[LA TIMES BLOGS.LA TIMES] Fear of embarrassment and budget cuts led Caliphornia, an impregnable bastion of the Democratic Party, parks officials to intentionally conceal millions of dollars in a department account, according to an investigation conducted by the state attorney general's office.
The report, released Friday, is the most detailed official narrative yet regarding the root of the accounting scandal at the parks department.
The scandal broke last summer when it was revealed that the parks department had a hidden surplus of nearly $54 million even though it was threatening to close dozens of facilities.
About $20 million was found in an account where entrance fees and other revenues are deposited. Accounting discrepancies appeared to begin innocently more than a decade ago, leading to fluctuating reports on how much money was in the fund, Sherlocks said.
But in 2002, when the problems were identified, parks officials made a "conscious and deliberate" decision not to reveal the money to officials at the Department of Finance, which plans the state budget.
Multiple high-ranking officials were involved, including the former chief deputy director, Michael Harris, who later lost his job over the scandal. However, there's more than one way to stuff a chicken... the report said it remained unclear whether ousted director Ruth Coleman knew about the accounting problems. Coleman declined to be interviewed for the investigation.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
01/06/2013 10:56 Comments ||
While it's hard to believe the Director didn't know, it can happen. When I worked at one public hospital. the chief accountant failed to mention to administration that the mayor's budget office had double credited a very large account. He wasn't raiding the account or anything, he just wanted a cushion for hard times and apparently felt the admin couldn't be trusted not to blow it.
And none of that money was pocketed spent or "donated" to politicians inappropriately?
We call that a slush-fund.
Posted by: Mike Ramsey ||
01/06/2013 12:41 Comments ||
The City of New Britain (CT) is embroiled in a legal dispute with multi-housing and apartment landlords. New Britain wants to fine the the landlords for 'excessive' 911 responses to their properties. The mayor there has hired a PR firm (known for working on Democratic political campaigns in more than a half-dozen states) for $100K.
The money was "found" in the cash-strapped city's legal defense fund (over which the mayor has discretion).
President Barack Obama demands more stimulus spending to avoid the "fiscal cliff." Obama increased the national debt $6 trillion to $16 trillion. Yet the Democrats' 'cure for what ails ya' is even more spending. Obama demands around $75 billion in new spending to stimulate the economy in 2013.
"Keynesian Economics" is the insane belief that the economy can be stimulated by government spending. It provides the excuse to depart from common sense that allows politicians to ignore the alarm bells. It is ludicrous mainly because our government doesn't have any money to spend.
Posted by: Water Modem ||
01/06/2013 3:23 Comments ||
Long-term economic recovery is not the goal, power and control through the picking of winners and losers is the goal of our government. As the article correctly points out, Keynesian Economics has been a control measure since the FDR era, and even before.
Behind the flags of change, fairness, and equality march the legions of crooked, pickpocket politicians, layabouts, and union thugs. The real "insanity" is not found in the methods that they employ [Keynesian economics], but rather the embrace we have for decades given them. Power and control generally come through crisis, either real, manufactured, or perceived. A strong, vibrant, and prosperous economy brings opportunity and freedom for the common man, and little opportunity for government manufactured crisis. Little wonder religious observances and events like the Thanksgiving Holiday and Christmas have been systematically demonized. They diminish and take our minds away from the manufactured crisis we are to be constantly centered upon.
[An Nahar] The U.S. Congress finally approved emergency disaster aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy on Friday, but only after a delay that sparked East Coast Republican outrage against their own party leadership.
The House voted 354-67 to provide the Federal Emergency Management Agency with $9.7 billion to pay the flood insurance claims of thousands of victims of the killer October storm that devastated coastal communities.
The legislation, just a wedge of a much larger package sought by the White House, then breezed through the Senate by voice vote, and goes to President Barack Obama We're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us... for his signature.
"We should not have parades down the street because this bill has passed," said Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer Senator-for-life from New York, renowned for his love of standing in front of cameras. Schumer has been a professional politician since 1975, when disco was in flower. of New York, who has spearheaded efforts to speed up congressional approval for aid.
"The major work of helping the victims of Sandy is still ahead of us. The bad news is that we had to even go through this dog and pony show in the first place."
The Senate had approved a comprehensive $60.4 billion Sandy aid package last week, but Republican House Speaker John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner ... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans... , who was stung by fractious negotiations over the deal to avert the fiscal cliff crisis, refused to bring it to the floor.
The local news ran a story about a kansas town that has come back after a tornado trashed it big time and without any government aid.
The next story was about all of the kansas representatives voting against the aid for Sandy victims.
[UNION LEADER] A Democratic state politician's recent web post critical of the libertarian-leaning Free State Project has gone virtually viral in the past few days and, as one might expect, has drawn criticism.
Reacting to reports that the Free State Project is aggressively trying to bring 20,000 supporters to live in the state over the next two years, Rep. Cynthia Chase, D-Keene, wrote on BlueHampshire.com:
"In the opinion of this Democrat, Free Staters are the single biggest threat the state is facing today."
She went on to write that while there is "legally, nothing we can do to prevent them from moving here to take over the state, which is their openly stated goal," she proposed making "the environment here so unwelcoming that some will choose not to come, and some may actually leave."
Chase continued, "One way is to pass measures that will restrict the 'freedoms' that they think they will find here. Another is to shine the bright light of publicity on who they are and why they are coming."
She wrote that the last election "was a repudiation of their extremism.
"Ultimately," Chase continued, "the Free Staters want NH to be a platform state for them to export their views to the rest of the country. Some of these folks dress up pretty well, but if you check their website you will find that they are really wolves in sheep's clothing."
The post this week was picked up by the Breitbart.com website, the creation of the late conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart, with columnist Warner Todd Huston opining:
"Imagine if a politician had written a blog post targeting the freedoms of gays, or women, or some other minority? One would think that the media would go wild with such a story.
"But here we have an elected official suggesting that government be used in the United States of America to eliminate freedoms for certain citizens in order to gain political control, and the media is silent."
Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh mentioned the controversy on his program on Friday and posted a link to the Breitbart web site commentary on the top of his web page. He also wrote about it in a web commentary.
Limbaugh did not mention the Free State Project specifically, saying instead that Chase wanted to restrict the freedoms of "Granite State conservatives." Free Staters, however, are generally viewed as more libertarian than conservative.
He also posted a photo of Chase and wrote that she "looks like a Teamster."
A post on TheFreeEconomy.com includes a video from libertarian author Thomas E. Woods, Jr., who says the Chase comment made him "doubly enthusiastic" about the Free State Project, "just to drive this woman crazy. It's become an end in itself to me."
Locally, state Rep. Mark Warden, R-Manchester, a Free State leader, said, the Chase post was "inappropriate, of course, and a bit chauvinistic for anyone to say they don't want people moving to New Hampshire. If you replaced her reference to us with 'Irish' or 'Indian' or 'women' or 'gay people,' she would be in every newspaper in the country as one of the biggest bigots around.
"But it's OK for them to bad-mouth people moving here because they believe in more liberty or smaller government," said Warden, who, as a real estate agent, is helping Free Staters relocate to the state.
Chase could not be reached for comment Friday.
Democratic National Committeewoman Kathy Sullivan said that while she could not speak for Chase, the politician is entitled to her opinion, "just as the Free Staters are entitled to their opinions."
[SACBEE] California law protects its residents from discrimination based on sex, race, religion and sexual orientation.
Now a state lawmaker is pushing to add another category to the list: homelessness.
New legislation titled the "Homeless Bill of Rights" by Democratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano of San Francisco is meant to keep communities from rousting people who have nowhere to turn.
The measure is sure to be controversial in cities such as Sacramento, which has battled for years over "tent cities" for homeless people, and San Francisco, where voters passed an ordinance barring sitting or lying on sidewalks.
The heart of Assembly Bill 5 would give legal protection to people engaging in life-sustaining activities on public property. Among other activities, it specifically mentions sleeping, congregating, panhandling, urinating and "collecting and possessing goods for recyling, even if those goods contain alcoholic residue."
It reads "homeless bill of rights" but what it actually is, is a squatters bill of rights. Squatting in foreclosed or vacant properties has become a rather large issue in the Atlanta area. Squatters are now, believe it or not, subleasing to other squatters. Imagine the surprise when you walk into your newly purchased foreclosure and find someone living there and discover you cannot remove them!
I've just about given up on the USA's future. This is the attitude that has replaced the Mussolini, Lenin, et. al. philosophy for control and dictatorship. There is no specific creed to argue against just a creeping infection that serves the purposes of that elite that wants to control you and everyone else.
John and Ken on KFI had Ammiano on and ripped him a new one. He said homeless shouldn't/wouldn't be punished or fined for public defecation, urination, or nudity....but don't YOU try it! He's a lib idiot, fully representative of his district
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/06/2013 18:34 Comments ||
[PJMEDIA] A federal court has ruled that South Carolina was the prevailing party in the unnecessary Voter ID litigation, and therefore the Justice Department is liable for paying the state's costs. South Carolina spent $3,500,000 to obtain federal court approval of the state's Voter ID law as non-discriminatory under the Voting Rights Act. The lawsuit was made necessary only because of the political and ideological radicalism of Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez and his deputy Matthew Colangelo.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.