Patterico's Pontifications


Awwwww: Sorority Scold Resigns

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:27 pm

I guess somebody decided that the “HORRIBLE, I repeat, HORRIBLE PR FOR THIS CHAPTER” was coming from her, rather than “people being fucking WEIRD at sports” and “people LITERALLY being so fucking AWKWARD and so fucking BORING.” What has the world of sororities come to?

A University of Maryland student, who sent a profanity-filled email to her sorority sisters that went viral, has resigned from her role in the Delta Gamma sorority, the organization announced on its website.

“Delta Gamma has accepted the resignation of one of its members whose email relating to a social event has been widely distributed and publicized through social media and traditional media channels,” the statement read.

I don’t know if she quit the whole sorority or just her role as whatever the heck she was when she was yelling at everybody.

Too bad. She was kinda funny.

I’m linking my Paul Anka/Sorority Scold hybrid again, because not enough people commented on it before, which makes me want to scream profanities at all of you in all caps. The girls get skirts!

Breitbart Was Right: New York Times Does Front-Page Story on Rampant Pigford Fraud

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:37 am

Alternate headline: New York Times reveals its racism.

Andrew Breitbart would tell anyone who would listen, at great length, about the Pigford fraud. Pigford was a class action lawsuit brought by black people who claimed to be farmers, and said the Agriculture Department had discriminated against them in making loan decisions. A court case had identified 91 potential claimants — but the Obama administration decided to engage in a more massive payout: $50,000 to virtually anybody who claimed that they had “attempted to farm” but could not because of discrimination.

Dangling $50,000 checks in front of people, while requiring almost no documentation (an affidavit from a pal backing you up was plenty good enough), predictably led to rampant fraudulent claims:

“It was the craziest thing I have ever seen,” one former high-ranking department official said. “We had applications for kids who were 4 or 5 years old. We had cases where every single member of the family applied.” The official added, “You couldn’t have designed it worse if you had tried.”

. . . .

In 16 ZIP codes in Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi and North Carolina, the number of successful claimants exceeded the total number of farms operated by people of any race in 1997, the year the lawsuit was filed. Those applicants received nearly $100 million.

In Maple Hill, a struggling town in southeastern North Carolina, the number of people paid was nearly four times the total number of farms. More than one in nine African-American adults there received checks. In Little Rock, Ark., a confidential list of payments shows, 10 members of one extended family collected a total of $500,000, and dozens of other successful claimants shared addresses, phone numbers or close family connections.

The scope of the problem runs into billions of dollars:

[A]n examination by The New York Times shows that it became a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stand to gain more than $130 million in fees. In the past five years, it has grown to encompass a second group of African-Americans as well as Hispanic, female and Native American farmers. In all, more than 90,000 people have filed claims. The total cost could top $4.4 billion.

Especially infuriating: when prosecutors were given a test case of fraud, in which the claimant admitted lying in his application, they declined to prosecute — and the reason both amuses and infuriates:

In Arkansas, prosecutors rejected a test case against a Pine Bluff police officer who had admitted lying on his claim form. Paula J. Casey, the United States attorney in Arkansas in 2000, said that singling out one individual raised questions of selective prosecution.

“The defendant could go to the jury and say: ‘Everybody else did this. Why am I standing here?’ ” she said.

There’s so much fraud, you see, that you can’t prosecute just one person. So you can’t prosecute anybody.

This is, of course, absurd logic. If it’s hard to prosecute people for reasons of proof, and you have someone who confessed, it’s not “selective prosecution” to charge that person. This reasoning, followed to its logical conclusion, would make it impossible to prosecute Internet fraud, which is certainly rampant and difficult to prosecute.

But, you see, there is a difference. The government does not aid and abet Internet fraud as a general rule. Prosecuting an Internet fraud case would not be embarrassing for the Obama administration.

Not so for a Pigford fraud case.

The article is stunning — and an incredible vindication of Andrew Breitbart:

Andrew’s site actually gets a nod in today’s article:

Public criticism came primarily from conservative news outlets like and from Congressional conservatives like Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, who described the program as rife with fraud. Few Republicans or Democrats supported him. Asked why, Mr. King said, “Never underestimate the fear of being called a racist.”

The Pigford fraud is not news to you folks. It was featured prominently here in several posts, many by Lee Stranahan, who worked closely with Andrew on the story. You can read the posts by searching the site for Pigford (just hit this link), but in all the coverage, one video stands out in my memory. It was published in this post. When I went to grab the embed code, it had a pitiful 891 views.

The video has to be seen to be believed. It shows someone coaching an audience on how to fill out the paperwork to get their $50,000 check. Watch the video to make your own judgment about the general attitude towards the truth in that room — both on his part, and on the part of the laughing audience. He tells people that there are four questions on the form, and that they must all be answered yes to get a check. He analogizes it to the four bases you must touch to score a run in baseball — and if all the bases aren’t touched, you go back to the dugout, meaning you don’t get a $50,000 check. He carefully explains that if they SAY they tried to farm, they DID attempt to farm, as far as the government is concerned. To call this a “wink and a nod” is being kind.

Excellent article by the New York Times. Congratulations to them, to Andrew Breitbart, and to Lee Stranahan for getting out the truth on this story.


Bipartisan Congressional Asshattery

Filed under: General — JD @ 8:14 am

[Guest post by JD]

It appears that the CongressCritters are working behind the scenes to exempt their staff personnel from ObamaCare. Apparently they discovered that it will have an adverse impact on them. So, rather than get rid of the monstrous obamanation, they are just trying to exempt their own people. Small businesses, large businesses, self-employed people and America in general will just have to continue to live under this job killing, deficit exploding, economy crippling disaster.

But not Congress.

Update – Boehner denies this on Twitter, but given his recent track record, and willingness to capitulate, that is not the least bit reassuring.

Let them hear about it.


Tsarnaev Was Too Radical for Radical Mosque

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:03 am

USA Today:

The mosque attended by the two brothers accused in the Boston Marathon double bombing has been associated with other terrorism suspects, has invited radical speakers to a sister mosque in Boston and is affiliated with a Muslim group that critics say nurses grievances that can lead to extremism.

Several people who attended the Islamic Society of Boston mosque in Cambridge, Mass., have been investigated for Islamic terrorism, including a conviction of the mosque’s first president, Abdulrahman Alamoudi, in connection with an assassination plot against a Saudi prince.

Its sister mosque in Boston, known as the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, has invited guests who have defended terrorism suspects. A former trustee appears in a series of videos in which he advocates treating gays as criminals, says husbands should sometimes beat their wives and calls on Allah (God) to kill Zionists and Jews, according to Americans for Peace and Tolerance, an interfaith group that has investigated the mosques.

The great part is that the mosque apparently wasn’t radical enough for him, because he kept getting up to argue with those preaching about how they were not observing their faith strictly enough:

When preachers told congregants at a mosque in November that it was appropriate for Muslims to celebrate US holidays such as the 4 July Independence Day and Thanksgiving, a man who would later be a suspect in last week’s the Boston Marathon bombing stood up to argue, the mosque said.

. . . .

The troublesome behaviour first came in November, just before the American harvest holiday of Thanksgiving, the mosque said. At a weekly prayer, a preacher gave a sermon saying it was appropriate for Muslims to celebrate American holidays. Tamerlan Tsarnaev stood up and argued that “celebration of any holiday was not allowed in the faith”.

The preacher met with Tsarnaev and discussed the issue after the service.

In January, the mosque said Tsarnaev had a similar outburst.

This time, the sermon included praise for civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jnr, and this time Tsarnaev shouted, calling the preacher a “non-believer” and “hypocrite” who was “contaminating people’s minds”. Congregants shouted back at him, telling him to leave, and he did.

I don’t see how any of this should have raised any red flags at all!

What, just because the CIA wanted him on a terrorist watch list? And because the Russians had repeatedly warned us of his adherence to radical Islam and the potential danger he posed? And because he left the country to travel to Chechnya?


I’ll tell you what difference it makes, Hil. I’ll tell you with a question.

How many other people who have been waving similarly giant red flags in the government’s face are walking around right now, planning to bomb and kill our children?

Hooray for the Teamsters

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:45 am

No, I’m serious. Funeral services are beginning for those killed in the Boston bombings, and when there is a high profile funeral, there may be Westboro Baptist cretins. Enter the Teamsters:

There was concern members of the Westboro Baptist Church, known for their hate speech, would picket the funeral, but the Teamsters Local 25 stepped in to make sure Campbell’s family would be shielded.

“We had the place pretty much locked down,” Local 25 President Sean O’Brien told “There is no place for anybody that was going to disrupt someone’s funeral.”

O’Brien estimated 1,000 Teamsters stood outside the church, ready to take care of business in the event there was a problem. It’s not clear if any protesters showed up.

I think we can all support this.


Man Slashes Rabbi’s Throat While Screaming “Allahu Akbar” — Police Trying to Determine Motive

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:28 pm

It’s a real head scratcher:

PARIS — An escapee from a psychiatric institution slashed a rabbi and his son with a box-cutter on Tuesday, prompting witnesses to tackle and subdue the attacker after a chase through a Paris synagogue, officials said.

The rabbi, who is in his late 40s, was recovering from surgery for a neck injury and his 18-year-old son sustained lesser injuries in the attack north of a touristic shopping area near Paris’ gilded Opera Garnier, according to police and judicial officials and Richard Prasquier, who heads CRIF, France’s largest umbrella organization of Jewish groups.

. . . .

The assailant was of Iranian origin, and an official investigation was underway to determine a possible motive, Prasquier said.

Gendarme!!! Look over here!

Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre, a spokeswoman for the Paris prosecutor’s office, said the two victims had been wearing Jewish skullcaps, and the attacker was detained after a chase through the synagogue. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which monitors anti-Semitic incidents worldwide, said in a statement that the assailant screamed “Allah-u-Akbar” — or “God is great” — during the attack.

I do believe we have . . . A CLEW!!! Alert Hercule Poirot!

Above: Not Hercule Poirot

Yes, it’s the biggest mystery since that Muslim guy shot up the Jewish community center while screaming his hatred of Israel and Jews. The motive for that attack was labeled a “mystery” by the Los Angeles Times (motto: “Derrrr.”).

I wish the intrepid investigators bonne chance in solving this, truly one of the world’s Greatest Mysteries of recent times.

Kochs Purchasing Tribune Would Drive Out Many of the Writers

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:30 pm

Harold Meyerson at the Washington Post:

A recent informal poll that one L.A. Times writer conducted of his colleagues showed that almost all planned to exit if the Kochs took control (and that included sportswriters and arts writers).

The writer appears confused about the difference between a bug and a feature.

Go, Kochs! Throw in the editors and you have yourselves a deal.

FBI Was Warned “Repeatedly” About Tsarnaev

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:45 am

Just lovely.

Russian authorities contacted the US government with concerns about Tamerlan Tsarnaev not once but “multiple’’ times, including an alert it sent after he was first investigated by FBI agents in Boston, raising new questions about whether the FBI should have paid more attention to the suspected Boston Marathon bomber, US senators briefed on the inves­tigation said Tuesday.

The FBI has previously said it interviewed Tsarnaev in early 2011 after it was initially contacted by the ­Russians. In their review, completed in summer 2011, the bureau found no ­evidence that Tsarnaev was a threat. “The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from” Russia, the agency said last week.

Following a closed briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, Senator Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said he believed that Russia alerted the United States about Tsarnaev in “multiple contacts,” including at least once since October 2011.

So was he on a watch list or not? Reports seem to vary widely.

Become a fan of Patterico on Facebook. Follow me on Twitter.

Bomber Received Welfare

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:27 am

As iowahawk says:


Marathon bombings mastermind Tamerlan Tsarnaev was living on taxpayer-funded state welfare benefits even as he was delving deep into the world of radical anti-American Islamism, the Herald has learned.

State officials confirmed last night that Tsarnaev, slain in a raging gun battle with police last Friday, was receiving benefits along with his wife, Katherine Russell Tsarnaev, and their 3-year-old daughter. The state’s Executive Office of Health and Human Services said those benefits ended in 2012 when the couple stopped meeting income eligibility limits. Russell Tsarnaev’s attorney has claimed Katherine — who had converted to Islam — was working up to 80 hours a week as a home health aide while Tsarnaev stayed at home.

Lefties will no doubt claim this is a one-off, and that it is silly to attack welfare because one terrorist was sucking up benefits from the state. Wake up and smell the triple mocha non-fat decaf latte, lefties. Go to any criminal courthouse and watch the people streaming in and out. By and large, they are the same people streaming in and out of welfare offices at the first of every month. We are funding a criminal underclass, and Tsarnaev is just one particularly violent example. This is a daily problem.

Meanwhile, we have “jobs Americans won’t do” which serve as a magnet for illegal immigrants to come here and work . . . only to discover that the phony documents they use to get those jobs will get them welfare benefits too — and as long as they make it here, some Republican idiots will eventually agree to let them stay here legally, so they can vote for more of those benefits in perpetuity.

Great country we have here, huh?

Become a fan of Patterico on Facebook. Follow me on Twitter.

Using a Drone to Kill a Run of the Mill Armed Robber Sounds Great to Me, Says . . . Rand Paul

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:11 am

What was that filibuster all about then?

“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash. I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”

If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, they are not legitimate targets for assassination, by drones or policemen. We’re supposed to do this thing called arresting them and bringing them to trial.

From this clip, it sounds like Paul cares only about surveillance. Drone strikes to kill any criminal suspect, however minor, don’t appear to faze him at all.

There are those who thought the idea of the government using drones to smite American citizen criminals in America was tinfoil hat stuff. Weeks later — just weeks! — we have had the Boston bombings, the manhunt for Tsarnaev, and John McCain and Lindsey Graham declaring him an enemy combatant. Do you think McCain or Graham would blink twice before ordering a drone attack on him if they could? And, now that our libertarian hero is giving such a tactic the thumbs up, even for a stick-em-up robbery suspect, who would stand up against them?

Help us, Ted Cruz. You’re our only hope.

Become a fan of Patterico on Facebook. Follow me on Twitter.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7309 secs.