ICYMI - links from around the web

There's been so much going on this week that I thought an ICYMI (in case you missed it) column was in order ... so here we go:

* Did you know that school officials have an "obligation" to ensure that property taxes that fund schools are "fair"??? Nope, I didn't realize that was in their job description either. But that's exactly what a representative of school administrators and boards told an Ohio senate committee this week.

The premise is that they *must* challenge the values of properties in order to ensure that fairness, but is that really the case? As Lucas County Auditor Anita Lopez says, if that were true, wouldn't they also challenge property values that are too high? Turns out, they don't.

Read the whole thing at Ohio Watchdog

* If you were asked to describe a political action committee, would you include a group of people who get together to talk about politics? How about if one of the people in the group was a blogger? Probably not your idea of a PAC - but that's exactly what Ohio thinks is a PAC and they want a Cleveland-area blogger to register and follow all the rules associated with being a PAC - and pay the fines/fees for not already doing so.

This could have ramifications for any group in the state that discusses politics, regardless of political perspective. So the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review what it calls the "nation's strictest PAC regulations."

Read more at Ohio Watchdog

* The Farm Bill - though since it's really 80% food stamps so the name is quite misleading - is pending before Congress. Here's some really interesting information you need to know, especially since the bogus 'food stamp challenge' is back. Funny that this ridiculous challenge seems to be a regular event every time the bill is up for vote...but I digress.

Take a look at this chart. Do you really think we should borrow even more money to fund a 56% increase in spending for the Farm Bill?

* If you think George Orwell got it right in his book 1984, you should read this article about Herbert Spencer who wrote The Man Versus The State - in 1884.

There are some really terrific quotes from him and his book like:

Regulations have been made in yearly growing numbers, restraining the citizen in directions where his actions were previously unchecked, and compelling actions which previously he might perform or not as he liked; and at the same time heavier public burdens … have further restricted his freedom, by lessening that portion of his earnings which he can spend as he pleases, and augmenting the portion taken from him to be spent as public agents please.

The more numerous public instrumentalities become, the more is there generated in citizens the notion that everything is to be done for them, and nothing by them. Every generation is made less familiar with the attainment of desired ends by individual actions or private agencies; until, eventually, governmental agencies come to be thought of as the only available agencies.

and in a nod to the 'you didn't build that' meme:

It is not to the State that we owe the multitudinous useful inventions from the spade to the telephone; it is not the State which made possible extended navigation by a developed astronomy; it was not the State which made the discoveries in physics, chemistry, and the rest, which guide modern manufacturers; it was not the State which devised the machinery for producing fabrics of every kind, for transferring men and things from place to place, and for ministering in a thousand ways to our comforts. The worldwide transactions conducted in merchants' offices, the rush of traffic filling our streets, the retail distributing system which brings everything within easy reach and delivers the necessaries of life daily at our doors, are not of governmental origin. All these are results of the spontaneous activities of citizens, separate or grouped.

You might not have time to read the whole book, but this article about it will give you a good overview - and might surprise you at how predictable the move to tyranny is.

Could George Orwell have imagined what's going on today?

Saturday marks the 64th anniversary of the publication of George Orwell's book 1984:

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a dystopian novel by George Orwell published in 1949. The Oceanian province of Airstrip One is a world of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, and public mind control, dictated by a political system euphemistically named English Socialism (Ingsoc) under the control of a privileged Inner Party elite that persecutes all individualism and independent thinking as thoughtcrimes. Their tyranny is headed by Big Brother, the quasi-divine Party leader who enjoys an intense cult of personality, but who may not even exist. Big Brother and the Party justify their rule in the name of a supposed greater good. The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a member of the Outer Party who works for the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue), which is responsible for propaganda and historical revisionism. His job is to re-write past newspaper articles so that the historical record always supports the current party line. Smith is a diligent and skillful worker, but he secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother.

With what's been going on lately, I can't help but wonder if we're there yet.

We have a media that is more interested in protecting their favored politician than in actually reporting the truth, often ignoring what should be major stories because they reflect negatively on their object of affection.

We have people calling for greater gun control as a means of preventing gun violence, yet Chicago - a city with gun-control laws these individuals would love to impose upon the rest of the nation - has one of the highest gun violence records in the country. How do these people not see the correlation?

We have children being expelled from school and even arrested because they have a toy gun or just drew a picture of one!

We have a monstrous government so completely out of control that the even President Barack Obama's former senior adviser David Axelrod says it's too big:

The government is simply too big for President Obama to keep track of all the wrongdoing taking place on his watch, his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, told MSNBC. “Part of being president is there’s so much beneath you that you can’t know because the government is so vast,” he explained.

The IRS targeted tea party and patriot groups. The Department of Justice bugged the phones of the press.

Now comes this from the Washington Free Beacon:

Contracted employees at an Environmental Protection Agency warehouse in Landover, Md., used surplus equipment to set up a gym and personal television spaces, a report by the agency inspector general released Monday said.
...
“The warehouse contained surplus gym equipment arranged to create exercise space for warehouse employees,” the report states. “The weights, machines, exercise equipment, and overall exercise area appeared to be well maintained. The exercise space was in excess of 30 by 45 feet. Carpet tiles from EPA inventory were placed on the floor in the gym area. This area has electrical power through an EPA power strip and provides music through other agency inventory items. Agency steno pads were used for recording workouts.”

That wasn't the only EPA story to make the news. How gargantuan does an agency have to be to give a fake employee numerous certificates of award?

“Richard Windsor” may have only been an alias for former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson, but that didn’t stop him from being awarded numerous certificates for ethics and records management.

The EPA awarded certificates naming Jackson/Windsor a “scholar of ethical behavior.” Jackson, under her secret alias, was also awarded certificates for completing training modules on email records management.

Jackson set up a secret email address under the pseudonym “Richard Windsor.” The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Chris Horner first discovered it in November.

Thank goodness for non-traditional media so we can know about these things, because we aren't going to get it from what passes for today's press corps - especially when you consider the latest from Erick Erickson.

The Democratic National Committee issued a memo saying Republicans were 'overreaching' when it comes to the IRS and other scandals. That was Friday - and by Monday that was the term being used by the press and others defending Pres. Obama and his administration.

We know the majority of the main stream media parrot whatever the Democrats want repeated, but apparently they're oblivious to how transparent they've become.

Add to this the recent court ruling that police can take a DNA swab of arrestees because it's just like taking fingerprints. And another court ruled that Google must turn over customer records to the FBI upon demand and without a warrant:

A federal judge has ruled that Google Inc. must comply with the FBI's warrantless demands for customer data, rejecting the company's argument that the government's practice of issuing so-called national security letters to telecommunication companies, Internet service providers, banks and others was unconstitutional and unnecessary.

Maybe it's not 1984 at all. I'm not sure that even Orwell could have imagined all this would become the norm.

PC? or not PC?

Our Lucas County Commissioners have added another stone on the path of political correctness by joining the effort to ban the r-word.

The commissioners proclaimed yesterday "Spread the Word to End the Use of the R-Word Day" as part of a larger nationwide campaign against derogatory forms of the word "retarded."

The national campaign, sponsored by the Special Olympics and spread through an online pledge at r-word.org, received recognition at schools and local governments from coast to coast.

To be quite honest, I haven't heard anyone use the term 'retard,' as suggested in the article, in decades and then it was by kids on the playground and had nothing to do with children who have legitimate developmental disabilities.

And it should come as no surprise to us that people can be hurt when you call them names. Isn't that just plain common sense - and isn't that the entire purpose of calling people names - to attempt to hurt them in some way?

Admittedly, this tactic is usually done by people who are either intent on being cruel or are lacking in their ability to present an argument in a logical, fact-based, coherent way. And the usual response to such actions is either to stoop to their level (Oh yeah? Well you're a poopy face!) or acknowledge that you are dealing with someone of limited abilities who might actually qualify under the term and walk away.

And note that the very purpose - to reduce or eliminate 'derogatory' uses of the word retarded - means that there are non-derogatory uses of the word. So this isn't about the word itself, it's about politeness and, since we no longer pay attention to manners but turn them into a political action, trying to control people's behavior so no one is offended.

But as a feel-good measure to get a bit of publicity, it's a pretty harmless resolution. However...

As part of the article, there is this line:

"...commissioners want the public to know is especially hurtful and offensive to those with intellectual disabilities."

My immediate thought was that 'those with intellectual disabilities' might describe many of our local elected officials.

But I couldn't help but think of George Orwell's 1984:

"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?... Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?... The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact, there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."

"The thought police would get him just the same. He had committed--would have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper--the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it."

"From where Winston stood it was just possible to read, picked out on its white face in elegant lettering, the three slogans of the Party:
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH."

Please don't misunderstand - I'm not equating the efforts to change the name of the Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Board to the Party in the book, but I am concerned about the growing efforts to control the language.

And this is just the latest example, though it is nowhere near as insidious as calling an act of terrorism a "man-caused disaster."