The army of terrorists that Barrack Obama once termed 'JV' has now taken control of half of Syria. The same army of terrorists is in control of huge portions of Iraq and Libya, and Northern Africa. Worse yet is that thousands of young men and women are joining in a clandestine effort in the Uk and USA and elsewhere.
'Not to worry' you say? Why worry, Barack Obama is out speaking to the Coast Guard and probably telling them exactly how to thwart the efforts of this 'JV' group of misfits. Right? Well Obama was at the Coast Guard graduation yesterday, but he spent much of his valuable time speaking instead about Global Warming.
Yup, the Commander-in-Chief gets a chance to speak to newly minted CG grads and he talks about melting ice packs and Polar Bears in Manhattan. He spends his time preaching the imaginary gospel of Al Gore to the grads, who didn't sign up to fight global warming, but rather to defend our waters.
Obama quote from Academy:
"If you see storm clouds gathering or dangerous shoals ahead you don't just sit back and do nothing," President Obama said Wednesday. "You take action to protect your ship, to keep your crew safe. Anything less is negligence. It is a dereliction of duty. So to with climate change."
What a buffoon! What an utter embarrassment to all who serve in the CG or any armed forces and what an embarrassment to the USA.
"Denying it or refusing to deal with it endangers our national security," Obama also said. "It undermines the readiness of our forces."
So in Obama's world of insanity the military has the job of fighting global warming. How dare he suggest something like this when it is a fact that perhaps 1,000s of people in this country alone are signing up to fight with ISIS. ISIS is taking over the Middle East and our Commander-In-Chief is telling the troops to pay attention instead to Global Warming. I think if there is dereliction of duty happening it is at the White House.
I wonder if Putin would speak to his military about global warming? I wonder if Ronald Reagan ever spoke to his military about global warming? I don't even think the tubby little Dictator from North Korea spends his time speaking to the military about global warming. I think if you speak to the military about global warming its because you can't speak intelligently about anything military.
I am a little less proud of being an American because of Barack Obama.
Next week, Bernadette and I will be hosting a meet and greet at the Barn with US Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), candidate for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. Senator Cruz is a great believer in the tenants of limited government and individual liberty which we have made a cornerstone of our time on Beacon Hill. Details of the event are below. We are asking anyone planning on attending to RSVP to Ethan Zorfas at email@example.com. We hope you will be able to join us.
The Barn is a center of conservative activism in Massachusetts. Much like the Liberty Clubhouse in Central Massachusetts, the Lyons have made their home available for countless conservative candidates and causes. This is not an event to be missed.
The address is 12 Highvale Lane and RSVP's are required at the email address above.
What: Meet and Greet with Senator Ted Cruz
Where: The Barn, 12 Highvale Lane, Andover MA
When: Saturday May 30, 2015, 6-8pm
(Gina McCarthy, brought to you by Mitt Romney. Oh Joy! - promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
Like the I.R.S. the Environmental Protection Agency is working hand in hand, perhaps illegally, in promoting agency policy. Under Gina McCarthy, the agency works day and night not to be accountable to Congress. As it pursues policies seeking the decarbonize the American economy, the E.P.A clearly is offering another example of how it needs to be reined in by Congress and, if it believes in the rule of law, the White House.
Lest you think this is some Fox News fantasy, the source of the story is the New York Times. (So it must be true).
WASHINGTON - When the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a major new rule intended to protect the nation's drinking water last year, regulators solicited opinions from the public. The purpose of the "public comment" period was to objectively gauge Americans' sentiment before changing a policy that could profoundly affect their lives.
Gina McCarthy, the agency's administrator, told a Senate committee in March that the agency had received more than one million comments, and nearly 90 percent favored the agency's proposal. Ms. McCarthy is expected to cite those comments to justify the final rule, which the agency plans to unveil this week.
But critics say there is a reason for the overwhelming result: The E.P.A. had a hand in manufacturing it....
The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance just sent out the following press release.
(BOSTON)--In a poll conducted late last week, Massachusetts voters indicated overwhelming support for Governor Charlie Baker's plan to reform the MBTA. 84% of those surveyed said they are behind Baker; only 16% opposed his approach.
The poll was commissioned by the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a non-profit, non-partisan organization that advocates for fiscal responsibility and good government solutions on Beacon Hill.
"It's clear that voters overwhelmingly support the Governor's plan to fix the MBTA. Our poll showed statewide support at 84%. I don't think even chocolate ice cream polls that high," said Paul Craney, executive director of Mass Fiscal Alliance. "We are calling on every senator to reject the watered-down measures offered by Senate leadership, heed their constituents' voices, and get behind Governor Baker's plan today."
Baker's plan includes important measures like placing T management in the hands of a fiscal control board, auditing its retirement system, and relieving the system of the state's anti-privatization statute, known as The Pacheco Law.
The poll includes 11,278 high-propensity registered voters in 29 of the Commonwealth's 40 Senate districts. Senator Brian Joyce's Milton-area district came in most favorable for Baker's plan at over 91% support, while Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz's district was the lowest, demonstrating 67% approval. Districts entirely or mainly located in Western Massachusetts, the South Coast, and the Cape and Islands were omitted from the survey.
A bombshell new report from the Pioneer Institute, which they shared with the FBI, details what we already knew. The Massachusetts Health Connector Authority was rife with corruption, secrecy, and overall incompetence. The Boston Herald reports:
iting internal documents and whistleblower accounts from former project officials at UMass Medical Center, who came forward in early 2014, Pioneer also sent its findings in an October 2014 letter to the head of the FBI and other federal watchdog agencies. One of the whistleblowers told the Herald he has already been questioned by the FBI.
"Although the state knew as early as September 2012 that the project was behind schedule and off track, the UMass Medical team chose to conceal CGI's deficiencies rather than remedy them," reads the report authored by health care expert Joshua Archambault of Pioneer. The "Commonwealth misrepresented the project's progress, both in a March 2013 connectivity test with the Federal Data Services Hub, and in a May 2013 presentation to CMS."
The October 2014 letter from Pioneer to the FBI claims "the Commonwealth appears to lie about progress on project to keep funds."
The case could put two political allies in an awkward position, with the administration of President Obama investigating the inner workings of the administration of longtime friend former Gov. Deval Patrick. Patrick could not be reached for comment yesterday. His former secretary of Health and Human Services, John Polanowicz, declined to comment, saying he had not seen the report.
The Patrick administration willfully hid the fact that the website would not be ready. That put the health of the citizens of the Commonwealth at stake.
This shows once again that Obamacare wasn't really about helping citizens, but about control of their lives.
What are the chances I"m going to get my $1100 fine back from the Commonwealth for not being able to purchase insurance last year?
You may have seen the stories coming across your social media streams, the six states of New England are initiating a coordinated speeding crackdown this weekend. The problem isn't speeding, it is artificially low speed limits that are a remnant of the 1970s. It is time to raise them.
Maine, under the leadership of Paul Lepage, was the first state east of the Mississippi River to increase it's speed limit to 75 MPH on some stretches of highway a few years ago. The speed limit is also 70 MPH just about anywhere but Portland, and Bangor.
NH raised its limit north of Concord on Route 93 to 70 mph recently and has had bills to do the same on Routes 89 and 101.
Massachusetts is one of only 12 state's with a 65 MPH or lower maximum speed limit as the figure below from Wikimedia Commons shows.
Kamal will be waked on Friday May 8, 2015 at the McDonough Funeral Home at 14 Highland Street in Lowell. The time is 3-7 pm with a service at 7 P.M.
Getting to the Funeral Home is easy. Take 495 to the Lowell Connector. Go all the way on the Lowell Connector until it ends. Then take a left. At the next light the funeral home will be up the street on the left.
As soon as the online condolence book is available we will post that link.
It is with heavy heart that I am reporting about the death of Kamal Jain. According to the Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association of Lowell, whose board Kamal served on, he passed away while working with his wife on her farm yesterday.
Jain, as you remember launched a spirited, yet respectful, campaign for Auditor against Mary Z. Connaughton. Upon learning of his death Mary Z. told Red Mass Group, "Kamal and I got to know each other during the campaign and even better after the campaign. We shared a similar vision on so many matters, my heart sank when I heard the news. We lost a committed public servant and my heart goes out to him and his family. He will be dearly missed by so many."
But beyond that, Jain has been working tirelessly to make my hometown Lowell, Massachusetts a better place. He has been helping to run Lowell Makes, a community workshop where people can turn ideas into products and creations.
The Mayans were apparently off by three years in their calculations. 2015 is apparently the beginning of end times. Why you ask? Simple, after five years Jim Lyons (R-Andover) has voted for a state budget. State Representative Kevin Kuros captured the moment in a photo for all posterity.
In all seriousness though, in a phone conversation Lyons told Red Mass Group why he voted for the budget. Lyons said, "there have been areas that I have been looking for in a budget since I got here. Due to the leadership of Governor Baker those issues have been addressed. The areas include a serious effort at reining in the growth rate of government spending, shrinking of the size of government - which Baker is doing with early retirement, and serious entitlement reform. This budget includes those and more. I am alos extremely happy that Representative Lombardo and I were able to get a serious look at the problem of the Department of Children and Families taking children from parents due to medical disputes."
The budget package approved, unanimously, by the house, has many of Governor Baker's priorities in it. This is no doubt due to his soaring popularity in the polls, and the Democrat leadership's not wanting to be on the wrong side of the administration during the honeymoon period.
A Republican representative told Red Mass Group that this budget is a win-win for Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey, "if the budget works Dempsey can take credit, if it doesn't he can say 'we gave the Governor what he wanted as a courtesy and it didn't work."
Budget highlights include a reduction in medicaid (MassHealth) spending, a moratorium on the Pacheco law for the MBTA for a period of time, and other strong reforms.
Yesterday the Massachusetts Republican Party sent out this statement by Chairman Hughes about the lack of transparency in the budget process.
Democrats on Beacon Hill owe the taxpayers of Massachusetts a more open and accountable budget process. The majority's lack of transparency on this multi-billion dollar budget is just another example of the excesses of one-party rule in the Legislature. Speaker DeLeo should move debate into the public eye, and let taxpayers see how their money will be spent."
One of the great equalizers that Republicans have as the minority party is the ability to keep their amendments out of consolidation, and to call for roll calls. It only takes a little less than half of the Republican minority to stand for a roll call, that's 16 members, in order for a roll call to be recorded.
That is why when you read the fine print on this State House News Story (via the Lowell Sun) you have to scratch your head.
Rep. Geoff Diehl sponsored an amendment to prevent tax dollars from being used "to procure, host, aid, further or remediate the effects of, the 2024 Olympics." The amendment permitted transportation investments "even if such expenditures may also facilitate procuring, hosting, aiding, furthering, or remediating the effects of, the 2024 Olympics."
"What we're trying to avoid is having the taxpayers on the hook for overruns. I urge the membership to pass this amendment so we don't have to wait for the ballot question to come about and have it passed for us," said Diehl, whose amendment calling for a privately-funded Olympics surfaced after 8 p.m. Monday.
When Diehl asked for a roll call vote, an insufficient number of both his Democratic and Republican colleagues rose to meet the threshold for a recorded vote. His amendment was then defeated on a voice vote.
Sources tell Red Mass Group that about ten Republican members stood for the Diehl Amendment. Why would Republican members not want to get the body on record on the use of taxpayer money for the Olympics. Polling shows that the public supports Diehl's conservative approach.
Why did Minority Leader Brad Jones, once again, not have the caucus stand for a conservative's common-sense budget amendment? Especially when the leader of the Party Kirsten Hughes is calling for more transparency.
The more things change, the more they really stay the same.
We just passed the 100 day mark of the governorship of Charlie Baker. Suffolk University just released a poll showing how the public thinks he is doing after those 100 days. He is wildly popular, Jon Keller reports.
The poll finds Baker is easily the most popular politician in Massachusetts right now, with 74-percent expressing a favorable view of him while only eight-percent hold an unfavorable opinion.
That is 15-points better than the next best numbers enjoyed by Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, who has a 59-to-11 percent favorable/unfavorable rating. (Sen. Elizabeth Warren is third with a 54-33 percent favorable/unfavorable rating.)
Baker's job-approval ratings are just as strong, with a 70-6 percent approval/disapproval spread. And when asked if Baker is a better governor than Deval Patrick was, 42-percent said yes, while only 24-percent said no.
Baker has earned those numbers by showing a strong, active leadership style. He took charge of the situation at the MBTA and has started on the path of reform. Reform that will start with getting the management of the agency under control, not new spending.
He has also submitted a budget, largely copied by the House Committee on Ways and Means, which slashes entitlement spending and puts long needed reforms of the Pacheco law into place.
He has announced the reduction of the state workforce by 5000 people through attrition, and an early retirement package.
Baker has shown a willingness to shrink the size and scope of state government, in a way that actually has Democratic support.
He should continue that and push for even greater reforms. Using the political capital when it is at its highest will show the nation that even in a blue state, you can shrink the size of government.
Hillary Clinton is not an exciting candidate. She wasn't exciting the last time. She isn't exciting this time. I'm apparently not the only one to notice this.
She's no Obama. She's not nearly as immediately likeable, captivating, hyper-articulate. She's not a great orator, she doesn't have much by way of magnetism or personal charisma (though she reportedly does have a terrific sense of humor), much less Obama's famous, deeply reassuring/infuriating Zen-like calm.
She can't hit a three-pointer from 25 feet out. She's not a surprising unknown...
It goes on. When a supporter has to write an article explaining "how to be excited" then it's definitely a problem. Anyways, it made me think of this scene from Wayne's World.
We always hear from some politicians how we need to protect 'humanity', 'women', and identity groups. Giving a damn about neighbors, a particular woman outside of a general sense, and individuals is somehow a very difficult thing for some of these same people who favor such lectures. In their own estimation though, their efforts on behalf of what they see as 'humanity', 'women', and identity groups absolve them of their practice of steam-rolling innocent individuals that may be parts of their 'beloved'-wholes.
Deb Goldberg is a classic example of this and the Boston Globe articles of the past few days show exactly how she feels about particular-woman empowerment. Great credit to the Globe and especially Tom Farragher for having the courage to un-relentingly call out the imperious, unbecoming behavior of a powerful office holder and local gazillionaire(inherited, un-earned). No one in state government rides a moral high horse of the stature Deb Goldberg does which makes this all the more galling and predictable. Equal pay for women, fossil fuel divestment, and all of her other crusades are all fine and good... but they mean more when actually practiced on a personal basis. When it came to empowering a young female subordinate starting her career, she chose instead to humiliate and cause her professional ruin.
Deb Goldberg 'rues her decision' only because she's been exposed for the petty tyrant she is. As for her account of 'working at Stop and Shop' (what heroism!) it's clear in her mind such an experience is the equivalent of a goddamn combat deployment or somehow makes her kin with the little people she crushes. Somehow despite such delusions and investing with Bernie Madoff... this woman was elected to the position of State Treasurer.
Fish rots from the head down, and looking at the pattern of how little people and especially women have been treated by her party's heir apparent this isn't an isolated incident. They are the greatest 'advocates for women' the world has ever known if you ask them, but if you're an innocent woman or individual in their way you will be destroyed without mercy.
Moreover, there's an old saying about American politics that "Republicans fall in line, while Democrats fall in love." Democrats have traditionally been more prone to factor passion and excitement into their selection process, while Republicans have been more businesslike in their tendency to settle for the "safe" establishment candidates who wait their turn. Barack Obama was the daring choice (compared to Hillary Clinton) in 2008, while Republican John McCain was "the next guy in line" that same year, as was Mitt Romney in 2012.
But fortunately for Mrs Clinton, that historical cliché appears to be in jeopardy this year. While Democrats seem all too eager to fall in line behind Clinton, Republicans are gearing up for what looks to be a contentious brawl.
It's not at all clear an establishment candidate will emerge. In fact, conspicuously absent for the GOP this time around is an obvious front-runner - an heir apparent - a "next guy in line." Sen. Rick Santorum, as the last man standing against Mitt Romney in 2012, would have been the obvious candidate, except that he isn't considered a top-tier candidate this time around.
There are those who disagree about Rick Santorum's chances, however Matt Lewis's list is as good as any. It's useful to check his top tier against this venn diagram of candidates produced back when it was thought Romney may enter the race. It holds up pretty well. Who do you support?
It probably wasn't very surprising that Charlie Baker came out against Indiana's religious freedom law.
Tim Buckley, communications director for Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, said in an email:
"Governor Baker disagrees with the Indiana law and is proud that Massachusetts has been and will continue to be a leader on equality, but is not proposing any restrictions on the ability of the Commonwealth's employees to do their important work."
He didn't come out as hard against it as he could have. Other governors banned travel from their state to Indiana. Charlie refrained from banning hypothetical travel to Indiana. Nonetheless, props to him because as we know even hypotheticals can get people in big trouble. One thing we should call him on, however, is that he signed the brief in support of gay marriage. Again, not surprising. The surprising thing is what the National Review notes:
But the payoff in the brief comes in the last sentence of this passage: "In a tolerant society, the right to marry can and should coexist with the right to disagree respectfully and to decline to participate as individuals based on sincerely held religious beliefs." This is precisely the issue that has drawn the wrath of the gay-rights and corporate communities that is befalling Mike Pence and Indiana's religious-freedom statute. According to the signatories of the brief, in a pluralistic society, gay marriage can and should coexist with the right to worship as one pleases, both in church and in one's everyday life (including, yes, in business).
What happened? Can't we expect him to agree with what he signed? Is the least bit of consistency too much to ask? The answer is quite simple. Since the time Baker and Polito signed the brief (a week or so ago?), their position has evolved. This is especially clear in the case of Karyn Polito. Again, not a surprising evolution knowing what we know. It does raise questions about what we don't know. Would Charlie refuse to support a bare minimum RFRA here in Massachusetts?
Don't expect sanctimonious Tim Cook to withdraw billions of investment from China. Boycotting Indiana is the easy way, a cheap hit from the corporate peanut gallery.
Read Eric Convey's brilliant takedown of the socially responsible corporate frauds.
Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL), whose CEO Tim Cook took a sharp jab at Indiana over the law, just won permission to do business in Saudi Arabia under its own name. Saudi Arabian law provides for execution of people caught in sexual acts with people of the same gender.
And that goes for Salesforce as well as Rod Dreher reminds us over at the American Conservative.
It's not a pretty picture. Gays are incomparably more free as gays in Indiana than in China. It's not even close.
Is this a problem for Marc Benioff? Is this a problem for Apple's Tim Cook? Why do they swallow the Chinese camel while straining at the Hoosier gnat? In Cook's case, it's money: the $16 billion Apple made in China in the first quarter of the current fiscal year - that's $16 billion in three months! - sure can buy some Tim Cook silence. He's pushing around Indiana and other American states because it's easy. It costs him nothing.
Besides, this is not really about human rights. This is about status competition among post-Christian America's white elites. Actual harm done to Chinese people, including LGBT Chinese people, by its government does not matter to Marc Benioff & his Silicon Valley friends. Potential harm to Indiana LGBTs - however unlikely, and however minor by comparison - matters because it is all the fault of Christianist Republicans.
I do wish Republican grassroots voters who valorize big business would understand what exactly it is they champion.
Is it time for liberal corporations to divest themselves of investment in horrid nations like Saudi Arabia and China? Good question. Let's see them walk the talk.
Are they and other gay-unfriendly nation-states the new 21st version of apartheid South Africa?
Don't hold your breadth. Pushing Indiana into a corner is small fry stuff.