NC General Assembly Considering Tax On E Cigarette Liquids

By William Teach May 14, 2014 – 2:48 pm

Most news sources are positioning this as a tax on e-cigarettes themselves, which is not quite correct. There will be no excise tax on the devices used, whether they be ones where you purchase replacement cartridges, such as Blue, or ones where you refill the cartridges yourself, such as my Kanger EVOD. Instead, they’re aiming at the e-liquids themselves. Even though many people purchase liquid with no nicotine

(Charlotte Business Journal) Draft legislation for the taxation of electronic cigarettes was approved Tuesday by the North Carolina General Assembly’s Joint Revenue Laws Study Committee, WRAL reports.

The state imposes a sales tax on the devices but does not collect an excise tax, as is imposed on cigarettes and other tobacco products. The proposal would tax the liquid in e-cigarettes – liquid that contains nicotine derived from tobacco – at a rate of 5 cents per milliliter.

This will supposedly bring in up to $5 million a year. And, I’m sure, some folks go “hey, it’s just 5 cents per milliliter. No biggie”. But, taxes always seem to start low, and work their way up. I purchase my favorite flavors in 30ml bottles. That’s an extra $1.50 each time, imposed artificially. And, for what reason? None of the articles I have read so far give a reason for imposing this excise tax. Other than, perhaps, because RJ Reynolds, a tobacco company, supports it, and their product would not be taxed.

(WRAL) Sen. Floyd McKissick, D-Durham, noted that the low rate could cause significant state revenue losses down the road.

“That will have an impact upon us when we do our budget projections for lost revenues … moving from 45 cents to 5 cents,” he said.

Wait, what? There is no excise tax currently on e-cig liquids. How can there be an revenue loss on something that doesn’t exist? This is simply Democrat World.

If Thom Tillis, who won the GOP nomination to go up against Kay Hagan for her Senate seat, wants to prove his Conservative bonofides he can kill this proposed legislation, as Speaker of the House. Tweet him here.

As Ronald Reagan pointed out, Government’s view of the economy is “If it moves, tax it”. Why mess with economic movement? When I purchase e-liquid, I pay the current NC sales tax. Why add more?

Read: NC General Assembly Considering Tax On E Cigarette Liquids »

Posted in Web/Tech | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 14, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a mountainside being turned into desert, which could mean that ballpark of the (horrible) San Francisco Giants* might be flooded from sea rise, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is This ain’t Hell…, with a post going old school on hashtag diplomacy.

*too bad such a cute women likes such an evil team. Yes, I am a Dodgers fan.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Bummer: Only 500 Days To Avoid “Climate Chaos” Doom

By William Teach May 14, 2014 – 11:02 am

Say, I wonder how the French foreign minister traveled to the United States? Did he walk, bike, and swim?

(CNS News) The world has “500 days to avoid climate chaos,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said alongside Secretary of State John Kerry at the State Department on Tuesday.

“We have 500 days to avoid climate chaos,” Fabius said. “And I know that President Obama and John Kerry himself are committed on this subject and I’m sure that with them, with a lot of other friends, we shall be able to reach success in this very important matter.”

Fabius was referring to the next big United Nations climate conference, scheduled to open in Paris, France in November 2015, or in 565 days’ time.

This is another important reason for Republicans to regain the Senate: blocking anything that comes out of the the 2015 climate vacation in Paris, where tons of government bureaucrats, NGO’s, left wing agitators, and a few scientists with agendas will take fossil fueled trips to tell Everyone Else they need to stop using fossil fuels. This will be preceded by this year’s IPCC Conference on the Parties, held in Lima, Peru. Interesting how so many are telling the Latinos in Peru that their COP doesn’t matter. Seems bigoted, eh?

Anyhow, notice that the assumption here is that if Government doesn’t force measures on citizens, doom will occur? Yet, these same people fail to follow the same prescriptions for themselves.

Read: Bummer: Only 500 Days To Avoid “Climate Chaos” Doom »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Christian Victim Of Boko Haram Denied Visa Multiple Times

By William Teach May 14, 2014 – 8:45 am

So claims her human rights attorney

(CNS News) A 15-year-old girl who witnessed the murder of her father and teenage brother at the hands of Boko Haram terrorists says she decided to tell her story after the group kidnapped almost 300 schoolgirls last month in the same village in northern Nigeria where she grew up.

Deborah Peters, speaking Tuesday at the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C., recalled how in 2011 members of Boko Haram came to her home in Chibok, where she lived with her brother and father, who was a pastor of a local church.

“Three men knocked on our door, and then my brother opened the door for them,” Peters said. “And they asked him, ‘Where is your dad?’ And he told them, ‘My dad is in the bathroom taking a shower.’

They took her dad out and attempted to force him to “deny his faith”, threatening to kill him if he didn’t. He refused, so, they shot him three times, shot her brother three times, then tied her up and left her between the corpses.

Emmanuel Ogebe, the human rights attorney who helped Peters come to the United States, said that visa requests filed on Peters’ behalf were denied “multiple times,” with the State Department citing no family ties in the U.S. as the reason.

Part of the reason was because Hillary Clinton’s State Dept. refused to designate Boko Haram a terrorist organization. I will say, the designation wasn’t as cut and dry as some claim, when international diplomacy comes into play. I truly hate to cite a Media Matters article, but, I recommend reading the latter half.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank has a bit of a meltdown in an article proclaiming that the Right Blames Hillary for the Boko Haram kidnapping, the same Hillary whose State Dept. supposedly denied Ms. Peters a visa (and, I think we can believe that the claim actually happened, based on what we’ve seen from the State Dept, especially under Clinton/Obama)

Conservatives have reached the firm conclusion that Hillary Clinton is to blame for those Nigerian schoolgirls kidnapped by the terrorist group Boko Haram, 14 months after she left office.

On Fox News last week, Elisabeth Hasselbeck attributed the attack to Clinton’s failure to put the group on a list of foreign terrorist organizations when she was secretary of state. That “perhaps could have saved these girls earlier,” Hasselbeck declared.

Interesting. That second article is the same one I cited from Media Matters. The first is from the always unhinged Slate, written by the always unhinged Amanda Marcotte. What Dana, along with the rest of his unhinged brethren miss, is not that Hillary is solely to blame, as the we blame the perpetrators, the hardcore Islamist members of Boko Haram. What is being noted is that Hillary was in charge of the State Dept. when it was refusing to designate BK as a terrorist organization. Milbank is also missing the point that this is politics. And, hey, I don’t remember Milbank complaining when Democrats were blaming George Bush for 9/11, rather than al Qaeda. Nor did he complain when Democrats Blamed Bush for “creating more terrorists” for daring to fight back against the terrorists. A talking point that disappeared when Obama kept the fight up and has been drone striking them.

Rush Limbaugh, on his radio show, suggested that Clinton didn’t designate the group as terrorist because its members are black.

Neither Politico nor Milbank understand the tongue in cheek statement was, in terms of Liberals always going the racist route when Conservatives do something.

The abduction of hundreds of Nigerian girls by Boko Haram, the latest atrocity by the militant group claiming to be acting on Islamic principles, has little to do with the United States.

Strange. Libya had little to do with the United States, yet, Obama launched an air war. Milbank goes on to give more “examples”, ending with

It was a textbook example of the anatomy of a smear.

Well, gee, Dana, what, exactly, did she do to work against Boko Haram? Perhaps you’d care to comment on Ms. Peters, and why her visa was denied many times?

Read: Christian Victim Of Boko Haram Denied Visa Multiple Times »

Posted in Hillary Clinton, Liberal World, RoP | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Claims Illegal Alien Enforcement Isn’t Smart

By William Teach May 14, 2014 – 8:18 am

I wonder if Obama will jump in on the latest Alec Baldwin controversy, where the NYPD stopped him for going the wrong way on his bicycle and they were going to ticket him. That’s right. Ticket him. Supposedly, he got snappy and they arrested him. I’d be ticked if I was going to get a ticket for riding a bicycle, too. But, hey, in Obama’s world, law enforcement should ignore most illegals. You can call them undocumenteds, if you want. Either way, no matter what phrase you use, it all means “they shouldn’t be here”

(Daily Caller) Enforcing immigration law “isn’t smart,” President Barack Obama told law enforcement officials Tuesday, just one day after the public learned he had released 36,007 illegal-immigrant murderers, rapists, thieves and other criminals into the nation’s communities.

Cops should be going after major criminals, not the many illegal immigrants that are quietly living in their districts, said Obama, who has twice sworn to uphold the nation’s laws.

“You’ve got to spend time dealing with somebody who is not causing any other trouble other than the fact that they were trying to make a living for their families,” Obama said.

“That’s just not a good use of our resources. It’s not smart. It doesn’t make sense,” said Obama, who has already directed immigration police to minimize enforcement of illegal living far from the border.

How does law enforcement know they aren’t causing any trouble if those tasked with enforcing the laws of their city, county, state, and the U.S. fail to investigate? Is speeding really “causing trouble”? Why, yes, yes it is, because it is The Law. What if those speeding are just trying to get to work and make a living for their family? By Obama’s reckoning, law enforcement should leave them alone. How about those fishing without a license? Are they really causing trouble? Perhaps we should just do away with Fish and Wildlife, at the state and federal levels. It’s just not a good use of our resources. Perhaps OSHA should leave companies alone. Not show up at companies and look around, interfering with operations. It’s not smart. And, hey, the IRS? It doesn’t make sense that they would audit good people without proof of illegal activities.

The statement will likely spur concerns among Republicans and the public that Obama can’t be trusted to implement the enforcement features of any immigration compromise.

I wish that was so. There are still enough fools within the GOP, especially the elected and establishment Republicans who will push for some sort of “it’s not amnesty!!!!!!” amnesty with all sorts of “triggers” that Obama will fail to uphold.

Obama’s call to end the enforcement of immigration law came during a staged event at the White House. The purpose was to stimulate his supporters’ declining interest in the largely defunct and unpopular 18-month campaign to sharply increase the inflow of immigrants and guest-workers. Obama needs to keep the issue boiling to boost turnout by Latinos in November.

Again with the campaigning. I’d say he’s given up on Doing President, but, then, his entire time in office has simply been one long campaign event, rather than bellying up to the bar and doing the job.

The illegals “are folks who are woven into the fabrics of our communities,” he said. ”Their kids are going to school with our kids. Most of them are not making trouble; most of them are not causing crimes. And yet, we put them in this tenuous position, and it creates a situation in which your personnel, who have got to go after gang-bangers and need to be going after violent criminals and deal with the whole range of challenges, and who have to cooperate with [the federal government] around our counterterrorism activities.”

See? It’s our fault, those of us who are legal U.S. citizens. The fact is that most of these illegals, and their anchor baby children, mostly fail to integrate into American society. They so often refuse to learn English. They demand that Everyone Else accommodate them. They demand driver’s licenses. That everything is in Spanish. That the government provide services and money to them. That they receive in-state tuition. But, hey, they’re minor law breakers, like, say, people who blow off stop signs and stop lights, so, no big deal. Until someone is coming at the intersection and an accident occurs. Till an ER is closed. And a U.S. citizen’s life is ruined through stealing identity. Lost jobs. Depressed wages. Kids can’t learn because illegals/anchor babies can barely speak the language. Take up resources such as food stamps and welfare. And all the other problems illegals cause.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Claims Illegal Alien Enforcement Isn’t Smart »

Posted in Barry Obama, Illegal Immigration | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Massachussets Gov. Deval Patrick Want Other People To Give Up Fossil Fuels

By William Teach May 13, 2014 – 6:04 pm

Nothing like a long, boring, patronizing speech on “climate change” during college commencement ceremonies

(Climate Progress) Deval Patrick is finishing up his second term as Governor of Massachusetts this year, but instead of fading into the role of a lame duck, he said something on Friday that it’s possible no sitting governor has said before.

Speaking to the UMass Amherst’s boisterous graduating class of 2014, Patrick detailed how “Massachusetts should finally end all reliance on conventional coal generation” in four years, and called for “a future free of fossil fuels.”

Say, how’d he get to Amherst? Think he walked or rode a bike? Mass. has no governor’s mansion (weird, eh?) His home is in Milton, Mass, almost two hours away from Amherst. Though his office is a bit closer.

While Patrick began his speech with the importance of citizenship, he devoted the majority of his time to climate change and clean energy. He highlighted the recent National Climate Assessment and how climate change was affecting New England. He then laid out the steps Massachusetts has taken over the last decade and a half to cut carbon emissions, invest in clean energy, and adapt to a changing climate.

“Between 2000 and 2012, the electricity generated from coal in New England dropped from 18 percent to 3 percent; electricity generated from oil is down from 22 percent to less than 1 percent,” Patrick said.

Good thing the cost of energy in Massachusetts hasn’t increased or something. Oh, wait, they have, because they are relying more on natural gas, which hasn’t been able to keep up with the demand due to cold and snowy winters, what with coal and oil artificially down. And simply up thanks to the renewables rules overall.

Anyhow, there you go, Warmists in Massachusetts: give up your own fossil fuels usage to save the climate or something. Even though Patrick himself takes lots of helicopter flights. Takes long fossil fueled car trips. Flies fossil fueled planes (he just flew to Latin America).

BTW, I’m up for replacing fossil fuels, gas mostly, as I’ve noted many times. Not because of “climate change”, but simply because they are environmentally pollutant, and not having to rely on other nations, particularly ones that are not friendly and are Islamist hotbeds.

Read: Massachussets Gov. Deval Patrick Want Other People To Give Up Fossil Fuels »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 13, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…are balloons full of helium is having a shortage cause of globull warming, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Obama releasing tens of thousands of illegal alien criminals.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, We Need To Get Rid Of This Choice Habit In Healthcare

By William Teach May 13, 2014 – 12:14 pm

Ed Morrissey calls this a monumental quote to remember in regards to how Ocare works

(NY Times) “We have to break people away from the choice habit that everyone has,” said Marcus Merz, the chief executive of PreferredOne, an insurer in Golden Valley, Minn., that is owned by two health systems and a physician group. “We’re all trying to break away from this fixation on open access and broad networks.”

Yeah, choice only seems to work for Lefties when it comes to aborting babies. Sister Toldjah notes

What’s this? Obamacare limits doctor and hospital options? Ya don’t say.

Hate to say we Toldjah So, NYT, but …

Heh! Let’s refer back to one of the best quotes ever on Ocare

Both of the California residents “vote independent and are proud to say they helped elect and re-elect President Barack Obama,” according to the San Jose Mercury News. They also both anticipated their rates would go up, just not so drastically.

“Of course, I want people to have health care, I just didn’t realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally,” Vinson said.

Waschura said he was “laughing” at House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Republicans until he got his new rates in the mail.

Everything’s lollipops and unicorns till your healthcare gets blow’d up.

Read: Say, We Need To Get Rid Of This Choice Habit In Healthcare »

Posted in Healthcare, Wonky Media | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmist Robert Samuelson: Say, We Don’t Really Have Solutions For “Climate Change”

By William Teach May 13, 2014 – 10:39 am

In what is one of his saner opinion pieces, Washington Post writer Robert Samuelson notes a few interesting things

Climate change: We have no solution yet

It would be healthy — in the sense of promoting honesty — if every report warning of global warming and climate change (the two terms are interchangeable) came with the following disclaimer:

Despite our belief that global warming poses catastrophic threats to many of the world’s 7 billion inhabitants, we acknowledge that we now lack the technologies to stop it. The purpose of our analysis and policy proposals is to create the political and economic conditions that foster the needed technologies. But there is no assurance that this will happen, and much time and money may be invested in futile and wasteful efforts.

(Warmist blather)

It’s useful for environmental groups to have global warming “deniers” (and, of course, behind them the sinister oil companies) as foils. The subliminal message is that once the views of these Neanderthals are swept away, we can adopt sensible policies to “do something” about global warming.

The reality is otherwise. The central truth for public policy is: We have no solution.

Of course, what he recommends is typical

My own oft-stated preference is for policies that might dampen global warming but would also address other problems. The most obvious idea is a carbon tax to help finance government and stimulate energy-saving technologies and new forms of non-carbon energy. If these technologies went global, the gap between rich and poor countries would narrow.

And there you go: more taxation, more Big Government. Standard boilerplate from the Cult Of Hotcoldwetdry. But, wait, it gets better, because those evil third worlders

Worse, almost all the projected increases in global emissions come from poorer countries, half from China alone. By contrast, U.S. emissions (and those of most rich nations) are projected to stay stable over the three decades. Economic growth is slowing; energy efficiency is increasing; and, in Japan and some European countries, populations are declining. Because poor countries understandably won’t abandon their efforts to relieve poverty, any further U.S. emissions cuts would probably be offset by gains in China and elsewhere. This dims their political and environmental appeal.

And there is another typical Warmist trope: those in developing countries must be forced to continue living a third world shithole life. Warmists know they already have theirs, and now want to deny others. I know what my recommendation is: Warmists should live the lives they want Everyone Else to live.

Read: Warmist Robert Samuelson: Say, We Don’t Really Have Solutions For “Climate Change” »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Poll Shows Majority Oppose Obama’s Contraception Mandate

By William Teach May 13, 2014 – 7:36 am

Perhaps Americans understand better than Team Obama that it is silly, patronizing, patriarchal, and could cause job loss

(Daily Caller) A majority of Americans — including a majority of women, independents, and young voters — oppose the contraception mandate created by Obamacare, according to a new poll set to be released Tuesday by the Family Research Council.

Fifty-three percent of likely U.S. voters oppose forcing employers to provide plans that various birth control methods, according to the poll, conducted earlier this month. Forty-three percent support doing so.

Just a note: that poll was been released on May 8th, and is available at the FRC website. It asked the question

Question:
As you may know, the President’s healthcare law contains the HHS mandate which requires that all private healthcare plans, including both employer based health plans and individual market health plans, cover preventative care services for women, which includes all FDA approved contraceptives, including drugs that can destroy a human embryo, and sterilization services without a direct cost to the patient. Employers that offer their employees’ healthcare plans that do not includes these drugs and services will be fined up to $100 per day per employee. Do you support or oppose this law?

40% strongly oppose, 26% strongly support.

Despite being a bargain for women, fifty percent of women oppose the mandate while only 45 percent support it, according to the poll, conducted by WPA Research on behalf of the conservative Family Research Council. Thirty-six percent of women strongly oppose the mandate, while 29 percent strongly support it.

Other groups that tend to support Democratic candidates oppose the mandate as well, according to the poll.

Forty-nine percent of adults between 18 and 44 years old oppose, and 47 percent support the mandate. Hispanics are split evenly on the issue, though slightly more in the heavily Democratic group strongly oppose the mandate than strongly support it.

FRC president Tony Perkins notes in the press release

“As the debate over the HHS mandate has played out in the media and the courts, Americans oppose the mandate because it puts the jobs, livelihoods, and healthcare of Americans at risk. It forces those who stand up for their conscience to choose between paying crippling fines that could shut down their business or dropping the healthcare of all their employees.

“Respecting freedom of conscience is a long-held American tradition and the government should not impose mandates or laws that force individuals and businesses to violate these beliefs just to hold a job, own a business, or have health insurance. This is a flawed mandate within a flawed law.

Let’s not forget, the contraception mandate was a creation of Team Obama, not the actual “Affordable” Care Act itself. There is no mention of any parts of the mandate within the law, in terms of any requirements. It was invented simply to patronize Democrats and women.

Read: Poll Shows Majority Oppose Obama’s Contraception Mandate »

Posted in Healthcare | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove