Gay Patriot Header Image

Some Zimmerman links

Recent-ish, and I found them worthwhile:

  • Shelby Steele on The Decline of the Civil Rights Establishment. “The purpose of today’s civil-rights establishment is not to seek justice, but to seek power…based on the presumption that [blacks] are still…victimized…This idea of victimization is an example of what I call a ‘poetic truth.’ Like poetic license, it bends the actual truth…[listeners] say, ‘Yes, of course,’ lest we seem to be racist…this establishment is fighting to maintain its authority to wield poetic truth…One wants to scream at all those outraged at the Zimmerman verdict: Where is your outrage over the collapse of the black family?” – Read the whole thing.

  • A good piece from Cathy Young reviewing the depth of the Established media’s malpractice in this case, and one from Bill Whittle expressing his outrage over that malpractice.

  • Now old, but: Video of the jury reading the Not Guilty verdict. (Just to see the moment. And sorry, but there is no honest way to force Zimmerman into a ‘white’ identity; by conventional standards, he seems clearly a Latino / person of color.)

BONUS (from Kurt in the comments): Bryan Preston critiques how Obama has cast his lot with the race-baiters. “In Florida, blacks benefit from ‘stand your ground’ laws more often than whites do…[and] the president went on to acknowledge that…’stand your ground’ was not invoked in Zimmerman’s defense, [but said] we should re-examine such laws anyway. Logically, why?”

UPDATE: Zimmerman helps people, despite the nasty death threats that Trayvon Martin supporters have inflicted not only on him, but even on strangers who (say) happen to have a phone number similar to his.

Is Obama’s Press Secretary a “paid liar”? (part III)

Posted by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) at 2:21 am - July 22, 2013.
Filed under: Big Government Follies,Dishonest Democrats,Economy

Some weeks ago, Dan asked if Jay Carney is a paid liar? Looking at Benghazi, I answered ‘yes’. Here is a newer example.

Last week, as reported by The Hill, Carney:

…dismissed reports that some employers were hiring more part-time employees because of the president’s signature healthcare law.

“The data reflects that there is not support for the proposition that businesses are not hiring full-time employees because of the Affordable Care Act,” Carney told reporters.

Perhaps Carney’s statement can be made true if we parse it Clinton-style, seeking his definitions of “data” and “is”. Perhaps Carney only accepts Harvard studies (or some such), and very likely, there hasn’t been one.

But the phenomenon of employers replacing full-time employees with part-time, due to Obamacare, is real and growing. The same article notes:

employers have added more part-time employees — about 93,000 a month — in 2013 than full-time workers — averaging about 22,000 per month. That’s a reversal from 2012, when employers hired 31,000 part-time workers and 171,000 full-time ones per month.

And how do we know it’s due to Obamacare? Well, I can’t think of any other (real) reason that Obama wants to delay his own employer mandate; can you? Or a reason why labor unions suddenly hate Obamacare?

But we don’t have to infer the cause. Comments and stories have abounded in the media lately, of businesses switching to part-time employees directly because of Obamacare’s insurance mandate for full-timers. Here is one recent commentary.

And even Uncle Ben says the Fed has been hearing it from the countless businesses which report into it:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke acknowledged that Obamacare regulations have caused employers to hire part-time workers, rather than full-time employees…

“[O]ne thing that we hear, you know, in the commentary we get at the FOMC is that some employers are hiring part-time in order to avoid the mandate there,” Bernanke told Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., during a House hearing. “So we have heard that.”

So, Jay: Can the baloney, OK? There doesn’t have to be an academic study on something for it to be true (and widely known).

Top political donors of the last 24 years

Via Zero Hedge last week.

I’m just a li’l part-time blogger, but in the top 20, I count only one eeeeeevil corporation favoring the GOP…against twelve unions, strongly favoring Democrats. Which party is all about the “big money” again?

ZH has a longer list, wherein you’ll glean these tidbits:

  • HRC comes in impressively (I mean it) at number 100, having given $11.9 million; 89% to Democrats.
  • The much-pilloried Koch Industries only comes in at number 62, with $17.4 million.
  • The much-pilloried NRA only comes in at number 52, with $20.2 million.
  • Umm…did I miss Halliburton? Or are they not in the top 100?

Top political  donors of the last 23 years