It was the announced "delay" of ObamaCare - the announcement that the administration would be "postponing" the effective implementation date of key provisions of ObamaCare - that blew my mind last week...
(*GNASHING MY TEETH*)
...to the point where I couldn't even blog.
(*EXHALE*)
Yep. Looking back, that was the point where I shut down.
Folks... by what right... by what legal authority... does Obama "delay" laws... "postpone" legal requirements?
Was the president given such authority within the text of the law? If so... no one is citing said text!
Has martial law been declared? Has President Obama declared a state of rebellion whereby he's been "forced" to assume extra-constitutional powers - with the approval of Congress?
NOT... TO... MY... KNOWLEDGE...!!!
It's amazing to me; I hear almost nothing from the media, the Republicans, constitutional scholars, discussing - let alone formally objecting to - this latest exercise in dictatorial power by His Most High Majesty Obama I.
There are a few exceptions... Mark Steyn for one. Charles Krauthammer for another. But, seriously, folks... having well-known conservative pundits opine and declare Obama's blatantly unconstitutional actions... er... unconstitutional... is besides the point! Where are America's foremost jurists?! Where are the deans of America's foremost law schools? Where are retired justices from the federal court system?
My friends, these are the questions that keep me awake at night.
(*BITING MY LOWER LIP*)
No. Scratch that. It's the answers that keep me up at night. Specifically it's the answer that America is no longer a constitutional republic and...
(*EYES TEARING UP*)
...that's just fine with most Americans.
8 comments:
http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130710/BUSINESS/130719892/1003
* SUBTITLED "HOW'S THIS FOR A SCAM?!"
Et tu, Wegmans?
Until recently, the company voluntarily offered health insurance to employees who worked 20 hours per week or more.
* BUT NO MORE!
The Rochester-based grocer that has been continually lauded for providing health insurance to its part-time workers will no longer offer that benefit. [T]he company said the decision was related to changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act.
* NOW HERE'S WHERE THE SCREW-JOB ON THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER KICKS IN... (KEEP READING!)
[P]art-time employees may actually benefit from Wegmans’ decision, according to Brian Murphy, a partner at Lawley Benefits Group, an insurance brokerage firm in Buffalo. “If you have an employee that qualifies for subsidized coverage, they might be better off going with that than a limited part-time benefit,” Murphy said.
That’s because subsidized coverage can have a lower out-of-pocket cost for the insured employee while also providing better benefits than an employer-paid plan.
* FOLKS... NOTICE THE WORD THAT KEEPS ON POPPING UP? THE WORD "SUBSIDIZED?" GUESS WHO PAYS FOR THE SUBSIDIZATION...?!
Under the Affordable Care Act, part-time employees are not eligible for health insurance subsidies if their employer offers insurance.
* THUS...
“It’s a win-win. The employee gets subsidized coverage, and the employer gets to lower costs,” Murphy said.
* YEP. THE BUSINESS "WINS." THE EMPLOYEE "WINS." AND YOU AND ME...? WE PAY FOR IT!
Wegmans employs roughly 1,433 full-time employees and 4,304 part-time employees in the Buffalo Niagara region.
* SO... THIS "WIN" MEANS THAT 4,304 MORE AMERICANS ARE JOINING THE RANKS OF THE WELFARE STATE ARMY! GREAT...! FRIGGIN' WONDERFUL...!
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD IN DISGUST*)
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-11-10-13-00
George Zimmerman's attorney strongly objected to a prosecution proposal that third-degree murder be included in the jury instructions.
* KEEP ON MOVING THE GOAL POSTS...
(*SIGH*)
Defense attorney Don West on Thursday called the proposal "outrageous," given that it is premised on the idea that Zimmerman committed child abuse since 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was underage when he was fatally shot.
* FOLKS... I'M STILL GUESSING ZIMMERMAN IS FOUND NOT GUILTY BECAUSE... WELL... CLEARLY HE'S NOT GUILTY... BUT EVEN IF ZIMMERMAN ESCAPES INJUSTICE, UNDERSTAND, THE SYSTEM OF AMERICAN JUSTICE IS DAY BY DAY TURNING INTO ONE OF "AMERIKAN" JUSTICE. (MEANING LACK THEREOF.)
Judge Debra Nelson says she will rule on the proposal later. The judge, however, agreed with the prosecution that jurors could consider manslaughter as a lesser charge.
* FOLKS... THIS IS WRONG! THIS IS GETTING TWO BITES AT THE APPLE! AGAIN... IMAGINE GETTING A TRAFFIC TICKET FOR GOING 85 mph IN A 65 mph ZONE AND BEING FOUND NOT GUILTY... ONLY TO BE RETRIED WITH THE NEW CHARGE BEING YOU WERE ACTUALLY GOING 84 mph... AND IF YOU GET OFF ON THAT ONE ANOTHER TRIAL FOR GOING 83 mph AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
Zimmerman's attorney said he wanted the six jurors to only consider the second-degree murder charge or not guilty.
* EXACTLY! BECAUSE THAT'S THE HIGHEST CHARGE THAT THE STATE CHOSE TO LAY! (ONE... BITE... AT... THE... APPLE! THAT'S HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK!)
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/immigration-house-republicans-93969.html
The House Republican leadership is reaching out to top House Democrats to assess their support for a piecemeal approach to immigration reform, according to sources involved in the discussions. These contacts are in the early stages, but the discussions are aimed at running up big bipartisan majorities for a series of GOP-authored bills, that could counter the bipartisan Senate bill.
In short, Democrats would smooth the prospects for passage.
The House’s immigration game-plan is to pass individual bills rather than take the comprehensive approach advocated by the Senate.
The legislation under discussion between Republicans and Democrats includes bills reworking the employment verification system and legislation to toughen border security, according to sources both involved in and familiar with the talks. ... Republicans have said that support for immigration reform is soft among GOP lawmakers and leadership is skeptical that there is backing for anything more drastic than border security and E-verify.
* LET'S HOPE! (NOT THAT I TRUST POLITICO - LET ALONE BOEHNER - BUT THIS DOES SOUND LIKE GOOD NEWS...)
Boehner called the immigration debate “important,” and said Republicans need a plan. Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Republicans should present an alternative to the Senate’s plan — just like the party did during the economic stimulus debate in 2009.
More than Cantor and perhaps even Boehner, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is someone who is catching Republicans’ eyes. The 2012 vice presidential nominee and House Budget Committee chair, who has been quietly meeting for months on immigration reform, took to the microphone at Wednesday’s meeting, saying that the GOP needs to tackle immigration — and now. Immigrants, he said, are important to the country’s economic vitality.
* NOW THIS DOESN'T SOUND GOOD... (AGAIN... I'VE NEVER TRUSTED RYAN.)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
There are two extreme poles in the House Republican Conference, and they were on clear display Wednesday in the Capitol.
In the meeting, which stretched more than two hours, Rep. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) stood up and delivered a speech about the dangers of entering into a formal conference negotiation with the Senate. Conservatives are worried that the House will be forced to accept the bipartisan Senate bill if they enter into those talks. Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) said that his leadership must “commit to certain principles on immigration reform and then we can go to a conference.”
* SOUNDS REASONABLE... (AND FITS WITH MY DISTRUST IN RYAN - AND BOEHNER!)
The tone diverges when people like Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Calif.) speak. He has a heavily Hispanic district near Sacramento, and told his colleagues in the closed meeting that there should be “no more excuses, it’s time for action.”
* "ACTION" MEANING AMNESTY.
(*SHRUG*)
The meeting, and the lack of progress made, is sure to frustrate the corporate interests who are dropping millions of dollars into the effort to "reform" immigration.
* EVEN "HE WHOSE NAME DARE NOT BE MENTIONED" SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONNECT THE DOTS. IT'S THE OLIGARCHS - THE WALL STREET REPUBLICANS AND WALL STREET DEMOCRATS - WHO WANT TO "REFORM" THE SYSTEM. (AND BY "REFORM" THEY MEAN MAKE IT EASIER TO LOWER WAGES AND BENEFITS AND INCREASE PROFITS WHILE EXPLOITING FOREIGNERS AND CUTTING POOR - OVER-REPRESENTED BLACK AMERICANS - OUT.) (CHECK OUT BLACK UNEMPLOYMENT; THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY WE NEED TO IMPORT UNSKILLED LABOR.)
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), one of immigration reform’s biggest foes in the House, said the division between Republicans who favor some sort of legalization and those who oppose it is “close to 50-50.”
* FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... LIKE I ALWAYS SAY... HALF OF THE GOP ARE ACTUALLY DEMOCRATS FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES.
Lawmakers did seem open to allowing children who were brought here illegally to stay in the country.
* THIS SHOULD BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. HELL... I'M EVEN OPEN TO A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FOR THE CHILDREN WHO WERE BROUGHT HERE AS CHILDREN!
“I personally think we could begin at least the process of addressing [that] before the August recess,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said of the so-called DREAMers.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353105/judge-confronts-zimmerman-testy-exchange-dimitrios-halikias
A hostile exchange took place in the courtroom today where George Zimmerman is on trial for second degree murder as Judge Debra Nelson questioned the defendant about his plans to testify.
Nelson reminded Zimmerman that he has the “absolute right to remain silent” if he so desires and proceeded to ask him whether he was prepared to testify. Defense attorney Don West twice objected to the question, but was overruled by Nelson, who explained, “The court is entitled to inquire if Mr. Zimmerman’s determination [sic] as to whether or not he wants to testify.”
The judge then began asking Zimmerman how much time he requires to determine whether or not he would like to testify. West again objected to the question and asked for more time to speak with his client, prompting Judge Nelson to raise her voice and exclaim, “Your objection is overruled!”
The tension escalated as another of Zimmerman’s defense attorneys, Mark O’Mara, was overheard asking under his breath, “What is going on?”
Kathi Belich, a journalist following the trial for a local news channel, tweeted her surprise at the line of questioning, writing “I have never seen that in more than 30 years of court reporting.”
* I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT THIS MEANS. NONE. ZILCH. PERSONALLY, I'D LOVE TO HAVE ZIMMERMAN TESTIFY. WHAT THE JUDGE'S MOTIVATION IS... NO IDEA!
* THREE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/sanford-bill-lee-exclusive/index.html
The George Zimmerman investigation was hijacked "in a number of ways" by outside forces, said the former police chief of Sanford, Florida.
Bill Lee, who testified Monday in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, told CNN's George Howell in an exclusive interview that he felt pressure from city officials to arrest Zimmerman to placate the public rather than as a matter of justice.
"It was (relayed) to me that they just wanted an arrest. They didn't care if it got dismissed later," he said. "You don't do that."
When Sanford police arrived on the scene on February 26, 2012, after Zimmerman fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, they conducted a "sound" investigation, and the evidence provided no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman at the scene, he said.
It had nothing to do with Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, he said; from an investigative standpoint, it was purely a matter of self-defense.
Zimmerman told police he killed Martin after the teen attacked him. While the evidence at the time corroborated that claim, the ex-chief said, Lee's lead investigator made a recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter.
* WHY...?
* WHILE I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM LEE'S LEAD INVESTIGATOR, HERE'S WHAT LEE SAYS:
Arresting Zimmerman based on the evidence at hand would have been a violation of Zimmerman's Fourth Amendment rights, he said. Thus, the Sanford police presented a "capias request" to the state's attorney, asking that the prosecutor determine whether it was a "justifiable homicide," issue a warrant for arrest or present the case to a grand jury.
"The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence - outside influence and inside influence - that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process," Lee said.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
"With all the influence and the protests and petitions for an arrest, you still have to uphold your oath."
(*NOD*)
"That investigation was taken away from us. We weren't able to complete it," he said.
* AND HE WAS PROVEN RIGHT!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)
One example involved the 911 tapes, in which neighbors implored dispatchers to send police as a voice in the background screamed for help. The Sanford police intended to release the tapes once the probe was over, Lee said, because you can't publicize evidence amid an investigation. Instead, the mayor told him on March 16 the tapes had been released to Martin's family and the public. The family was asked to help identify voices, Lee said, but if police were in charge of the investigation, they wouldn't have presented evidence to a group.
* OBVIOUSLY!
"It should be done individually so there's no influence on the other people in the room," he said.
* OBVIOUSLY...!!!
"Then, there's no questions that can be brought up about how (an identification) was obtained or whether it was influenced."
(*SIGH FOLLOWED BY NOD*)
I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity.
* GOOD FOR YOU, CHIEF! GOD BLESS YOU!
Releasing the evidence to the public was problematic, as well, because it created the potential for someone to concoct a "story about what they observed when they really didn't observe it," he said.
* DUH!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)
Martin family attorney Jasmine Rand said she doesn't believe playing the tapes to a room full of people "makes any difference to the outcome of the case."
* AND WHAT EXACTLY WOULD YOU EXPECT HER TO SAY?!
Lee was placed on paid leave March 22, 2012, after the Sanford City Commission expressed a lack of confidence in him. The same commission rejected his resignation in a 3-2 vote a month later, with dissenting commissioners questioning the fairness of Lee's losing his job. Two months later, Lee was sacked.
* NAH... (*SNORT*) (*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)... NOTHING POLITICAL HERE!
City Manager Norton Bonaparte said in a news release, "The police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community."
* THE CHIEF OF POLICE HAS TO BE HONEST AND COMPETENT AND TO PUT THE LAW AND JUSTICE ABOVE HIS PROFESSIONAL CAREER ADVANCEMENT. THAT'S THE KIND OF GUY LEE SOUNDS LIKE. BONAPARTE... NOT SO MUCH.
Lee believes lack of confidence did play a role in his dismissal, he told CNN, but he also believes Bonaparte faced political pressure and terminated him "without cause," which was permitted under his employment contract. "I upheld my oath," Lee said. "I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity."
Asked whether he would do things differently given the opportunity, the 30-year veteran of law enforcement said there always are things he could change in hindsight, but he stands by the investigation. At every turn in the 40-minute interview with CNN's Howell, Lee doggedly defended his investigators, saying race never played a role in any decision and that his officers "conducted an unbiased review."
Investigators knew letting Zimmerman walk free for 46 days was an unpopular decision - and they took abuse for it - "but they performed professionally. That's the mark of a strong police department."
Lee took issue with the media casting his department as apathetic or lackadaisical in the case. "A lot of the information that was given out as fact was misinformation," he said. "It was reported in some media that we didn't conduct an investigation for two weeks, but yet in that same media they would show a photograph of a crime scene with crime scene tape, with patrol cars and blue lights and investigators on the scene."
* YEP. THAT'S THE MSM!
Post a Comment