Barack Obama is the patron saint of the liberal masses and they love their messiah with all their hearts and soul. Well then they had better heed a new study that shows black men in prison have a better chance of living than black men who are not in prison.

Black men are half as likely to die at any given time if they’re in prison than if they aren’t, suggests a new study of North Carolina inmates. al-Reuters

Given that Obama is a past drug user, drinks alcohol, smokes cigarettes and eats unhealthy foods and given that he has one of the most stressful jobs in the world it is very likely that he will suffer some catastrophic health related event. Add to that list the fact that he is a black man who is not in prison and the odds are really against him and it is high time we did something to help him out. After all, we can’t have the little Obama-bots wandering around more aimlessly than they already are.

So for his own health and the peace of mind of his followers we need to put him in jail.

Barack Obama needs to be confined to a penal institution in short order so that he will have a better chance of living.

It is the least we can do for him and his minions.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Did you know that wearing a hat can get you thrown in jail for life? Did you know that if you call a court “a joke,” that you can be jailed for 60 days? Oh, no, not in a communist country, right here in the so-called “Land of the Free.”

And yes, I’m completely serious. Both of these things have happened in the past two days.

In the first case, one Pete Eyre was wearing a hat. He wasn’t bothering anyone else. He wasn’t harming anyone. He wasn’t putting anyone in danger. Heck, his hat wasn’t even blocking anyone’s view of anything. A man told Pete to remove his hat. He refused. So he was beaten and thrown in jail. That was yesterday. Today, the judge decided that Pete would stay in jail for the rest of his life. Yes, that would be in America. New Hampshire, to be exact.

In the second case, another person, Ademo, was watching the decision that the judge was making in the above case (to keep Pete in jail for the rest of his life for the crime of wearing a hat). Ademo, seeing that the judge was a total fool, and seeing that the judge was going to jail his friend for life, got up, and walked out of the court. Well, he tried to walk out of the court. On his way out, he said something about the court being a joke. The same fool judge then threw Ademo in jail for 60 days. Yes, you read that correctly — 60 days in jail for calling a courtroom “a joke.”

And no, there will be no “winning in court,” or “lawsuits” or “settlements.” You see, these people are all 100% immune from the very system they support. While this judge probably deserves to be tarred and feathered, there is no chance he will face any discipline in any way — because other judges, who like having unlimited power, would have to rule that he did something wrong. If I were to see this judge on the street, I would certainly let him know what an absolute fool he was. Of course, that would likely get me thrown in jail for a few months as well.

So, next time you’re walking around, believing you’re in a free country, think of Ademo and Pete. They’re spending lengthy time in jail for the serious crimes of wearing a hat, and saying that the court is a joke. And you keep telling yourself that you live in a free country, because you’re not going to convince me.

Before I start, let me say that I admire Charlie Rangel’s military service to this country. On 30 November, 1950 he and his unit were attacked by the Chinese while he was serving in the Korean War. Rangel was wounded but managed, as a Private, to take control of about 30 soldiers and get them to safety in freezing temperatures. His actions saved them from capture and likely saved their lives. He received several medals for his heroism and for that, this nation should be grateful.

But that does not negate the fact that over the years that Rangel has served in Congress he has done things that would get the average citizen thrown in jail.

Yesterday, Rangel was censured by the Congress, a punishment just below expulsion. Rangel was found guilty of nearly a dozen ethics violations including not paying taxes for a rental property. This is particularly bad because Rangel was in charge of the group responsible for our tax laws. It is not likely that Rangel will be prosecuted for failure to pay his taxes. He has already paid what was reported that he owed and the matter will be considered settled. If he were the average guy on the street, he would be in jail.

Even the not so average guys go to jail. Wesley Snipes, the actor, was sentenced to three years in jail for failure to pay his taxes. Snipes was led to believe that there was no compelling law that required him to pay the taxes so he didn’t. The fact that he paid $5 million dollars (of the $15 million he owed) did not sway a judge and he will serve three years.

What is the difference between what Snipes did and what Rangel did? Rangel knew the tax laws and did not pay his taxes. He claimed that it was a mistake and poor bookkeeping. Snipes was told by his tax advisers that he did not have to pay the taxes and he didn’t.

Both men were guilty of not paying their taxes but one of them had to face Congress and have his censure read aloud while the other will spend three years behind bars.

To top it off, Snipes has not been accused of any other wrongdoing.

Snipes was made an example. His jail time is a direct message to those who think there is no law compelling them to pay taxes. This is an intimidation tactic to get people who think the same thing to stop and think before they decide not to pay taxes.

There are obviously two sets of rules. One set for the members of Congress (and other top government officials) and one set for the rest of us. How many people in the Obama Administration alone were outed as tax evaders only to pay what they owed and move into high paying positions?

Rangel made a big show of his censure proceedings and asked others to vote for a lesser punishment. People have talked about the embarrassment of standing in the well of the House floor while the censure is read by the Speaker.

I bet if one were to ask Wesley Snipes which punishment he preferred he would gladly stand in the well of the House and have a censure read.

And you can bet Rangel prefers this to three years in jail.

You can bet they would both prefer the Tim Geithner resolution where they could apologize for the oversight, pay the back taxes (no interest or penalties) and then move on with their lives.

At 80 years of age it is time for Rangel to consider retiring and enjoying the rest of his life.

And it is time for Congress to have real oversight where members are held as accountable as the poorest person in the country.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas has been caught doling out scholarships to her family members and to the children of one of her aides. She did this in violation of the rules governing the scholarships which are paid for through the Congressional Black Caucus. Among the rules are specific prohibitions on awarding scholarships to family members and to people related to anyone associated with the scholarship program. Those awarded must live or study in the district of the member of Congress or in a district of another member of the CBC. I assume white children are eligible though I wonder how many actually get the awards. I also wonder how it would be received if there was a scholarship program that was open only to people in the districts of Tea Party Caucus members…

Anyway, Johnson is in hot water. In my opinion she should be prosecuted and she should be investigated by the Ethics Committee. Her responses to the discovery of her illegal activities have been underwhelming and have highlighted her arrogance. Johnson has stated that names came across her desk and that she was not directly involved and all kinds of things but then we see this statement and wonder what planet she is on:

Last week, Johnson initially defended her scholarship choices, then acknowledged violating the scholarship rules, though she said she did so “unknowingly.” She also said that all qualified applicants have gotten a share of scholarship funds each year, and that she might not have picked relatives had there been more qualified applicants. Dallas News

How could she have violated the rules unknowingly when the rules say that no family member is eligible? She had to know that the people involved were related to her because they were her grandsons. In addition, she admitted that she knew in her last sentence. She said she would not have awarded the scholarships to family members if there had been more qualified candidates. Therefore, she knew they were her family.

Also, and here is where she shows her true stupidity, her family members were NOT qualified. Therefore, any other applicant (who met the standards) was MORE qualified. She does not seem to understand this little piece of logic so let us spell it out one more time. Her family members were NOT qualified so all other applicants (who met the standards) were MORE qualified and her argument is only a fabrication to cover her rear end.

If she claims ignorance then not only should she be prosecuted for the scholarship fraud, she should also be removed from office for gross incompetence.

Johnson says she will pay back the money for the scholarships by the end of the week. I am unsure which ones she means but if she is going to pay for all of them it will cost quite a bit of money.

I would also like to point out that the application for the scholarship asks applicants if they are related to anyone associated with the program. The people who investigate this might want to look at the applications and see how those questions were addressed. There might be fraud coming from more than one direction.

Maybe they can all get a family cell at the iron bar hotel…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was given an awful lot of rope after he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice when he tried to cover up wrongdoing while in office. He was given probation and ordered to pay back 1 million dollars to the city. He was allowed to move to Texas so he could work at his $120,000 a year job to pay off his debt but he screwed that up. He hung himself with the rope he was given.

Kilpatrick, as part of his probation, was ordered by the court not to hide any assets that could be used to pay restitution. He decided to hide assets and the judge sent him to jail for violating his probation. This from the judge says it all:

“Probation is no longer an option. The terms of your earlier probation no longer apply. That ship has sailed,” Groner said. “This is all because of the actions of you, Mr. Kilpatrick. You were convicted … all because you lied under oath. That lie … was part of a broader attempt to cover up your misdeeds while serving as mayor.

“You challenged this court’s authority,” Groner said. “You attempted to utilize semantics and exploit loopholes. The broader context of this issue is that your family living expenses — including living in a million-dollar home, driving a brand new Escalade and purchasing elective surgery for your wife — you have made it perfectly clear that it’s more important to pacify your wife than comply with my orders.”

Kilpatrick will get 120 days credit for time he served in 2008-09 in the Wayne County Jail. That means he will serve 14 months in a Michigan prison before he can apply for parole.

“Sergeant, can you secure the defendant, please,” Groner commanded as four sheriff’s deputies moved in to handcuff Kilpatrick and led him from the courtroom. Detroit News

Kilpatrick will have to serve between 1.5 and 5 years though his attorneys are certain to appeal. His supporters feel he was treated unfairly.

Right. The only people treated unfairly were those who trusted him to hold office in an ethical fashion. He shattered that trust and spun a web of lies.

He needs to spend time in jail though I doubt he will learn a thing.

There is concern about what this will do the the family. Sell that million dollar home and pay off the debt and then get jobs.

Now there is a novel idea.

Never surrender, never submit.

In an interview with Jake Tapper of ABC, Barack Obama discussed the health care debacle that is working its way through Congress. Tapper asked him about the provisions in the bill for people to go to jail if they do not get insurance and refuse to pay the tax that will be levied on them for the refusal. Obama danced around the jail issue and said that everyone had to buy insurance. He likened it to car insurance, an argument that I have already destroyed. People are only forced to buy car insurance if they own a car. People do not have to have a car. Here is a part of Obama’s answer that shows promise:

“I think the general broad principle is simply that people who are paying for their health insurance aren’t subsidizing folks who simply choose not to until they get sick and then suddenly they expect free health insurance. That’s — that’s basic concept of responsibility that I think most Americans abide by,” Mr. Obama said, “penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their health insurance.” [emphasis mine] ABC

This is interesting indeed. I think Obama might be on to something. Let me change that last sentence to this [select one or more of the options]:

“penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the system and force others to pay for their [welfare, abortions, tuition, tax liability, home heating fuel, electricity, cars, and other social programs].”

Barack has hit the nail on the head. We have far too many people in this country who are on welfare and who do not pay any income taxes (not including the people in his administration). We have people who expect the government (read the taxpayer) to pay for abortions. There are programs to pay for electricity and heating fuel and all of these come from the taxpayer. Cash for clunkers was nothing more than taxpayer money going toward a vehicle for another person.

If all these people abode by the idea of basic responsibility then we would not have them running around with their hands out looking for more taxpayer money. We should have an appropriate penalty for those who are getting money, a free ride, while the rest of us do what is right.

The other interesting thing is that Obama said that it is not right for these free loaders to expect someone else to pay for their health insurance but the government plan is nothing more than taxpayers paying for people’s health insurance. Isn’t that a bit ironic?

I wonder why so many people fail to see the contradictions.

I wonder how long it will be before the liberals tell me that it is different…

During the campaign, then candidate Obama poo-pooed the idea of compulsory insurance. He told Hillary Clinton, who had proposed the idea, that he did not think it was wise and that controlling costs would allow people to get insurance. In my previous post I stated that no one expects a politician to keep a campaign promise but this was not a promise, this was Obama’s position on an aspect of an opponent’s cure for the problems in health care.

Obama said that he did not think it was good to force people to buy insurance.

Now that he has won the election he has more positions than the Karma Sutra and he changes them often. Interestingly, he intends to do to America what the Karma Sutra instructs people to do to each other.

Barack Obama is touting Obamacare as the only way to fix the problem. We have heard from him and his surrogates that there are only two options, his way or what we have. This is blatantly false and misleading and designed to push through an agenda that is about controlling our lives.

Under Obamacare, those who fail to buy health insurance (and subsequently do not pay the imposed tax for failing to do so) may be sent to jail for a year, fined $25,000, or both. Senator John Ensign requested confirmation of this from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold. Ensign received a handwritten note confirming the information.

I previously wrote that the Obamacare plan would impose a tax increase on the middle class and this is nothing more than a tax increase an the penalty for failing to pay that tax increase. If people pay for the insurance they have paid a tax increase, and if they pay the penalty, they have paid a tax increase. The penalties are for failing to pay what the bill clearly states is a tax.

As Lauri Regan of the American Thinker stated:

Last week, Obama provided us with the untruth that the individual mandate penalty of $1900 is not a tax increase. But if it is not a tax increase, how can the IRS enforce it with the threat of jail or fine? In Obama’s world of fun and games, I suppose anything goes, but I for one have no desire to take my “Chance.”

This, of course, is in addition to all the tax increases that will be hidden in various other aspects of the bill so as to deceive people into thinking that Obama did not raise their taxes. Sometime in the future there will be unhidden tax increases as Obama tries to tackle the huge debt he is racking up. That will probably be after the 2012 election, should he win.

This is America. How can they fine or jail people for not buying health insurance? What will they mandate next that forces us to pay more of our money? Will they require that we all buy a gym membership? Will we all be required to buy subscriptions to a local newspaper to help bail them out? Where will it end?

Will it end with the USA being renamed the USSA?

The Democrats are adding to this bill and they are pushing for government run health care so they can control that part of the economy and have nearly complete control over our lives.

The note from Barthold makes it pretty clear they intend to take over our lives with the use of force.

Good. Force gets force in return and though many politicians think the protests and opposition will die down, they will soon find out that they were wrong.

In 2010, we need to add all of them to the rolls of the unemployed.

Others:
Gateway Pundit

A quick look around.

Obama can’t get over British Treatment of grandfather

When Kenya was under British rule the Brits evidently treated Obama’s granddaddy rather rudely. To return the favor Obama has treated the British PM the same way. Obama snubbed PM Brown by cancelling a press conference and then by having a half-hearted meeting. Brown gave The Evil Won some very nice, thoughtful gifts. Obama gave the PM a gift box of DVDs. They were American movie classics. As if Brown could not get them from about any source.

The Klingon First Lady saw her two daughters get nice clothing from the PM’s wife. She gave the Brown’s boys helicopter models of Marine One. Is there any doubt that the Obama’s hit the White House gift shop for these gifts?

It is one thing to hold a grudge. It is quite another to treat an ally badly while representing the country. I hope the Brits realize that the Obama’s attitudes do not reflect the attitudes of the entire nation.

Couple faces life in prison for tax evasion and police standoff

The Browns (not the visiting Brits) refused to pay taxes stating that they were unconstitutional. They then had a long standoff with police because they refused to surrender. They are now in jail and face life in prison:

The Browns virtually face life sentences if they are convicted of all of the charges against them. Ed Brown, 66, and Elaine Brown, 68, are serving 63-month sentences for tax-related crimes. One of the new charges – of possessing destructive devices – carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 years in prison, on top of any penalties from the other charges. Concord Monitor

Meanwhile, Timothy Geithner heads the US Treasury even though he deliberately did not pay his taxes. Charlie Rangel and Tom Daschle are also not in jail though they, like others who Obama wanted to serve him, did not pay their taxes. What a country.

More on small businesses

There are many who think that the tax increases on those who make over $250,000 will not affect small businesses to any large degree. Time will tell but the Gateway Pundit has some interesting information on the issue.

Most people who have no problems with increasing taxes on the evil rich are those who think others should pay their way or the way of others. These are the folks who think it is OK for those of us who pay our mortgages on time to also pay for the homes of people who could never afford what they bought. There is something wrong with the psyche of a person who thinks it is OK to take the money that one person has earned and give it to others.

There are 5 computers in my house. Should I be forced to give a few of them to people who have no computers? We have two cars and there are people who have none. Maybe we should have to give them one of ours.

Where does it stop? How is it fair? Why should one part of society be compelled to provide for another part?

Why did we let liberals create a dependent class of people?

Will California Judges legislate from the bench, again?

Californians passed a law a few years back banning same sex marriage. The court struck it down because, they claim, it went against California’s Constitution. So, the voters went to the polls to vote on Proposition 8 which amended the Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Now there is another lawsuit and the court will decide if the change to the Constitution was legal, at least according to their rules. The state and its voters did it correctly but the outcome was not what a special aggrieved unit of victims wanted so off to court it goes.

Regardless of how one falls on this issue, the people of California expressed their will and they did it within the framework of their laws.

No court should undo that. Just because we don’t like the outcome does not mean it was illegal. Yahoo News

Joe the Plumber sues Ohio

Joe the Plumber is suing three Ohio officials for invasion of privacy after they went through his records illegally. Joe caught Obama exposing his radical Socialist agenda and that set off a firestorm of invasion of privacy and cover up.

The media went after Joe instead of the law breakers when this happened. If it had been some liberal who was wiretapped talking to Osama bin Laden the ACLU and every other victim enabling group would be having conniptions over the privacy issue.

Not so much with Joe. He exposed the Emperor as having no clothes.

The media also went after Joe because he owed back taxes. They treated him more harshly than all the tax cheats Obama has on the government dole.

I hope he gets a gazillion dollars.

Joe, if you do make sure you pay your taxes. Otherwise you might be selected to be in the Obama administration. AP

That is all for now. Feel free to comment or trackback.