Obama Budget Voted Down; 97-0

The Hill:

The Senate voted unanimously on Wednesday to reject a $3.7 trillion budget plan that President Obama sent to Capitol Hill in February.

Ninety-seven senators voted against a motion to take it up.

Democratic aides said ahead of the vote that the Democratic caucus would not support the plan because it has been supplanted by the deficit-reduction plan Obama outlined at a speech at George Washington University in April.

So, the Senate leadership is kicking its constitutional duties over to the executive branch based on another platitudinous Obama speech that negated his own budget presented two months earlier. Let me repeat that Democrat's have not allowed a budget to pass in over two years and counting. That's change you can believe in!

The Democrat party has backed itself into a corner as it has moved so far left that any plan to the right of the extreme People’s Budget presented in April by the radical Congressional Progressive Caucus will get no real support from the base. That’s the only Democrat plan that’s been presented and even though it was dead on arrival, the People’s Budget (Read Here) was received favorably by a significant number of Democrats and members of the Media.

But that budget - dripping with Marxist anger - was too honest about the left’s intentions and is so politically toxic and economically insane that it makes any PR problems with Ryan’s plan look insignificant by comparison. Democrats know they can’t put together any major plan that will get party support and wont send voters running to the GOP alternative.

Republican’s need to realize they’re in a good position here if they take their last chance to grow a set and take an unequivocal stand. If not now, when? Ryan, and now, Pawlenty, are leading and treating Americans like adults who have to make hard choices. It remains to be seen if the rest of the party will follow.

Winners of the rental economy

Via CNN Money:

FORTUNE -- There are still many factors discouraging even the most savvy homebuyers from purchasing a home, but a new class of renters is expected to bring a bright spot to the troubled U.S. real estate market. Prices for rental apartments are expected to rise nationally – by approximately 4.5% in 2011 and up to another 3% in 2012, according to Rent.com...

...Given that many homeowners are still trying to clean up their messy finances, it might be hard to see how higher rents could benefit the overall U.S. housing market. In theory, at least, renting could become so expensive that it costs less to buy a house and make monthly mortgage payments.

In fact, that's happening already, even if it hasn't yet translated to a return to homeownership. In Moody Analytics' latest list of rent ratios for 54 U.S. metropolitan areas, 29 cities fell into the "better to buy" category. With many experts predicting that home prices have further to fall this year and with higher expectations for rentals, more cities could end up on the buy side of the buy-versus-rent calculator.

But much of that will likely depend on huge hurdles weighing on the housing market – namely, record foreclosure rates, high unemployment and tighter lending standards for new mortgages. Areas that continue to experience high foreclosure rates and widespread unemployment, such as Florida and Arizona, might find it more affordable to buy than rent. Yet renting will likely be king in more urban areas with more employment opportunities, such as New York and Seattle. ------

Historically, rising rents are a sure sign of a coming resurgence in housing sales and prices, but this is obviously not a typical downturn. It's hard to predict how long this pent up demand will remain on the sidelines or how long it will take the existing massive over supply to be absorbed down to a healthy level. Moreover, with food and energy inflation worming its way into the broader economy and the inevitability of higher interest rates, would be home buyers may still choose to pay higher rents rather than take on the responsibilities of home ownership. It also remains to be seen just how much more destructive uncertainty our reckless government will inject into the economy and further encourage people and businesses to do nothing.

On the other hand (apologies to Harry Truman), a downturn or crash in the stock and/or bond markets - which is increasingly likely - might make real estate an attractive alternative investment, as it has in the past. There is no significant new supply of single family homes or condos currently on line and existing homes in many markets are selling at or below construction costs. That's not good, but it does mean that the current supply wont have to compete with new construction for some time even after the market turns, simply due to the long lead time required to build new housing.

Model Bill Would Revoke State's License to Steal

Reason:

Today the Institute for Justice and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers unveiled "model state legislation" that abolishes the practice of civil asset forfeiture by requiring the government to convict people before taking property linked to their alleged crimes. The bill (PDF) cuts to the heart of the injustices associated with forfeiture laws that bizarrely accuse the property, rather than its owner, of wrongdoing. Even when states officially allow innocent owners to reclaim their property, the process is often so cumbersome and expensive that they surrender to state-sanctioned theft. Furthermore, states typically allow the law enforcement agencies that initiate a forfeiture to keep much or all of the proceeds for their budgets, giving police and prosecutors an incentive to target people based on the value of their property rather the seriousness of their crimes. The I.J./NACDL would do away with that practice as well.

Despite reforms prompted by numerous reports of outrageous forfeiture abuses, a 2010 I.J. study, Policing for Profit, gave only three states—Maine, North Dakota, and Vermont—a grade of B or better. For a sense of how tenacious the resistance to reform has been, have a look at these three snapshots from Reason:

May 1990 (PDF): "United States v. One Assortment of 89 Firearms: Drug Warriors Are Using an Obscure Medieval Legal Doctrine to Sweep Aside Property Rights and Due Process," by Stefan B. Herpel

August/September 1993: "Ill-Gotten Gains: Police and Prosecutors Have Their Own Reasons to Oppose Forfeiture Law Reform," by Richard Miniter

February 2010: "The Forfeiture Racket: Police and Prosecutors Won't Give Up Their License to Steal," by Radley Balko

More on asset forfeiture here.

Obama adviser tells Congress she has more important things to do

Via Hot Air:

White House adviser Elizabeth Warren, in a heated House hearing Tuesday, touted the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as a vital new financial-markets cop while Republican lawmakers slammed the agency as a powerful financial regulator with too few checks and balances.

The Harvard professor also rejected one House Republican’s accusation that she gave

misleading testimony to Congress in March and was lying about her schedule...

Mr. McHenry and Ms. Warren also got into a spat over how long the hearing should run. Ms. Warren said the committee had agreed to end the 1:15 p.m. hearing at 2:15 p.m. so she could make it to a meeting.

The lawmaker accused her of making up the agreement.

“You might want to have a conversation with your staff,” Ms. Warren replied.

Ed Morrissey reacts to this imperious jerk:

I’m sorry Ms. Warren feels inconvenienced, but perhaps she might want to take a civics course to understand the separation of powers and checks and balances in the federal system. Congress gets to hold hearings on operations in the executive branch, and they’re not required to put a time limit on their inquiries, especially a one-hour limit that barely gets by the opening remarks in most committee hearings. If Warren doesn’t like being held accountable to the legislature and to the people, well … she’s in the right administration, apparently.

Indeed. I’d like Ms. Warren to explain how she, a Harvard lawyer with no private sector experience, who has never created a dime of wealth and doesn’t know a balance sheet from a bed sheet is somehow qualified to direct the consumer finances of 310 million people.

Actually, no one is qualified to do that without disastrous consequences, as anyone with a basic understanding of market economics and history will tell you. Central planning only works for the planners until it doesn't. Then they tell you that you must give up more of your liberty to fix the problems the planners created

Warren does travel in the right political circles and clearly that’s all that matters to the Obamunists:

In July 2010, Warren spoke at an East Hampton, New York event on the topic of “Restoring the Integrity of the U.S. Financial Markets.” Fellow panelists included George Soros and Van Jones. That same month, Warren spoke at a Netroots Nation conference on the topic of “Building a Progressive Economic Vision.”

The Path to Prosperity (Episode 2): Saving Medicare, Visualized

Rarely do you see a politician who is willing to treat the electorate like adults and give them the hard truth despite the political consequences. At least Paul Ryan will be able to say he tried his best if Americans don't listen to him. You can see Episode 1 here.



This stands in stark contrast to Senate majority "leader" Harry Reid, who just said: “There’s no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion... It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.” Democrats haven't passed a budget in well over two years, preferring instead to hide from responsibility or demonize opponents purely for political purposes. Meanwhile, we get closer to driving off the financial cliff with every passing day.

Speaking of cliffs, this is how Democrats insult our intelligence and demonstrate just how serious they are about an impending economic disaster:

Some college petitions

Exposing Leftists:

What happens when well indoctrinated students are asked to be intellectually honest and consistent? Well, it's pretty disturbing. Here they are supporting free speech while signing a petition to take it away from those they disagree with. I wonder what makes them think the same won't happen to them? Maybe they think their opinions will never diverge from whatever the left tells them to think and say.



And here they're asked to agree to have high GPA's redistributed to those less fortunate than they are. After all, they don't need all those high grades and clearly those who are failing are entitled to them in the interest of fairness.



And finally, these glittering jewels of stupidity are asked to pledge to pay off the national debt. That makes sense since they're usually the most vocal about opposing any spending cuts, right? They don't think so.

WaPo Hawking $300 Online 'Master Class' Course on Economic Literacy

Newsbusters:

The Washington Post hopes you may want to "Widen Your World," with online "Master Class" courses that cost $200-$300 a pop.

For example, there's Steven Pearlstein's "Introduction to Economic Literacy."

[Lesson number one: don't spend $300 to have a liberal journalist lecture you.]

I wrote about Mr. Pearlstein three times in 2008, (here, here and here) but stopped because I realized that chronicling the astonishing economic illiteracy of WaPo's (anti) business reporter was like shooting ducks in a barrel and had become boring. Now WaPo is laughably offering up Pearlstein as some sort of economic literacy expert, which is akin to touting Michael Moore as a diet and fitness guru.

Rules for fools

The Economist:

In the 1950s, when organisation man ruled, fewer than 5% of American workers needed licences. Today, after three decades of deregulation, the figure is almost 30%. Add to that people who are preparing to obtain a licence or whose jobs involve some form of certification and the share is 38%. Other rich countries impose far fewer fetters than the land of the free. In Britain only 13% of workers need licences (though that has doubled in 12 years)...

...The list of jobs that require licences in some states already sounds like something from Monty Python—florists, handymen, wrestlers, tour guides, frozen-dessert sellers, firework operatives, second-hand booksellers and, of course, interior designers—but it will become sillier still if ambitious cat-groomers and dog-walkers get their way...

America’s Licence Raj crushes would-be entrepreneurs. Consider three people who come from very different states and occupations. Jestina Clayton is an African hair-braider with 23 years of experience. But the Utah Barber, Cosmetologist/Barber, Esthetician, Electrologist and Nail Technician Licensing Board told her that she cannot practise her craft unless she first obtains a licence—which means spending up to $18,000 on 2,000 hours of study, none of it devoted to African hair-braiding.

Justin Brown is an abbot at a Benedictine abbey that supplements its meagre income by making and selling simple wooden coffins. But the Louisiana Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors has ordered him to “cease and desist”. Heaven knows what harm a corpse might suffer from an unlicensed coffin. Barbara Vanderkolk Gardner runs a flourishing interior-design business in New Jersey. But when she tried to expand into Florida, the state’s Board of Architecture and Interior Design ordered her to delete all references to “interior design” from her website and stop offering “interior design services” in the Sunshine State...

You might imagine that Americans would be up in arms about all this. After all, the Licence Raj embodies the two things that Americans are supposed to be furious about: the rise of big government and the stalling of America’s job-creating machine. You would be wrong. Florida’s legislature recently debated a bill to remove licensing requirements from 20 occupations, including hair-braiding, interior design and teaching ballroom-dancing. For a while it looked as if the bill would sail through: Florida has been a centre of tea-party agitation and both chambers have Republican majorities. But the people who care most about this issue—the cartels of incumbents—lobbied the loudest. One predicted that unlicensed designers would use fabrics that might spread disease and cause 88,000 deaths a year. Another suggested, even more alarmingly, that clashing colour schemes might adversely affect “salivation”. In the early hours of May 7th the bill was defeated. If Republican majorities cannot pluck up the courage to challenge a cartel of interior designers when Florida’s unemployment rate is more than 10%, what hope has America? The Licence Raj may be here to stay.

The Meaning of Socialism

What's the real definition of socialism? How is it distinct from regulation and a social welfare state? Why are intellectuals still enamored of a system that brought us Stalin, Hitler, and more recently Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong-Il? And what can the United States learn from Sweden about free enterprise and capitalism?

Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie sat down with Kevin Williamson, who is deputy managing editor of National Review and author of a new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism, to discuss the meaning of socialism in history and the current moment.

I just finished reading Williamson's book and it's an excellent and very readable primer on the subject. What it reinforces is the historically proven ecomomic fact that centrally planned economies don't work, can't work and will never work. Even in countries like Sweden where the people generally support the notion of socialism, they're finding that the system eventually collapses on itself and they must move to freer economies in order to survive.

New housing starts fall 10.6% in April

Via Hot Air:

The housing market continues to decline sharply, according to the latest figures on new housing starts and residential building permits. The Census Bureau reported today that the annualized rate of new residential starts dropped over 10 points from March to April, and that single-family starts dropped 5.1%. Permit applications also declined by 4%, which indicates that no one sees much hope for renewed demand in the market:

Reuters:

Housing starts and permits for future home construction fell in April as an overhang of homes on the market discourages builders from taking on new projects, pointing to prolonged weakness in the housing sector.

The Commerce Department said on Tuesday housing starts dropped 10.6 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 523,000 units. March’s starts were revised up to a 585,000-unit pace from the previously reported rate of 549,000 units.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast housing starts rising to a 568,000-unit rate. Compared to April last year, residential construction was down 23.9 percent, the largest decline since October 2009.

Residential construction is being crowded out by an oversupply of used homes on the market, in particular, foreclosed properties, which sell well below their value.

What this typically ignorant journalist is trying to say is that many existing homes are selling below their replacement cost and new construction doesn't pencil out at that price point.

As inflation worms its way into the broader economy, construction costs will rise but wont translate into higher prices for new or existing homes due to an over supply that will not be absorbed any time soon.

We are now entering the summer construction season when industry employment typically rises. Based on this data, that's not going to happen this year and will likely go down

CDC: U.S. murder toll from guns highest in big cities

USA Today:

According to the CDC, 25,423 murders by gunfire took place in the United States in 2006 through 2007 — the years of the most recent available statistics.

Among these deaths, the rate of firearm homicides was higher in inner cities than in other parts of cities and higher than the murder rate of the country as a whole, Dahlberg said. People living in 50 of the largest cities, in fact, accounted for 67% of all firearm homicides.

In addition, children and teens aged 10 to 19 in these areas — more than 85% of them male — accounted for 73% of all firearm homicides, Dahlberg noted.

The gun haters have been dealt some serious blows in recent years, from the Heller decision to the successful implementation of concealed carry laws in most states that have failed to produce the wild west scenarios that were breathlessly predicted.

But this report from a government agency no less, should put to rest the notion that gun violence is a nationwide problem that requires everyone to relinquish their constitutional and natural right to self defense.

In fact, this report points to just one more pathology created by the welfare state that has encouraged created matriarchal communities with millions of young men roaming the streets without any male direction in their lives other than the older gangstas who teach them ways of criminality and irresponsibility. And yes, this effects the black community most because their families and neighborhoods have endured a disproportionate share of the destruction from state funded "compassion" that creates generation after generation of dependent people trapped on the liberal plantation. It's a cruel and shameful waste of human potential.

Cafeteria Cams Track Students' Calorie Consumption at School

Time:

School lunches have been getting a lot of attention, especially since President Obama signed a $4.5-billion bill last December to improve the quality of students' meals. In Los Angeles, the schools superintendent announced this week he was considering a ban on sugary chocolate milk, while in San Antonio, health researchers installed cameras in lunch rooms to monitor what kids were eating.

The San Antonio program, made possible by a $2 million research grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, involves placing cameras in cafeteria lines and in the trash area in order to document what kids buy for lunch and how much of it they consume.

The childhood obesity "crisis" is no more a crisis than the discredited global warming scam. Both are designed to increase government power over individuals and to funnel cash to the parasites who keep these tyrants in power. The warming fraud is now dying a slow and painful death but this one is just gaining speed within the government schools and is part of an overall strategy to usurp parental rights and responsibilities in order to create uneducated, but well indoctrinated and malleable servants of the state.

What better way to get kids used to their private, individual choices being scrutinized by unelected hacks than to do it in the elementary school cafeteria line. This assault on liberty is almost entirely based on the simplistic and misleading Body Mass Index that was adopted by government to measure obesity in the 80's. But the BMI, which has also been discredited as misleading at best, as it compares only height to weight and makes no allowances for differing growth patterns in children, nor does differentiate between muscle and fat. According to the BMI, Donovan McNabb, Reggie Bush and Tom Brady are all obese. And they will be counted as such in the governments plans to record all of our BMI's as part of Obamacare . Imagine how many other things the government will claim the need to monitor and control when they can declare the whole country as too fat for freedom.

Former Warmist Scientist Says AGW Climate Alarmism False

Financial Post:

The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant...

...In science, empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory — that just happens to keep them in well-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.

There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbance. Otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it...

We are now at an extraordinary juncture. Official climate science, which is funded and directed entirely by government, promotes a theory that is based on a guess about moist air that is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only ways to curb emissions are to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use. And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government — how exciting for the political class!

...Finally, to those who still believe the planet is in danger from our carbon dioxide emissions: Sorry, but you’ve been had. Yes, carbon dioxide is a cause of global warming, but it’s so minor it’s not worth doing much about.

Hat Tip to Hot Air.

New Yorkers under 30 plan to flee city, says new poll; cite high taxes, few jobs as reasons

NY Daily News:

ALBANY - Escape from New York is not just a movie - it's also a state of mind.

A new Marist College poll shows that 36% of New Yorkers under the age of 30 are planning to leave New York within the next five years - and more than a quarter of all adults are planning to bolt the Empire State.

The NY Post offers its own opinion of this news:

That's no surprise, actually. New York leads the nation in state and local levies, with property taxes right at the top:

* The 15 counties with highest property taxes in the nation, as a percentage of home value, are all in New York.

* Nassau and Westchester are the two most heavily taxed counties in America, in absolute dollars.

* The state's median property tax is almost double that of the nation.

Meanwhile, the huge burden on businesses -- which pay five times as much in property taxes as in corporate-income taxes -- drives away investors. And jobs.

With workers, particularly young ones, not far behind.

In 1980, New York had 41 electoral votes to Florida's 17. Now both states are tied at 29. But the NY parasite class is so entrenched that there's virtually no hope the state or NYC will change its ways even after it becomes the next Michigan.

Andrew Klavan: Behold! Your Public Sector Unions at Work.

Dallas keeps $2,000 found by honest teen

WFAA.com

DALLAS — Dallas will keep $2,000 found by a teenager in a parking lot last February.

The money will go into the city's general fund — not back to Plano high school student Ashley Donaldson, who found the cash in an envelope at the Pavillion Shopping Center in North Dallas.

"I don't regret making the decision I did," she said. "I feel proud of myself for giving the money back. It's one of the biggest decisions of my life."

The 15-year-old Shepton High School student spotted the money on the ground and took it to a nearby Chase Bank.

Over the last three months, the bank and Dallas police have tried to find the owner, but have had no luck.

On Tuesday, police said under a new city policy, the unclaimed money will go into Dallas' general fund — not back to the person who found it, as in years past.

This is theft, pure and simple. What superior right does the government have to that money? None, other than what these greedy POS's claim for themselves. Don't expect anyone to do the right thing and turn in found property again in Dallas. Leave it to government to always encourage the worst in people. And they wonder why so many hold them in such contempt.

Senate Democrats push to end tax breaks for big oil companies to cut deficit

From WaPo:

Senate Democrats unveiled a plan Tuesday to save $21 billion over the next decade by eliminating tax breaks for the nation’s five biggest oil companies, a move designed to counter Republican demands to control the soaring national debt without new taxes.

That's it? This is the big plan? $2.1 billion a year works out to about .oooo nothing % of the deficit or the budget and the only real effect this will have is to raise energy prices and encourage more oil imports.

Look, the Democrats have no interest in reducing the deficit if it means reducing the power and money they steal from private citizens. They have no interest in reducing gas prices since that reduces mobility and makes you easier to control. They have no interest in reducing the inflation they have caused or increasing private sector employment since a robust private sector and a financially independent populace is direct threat to these two bit tyrants and their desire to rule.

Why the housing market is caught in a liquidity trap

Via CNN Money:

FORTUNE – In textbook economics, lower interest rates typically spur higher investments. Money is cheap. So the assumption is that people, banks and companies will spend more, therefore helping the economy grow.

But that doesn't always work. Sometimes cutting the rate of interest, even to zero, won't necessarily pull an economy out of a recession. British economist John Maynard Keynes called this the liquidity trap -- when virtually everyone becomes so risk averse that banks would rather sit on their cash than offer credit. And even if banks start lending more, people wouldn't want the credit anyway.

It is a grim scenario. And it appears today that no sector in the U.S. economy has suffered more from the liquidity trap than the housing market.

For all the attention policymakers placed on the Fed's actions over interest rates, the cost of borrowing is far from the problem. Record-low mortgage rates have done little, if anything, to encourage home purchases or even refinances. And while home builders way overbuilt in the years leading up to the 2008 housing bust, the fact that mortgage rates have had little influence over home purchases underscores how weaknesses from the demand side (as opposed to the supply side) is perhaps the bigger problem.

The demand side is low because potential buyers don't see a bottom and are fearful of losing money themselves. Moreover, the radically anti-business White House has caused so much uncertainty in the business community that it has trickled down to consumers. People who fear for the future no matter how well they're doing today, generally don't commit themselves to large financial responsibilities like home ownership.

Housing Market Can't Get Going

It's hard to understate just how much damage the Federal Government and its proxies have done to the U.S. real estate market. One of the reasons is that we still don't know how much worse it will be or for how long. Zillow has some new stats:

Home values fell three percent in the first quarter of this year, marking a pace of decline not seen since 2008 when the housing recession was at its worst. Home values fell one percent between February and March and 8.2 percent from March 2010. The cumulative decline in home values since the market peak is now 29.5 percent (see Figures 1 and 2).

Nearly three-quarters (74.5 percent) of homes in the United States lost value from Q1 2010 to Q1 2011. That’s up from Q4 2010, when 69.2 percent had lost value, but is down substantially from a peak of 85.5 percent in Q1 2009.

A record (37.7 percent) number of homes sold in March were sold for a loss. The rate of homes selling for a loss has steadily increased since June 2010.

Negative equity in the first quarter reached new high with 28.4 percent of all single-family homes with mortgages underwater, from 27 percent in Q4.

As your humble real estate expert, I can tell you with complete certainty that I don't have the foggiest idea when the market will begin to stabilize and anyone who tells you they do is full of it.

No one knows how long it will take for all the foreclosures to work their way through an already overwhelmed system. Nor is it clear how many non-performing loans are still on lenders books at full value that are being slowly liquidated lest they go belly up if these securities were liquidated and marked to market today. Those balance sheets are just smoke and mirrors and that's why the Fed is lending them money at 0% and selling them treasuries at 4%. You're paying the bill for this and all the government's other reckless spending through inflation from a debased dollar and debt as far as the eye can see.

"Human” Rights to Nature

Via Hot Air:

Fox News features a new environmental movement that wants to grant “human rights” to very non-human objects — and in some cases, inanimate objects. Via Greg Hengler, no one will be at all surprised to find out that Van Jones is at the forefront of this effort:

It's easy to dismiss this blatant attack on private property rights as kook fringe stuff but lets ask ourselves how many things seemed kooky years ago that are policy today. Your toilet, your light bulbs and countless other things have been made the business of the federal government and those who claim the right to rule the lives of others are relentless.

Obama's 'Gangster Politics'

Wall Street Journal:

President Obama has officially kicked off his 2012 re-election campaign, and don't Republicans know it. The president is expected any day now to sign an executive order that routs 70 years of efforts to get politics out of official federal business.

Under the order, all companies (and their officers) would be required to list their political donations as a condition to bidding for government contracts. Companies can bid and lose out for the sin of donating to Republicans. Or they can protect their livelihoods by halting donations to the GOP altogether—which is the White House's real aim. Think of it as "not-pay to play."

Whatever you call it, the order amounts to the White House brazenly directing the power of government against its political opponents...

Some call it Chicago politics or banana republic stuff a la Chavez or Evo Morales. But it's simply the way those who deign to rule rather than govern always operate. The left can't win on an open and level playing field, so they silence and punish the opposition. This type of behavior differs from a Castro or Stalin only by degree and it's not to hard to imagine what Obama and the left would do without what's left of our Constitution.

Licensed to Death: How the Government Prevents You from Earning an Honest Living

Could Osama bin Laden's Death Bankrupt al-Qaeda?

From Time:

The telegenic figure of bin Laden was always the main draw. His myth, that of the giant, soft-spoken warrior who gave up palatial luxuries for jihad, resonated with many rich Gulf sheiks who eased their conscience by sending a pile of cash his way. It was easier than picking up an AK-47 and following bin Laden into the snowy Afghan wastes. From Casablanca to Peshawar in Pakistan, young, impressionable Muslims carry photos of bin Laden on their cell phones. They would download his sermons from as-Sahab and extremist websites, whenever he managed to smuggle them out.

Like any private organization, Al Quaeda has assets and in their case almost all of the value was in the form of Goodwill represented by Osama Bin Laden. That’s one of the big risks for organizations whose public face is in the form of a living person.

Osama had become not much more than a figurehead keeping the whole thing together - His tactical value was all but gone. AQ's benefactors (investors) now have to see whether Zawahiri or someone else can keep it from falling apart.

But that doesn't mean these fascist cowards wont be looking for other Muslim murder-for-hire operations that will act as their proxy. The big funders of Al Quaeda need a double tap as well and I'm sure we know who they are.

Nanny of The Month

From Reason TV:

This month's slate of busybodies includes the FDA whose agents embarked on a year-long sting operation to bust an Amish company for selling raw milk. And then there are the killjoys at New York's Department of Health who were poised to crack down on "dangerous" activities like wiffle ball and freeze tag.

But time around no one out-nannied the Chicago public school principal who banned students from eating homemade lunches.

NLRB Proving Ayn Rand Was Right

Via Hot Air:

The Denver Post editorial board weighs in with some rather blunt questions:

With the economy still limping, and President Obama promising to create jobs, why on earth are his appointees killing jobs in South Carolina?

A common refrain among recession-weary Americans is that we don’t make anything in this country anymore. However, workers in South Carolina have a chance to make something — Boeing 787 Dreamliners that would be flown around the world — and yet Obama’s labor-cozy appointees to the National Labor Relations Board are intent on scuttling it.

Boeing, a vital U.S. company, wants to build a plant in South Carolina and bring good-paying manufacturing jobs to the state. They’ve already poured billions into the facilities and have hired 1,000 workers. But the NLRB filed a lawsuit last month to force Boeing back to Washington state, where workers would be represented by a union. The NLRB claims Boeing decided to open a non-union plant in South Carolina in retaliation for past strikes in Washington.

So what if it did?

The NLRB’s action is beyond unsettling. The lawsuit, in effect, is an effort to tell an American company how to operate its business and to intimidate its officers.

Over at The Hill, Representative Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) casts the situation in a stark light:

This is the first time in history the NLRB has argued that a company is violating federal law simply based on where they choose to locate a factory.

Now keep in mind, Boeing wasn’t moving jobs to South Carolina and they weren’t laying off employees in Washington. Rather, they opted to build and operate a new factory in South Carolina.

Did the cost of labor play a role in their decision to open this factory in South Carolina? Of course it did. Just as, I’m sure, state tax rates and property value also played a role in their decision.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Westmoreland identifies the unelected bureaucrat spearheading the NLRB's new hostility toward private enterprise and economic liberty:

Even with a Democrat controlled Senate, President Obama couldn’t get Craig Becker approved to head the NLRB because of his connections to labor unions and his career as an attorney for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). So, as he has done before when he can’t get his way in Congress, the president opted to sidestep the constitutional authority of the Senate to approve his appointments and gave Becker a recess appointment.

So, Obama went to extraordinary lengths to get Becker on the NLRB which should make clear that that both men are of a like mind when it comes to labor relations. Let's review who Craig Becker is and why even some Democrats couldn't openly support his appointment:

From Discover The Networks:

Becker's views are simple: no American employed anywhere should have the right to resist being part of a labor union. While acknowledging that "[a]t first blush it might seem fair to give workers the choice to remain unrepresented," he explains: "Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as their monopoly-bargaining agent." ...

To end workers' self-imposed disenfranchisement, Becker has considered doing away with union elections altogether, or instituting a "reform" to "mandate employee representation" under a system where the only "question posed on the ballot would simply be which representative" would be named as union leader. In a 1993 Minnesota Law Review article, Becker rejected both possibilities on the grounds that "each would require fundamental statutory revision unlikely in the foreseeable future."...

Becker has sought to change this, from top to bottom. He believes the NLRB should strip companies of the right to speak out against unionization at work; bar them from preventing -- or even protesting -- voting fraud; and deny them nearly all right to petition the NLRB. He contends that management should not be allowed to talk about the dangers of unionization on company grounds, as the law has allowed since the 1930s, because in his view employees constitute a "captive audience." Yet he raises no objection to aggressive union organizers stalking workers from the parking lot to their homes. Becker is straightforward in his view that "employers should be stripped of any legally cognizable interest in their employees' election of representatives," and that "employers should have no right to raise questions concerning voter eligibility or campaign conduct."

Under Becker's proposed rules, ineligible voters -- possibly full-time union employees who do not work for the company -- could show up on election day, cast their ballots for SEIU, and if the firm ever found out, it would have no means of recourse. Becker argues that entrepreneurs lack "the formal status either of candidates vying to represent employees or of voters"; he believes they simply exist to pay the wages that unions demand. Should they object, Becker advocates curtailing businesses' right to contest NLRB rulings in federal circuit court.

From Red State:

Before going into the another, fairly-recent example of a union-run bureaucracy run amok, let’s review some of President Obama’s union-controlled NLRB’s actions to date:

• Prosecuting an employer for opting to open a non-union assembly plant
• Suing states whose voters prefer secret ballots over card check
• Finding an employer guilty of unfair labor practices for not letting off-duty workers of a contractor on to the employer’s property
• Giving unions the okay to let their union supporters threaten non-union supporters with physical violence
• Moving to humiliate employers, as well as giving unions access to employees and property
• Considering forcing all NLRA-covered employers to post notices telling employee how to unionize
• Contemplating letting unions unionize workers into micro-unions
• Undermining union-free employees by giving unions (and employers) the right to negotiate “sweetheart deals” (before the union represents said employees) in exchange for unionizing employees

Of course, as the NLRB has become union bosses’ go-to agency to enact an agenda that they couldn’t otherwise get through Congress, there are other NLRB actions than just these that are listed.

"When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed." — Ayn Rand

The Bed Wetting Begins

I think Petula Dvorak at WaPo is the first, but certainly wont be the last moral idiot to try to sell this hackneyed line of crap:

Well past midnight, cars zipped up and down the streets of downtown Washington with women standing up through sunroofs waving ginormous American flags and guys blowing vuvuzelas, spring break style.

It felt a little crazy, a bit much. Almost vulgar...

When I saw that folks were celebrating in the streets at the news of bin Laden’s death, my first reaction was a cringe. Remember how we all felt watching videos of those al-Qaeda guys dancing on Sept. 11?

Are we simply creating star-spangled recruitment tapes for a new generation of terrorists killing in the name of their new martyr?

Osama's Final Moments

The animators in Taiwan give us their version of the operation: