U.S. government—is set at the top.
This history also casts light on White House claims that it was clueless about the IRS’s targeting. As Huffington Post’s Howard Fineman wrote this week: “With two winning presidential campaigns built on successful grassroots fundraising, with a former White House counsel (in 2010-11) who is one of the Democrats’ leading experts on campaign law (Bob Bauer), with former top campaign officials having been ensconced as staffers in the White House . . . it’s hard to imagine that the Obama inner circle was oblivious to the issue of what the IRS was doing in Cincinnati.” More like inconceivable.
And this history exposes the left’s hollow claim that the IRS mess rests on Citizens United. The left was targeting conservative groups and donors well before the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling on independent political expenditures by corporations.
If the country wants to get to the bottom of the IRS scandal, it must first remember the context for this abuse. That context leads to this White House.
In a related item, courtesy of NRO‘s The Corner, Andrew Stiles relates how the 5th Amendment’s latest proponent was also up to her ears in extralegal activities long before she’s willing to admit…at least under oath:
Lois Lerner Directly Involved in IRS Targeting, Letters Show
A series of letters suggests that senior IRS official Lois Lerner was directly involved in the agency’s targeting of conservative groups as recently as April 2012, more than nine months after she first learned of the activity.
Lerner, the director of the IRS exempt organizations office in Washington, D.C., signed cover letters to 15 conservative organizations currently represented by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) between in March and April of 2012. The letters, such as this one sent to the Ohio Liberty Council on March 16, 2012, informed the groups applying for tax-exempt status that the IRS was “unable to make a final determination on your exempt status without additional information,” and included a list of detailed questions of the kind that a Treasury inspector general’s audit found to be inappropriate. Some of the groups to which Lerner sent letters are still awaiting approval.
Lerner has denied involvement in the targeting, which she has blamed on a few “front-line people” in the agency’s Cincinnati field office. “I have not done anything wrong,” she told members of the House oversight committee on Wednesday. However, she then refused to answer any questions, citing protection under the Fifth Amendment. She has since been placed on (paid) administrative leave, and the committee may call her to testify again.
“One thing is clear: this correspondence shows [Lerner’s] direct involvement in the scheme,” wrote Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the ACLJ. “Further, sending a letter from the top person in the IRS Exempt Organization division to a small Tea Party group also underscores the intimidation used in this targeting ploy.”
The letters coincide with former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman’s March 2012 testimony before Congress, in which he said there was “absolutely no targeting” of conservative groups at the agency. Months later, an internal IRS investigation concluded that the agency had engaged in such targeting. Obama-administration officials have insisted the targeting stopped in May 2012, although a number of ACLJ clients have received similar requests for information from the IRS within the past year, according to chief counsel Jay Sekulow.
And now we learn Shulman’s wife is a Dimocratic shill. Nothing to see here; these aren’t the scandals you’re looking for…
…move along!
On the immigration front, Jeff Foutch forwarded the following from CNSNews, which only serves to confirm the depth of the hole Marco Rubio’s digging for himself with Conservatives grows deeper every day:
Immigration Bill Legalizes 45% of ICE’s Criminal Caseload
Nearly half (45%) of illegal aliens arrested on criminal charges would be eligible for legal status under the immigration bill S. 744, analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) shows. Looking at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) records from its Secure Communities program for the six month period Oct. 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013, the analysis shows that 17,208 of 38,547 (45%) criminal illegal aliens would be eligible for legalization under the bill despite their offenses.
The 17,208 criminal illegal aliens are classified as by ICE as “Level 3 offenders in ICE parlance (convicted of fewer than three misdemeanors on separate occasions), fugitives, prior removals and returns, illegal border crossers, and over-stayers and visa violators,” the analysis shows. It cites an illegal alien convicted of negligent vehicular homicide as an example of the type of criminal alien who would qualify for legalization under the bill:
“This group would include the likes of Manuel Zaruma, a 24-year old illegal immigrant construction worker from Ecuador, who recently was convicted in Worcester County, Mass., of negligent vehicular homicide (a misdemeanor), driving unlicensed, and two more traffic infractions after a crash that killed Andrea Agosto, age 47, mother of three children.“
It would take three such fatal crashes to make Zaruma ineligible for legalization, CIS notes.
The remaining 22,339 (55%) were convicted of a felony or at least three misdemeanors and, thus, would be ineligible for legalization – “unless the Homeland Security Secretary waived their ineligibility, which is allowed under the bill,” CIS says. As “The Right Views” previously reported, the ICE Council warned Congress in a letter that the S. 744 stipulates that “the (DHS) Secretary is given the ‘sole and unreviewable discretion‘ to waive that ineligibility for large classes of qualifying aliens.”
The letter warns that political appointees would have the power to pardon virtually all types of criminal acts:
“At least two of these standards appear undefined by S. 744 or current law, providing political appointees with broad authority to establish their own definitions of these terms and pardon criminal acts under almost any circumstance.“
In a separate analysis of S. 744, CIS warns that the bill creates other threats to public safety, national security and enforcement efforts, as well, since it is “designed to reward and protect lawbreakers” while undermining current immigration law measures.
Which is akin to what Conn Carroll described in Monday’s edition of the Morning Examiner as…
Turning now to Tales From the Darkside, The New Media Journal recently featured John “Criminal” Conyers doing his imitation of Captain Renault:
Conyers ‘Shocked’ to Discover Farrakhan Is Anti-Semitic, Racist
You can sympathize with John Conyers, the longest serving member of the House of Representatives and a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus, who came to hear some inspirational words of wisdom from notoriously inspiring figure Louis Farrakhan, only to discover, a week later, to his shock and surprise, that the speech he was approvingly nodding to was really racist.
Conyers, who attended Farrakhan’s speech Friday night at Fellowship Chapel, issued a strong statement that distanced himself from the Nation of Islam leader’s remarks, which were blasted earlier this week by a Jewish civil rights group and others. “Farrakhan made unacceptable racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic statements, which I condemn in the strongest possible terms,” Conyers said. “It was my expectation that Minister Farrakhan’s speech would focus on the many challenges facing the city of Detroit. In previous days, he had discussed efforts to revitalize our city by purchasing property and investing in blighted neighborhoods. Regrettably, he used this opportunity to promote views that have no place in civilized discourse.”
Shocking. Who would have thought that Farrakhan would spew hateful bigotry when given a big shiny podium, instead of dealing with the challenges facing Detroit. Like the challenge of the Racist White Jew bloodsuckers created by a Black Mad Scientist named Yakub who will return in his UFO to banish the white beast-men from the earth… as Nation of Islam doctrine states.
In another item directly related to Detroit’s current circumstances, the result of policies perpetually promoted by Conyers and his ilk, Jeff Jacoby poses the question…
Is This Any Way to Help the Poor?
Is welfare corrupt? Of course it is, and in a damning report last week, the Massachusetts state auditor, Suzanne Bump, rounded up some of the scams:
Welfare payments issued to recipients long after they were listed as dead. Multiple recipients using one Social Security number – and multiple Social Security numbers being used by one person. Electronic benefit cards from Massachusetts being used in places like Hawaii, Las Vegas, and the Virgin Islands. Tens of thousands of blank EBT cards missing from state welfare offices. Repeated requests for “lost” benefit cards to be replaced.
In a report that covered only a two-year period, Bump’s investigators identified at least $18 million in illegal or suspicious welfare payments. “It pains all of us,” Bump told reporters, “to think that the program’s integrity is not being maintained.”
If this sounds familiar, it should. Blistering exposés of welfare fraud and abuse, in Massachusetts and elsewhere, have become almost routine.
Over a 22-month period in New Jersey, that state’s comptroller disclosed last week, prison inmates collected almost $24 million in unlawful welfare benefits – including $10.6 million in unemployment checks and $4.2 million in food stamps. TV reporters in Florida documented the use of welfare benefit cards in strip clubs, liquor stores, bowling alleys, and bingo parlors. A 65-year-old cashier in New Hampshire was fired last year for refusing to let a young man use an EBT card to buy cigarettes.
The new Massachusetts audit, meanwhile, followed an earlier report by the state’s inspector general, who estimated that the state is squandering $25 million a year on improper welfare payments. And before that was a national investigation by the US Department of Agriculture, which administers the food stamp program. It uncovered fraud in every state it reviewed.
Is welfare corrupt? Is it ever. And yet the infuriating waste of taxpayer funds is only the beginning of the corruption.
More Americans rely on government assistance today than ever before. Food stamps have become almost a middle-class entitlement. At the end of 2012, a record 47.8 million people were on food stamps. Of the 115 million households in the United States, 23 million – one in five – are on the food dole.
It wasn’t so long ago that such a degree of dependency would have been inconceivable. In 2001, according to federal data, 17.3 million people were receiving food aid. In little more than a decade, the food stamp rolls have almost tripled.
That didn’t happen by accident. Under the last two presidents, increasing food stamp enrollment became an explicit government goal. George W. Bush sharply expanded eligibility, rebranding food stamps as “nutritional assistance” instead of welfare. (Yet another reason we’ll never vote for another Bush.) States were encouraged to sign up more recipients – a ball the Obama administration took and ran with. The Agriculture Department promotes food stamps through radio ads and “public service” announcements; billboard-style ads appear on city buses. To attract even more participants, USDA advises local welfare agencies to “host social events where people mix and mingle” – show them a good time, and try to get them on welfare.
Is this any way to help the poor? FDR didn’t think so. In his annual message to Congress in 1935, President Roosevelt warned that “continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber.” The father of the New Deal knew that “to dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of a sound policy. It is in violation of the traditions of America.”
It is a mark of how far we have declined that a political figure who dared to say such a thing today would be denounced as heartless, a hater of the poor, even a racist – as Newt Gingrich found out when he tried to make an issue of soaring food stamp rates during the presidential campaign. (Though Newt was the wrong messenger.) When Massachusetts lawmakers last year tried to prevent EBT cards from being used to pay for tattoos, guns, or jewelry, Governor Deval Patrick vetoed the measure, saying he would not be a part of “humiliating poor people” or making them “beg for their benefits.”
FDR feared the effect of long-term dependence on government. Political leaders today enable it.
Welfare corrupts in so many ways. What it does to taxpayers is bad, and what it does to welfare recipients is worse. But what it is doing to our nation’s character and deepest values may be its most damaging impact of all.
On the Lighter Side…
And here’s one which epitomizes our “Present” President…
…along with another which should give TLJ something to consider next time we’re out of town:
Then there’s these bits of satire on the now-infamous Umbrellagate:
Speaking of umbrellas…
Must have been the…
… “assault” model!
And in the Entertainment Section, Breitbart reports on what’s certain to soon be mandatory viewing for aspiring Boy Scouts:
Children’s Network Launches Transsexual Superhero Show
Nothing says “child-appropriate material” quite like gender-bending underage superheroes. At least that’s the theory over at the Hub, the network co-owned by Discovery and Hasbro, which is trotting out its latest soon-to-be-dud, SheZow. That show follows the adventures of a 12-year-old boy named Guy who uses a magic ring to transform himself into a crime-fighting girl. Yes, you read that correctly. When Guy says the magic words – “You go girl!” – he becomes SheZow, wearing a purple skirt and cape, as well as pink gloves and white boots.
The chief executive of the Hub, who may or may not have been high (and leftist) when she greenlit this project, is Margaret Loesch. Loesch commented, “When I first heard about the show, my reaction was ‘Are you out of your minds?’ Then I looked at it and I thought, ‘This is just funny.’”
The target audience for the Hub is children aged two to eleven.
Meanwhile, over in the Medical Section, who knew Michael Douglas had discovered more than greed is good:
Michael Douglas: Oral sex can cause cancer
Thanks, Mike; tell us something Rock Hudson already didn’t! Now maybe if you’d stayed faithful to your first wife…
Finally, Bill Meisen forwarded our last item, another titillating tale ripped from the pages of the Crime Blotter:
911 Dispatcher Tells Woman About To Be Sexually Assaulted There Are No Cops To Help Her Due To Budget Cuts
An Oregon woman was told by a 911 dispatcher that authorities wouldn’t be able be able to help her as her ex-boyfriend broke into her place because of budget cuts. Oregon Public Radio reports that an unidentified woman called 911 during a weekend in August 2012 while Michael Bellah was breaking into her place. Her call was forwarded to Oregon State Police because of lay-offs at the Josephine County Sheriff’s Office only allows the department to be open Monday through Friday.
“Uh, I don’t have anybody to send out there,” the 911 dispatcher told the woman. “You know, obviously, if he comes inside the residence and assaults you, can you ask him to go away? Do you know if he’s intoxicated or anything?”
The woman told the dispatcher that Bellah previously attacked her and left her hospitalized a few weeks prior to the latest incident. The dispatcher stayed on the phone with the woman for more than 10 minutes before the sexual assault took place. “Once again it’s unfortunate you guys don’t have any law enforcement out there,” the dispatcher said, according to Oregon Public Radio. The woman responded: “Yeah, it doesn’t matter, if he gets in the house I’m done.”
Police say Bellah choked the woman and sexually assaulted her. He was arrested by Oregon State Police following the incident. “There isn’t a day that goes by that we don’t have another victim,” Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilberson told Oregon Public Radio. “If you don’t pay the bill, you don’t get the service.” The sheriff’s department had to cut 23 deputies and the entire major crimes unit after it lost a multi-million dollar federal subsidy, according to Oregon Public Radio. There are now only six deputies left.
The sheriff’s department even put out a press release warning domestic violence victims to “consider relocating to an area with adequate law enforcement services.”
We’d suggest a infinitely simpler, far more effective strategy:
Case closed! Oh…and Sheriff Gilberson can pound sand.
Magoo
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.