Ponder This:

Real public servants are free enterprising individuals who, inspired, embrace challenge, take risks, and create, sometimes big, and often, they create jobs in the process, all out of their ideas, and self initiative...

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Prop. 23 Foe Profits From ‘Dirty Coal’

OCT. 28, 2010

By WAYNE LUSVARDI

NO on 23 backer and Democrat Tom Steyer’s Farallon Capital Management Company holds stock in “dirty coal,” nuclear, and oil and gas companies, and in a Chinese solar panel supply company that potentially would rob jobs from Californians, even as the NO on 23 campaign blasts Prop. 23 backers for similar investments.Click her to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Have you noticed a lot of incumbents in Sheep's Clothing on the ballot?

In looking at local elections in San Jose, there are a lot of well established politicians like Forest Williams who have been in local office for decades pretending they are an outsider. Williams' brief bio on the ballot, for example, completely omits his long political career and doesn't mention his usual public Union supporters -- making him seem like a new face on the scene. The same goes with Jim Beale, State Assembly, who downplays his incumbent status and again tries to appear as a new arrival on the scene. And look at Tom Torlakson's bio -- the man has been politics for 32 years but his bio makes him seem like he's just a science teacher!
Click here to see a real breath of fresh air.
Bookmark and Share

Beware Incumbents in Sheep's Clothing! They're hiding out and running as new to Politics

I see a lot of well established politicians who have been in office for decades pretending they are outsiders. Forest Williams' brief bio on the ballot, for example, omits his long political career, making him seem like an outsider. Likewise, Jim Beale (State Assembly) downplays his incumbent status and tries to appear like an outsider. Other incumbents have just pulled a vanishing act -- like long-time Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren whose recent embarrassing gaffes and scandals, plus voter anger over her support for the healthcare bill, have sent her scurrying for cover. She won't debate the issues, won't speak in public, and won't even appear before the voters. Where in the world is Zoe??

Voters beware! Look carefully at the candidates, the incumbents and machine politicians are hiding their pasts and misleading the voters to get re-elected.--

John Cunnuningham, San Jose CA
Click here to see a real breath of fresh air.
Bookmark and Share

Michigan Turns to the GOP for Jobs During previous recessions, voters went for Democratic candidates. Not this year.

By MICHAEL BARONE

When I was growing up in Michigan, the political rules were pretty simple. About 40% of all voters were in union households with at least one union member—and they voted heavily Democratic. Others voted Republican, but by smaller percentages. The usual result was a close election, but in recession years like 1958, when thousands of United Auto Workers members were laid off by General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, voters shifted toward the Democrats on the belief that more government spending would help them through tough times.

No more. This year there is no question that Michigan is in economic distress. It had the nation's highest unemployment rate for more than three years until it was overtaken by Nevada last May. Now it's No. 2. But unlike during earlier recessions, Michigan isn't trending Democratic. It's going the opposite way.Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Saturday, October 30, 2010

California Voters, What about the Judges? How do you vote for Judges if you want Judicial Restraint and not Judicial Activism?

I recommend this site even though I don't share their recommendations on whom to vote for, whom not to vote for, and why. I appreciate the graphs ranking judicial candidates on their propensity to adhere to the letter of the law in their presiding and rulings. And equally helpful are the PDF documents with briefs on the background judicial opinions and rulings of each candidate. You can make up your own mind, but the resource is invaluable and is impossible to find in such a concentrated format anywhere else, to my knowledge. If you know of other sites that also give you unbiased information, even if it's couched in biased opinions and recommendations, please share! Click here to see Craig Huey's Election Forum Guide
Bookmark and Share

I Was Two When My Parents, Aunts, Uncles, & Grandparents Moved Their Families From Texas to CA for Jobs. Now Texas is the New California.

Say it Ain't So: "Texas is the New California"

By Joel Fox
Editor of Fox & Hounds and President of the Small Business Action Committee
Fri, October 29th, 2010
After looking at the state unemployment numbers that came out last week, the Wall Street Journal declared in an editorial that Texas cities have become the destination for investment and entrepreneurship. The paper flatly states: "Texas is the New California."

Has the Golden State dropped so low that we have lost our reputation as the home of innovation and bright beginnings? Have entrepreneurs found a more comfortable, happier place to call home? It sure looks that way.

The Journal noted California's huge job loss and Texas's job gain. But more than that, the paper implied that Texas is the new destination for the entrepreneur. Texas has become the target for "high tech, venture capital, aeronautics, health care and even industrial manufacturing." Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Friday, October 29, 2010

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Harry Reid & Barack Obama on SNL



Bookmark and Share

Why Latinos should vote Tea Party

Martha Montelongo
October 25,2010
Orange County Register

The firestorm ignited by Robert Deposada's Latinos for Change ads blipped off the news cycles in less than three days. The ads urged Latinos not to vote.

But Democrats have seized on the incident as a hammer to convince Latino voters it is a Republican ploy to suppress their vote and undermine their power to decide this election.

First, I find offensive the implied assertion – by "Latino leaders" and the Univision executives – that Latino TV viewers must be protected from hearing or viewing misguided political campaign messages urging them not to vote. They suggest Latinos are too helpless to discern matters for themselves. And we are to presume these self-appointed protectors are benevolent and above reproach for their move to shield their audience.

Deposada's message to Latinos was foolish, even if the claims he makes are true. He said Latinos are taken for granted and played by the Democrats but disrespected and denigrated by a growing chorus of Republicans who voice anti-Hispanic, anti-immigrant vitriol. Republicans don't sound like they want to be friends.

I understand Deposada's frustration; however, being single-issue minded when speaking to Latinos also betrays Latinos. More important issues affect Latinos:
Click here to read the full article. I hope you will, whether you are Latino or not, and I hope you'll share it. Thank you.
Bookmark and Share

Public employee unions funnel public money to Dems

By: Michael Barone
Senior Political Analyst
October 26, 2010

Who is the largest single political contributor in the 2010 campaign cycle? You can be pardoned if you answer, erroneously, that it's some new conservative group organized by Karl Rove. That's campaign spin by the Obama Democrats, obediently relayed by certain elements of the so-called mainstream media.

The real answer is AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The union's president, Gerald McEntee, reports proudly that AFSCME will be contributing $87.5 million in this cycle, entirely or almost entirely to Democrats. "We're spending big," he told the Wall Street Journal. "And we're damn happy it's big."
Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Pro-union study twists stats, takes public for saps

By: Steven Greenhut
Special to The Examiner
October 24, 2010

California’s public employee unions have taken the public for suckers for years, so it’s understandable they now think they can play us for fools.

A study released Monday by a think tank that specializes in pro-union advocacy purports to show that public employees receive less total compensation than their counterparts in the private sector. Unfortunately, the study is being depicted in the media as a serious analysis that debunks public hysteria about overpaid and over-pensioned public employees in cities such as Bell. But it’s nothing of the sort.

“This is the kind of paper where they started with a conclusion and tailored the research around it,” said my Pacific Research Institute colleague Jason Clemens, an economist who directs PRI’s research efforts. Basically, the researchers took the total wages in the public and private sectors, averaged it out and then adjusted for educational levels and several other factors.

The researchers didn’t look at, say, a private sector janitor with a set amount of experience and compare his total compensation package to a similarly skilled janitor in the public sector. “Instead, the study relied on education levels —- ‘the single most important earnings predictor’ —- and other factors widely found to affect compensation levels, such as gender, race, ethnicity and disability, to compare the two sectors,” reported the San Francisco Chronicle. They also adjusted for average employee age.

How anyone could report that without noting that such an approach is bogus, is beyond my comprehension. Click here to read the rest of the article at the SF Examiner website or you canClick here to read the article at CalWatchDog.com.

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Latino Dems Should Rethink Loyalty

By Joel KotkinSeptember 26 2010
Appearing in:
Politico

Given the awful state of the economy, it’s no surprise that Democrats are losing some support among Latinos. But they can still consider the ethnic group to be in their pocket. Though Latinos have not displayed the lock-step party loyalty of African-Americans, they still favor President Barack Obama by 57 percent, according to one Gallup Poll — down just 10 percentage points from his high number early in the administration.

This support is particularly unusual, given that probably no large ethnic group in America has suffered more than Latinos from the Great Recession. This is true, in large part, because Latino employment is heavily concentrated in manufacturing, and even more so in construction.

A half-million Latino workers in the construction sector — in which their share of the work force is double what it is in the broader economy — have lost their jobs since the start of the recession.

Unfortunately, the Obama stimulus plan was light on physical infrastructure. It favored Wall Street, public-sector unions and large research universities. Big winners included education and health services — in which Latinos are under-represented.

Not surprisingly, Latino communities across the country are in trouble. Today, of the 10 most economically “stressed” counties, seven are majority or heavily Latino, according to The Associated Press.

Theoretically, Republicans should be able to take advantage of this situation. But not with the party’s increasing embrace of its noisy nativist right — evident not only in support of the controversial Arizona immigration law but also in the strong move against “birthright citizenship.” This makes the prospect of earning back President George W. Bush’s 40-plus-percentage-point support difficult at best. Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Obama to Latinos: " Punish our Enemies"



The Latino vote could swing the U.S. Senate and stop the ruinous trajectory the Democrats running Congress launched us on. Latinos are a swing vote in five of eight four of six (Oct 26, 10) toss-up states for U.S. Senate races.

Democrats have neglected to push through immigration reform even though since 2006 they have been the majority in power in both the Senate and the House. President George W. Bush would have signed a bill. So would President Barack Obama, so he says.

But here he is desperate for the Latino vote to swing the elections to at least save the Senate.

Obama tells Latinos in the audience that "he's committed to making it happen..." but "if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying we're going to punish our enemies and reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us then its going to be lot harder..."

Make what happen? Comprehensive Immigration Reform? Latinos voted for Obama because he promised Immigration Reform when he got elected but no bill. But he expects Latinos to believe him that this time if Latinos "punish our enemies" then he'll "get it done, because he can't do it alone." Right. ¡Cínicos! (Shameless!)

The majority of Latinos may agree that immigration is now the most important issue. But it is not the only issue. It was not always the number one issue. It has been in the top seven for years, but the emotional dynamics and spirit of debate over Arizona’s SB 1070 elevated the levels of anxiety and dissonance. Jobs, the cost of living, education and healthcare still rank in the top five, after immigration, in that order.

What good is immigration reform if there are no jobs for those who are already here, not to mention those who will come?

What has he delivered? Why would we give him more time to cause more damage.

Bookmark and Share

Monday, October 25, 2010

Chilean Mining Rescue Offers Lesson Worth Importing

"We did it the Chilean Way," noted President Sebastián Piñera after 33 miners were rescued from a ten-week ordeal in a copper mine in western Chile. And so they did. Chile's rescue effort welcomed technological assistance from companies on opposite sides of the planet, including Samsung of Korea and Center Rock of the United States, to name but two.

As in the rescue operation, so in Chile's trade policy: the country's success stems in no small measure from avoiding the nationalistic protectionism that has crippled numerous countries in the less-developed world, according to Independent Institute Senior Fellow Alvaro Vargas Llosa. The lesson? "The less inward-looking a country is," writes Vargas Llosa in his latest column, "the more successful it can be--and the prouder its patriotic citizens can be of its achievements."

The United States, Europe, and Japan should also "import" that lesson if they wish to reverse their decline. "Getting it right is an attitude that needs to be renewed with each generation," Vargas Llosa continues. "Perhaps the extraordinary achievements coming out of the emerging world will help trigger that process."
Click here to read the article.
Bookmark and Share

Call Me Senator Video Featuring Barbara Boxer from David Zucker, the Director of Airplane and The Naked Gun


Call Me Senator from RightChange on Vimeo.
Click here to go directly to host site for the video.
Bookmark and Share

Call Me Former Senator Barbara Boxer

Who can forget California Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer’s put-down of Brigadier General Michael Walsh, during a June 2009 committee hearing? When he addressed her as “Ma’am,” in answering a question about the New Orleans levee system, she petulantly interrupted: “Could you say Senator, instead of Ma’am? I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it.”

“Ma’am” is a term of respect given by military personnel to superior female officers. So she’s right. She didn’t deserve it. Her behavior was once again disrespectful, arrogant, condescending-and demeaning to a Congress whose public esteem is deservedly at a record low.

As Californians head to the polls November 2, they should ponder very carefully whether they really want, and can really afford, another six years of Barbara Boxer. Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Here's why it is strategically more effective for libertarians to run on the Republican Ticket

Dems back third-party candidates to undercut GOP
Jim Rutenberg, New York Times new york times
October 23, 2010 Saturday, October 23, 2010

Seeking any slight advantage in their effort to avoid losing control of Congress, Democrats are working behind the scenes in a number of tight races to bolster longshot third-party candidates who have platforms at odds with the Democratic agenda but hold the promise of siphoning Republican votes.
Click here to read more.
 
Bookmark and Share

Friday, October 22, 2010

About Prop 19, Michael Olson on his Food Chain Radio show, will examine the Pros and Cons--"Up in Smoke"

I met with Michael Olson on Thursday for coffee, which neither of us had, because it was already 10 am and we were both at capacity for our caffeine ingestion limits. We talked briefly about his show on Saturday. He raised some valid concerns. One of them has to do with the commercialization of the industry and would people lose choices and quality? If Marijuana did become legal, if its regulation went the way of tobacco, for example, then discerning connoisseurs would lose choices and quality and freedom of choice for what to cultivate and grow. The finer quality of cannabis may become scarcer and remain expensive. But what if legalizing marijuana goes the way of grapes for wine making.

It seems the cottage industry of cannabis growers now, who sell to clinics, are as sophisticated, meticulous and nuanced as are many of the wonderful and superior wine makers of the world, who employ their share of oenologists. What is the equivalent in the cultivation of Cannabis, or Marijuana, to the oenologist to wine making? I don't know what they're called, but they do the same thing, only their expertise is related to the varieties of cannabis seeds and their properties, characteristics, flavor, climates they grow in, soils, etc. I'll have to ask Michael if I catch the show, which I intend to do. It seems that the cannabis industry is indeed very sophisticated in it's cultivation as a fine craft. If it does go legal, I hope it goes the way of wine, and not tobacco.

Catch Michael Olson's show live at 9 am on Saturday mornings on KSCO AM 1080, in Santa Cruz and throughout the Monterey Bay. Or on line at KSCO.com or if you miss the show, listen to the podcasts on Olson's site at metrofarm.com
Bookmark and Share

From my friend Manny Klausner, he send this piece by Matt Welch at Reason.com concerning the firing of Juan Williams from NPR. I call it Political Correctness goes Westworld.

Matt calls it Juan Gone. Catchy. kind of rhymes with bong, which incidentally is part of this piece in the form of a YouTube clip from Herold and Kumar 2, the full airplane scene. NPR execs who fired Juan, idiots. But damn, are we messed up for not being miffed over this absurdity?

Juan Gone

Matt Welch | October 21, 2010

Here's a Washington Post headline for you: "NPR fires Juan Williams over anti-Muslim remarks." What were the "anti-Muslim remarks" in question? These:

"I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country," he said. "But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they're identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Williams then brought up a statement made in a New York courtroom this month by Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani American who pleaded guilty to trying to detonate a bomb in Times Square and was sentenced to life in prison.

"He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts," Williams said.

That latter half cannot be the objectionable bit, so we're left with this 21st century ask-the-ethicist puzzler: Is it now "anti-Muslim" to admit your anxiety when seeing an Orthodox-looking Muslim on Islamic terrorists' most infamous weapon of mass murder? I think if you stated that most Muslims are a threat (a much more declarative formulation than "I get worried" about "people who are in Muslim garb"), or that all Muslims should be singled out for special scrutiny, or that our basic policy problem is with Muslims, then you might be getting warmer. But later in the O'Reilly interview, Williams specifically repudiated all three of those sentiments:

Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Found an even better quote from Greenhut's piece on why No on 22: "Remember that redevelopment agencies are not local agencies. Legally, they are state agencies, although they are managed by local officials. If Prop. 22 passes, these agencies will get protection from state “raids” on their finances, which makes them largely unaccountable: the locals can’t control their abuses because they are state agencies, and the state can’t grab their money because they are local agencies. They apparently want it both ways."

Prop. 22 protects corporate welfare

AUG. 23, 2010

It’s always entertaining watching various tax consumers fight with one another over a shrinking revenue pie, which makes the Proposition 22 campaign a spectacle. Despite the chatter from supporters about “saving local services” and stopping Sacramento from “raiding” local treasuries, this November initiative simply pits different government groups against each other to save their resources.

The main beneficiaries if the initiative passes: developers who receive tax subsidies to build their so-called “redevelopment” projects and bureaucrats who like to micromanage land use in their cities. This one is an easy “no” vote for any number of reasons.

Prop. 22, the Local Taxpayer, Public Safety and Transportation Protection Act, “prohibits the state, even during a period of severe fiscal hardship, from delaying the distribution of tax revenues for transportation, redevelopment or local government projects and services,” according to the attorney general’s ballot description. In simple English, the measure would stop the state government from diverting money from redevelopment and transportation agencies to the general fund – no matter what disastrous fiscal mess the state finds itself in.

Both sides are trying to depict themselves as advocates of some sacred principle such as local control, but this is nothing more than various groups fighting to preserve their budgets by throwing other budgets overboard. Keep that in mind as you sort through all the campaign mailers that will soon be coming your way. Virtually all these government groups would love to simply raise everyone’s taxes to preserve their programs and pensions – but in this case they are fighting each other rather than ganging up to fleece taxpayers.

Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Sunday, October 10, 2010

"California’s leadership’s embrace of AB32/SB375 is unlikely to achieve any of its goals. It will be a drag on economic activity. Its impact on global greenhouse gasses will be negligible. Worse, it is very inefficient. Economic research is not ambiguous. Subsidies and command-and-control regulation are far from the cheapest way of improving the environment."

I'm voting yes on Prop 23, and if you care about jobs, you will too.
California cool may be legendary, but as the Huey Lewis song says, sometimes bad is bad, and California’s economy is bad, very bad, and it’s not going to get better soon without real change. Plenty of lawmakers, especially the governor, are counting on renewable energy and green industry to provide California with an economic rebirth. It won’t happen. Read why here and here.

I’m thinking that now would be a good time for Californians to lose their cool.

Californians value cool. I’m not sure how this came to be. It might be the weather. It might be the entertainment industry. Whatever the reason, Californians don’t get excited. Better to go with flow than to get excited. Things will be ok. Concerned about the economy? Stay cool Dude. It’ll come back. Always has. Always will. Relax.

It’s not cool to get excited, or heaven forbid, panic. Californians are not quick to react to problems, so confident that eventually the problem will just go away. This was forcefully brought home to me when a member of California’s legislature told me that “It doesn’t matter what we do in this building. California will always rebound.”
Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Friday, October 8, 2010

Pull Quote: "The libertarian strain in the American electorate has long been neglected by the mainstream media. But, through the Tea Party, it has gained ascendancy on the right. Those who want the government to stay out of both boardrooms and bedrooms have come to dominate the [Republican] party and its nominating process."

The Democratic Party is hopelessly bound by Big Labor, Public Employee Unions, the SEIU, the NEA and the AFT. 
Both parties have their share of Big Govt Politicians who are happy to enrich themselves and appease their financial backers, and union members, who like to lord over individuals and romanticize central planning as if they were the ones who would make it work better than a decentralized, nimble, flexible market economy, even though there is NO EXAMPLE IN HISTORY WHERE CENTRALIZED GOVT HAS EVER WORKED. Call them delusional. 

Between the two parties, the Republican Party is the only one, that has powerful factions of members who openly compete for dominance over political economic policy and ideas. 

In the Democratic Party,  as we have witnessed  these past two years, their behavior when they control all three branches of the Federal Government, dissenting ideas or votes are not tolerated, period. That's why this piece by Dick Morris is so powerful:

Economic Issues at the Forefront: This election season, fiscal conservatives own the GOP grassroots.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
October 7, 2010


The coalition Ronald Reagan assembled of fiscal and economic conservatives, evangelicals, and national-security advocates has always been dominated by the social issues at the grassroots level. While free-market economic conservatives lived in New York and dutifully attended their Club for Growth meetings and national-security types inhabited Washington, the Republican social conservatives dominated the grassroots of the party. They alone could turn out the numbers to rallies and to the polls on primary or Election Day.

Now, all that has changed. It is the fiscal conservatives and free-market supporters who own the Republican streets. Through the Tea Party, they have come to dominate the grassroots of the GOP. It is as if an invisible primary were held for supremacy at the grassroots and the Tea Party won.

And social issues are nowhere on the Tea Party agenda. I recently participated in a conference call with tea-party affiliates throughout the country. During the question period that followed my speech, one leader of a local tea-party group asked a question about abortion. The conference-call leader jumped in before I could answer and ruled the query out of order. “Our priorities are to oppose taxes, support fiscal conservatism, and advance free-market principles,” she scolded the questioner. “We do not take a position on social issues like abortion,” she added.
Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

You don't say...Is it wishful thinking to say the jig is up? Pull Quote: "Overcompensation of public employees, considering all factors of remuneration, may approach to 80 to 120 percent more than private employees in comparable positions as a norm for hundreds of thousands, if not more than one million, public employees in the state."

Study Says Public Pay Out Of Line

OCT. 5, 2010

A new California think tank is releasing a new study Wednesday on reforming public employee pay and pensions. We reprint the entire study here today with permission from the California Center for Public Policy.

CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY

Reforming Public Employee Compensation and Pensions

Executive Summary

It is time to reform public employee compensation in California. Public employee compensation is out of line with the private sector in every area. There are thousands of individual government agencies in the state, employing almost 2 million individuals. Whether the standard is salary, working conditions, benefits, or especially pensions, public employees in California receive compensation far in excess of what workers in the private sector do. It is illiberal and unjust, and no true liberal or progressive should support current public employee compensation.

Tens of thousands of public employees in the area of public safety are among the highest paid individuals in any occupation. The $2 to $5 million in annuity value that these employees may receive through pension programs in their early to middle fifties makes these employees’ comprehensive career compensation among the highest in America.

The $1 million to $2 million in annuity value that more than a million non-public safety employees in California will receive through their pension programs in their middle fifties to early sixties similarly makes most California public employees de facto millionaires by their middle to late fifties. Frequently, California public employees, particularly in public safety, pay less than half or even nothing toward the employee’s portion of retirement programs for the benefits they will receive.
Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Saturday, October 2, 2010

(Rome is burning and ...) Who Cares About Nannies? Or housekeepers?

From CalWatchDog.com, Steven Greenhut: If only Meg Whitman were an actual human being, rather than a carefully crafted campaign machine surrounded by scores of advisers, she could have indignantly mocked the Jerry Brown/Gloria Allred cheap-shot October surprise regarding Whitman’s illegal nanny. Whitman didn’t do anything wrong, yet the Bee plastered this on the front page for two days and all the usual suspects are pretending that Whitman is a goner. Some Republicans are responding by pointing to similar illegal-immigrant situation with an aide to a Brown spokesman. So what?Click here to read more.
Bookmark and Share

Botched Paramilitary Police Raids: An Epidemic of "Isolated Incidents"

"If a widespread pattern of [knock-and-announce] violations were shown . . . there would be reason for grave concern." —Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Hudson v. Michigan, June 15, 2006. An interactive map of botched SWAT and paramilitary police raids, released in conjunction with the Cato policy paper "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids," by Radley Balko. What does this map mean? How to use this map View Original Map and Database

Key

Death of an innocent. Death or injury of a police officer. Death of a nonviolent offender.
Raid on an innocent suspect. Other examples of paramilitary police excess. Unnecessary raids on doctors and sick people.
The proliferation of SWAT teams, police militarization, and the Drug War have given rise to a dramatic increase in the number of "no-knock" or "quick-knock" raids on suspected drug offenders. Because these raids are often conducted based on tips from notoriously unreliable confidential informants, police sometimes conduct SWAT-style raids on the wrong home, or on the homes of nonviolent, misdemeanor drug users. Such highly-volatile, overly confrontational tactics are bad enough when no one is hurt -- it's difficult to imagine the terror an innocent suspect or family faces when a SWAT team mistakenly breaks down their door in the middle of the night. But even more disturbing are the number of times such "wrong door" raids unnecessarily lead to the injury or death of suspects, bystanders, and police officers. Defenders of SWAT teams and paramilitary tactics say such incidents are isolated and rare. The map above aims to refute that notion.

Blog Archive