Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever

[B-Man]

Good news.............

FP: Trump administration may cut UN funding by 50%

 

 

State Department staffers have been instructed to seek cuts in excess of 50 percent in U.S. funding for U.N. programs, signaling an unprecedented retreat by President Donald Trump’s administration from international operations that

keep the peace, provide vaccines for children,

monitor rogue nuclear weapons programs, and promote peace talks from Syria to Yemen, according to three sources.

The push for such

draconian measures

comes as the White House is scheduled on Thursday to release its 2018 budget proposal, which is expected to include cuts of up to 37 percent for spending on the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign assistance programs, including the U.N., in next year’s budget. The United States spends about $10 billion a year on the United Nations.

"keep the peace & Children's vaccines".....................written with a straight face no doubt............

Edited March 14, 2017 by B-Man

[Meathead]

Liberals continue to implode.........

 

 

 

 

It makes zero sense. Masturbation and abortion are not even comparable.

 

Are females fined for masturbating as well, by the way?

 

No matter................this strategy will totally lead to a permanent extinction of Dems in government.

 

 

 

 

i hope you realize that was an intentionally farcical piece of legislation

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

.

[TH3]

Liberals continue to implode.........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It makes zero sense. Masturbation and abortion are not even comparable.Are females fined for masturbating as well, by the way?

 

No matter................this strategy will totally lead to a permanent extinction of Dems in government.

 

I heard the word "gullible" isn't even in the dictionary.....quick go check.... Edited March 15, 2017 by baskin

[B-Man]

 

i hope you realize that was an intentionally farcical piece of legislation

 

 

Gee...................MEATHEAD..............

 

You mean just like it said in the article I posted ?

 

The Hill

✔ @thehill

Dem lawmaker introduces bill to fine men for masturbating to highlight anti-abortion laws' impact on women http://hill.cm/w4FpXlY pic.twitter.com/vAebBng4oO

 

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/184741-americans-hate-the-federal-government-more-than-ever/page-31?do=findComment&comment=4286345

 

The part you didn't include

 

 

Honestly, you guys are so set in your bias, you can't see straight..

 

 

Hilarious that you did fool Baskin though ..............that makes it worth it...........

[Meathead]

your response seemed to indicate you jumped to a conclusion. sarcasm is hard to discern on the interwebs and there was nothing in your post to indicate such. perhaps i am not familiar enough with your reputation to make that determination from what little you provided, so forgive my error

I heard the word "gullible" isn't even in the dictionary.....quick go check....

 

it appears i wasnt the only one

 

bman, are you sure you arent covering up? you can tell us if you actually jumped to a conclusion there, we promise we wont laugh at you

[B-Man]

Connecticut Kennedy Thinks State Should Own Your Organs

Lifezette ^ | 14 Mar 2017

Connecticut State Sen. Ted Kennedy Jr. (D-Branford) — son of former U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) — wants to give state government control over what happens to citizens’ organs after they die.

Kennedy recently introduced SB 750, which would automatically enroll Connecticut’s citizens in the organ donation program.

(Excerpt) Read more at lifezette.com ...

New Yorkers who don’t vote would pay $10 fine under assemblywoman's bill

 

New York Daily News ^ | Friday, March 17, 2017, 6:11 PM | Glenn Blain

A state lawmaker from Manhattan wants to make it costly for New Yorkers not to vote. Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, a Democrat, introduced legislation this week that would establish “compulsory voting” in the state and punish those who don’t vote with a $10 fine.

Edited March 19, 2017 by B-Man

[ExiledInIllinois]

Yeah... What a bunch of d*cks:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/former-nc-police-chief-detained-at-jfk-for-90-minutes/2017/03/19/691398bc-0d15-11e7-aa57-2ca1b05c41b8_story.html?utm_term=.d3d8d45eb17c

 

"Aden described the scene in a Facebook post Saturday, adding that the officer who told him that he wasnt being detained has an ignorance of the law and the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that should disqualify him as a customs officer.

 

I certainly was not free to leave, Aden said."

 

 

We all know the Fed can be overbearing. Good to see things are getting better. We knew they were d*cks before, now they are just being unreasonable to be unreasonable.

 

I bet they were playing "free cell" for the better part of that 90'minutes... You can't fool me! Hey, these Fed workers got a tough job. ;-) :-)

[Nanker]

Americans don't have any rights when they're presenting at Customs when reentering the country. Customs Agents don't have to allow any citizen reentry until they're satisfied there's nothing about the person that is illegal.

[DC Tom]

Yeah... What a bunch of d*cks:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/former-nc-police-chief-detained-at-jfk-for-90-minutes/2017/03/19/691398bc-0d15-11e7-aa57-2ca1b05c41b8_story.html?utm_term=.d3d8d45eb17c

 

"Aden described the scene in a Facebook post Saturday, adding that the officer who told him that he wasnt being detained has an ignorance of the law and the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that should disqualify him as a customs officer.

 

I certainly was not free to leave, Aden said."

 

 

We all know the Fed can be overbearing. Good to see things are getting better. We knew they were d*cks before, now they are just being unreasonable to be unreasonable.

 

I bet they were playing "free cell" for the better part of that 90'minutes... You can't fool me! Hey, these Fed workers got a tough job. ;-) :-)

 

CBP can basically do whatever they want. It's sad, but true, and has been that way for a long time.

 

About the only good thing about the Trumpocalypse so far is that it's finally highlighting this practice.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Understood when you are in "no man's land." It just highlights why Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever. Put the douchebaggery screws to citizens re-entering the country... Then claim 'safety & security." Can always hide behind "safety & security" when somebody wants to be a doosh.

 

Just don't let it happen to me, is what many Americans would say... Detain somebody else.

[B-Man]

New Maine anti-discrimination bill would protect… climate change skeptics

by Jazz Shaw

 

If you live in Maine you already enjoy the normal complement of protections against discrimination based on religion, race, gender, sexual orientation and all the usual demographic pigeonholes. But if a new bill being introduced next month manages to be passed into law you can also be protected from the government based on your position on the subject of climate change. This sounds like satire, but apparently it’s not. (Yahoo! News)

 

Rep. Larry Lockman has introduced a bill that would limit the attorney general’s ability to investigate or prosecute people based on their political speech, including their views on climate change. It would also prohibit the state from discriminating in buying goods or services or awarding grants or contracts based on a person’s “climate change policy preferences.”

Lockman, an independent business consultant, said there is a “faith-based ideology of climate change hysteria and anybody who is a skeptic is immediately labeled a heretic who must be silenced,” the Portland Press Herald reported.

 

 

 

{snip}

 

I suppose the first question to ask is, protection from what? The author of the bill is bringing up some investigations launched by the state attorney general into whether or not Exxon Mobil “misled” people on the possible consequences of climate change. It sounds as if that’s where this bill is heading, but isn’t that already covered under the general concept of free speech?

It doesn’t seem to me as if the government can really discriminate against you based on the position you take in an ongoing scientific debate. If that were the case we probably could have locked up all the flat earth people by now. And if you can’t show some actual damages to someone it becomes difficult to get a law approved to protect them. Granted, the amount of taxpayer money which has been flushed into environmentally sensitive initiatives put in place by the EPA under Brock Obama might certainly be considered “damages.” But again, that’s really not discrimination so much as just bad policy.

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/22/new-maine-anti-discrimination-bill-would-protect-climate-change-skeptics/

[DC Tom]

New Maine anti-discrimination bill would protect… climate change skeptics

by Jazz Shaw

 

If you live in Maine you already enjoy the normal complement of protections against discrimination based on religion, race, gender, sexual orientation and all the usual demographic pigeonholes. But if a new bill being introduced next month manages to be passed into law you can also be protected from the government based on your position on the subject of climate change. This sounds like satire, but apparently it’s not. (Yahoo! News)

 

Rep. Larry Lockman has introduced a bill that would limit the attorney general’s ability to investigate or prosecute people based on their political speech, including their views on climate change. It would also prohibit the state from discriminating in buying goods or services or awarding grants or contracts based on a person’s “climate change policy preferences.”

Lockman, an independent business consultant, said there is a “faith-based ideology of climate change hysteria and anybody who is a skeptic is immediately labeled a heretic who must be silenced,” the Portland Press Herald reported.

 

 

 

{snip}

 

I suppose the first question to ask is, protection from what? The author of the bill is bringing up some investigations launched by the state attorney general into whether or not Exxon Mobil “misled” people on the possible consequences of climate change. It sounds as if that’s where this bill is heading, but isn’t that already covered under the general concept of free speech?

 

Protection from...prosecution? Because it's not covered by free speech as much as much as it is the provision by Schenck v. US that speech that represents a "clear and present danger" is not protected speech.

 

I mean, if seismologists can be convicted of manslaughter for not accurately predicting an earthquake, certainly Exxon-Mobil can be sued for misrepresenting the threat to Oroville Dam.

[grinreaper]

What if they are going into the family business or get drafted by the Cubs?

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/chicago-mayor-no-high-school-diploma-without-acceptance-letter/ar-BBzrR8W?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=HPCOMMDHP15

 

Chicago high school students may soon need to create a plan for their future in order to graduate.

Mayor Rahm Emanuel appeared on “CBS This Morning” on Wednesday to discuss his new proposal, which would require students to develop a post-high school plan before receiving a diploma.

Chicago would be the first city to adopt such a requirement if the measure is approved by the city’s board of education.

“We live in a period of time where you earn what you learn,” Emanuel said. “The school system of K through 12 is not applicable to the world and the economy and the world that our high school students are graduating to. So we’re moving to a pre-K to college model.”

Under the proposal, all Chicago Public School students starting with this year’s freshman class would have to show an acceptance letter to a four-year university, a community college, a trade school or apprenticeship, an internship, or a branch of the armed services in order to receive their high school diploma.

[B-Man]

Veterans Affairs has 346 workers who do only union work

by Sean Higgins

 

Original Article

 

 

An estimated 346 employees in the Department of Veterans Affairs do no actual work for taxpayers. Instead, they spend all of their time doing work on behalf of their union while drawing a federal salary, a practice known as "official time." That´s according to a report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office.

[grinreaper]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/05/medicaid-blows-109-billion-promotional-demonstrations/

 

In a classic example of government waste, the taxpayer-funded program (Medicaid) that provides health insurance for the poor spends over $100 billion on “demonstrations” to promote the benefit that already covers millions of people nationwide. That’s an astounding 33% of Medicaid’s total federal budget for experiments and projects that supposedly help states test and evaluate new approaches to deliver the welfare benefit, which is already spread thin.

 

Medicaid is administered by states and is jointly funded by the federal government and states. Millions of low-income adults, children, pregnant women and people with disabilities are covered under the program, which cost American taxpayers an eye-popping $545.1 billion in 2015, according to government figures. A little-known section of the Social Security Act gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) authority to approve experimental, pilot or demonstration projects that promote the objectives of Medicaid and its counterpart, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), as if they really need to be further publicized. The purpose of the demonstrations, according to the Social Security Act, is to expand eligibility to individuals who are not otherwise Medicaid or CHIP eligible, provide services not typically covered by Medicaid and use innovative service delivery systems that improve care, increase efficiency and reduce costs.

 

Ultimately, the goal is to increase and strengthen states’ overall coverage of low-income individuals, enhance access to provider networks that serve low-income populations and boost the efficiency and quality of medical care through “initiatives” that “transform service delivery networks.” This could mean anything. The only restriction is that the demonstrations must be “budget neutral,” which means that the money comes out of the federal portion Medicaid’s budget. In fiscal year 2015 Uncle Sam blew $109 billion to promote Medicaid, according to a scathing federal audit, that blasts the program for wasting 33% of its budget on such nonsense. Medicaid’s demonstration spending ballooned from $29 billion in 2005 to the $109 billion in 2015, the audit reveals. In ten states demonstration expenditures comprised 75% or more of total Medicaid expenditures, the probe reveals. Six other states spent between 50% and 75% of their Medicaid budget on demonstrations.

[DC Tom]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/05/medicaid-blows-109-billion-promotional-demonstrations/

 

In a classic example of government waste, the taxpayer-funded program (Medicaid) that provides health insurance for the poor spends over $100 billion on “demonstrations” to promote the benefit that already covers millions of people nationwide. That’s an astounding 33% of Medicaid’s total federal budget for experiments and projects that supposedly help states test and evaluate new approaches to deliver the welfare benefit, which is already spread thin.

 

Medicaid is administered by states and is jointly funded by the federal government and states. Millions of low-income adults, children, pregnant women and people with disabilities are covered under the program, which cost American taxpayers an eye-popping $545.1 billion in 2015, according to government figures. A little-known section of the Social Security Act gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) authority to approve experimental, pilot or demonstration projects that promote the objectives of Medicaid and its counterpart, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), as if they really need to be further publicized. The purpose of the demonstrations, according to the Social Security Act, is to expand eligibility to individuals who are not otherwise Medicaid or CHIP eligible, provide services not typically covered by Medicaid and use innovative service delivery systems that improve care, increase efficiency and reduce costs.

 

Ultimately, the goal is to increase and strengthen states’ overall coverage of low-income individuals, enhance access to provider networks that serve low-income populations and boost the efficiency and quality of medical care through “initiatives” that “transform service delivery networks.” This could mean anything. The only restriction is that the demonstrations must be “budget neutral,” which means that the money comes out of the federal portion Medicaid’s budget. In fiscal year 2015 Uncle Sam blew $109 billion to promote Medicaid, according to a scathing federal audit, that blasts the program for wasting 33% of its budget on such nonsense. Medicaid’s demonstration spending ballooned from $29 billion in 2005 to the $109 billion in 2015, the audit reveals. In ten states demonstration expenditures comprised 75% or more of total Medicaid expenditures, the probe reveals. Six other states spent between 50% and 75% of their Medicaid budget on demonstrations.

 

I worked on a project under that program. I had seven developers working for me, and had a weekly status call with one hundred and thirty four managers.

[Chef Jim]

 

I worked on a project under that program. I had seven developers working for me, and had a weekly status call with one hundred and thirty four managers.

A project? As in one project? WTF?!?

[Azalin]

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/05/medicaid-blows-109-billion-promotional-demonstrations/

 

 

Good grief - why do they need to promote medicaid anyway? It's not like people haven't been taking advantage of it for decades already.

 

 

I worked on a project under that program. I had seven developers working for me, and had a weekly status call with one hundred and thirty four managers.

 

I have to wonder - what role, exactly, does one hundred and thirty four managers have in something like this? How many rank and file actually report to them? And finally, why are so damned many people needed to process this crap? I honestly do not mind providing assistance to those that truly need it, but at what point will people begin to realize that this is just too top heavy and unnecessarily expensive?

[mead107]

Top heavy government