The Ridgewood Blog Brings a Free Market Laissez-faire Point of View to Local, New Jersey State and National Issues.
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ, Tim Wu, the former Biden White House “antitrust expert” known for coining the term “net neutrality,” has sparked a heated debate with his recent op-ed in the New York Times. The piece, headlined in a way that underscores the apprehensions of the progressive left, addresses what Wu sees as the judiciary’s mismanagement of the First Amendment.
Throughout most of 2020 the state has been working in concert with large corporations to take away basic rights. This could technically be called Fascism or Corporatism. But the fuel of this fire, unmistakably, is Marxism.
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Trenton NJ, Governor Phil Murphy today signed Executive Order No. 180. The Order extends the Public Health Emergency that was declared on March 9, 2020 through Executive Order No. 103, which was previously extended on April 7, May 6, June 4, July 2, and August 1. Under the Emergency Health Powers Act, a declared public health emergency expires after 30 days unless renewed.
Continue reading Governor Murphy Extends Public Health Emergency in New Jersey
Updated on June 9, 2017 at 10:53 PMPosted on June 9, 2017 at 2:35 PM
BY MARK DI IONNO
Columnist, The Star-Ledger
Grant Berardo wore his navy blue “TRUMP Make America Great Again” T-shirt to picture day last fall at Wall Township High School.
Nobody told him not to. And since he is only a junior, there was no picture-day dress code.
The proofs came back, with the picture the way he posed for it, Trump shirt and all. His picture day image is also used on the electronic student ID system, with Trump intact.
https://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2017/06/students_trump_shirt_black-out_in_high_school_year.html
You’re using that word wrong.
“Tolerance” as a social virtue is a relatively recent concept and specifically refers to the quality that is the opposite of bigotry.
“Tolerance” is not the same as niceness or politeness, though it can accompany those traits.
People who stand for tolerance stand against bigotry. And people who stand against bigotry may absolutely be angry, and even rude. They may have no time or patience for bigotry. They are still standing against bigotry. The concept of tolerance does not include “tolerating” bigotry.
Please remember this before you again pull out the tired trope of “you’re not putting up with my bigotry, therefore you’re intolerant.”
Posted by Jonathan Levin Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 11:05am
Twitter, an invaluable news aggregator when properly run and used, has seemingly taken aim at conservatives and those advocating conservative causes.
In early January, Twitter stripped Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos (@Nero on Twitter) of his “verification,” saying he violated the anti-harassment Terms of Service.
A verified account means the user has a little blue checkmark next to his or her user name. It is Twitter’s way of affirming to all other users that this is, in fact, the person he or she claims to be. It sounds like a small thing, but Twitter, like so much social media, is rife with accounts purporting to be or that just look like a real public figure.
That verification checkmark tells all the other users that a particular account is the real thing. Having a verified account can be a big draw and boost followers who are otherwise reluctant to be suckered or drawn in by fakes. Stripping verification takes that mark of legitimacy away. It is also a sort of peculiar way to punish violations of terms of service. Assuming @Nero actually violated the terms of service, is the account somehow no longer Yiannopoulos’s?
Of course not. More important, it is not at all obvious that @Nero violated the terms of service at all. Stipulate that he is a troll who relishes destroying the Left’s sacred cows and laughs at the resulting discomfiture. Stipulate even that it’s really not nice and consciously deprives people of their “safe spaces.” So what? Five minutes on twitter reveals death threats by and against every possible demographic. Terror accounts proliferate. Anti-Semitism is rampant.
Leaving these accounts untouched but de-verifying a public figure like @Nero for violating the Terms of Service in the course of his public persona is nonsensical. Other Twitter methods for stifling anti-PC thought have come to light.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2016/02/is-twitter-silencing-conservatives/
Obama to impose new gun control curbs next week
By Juliet Eilperin January 1 at 3:35 PM
HONOLULU — President Obama will press ahead with a set of executive actions on guns next week despite growing concerns in the U.S. over terrorism that have dampened some Americans’ enthusiasm for tighter firearms restrictions, according to several individuals briefed on the matter.
The president will meet with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch on Monday to finalize a series of new gun control measures, according to several individuals who asked for anonymity because the plan was not yet public, and announce his package of proposals shortly after that.
One of the main proposals Obama is poised to adopt–expanding new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers -enjoys overwhelming public support: a Quinnipiac University poll in December found 89 percent supported background checks at gun shows and for online sales.
But Obama’s executive actions also come as Americans have become more fearful about the prospect of terrorist strikes and have voiced an openness to having ordinary citizens carry guns.
“This administration views the Internet as a threat.” Senator Ted Cruz
Oct. 19, 2015 9:57pm Oliver Darcy
Ted Cruz said Sunday evening that the “threats to Internet freedom” have “never been greater” and could have the potential of affecting independent online news outlets like the Drudge Report.
Speaking to TheBlaze Sunday evening in Dallas, Texas, the Republican presidential candidate respondedto reports that Congressional review of digital copyright law could threaten aggregator news websites.
“I think threats to Internet freedom continue growing,” Cruz said. “This administration views the Internet as a threat.”
https://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/19/ted-cruz-says-he-cannot-overstate-the-threats-to-internet-freedom-independent-news-websites-like-drudge/
An instructive example out of Kenya (and a few from our own backyard).
Elizabeth Nolan Brown|Oct. 20, 2015 8:00 am
One of the most baffling things about the newfangled “liberal” push for laws against so-called hate speech is their inability to imagine these bans backfiring. In their zeal to punish those who spread sexist, racist, transphobic, or otherwise out-of-fashion speech, they seem to forget that history has a bad track record of using censorship to suppress religious, social, sexual, and political minorities. And that’s exactly what’s been happening in Kenya, according to Nairobi-based newspaper The Star.
“There is growing evidence that the government is using prosecution for hate speech as a tool to silence its opposition critics,” writes John Onyando. “The norm is incendiary speech by pro-government politicians and online activists going unchecked while law enforcement agencies enthusiastically pounce on the mildest expressions by critics.”
The agency tasked with prosecuting hate speech in Kenya is called the National Cohesion and Integration Commission (NCIC); it was formed in 2008 to address ethnic conflicts in the nation. Onyando asserts that NCIC has ignored the bulk of complaints it has received and acts “more like an arm of the ruling coalition” than an independent agency, honing in only on those who speak out against the Jubilee Alliance, a coalition established in 2013 to support the candidacy of current President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto.
https://reason.com/blog/2015/10/20/how-hate-speech-laws-work-in-practice
file photo by Boyd Loving
“What Would Yogi Do? Guidelines for Athletes, Coaches and Parents”author John McCarthy will speak to the Community Relations Advisory Board of Ridgewood and Glen Rock Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 7:30 P.M. in The Village of Ridgewood Municipal Building, 131 North Maple Ave. Ridgewood, NJ in the first floor Garden Room.
Professor John McCarthy provides specific strategies to get athletes, coaches and parents on the same page. Referring to the three entities of sports as co-dependent parties, McCarthy uses Yogi Berra’s career and his own life experiences to illustrate how sports done the right way can enhance everyone’s life.
John McCarthy is an adjunct Professor at Montclair State teaching, “Coaching Principles and Problems,” in addition to, “Sports Psychology,” and “Social Problems in Sports.” McCarthy is a former two-sport, first team, nonpublic All-State athlete. He is co-founder of the Institute for Coaching.
The Advisory Board has been working to expand its, Respect, Give it to Get it Campaign by encouraging a community wide dialogue regarding civility.
All Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public and provide a safe environment for community members experiencing or witnessing bias-related crime to be heard.
Individuals working or living within the Ridgewood Environs who have experienced bias intimidation, housing discrimination, racism, sexism, or an injustice based on their sexual orientation are urged to contact the board at crabnj@gmail.com.
The Community Relations Advisory Board, Appointed by the Mayors of Ridgewood and Glen Rock was created to overcome bias attitudes toward persons or groups based on their race, color, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or disability. The all-volunteer Board meets the third Wednesday of each month. Visit us on Facebook @ Community Relations Advisory Board of Ridgewood and Glen Rock.
When a group confuses its politics with moral doctrine, it may have trouble comprehending how a decent human could disagree with its positions.
David Harsanyi | September 25, 2015
This week, for example, while thinking about the pope’s take on global warming, I tweeted out this comment: “Celebrate climate change, an externality of the greatest poverty destroying program in the history of mankind.” There is plenty to disagree with in my observation, I admit. Although I believe what I wrote to be true, I sent it out partly to elicit exactly the sort of reaction my tweet got—with one person calling me a psychopath (a Slate writer, not some anonymous critic) and another calling me sociopathic, among other things. I don’t mind the insults (perversely, in fact, I sort of enjoy them), but I do mind that the debate is over.
Conservatives may be ethically compromised, uninformed or—if liberals are in a generous mood—mentally unstable, but they can’t be for real. At least, that’s the sense I increasingly get from the left these days. Blame it on social media.
When a group confuses its politics with moral doctrine, it may have trouble comprehending how a decent human could disagree with its positions. This is probably why people confuse lecturing with debating and why so many liberals can bore into the deepest nooks of my soul to ferret out all those motivations but can’t waste any time arguing about the issue itself.
Are you also corrupt? Probably. Bought off by big oil, big food or big something or other? Washington is teeming with Manchurian candidates, because no one could possibly be this malicious on his own. Why should liberals debate a point when they can debate your imaginary sugar daddy? Why else would conservatives “hate workers”? Why would they “bet against America”? Why do they want to destroy democracy? Why would conservatives vote against their own interests? Someone pays them to lie.
https://reason.com/archives/2015/09/25/liberals-are-done-debating
By Lauretta Brown | July 23, 2015 | 3:32 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) – “In America we cannot have a group say, if you don’t agree with me, I will silence you and make sure you cannot operate,” Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) said on Tuesday in reference to preserving religious liberty for faith-based groups in light of the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize homosexual marriage.
“In a private institution, if you remove tax-exempt status and you remove the opportunity to have student loans and you remove the Pell grants, you’ve shut down that institution and it was a volitional act to say: you disagree with me, I will close you down,” Lankford said.
“That is something we’ve got to be able to guard against, to say, can people have religious belief?” said the senator. “That affects how they hire and what they do.”
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/sen-lankford-religious-liberty-we-cannot-have-group-say-if-you-dont?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cns&utm_term=facebook&utm_content=facebook&utm_campaign=n-lankford-religious-liberty
JULY 22, 2015
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that confirm that the IRS used donor lists to tax-exempt organizations to target those donors for audits. The documents also show IRS officials specifically highlighted how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce may come under “high scrutiny” from the IRS. The IRS produced the records in a Freedom of Information lawsuit seeking documents about selection of individuals for audit-based application information on donor lists submitted by Tea Party and other 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organizations (Judicial Watch v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:15-cv-00220)).
A letter dated September 28, 2010, then-Democrat Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) informs then-IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman: “ I request that you and your agency survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5) and (c)(6) organizations …” In reply, in a letter dated February 17, 2011, Shulman writes: “In the work plan of the Exempt Organizations Division, we announced that beginning in FY2011, we are increasing our focus on section 501(c)(4), (5) and (6) organizations.”
In 2010, after receiving Baucus’s letter, the IRS considered the issue of auditing donors to 501(c)(4) organizations, alleging that a 35 percent gift tax would be due on donations in excess of $13,000. The documents show that the IRS wanted to cross-check donor lists from 501(c)(4) organizations against gift tax filings and commence audits against taxpayers based on this information.
A gift tax on contributions to 501(c)(4)’s was considered by most to be a dead letter since the IRS had never enforced the rule after the Supreme Court ruled that such taxes violated the First Amendment. The documents show that the IRS had not enforced the gift tax since 1982.
But then, in February 2011, at least five donors of an unnamed organization were audited.
The documents show that Crossroads GPS, associated with Republican Karl Rove, was specifically referenced by IRS officials in the context of applying the gift tax. Seemingly in response to the Crossroads focus, on April 20, IRS attorney Lorraine Gardner emails a 501(c)(4) donor list to former Branch Chief in the IRS’ Office of the Chief Counsel James Hogan. Later, this information is apparently shared with IRS Estate Gift and Policy Manager Lisa Piehl while Gardner seeks “information about any of the donors.”
Emails to and from Lorraine Gardner also suggested bias against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. An IRS official (whose name is redacted) emails Gardner on May 13, 2011, a blog post responding to the IRS targeting of political and other activities of 501(c)(4), (5) and (6) organizations:
Law Lets I.R.S. Seize Accounts on Suspicion, No Crime Required
By SHAILA DEWANOCT. 25, 2014
ARNOLDS PARK, Iowa — For almost 40 years, Carole Hinders has dished out Mexican specialties at her modest cash-only restaurant. For just as long, she deposited the earnings at a small bank branch a block away — until last year, when two tax agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had seized her checking account, almost $33,000.
The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes — in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report.
“How can this happen?” Ms. Hinders said in a recent interview. “Who takes your money before they prove that you’ve done anything wrong with it?”
The federal government does.
Using a law designed to catch drug traffickers, racketeers and terrorists by tracking their cash, the government has gone after run-of-the-mill business owners and wage earners without so much as an allegation that they have committed serious crimes. The government can take the money without ever filing a criminal complaint, and the owners are left to prove they are innocent. Many give up.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/law-lets-irs-seize-accounts-on-suspicion-no-crime-required.html?_r=0
New Jersey Cop: “Obama has decimated the freak’in Constitution, … so we don’t have to follow the Constitution.”
A shocking video shows a New Jersey cop responding to a complaint about corruption by asserting that law enforcement officers no longer need to follow the Constitution because it has already been decimated by President Obama.
Seeking to file a complaint about the Helmetta Regional Animal Shelter, Steve Wronko visited the Helmetta Police Department to air his grievances about the shelter falling prey to nepotism and corruption as a result of Helmetta Mayor Nancy Martin appointing her son Brandon Metz to head up the facility.
“I’ve made objections about what’s going on at the shelter over there,” Wronko tells the police officer, adding, “My first and fourth amendment rights were violated, my civil rights were violated.”
“Obama just decimated the freakin’ Constitution, so I don’t give a damn. If he doesn’t follow the Constitution, we don’t have to,” responds the cop, brazenly violating the oath he swore to uphold the Constitution.
The comment is self-evidently shocking, but it also provides an insight as to how corruption from the very top reaches all the way down to the bottom, providing law enforcement with a twisted form of justification for their unconstitutional activities.
At the end of the video, other police officers arrive to kick Wronko out of the building, with the cop who doesn’t give a “damn” about constitutional rights stating, “Either you get out or you’re gonna get locked up.”
“Maybe this instance, captured on film for the whole world to see, will serve as a wake up call to those who may still be asleep,” writes Matt Agorist. “Please share this so that it can help others to see the leviathan for what it is, a gang of thieves writ large.”
The only question that remains is if police officers feel they no longer need to follow the Constitution, should Americans be expected to obey the law?
Video link here:
https://www.infowars.com/cop-if-obama-doesnt-follow-the-constitution-we-dont-have-to/