Is A Guaranteed Minimum Income Next? ~~ J.D. Longstreet

Stolen from Faultline USA

About a year and a half go, I wrote of my concern that the Obama Administration would soon seek a guaranteed minimum income for every American. As we have watched the the unemployment benefits extended and extended and extended again and again, one must wonder if, in the end, that isn't exactly where we are headed. My concern has not slacked one iota.

Below is the article, shortened a bit. I hope you find it informative and enlightening. ... JDL

**************************************

If the Obama Administration and his fellow Socialist/Marxist/Progressives (who camouflage themselves as democrats) in the US government aren't sent packing in November, I fully expect the next step in securing a socialist state in America is a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for every American.

Think about it. It is one of the few steps remaining that would solidify the hold government has on every man, woman, and child in America.

We know from the records that the welfare rolls have increased exponentially under Obama. Recently, changes were made by Presidential Executive Order to redefine "work" allowing even more applicants for welfare to be added to the welfare rolls. Why? Could it be the Obama Administration is deliberately attempting to "crash" the US welfare system? If so -- why?

I contend -- that is exactly what is happening.

If I an correct, then we are actually seeing the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" at work. We are observing the foundation, the groundwork -- if you will -- for establishing a guaranteed annual (minimum) income for American citizens. It is very, very, worrisome. But -- it is only the latest move by our socialist leaders to break America so they can re-mold her in the image of their choosing, which is, unarguably a socialist/Marxist state.

America is in a death spiral, dear reader. If the American electorate doesn't shake itself out of this stupor in which it is currently wallowing and come out swinging like the people we like to think we are, we are going to lose our liberty, our individual freedom, and our country.

What we are talking about here is "a government-ensured guarantee that all citizens unconditionally receive an income sufficient to meet their basic needs." SOURCE

Look around you. Consider the extremely high percentage of Americans already on what we call "Welfare" and consider, too, that nearly half of all Americans currently receive some form of government monetary assistance every month and then -- ask yourself what will happen to America's economy if Americans are guaranteed an annual income whether they work and contribute to our society or not.

Let's look a bit closer: What is a BIG? It is a Basic Income Guarantee. "The basic income guarantee (BIG) is a government insured guarantee that no citizen's income will fall below some minimal level for any reason. All citizens would receive a BIG without means test or work requirement. BIG is an efficient and effective solution to poverty that preserves individual autonomy and work incentives while simplifying government social policy. Some researchers estimate that a small BIG, sufficient to cut the poverty rate in half could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes." SOURCE

Here's more: "The Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) is a government ensured guarantee that no one's income will fall below the level necessary to meet their most basic needs for any reason. As Bertrand Russell put it in 1918, "A certain small income, sufficient for necessities, should be secured for all, whether they work or not, and that a larger income should be given to those who are willing to engage in some work which the community recognizes as useful. On this basis we may build further." Thus, with BIG no one is destitute but everyone has the positive incentive to work. BIG is an efficient, effective, and equitable solution to poverty that promotes individual freedom and leaves the beneficial aspects of a market economy in place." SOURCE

OK. So, how would we pay for it? Those who advocate the BIG say (above): " ... could be financed without an increase in taxes by redirecting funds from spending programs and tax deductions aimed at maintaining incomes."

HUH?

That's strange because just a bit lower on the page we find this: "The most commonly cited source of revenue for BIG is the income tax. Most proposals combine a basic income guarantee with a flat tax on income. Charles Clark estimates that a flat income tax rate of less than 40% would be enough to finance all current government spending and a BIG large enough to eliminate poverty." SOURCE

I have to wonder if "less than 40%" means 39.99%?

It's coming. How can I be so sure? Because the next attempt at a BIG for the US will be only the latest iteration. The movement for a guaranteed income has been around for a long time. A quick check for advocates of a guaranteed income at Wikipedia brought some surprises. For Instance: American revolutionary Thomas Paine advocated a basic income guarantee to all US citizens as compensation for "loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property" (Agrarian Justice, 1795).

French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte echoed Paine's sentiments and commented that 'man is entitled by birthright to a share of the Earth's produce sufficient to fill the needs of his existence' (Herold, 1955).

In 1962, economist Milton Friedman proposed a Negative Income Tax coupled with a flat tax in support of a guaranteed minimum income.

In 1963, Robert Theobald published the book Free Men and Free Markets, in which he advocated a guaranteed minimum income (the origin of the modern version of the phrase).

In 1966 the Cloward–Piven strategy advocated "overloading" the US welfare system to force its collapse in the hopes that it would be replaced by "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

In his final book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967) Martin Luther King Jr. wrote: "I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income." -—from the chapter titled "Where We Are Going".

In 1968, James Tobin, Paul Samuelson, John Kenneth Galbraith and another 1,200 economists signed a document calling for the US Congress to introduce in that year a system of income guarantees and supplements.

In 1973, Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote The Politics of a Guaranteed Income in which he advocated the Guaranteed Minimum Income and discussed Richard Nixon's GAI proposal.

We encourage you to read the article at Wikipedia

There are references to other advocates of a national guaranteed income in the article at Wikipedia, but I think you get the idea.

Oh, and while you are on the Wikipedia page, scroll down and check out the list of suggested means of funding for a national guaranteed income. But -- be sure you are sitting down before you do.

A guaranteed income for all Americans is the worst idea for America since, well, Obamacare!

Item number two in the The Black Panther Party: Platform and Program includes the following statement: "We believe that the federal government is responsible and obligated to give every man employment or a guaranteed income." SOURCE

As I mentioned above -- I have to wonder if the massive increase in the number of Americans on Welfare under the Obama Administration is in keeping with the Cloward–Piven strategy which suggests overloading the US welfare system forcing it to collapse and setting the stage for a guaranteed income for all Americans. You can read more on the Cloward-Piven strategy here.

I cannot even begin to tell you how deeply, deeply, opposed to the entire idea of a guaranteed annual income for all Americans I am. The American republic would be crushed and wiped out by internal rot!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The only way to make this work is to tax everyone at a 70% rate.  Not just the rich, but everyone.  Think how that would go over.

We can laugh now, but Moonbat ideas like this one has a way of becoming reality.  And after the debacle of Obamacare do we really want this to be enforced upon us?  And if the Democrats get the House back they will do this.  Just a warning.

Watching History Unfold ~~~ By J. D. Longstreet

From Faultline USA

Obama's War Mongering

 

For one to say: "These are perilous times," in reference to our current position on the time continuum, would be a vast understatement.

With a military spent and degraded, the US stands on the cusp of a THIRD WORLD WAR, which will -- win, lose, or draw, likely finish America for good.

Our President is insistent upon involving the US in the "trigger conflict" which will, undoubtedly, set the wheels in motion that will spark a regional conflagration drawing in the remaining nations of the world due to the strategic location of the shooting war itself.

To make matters worse, our national legislature, the Congress, appears ready to endorse the President's war mongering. Frankly, I had thought they had better sense. But I now believe I was woefully wrong. They really ARE that dumb.

The argument that Obama's war will be short-lived and have a narrow strike zone and limited scope is all unadulterated Bovine Scatology. The moment the first American bomb strikes Syrian soil it's: "GAME ON!" The proverbial powder keg will explode and all hell will break loose all over the world. That includes inside the contiguous United States, as well. This time it is entirely likely that America will have war on its own shores.

If you have ever, as an adult, taken a fall, you know there is a split second when your mind suddenly grasps that your body is going to fall and strike the hard floor and there is absolutely nothing you can do to prevent it. In that same instant your mind begins preparing for the painful aftermath, which it is now certain is forthcoming. All of this takes place in an instant.

That's where this scribe is in assessing Obama's coming war in Syria -- or should I say: Obama's war in the Middle East, or even Obama's Third World War? The frustrating inability to do anything to prevent it is palpable.

It's as though the United States is on a pre-planned excursion into Hell, itself, and the American people, like blind lemmings, are marching right along behind their Luciferian leader into the jaws of perdition having been easily convinced the heat they feel is only the rays of a friendly sun.

The systematic dismantling of the United States by the marxocrats is nearly complete now. Only one thing remains: Destruction of America's military might. That, too, it appears, is approaching an advanced stage.

Consider the following from David G. Bolgiano in an OP-ED piece n the September 1st edition of the Fayetteville Observer of Fayetteville, NC, the home of Ft. Bragg:

"There has been a systemic winnowing of steely eyed killers from our military's senior-leader ranks. In their place are effete politicians with Harvard Kennedy School of Government-like credentials but lacking true, close-in killing experience. Under such leadership, the lives of suspected al-Qaida and Taliban are valued the same as our own young men and women.

This misguided approach to fighting a counterinsurgency fails, as Winston Churchill stated, to "decline utterly to be impartial as between the fire brigade and the fire." This raises a serious overarching question, "Why fight?" If the current crop of leaders and lawyers were running the show back in 1944, the entire E Company, 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment of "Band of Brothers" fame would have been court-martialed. Moreover, we would now all be speaking German." SOURCE

Mr. Bolgiano goes on to say in his excellent article: "Unfortunately, ill-informed and untrained lawyers have created an unnecessary legal bogie monster by substituting fuzzy notions from human rights law for the sound doctrine of the law of war. We now conduct war by such silly notions as "warrant-based targeting" and "minimum force." The enemy has become quite adept at using this tactic of "lawfare" to make us much less combat-effective.

Many commanders are afraid to use force when their own troops are under attack." (Emphasis by underlining --MINE. ED) SOURCE

Through decades of scripture study I have wondered, as I am told many of you have as well, why the US (or American army) is not identified amongst the other armies of the great nations of the world in the scripture covering the final battle, the Battle of Armageddon.

Could it be that THE US ARMY WILL NOT BE THERE because -- there will be no United States in existence to send an army.

For old-timers, like me, watching history unfold today is akin to watching a review of things past.

One of the things one learns as one grows older is that history does, in fact, repeat itself. The old adage that those who refuse to learn the lessons from history past are doomed to repeat the mistakes their forebears made -- is also true -- and in spades!

Who would have thought that a few pistol shots resulting in the death of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria on June 28th, 1914 would lead to not one, but two, world wars? With brief respites, the nations of the world were at each other's throats for the next 30 some-odd years.

If Obama gets his way, the US will be interfering in a civil war in a nation in which there are no vital national security interests for the United States. None.

Are the people of Britain, France, and Germany smarter than the US? Each have said "no" to standing with Obama in a war which is undoubtedly the "initializer" for a greater conflict.

The American people have cast their lot with the peoples of Britain, France and Germany. BUT -- the LEADERS of the American people seem ready to defy the American people, the lessons of history, and even common sense, to involve the United States in a conflict that (I BELIEVE) will ultimately lead to the collapse of the US and it's final break up into a number of smaller nations.

Somehow, the American people have come to view electing a President as equal to electing a prom king or even a student body president. It has become a popularity contest. And THIS is the result. A leader who, when he deigns to lead at all, tends to lead the nation toward defeat and destruction.

Today America resembles an out of control "Merry-Go 'Round," or carousel, accelerating faster and faster with no way for the riders to get off. The ONLY option is to hold on and wait for the crash.

Tiny Minds Think Alike

Pat Condell rants about the Loonies on the left and their idea of Free Speech.



Click here if the video fails to load.

How Common Core Standards Are Destroying Our Children's Education

Last month California switch from their previous standards of education to Common Core Standards.  While hailed as a major step forward its true goal is to indoctrinate students to the "Progressive" agenda.  In fact it harms Black and Latino students by failing to prepare them for college.

California will no longer require eighth-graders to take algebra - a move that is line with the Common Core standards being adopted by most states, but that may leave students unprepared for college.

Last month, California formally shifted to the Common Core mathematics standards, which recommend that students delay taking algebra if they aren't ready for it. Previously, algebra class was a requirement for all eighth-graders in the state.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative, which is sponsored by the National Governor's Association, is an effort to unify diverse state education curricula. Forty-five other states and the District of Columbia have signed on so far.

But some education experts worry that the change will further damage struggling students' college chances, since early proficiency in Algebra I is an excellent predictor of college graduation, according to the Mercury News.

Black and Latino students in California are significantly more likely to fail eighth-grade algebra, and 80 percent of those who fail it once will fail it again when they take it in high school.

A study published by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area claims that some minority students who score well enough to place into advanced math classes are often mistakenly held back.

Source

Does anyone find this ironic that the 2 groups of students with the highest rate of dropping out of school will be hurt the most by this.  Just another tool in the Progressive arsenal to keep Blacks and now Latinos on the Plantation.

First They Came For The Guns...

And took them out of their hands in Great Britain.  They promised the population that they would be safe, that crime would reduce to almost nothing.  It didn't happen.  In fact, crime increased.  Crime with knives increased.  So now they will ban the knife.

The good news is that if we ever do get that assault rifle ban, followed by a handgun ban, followed by a ban of anything that can shoot bullets, the “Banners” will still have a banner year of banning all the other ways with which people kill other people.

Violent crimes haven’t gone away with the UK’s gun control. They’ve actually gone up.

Britons suffer 1,158,957 violent crimes per year, which works out at 2,034 per 100,000 residents. The U.S., meanwhile, has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is lower than France’s, at 504.

Instead of gun crime, the UK worries about knife crime. And has been practicing knife control.

The UK outlawed the switchblade and gravity knife in 1959.

In 1988 possession of a pocket knife with a blade larger than 3 inches in public became illegal.

In 1996, it became illegal to sell a razor blade to anyone under the age of 16.

In 2007, you needed a license to be able to sell “non-domestic knives.”

Despite all that knifepoint robberies rose by 10 percent this year and there are some 60,000 stabbings each year. So the push is on to outlaw long kitchen knives. Once that’s done, surely utopia will be at hand.

A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase – and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives have little practical value in the kitchen.

None of the chefs felt such knives were essential, since the point of a short blade was just as useful when a sharp end was needed.

The researchers say legislation to ban the sale of long pointed knives would be a key step in the fight against violent crime.

“We suggest that banning the sale of long pointed knives is a sensible and practical measure that would have this effect.”

Certainly no law-abiding person needs a long blade kitchen knife. No one is talking about outlawing all kitchen knives. Just the ones with long blades. No reason for anyone to go beyond a paring knife anyway.

The chefs say so and what does Julia Child know anyway.

Take a good look America. This is where we’re headed under liberal dominion.

Source

What happens if you are a young girl and you need to shave your armpits? Or a boy age 15 and that peach fuzz is growing dark

I suppose the 10 top chefs they asked were vegans.  I need a long, sharp blade to filet fish.  Need a long, thick blade to butcher a kill.  Heck try to carve a roast or a turkey with a steak knife.  I need a very sharp long knife (and sharp fork) to do that too.

You cannot legislate safety for every situation.  You can kill with a steak knife, razor, heck a very sharp Swiss Army Knife.  Unless you have a cop following each and every person 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, you will never prevent murders.

I suggest every person who cooks, who carves, who loves their freedom to rise up and strike a blow for freedom and kill this stupidity before it gains any grounds with the ruling Elites.

Meatless Mondays?

Hat Tip The Lid

Nanny State at work!

Yes ladies and gentlemen all you have to do is "Pledge" to give up eating meat on Mondays.  Right now it is voluntary but give these assholes enough time and it will be mandatory with stiff fines.

From the City Council that declared war on trans-fats and fast-food restaurants comes the latest way to make residents feel, well, guilty about what they eat.

The Los Angeles council, in a 14-0 vote on Friday, adopted a resolution urging residents to adopt a personal pledge to have a "meatless Monday."

While it does not have the force of law and police will not be checking what you brought to work for lunch, city officials said they hope it will start a trend, make residents healthier and reduce the impact on the environment.

"This follows the `good food' agenda we recently adopted supporting local, sustainable food choices," said Councilwoman Jan Perry, who has called for a ban on new fast-food restaurants in South Los Angeles to fight obesity.

"We can reduce saturated fats and reduce the risk of heart disease by 19 percent," Perry said. "While this is a symbolic gesture, it is asking people to think about the food choices they make. Eating less meat can reverse some of our nation's most common illnesses."

Councilman Ed Reyes, who joined with Perry in proposing the resolution, said one of his sons has been diagnosed with diabetes.

"The issue is how does a local municipality engage in this and how do we create change," Reyes said. "If we do it one plate at time, one meal, one day, we are ratcheting down the impact on our environment. We start with one day a week and then, who knows, maybe we can change our habits for a lifetime."

The proposal was developed by the Food Policy Council, which has a goal of "creating more and better food jobs" and encouraging food companies and small food enterprises as part of a bigger agenda to encourage healthy foods in the city.

Source

Los Angeles has many problems.  Crime, Drugs, Gangs, Failing Schools.  But they are waging war on meat.  Why?  Because they can draw attention away from every other problem they have.  They are heading for bankruptcy and all they can do is deny their citizens the joy of eating the foods they love.

I am sure that Michelle Obama will talk her husband into making this a national law.

Remember The Fish!!!!

On October 11th a truck carrying 1,600 pounds of live fish and tanks of pure oxygen flipped, leading to the biggest fish fry in Irvine history a mess on the street.  While no one was injured many fish became dinner.  Everyone forgot the incident except....PETA.  Yes PETA who believe that animals should have more rights than people.  Now they are demanding that the City of Irvine do this:

An Irvine resident is requesting that the city install a sign to memorialize the hundreds of fish killed in a traffic crash in early October as they were being taken to Irvine Ranch Market.

In the letter, Dina Kourda, on behalf of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, asks the city's street maintenance superintendent to place the sign at the site of the crash on Walnut and Yale avenues.

he sign would read, "In memory of hundreds of fish who suffered and died at this spot," to remind tractor-trailer drivers of their responsibility to the animals who are "hauled to their deaths every day," according to the letter provided by PETA.

The crash occurred Oct. 11 when a truck, carrying 1,600 pounds of live fish and several tanks of pure oxygen, crashed with two other vehicles.

The oxygen was used to keep saltwater bass alive as the fish were being taken to market.

"Although such signs are traditionally reserved for human fatalities, I hope you'll make an exception because of the enormous suffering involved in this case," the letter read.

"Research tells us that fish use tools, tell time, sing, and have impressive long-term memories and complex social structures, yet fish used for food are routinely crushed, impaled, cut open, and gutted, all while still conscious. Sparing them from being tossed from a speeding truck and slowly dying from injuries and suffocation seems the least that we can do," the letter continued.

Kourda requests that the sign be placed at the edge of the right of way farthest from the road in order to prevent it from interfering with traffic.

Source

I have an idea for the sign that should be placed there:

2012 The Democratic National Convention Speakers List: A Who's Who Of Extremists

4 years ago the Democrats had a convention that tried to convince the American people that their party was one of inclusiveness.  Their speakers were moderates, Blue Dogs, pro-life, and not a liberal, not a progressive in sight.  Today it is opposite.  Today some of the most extreme liberals and progressives the party has will speak.  They will bash Mitt Romney as a rich man who hates people.  They will praise Barack Hussein Obama as the second Coming.  They will tell the American people that government knows what's best and will tell you what is best for your life too.  But will they succeed?

**********************************************************************************

By Susan Duclos

Next week is the 2012 Democratic National Convention and they have provided a list of speakers, which includes the President of Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Ms. Sandra "taxpayers should pay for college student's birth control pills" Fluke.

Note- Going through the list and adding links to controversial statements, unfavorable ratings, scandals and disagreements with Obama's attacks against Romney by some of the very speakers listed, and those that voted for Obamacare, it is apparent that while the GOP 2012 Convention highlighted diversity in the party and while appealing to their base, they also made sure to be inclusive, to make their case to those undecided voters, centrists, moderates, conservative Democrats and Independents,.

The Democratic list is a who's who of far far left liberal extremists who have often alienated undecided voters un-apologetically.

Obviously Democrats have decided they need to rally their base because of the enthusiasm gap that favors Republicans heading into the November elections, without a care to appealing to moderates, undecideds, centrists and Independents.

Speaker list:

Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin
Congressman Xavier Becerra of California (Voted for Obamacare)
Newark Mayor Cory Booker- (Publicly criticized Barack Obama's attacks on Mitt Romney's private equity experience)
Congressman G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina (Voted for Obamacare)
Former President Jimmy Carter (via video)- (Carter was ranked by Newsweek/Daily Beast in the voter's list of 10 worst presidents- but ranked above Obama)
San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, who will be the first Latino keynote speaker at a Democratic National Convention
Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee
Congresswoman Judy Chu of California (Voted for Obamacare)
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri (Voted for Obamacare)
Former President Bill Clinton
Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina (Voted for Obamacare)
Former Republican Governor of Florida Charlie Crist
Lieutenant Governor of North Carolina Walter Dalton
The Honorable Arne Duncan
Congresswoman Diana DeGette of Colorado (Voted for Obamacare)
Former Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Tammy Duckworth
U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois (Told a room full of illegal aliens that he could be looking at the a future "president" -Note- Only natural born citizens can become president)
Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Maryland (Voted for Obamacare)
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (Recently ticked off Chicago Church leaders by vowing to block Chick-Fil-A from building in his hometown by saying "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago's values.")
Georgetown Law School Graduate Sandra Fluke- (Told an unofficial congressional hearing "Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.")
Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx
Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts- (Riddled with scandals and more recently decided to joke about the Trayvon Martin shooting)
Former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt
Former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm
Congressman Charlie Gonzalez of Texas (Voted for Obamacare)
U.S. Senator Kay Hagan of North Carolina
California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris
Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper
Congressman Steny Hoyer of Maryland- (Voted for Obamacare)
Former Governor of North Carolina Jim Hunt
DCCC Chairman Congressman Steve Israel of New York- (Voted for Obamacare)
Montana State Superintendent of Public Instruction Denise Juneau
Former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine
Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy (ret.)
Congressman John Larson of Connecticut- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congressman John Lewis of Georgia- (Voted for Obamacare)
CarMax co-founder and former CEO Austin Ligon
President of NARAL Pro-Choice America Nancy Keenan
Caroline Kennedy
U.S. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts- (Voted for Obamacare)
Women’s rights activist Lilly Ledbetter
Obama Campaign Co-Chair Eva Longoria
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy
Delaware Governor Jack Markell
Boston Mayor Tom Menino
The Honorable Karen Mills
U.S. Senator Patty Murray of Washington- (Voted for Obamacare)
Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter
U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, together with the women of the U.S. Senate- (Voted for Obamacare)
Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (Also aims for Romney, but hits Obama on Bain attacks)
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi- (Pelosi ranked least-liked congressional leader)
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi will also lead a presentation of the women of the House:-
Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney of New York- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez of New York- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Gwen Moore of Wisconsin- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz of Pennsylvania- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Maryland- (Voted for Obamacare)
Candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives Joyce Beatty of Ohio
Candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii
California Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez
Congressman Jared Polis of Colorado- (Voted for Obamacare)
Congressman David Price of North Carolina- (Voted for Obamacare)
Illinois Governor Pat Quinn
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada (Second most unpopular congressional leader, after Pelosi)- (Voted for Obamacare)
President of Planned Parenthood Action Fund Cecile Richards- (Planned parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the United States)
Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak
The Honorable Ken Salazar
Journalist Cristina Saralegui
U.S. Senator Charles Schumer of New York- (Voted for Obamacare)
Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer
The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius- (Leading the assault on Religious Freedom- HHS Mandate)
Costco co-founder and former CEO Jim Sinegal
Former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland
Congressman Chris Van Hollen- (Voted for Obamacare)
Los Angeles Mayor, Democratic Convention Chair Antonio Villaraigosa
The Honorable Tom Vilsack
Senate candidate from Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren (Suffered her own "heritage" controversy recently and is trailing Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Senate race.)
DNC Chair Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida- (Ranked most unpopular Obama reelection campaign surrogate.)
Congressman Mel Watt of North Carolina- (Voted for Obamacare)

**********************************************************************************

The perfect Convention for Liberals, scripted by liberals,  produced by the Obama Regime with the help of the Hollywood elite.  The MSM especially MSNBC will praise every speaker, every speech as a masterpiece.  But will the American people buy it?  I hope not.

Let his days be few, let another take his office.  --  Psalm 109: 8

Stolen From Hat Tip to Patriot's Corner

I am posting this in its entirety.   We have seen a lot of waste in the government.  This is just not waste, it is criminal especially after the Solyndra fiasco.
************************************************************************************

I am posting this  exclusive post by Dr. Eowyn from Fellowship Of The Minds.

A true story of massive government waste to the tune of $16 million of our tax dollars to finish a hangar. Yes a hangar and one way over budget, way overdue past the deadline for completion.

All I ask is that you help Dr.Eowyn get this story out. It needs to be exposed for what it truly is. 

Massive government waste and mismanagement.

**************************************************************************************

Govt waste: Will a $16 million hangar ever get finished?

By Dr. Eowyn

The following article is a FOTM exclusive, published nowhere else, on a mismanaged military construction project that is shaping to be a $16 million boondoggle — at a time when America, with a national debt of $16 trillion, can ill afford it.

Please help FOTM to publicize this, by linking this post to your Facebook and Twitter accounts and by sending this to your email list, especially your representatives in Congress!
 

 We’ve all read or heard about notorious wasteful government spending such as the $16 muffin or the $436 hammer or the $15.3 million bridge-to-nowhere in Alaska. (For more on the U.S. government’s wasteful spending, go to Project on Government Oversight.)

Here’s a story about a fighter aircraft hangar that was supposed to be renovated but instead will be abandoned, boarded up, and never used, sending $16 million of hardworking taxpayers’ money down the drain.

The story begins in the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station in Cherry Point, North Carolina.

 

 

 On October 7, 2008, the United States government, in the person of the commanding officer of NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering Command) Mid-Atlantic in Norfolk, VA, issued a solicitation for bids on Military Contract P809 for Fiscal Year 2009 (henceforth referred to as “Solicitation”).

The contract was to undertake the renovation and facilities upgrades to a hangar (Hangar 130) on the Marine Corps Air Station in Cherry Point, to accommodate two F/A-18 E/F squadrons. This would involve, among others, the reconfiguration of hangar space to house maintenance, training, and administrative functions.

According to NAVFAC’s solicitation document, the government’s estimated cost for the project was $10 million to $15 million. (See the 59-page “Solicitation No. N40085-08-R-1424″ here or from FOTM’s media library.) But a NAVFAC presentation at the 11th Annual NC Defense Trade Show had the cost for the project when the contract was awarded to be $16.2 million; and a PDF document on the Department of the Navy’s Budget Estimates for FY 2008 had the cost of the project to be $16.5 million.

The solicitation form specifies that the contractor with the winning bid must “begin performance within 15 calendar days and complete it within 651 calendar days after receiving the notice to proceed.” In other words, the project construction period was not to exceed 651 calendar days, which is to be conducted in 2 phases. This time limit is “mandatory” and “non-negotiable.”

Certain conditions were attached to the Solicitation, including:

1. The Base Bid includes work in accordance with the drawings and specifications by the architectural-engineering firm, Dills Ainscough Duff, P.C., of Virginia Beach, VA, which had been commissioned by NAVFAC, except for two options items:

• The construction of a single-story operational trainer building
• The construction of a single-story pre-engineered metal building for storing and testing special ordnance devices using the “1760 Cable” to attach to F18 aircraft.

2. This acquisition will result in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for construction services. [FFP contracts are those contracts that: (a) provide for a price which normally is not subject to any adjustment; (b) are negotiated usually where reasonably definite specifications are available, and costs can be estimated with reasonable accuracy; (c) places minimum administrative burden on contracting parties; (d) subjects a contractor to maximum risk arising from full responsibility for all cost escalations.]

3. The wining Contractor must abide by the government’s Affirmative Action goals of 31% minority and 6.9% female participation in each trade on all construction work in the covered area.

4. If the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract (651 calendar days), the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $7,161.57 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.

5. If the Government terminates the Contractor’s right to proceed, liquidated damages will continue to accrue until the work is completed. These liquidated damages are in addition to excess costs of repurchase under the Termination clause.

This hangar renovation project is a MILCON (Military Construction) project.

MILCON involves the construction of facilities that cost in excess of $750K. MILCON appropriations are separate from all other appropriations approved by Congress in that once funding is approved by Congress, construction must begin within three years and be completed within five years. Further, each MILCON project requires individual approval by Congress. A project cannot be funded until it is designed, which was why before NAVFAC issued its solicitation for contractors to bid on the hangar renovation project, NAVFAC commissioned the architectural-engineering firm Dills Ainscough Duff, P.C. to draw up the designs for the renovation. Using those designs, NAVFAC produced an estimated cost of the hangar renovation and then applied for funding from Congress.

MILCON projects requested by lawmakers are subjected to a stringent vetting process before either the House or Senate appropriations committees include them as earmarks in an annual spending bill. Once a MILCON project has been earmarked and approved for the specified estimated cost, the project is “capped” — which means no additional money can be added to or subtracted from that construction project.

What this means in the case of MILCON P809 is that if the Congress-approved funds are exhausted before the hangar-renovation project is completed, further work on the project must be discontinued because, simply put, there is no more money.

According to the defense.gov web site dated March 25, 2009, Blue Rock Structures, Inc., won the bid for the hangar project, with an expected date-of-completion of January 2011.

However, this is what Blue Rock’s web page “Ongoing Projects: P809 Facilities Upgrades for FA-18E” says:

Contract Number: N40085-09-C-3204

Location (of project): MCAS, Cherry Point, NC

Description: Renovation of an existing Hangar 130 to accommodate two F/A18 E/F squadrons to include building upgrades and re-configuration of spaces to house maintenance, training and administrative functions. The renovations will include: fire sprinkler system, fire suppression installation, fire main water distribution, compressed air upgrades, hanger door upgrades and motorization, floor resurfacing and recoating, recoating of roof, site improvements and replacement  of adjacent aircraft pavement.

 

Completion Date: Feb. 3, 2012

Project Duration: 1046 days

Did you get that?

Blue Rock Structures now says the hangar project is supposed to be completed on Feb. 3, 2012, but the project is listed under the contractor’s “Ongoing Projects” and the project had already taken 1,046 days — 395 days more than the prescribed 651 days! Since the project is still listed under Blue Rock Structures’ “Ongoing Projects,” and since we are now in August 2012, this means the completion of the project is now more than 1½ years overdue!

A delay of more than 1½ years is suggestive of the contractor encountering unforeseen problems, as well as cost overruns. Certain questions must be asked:

• Did the problems arise as a result of flaws in the designs by the architectural engineering firm Dills Ainscough Duff — designs which NAVFAC had approved? If so, was anything done to correct the flaws?

• Is Blue Rock Structures delaying the project to procure more money from the government?  If so, why didn’t NAVFAC fire the contractor?

• What are the cost over-runs in light of the fact that the project is still listed as ongoing, more than 1½ years over the allowed “mandatory” time of 651 days?

• Are all the funds earmarked for this project spent?

• Has this problem been brought to the attention of Congress?

• And the BIG question, WHO IS BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE for this costly delay?

In the meantime, at least a year ago the U.S. Navy had changed its mind about moving the squadrons of FA-18s from Virginia to Cherry Point, NC, which was the reason for renovating Hangar 130 in the first place. All of which means that the money spent by local businesses and residents to prepare Cherry Point to accommodate two new Navy squadrons was all for naught.

What does all this mean for the 49% of Americans who still pay federal income taxes?

Answer: $16.5 million of our money may have been wasted — down the drain of the sinkhole called Government Waste, Incompetence, and Unaccountability.

Original source is here.

***********************************************************************************

 

There is no accountability, no oversight.  What was started under the Bush Administration has become a bloated waste of money under the Obama Regime.  I wonder how fast this project would have been completed if the money that had been spent on Solyndra and other moonbat projects had been spent on projects like this, the taxpayers would not be out of so much money.

 

 

The Ugliest Newspaper In Britain....And Maybe The World

A great rant from Pat Condell on the Guardian





More scurrilous lies from the shameless Guardian
http://honestreporting.com/israel-made-me-beat-my-wife/

The Guardian's Jewish problem
http://cifwatch.com/2012/07/24/guardians-jewish-problem-paper-praises-extreme...

Guardian writer plumbs the moral depths
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/19/israeli-lives-more-important-pale...

The Guardian's anti-Semitic explanation for the Shalit deal
http://honestreporting.com/the-guardians-anti-semitic-explanation-for-shalit-...

Guardian readers' editor on... averting accusations of anti-Semitism
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/06/averting-accusations-of-a...

The Guardian acknowledges anti-Semitism... or does it?
http://honestreporting.com/the-guardian-acknowledges-anti-semitism-or-does-it/

How could the Guardian give a platform to a genocidal fascist?
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/06/12/how-could-the-guardian-give-a-platform-to-...

Hamas leader's op-ed enforces Guardian's anti-Israel message
http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/06/08/hamas-leader-haniyehs-op-ed-enforces-gua...

The Guardian turns the world upside down again
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/06/13/animus-and-inversion-the-guardian-turns-th...

Left-wing bias written in the BBC's DNA, says newsreader.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BB...

According to the BBC, Israel has no capital city
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1424/according_to_the_bbc_israel_has_no...

Guardian editorial defends anti-Semitic preacher
http://cifwatch.com/2011/07/01/on-anti-semites-and-their-enablers-guardian-ed...

The Guardian and David Miller
http://www.spittoon.org/archives/11291

Islamophobia silencing Musilms?
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/islamophobia-silencing-muslims/

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to 2012 - The Liberals' Odyssey

by James Sharp

To  borrow a term from the hippies' 1960's vernacular, "flashback" 40-50 years and take a look at liberals' ideologies and how those ideologies have changed since the 1960's:

The United States in the 1960's was marked by tremendous social upheaval. Beginning in the early-1950's, black Americans staged widespread protests demanding equal rights. Monumental legislation allowing African-Americans to sit at the same lunch counter as Caucasians was passed in 1964. The 1960's also brought us the war in Viet Nam, the Sexual Revolution and the free love that it brought, marijuana and LSD, and groundbreaking rock music which reflected the aforementioned social changes.

One of the catch-phrases of the 1960's was, "Don't trust anyone over thirty (years of age)." Distrust of "the establishment" was widespread during this period of time and massive demonstrations, many protesting the war, were commonplace. America closed out the decade of the 1960's with the rock music festival known as Woodstock. Woodstock represented the pinnacle of the counter-culture. Free-love and drug use were widespread as hippies indulged in an orgy - both figuratively and literally - of drugs, sex, and rock 'n' roll.

The distrust of the older generation paralleled widespread hatred of the government. One popular 60's rock anthem warned youth that if they, "...step out of line, the man (will) come and take you away," (Buffalo Springfield's song, For What It's Worth).

Fast forward to the second decade of the 21st century. Now, it seems, that the aging liberal hippies have done an about-face. The left no longer distrusts the government; they now love it and, in a manner of speaking, seem to almost worship it. Something has changed. The same hippies - who once espoused their right to ingest whatever substance they wanted without "the man" telling them that they couldn't - now seem to welcome the government telling them how to live their lives. No longer do the hippies want the government to leave them alone; they relish the government regulating everything from the food that they eat, to the kind of car they can drive, to the kind of light bulbs they can and cannot use, and, most surprisingly, what kind of health insurance they MUST carry.

Ironically, the government throughout the 1960's, was controlled mostly by liberals. Conservatives in government were the minority as proven by the crushing defeat of Republican Barry Goldwater by Democrat Lyndon Johnson in the presidential elections of 1964.

Now, in 2012, the same liberals that once detested being told how to live their lives (in The Animals' song, It's My Life, Eric Burdon proclaims, "It's my life and I'll do what I want"), now espouse a government telling, not just them, how to live their lives, but telling EVERYONE how they should live their lives. When the US was involved militarily in Viet Nam, protests were everywhere - many violent. The US has now been fighting in Afghanistan for over ten years, but barely a peep is heard from liberals.

Amazingly, the hippies of the 1960's, who were so adamant in their "leave me alone" message of the time, now welcome "the man's" intrusion into their lives. Bob Dylan's song, Subterranean Homesick Blues, contains the following line: "Johnny's in the basement mixing up the medicine; I'm on the pavement thinkin' about the government."

Now, instead of fearing the government,  most liberals are beating the pavement actually CHEERING the government.

No Baptists Allowed

Hat Tip to Israel Matzav

I find it ironic that the Moonbat Left screams on how tolerant the Palestinian Authority is towards Christians.  How under the PA Christianity is allowed to be practiced.  Just look at the plight of the Christian community in Bethlehem.   Just look at the flourishing of these communities.  So what the PA is doing to the Baptists in Bethlehem should come as a shock to the left.

A week after Prime Minister Salam Fayyad told an audience of Evangelical Protestants from across the world that his government respected the rights of its Christian minorities, officials from the Palestinian Authority have informed Bethlehem pastor Rev. Naim Khoury that his church lacked the authority to function as a religious institution under the PA.

The church can still gather to pray, for now, but the PA’s decision conveyed on Saturday will have a real impact on the members of First Baptist, which endured numerous bomb attacks during the First Intifada.

“They said that our legitimacy as a church from a governmental point of view is not approved,” said Khoury’s son, Steven, who serves as an assistant pastor at First Baptist. “They said they will not recognize any legal paper work from our church. That includes birth certificates, wedding certificates and death certificates. Children are not even considered to be legitimate if they don’t have recognized paperwork.”

The irony, Steven said, is that the PA’s announcement comes right after the Christ at the Checkpoint Conference. This conference, which took place from March 5 through March 9, 2012 was a gathering of approximately 600 Evangelical Protestants from across the globe (mostly from the United States) to discuss the theology of Christian Zionism, which some Evangelicals believe increases the prospect of violence in the Middle East and gives support to Israeli policies that they do not like.

During the opening night of the conference, Palestinian Prime Minister Fayyad told the assembly that his government respected the rights of Christians. Palestinians celebrate religious holidays together, PA officials attend Christmas celebrations and even attend Midnight Mass for Christmas, Fayyad said.

“This is what it means to be a Palestinian,” Fayyad said, adding that the PA feels a deep sense of responsibility for the holy places and will allow unfettered access to places of spiritual significance in areas under its control.

Nevertheless, there is a sense among Christians in Bethlehem that anti-Christian animus has gotten worse in the city over the past few years, Khoury said. “People are always telling them, ‘Convert to Islam. Convert to Islam. It’s the true and right religion.’”

This is the second time the church has been told it is operating without PA sanction, Khoury said. Other churches in Bethlehem are left alone, said Khoury, who suggested that the church’s love for both the Jewish and Arab people and its belief that both can live in the land in peace may have played a role in the PA’s decision. Prior to the PA, the church, which was founded in 1980, never had a problem with its paperwork, Khoury said.

“We believe it’s people who don’t like what we’re doing and the message we offer,” he said.

The church’s message of reconciliation flies in the face of the propaganda that permeates Palestinian society. Muslim clerics routinely offer up anti-Semitic rants on PA television and so-called peace activists have turned the concrete sections of the security barrier in Bethlehem into a canvas for their propaganda, which in some instances proffers a troubling fatalism to its viewers.

For example one section of the security barrier near the Alrowad refugee camp in Bethlehem depicts two Palestinian youths throwing rocks and another being arrested by Israeli soldiers. Alongside the image, the artist has written in French and English the phrase “We can’t live, So we wait for death.”

Khoury said the Palestinian Authority needs to treat all sects with equality and respect their rights. “The First Baptist Church in Bethlehem has demonstrated its value to the community over the years and proven itself to be a law-abiding church,” Khoury said.

Khoury said he will speak to members of Congress in the United States to draw attention to what is happening to First Baptist in Bethlehem.

“We did let them know that we’re not going to go quietly on this,” Khoury said. “We want our church to be fully recognized equally with all the other recognized denominations. Our church deserves the right to be equally recognized amongst all the other recognized denominations in the PA.”

Joann Magnuson, a long-time observer of Christian communities in the West Bank, said she has known the Khourys for at least 15 years.

“I know them to be serious Christians, busy caring for their flock and preaching the gospel of love and forgiveness,” she said. “It’s seems more than coincidence that the Christ at the Checkpoint conference ended and now the Khourys are being targeted.”

At the time of publication the PLO Mission in Washington, D.C. has not responded to The Algemeiner’s request for comment on these allegations. This story will be updated as information allows.

Source

The first thing Islamist do is to eliminate the Churches.  The PA has plans already written to convert the Church of the Nativity into a Mosque.  They cannot convert the holiest Church in Christendom into a Mosque while allowing this little Baptist Church to exist.

It seems that the Evangelicals who attended the anti-Semitic Christ at the Checkpoint Conference and were told that no restrictions would happen to the Christian Community.

And they believed it too.  I've got a bridge to sell these useful idiots.  It's an antique, but in excellent condition, you have to pay shipping and handling:

Peace Now's Megillah

If you know the story of Purim (You can read it here.) this will hit your funny bone with a sledgehammer.  The Tribe, Latma TV brings to the world the Story of Esther but with a very leftist view.  (And we all know the media in Israel leans far left.)

With Obama the Peace Maker, Shimon of Peres, Ahmadinejad, Mordechai and "The Settlers" the whole gang of good guys and bad guys are here.

Happy Purim

Code Pink To Disolve!

It was announced today by Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin that the organization Code Pink will be dissolving and giving up their Communist agenda.  Ms Benjamin was informed that when the revolution was over she and the other useful idiots members of Code Pink would be given a long, well deserved rest in a retraining center health spa.  There they will become the perfect members of the new society.

Upon hearing this these ladies in pink of the left tore off their pink garments, donned camouflage fatigues and ran to the nearest recruitment office.  There they will serve their nation.

We Said WHAT?

For days the liberals have cried that Catholic Charities support Obama's compromise on the Birth Control/Abortion issue.  Planned Parenthood keeps crying that the Catholic Charities support their cause.  I have even heard these idiot talking heads proclaiming that the Jesuits were supporting both Birth Control AND Abortion.

Today Catholic Charities spoke out:

A leading Catholic charity group wants the public to know it has not endorsed the Obama administration's latest policy requiring free contraceptive coverage for employees, despite "mischaracterizations in the media."

Catholic Charities USA has occasionally been cited as a supporter of the new policy, after the administration announced last week it would no longer require religious organizations to directly offer contraceptive coverage to workers. That's almost certainly because the White House listed the group on an official blog that cited "praise from a wide range of individuals and organizations" for the policy change.

Along with statements from Planned Parenthood and other supporters was a brief statement from Catholic Charities. The group said at the time that it "welcomes the administration's attempt to meet the concerns of the religious community" and looks forward to reviewing the final language.

"We are hopeful that this is a step in the right direction," the group said.

But the organization has since posted a clarification on its website, after that statement was interpreted by some as an endorsement.

"We have not endorsed the accommodation to the HHS mandate that was announced by the administration last Friday," the group said.

Rather, the group said it would "unequivocally share the goal" of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to "uphold religious liberty."

"Any representation to the contrary is false," Catholic Charities said.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has voiced serious concerns with the new policy.

The policy change would let religious institutions decline to offer the coverage, but would require insurance companies to then offer that coverage directly to workers. Groups like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops want a broader exemption.

Conference head Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan said in an interview with The Association Press that U.S. bishops will work in support of legislation that would give any employer the ability to deny contraceptive coverage on religious or moral grounds.

Source

The left now is sitting with egg on their faces.  I wonder if voting for Obama will become a Mortal Sin punishable by excommunication.  Nice idea though.

Behind The Iron Curtain In New Jersey: They Want To Ban Ammo In NJ

Stolen from Patriot's Corner

I thought I had heard of every type of Gun Control.  Background checks, weeks to wait for a gun, cities that ban handguns no matter what (Thank you Heller!), but this one takes the cake.

I knew New Jersey was not really part of the United States and now I am 100% sure.

Anyone still think Chris Christie is true Conservative?

This is what happens when liberals get elected or 'moderate conservatives get into office.

Who will be REALLY safe if this band passes? Criminal, that's who.

It may get worse in Nazi Jersey as the legislature is also considering bill A103:
One provision of this police safety legislation significantly increases the penalties relating to “defaced” firearms. Because of New Jersey’s longstanding poorly crafted definition of “defaced” firearms, it is possible that refinishing a firearm, or long-term damage from rust or scratches from ordinary wear and tear, could be deemed “defacement” subjecting honest gun owners to lengthy prison sentences, even though identifying information on the firearm is still legible.

From Ammoland

NJ Assembly Committee To Consider Ammo Ban In The Name Of Police Safety

A588 would enable the Attorney General to ban handgun and rifle ammunition by executive fiat.

Trenton, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- Common hunting, target, and self-defense ammunition would be subject to ban under A588, along with BB’s, airgun pellets, and plastic airsoft pellets!

Additional legislation being considered (A1013) could land gun owners in jail for refinished or damaged firearms that might be deemed “defaced”

On Monday, January 30 at 2:00 p.m. the New Jersey Assembly Law & Public Safety Committee is scheduled to consider A588, legislation that would enable the Attorney General to ban all handgun and most rifle ammunition if he unilaterally determines that it “poses a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement officers.”

Cleverly disguised as police safety legislation aimed at armor piercing ammunition (which is already prohibited under federal and state law), the measure actually opens the door to a sweeping ammunition ban by an unelected public official by executive fiat. Common hunting, target, and self-defense ammunition would be subject to ban, along with BB’s, airgun pellets, and non-metallic ammunition like plastic airsoft pellets, if the Attorney General decides that they pose a threat to the safety and well being of law enforcement.

Although the bill only mentions handgun ammunition, it is in fact not limited to handgun ammunition, and would apply to all rifle ammunition for which a handgun if ever made. As an increasing number of gun manufacturers make handgun models that shoot rifle caliber ammunition, the line between “handgun” vs. “rifle” ammunition has become blurred, and the New Jersey State Police have already begun treating rifle ammunition in this category as if it were handgun ammunition for regulatory purposes.

So long as a handgun exists that shoots a particular caliber of rifle ammunition, New Jersey treats that ammunition as if it were handgun ammunition.

The Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee is also scheduled to consider A1013 on Monday. One provision of this police safety legislation significantly increases the penalties relating to “defaced” firearms. Because of New Jersey’s longstanding poorly crafted definition of “defaced” firearms, it is possible that refinishing a firearm, or long-term damage from rust or scratches from ordinary wear and tear, could be deemed “defacement” subjecting honest gun owners to lengthy prison sentences, even though identifying information on the firearm is still legible.

PLEASE IMMEDIATELY CONTACT MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY LAW & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE!


TELL THEM TO VOTE “NO” ON A588 – BACKDOOR AMMUNITION BAN!

TELL THEM TO VOTE “NO” OR AMEND A1013 TO PROTECT HONEST GUN OWNERS FROM SEVERE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES!


MEMBERS OF THE NEW JERSEY ASSEMBLY LAW & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE:

Charles Mainor (Chair) (D31)
AsmMainor@njleg.org
Phone: 201-536-7851
Fax: 201-536-7854

Gilbert L. Wilson (Vice Chair) (D5)
AsmWilson@njleg.org
Phone: 856-547-4800
Fax: 856-547-5496

Nelson T. Albano (D1)
AsmAlbano@njleg.org
Phone: 609-465-0700
Fax: 609-465-4578

Daniel R. Benson (D14)
AsmBenson@njleg.org
Phone: 609-631-0198
Fax: 609-631-0324

Sean Connors (D33)
AsmConnors@njleg.org
Joseph Cryan (D20)

AsmCryan@njleg.org
Phone: 908-624-0880
Fax: 908-624-0587

Sean T. Kean (R30)
AsmKean@njleg.org
Phone: 732-974-0400
Fax: 732-974-2564

Gregory P. McGuckin (R10)
AsmMcGuckin@njleg.org
Phone: 732-974-0400
Fax: 732-840-9757

Erik Peterson (R23)
AsmPeterson@njleg.org
Phone: 908-238-0251
Fax: 908-238-0256

David P. Rible (R30)
AsmRible@njleg.org
Phone: 732-974-1719
Fax: 732-974-3615

Bonnie Watson Coleman (D15)
AswWatsonColeman@njleg.org
Phone: 609-292-0500
Fax: 609-633-2179

Original article is here.

This is not just insane, but I think they are channeling Chris Rock on this:



What is funny in a comedy routine is not funny in real life.  Nor do I believe this is constitutional.  But what do I expect from a bunch of Moonbats.  Come on New Jersey.  Think before you vote.