Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘regulation’ Category

Since I gave Michelle a hat tip earlier, might as well make it a pair. (It’s easier to get away with staring with my hat tipped low). Something is making me think of Michelle and pairs today. Not sure what that is. Wait, don’t tell me, I almost got it figured out….damn, I forgot again. What was it, I wonder? Anyway. A wolf, a sheep, and a wolf in sheep’s clothing went in the polling booth….did I mention voting was mandatory in the USSR?

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

H/T BureauCrash

Read Full Post »

By GILLIAN FLACCUS, Associated Press Writer

SANTA ANA, Calif. – Staffing was so inadequate at a California senior center that a rat crawled into an Alzheimer’s patient’s mouth and died there before staff noticed, a lawsuit claims.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday on behalf of 90-year-old Sigmund Bock, alleges that administrators at the Paragon Gardens Assisted Living and Memory Care Community in Mission Viejo overbooked their facility to receive corporate bonuses, but cut back on staff to increase profits.

“The facility so literally ignored the needs of their residents … as to allow vermin in the form of a rat to become lodged in the mouth of Sigmund Bock and die therein,” the lawsuit alleges.

Melody Chatelle, a spokeswoman for Sunwest Management Inc., the Oregon-based company that operates Paragon, denied the allegations.

“We take care of our residents, and find this negative publicity to be a disheartening affront to our professional caregivers and most especially to our residents and their loved ones,” she said.

Click here to read the rest of the article.

Of course, the nursing home claims they did nothing wrong, but apparently a staff member observed that patient sharing candy with a rat earlier that day, but thought nothing of it and did nothing to stop it.

This is not the first time that particular nursing home has gotten into trouble, either. Apparently they almost got their ticket pulled when a 71-year-old dementia patient wandered off last year. Tragically, that patient has never been found.

This kind of stuff just majorly pisses me off. Nursing homes like that one must choose their staff by leaving them alone in a room with a small puppy, to make sure they’ll torture it.

Read Full Post »

Orlando police have unbelievably arrested 21-year-old Eric Montanez, an activist with the charity “Food Not Bombs”, for feeding 30 homeless people in downtown Orlando.

A city ordinance, supported by businesses which claim the homeless frighten away customers, prevents feeding more than 25 homeless persons within two miles of Orlando City Hall. The law does allow charities to feed more than 25 people at a time with a special permit, but only allows two such special permits per year. Perhaps they feel charitable only on Christmas and Thanksgiving?

I’ve been in downtown Orlando. It’s no different from any other large city, insofar as the homeless population is concerned. It’s also nothing special, and chances are this ordinance has little to do with the homeless frightening customers, and everything to do with the people who work downtown not wanting to deal with them.

Police videotaped Montanez as he fed the needy some stew from a large kettle. They later arrested him and charged him with a misdemeanor for violating the ordinance, and took a sample of the stew as evidence. A police spokesperson said that Montanez is the first person to be arrested under the controversial law.

Frankly, I hope he prevails in court, and that the law is found to be unconstitutional. After all, it is a restriction on the First Amendment right to peaceably assemble. Besides, charities historically have done a much better job of caring for the needy, but that wouldn’t let the government have quite so much control, would it? The charities go where the needy are, and in most cases, they’re downtown. The government needs to butt out, and let the charities do what they do best.

I also have to wonder if there is any connection between this action and the name of the charity, “Food Not Bombs”. There may be more to this than meets the eye.

Read Full Post »

Illegal Immigration Quiz
by Joseph Knight


The Libertarian Enterprise

(1) Who will remove you from your home, job, family, and community to lock you in a cage like an animal for no reason other than what you smoke in your pipe or grow in your garden?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(2) Who demands that you surrender a portion of each paycheck to be used for purposes that they decide on rather than you?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(3) Who demands that you render tribute annually or be evicted from your property?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(4) Who demands that you take no medicine or medical treatment without their permission?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(5) Who tells you whom you may or may not hire?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(6) Who demands that you turn your children over to them daily for indoctrination?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(7) Who tells you with whom and under what conditions you may have sex?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(8) Who claims the right to enslave you or your children to fight their wars?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(9) Who can seize your property for any purpose they desire?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(10) Who tells you what you may or may not read, look at, and listen to?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(11) Who can kick in your door and go through your stuff with impunity?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(12) Who is most likely to disarm you?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(13) Which group claims to work for you, gets exorbitant salaries, but can’t be fired unless you act in concert with large numbers of like-minded individuals?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(14) Who created and perpetuates the welfare state?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

(15) Which of these terms is the antithesis of “freedom”?

A. Government
B. Illegal immigrants

Read Full Post »


The Alex Jones Infowars website
reports (links added by me):

The city council in Brooksville, Florida voted this week to advance a proposal granting city officials the authority to place liens and foreclose on the homes of motorists accused of failing to pay a single $5 parking ticket. Non-homeowners face having their vehicles seized if accused of not paying three parking offenses.

According to the proposed ordinance, a vehicle owner must pay a parking fine within 72 hours if a meter maid claims his automobile was improperly parked, incurring tickets worth between $5 and $250. Failure to pay this amount results in the assessment of a fifty-percent “late fee.” After seven days, the city will place a lien on the car owner’s home for the amount of the ticket plus late fees, attorney fees and an extra $15 fine. The fees quickly turn a $5 ticket into a debt worth several hundred dollars, growing at a one-percent per month interest rate. The ordinance does not require the city to provide notice to the homeowner at any point so that after ninety days elapse, the city will foreclose. If the motorist does not own a home, it will seize his vehicle after the failure to pay three parking tickets.

Any motorist who believes a parking ticket may have been improperly issued must first pay a $250 “appeal fee” within seven days to have the case heard by a contract employee of the city. This employee will determine whether the city should keep the appeal fee, plus the cost of the ticket and late fees, or find the motorist not guilty. Council members postponed a decision on whether to reduce this appeal fee until final adoption of the measure which is expected in the first week of April.

Ordinance No. 743 (Brooksville, Florida City Council, 3/19/2007)

Read Full Post »

Text by Steve Kubby http://kubby2008.com/node/36; embedded links by me, “the paulienator”

[Note: This blog entry was submitted to several California newspapers for publication last week. While it addresses a “state issue,” I believe that the sentiments expressed herein are also applicable to the presidential campaign]

Since his election to office, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has carefully cultivated his image as a “moderate,” plopping himself down in the muddled middle of every issue — often to the detriment of the very Californians he’s sworn to serve. In no case is that more true than with respect to issues of family and marriage.

In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill which would have recognized same-sex marriages in California, citing an inapplicable referendum result (Proposition 22, which applied to marriages solemnized outside California and which is void due to its conflict with the US Constitution’s “Full Faith and Credit” clause). He matched that veto with a pledge to uphold the state’s current “domestic partnerships” scheme. Now he’s making the same promise again versus AB 43.

This is the “middle” that Governor Schwarzenegger stands astride: Not slavery, just segregation. Not extermination, just “second class citizenship.”

There are two sides to marriage, and neither of them are the government’s business.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: