Video Podcast – Trump is Beating Back EPA Regs – Nanny State Shuts Down Lemonade Stand

Trump’s EPA is rolling back regulations from the Obama radicals by shelving around 860 regulatory actions the last administration tried to sneak in, including the Clean Water Act.

The British Nanny State thugs shut down a 5 year old girls lemonade stand and fine her about $200. But it’s not just jolly ole England. It’s happening all over America. read more

Washington State’s New Wealth Distribution Tax

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

There is a ballot initiative coming up for vote this November. It’s the only one of its kind in the entire country – but hey – things must begin somewhere. I suppose it’s possible that other states are taking a wait-and-see approach – to allow Washington to be the guinea pig before jumping on the bandwagon.

Like all Western States, Washington has suffered with drought and wildfires for quite sometime now. Evidently the only thing that can put a halt to these environmental catastrophes in a Carbon Tax. Yes –a carbon tax.

According to ThinkProgress, the people of Washington State “will have the rare chance to vote on whether the state should tackle climate change by going after the root cause: rampant atmospheric pollution of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide.”

Ballot initiative 732 is directly modeled after what the article calls the “successful and widely popular carbon tax in British Columbia (BC).” read more

My WND Weekly Exclusive

Keep the Government Away from Facebook

So Facebook is liberal, or at least has a left bias. What a revelation. What high-tech type company isn’t. I mean, really – Google, Apple, Microsoft – they’re all run by libs, and most who work for them also tilt left. These companies all have this in common. How is it a surprise to anyone?

They have another thing in common. They are also private corporations and, as such, should be able to do whatever they wish regarding the content they allow or rank. This is not to say we on the right can’t complain or make a stir when we see bias. read more

Another Bubble About To Pop – Have We Learned Nothing?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

In a real free-market capitalist system, one has the opportunity to succeed beyond his or her wildest dreams, but also to fail miserably. And those successes and failures should be on the person or persons willing to take the risk. The decision should be ours and ours alone and thus the consequence of our decisions should also be ours.

But as we know (or should), America does not have a free-market capitalist system. What we have is a fixed, crony corporatist system – where a select, connected few can game the system, which is coincidentally setup to be gamed, make poor decisions based on the rigged system and never suffer a consequence for those mistakes.

As long as the same politicians and corporate cronies run the system, mistakes, which we pay the price for in the form of government bailouts, will repeat.

We all know what happened regarding the housing bubble, as the government forced banks into granting loans to people who would otherwise have no business buying a house and in a lot of cases had no means to pay for the property. Still, due to government policy, virtually anyone could overextend themselves in search of the “American dream.” read more

Please Don’t Feed the Children

by: the Common Constitutionalist

If you’ve ever walked through a park, you can’t help but notice the hundreds of pigeons flying around, as well as standing in front of park benches waiting to be fed. The same can be said of seagulls that hover inexplicably over landlocked parking lots.

They’re seagulls! What the heck are they doing hanging out in the parking lot an hours drive from the beach? The same thing the pigeons are doing – looking for an easy meal.

We see signs posted in every State and national Park. “Don’t Feed the Animals.” And why? Well, it’s because it’s dangerous, for one. They may just as easily turn on the one feeding them. And second: they don’t want the animals to get used to expecting a free meal. It happens all the time. The animals soon understand that it’s easier to dumpster dive or to break into someone’s home then forage or hunt for a meal.

It doesn’t take long to inadvertently train the wild beasts to infiltrate human habitat for an easy snack. But you can hardly blame the animals. The humans are the ones at fault. It’s free food after all.

And the same can now be said of America’s children. For the entire school year, the children have been conditioned to think of school as not just a place to learn (hopefully), but also the source of practically all their meals.

It used to be, back in the days of rugged individualism, that there would be one meal a day at school – lunch. You could Brown-bag it or pay for the daily cafeteria fare. Then, no doubt some politician or academic discovered that little Johnny and Janey couldn’t afford to pay for lunch. Somehow they could afford those $100 Nikes – but not lunch. read more

Government Takes Children From Parents

by: the Common Constitutionalist

What would you do if the authorities, be it local, state or federal, came to your door one day, weapons in hand and demanded you hand over your children?

I’ve actually thought of this scenario – what I would do if the jackboots showed up at my door. I think about it more since I’ve been writing disparagingly about the government in general and about the present administration specifically.

It really hit home with me about 18 months ago, when my son had his annual physical and the doctor asked him if there were any guns in the house. He had the presence of mind to answer that with all due respect, that’s not you’re concern – and the doctor moved on.

Yet these types of scenarios are beginning to play out in real life. You may recall the case of the Meitiv family in Maryland who are being investigated for the crime of allowing their children to walk to the playground by themselves without an adult escort. Oh the horror! These fiendish parents got nabbed by way of an anonymous tip from a concerned citizen who had nothing better to do then to stick his or her nose into someone else’s business.

Then there is the case of the Nauglers of Kentucky. This family has chosen to “live off the grid.” That’s apparently their crime. read more

Nanny State Coincidence

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

Although it’s been going on for years, it seems lately there is an all-out assault by the nanny government to crack down on our liberties.

 

In any normal, liberty loving society, when the people push back, there government is supposed to acquiesce to their (our) wishes. That’s the way it’s supposed to work. Government is supposed to serve the people.

 

But we all know that’s a joke – a sick joke, with a bad punchline.

 

Nowadays, when the people say no, our rulers just do the old end around, or sleight-of-hand. They cause us to concentrate on one thing and do another behind our backs.

 

Lately it seems that even this tactic has changed and the Nanny State has begun to attack us from all sides.

 

Take this global warming nonsense. With every passing year, the people are coming to realize what a hoax it has been. Every poll conducted puts the climate change concern at or near the bottom of a fairly long list of worries. read more

Bloomberg’s Ban

Bloomberg’s ban prohibits 2-liter soda with your pizza and some nightclub mixers

 

SODA Ban

 

Take a big gulp, New York: Hizzoner is about to give you a pop.

Nanny Bloomberg unleashes his ban on large sodas on March 12 — and there are some nasty surprises lurking for hardworking families.

Say goodbye to that 2-liter bottle of Coke with your pizza delivery, pitchers of soft drinks at your kid’s birthday party and some bottle-service mixers at your favorite nightclub.

They’d violate Mayor Bloomberg’s new rules, which prohibit eateries from serving or selling sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

Bloomberg’s soda smackdown follows his attacks on salt, sugar, trans fat, smoking and even baby formula.

LESS SODA, MORE DOUGH: If you order a pizza, you cannot get a large bottle of soda delivered with it. Already, Domino’s locations across the city are doing away with 1 and 2 liter bottles of soda, deliveryman Philippe Daniba says. They’ll sell smaller bottles instead — costing you more money and increasing plastic waste.

NANNY MIKE’S CAN’T-DO ATTITUDE

The city Health Department last week began sending brochures to businesses that would be affected by the latest ban, including restaurants, bars and any “food service” establishment subject to letter grades.

And merchants were shocked to see the broad sweep of the new rules.

“It’s not fair. If you’re gonna tell me what to do, it’s no good,” said Steve DiMaggio of Caruso’s in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn. “It’s gonna cost a lot more.”

And consumers, especially families, will soon see how the rules will affect their wallets — forcing them to pay higher unit prices for smaller bottles. Continue Reading

Frankenfood

Genetically modified foods: Why does California insist on finding a problem where nobody else does?

by: Erika Johnsen

On the state’s ballot in November, Californians will be voting on Proposition 37 — an initiative that would require all foods produced with or from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to carry mandatory warning labels. Oh, sure, it all sounds well and good and simple enough, except that such a measure would impose significant expenses on (often small) businesses; would cost the way-past-completely-broke California government up to over a million dollars to regulate the practice; and, oh yeah — is completely pointless because there is not a single documented case of “adverse health consequences” due to genetically engineered foods.

For a group of people who subscribe to the supposed “party of science,” progressives and environmentalists have waged a strange and steady campaign against the very idea of genetically modified foods. These “frankenfoods,” as they’re sometimes dubbed, are supposedly bad for us because they don’t occur by themselves in nature. But, here’s a news flash, greenies: Human beings have been ‘modifying’ foods with agricultural techniques for centuries. We didn’t just stumble upon corn as we know it today, and we make new apple hybrids all the time. Many medicines, I might also point out, are man-made, but we know that medicines can save lives. Tylenol doesn’t grow on trees, you know. From Forbes:

Except for wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the fruits, vegetables and grains in our diet have been genetically improved by one technique or another – often as a result of seeds being irradiated or genes being moved from one species or genus to another in ways that do not occur in nature. But because genetic engineering is more precise and predictable, the technology is at least as safe as – and often safer than – the modification of food products in cruder, “conventional” ways. This superior technology is the target of Prop. 37.

The safety record of genetically engineered plants and foods derived from them is extraordinary. Even after the cultivation worldwide of more than 3 billion acres of genetically engineered crops (by more than 14 million farmers) and the consumption of more than 3 trillion servings of food by inhabitants of North America alone, there has not been a single ecosystem disrupted or a single confirmed adverse reaction.

The advantages are also remarkable. Every year, farmers planting genetically engineered varieties spray millions fewer gallons of chemical pesticides and substantially reduce topsoil erosion. In addition, many of these varieties are less susceptible to mold infection and have lower levels of fungal toxins, making them safer for consumers and livestock.

Not only would requiring these types of foods to carry mandatory labels impose costs on producers and raise prices for everybody, including consumers, they would imply to consumers that they need to be wary of undefined dangers, which in turn limits their choices unnecessarily. Maybe part of the idea is that consumers are supposed to spring for the organic foods as an alternative (which no state has any business doing anyway), except that recent studies have suggested organic food might not actually be all that it’s cracked up to be:

…Stanford University doctors dug through reams of research to find out — and concluded there’s little evidence that going organic is much healthier, citing only a few differences involving pesticides and antibiotics.

Eating organic fruits and vegetables can lower exposure to pesticides, including for children — but the amount measured from conventionally grown produce was within safety limits, the researchers reported Monday.

Nor did the organic foods prove more nutritious.

Even the federal Food and Drug Administration, normally inclined towards being more meddlesome over less, has declined to require all foods in the U.S.A. to carry GMO labels. Imposing such a mandate in California would create a whole new level of regulation-and-litigation bureaucracy that no Californian food-business or individual consumer could avoid paying for. (For more resources, here’s a great piece from the Volokh Conspiracy on why this whole labeling idea is a possibly unconstitutional farce, and an op-ed from the LA Times on why California’s entire ballot-initiative procedure is a hot mess.)

The hubris of ignorant environmentalist groups never ceases to amaze. Have they ever paused to consider that genetically modified foods can, perhaps, save lives and help lift human beings out of poverty? Maybe? I know I’ve posted this video from Penn & Teller before, but it is great, and well worth the watch (warning: some brief foul language).