Crush Liberalism

Not content with Wal-Mart, MD libs go after small businesses

Recall the recent post about how Maryland carried out the union thugocracy’s dirty work by attacking Wal-Mart with anti-worker legislation? The MD libs told us that they were targeting big businesses and not small ones. It’s not like liberals lie, right?

Yeah…right. From the premier Washington, D.C., newspaper, the Washington Times:

A Democratic lawmaker is aiming to force Maryland’s small businesses to pay a minimum level of employee health benefits, expanding the so-called “Wal-Mart tax” to nearly every business in the state.

The bill by Delegate James W. Hubbard, Prince George’s Democrat, would require businesses with fewer than 10,000 employees to spend 4.5 percent of payroll on employee health care or pay an equivalent amount to the state’s Medicaid program. Nonprofit businesses with fewer than 10,000 employees would have to spend 3 percent or give the money to Medicaid.

The proposal closely resembles the bill Democrats passed this year over the veto of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., a Republican. It requires businesses with more than 10,000 employees to pay 8 percent of payroll on employee health benefits or pay it to Medicaid. Wal-Mart is the only business in the state that doesn’t comply.

However, the governor warned that the Wal-Mart bill was the first step toward a government-run, taxpayer-funded health system.

An Ehrlich spokesman said the prediction was rapidly coming true.

“The Maryland General Assembly has put virtually every small business in the cross hairs for a new tax,” spokesman Henry P. Fawell said. “Politicians are picking the winners and losers in the marketplace. … It is government-run health care.”

Notice that whenever a Democrat runs for president, we hear how he is a big-time proponent of small business and only wants to stick it to the big evil corporations? Those of us not consuming the left’s Kool-Aid have always known this to be a lie. Their voting record has run contrary to their “pro-small business” rhetoric.

Maryland is living proof that when it comes to business of any size, liberals just can’t help themselves: they’re anti-capitalistic to the core! When businesses leave the state, who will Maryland’s liberals blame? Probably George W. Bush!

February 22, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Bush to veto any attempts blocking UAE port deal?

Bush has not issued the first damned veto since he took office over five years ago. Pork-laden spending bills? Budget-busting federal spending? Campaign finance reform bill? Prescription drug bill? Nope, no way, negative, and NOT!

However, it’s reassuring to see that our leader can finally find something worth wielding his veto pen over, and that issue is…the UAE port deal. From the AP:

Brushing aside objections from Republicans and Democrats alike, President Bush endorsed the takeover of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports by a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates. He pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement.

I would be surprised if Congress doesn’t have the votes to override his veto. Is Bush willing to issue his first veto just to watch it get overridden? Does the UAE have some kind of incriminating photos of the twins that they’re holding over his head? Doesn’t Congress have the constitutional right and obligation to regulate how much IF ANY money will be spent on port operations, and to whom this money can be paid?

And just what kind of a headache is this port deal causing?

Bush’s veto threat didn’t stop local efforts to block the deal. New Jersey’s governor, Jon S. Corzine, said Tuesday the state will file lawsuits in federal and state courts opposing the agreement. Corzine, a Democrat, cited a “deep, deep feeling that this is the wrong direction for our nation to take.”

A company at the Port of Miami, a subsidiary of Eller & Company Inc., sued last week to block the deal in a Florida state court. It said that under the sale, it will become an “involuntary partner” with Dubai’s government and it may seek more than $10 million in damages.

Also, I’ve heard some folks (like A.G. Alberto Gonzales) say that this isn’t about port security, but about port operations. Admittedly, I don’t know (or pretend to know) much about port operations, but it seems to me that port operations and port security are very much intertwined. If operations are poorly executed or supervised, then aren’t port security threats a possibility?

February 22, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

S.F.: "Who needs a military?"

San Francisco is well known as a bastion of kooks, a microcosm of reality-detachment, and a debauchery-driven ville removed from the inconveniences of the real world in which the rest of us live. One needs to look no further than one of their own city council members, named Gerardo Sandoval. Transcript from Hannity and Colmes:

HANNITY: I rarely agree with Dianne Feinstein. And she even says this is not the San Francisco that I know. This is — and I guess this is the mentality. Do you think America should unilaterally disarm? Should we give up our weaponry and our war — our tools of war?

SANDOVAL: You know, that’s a very complicated question. But I would say yes, we should. We should invest our money in our kids.

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: This is Alan in New York. Should we not have military?

SANDOVAL: I don’t think we should have a military. Absolutely.

COLMES: We shouldn’t have a military? Wait a minute. Hold on. The United States should not have a military?

SANDOVAL: What good has it done for us in the last five years? That’s right. What good has it done us…

What good has the military done us? Well, considering that San Francisco hasn’t been nuked, I’d say that the “useless” military hasn’t performed too badly. Continuing:

SANDOVAL: We think about the billions that we’re spending in Iraq right now, if we spend it on schools. We should not…

COLMES: The United States should not have a military?

SANDOVAL: That’s correct.

COLMES: Are you kidding me?

SANDOVAL: The United States should not have a military. All in all, we would be in much, much, much better shape.
…
COLMES: But to say that we shouldn’t have a military is absolutely absurd. It’s incredible. That’s a ridiculous fringe point of view.

HANNITY: That’s exactly what I was thinking, Alan. Welcome to San Francisco.

SANDOVAL: If you’re saying that we don’t have a right to defend ourselves that’s different from we shouldn’t have a military.

COLMES: What do you want to defend ourselves — what do you want to defend ourselves with?

SANDOVAL: Well, you got cops. It’s called the Coast Guard. There’s lots of things different.

COLMES: You want to send cops to defend our shores if we’re attacked? You want to send cops overseas if we’re attacked? Cops?

Maybe we could send firefighters to fight the bad guys with fire hoses? Oh, wait! That would look too much like the Jim Crow days in the South, and it may hurt terrorists’ (or the ACLU’s, or UW’s student government’s) feelings! No, scratch that idea. Continuing:

COLMES: I don’t. Actually, Gerardo, you don’t know anything about what I stand for if you can say that. I’ve been one of the most outspoken people against this administration and the war in Iraq.

But that doesn’t mean we as Democrats hate the military or don’t want to defend this country. And I’m amaze you could get on national television and say we shouldn’t have a military in America?

SANDOVAL: Well, that’s the way I think a lot of people feel here in San Francisco.

Sandoval is right, and Alan Colmes is wrong. A lot of people (probably most of them) in San Francisco feel the same way as this Sandoval nitwit, and contrary to what Colmes says, it’s proof that Democrats do indeed loathe the military and have little interest in defending this country. Colmes is probably dismayed that such a rare honest look into the left’s mentality was on public display, for all the world to see.

Like Hannity said: “Welcome to San Francisco” indeed. And the left wants us to trust them with national security? I’d trust Ted Kennedy to be my chauffeur before I’d trust the left to manage defense and security issues!

February 22, 2006 Posted by crushliberalism | Uncategorized | 1 Comment