Skip

Yep – overseen and given guidance by Hillary Clinton’s State Department, USAID is paying for newly minted Asian IT pros to offshore more American IT jobs away.  It’s one thing to compete but who came up with this plan to tilt the board against Americans?  If I remember right, Hillary did say, after saying that she wants to put all Appalachian coal miners out of business, that she wanted to retrain them, partly in IT.  So, kill their self-dependance and then kill their hopes in one fell swoop? Emphasis mine:

Despite President Obama’s pledge to retain more hi-tech jobs in the U.S., a federal agency run by a hand-picked Obama appointee has launched a $36 million program to train workers, including 3,000 specialists in IT and related functions, in South Asia… Following their training, the tech workers will be placed with outsourcing vendors in the region that provide offshore IT and business services to American companies looking to take advantage of the Asian subcontinent’s low labor costs.

Under director Rajiv Shah, the United States Agency for International Development will partner with private outsourcers in Sri Lanka to teach workers there advanced IT skills like Enterprise Java (Java EE) programming, as well as skills in business process outsourcing and call center support. USAID will also help the trainees brush up on their English language proficiency. USAID is contributing about $10 million to the effort…

So what are Americans to think when their own government is working to put them out of work?  I thought the purpose of the American Government was to, at the least, not hurt American jobs.

Read more

Kimberly’s post on Portsmouth Police Commissioner Joe Plaia reminded me of this at the Union Leader concerning the NH Senate upholding Gov Maggie “The Red” Hassan’s veto of NH Constitutional Carry:

Democratic Senate Minority Leader Jeff Woodburn said the legislation is a solution in search of a problem that doesn’t exist, and that New Hampshire police chiefs do not deny permits without a good reason.  “There have seldom been unreasonable denials of a (concealed carry) permit,” he said. “And when it does happen, it is brought to public light and dealt with.”

He doesn’t get out much, does he? Or, like a Progressive, thinks more highly than he ought of our “expert and non-partisan bureaucrats” which, if anything these last eight years, we have found to be non-expert and highly partisan. We’ve seen cases of pure malfeasance – go unpunished or swept under the rug.  And in the blather of Woodburn, even if the police chiefs do badly, he blithely dismisses the impact and gives the impression of “no blood, no foul; it will self-correct or be of little consequence.  “Not to worry about”!

It is clear that he certainly didn’t bother to do his due diligence before opening his yap. If he had, he would have found the story of a police chief doing EXACTLY what he says doesn’t happen (and I bet he doesn’t think voter fraud doesn’t happen either, bless his heart) to ‘Grok friend Michelle Lavell who had to spend thousands of dollars PROVING her innocence against a police chief who decided to deny her permit renewal because she refused to give any additional information to the chief beyond what the law required (emphasis mine):

During the presser, Chairman Michelle Levell spoke about her own personal story of abuse by her police chief who decided to change the rules of the pistol/revolver application. Levell was denied her renewal because the police department illegally change the requirements.

Read more

This is just AWESOME!  We all know that the Left continues to assault our traditional cultural norms and will do so until there is nothing to “conserve”.  The biggest deal is “gender identity” and “gender fluidity” which continues their nihilism onslaught against absolute values by declaring anybody can call themselves pretty much anything they want as far as which sex they are (male, female, and pretty much every stupid pitstop along the way that they can think of – anything to blur any distinction between anything and anyone).  First relegated to Academia’s Ivory Tower, this movement, first started by the Feminist Critical Thinking, it is now pouring out at the rest of us like Ebola outbound from a ruptured infected cell.

Lately, we’ve seen college campuses starting the process of mandating that anyone can define what they are AND what the rest of us MUST call them with pronouns the battleground. (NYC, too, with HUGE fines if employers and other employees refuse to use the “proper” pronouns).  So, one enterprising lad by the name of Grant Strobl decided to go all Alinsky on the University of Michigan.  His choice of pronouns by which he must be called?

His Majesty

Read more

Here’s what I left as a comment:

This is one of the really big reasons many on the Right sneer at environmentalists – EVERY problem seems to require getting Government involved to achieve their wants. Make it bigger (hardly ever better) and more intrusive in making the rest of us hew to your idea of what is right.

How about this – how about petitioning the COMPANIES and the growers instead? If it is that great of an idea, wouldn’t it be logical to do that FIRST instead of running to Daddy Govt to spank everyone else?

And even better – you see a problem in the marketplace? Don’t like what is being done? Put your money and time where your mouth is and fill that perceived “void” (in this case, the packaging you want but aren’t getting) in the marketplace by starting your own company and just out-compete everyone else. Why not, if there are just so many darn people who are “demanding” what you want – by your own words, you should be a resounding success (and sincerely, more power to you for having done so).

But remember this – that will be much much harder than, you know, bitching about it some regulators and annoying the rest of us that will have seen yet a choice disappear from our lives because “you don’t need that“.

“You don’t need that” – the tell of Progressives and the intent to use the force of Government to enforce it.  The post I left it at?

Read more

I try hard not to be a conspiracy hound (although a couple of our Progressive commenters, bless their hearts, keep rolling rocks on ‘Grok grounds so that the phrase “looking under rocks to find a conspiracy” could be used) so a lot of times I’ll pass on posting something up simply because, well, “first info” isn’t always right. Or the second.  Sure, it means that sometimes I’m not “first” and it gets to be too late to bother.  So I don’t travel over to Info Wars but the when it has Obama’s words from his latest UN speech?  Well then, the title: VIDEO: OBAMA THINKS US SOVEREIGNTY OVERRATED, SHOULD CEDE FREEDOMS TO UN (emphasis mine):

And we can only realize the promise of this institution’s founding — to replace the ravages of war with cooperation — if powerful nations like my own accept constraints. Sometimes I’m criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions. But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security. And I think that’s not just true for us.

I read that and immediately thought of Ol Ben:

Read more

(former) NH State Rep. Sandra Keans (R, now D): “I don’t try to justify anything by the Constitution, it’s not my job and I don’t want to do it”.

I was asked about that statement (reformatted, emphasis mine):

Your list seems to keep getting longer…I like the way you simply add on…

You quote a statement from Rochester NH’s State Representative and Rochester City Councilor Sandra Keans. You mention she has said “I don’t try to justify anything by the Constitution, it’s not my job, and I don’t want to do it.” If she was asked about this…she would defend herself by saying it’s someone else’s responsibility to pass judgment on Bills etc., through Legal Counsel…

Wouldn’t this make her type of statement true?  To confront her on this would seem to be useless…right? I suspect ALL would use the same justification as her…… Not my Job!

Here is my reply:

Read more