“Antoinette Perrine has barricaded her front door since her brother was killed three weeks ago on a basketball court near her home in the Harlem Park neighborhood of West Baltimore. She already has iron bars outside her windows and added metal slabs on the inside to deflect the gunfire. “I’m afraid to go outside,” said Perrine, 47. “It’s so bad, people are afraid to let their kids outside. People wake up with shots through their windows. Police used to sit on every corner, on the top of the block. These days? They’re nowhere.”
Perrine’s brother is one of 36 people killed in Baltimore so far this month, already the highest homicide count for May since 1999. But while homicides are spiking, arrests have plunged more than 50 percent compared to last year. The drop in arrests followed the death of Freddie Gray from injuries he suffered in police custody. Gray’s death sparked protests against the police and some rioting, and led to the indictment of six officers.
Now West Baltimore residents worry they’ve been abandoned by the officers they once accused of harassing them. In recent weeks, some neighborhoods have become like the Wild West without a lawman around, residents said.
“Before it was over-policing. Now there’s no police,” said Donnail “Dreads” Lee, 34, who lives in the Gilmor Homes, the public housing complex where Gray, 25, was arrested. “I haven’t seen the police since the riots,” Lee said. “People feel as though they can do things and get away with it.I see people walking with guns almost every single day, because they know the police aren’t pulling them up like they used to.”
Police Commissioner Anthony Batts said last week his officers “are not holding back” from policing tough neighborhoods, but they are encountering dangerous hostility in the Western District. “Our officers tell me that when officers pull up, they have 30 to 50 people surrounding them at any time,” Batts said. At a City Council meeting Wednesday, Batts said officers have expressed concern they could be arrested for making mistakes…”
Confirming why citizens of the remarkably misnamed “Charm City” are referred to as “Baltimorons”, and the duskier the dimmer.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, courtesy of Townhall.com, Baberaham Lincoln offers facts not in evidence in the on-going illegal immigration debate:
Ramos Can Stay, But Matt LauerHas to Go
I finally found a Mexican willing to do a job no American will do! I have an explosive book on the No. 1 issue in the country coming out next week, I’ve already written 10 New York Times best-sellers — I’d be on a postage stamp if I were a liberal — but can’t get an interview on ABC, NBC or CBS.
Only Mexican-born Jorge Ramos would interview me on his Fusion network. Yay, Jorge!
After a spellbinding interview, Ramos ended by asking this excellent question — which I had suggested myself for all authors, most of whom write very boring books, harming the marketability of my own books: “Is there anything in your book that isn’t already generally known?”
My soon-to-be-released book, “Adios, America! The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole,” is jam-packed with facts you didn’t already know. Don’t even think of using it as a coaster, like those other books.
These are just a few:
— Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act was expressly designed to change the demographics of our country to be poorer and more inclined to vote Democratic.
— It worked! Post-1970 immigrants vote 8-2 for the Democrats.
— Citing this dramatic shift in the Democratic Party’s fortunes, Democratic consultant Patrick Reddy called the 1965 Immigration Act “the Kennedy family’s greatest gift to the Democratic Party.”
— Immigrants admitted before 1970 made more money, bought more houses and were more educated than Americans. The post-Kennedy immigrants are astronomically less-educated, poorer and more likely to be on welfare than the native population.
— With no welfare state to support them, about a third of pre-1965 Act immigrants returned to the places they came from. British and Jewish immigrants were the least likely to go home — less than 10 percent did.
— Although America is admitting more immigrants, they are coming from fewer countries than they did before 1970. On liberals’ own terms, the country is becoming less “diverse,” but a lot poorer and a lot more Latin.
— America has already taken in one-fourth of Mexico’s entire population.
— In 1970, there were almost no Nigerian immigrants in the United States. Our country is now home to more Nigerians than any country in the world except Nigeria.
— America takes more immigrants from Nigeria than from England.
— The government refuses to tell us how many prisoners in the United States are immigrants. That information is not available anywhere. But the ancillary facts suggest that the number is astronomical.
— There are more foreign inmates in New York state prisons from Mexico than from the entire continent of Europe.
— Hispanics are less likely to be in the military than either whites or blacks, and a majority of Hispanic troops are women. On the other hand, Hispanics are overrepresented in U.S. Prisons.
— In Denmark, actual Danes come in tenth in criminals’ nationality, after Moroccans, Lebanese, Yugoslavians, Somalis, Iranians, Pakistanis, Turks, Iraqis and Vietnamese.
— At least 15 percent of all births in Peru and Argentina are to girls between the ages of 10 and 15. In the U.S., only 2 percent of births are to girls that young, and those are mostly Hispanics, who are seven times more likely to give birth at that age than white girls are.
— Sex with girls as young as 12 years old is legal in 31 of the 32 states of Mexico.
— In all of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel combined, there have been eight reported births to girls aged 10 or younger. Seven of the eight were impregnated by immigrants.
— In some areas of America, law enforcement authorities have given up on prosecuting statutory rape cases against Mexican men in their 30s who impregnate 12- and 13-year-old girls, after repeatedly encountering parents who view their little girls’ pregnancies as a “blessing.”
— The same North Carolina newspapers that gave flood-the-zone coverage to a rape that never happened at a Duke lacrosse party completely ignore real rapes happening right under their noses, being committed against children by immigrants providing cheap labor to the state’s farming and meat-packing industries.
— Since 2004, Mexicans have beheaded at least a half-dozen people in the United States.
— Mexican drug cartels — not ISIS — pioneered the practice of posting videotaped beheadings online.
— An alleged “ISIS” beheading video making the rounds in 2014 was actually a Mexican beheading video from 2010.
— Post-1970 immigrants have re-introduced slavery to America. Indian immigrant Lakireddy Bali Reddy, for example, used the H1-B visa program, allegedly for “high-tech workers,” to bring in 12-year-old girls he had bought from their parents for sex.
— The above story was missed by the San Francisco Chronicle. It was broken by a high school journalism class.
— The ACLU took Reddy’s side.
— We’re still letting in Hmong immigrants as a reward for their help with the ill-fated Vietnam War, which ended 40 years ago.
— Between 2000 and 2005, nearly 100 Hmong men were charged with rape or forced prostitution of girls in Minneapolis-St Paul, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The vast majority of the victims were 15 years old or younger. A quarter of the victims were not Hmong.
— Proponents of the 1965 immigration bill swore up and down that it would not alter this country’s demographic mix. In fact, Kennedy’s immigration policy has brought about the greatest demographic shift of any nation in world history.
— In 1980, Reagan won the biggest electoral landslide in history against an incumbent president, Jimmy Carter. Without the last 40 years of immigration, in 2012, Mitt Romney would have won a bigger landslide than Reagan did. He got more of the “Reagan coalition” than Reagan did.
— If Romney had won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote, he still would have lost. If he’d gotten just 4 percent more of the white vote, he would have won.
Is it any wonder a Mark Zuckerberg-sponsored event in San Francisco touts…
“This country was built on a dream, and a belief that the course of our lives does not have to be determined by the country, culture, and socioeconomic status that we were all randomly born into. Immigration is a proven solution to this “unjust lottery” of life, but somewhere along the way we lost sight of that dream.“
What ever happened to brightening the corner where you are? Wouldn’t helping deprived nations develop better life lotteries within their own borders be a much more effective way of dealing with third-world poverty rather than impoverishing America through the uncontrolled invasion of tens of millions of uneducated, illiterate, unskilled illegal aliens? Sure it would.
Though if your goal isn’t to eradicate poverty, but rather to consolidate perpetual political power through a massive influx of new government-dependent Dimocrats, the plan makes all the sense in the world.
Next up, in the Ya Gotta Love Labor segment, the hypocrisy literally oozes out of this headline from Best of the Web:
“Fight for $15” or “Fight $15”? Turns out that depends on whether it’s a union shop.
“…And speaking of unions, this report from the Los Angeles Times gives the lie to the entire minimum-wage argument:
Labor leaders, who were among the strongest supporters of the citywide minimum wage increase approved last week by the Los Angeles City Council, are advocating last-minute changes to the law that could create an exemption for companies with unionized workforces. . . .
[The delightfully named] Rusty Hicks, who heads the county Federation of Labor and helps lead the Raise the Wage coalition, said Tuesday night that companies with workers represented by unions should have leeway to negotiate a wage below that mandated by the law.
“With a collective bargaining agreement, a business owner and the employees negotiate an agreement that works for them both. The agreement allows each party to prioritize what is important to them,” Hicks said in a statement. “This provision gives the parties the option, the freedom, to negotiate that agreement. And that is a good thing.”
Freedom of contract is a good thing—who’d have thunk it? From the standpoint of the unions’ institutional interests, it’s an even better thing to have a monopoly on freedom of contract.The Hicks proposal would give some employers an incentive to yield to unionization efforts in exchange for discounted wages (from which employees would have union dues deducted)…”
Ya gotta love organized labor; they’re never shy about spending their members dues backing Dimocratic initiatives, then pushing for exemptions for themselves. Last time it was ObamaScare; now its the unaffordable $15/hour minimum wage.
Moving on, writing at NRO, Kevin Williamson wonders…
“Joe Biden — who is, incredibly, vice president of these United States — took the occasion of Memorial Day to telephone the Iraqi prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, for the purpose of making the political equivalent of a halftime locker-room speech: “Biden assures Iraqi prime minister of U.S. support,” reported ABC News. When Biden assures you of U.S. support, it is time to update your life-insurance policy and begin quietly executing whatever your Plan B is. Let’s hope he has a good real-estate agent.
But let’s not blame poor feckless Joe Biden, the terrified rodential little man with the lingering hands and too much fondness for the word “literally,” the definition of which he does not seem to know. Yes, the vice president is an unserious man on this, as on all matters, but he is an unserious vice president who serves at the pleasure of an unserious president, who serves at the pleasure of an unserious people — us.
Conservatives charge that President George W. Bush had effectively won the war in Iraq and that President Barack Obama subsequently lost it. This is more or less true, but some of my more hawkish friends omit the key fact: Barack Obama was elected for the express purpose of surrendering such gains as we had made in Iraq, the American people having judged the price of securing them too high. The electorate in 2008 was war-weary and, embarrassing as it is to admit, craven, and not only on the matter of our military campaigns. The electorate has come to take the Lyndon Johnson–Hermann Göring “guns vs. butter” rhetoric literally (n.b., Mr. Vice President!), as if through some transmutational property of politics we could convert the matériel invested in the long war with Islamic supremacists into subsidies for foodstuffs or, better yet, for health-insurance premiums. Senator Obama argued precisely that, and subsequent evidence suggests that he just may be daft enough to believe it.
President John Kennedy in his inaugural address famously promised that the United States stood ready to “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” He didn’t mean it, of course, and neither do our contemporaries when they echo that uplifting but ultimately dishonest sentiment. The question is, What price are we prepared to pay, and what burdens are we prepared to bear, if any, to keep the so-called Islamic State from completely overrunning not only Iraq but a wide swath of the Middle East?…”
We disagree strenuously with one of Williamson’s assertion: while The Obamao may have been elected in part to wind down U.S. involvement in Iraq, he certainly wasn’t elected to give back the gains America had made, and sure as HELL wasn’t elected to abandon Iraq to ISIS.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, here’s a real shocker:
That sure is a lot of paper clips. Obamacare is set to addmore than a quarter-of-a-trillion—that’s trillion—dollars in extra insurance administrative costs to the U.S. health-care system, according to a new report out Wednesday. The $273.6 billion in additional insurance overhead represents an average of of $1,375 per newly insured person, per year, from 2012 through 2022.
The overhead cost equals a whopping 22.5 percent of the total estimated $2.76 trillion in all federal government spending for the Affordable Care Act programs during that time, the authors of thereport in the journal Health Affairs noted.
In contrast, the federal government’s traditional Medicare program has overhead of just 2 percent, according to the report.
This on top of a GDP which shrank 0.7% in the 1st Quarter.
And in the Environmental Moment, the real story isn’t the latest EPA overreach, but the manner in which it was justified and publicized:
“The Environmental Protection Agency excluded several news outlets and reporters who regularly cover the agency from a press briefing and announcement regarding its release of a regulation that expands its jurisdiction over waterways.
…EPA also excluded some New York Times reporters who regularly cover the EPA, one of whom co-wrote a story critical of the agency last week. It instead invited Ron Nixon, a reporter who covers the effect that legislation and regulations across various agencies have on consumers.
The selectivity comes after a Times article last week accused the agency of enlisting environmental groups to flood the public comments on the rule. Some sources in the Times story said the EPA might have flouted lobbying rules in promoting the regulation.The EPA called the Times piece “sloppy” and “erroneous,” though the newspaper’s public editor found no merit in those accusations. McCarthy said Wednesday that the agency “did nothing that would cross any legal lines here.“…”
McCarthy said it, so America should believe it, right?!? After all, it’s not like anyone in the highest echelons of Liberal governance would lie?!?
Put another way, “Oh, you’ve written something critical of the EPA or the Obamao’s Administration?”
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.