2
1
View Full Article
Mike Shedlock

Mike Shedlock

Mike Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for Sitka Pacific Capital Management.

Most Recent Articles

Join the Debate
44 Comments So Far
« Previous1Next »
Chris from Kalifornia Wrote: Oct 18, 2012 1:47 PM
This is an illegal conspiracy to break the law and that makes it a felony. The mere act of making the suggestion is all it takes. If the companies fail to follow the law they will not have a legal leg to stand on. Even if they have it in writing, an illegal contract is unenforceable. Any contract that requires breaking the law is an illegal contract. I worked for many years as a federal government contract specialist and I know this is factual. I had to turn down more than one low bid because the conditions of the contract and their set up would have required them to break the law to fulfill portions of the contract.

What the Obama administration has proposed is clearly illegal.
Flag as Offensive
Chris from Kalifornia Wrote: Oct 18, 2012 1:48 PM
Not sure why this column has been reposted but since it is, I felt it worthwhile to repost my thoughts about the legality of the Federal Government's actions.
Flag as Offensive
Dorothy152 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 6:12 PM
I do find myself wondering about the value of 'mail in voting'. I wonder how many 'filled out' mail in applications are submitted by those entitled to vote but someone else completes the form and just lets the 'voter' put his X or signature on it. There is probably no good way to control that problem other than going back to having a voter appear in person at the polling station and identify themselves. Does make one question today the value of one's vote doesn't it! Whose idea was 'mail in voting' .
Seems it should be available only to those absent from the country or too old or disabled to get to the voting station! When I registered all I was asked to provide was my name and address!
Flag as Offensive
AmIBlue Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 5:53 PM
...another case of skewing the unemployment numbers....as o said ' tell Achminiajad to wait till after the election...'. Guess (know!) this is what he is saying again, '...no layoffs till after the election.....I'll even pay the salaries, benefits, et.' ARE we really going to break the law and allow this??
Flag as Offensive
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:43 PM
What is it with Democrats stealing from taxpayers to help Democrat campaigns? In Mass., we have Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren, whose daughter heads a liberal organization that sued the state over some 1993 law that requires welfare recipient have the opportunity to register to vote at the welfare office (guess it's too much work to go to town hall like everyone else). The state attorney general's office (run by a Democrat) settled the case in record time instead of fighting it like they do with everything else. The ridiculously generous settlement has them spending $275K of taxpayer money to mail voter registration forms to welgfare recipients (who mostly vote Democrat). They're trying to say it's "coincidence" that Warren's daughter...
Flag as Offensive
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:48 PM
... is involved; that it's "coincidence" that the Attorney General is a Democrat; that it's "coincidence" the law firm involved has the Democrat governor's wife as a partner; that it's "coincidence" for all this to happen just in time for the elections. I wonder if they would have been so eager to settle if it had been gun owners wanting to be able to register to vote when they go get their gun permits?

It was bad enough when they spent taxpayer money on those Occupy clowns, refusing to make them follow the same laws as everyone else. Why is it Democrats keep demanding more government and regulations, yet refuse to accept that those regulations apply to themselves?
Flag as Offensive
Unsudscribed Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 2:52 PM
Many Republican toadies like to say that all the Clinton administration defense cuts occurred in Bubba's first two years, before Newt Gingrich became Speaker of the House.

Let's see what Newt says about his National Security concerns in his 1994 'Contract with America', as seen below.

"The National Security Restoration Act"

"An act to prevent U.S. troops from serving under United Nations command unless the president determines it is necessary for the purposes of national security, to cut U.S. payments for UN peacekeeping operations."

Newt Gingrich and the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Base Realignment and Closure (or BRAC) Act in November of 1995.
Flag as Offensive
Moonbat Exterminator Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 12:59 PM
Team Obama is attepting by this offer to form a contract to perform an illegal act. I'm not a lawyer, but I know that such a contract is unenforceable and void. It's an open invitation for trial lawyers to sue the bejeezus out of these contractors and if those contractors try to seek the offered reimbursement, not a court in the land, well maybe the 9th Circus, would rule for the contractors. Also, the irony of asking companies to violate a Dem sopnsored law that the unions wanted is amazing, especially when you discover that the Dems want to extend the notification period from 60 to 90 days. I thought it was the job of the executive branch to enforce all laws on the books.
Flag as Offensive
Chris from Kalifornia Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 1:40 PM
You are absolutely right. This is an illegal conspiracy to break the law and that makes it a felony. The mere act of making the suggestion is all it takes. If the companies fail to follow the law they will not have a legal leg to stand on. Even if they have it in writing, an illegal contract is unenforceable. Any contract that requires breaking the law is an illegal contract. I worked for many years as a federal government contract specialist and I know this is factual. I had to turn down more than one low bid because the conditions of the contract and their set up would have required them to break the law to fulfill portions of the contract.

What the Obama administration has proposed is clearly illegal.
Flag as Offensive
K.R.2 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 7:35 PM
Hey, what's one more felony to this sorry @$$ bunch that is in charge now?
Flag as Offensive
SpaceVegetable Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:52 PM
Like all Democrats, they believe all that big government and regulation they're so fond of only applies to someone else. That's their favorite tactic. Blame someone else for everything, demand all manner of new regulations to apply to someone else, then tax someone else to pay for it.
Flag as Offensive
hitthedeck Wrote: Oct 11, 2012 2:21 AM
Moonbat, Obama has America's credit card and uses it like a drunk sailor in a cathouse. Its time to take it away from him and send him packing back to the hood where he can give classes on getting free stuff from the government.
Flag as Offensive
mflorest Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 11:24 AM
Anyone else seeing a common theme here besides me? An administration encouraging the breaking of laws as long as it benefits the Democrats?
Nothing to see here folks just move along!
Flag as Offensive
Blair31 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 10:37 AM
Could you imagine the faux outrage if this was Bush telling defense contractors to break the law?
Flag as Offensive
K.R.2 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 7:37 PM
If Obama had been Jerry Sandusky, it would have all been fine with the main stream media. There is something new and outrageous every day and not a contrary word is said.
Flag as Offensive
Charles R Anderson Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 9:52 AM
It has been pointed out that in years past, employment of 18 to 25 year olds has fallen drastically in September as students returned to college and gave up their summer jobs. Not this September or last September. I suspect three things are going on here. One is that these last two summers, many fewer students were able to find jobs in the summer, so the student drop in employment in September was much less due to them returning to college. Another effect is that with college expenses having increased much more than family incomes have for many years, many more students may have very part-time work-aid assignments at their colleges as part of their student-aid packages. Now the BLs may be counting these students as part-time employees.
Flag as Offensive
OldTimer Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 9:30 AM
When "liberal' state and local elected and appointed officials tell their law en forcement officers to ignore or disobey federal law and Mr. Obama follows suit by telling INS agents to ignore or disobey laws, and fights virtually every effort to get the invasion by illegal aliens under control, why should anyone believe he would not find other ways to break the law?

In addition, why have we not heard more about Article I Section 7 of the Constitution as relates the seeming UNCONSTITUTIONALITY of the revenue increasing aspects of 'ObamaCare' which was declared a 'tax' by the Supreme Court? After all, didn't that aspect originate in the Senate, noit the House?
Flag as Offensive
John2561 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 9:21 AM
Don't forget the unions are hiding this from their members also.
Flag as Offensive
Fuzzy^57 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 8:20 AM
Obama has MISUSED "Executive Power" just as if he was a dictator. Obama should never have been allowed to abuse this power as I blame the Congress for permitting it. Obama should have been called out for this grave misuse and also hiring 44 plus czars in authoritative positions, without Congress vetting these criminal, communist friends of Obama. Obama is nothing but a FRAUD from day 1 and should be investigated fully, as ALL his actions are more than likely ILLEGAL and against the Constitution of the United States of Republic!!
Flag as Offensive
2004done Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 12:11 PM
I must vehemently disagree: "as if?" other than that, ... spot on!
Flag as Offensive
K.R.2 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 7:37 PM
Yes, there is no "as if".
Flag as Offensive
Fuzzy2 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:01 PM
I second Fuzzy^57's sentiment.
Flag as Offensive
justplainhadit Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 7:06 AM
Who will pay these fines when Obama is kicked out of the Whitehouse and this scheme is proven to be illegal and it is deemed that the government is not liable for the referenced fines?:

Flag as Offensive
Icthelite Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 11:08 AM
From those who always pay for the hallow promises made by our leaders on Capitol Hill.
WE THE PEOPLE
Flag as Offensive
T.C.7 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 6:05 AM
Flagged all posts by the lunatic, deuxieme
Flag as Offensive
Jay Wye Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 11:43 AM
roger,wilco.
Flag as Offensive
absinthe48 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 5:47 AM
Surely this is an impeachable offense, the president offering taxpayer money as a bribe to federal contractors in order to induce them to break a federal law. A "high crime and misdemeanor" if I ever saw one.
Flag as Offensive
Icthelite Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 11:11 AM
There have been severaal impeachable offenses our congress could have acted on but didn't. Don't hld your breath for anything to happen here.
Flag as Offensive
SpiritInterface Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 5:16 AM
This is typical of the CORRUPT Obama administration. They encourage businesses to violate federal law and promise to use federal funds to pay for the legal costs. Totally screwing both union and non-union employees just so the unemployment numbers don't spike just before the election. And the MSM wonders why the people on the street think that the Jobs numbers are cooked.
Flag as Offensive
Icthelite Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 11:13 AM
And all the time our Congress is leaning back in their comfortable chairs twiddling their thumbs.
Flag as Offensive
gdoran Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:19 AM
This is another abuse of power another unlawful act by a person that should have already been impeached for not upholding his oath our laws as written and trampling our liberty and our rights , our Flag and the constitution someone in the justice dept needs to arrest the dictator
Flag as Offensive
gdoran Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 4:19 AM
This is another abuse of power another unlawful act by a person that should have already been impeached for not upholding his oath our laws as written and trampling our liberty and our rights , our Flag and the constitution someone in the justice dept needs to arrest the dictator
Flag as Offensive
alieber Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 2:35 AM
I think this is despicable and I hope these employees are paying attention and it shows these defense employers are in the tank for obama, it is just another example of obama's blatent disregard for the law and constitution and I hope that he gets booted back to chicago
Flag as Offensive
American1st Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 6:19 AM
I kept hoping the Pubs would bring charges against him before the election so he and the Worst Lady would not go back to Chicago to continue to live the life they have become accustomed to ON OUR DIME! We will have to pay through the nose for them after they're gone.
Flag as Offensive
Dorothy152 Wrote: Oct 10, 2012 6:22 PM
Yes. It's time to change the law and provide for an ex-President an allowance based on his net income for 4 years only after they leave office plus security if found necessary. They all are quite wealthy and should not be living on the public taxpayers. Carter, Bush, Clinton, Bush. Obama, are all quite rich!
Obama is young enough to get a 'real job'!
Flag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »
New comments on this article - click to refresh