It wasn’t an Anti-Government Tea Party Nut that sent Ricin to President Obama

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 8th, 2013

Week in Review

After the Boston Marathon bombings the liberal media was quick to point out the symbolism surrounding that day (tax day, anniversary of Waco, anniversary of Oklahoma City bombing, Patriots’ Day, etc.) pointing to an anti-government Tea Party nut.  Some even commented that they hoped it wasn’t a Muslim.  Because they wanted it to be an anti-government Tea Party nut.  To justify further oppression of the Tea Party.  And not to bring up issues about the war on terror.  Or immigration reform.  But it had to be some Muslim.  Greatly dismaying those on the left.

The same thing happened when someone sent letters with ricin to President Obama and New York City Mayor Bloomberg.  It was all over in the news when there was a chance it was some anti-government Tea Party nut.  But now you hardly hear anything about it.  Because it was not an anti-government Tea Party nut (see Bit-part actor charged over plot to frame husband for ricin letters by Paul Harris posted 6/8/2013 on the guardian).

It is a story that reads like the plot of a cheap, pulp thriller – except perhaps not quite as believable.

On Friday, a pregnant bit-part actor in Texas was charged with sending letters to President Barack Obama and New York mayor Michel Bloomberg laced with the deadly nerve poison ricin in an apparent bizarre bid to frame her husband for the crime.

Shannon Richardson, who has had small roles on TV shows like the Walking Dead and Vampire Diaries, is a mother of five, who first went to the police with her concerns that her husband, Nathaniel Richardson, might have mailed the letters – which were intercepted before they reached their intended recipients.

But as investigators studied the case the focus of their questioning instead began to settle on the person who had made the outrageous claims in a scenario that on its face value saw a marital spat develop into a full blown bio-terrorist attack on the White House…

Amazingly this is not the first case of its kind this year. In April letters laced with ricin were sent to Obama, a Mississippi senator and a local judge. Paul Kevin Curtis of Corinth, Mississippi, was quickly arrested but charges were dropped and another man was picked up. That man, J Everett Dutschke, was later charged with mailing the letters, but also with trying to frame Curtis – who was described as a local rival.

As much as they want these attacks against America to be from disgruntled anti-government Tea Party nuts so they can further marginalize the Tea Party and get more sympathy for using the IRS to harass them they’re not.  These people breaking the law aren’t law-abiding Tea Party people.  They are anti-American Islamist terrorists.  Or just some nut doing something stupid.

But that doesn’t fit the narrative.  So the left continues to belittle and marginalize the Tea Party.  And uses all the powers of their office to attack them.  Or any of their other political enemies.  While urging everyone not to jump to any conclusions that the Boston Marathon bombers were radical Muslims who hated America.  No.  That didn’t mean anything.  But the symbolism of April 15?  We should all fear the law-abiding people of the Tea Party on that day.  For they may do something crazy like throw tea bags into Boston Harbor.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mayor Bloomberg says Unhidden Cigarettes in Retail Stores encourage People to Start Smoking

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 24th, 2013

Week in Review

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg knows what’s best for New Yorkers.  Lucky for New Yorkers that they have Mayor Bloomberg to be their parent.  For apparently, without him, New Yorkers would be just too stupid for their own good (see New York mayor wants to ban stores from displaying cigarettes by Jonathan Allen posted 3/18/2013 on Reuters).

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on Monday proposed requiring that cigarettes be hidden from view in retail stores as a means to reduce smoking in what he said would be the first law of its kind in the United States…

Bloomberg, a former smoker, is accustomed to industry opposition from previous measures to improve the health of New Yorkers, including bans on smoking in most offices, restaurants, bars, parks and on beaches.

Bloomberg has also taken steps to curtail the use of trans fats and salt in the city’s restaurants. Last week a court unexpectedly struck down his attempt to limit the size of sugary drinks, in part because it did not go through the City Council. The city is appealing that ruling.

“These laws would protect New Yorkers, especially young and impressionable New Yorkers, from pricing, discounts and exposure to in-store displays that promote tobacco products,” Bloomberg told a news conference at a city hospital.

“Such displays suggest that smoking is a normal activity and they invite young people to experiment with tobacco. This is not a normal activity,” he said…

The proposal would also increase penalties on stores that illegally resell cigarettes smuggled in from states with lower tobacco taxes, which Bloomberg said cost the city $30 million in lost tax revenue every year.

Over the last 18 months, inspectors visiting 1,800 cigarette retailers found 46 percent were selling untaxed or unstamped tobacco products, city officials said. New York City cigarettes are the most expensive in the nation at around $12 or $13 a pack after federal, state and city taxes.

Cigarettes are a funny beast.  People like Mayor Bloomberg hate them and want to make it hard for people to smoke.  But he sure loves taxing them.  And when they find cheaper out-of-state cigarettes in stores what is his concern?  That these cheaper cigarettes will make it easier for poor people to smoke?  No.  It is the lost tax revenue to the city that these poor people aren’t paying.

People aren’t smoking because they see cigarettes for sale and say, “Hmmm, smoking looks irresistibly delightful.  I must try it.”  Kids smoke because their heroes in music, television and Hollywood smoke. They look cool smoking and these kids want to look cool like them.  And grown up.  For smoking is an acquired taste.  You have to work at it before you can stand the discomfort of smoking.  But kids do it.  Because they want to look older than they are.  And cool.  Like Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, Slash, etc., look on stage with a cigarette hanging out of their mouth as they play a low-slung guitar.  That gets them the ladies.  Like the suave movie hero that gets the ladies and ends up in bed with them.  Who both enjoy a satisfying after-sex smoke.  To be cool like womanizing Don Draper.  Who starts his day with a bourbon and a smoke.  And the cool and liberated women who work with him in the Sixties that smoke.  This is why kids start smoking.  To be like the people they want to be like.  Not because they can see cigarettes for sale.

So smoking is not a ‘normal’ activity.  Well, we don’t need smoking to sustain the human race.  For it serves no necessary biological function.  So, yes, smoking is not normal.  But neither is recreational sex.  Or male-to-male sexual contact.  Which provides no biological function whatsoever.  So one would assume Mayor Bloomberg finds male-to-male sexual contact not a normal activity.  Which can result in AIDS.  According to the CDC there were approximately 16,694 adults and adolescent-men who contracted AIDS in 2011 from male-to-male sexual contact.  In the previous year AIDS claimed 15,529 lives.  Is the mayor going to place restrictions on these activities, too?  After all, he has gone after cigarettes, trans fats, salt, sugary drinks.  What’s to stop him from entering the bedroom.  After all, it’s for New Yorkers’ own good.

Now there are those on the Left who support regulating Americans in their personal life.  Because they think average Americans may not be smart enough to know better.  But where does it end?  Something to think about now that the government will be picking up the tab for our health care thanks to Obamacare.  And we will have to do pretty much whatever they tell us to do if we want some of their health care services.  And to cut costs they may try to ban certain unhealthy lifestyle choices.  From smoking.  To excessive sexual activity that can result in sexually transmitted diseases.  After all they’re banning assault rifles that claimed 323 lives in 2011.  Why wouldn’t they try to ban something that kills more people.  Like male-to-male sexual contact.

When you allow the state to ban lifestyle choices it can start with smoking and sugary drinks.  But it can end with activity behind the bedroom door.  Such as the Left is always accusing the Right of wanting to do.  But it isn’t the Right trying to micromanage our private life.  All the hostility to cigarettes and the foods we enjoy is primarily from the Left.  From those in the nanny state.  So it’s just a matter of time before the Left starts regulating our sexual lives.  Which they will claim they have the right to do.  As Obamacare gives them that right.  Because the state will now be paying for the consequences of our lifestyle choices.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Governor Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg are taking on the Teachers Unions over Teacher Evaluations

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 2nd, 2013

Week in Review

Once upon a time Republicans ruled New York.  George Pataki was governor from January 1, 1995 – December 31, 2006.  And Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York City from January 1, 1994 – December 31, 2001.  Sparking a renaissance in New York.  Especially in New York City.  For Giuliani cut crime and improved the quality of life for New Yorkers living in America’s greatest city.  But I don’t recall them taking on the public schools like the current Democrat leadership (see New York City’s schools could lose 2,500 teachers by next year by Hilary Russ posted 1/28/2013 on Reuters).

New York City’s public schools over two years will lose $724 million in state aid and as many as 2,500 teachers through attrition, because of a labor union conflict over a teacher evaluation system, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said on Monday.

The schools lost $250 million of that total earlier this month after the city and United Federation of Teachers failed to agree on a way to evaluate teacher performance.

City schools would lose that same baseline funding amount in the state’s coming fiscal year, which begins April 1, plus another $224 million under the state budget proposed by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo last week, Bloomberg said at a joint legislative hearing…

City schools could lose $1 billion altogether in baseline state funding without action on the teacher evaluations, said New York City Comptroller John Liu, who testified after Bloomberg.

Bloomberg, however, said that the union tried to introduce new provisions to an agreement at the last minute that would have made the evaluation system a “fraud” because it would have expired in two years – the same amount of time required to conduct the evaluations, making the process pointless.

This is not what you expect to hear coming from Democrat governors and Democrat mayors.  For the teachers unions help these people get into office.  By funding their campaigns with union dues.  And getting out the vote with their foot soldiers.  It is doubtful that these actions will swing the teachers’ support over to the Republican cause.  But it is interesting to see these Democrats bite the hand that feeds them.

It also shows how contentious teacher evaluations are.  For the unions are willing to lose $1 billion in funding to avoid evaluating their teachers.  One has to wonder why?  Why are they so dead-set against evaluations when every industry in the private sector evaluates their employees?  The common answer is that evaluations aren’t fair.  That they just measure a student’s ability to read, write and do math.  And not more important things like helping these kids see things from a liberal point of view.

The problem is this, though.  Businesses want to hire graduates who can read, write and do math.  For these are necessary skills in the business world.  And seeing things from a liberal point of view will not allow American kids to keep up with the Chinese and Indian kids.  Who are learning how to read, write and do math.  Which is why more and more jobs are being out sourced to these countries.  Their kids score better on standardized tests than our kids.  And end up getting better jobs.

This may be why these Democrats are taking on public education.  New York has some of the highest tax rates in the country.  These high rates are causing the best and brightest to leave New York.  As more and more of their earnings are taxed away.  And who is replacing the best and brightest?  The kids graduating from the public schools.  Who apparently aren’t doing as well as they could.  As Bloomberg and Cuomo are playing hardball when it comes to these teacher evaluations.  There must be a reason for that.  And one can only assume that they want their high school graduates to be better and brighter.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Coca-Cola denies making People Obese and Objects to Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s 16 Ounce Limit

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 9th, 2012

Week in Review

Coca-Cola strikes back.  Attacking New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed ban on large sizes of sugary drinks.  They say the facts don’t support the mayor’s claim.  That their fattening drinks are not making people obese.  And they have a point.  For I have seen a lot of thin-challenged people order diet drinks.  To justify their indulgence in things that are not diet (see Coke says obesity grew as sugary drink consumption fell by Bruce Horovitz posted 6/8/2012 on USA Today).

Coca-Cola, the world’s largest soft-drink maker, is pushing back against New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s provocative proposal a week ago to limit to 16 ounces the size of sugary drinks that could be sold at city restaurants, theaters and street carts.

“There is no scientific evidence that connects sugary beverages to obesity,” says Katie Bayne, Coca-Cola’s president of sparkling beverages in North America, in an exclusive interview.

In fact, Bayne says, during the period from 1999 through 2010, when obesity was rising, sugar intake from beverages was decreasing. During that period, she says, sugars from soda consumption fell 39% even as the percentage of obese kids jumped 13% and obese adults climbed 7%.

Mayor Bloomberg was unavailable, but his deputy press secretary, Samantha Levine, says Coke’s numbers have more fizz than fact.

I remember having dinner with some friends one night.  One lady in our group enjoyed a Long Island iced tea before the appetizer.  She had another one with the appetizer.  And another one with her meal.  Which was a large cut of steak and a baked potato smothered in butter and sour cream.  With a side of shrimp scampi.  She ordered a soft drink to go with her meal.  A Diet Coke.  But despite this Diet Coke which was the only soft drink she drank she was a little on the heavy side.  And by ‘a little’ I mean she probably could be included in the above statistics.

Remember the salad bar craze?  People were going to eat healthy salads instead of fattening meals.  How many of us were next to someone at the salad bar as they loaded their plate with ham, pepperoni, bacon, boiled egg, cheese, etc.  While passing over the fresh vegetables?  Then topped off their salad with two or three helpings of a creamy salad dressing?  And washing it all down with a diet beverage?  I’m sure we’ve all seen this.  Someone eating a ‘healthy meal’ that had three times the fat than in your typical fast food combo meal.

This 16 ounce limit on sugary drinks will probably not stop people from having their Long Island iced teas or eating large helpings of a delicious meal.  So the danger is that when this sugary drink ban doesn’t work they’ll expand the ban to include other fattening things.  And keep expanding it until they see a reduction in the obesity rates.  To the point where restaurants may one day become the calorie police.  Perhaps allowing you to buy a baked potato with butter or sour cream but not both. 

Don’t think that can happen?  Well, they’re trying to make restaurants, theaters and street carts the sugary drinks police.  Something no one would have believed possible a decade earlier.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,