NC Becomes 1st State To Drop Federal Jobless Funds

Photo Credit: CESAR MANSO/AFP/Getty Images

Photo Credit: CESAR MANSO/AFP/Getty Images

With changes to its unemployment law taking effect this weekend, North Carolina not only is cutting benefits for those who file new claims, it will become the first state disqualified from a federal compensation program for the long-term jobless.

State officials adopted the package of benefit cuts and increased taxes for businesses in February, a plan designed to accelerate repayment of a $2.5 billion federal debt. Like many states, North Carolina had racked up the debt by borrowing from Washington after its unemployment fund was drained by jobless benefits during the Great Recession.

The changes go into effect Sunday for North Carolina, which has the country’s fifth-worst jobless rate. The cuts on those who make unemployment claims on or after that day will disqualify the state from receiving federally funded Emergency Unemployment Compensation. That money kicks in after the state’s period of unemployment compensation — now shortened from up to six months to no more than five — runs out. The EUC program is available to long-term jobless in all states. But keeping the money flowing includes a requirement that states can’t cut average weekly benefits.

Because North Carolina leaders cut average weekly benefits for new claims, about 170,000 workers whose state benefits expire this year will lose more than $700 million in EUC payments, the U.S. Labor Department said.

Lee Creighton, 45, of Cary, said he’s been unemployed since October, and this is the last week for which he’ll get nearly $500 in unemployment aid. He said he was laid off from a position managing statisticians and writers amid the recession’s worst days in 2009 and has landed and lost a series of government and teaching jobs since then — work that paid less half as much. His parents help him buy groceries to get by.

Read more from this story HERE.

Scalia: ‘High-Handed’ Kennedy Has Declared Us ‘Enemies of the Human Race’

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

Dissenting from this morning’s opinion on the Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Antonin Scalia – as expected – holds nothing back.

In a ripping dissent, Scalia says that Justice Anthony Kennedy and his colleagues in the majority have resorted to calling opponents of gay marriage “enemies of the human race.”

But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “dis- parage,” “injure,” “degrade,” “demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

Scalia says that the court’s holding – while limited to the Defense of Marriage Act – is a sure sign that the majority is willing to declare gay marriage a constitutional right.

It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.

Read more from this story HERE.

Man Faces 13 Years in Jail for Criticizing Big Banks with Sidewalk Chalk Messages

Photo Credit: Scripps Media

Photo Credit: Scripps Media

By Marie Coronel. The case against a North Park man who wrote anti-big bank messages on city sidewalks with chalk will go to trial, a judge decided Tuesday.

Jeff Olson is charged with 13 counts of vandalism and is facing 13 years in jail, as well as $13,000 in restitution fees.

Olson calls the charges heavy-handed and describes what he did as free speech.

“I was encouraging folks to close their accounts at big Wall Street banks to transfer their money local nonprofit, community credit unions,” said Olson.

Surveillance pictures showed him writing on the sidewalks of banks using children’s chalk to promote anti-big bank websites. Olson told 10News he did this more than a dozen times at three different locations in Hillcrest and North Park. Read more from this story HERE.

_______________________________________________________________________

big banksJudge Won’t Allow Bank-Protester to Claim First Amendment Protections for Chalk Messages

By Dorian Hargrove. The First Amendment has no place in Superior Court Judge Howard M. Shore’s courtroom, not when it comes to vandalism with water soluble chalk.

Today the trial began in the case of a San Diego man who is being charged with 13 counts of vandalism for writing anti-big-bank slogans with washable children’s chalk on a sidewalk outside of three Bank of America branches in Mid-City.

On one side sat Jeff Olson, the 40-year-old political activist who protested against the bailout of the big banks early last year. On the other side was Deputy City Attorney Paige Hazard and law student and city attorney employee William Tanoury. Also accompanying Hazard were two other representatives from the City Attorney’s side.

For Olson, and any free-speech advocates and political activists, the day couldn’t have gone much worse.

Judge Shore granted Hazard’s motion to prohibit Olson’s attorney Tom Tosdal from mentioning the First Amendment, free speech, free expression, public forum, expressive conduct, or political speech during the trial. Read more from this story HERE.

Zimmerman Murder Trial: State’s Key Witness Damaged; Trayvon Friend Says Screams on Tape Weren’t His (+video)

Photo Credit: orlando sentinel

Photo Credit: orlando sentinel

From the witness stand Wednesday, the state’s star witness in the George Zimmerman murder trial, Rachel “Diamond” Jeantel, gave her account of Trayvon Martin’s last seconds — and they were dramatic.

While on the phone with Trayvon, he told her a man was following him, someone he described as a “creepy-ass cracker,” Jeantel said. He got close enough to Trayvon that she could hear the man say, “‘What are you doing around here?'”

Jeantel then heard a “bump,” followed by something she described as “grass sound.” Trayvon said, “Get off. Get off,” then the phone went dead, she testified.

Jeantel’s account, though, was nearly lost amid the problems and spectacle she created. She used street slang, was sometimes defiant and talked so fast and so softly that it was often impossible to make out her words.

The court reporter interrupted her a dozen times, asking her to repeat herself. Jurors interrupted, too, although not as often, and stopped when Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson told them, “You can’t ask questions. If you can’t understand, just raise your hand.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Passage of the Amnesty Bill Will Spell the End of Our Republic

amnestyOn Monday, June 24, 2013, the U.S. Senate passed a cloture motion (which ends debate) on the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven Amendment to the Gang of Eight’s horrifying illegal alien amnesty bill – mislabeled “immigration reform.”

The true purpose of this amnesty proposal is to capture future votes for the Democratic Party. Those who do not acknowledge that blatantly obvious fact either suffer from some debilitating mental illness or are working for the other side.

On rare occasions, even the Left admit the objective. Eliseo Medina, the honorary Chair of the Democratic Socialists of America, and International Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), said in 2008:

…If we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. Can you imagine if we have …even two out of three, if we get 8 million new voters… we will create a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.

The “governing coalition for the long term” refers of course to the “permanent progressive majority” Democrats have fantasized about for decades.

The number of illegals in this country is repeatedly cited as 11 million. This is almost certainly an underestimate. In reality the number is 20 to 30 million or more, according to a 2007 study in Social Contract. Bear Stearns estimated about 20 million in 2005. When amnesty passed in 1986, official estimates were 1.2 million illegals. There were actually 2.7 million – more than double. Within ten years, INS estimated the illegal population had grown to 10 million. It is delusional to believe the number has only increased by another 1 million in the 17 years since. Furthermore, when amnesty passes, the newly-legal aliens will invite their relatives to come, further inflating that number through chain migration.

Herein lies the real reason Democrats are slavering for this amnesty bill to pass and are tickling themselves pink that there are Republicans stupid and gullible, (or corrupt) enough to help them realize their dream. And make no mistake, an increase of 30 million in the Democrat Party voter base will guarantee Democrat majorities in the U.S. House, Senate and Presidency for the foreseeable future.

Despite the impossibly bizarre belief by some Republicans that amnesty will make illegals “like us,” a high level Congressional source recently acknowledged to me that passage of this bill will spell the end of our Republic and that we literally have only weeks to stop it. Despite House Speaker John Boehner’s somewhat ambiguous assurances, this bill is likely to get a vote in the House.
The original Gang-of-Eight bill was really bad, as became readily apparent quite quickly. The overtly fraudulent Schumer-Corker-Hoeven Amendment was offered as a fig leaf to reassure fools that the original bill — which already promised in-and-of-itself to enhance border security – would actually enhance border security. But in reality it makes things worse. The amendment:

Legitimizes illegal immigration: Section 2302 says if you overstay your visa in the future you can still apply for a green card and become a citizen. It is permanent lawlessness… They cannot do that legally under current law!

Has no requirement to deploy technologies: The Corker amendment would give the Secretary of Homeland Security full discretion as to how technology would be deployed, or whether it would be deployed at all.

Obama’s Gun Control Agenda Now Attempts to Link Public Health Issues to Gun Ownership

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

In the near future, Americans who own or want guns likely will be subject to rafts of new questions from social scientists, medical researchers and law enforcement officials intent to discover just what guns they own, why they own them and what they intend to use them for — not to mention where and how they keep them.

They will also likely have more researchers poring over such issues as whether childhood education programs against gun violence actually work; whether there actually is any relationship between violence in the media and in real life; and whether the safety plans that were drawn up by schools, colleges and communities in the wake of highly publicized mass shootings actually are effective.

Those and many other gun-related questions are the thrust of a new social science research agenda that the Obama administration hopes will keep the push for gun control alive for years to come.

The research agenda is intended to produce mammoth amounts of raw data on American gun owners, users and their circumstances, meaning that violence resulting from firearms use will be studied for “its causes, approaches to interventions that could prevent it, and strategies to minimize its health burden”…

The agenda, which aims to sidestep Second Amendment political and constitutional issues of gun ownership through its public health focus, was released earlier this month in a 124-page report titled, “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearms Related Violence.” It was sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) with financial support from private foundations.

Read more from this story HERE.

Limbaugh: ‘Looks Like Doom, Unavoidable Doom’

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

In the wake of a string of recent advances for Barack Obama’s left-leaning agenda, radio’s Rush Limbaugh, the top-rated voice on the political right, admitted Wednesday there appears on the surface to be little hope in rescuing America.

“It all looks like doom, unavoidable doom,” Limbaugh lamented.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Defense of Marriage Act that defined marriage as the union between a man and woman to be unconstitutional.

But Limbaugh pointed out that was just one of a number of leftist initiatives moving ahead at full throttle.

“If amnesty happens,” he explained, “seven years from now this gonna be an entirely different country – politically, culturally, linguistically. It’d be different in six months if that happens. But that’s not isolated. Amnesty happens after Obamacare, and Obama’s efforts on climate change and so forth.”

“It looks like we’re headed to one-party rule!” he exclaimed.

Read more from this story HERE.

House Conservatives Promise to Oust Boehner if he Break His Oath and Moves Amnesty Bill Without Majority Support

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

House Republican conservatives warned Wednesday they would move to oust Speaker John Boehner if he puts an immigration reform bill up for a vote that doesn’t have the support of a majority of GOP members.

“There gets to be a time when there is a straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back,” Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., said at a monthly question and answer event featuring a group of conservative lawmakers.

Salmon, along with Reps. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho; Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas; and Rep. Tom McClintock, of California, said they do not support the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform plan now advancing in the Senate, despite the passage of an amendment that would at 20,000 border agents and other border security measures to the bill.

Boehner, R-Ohio, told Republicans today he will not take up the Senate bill, repeating a pledge he made in writing last month, and instead plans to move House-authored legislation. But many in the conservative wing of the GOP conference fear Boehner will allow a bill on the floor that includes legalization or a pathway to citizenship for the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants but does not include the level of border security they believe is needed to stop illegal migration.

Such a bill could pass with mostly Democratic support and a fraction of the Republican conference backing it.

Read more from this story HERE.

Copperhead Movie a Unique Take on the Civil War

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

Wednesday, June 25, 2013 – Orthodox mythology of the Civil War holds that the Northern states rallied in unity behind the messianic President Lincoln on a noble mission to liberate the slaves and preserve the Union. Its terrible cost in American lives – unmatched by any other conflict before or since – is taken as a measure of that nobility, and anyone who challenges that view can only be an idiot, or worse, a closet racist. The truth, as usual, is a little more complicated.

Copperhead, a movie set to open this coming Friday, June 28, grapples with one of these complicated truths: Northern opposition to the war. This is a truly unique Civil War movie. There are no battle scenes; no exploration of different campaigns and the military logic that informed them. Rather, this movie explores the politically uncomfortable realities – the divergence of interests and opinions, of rhetoric versus reality, and the social upheavals – that accompany major conflict. It may not change your view on the Civil War, but certainly challenges orthodox thinking, and deepens our understanding of an aspect that is rarely mentioned.

Copperheads were the derogatory name given by Republicans to “Peace Democrats,” a wing of the Democratic Party that opposed the Civil War. While Republicans were referring to the poisonous snake of that name, Copperheads responded by defiantly wearing lady liberty lapel buttons cut from copperhead pennies. They wielded a fair amount of influence, especially in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, but their protest was felt throughout the North. Most Copperheads believed the war was unconstitutional and destructive, and that Lincoln was abusing his power. Some low-income laborers, for example in the coal fields of Pennsylvania, also saw liberation of the slaves as a threat to their jobs. Prominent leaders included Ohio Representative Clement Vallandigham.

The Copperheads’ polar opposites were the “Radical Republicans,” represented by such figures as Ohio Senator Benjamin Wade, Horace Greeley, Frederick Douglass, Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens, who believed that Lincoln was not working hard or fast enough to emancipate the slaves. Their sentiments at the time were perhaps best captured by General Order Number 38, written by Union General Ambrose Burnside, making it illegal to criticize the war effort. The Order was used as pretext to arrest Clement Vallandigham for treason. Embarrassed by this excess, Lincoln commuted the sentence, but banished Vallandigham to the Confederacy.

The movie centers on two upstate New York families and the town’s reactions to their unyielding positions as the war’s effects hit home. The Copperheads are represented by patriarch Abner Beech (Billy Campbell), his wife M’rye (Genevieve Steele) son, Jeff (Casey Brown), and the orphan they have taken in, Jimmy (Josh Cruddash). The Beech’s run a dairy farm.

The Radical Republicans are represented by the family of Jee Hagadorn (Angus Macfayden of Braveheart fame), his daughter Esther (Lucy Boynton), and son Ni (Augustus Prew). Jee runs a saw mill and manufactures wooden barrels. Avery, an elderly Republican who attempts to keep peace among the various town factions, is played ably by Peter Fonda. One criticism of the film is that it is slow in developing the characters, thus it takes a while to figure out how each one fits into the story.

The period covered in the film, 1862, saw Democrat Horatio Seymour elected governor of New York State, along with a number of other Democrats. A Democrat was elected governor of New Jersey and Copperheads also won majorities in the Illinois and Indiana legislatures that year. Abner Beech provokes the town following the election by holding a celebratory bonfire, which the town’s Republicans see as an open act of defiance.

The antagonists opposing sentiments are well captured when Abner comments aloud to his family on a local newspaper story following the election: “Benjamin Wade, a Republican of Ohio, says anyone who quotes the Constitution in the current crisis is a traitor. A traitor! Can you imagine? But listen how a Democrat paper in Ohio gave it right back to him: ‘Such an abolitionist should be hung until the flesh rots off his bones and the winds of Heaven whistle Yankee Doodle through his loathsome skeleton.’”

Echoing Romeo and Juliet, Jeff Beech becomes enamored of Esther Hagadorn. Esther only courts him, however, after he agrees to use his middle name, “Tom.” She finds “Jeff” unacceptable, because it reminds her of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, even though he explains that he was named after Thomas Jefferson. He agrees anyway and becomes “Tom” to her family and his friends. Abner’s response to the influence Esther and her father is having on his son’s political views is classic Dad: “The way to a woman’s heart, boy, ain’t by rejecting one’s own kin and parroting the asinine opinions of her father.” Nonetheless, Jeff defies his father, joins the Union Army and goes off to war.

Jee Hagadorn, meanwhile, seeks to dissuade Esther from her interest in Tom with a torrid quote from Mark: “Brother will betray brother unto death, and the father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death…” He adds “I am a blind pilgrim on this earth, but even I can see when a boy sparks a girl.” To which Esther responds “Dear father, sparks don’t always lead to a fire.” He then flatly states, “If you marry him, well, he will kill me.”

Jee Hagadorn’s son, Ni – short for “Benaiah” one of David’s Old Testament generals – tolerates his father’s rigid dogmatism with sarcasm and defiance. Ni relates to Jimmy how every day his father lambasts him for not living up to his name. “I should’ve named you Pete, or Steve, or William Henry!” Jee wails. “I get this every day,” Ni tells Jimmy, but adds, “I said ‘Now listen here, patriarchs in glass houses mustn’t heave stones. You’re named after Jehoaddan, that’s in the Bible. He made a covenant with God. I ain’t never seen you make no covenant. All you do is make barrels.’” Jimmy asks “What did he say?” Ni smiles, “I left before he could say anything.”

The movie’s plot thickens as news of town casualties come back from the front, and the Radical Republicans, led by Jee Hagadorn, become increasingly hostile to Beech and the other Copperheads. Beech finds almost no buyers for his dairy products, and is scorned by the local preacher at the Sunday service. It is easy to imagine such drama playing out in a small town, where residents interact on a daily basis. I won’t spoil the dramatic ending for you.

The film has an unmistakable air of authenticity. It was shot entirely on location at Nova Scotia’s King’s Landing, a “living museum” reconstructed to mimic a 19th century North American town. The book on which the film was based, Copperheads, was written in 1893 by Harold Frederic, an author who lived through the period in question. His novel therefore captured the mannerisms and speech of the day.

Copperhead was directed by Ron Maxwell, who also directed two other well-known Civil War classics, Gettysburg and Gods and Generals. The screenplay was written by Bill Kaufman, a novelist whose contrarian political leanings appear well-fitted for this contrarian plot. Kauffman has been described as a pacifist, an anarchist, an anti-war conservative, even paleoconservative; he is most decidedly anti-war and this is a prevailing theme in Copperhead.

This is perhaps best captured in an exchange between Jimmy and Abner. Jimmy asks, “Mr. Jefferson wrote that all men are created equal. Those slaves are men, aren’t they?”

Abner responds, “They are, they surely are. But their cure is worse than the disease. War ain’t a cure for this. Slavery ain’t right… but killing people, destroying whole cities and towns and turning the government in Washington into God’s almighty army isn’t right either. Why make things worse… only make for a lot of dead boys.”

One is tempted to draw a comparison between Copperheadism and the anti-war sentiments of sixties radicals. The Copperheads were boisterous activists and a few did have sympathies for the Southern cause. However similarities cease there. Copperheads really were opposed to the war, both because they saw the death and destruction as unnecessary, and because they believed it to be unconstitutional. Most also remained loyal to the Union.

Leftist leaders of the anti-war movement, on the other hand, aren’t really anti-war, but anti-US. This is best exemplified by Obama’s friend Bill Ayers, who wrote in his manifesto Prairie Fire, “We are communist women and men… Our intention is to disrupt the empire, to incapacitate it, to put pressure on the cracks, to make it hard to carry out its bloody functioning against the people of the world, to join the world struggle, to attack from the inside… Without mass struggle there can be no revolution. Without armed struggle there can be no victory.” Peace Democrats, for sure.

Conservatives will appreciate the other major theme of the movie, the U.S. Constitution. Many Copperheads firmly believed the war was unconstitutional and that Lincoln was abusing his power. What is left completely out of the movie, however, is the fact that some were also racist, and opposed the war on that basis. So while one can appreciate their devotion to the Constitution, and enjoy the movie because of it, their image remains tarnished by that reality.

Kauffman deliberately remained faithful to the book’s rich dialog. As Maxwell explained, “That line where an ear of burnt corn is described as ‘tougher than Pharaoh’s heart’ is so good you’d be crazy to cut it. The book was filled with them, illuminating a time and a place and a mind-set that’s been positively informed by the memorizing of scripture.”

This loyalty to the day’s dialog is refreshing in its honesty and wholesomeness. There is only one curse word to be found, and that uttered by the town bad boy, from which such might be expected – but even that seems out of place. I kept contrasting this in my mind with the idiotic Hansel and Gretel, Witch Hunters, which I had to sit through recently. The film pretended to be set in some fantasy medieval period, but was so rife with “F” and “S” bombs you couldn’t even enjoy the sophomoric humor, much less believe the setting. As Hollywood would doubtless be surprised to learn, Copperheads is enriched by both its authenticity and the absence of such base gimmicks. This historical honesty also evidences the nation’s then devout Christianity, another welcome departure from typical Hollywood fare.

As Paul Buhle & Dave Wagner write in a Swan’s Commentary review: “This is a movie with a script that is for a change equal to the complicated politics of the dangerous moment it explores, when the outcome of the Civil War was far from certain.”

This is a movie well worth seeing; both for its accurate depiction of the times, its rich narrative, and the unique, rarely discussed subject matter, which was in fact a major component of the days’ controversies. It is also completely family friendly – a rarity in Hollywood these days.

HERE is a theater listing.

HERE is the trailer.

_______________________________________________________________________

James Simpson is an investigative journalist, businessman and former economist and budget examiner for the White House Office of Management and Budget. Mr. Simpson’s work is published at AIM.org, American Thinker, Breitbart, Capital Research Center, Washington Times, WorldNet Daily and elsewhere. He is also featured in Curtis Bowers’ award winning documentary Agenda: Grinding America Down.

Texas Gov. Perry Calls Second Special Session on Abortion, Gets Viciously Attacked by Left

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

By Associated Press. After a one-woman filibuster and a raucous crowd helped derail a GOP-led effort to restrict Texas abortions, Gov. Rick Perry announced Wednesday that he’s calling lawmakers back next week to try again.

Perry ordered the Legislature to meet July 1 to begin 30 more days of work. Like the first special session, which ended in chaos overnight, the second one will include on its agenda a Republican-backed plan that critics say would close nearly every abortion clinic across the state and impose other widespread limits on the procedure.

“I am calling the Legislature back into session because too much important work remains undone for the people of Texas,” Perry said in a statement. “Texans value life and want to protect women and the unborn.”

The first session’s debate over abortion restrictions led to the most chaotic day in the Texas Legislature in modern history, starting with a marathon filibuster and ending with a down-to-the wire, frenetic vote marked by questions about whether Republicans tried to break chamber rules and jam the measure through.

The governor can convene as many extra sessions as he likes and sets the agenda of what lawmakers can work on. Also listed on the session’s agenda are separate bills to boost highway funding and deal with a juvenile justice issue. Read more from this story HERE.

____________________________________________________________________

Fu****r: Left Viciously Attacks Governor Perry for Not Giving Up on Pro-Life Legislation

By Jason Howerton. Perry’s move infuriated the left and they let everyone know it on Twitter Wednesday. It got ugly (Warning! Strong and hateful language):

tx gov
____
txgov
____
txgove

Read more from this story HERE.