Friday, May 21, 2010

Barker's Newsbites: Friday, May 21, 2010


Now how's this for Friday's newbite theme?

The Age of Obama, my friends... the Age of Obama...
Posted by at

16 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/nj_gov_christie_vetoes_million.html

It took about two minutes from the time Senate President Steve Sweeney certified the passage of the millionaires tax package for Gov. Chris Christie to veto the bills at his desk.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

"While I have little doubt that the sponsors and supporters of this bill sincerely believe that the state can tax its way out of this financial crisis, I believe that this bill does nothing more than repeat the failed, irresponsible and unsustainable fiscal policies of the past," wrote Christie in his veto statement. "Now is not the time for more of the same. Ultimately, another tax increase will punish the state’s struggling small businesses and set our economy further back from recovery."

* GOD BLESS THIS GUY...!!! I TELL YA... I HAVEN'T FELT THIS POSITIVE ABOUT A POLITICIAN SINCE REAGAN!

May 21, 2010 at 9:40 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703691804575254401645329716.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

In the rapturous days after Barack Obama's victory and the Democratic congressional sweep that accompanied it, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank declared that the new Congress would enact a "new New Deal." Few people really thought at the time that he or his party meant this seriously. After all, the original New Deal—as anyone who has read history knows - failed to revive the economy.

* OH, PLEASE... WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A NATION OF IDIOTS! OF COURSE I KNOW THE NEW DEAL WAS A DISASTER AND SO DO MOST OF YOU READING THIS NEWSBITE, BUT I'D WAGER THAT IF A POLL WERE TAKEN YOU'D GET BARE MINIMUM 70% OF RESPONDENTS STATING THEIR BELIEF THAT FDR'S NEW DEAL WAS A SMASHING SUCCESS. (AND OF THE REMAINING 30%... A LARGE CHUCK OF THE "NO" VOTE WOULD BE KNEE-JERK "CONSERVATISM" ABSENT AN UNDERLYING UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE NEW DEAL ACTUALLY DID AND HOW AND WHY IT MADE THINGS WORSE RATHER THAN BETTER.

* HELL... IT'S NOT LIKE THEY TEACH ABOUT THE NEW DEAL IN HIGH SCHOOL OR EVEN COLLEGE... (*SNORT*) AND AS TO WHAT MENTION OF THE NEW DEAL THERE IS... REFERENCES YOU'LL GET FROM SCHOOL OR THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ARE OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE.

* ALL OF WHICH BRINGS US TO THE DODD BILL - WHICH PASSED THE SENATE YESTERDAY WITH FOUR RINO VOTES:

After Scott Brown's election to Ted Kennedy's Senate seat, Republicans had the votes to prevent the closing of debate and keep the Dodd bill off the Senate floor. They could have argued that legislation this important should not be rushed through Congress. They could have pointed out that there were no hearings on most of the major elements of the bill. And they could have reminded the Democrats that the commission Congress appointed to advise them on the causes of the financial crisis would not be reporting until mid-December.

They did none of these things.

Instead they backed away from cloture, allowing the legislation to go to the Senate floor where the bill, bad enough to begin with, became steadily worse.

Why was the GOP unable to stand united and filibuster the bill before it reached the Senate floor? For the least meritorious of reasons, it seems: unwillingness to go to the voters this November without having done "something" to punish Wall Street and the banks. This is true even though Senate Republicans know perfectly well that government housing policies were the principal cause of the financial crisis and the bill does nothing to address this issue, and that the losses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - whose chief sponsor over many years was the same Barney Frank - will cost the taxpayers far more than TARP.

* WE'RE DEALING WITH IDIOTS. SELF-SERVING, UNCARING, IGNORANT IDIOTS.

The only good thing to come from this spectacle is that it shows the business community and American voters that the Democratic Party—despite the moderate face of the Obama presidential campaign—has not outgrown their New Deal mentality. Democrats are still the party of government and the special interests that cling to it. The trouble is, the Republicans have not shown the American public that they have as clear an understanding of what they are for.

May 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104575226290221967322.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

U.S. cotton farmers took in almost $2.3 billion dollars in government subsidies in 2009, and the top 10% of the recipients got 70% of the cash.

Now Uncle Sam is getting ready to ask taxpayers to foot the bill for another $147.3 million a year for a new round of cotton payments, this time to Brazilian growers.

* READ THE ARTICLE, PEOPLE... (*SIGH*)

May 21, 2010 at 12:04 PM
William R. Barker said...

* Sorry! But apparently I forgot to cut the source header for the "hat tip." Anyway...

The 59-39 vote last evening in the Senate to approve its version of legislation to overhaul financial regulations was very much along party lines.

But there were four Republicans who joined the majority, and two Democrats who voted against the measure:

Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Susan Collins of Maine.

Charles Grassley of Iowa.

Olympia Snowe of Maine.

May 21, 2010 at 12:12 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704513104575256680430484878.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

A total of 775 banks, or one-tenth of all U.S. banks, were on the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s list of "problem" institutions in the first quarter, as bad loans in the commercial real-estate market weighed on bank balance sheets.

Poor loan performance in other sectors also continued to hurt banks, with the total number of loans at least three months past due climbing for the 16th consecutive quarter, FDIC officials said in a briefing on Thursday.

There were 702 on the FDIC's "problem" bank list at the end of 2009 and 252 at the end of 2008.

Regulators have shut 72 banks so far this year, more than double the number closed by this time last year. Ms. Bair said regulators were preparing for a steady pace of additional closures through the end of the year. A total of 237 banks have failed since the beginning of 2008.

The failures continue to strain the FDIC's fund to protect consumer deposits... The agency's deposit insurance fund stood at negative-$20.7 billion at the end of the first quarter...

* YEP... YOU READ THAT CORRECTLY -- NEGATIVE TWENTY BILLION, SEVEN HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS... NEGATIVE... YEP...

* WELCOME TO THE AGE OF OBAMA, PEOPLE...!!!

May 21, 2010 at 12:35 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/business/economy/21pension.html

In Yonkers, more than 100 retired police officers and firefighters are collecting pensions greater than their pay when they were working. One of the youngest, Hugo Tassone, retired at 44 with a base pay of about $74,000 a year. His pension is now $101,333 a year.

It’s what the system promised, said Mr. Tassone, now 47, adding that he did nothing wrong by adding lots of overtime to his base pay shortly before retiring.

* "THE SYSTEM" IS THE PROBLEM.

Despite a pension investigation by the New York attorney general, an audit concluding that some police officers in the city broke overtime rules to increase their payouts and the mayor’s statements that future pensions should be based on regular pay, not overtime, these practices persist in Yonkers. The city has even arranged for its police to put in overtime as flagmen on Consolidated Edison construction sites. Though a company is paying the bill, the city is actually reporting the work as city overtime to the New York State pension fund, padding future payouts — an arrangement at odds with the spirit of public employment, if not the law.

* AND GOD HELP US... YONKER'S MAYOR IS A RINO BY THE NAME OF PHIL AMICONE.

* THE YONKERS CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT - CHUCK LESNICK - IS A DEMOCRAT.

* I SUPPOSE YOU COULD CALL THIS BIPARTISANISM IN ACTION. (*SMIRK*)

According to pension data collected by The New York Times from the city and state, about 3,700 retired public workers in New York are now getting pensions of more than $100,000 a year, exempt from state and local taxes.

Census data from 2008 show that the typical state or municipal pension is substantially richer than the typical company pension - $15,941 versus $7,904 - for retirees aged 65 and older.

By tradition, public employees have said they accepted lower salaries in exchange for better benefits, but the Census data show this has not been true for a number of years. In 2008 the median pay for a worker in the private sector was $39,877, compared with $45,124 for a state or local employee.

* AND THE GAP IN BENEFITS - WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ON THE "WINNING" SIDE - IS EVEN LARGER IF MEMORY SERVES!

And, while companies must adhere to uniform federal guidelines about setting aside money to pay pensions, states do not. Some, like New Jersey, have failed to fund their pensions for years and have fallen so far behind they may never catch up again.

In Yonkers, contributions to the state pension fund keep rising. This year, to save money, the city is proposing to eliminate about 90 police jobs, out of 640. The savings, though, will not even cover the extra cost of the overtime-enriched pensions. Meanwhile, the police say the layoffs will make the situation worse, because shrinking the police force means those who remain must work even more overtime, driving up pension costs even more.

May 21, 2010 at 4:01 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=139401&catid=339

[T]he Colorado Department of Labor says its unemployment fund has reached insolvency.

As of May 11, the state has borrowed $254 million in federal funds to continue to pay benefits to people who are unemployed.

* AND HOW EXACTLY IS COLORADO PLANNING ON PAYING THESE "LOANS" OFF...???

Although people who are unemployed will not see a change in their checks, businesses across the state will feel the pinch in the form of unemployment insurance rate hikes.

* AHH... THEY'LL MOVE THE GOALPOSTS - CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME. NICE...

Executive Director of the [Colorado] Department of Labor & Employment Don Mares...says the state could pay back the more than $250 million to the federal government as early as 2013. He says that depends on how quickly the job market moves in the recovery...

* PAY IT BACK BY JACKING UP RATES WHICH MAY OVERLOAD MORE BUSINESSES LEADING TO MORE UNEMPLOYMENT...

(*HEADACHE*)

This is not the first time the Colorado Department of Labor has had to borrow to pay people who are unemployed. Mares says the state's Unemployment Trust Fund went into the red in the middle of the 1980's during a recession and had to borrow federal funds for 3 1/2 years.

* SO... THIS IS... er... NORMAL...??? BUSINESS AS USUAL...??? (HEY... HOW MUCH YOU WANNA BET COLORADO DIDN'T ACTUALLY "PAY BACK" THOSE LOANS IN THE SENSE YOU AND I PAY OFF OUR LOANS?)

Colorado is also not alone in its unemployment money woes, 34 other states across the country have also had to borrow federal funds to pay unemployment benefits.

* SUPER... JUST SUPER...

May 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/

A top Department of Homeland Security official reportedly said his agency will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities.

* AND THE HITS KEEP ON HITTING, FOLKS...

John Morton, assistant secretary of homeland security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, made the comment during a meeting on Wednesday with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, the newspaper reports.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said ICE is not obligated to process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities.

"ICE has the legal discretion to accept or not to accept persons delivered to it by non-federal personnel," Napolitano said. "It also has the discretion to deport or not to deport persons delivered to it by any government agents, even its own."

* AGAIN, FOLKS... NOT THE ONION... NOT A SNL SKIT... THIS IS YOUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT UNDER CHIEF EXECUTIVE BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-AL, said it appeared the Obama administration is "nullifying existing law" and suggested Morton may not be the right person for his post if he fails to enforce federal immigration law.

"If he feels he cannot enforce the law, he shouldn't have the job," Sessions told Fox News. "That makes him, in my view, not fulfilling the responsibilities of his office."

Sessions said the U.S. government has "systematically failed" to enforce federal immigration law and claimed Morton's statement is an indication that federal officials do not plan on working with Arizona authorities... "They're telegraphing to every ICE agency in America that they really don't intend on cooperating with Arizona," Sessions said. "The federal government should step up and do it. It's their responsibility."

May 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534631/201005201812/Government-The-Next-Bubble-To-Burst.aspx

Federal spending alone this year accounts for 25% of our nation's gross domestic product. If you add state and local spending, the number is closer to 50%.

After big government spending, government employee unions pose a serious threat to America's fiscal health. Over the past 30 years, union membership has declined significantly, from 23% of all workers in 1980 to about 12% today. But the percentage of union members working for government has soared: Over 50% of all union workers in the U.S. are employed by the government compared with only 17% in 1980.

In addition, government workers make about $10 per hour more than the average private sector worker.

And when they retire, taxpayers are on the hook to pay for lucrative pensions promised by a generation of politicians trying to win the next election.

Congress will not make the tough decisions necessary to reduce spending unless we force its hand. ... The current Congress is spending money so frivolously, there is a strong possibility it may not even adopt a budget resolution this year for the first time since modern budget rules were adopted in 1974.

* AGAIN, FOLKS... I'VE HIT UPON THIS TIME AND AGAIN IN NEWSBITES; HOW MANY OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS DO YOU THINK ARE AWARE THAT CONGRESS PROBABLY WON'T PASS A BUDGET THIS YEAR?

[H]undreds of billions in federal spending annually goes to crooks defrauding the government. According to an October 2009 white paper by Thomson Reuters, 19% of the overall waste from the American health care system is through willful theft in the Medicare and Medicaid system.

The current political class simply refuses to solve the spending problem...

* HELL... THEY'VE MADE IT WORSE! FAR WORSE! BUSH AND THE RINOs WERE PIKERS COMPARED TO OBAMA, PELOSI, AND REID!

May 21, 2010 at 4:49 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534694/201005201839/Lights-Out-In-LA-.aspx

An Arizona official asks a good question: If California wants to boycott Arizona over the way it enforces federal law, what about the electricity California gets from there?

Gary Pierce, a commissioner on the five-member Arizona Corporation Commission, has done just that, calling the bluff of the Los Angeles City Council and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Pierce wrote Villaraigosa a letter saying in essence that if L.A. didn't need Arizona's business, maybe it didn't need Arizona's power either. Pierce noted Villaraigosa had pledged L.A. would "send a message" by cutting the "resources and ties" they share. He wanted to know if the mayor also wants to give back the 24% of the electricity it gets from Arizona power plants.

"If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation," Pierce wrote, suggesting the mayor and the council were all hat and no cattle.

May 21, 2010 at 4:49 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534696/201005201839/The-Green-Jobs-Myth.aspx

A Spanish economics professor said attempts by his country to create a green economy would fail. Now a Spanish government report confirms his findings...

The professor, Gabriel Calzada Alvarez of Juan Carlos University in Madrid, produced a 41-page study last year on the European experiment of going full bore on the conservation front. He found that "the Spanish/EU-style 'green jobs' agenda now being promoted in the U.S. in fact destroys jobs."

For every green job created by the Spanish government, Alvarez found that 2.2 jobs were destroyed elsewhere in the economy because resources were directed politically and not rationally, as in a market economy.

"The loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices," the professor told the press.

[Alvarez's] results have been backed up by Carlo Stagnaro and Luciano Lavecchia, a couple of researchers from the Italian think tank Istituto Bruno Leoni. They found that in Italy, the losses were worse than they were in Spain: Each green job cost 6.9 jobs in the industrial sector and 4.8 jobs across the entire economy. "Green investments are an ineffective policy for job creation," they say in their report. Despite the other merits of investments in new energy, "to the extent that the 'green deal' is aimed at creating employment or purported as anti-crisis or stimulus policy, it is a wrong policy choice."

Even more inconvenient for the environmental left is a study by the Spanish government. This leaked document supports the Alvarez report. The green lobby can't claim bias in this analysis because the Zapatero administration that compiled it is a socialist government that sees windmills when more rational people see dragons.

The findings from Europe contradict President Obama's claim in his State of the Union address that "the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy." Before he took office, he warned that the U.S. was falling behind nations that are "making real investments in renewable energy."

Now it looks like the U.S. is lucky to be lagging in alternative-energy investment. The Alvarez study says that following the Spanish model, held up by Obama as a standard the U.S. should follow, is likely to cause 6.6 million to 11 million job losses "as a direct consequence were it to actually create 3 to 5 million 'green jobs.' "

Renewable energy is trendy and for many offers political gain. But Washington should shut down the green economy nonsense before too much of other people's money is spent on projects that do more harm than good.

May 21, 2010 at 4:50 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/534728/201005201852/Water-Sanity-For-Central-California.aspx

A federal judge has struck a blow for California's water-deprived Central Valley, ruling that draconian federal water cutbacks violate human rights because - surprise! - people also belong in the ecosystem.

Next time a concept like, say "death panels" from the federal government seems far-fetched, consider the ordeal California's Central Valley has endured for the past two years. Based on a judicial ruling, some of the most prized and productive agricultural land in the country was turned into a wasteland after its water was shut off. The ruling was derived from an 800-page "biological opinion" put out by regulators enforcing the National Environmental Policy Act, ostensibly to protect a finger-sized fish called the delta smelt and some other wildlife.

Regulators complained that smelt were getting ground up in pumping stations that brought river water from California's north to its south, so the water had to stop.

Even the judge was appalled at being forced into the ruling but had no choice, given the law, and tried to cushion the impact.

Tuesday, that same judge, District Judge Oliver Wanger declared to federal regulators that they must consider the impact of their "draconian" actions on human communities, something they've never done up until now.

The water shut-off has been a nightmare for California. Huge farms growing the world's finest grapes, peaches, almonds, pistachios, plums and walnuts - as well as cotton, carrots, cantaloupe and the other lush truck crops that come out of California's temperate weather and rich soil - have gone fallow. Adding insult to injury, water has increasingly been turned into a bargaining chit, with Washington using access to it as political leverage to force local congressmen to vote for unpopular bills like health care reform.

California's communities have suffered terrible disruption, with unemployment as high as 45% in some towns and farm workers forced to stand in food lines for bags of Chinese-grown carrots near fields they once harvested.

May 21, 2010 at 4:50 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm

Every journalist loves a peaceful protest-whether it makes news, shakes up a political season, or holds out the possibility of altering history. Then there are the ones that show up on your curb - literally.

Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer.

Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America, a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that - in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action - makes his family fair game.

Waving signs denouncing bank "greed," hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer's steps, and onto his front porch.

* FOLKS... ARE YOU READING THIS...?!?! (YOU KNOW... I ONLY FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS VIA GLENN BECK... YOU'D THINK THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A NATIONAL NEWS LEAD!)

Baer's [14 years old] son Jack - alone in the house - locked himself in the bathroom. "When are they going to leave?" Jack pleaded when I called to check on him.

Baer, on his way home from a Little League game, parked his car around the corner, called the police, and made a quick calculation to leave his younger son - [12 years old] - behind while he tried to rescue his increasingly distressed teen.

Now this event would accurately be called a "protest" if it were taking place at, say, a bank or the U.S. Capitol. But when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be "mob."

Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked - even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might "incite" these trespassers.

Sunday's onslaught wasn't designed for mainstream media consumption. There were no reporters from organizations like the Washington Post, no local camera crews who might have aired criticism of this private-home invasion. Instead, a friendly Huffington Post blogger showed up, narrowcasting coverage to the union's leftist base. The rest of the message these protesters brought was personal - aimed at frightening Baer and his family, not influencing a broader public.

May 21, 2010 at 11:42 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://bigjournalism.com/acary/2010/05/21/d-c-metro-police-escorted-seiu-protesters-to-greg-baers-home/

The family of Greg Baer, Bank of America executive, is located in a jurisdiction protected by the Montgomery County Police Department (MCPD), which responded promptly to a disturbance call from his neighborhood last weekend.

According to Corporal Dan Friz, an MCPD spokesperson in Rockville, Maryland, the department received a disturbance call from one of Baer’s neighbors at 4:10 pm last Sunday. Four MCPD units arrived at Baer’s Greenville Rd. address at 4:15 pm. At least two Metropolitan Police Department units from the nearby District of Columbia were already at the scene when they arrived.

* REPEAT... "AT LEAST TWO WASHINGTON DC COP CARS WERE ALREADY THERE - IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY... OUTSIDE OF THEIR OWN JURISDICTION.

Why?

Because police cars attached to the Washington MPD’s Civil Disturbance Unit had escorted the SEIU protesters’ buses to Baer’s home.

* YOU'RE FOLLOWING THIS... RIGHT?

Such cross-jurisdictional escort activity is not uncommon for both departments according to Friz and Metro Police Department spokesperson Officer Eric Frost. Still, the District police did not inform their colleagues of what was about to happen in one of their Maryland neighborhoods.

* WHAT...?!?!

The Maryland officers reported there were approximately 500 protesters on and near the front lawn of Baer’s house. Montgomery County was not given a “heads-up” concerning the planned protest.

* GETTING THE PICTURE, FOLKS...???

So, let’s sum this up: A caravan of SEIU buses receive a Metropolitan (D.C.) Police Department escort to a private home in Maryland where the protesters, from all appearances, violate Montgomery County law by engaging in a stationary protest. The Montgomery County police were not informed by their cross-jurisdictional colleagues of the impending, unusually large protest pending in their jurisdiction.

What’s up with that? Had the mob decided to torch the house, the D.C. police would not have been authorized to intervene. Not their jurisdiction. They’re just escorts. Meanwhile, a teenage boy is home alone, frightened by what’s happening outside his front door.

There’s something very wrong with this picture.

* NO SHIT!

May 21, 2010 at 11:51 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/05/32-states-have-borrowed-from-treasury.html

Economic Policy Journal has learned that 32 states have run out funds to make unemployment benefit payments and that the federal governmant has been supplying these states with funds so that they can make their payments to the unemployed. In some cases, states have borrowed billions. As of May 20, the total balance outstanding by 32 states (and the Virgin Islands) is $37.8 billion.

The state of California has borrowed $6.9 billion. Michigan has borrowed $3.9 billion, Illinois $2.2 billion.

* THE OTHER BILLION-PLUS BORROWERS ARE:

Florida - $1.6 billion
Indiana - $1.7 billion
New Jersey - $1.7 billion
New York - $ 3.2 billion
North Carolina - $2.1 billion
Ohio - $2.3 billion
Pennsylvania - $3 billion
Wisconsin - $1.4 billion

* NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, FOLKS... (*SMIRK*)... HEY... HOW'BOUT THOSE METS...?!?!

May 22, 2010 at 12:03 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/family-95100-city-woman.html

* LET'S SEE IF THIS STORY GETS FURTHER ATTENTION...

* I'M TRYING NOT TO PRE-JUDGE UNTIL MORE FACTS COME OUT... BUT IT SURE AS HELL SOUNDS AS IF ONE OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS WAS KILLED BY POLICE FOR NO GOOD REASON.

A U.S. Census worker "had been confronted by residents who pointed a firearm at the worker and said they would not answer any questions and closed the door," said police spokeswoman Shawna Pavey.

* A WOMAN... ON HER OWN PROPERTY... HAVING ATTEMPTED TO DISENGAGE FROM ANY FURTHER ESCALATION...

* AGAIN, FOLKS... I'M TRYING NOT TO PRE-JUDGE...

May 22, 2010 at 12:14 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)