Even a liberal might find this alarming

Federal prosecutors grounded their jurisdiction to bring charges on Amish minister on the commerce clause. Leader convicted and sentenced to fifteen years.

U.S. Attorney Steven M. Dettelbach, of the Northern District of Ohio, argued in the indictment that the “Wahl battery-operated hair clippers” used in the assaults “were purchased at Walmart and had travelled in and affected interstate commerce in that they were manufactured in Dover, Delaware.”

Attorney Harvey Silverglate estimates that the average citizen now commits three felonies a day, thanks to the proliferation of federal laws and regulations. What that means is if you annoy the government, they can destroy you at will. Giving them jurisdiction to do that because you bought a something manufactured out of state (or used a telephone, or mailed a letter, etc. etc.) just pushes us further down the road to servitude.

Fudrucker’s stalking horse?

Come into my den, said the spider to the fly

Democrat Third Selectman Drew Marzullo is pushing for a change in the structure of the BET and I wonder why?

“Marzullo said that the minority caucus leader shouldn’t have to ask for permission to assign to Democratic committee seats, just as Republicans wouldn’t want Democrats dictating assignments.”

Republicans and Democrats actually serving on the BET disagree:

“There’s no broken system here,” Mason said. “It’s worked well. This is how the electorate has wanted it since 1921. Why is this problem up now?”

Finger, the current leader of the BET’s Democratic caucus, echoed Mason on the committee assignments process.

“To my knowledge, in recent history, I believe that every recommendation that was made by the caucus leader was accepted by the chair of the BET,” Finger said. “I don’t know of one instance where the minority party’s recommendations have not been adhered to. He didn’t tell me, `This is who I want.’ “

So what’s actually going on here, that our Cos Cob EMT rep who ordinarily directs his attention to cellphobe towers and swimming pools for the needy suddenly sees a need to reform the BET? Buried in the Greenwich Time article is what I consider to be the money quote:

By allowing each caucus to determine committee assignments, Marzullo said that would afford members of the minority party due process in the event there is an attempt to strip them of their post.

As was announced a few weeks ago, Marzullo ally and Chairman of the Greenwich Council of Democrat Looters, Francis X. Farricker,  intends to join with another Democrat who’s also lost a First Selectman’s race, John Blankley, to oust two of their fellow Democrats from the BET. I’m guessing that the two of them anticipate turmoil and antipathy among their pals on the board if they succeed, and they’ve instructed Drew to change the rules so that they’ll be protected against the anger of their former friends.

That’s just my speculation, but there’s something going on here besides a sudden interest in civic reform by our man from Cos Cob.

Obama: the gift that keeps on taking

The redistributionist turns his attention away from the golf course (he’s out there today, again) to direct his greed towards those who dare save for retirement.

That’s the message in President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014, which for the first time proposes to cap the amount Americans can save in these tax-sheltered investment vehicles. The White House explanation is that some people have accumulated “substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.” So Mr. Obama proposes to “limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million for someone retiring in 2013.”

Thus do our political betters now feel free to define for everyone what is “needed” for a “reasonable” retirement. Not to be impertinent, but does this White House definition include being able to afford summers at age 70 at Martha’s Vineyard near the Obamas?

The feds may think $3 million is all you need after a lifetime of work, but that’s roughly the value of a California police sergeant’s pension if she works for 30 years, retires at age 50 and lives to normal life expectancy.

The Administration’s political motive here is two-fold: First, it’s a redistributionist play and a revenue grab. But for many on the left it’s also about reducing the ability of individuals to make themselves independent of the state. They have always disliked IRAs, just as they oppose health-savings accounts, because over time they make Americans less dependent on federal entitlements or transfer payments.

 

The next embarrassment from Connecticut

In a pathetic attempt to outdo Dick the Dick Blumenthal in the Stupidity Goose Step Parade, freshman Senator Chris Murphy manages to call for the suppression of two Constitutional rights in just one press release. The man from Munich demands that Fox Sports stop broadcasting  NASCAR races because the NRA is a sponsor. For those like Dollar Bill who dismiss the constitution as an obsolete document written by white, sexist homophobes and thus are unfamiliar with its provisions, that would be the government attempting to suppress free speech (1st Amendment) and the right to bear arms (2nd).

Easy to understand the gentleman’s pique at both freedoms, after he received this dressing down from college students on their right to be free from government goons like Senator Murphy.

Obama is weeely, weely angwy!

Cry all you want, I can’t hear you – nanananana!

In a stunning display of the might of the American Empire, Obama puts North Korea firmly in its place. His Secretary of State warns North Korea that they risk offending “international opinion” should they go ahead and blow up Japan and Austin. “No more invitations to sock hops and hay rides”, John Kerry promises, “and don’t even think about going out Saturday night.”

Bottom story of the day

Robert Kennedy and Chavez
(Photo by Walt)

Atlantic: Venezuelan election won’t be fair.

For 14 years Chavez has embodied the “Bolivarian” revolution. If chavismo is to survive Chavez it will have to choose between three paths: radicalization of the current hardline competitive authoritarian model into a fully authoritarian regime (a dictatorship), mere continuation of competitive authoritarianism or, the most unlikely scenario, dismantling chavismo little by little to turn Venezuela into some semblance of a real democracy.

[C] onsequences could be profound if the opposition became government. Corruption in Venezuela during the Chavez era has reached levels that would make many of the world’s oil autocrats blush. So, first off, the heirs of Chavez must prevent the dozens or hundreds of investigations and prosecutions that would follow a democratic transition. It is believed that tens of billions of petro-dollars have been siphoned off by those in government. The new oligarchs know all too well that Chavez’s abrupt exit threatens their ability to retain and enjoy their wealth.

Chavez’s successors must also worry about accountability for the escalating scale of human rights violations — none of which have been punished–over the course of his rule. These include such iconic events as the killing of nineteen protestors and the wounding of hundreds more on April 11, 2002. The heirs to Chavez know that at some point they will have to answer for their share of the bloodshed — and for other serious crimes. Under Chavez, Venezuela became a veritable narco-state, affording military protection and safe passage to the Colombo-Venezuelan cartels and their protectors in the FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a left-wing insurgency that has long been implicated in the drug trade). The U.S. has formally designated some of Venezuela’s most senior politicians and military officials as “drug kingpins,” including the current defense minister. The European Union is also clear that Venezuela is a narco-state. Lacking the protection of high office, the chavistasknow they would be sitting ducks for international prosecution on drug charges.

For nearly 14 years, Hugo Chavez labored with tireless energy, undeniable charisma, and ruthless design to destroy the opposition, silence critics, and intimidate skeptics, all while leaving the Potemkin façade of a “democracy”. These conditions have made Venezuelan elections under Chavez utterly unfair. Judges who ruled against Chavez were imprisoned. Those that remain openly declared their fealty to him. The previous opposition presidential candidate is in exile. Businessmen who supported opposition candidates were investigated and expropriated. Labor leaders who opposed the government were imprisoned. Opposition radio and TV stations were shut down, denied permits, and fined. Those that survived engaged in self-censorship. Since Chavez’s death, the only remaining independent television channel was purchased by partisans of the Chavez party and is unlikely to maintain editorial independence beyond April. The electoral council is demonstrably biased in favor of the government. And every so often, elections have been held in which the opposition wins enough seats in parliament, governorships, mayor’s offices, and a high enough percentage of the presidential vote for superficial observers to declare, “Well, we may not like it, but this is the people’s will.”

(Space below reserved for Dollar Bill and his crowd to comment, though I can do it for them: “Blame Bush! – Thatcher sucks! Cheney Cheney Cheney!”)

Shocker: global warming did not cause last year’s drought

That’s what NOAA concludes, but whoever said it did? Oh, that’s right, the warmists, like Huffington Post (July, 2012); Climatecentral.org;    The Sierra Club, and the Associated Press among many, many others.

Next thing you know, Al Gore will confess that he lied about the merits of ethanol to enhance his election chances.