The government was still subsidizing tobacco, just as our tax dollars subsidize the sugar and meat industries today. The AMA actually went on record refusing to endorse the Surgeon General’s report. Could that have been because they had just been handed ten million dollars from the tobacco industry?
Source: The Disconnect Between Science and Policy | NutritionFacts.org
# – # – # – # – #
Why is the Gooferment subsidizing anything?
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | 
ADHOC | 
Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
2019-Apr-06
https://www.srz.com/resources/new-jersey-passes-law-making-ndas-in-settlements-of.html
New Jersey Passes Law Making NDAs in Settlements of Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassment Claims Unenforceable
Date April 5, 2019
On March 18, 2019, New Jersey passed a law rendering unenforceable certain provisions in employment contracts and settlement agreements that are “entered into, renewed, modified, or amended” on or after March 18, 2019. First, provisions in employment contracts that waive prospectively any substantive or procedural right or remedy relating to claims of harassment, retaliation or discrimination are unenforceable. For example, under the law, jury trial waivers with respect to harassment, retaliation or discrimination claims in employment agreements will not be enforceable.
Second, the law renders nondisclosure provisions in agreements that have “the purpose or effect of concealing the details relating to a claim of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment” unenforceable against employees and former employees. If, however, the employee publicly reveals enough details about the claim that the employer is reasonably identifiable, then a nondisclosure provision is also unenforceable against the employer. Nondisclosure provisions will therefore only work to prevent the employer from disclosing the details of a claim, unless the employee publicly discusses the matter with enough detail that the employer is reasonably identifiable. In that case, the nondisclosure provision will have no effect. In every settlement agreement resolving an employee’s discrimination, retaliation or harassment claim, the employer must include a bold, prominently placed notice that states that “although the parties may have agreed to keep the settlement and underlying facts confidential, such a provision in an agreement is unenforceable against the employer if the employee publicly reveals sufficient details of the claim so that the employer is reasonably identifiable.” The law does not prohibit employers from requiring their employees to sign non-competition provisions or provisions that protect proprietary and other confidential information.
The law also prohibits employers from retaliating against an employee who refuses to enter into an agreement containing a provision that is unenforceable under the new law. If an employer attempts to enforce such a provision, then the employer will be liable for the employee’s attorneys’ fees and costs.
New Jersey’s law is far more stringent than New York’s recent law limiting nondisclosure provisions. New York’s law prohibits nondisclosure provisions in settlements of sexual harassment claims, except when confidentiality is the claimant’s preference. The claimant has 21 days to consider whether confidentiality is the claimant’s preference. If it is, then, after the 21-day period, the parties must memorialize the claimant’s preference in a written agreement, which the claimant can revoke within seven days.[1] By contrast, New Jersey’s law applies to all forms of harassment, discrimination and retaliation prohibited by New Jersey law and deems all non-disclosure agreements with respect to such claims unenforceable.
Authored by Mark E. Brossman and Holly H. Weiss.
# – # – # – # – #
Isn’t this interesting?
Wonder if it applies to politicians and bureaucrats?
Be nice to know who in “public service” is screwing around!
Wonder how that slipped through?
# – # – # – # – # 2019-Apr-06 @ 13:23
Leave a Comment » | NEW JERSEY | Tagged: Discrimination, NDAs, Retaliation | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 11:27 AM Thomas Briscoe wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: <Richard Prezioso>
Date: Apr 5, 2019 at 11:11 AM
To: <tennistitan>
Subject: Fwd: Yes Or No
Begin forwarded message:
From: Walter Olsewski
Date: April 4, 2019 at 2:17:27 PM EDT
To: “Robert J. Byrnes”
Subject: Re: Yes Or No
I vote yes.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 2:04 PM Robert J. Byrnes <byrnesrj@optonline.net> wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ben J
Date: April 3, 2019 at 8:56:25 AM EDT
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Subject: Fwd: Yes Or No
This vote only requires you to forward it to someone else for it to be counted.
As many of you are aware, the Knights of Columbus submitted to congress that the words “Under God” should be added to our pledge of allegiance. Both Houses of Congress passed the law and it was signed by President Eisenhower in 1954. The information below was based on a poll taken by NBC on what percentage should keep the words in our pledge versus the percent who want it removed.
If you read this and agree that “under God” should be left in the pledge, then just forward it to others and you have voted for it to be left in. If you delete it and don’t forward it you are voting NO to “under God…” Easy, huh?
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
86% to keep God in the Pledge of Allegiance and 14% against. That is a pretty commanding’ public response.
Why should our Nation cater to 14%?
If you agree, pass this on. If not, simply delete.
# – # – # – # – #
# – # – # – # – #
MY RESPONSE:
Sorry, but “no”.
If one, as a citizen, pledges “allegiance”, then one assumes that there is some type of “social contract”. In order for there to be a “contract”, Judge Judy says there has to be a meeting of the minds and considerations exchanged. The State, in return for my allegiance, is supposed to protect me from aggression. Yet, in its own courts, <<<Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) >>> held that the Government police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to citizens based on the public duty doctrine.
Hence, I think the current Gooferment has violated the terms of any “social contract”. It has also, with reckless disregard, exceeded its Consititutional limitations.
Therefore, I refer to Lysander Spooner —
“Inasmuch as the Constitution was never signed, nor agreed to, by anybody, as a contract, and therefore never bound anybody, and is now binding upon nobody; and is, moreover, such an one as no people can ever hereafter be expected to consent to, except as they may be forced to do so at the point of the bayonet, it is perhaps of no importance what its true legal meaning, as a contract, is. Nevertheless, the writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth. But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” Lysander Spooner (1808-1887), No Treason (1870) http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-6.htm#no.6
— that it’s time for a “revolution” to put the evil genie BACK in the bottle or Pandora’s box.
I do NOT consent.
“I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.” ― Robert A. Heinlein
All this being sad, I’m too old and weak to to fight the Leviathan State alone. But that doesn’t mean I have to go along willing “when they load us on the trains to the camps.”
From my cold dead hands.
Crazy Old Ferd
# – # – # – # – #
# – # – # – # – #
TO MY OLD HIGH SKRULE CHUM WHO SENT THIS TO ME, I INCLUDED:
P.S.: “And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?” Paul Scofield as Thomas More in “A Man for All Seasons” (1966)
# – # – # – # – #
And, when it’s said, or the National Anthem is sung, I’ll stand respectfully to all the women and men who died, or spilled their blood, to protect the ideals of the nation. They may have been misguided, deceived by politicians and bureaucrats, and betrayed by their fellow countrymen, but they deserve my respect for their sacrifice. I am morally responsible for these casualties happening.
# – # – # – # – # 2019-Apr-05 @ 13:48
Leave a Comment » | Ranting | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
Ikigai, loosely translated, means sense of purpose in life. And in Okinawa, a person’s ikigai often grows as they get older. It is their reason for living, that thing that propels them out of bed in the morning. In the United States, people often retire in their mid-60s, but there isn’t a similar word in Japanese because the concept of retirement doesn’t even exist.Moai is an informal social group of people who have common interests and look out for each other. Your moai is your “tribe” and another reason Okinawans believe they live so long.
Source: The Land of Immortals: How and what Japan’s oldest population eats – CNN
* * * * *
Very interesting ideas — Ikigai and Moai — here.
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
Following the old practice of economic protectionism, lobbyists from big rice signed a formal public letter complaining about the rise in popularity that these carbs substitutes have been earning among the health-conscious. If you’re a politician that wants to stay in the good graces of big rice, you’d be best to heed their call.
Source: Arkansas Declares War on Cauliflower Rice
# – # – # – # – #
Ahhh, yes, politicians and bureaucrats follow the instructions of their masters, Crony Capitalists.
Argh!
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
Hopefully, SCOTUS agrees to hear the Sievers case or summarily reverses the Nebraska Supreme Court. SCOTUS has already ceded too much leeway to police to stop motorists as pretext, but police officers should at least meet the minimum standard for a legal stop.
Source: A Pretextual Traffic Stop Should Require Sufficient Pretext | Cato @ Liberty
# – # – # – # – #
Yeah, seek one part of the Gooferment to protect us from another part of the Gooferment.
Don’t be surprised at the outcome.
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
On February 19, 1942, just a couple months after the attack, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order to deport and incarcerate all Japanese-Americans. Thousands of people, many of whom were born in the US, were forced to abandon their houses, businesses, farms, and possessions. They were loaded into busses with only as many things as they can carry with no knowledge of where they’re going and how long they’re staying there.A photographer Dorothea Lange who is probably best known for her photo titled Migrant Mother was hired by the US government to document the evacuation. The photographer perfectly captured the devastating moments of Japanese-Americans leaving their old lives behind and entering into the unknown. However, the military wasn’t happy with Lange’s opposing opinion of the internment camps. The photographs were seized from her and only made public in 2006. Today we finally have the opportunity to look back at this particular moment in history and see for our selves how the lives of Japanese-Americans were changed forever.
# – # – # – # – #
It can’t possibly have happened here?
And, it can’t possibly happen again?
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . .” — Alexander Solzhenitsyn
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
Like all forms of socialism, the Green New Deal suffers from what Ludwig von Mises identified as the “calculation problem.” Knowledge of the most efficient use of resources is conveyed by prices set in a free market. Prices reflect individuals’ subjective preferences regarding the best use of resources. When government uses force to remove resources from the marketplace, it makes it impossible for the price system to function, leaving government officials and private citizens unable to determine the most efficient use of resources. That is why every attempt at government management of the economy inevitably reduces the people’s standard of living.
Source: The Green Bad Deal | | Tenth Amendment Center
# – # – # – # – #
“Like all forms of socialism” leads to poverty, death, and destruction.
“That is why every attempt at government management of the economy” leads to Unintended Consequences!
That’s why to the socialist “Green Dealers” I say “you are out of your <synonym for the act of procreation> minds”!
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
We’ve often countered arguments in favor of gun bans by pointing out that criminals aren’t going to give up their guns. This is often laughed at by anti-gunners, either that or they argue it’s irrelevant for some ridiculous reason.Now, with New Zealand on the cusp of banning certain firearms, the nation’s most notorious gang has vowed not to give up their guns.
Source: New Zealand Gang Refuses To Give Up Their Guns
# – # – # – # – #
(1) Criminals don’t disarm because of any law, diktat, or regulation.
(2) One of the sparks of the American revolution was the attempt by the British Army to seize munitions at Lexington and Concord. Look how that worked out!
(3) Isn’t self-defense a basic human right?
(4) The Gooferment has abrogated, by its own court decisions (i.e., no specific duty to protect anyone), its end of the supposed “social contract” (i.e., the citizen pledges allegiance and the government pledges protection).
“Inasmuch as the Constitution was never signed, nor agreed to, by anybody, as a contract, and therefore never bound anybody, and is now binding upon nobody; and is, moreover, such an one as no people can ever hereafter be expected to consent to, except as they may be forced to do so at the point of the bayonet, it is perhaps of no importance what its true legal meaning, as a contract, is. Nevertheless, the writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth. But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” Lysander Spooner (1808-1887), No Treason (1870) http://praxeology.net/LS-NT-6.htm#no.6
(5) One theory of “human rights” is that you are only entitled to those rights that you are willing to fight, and die, for. Those, that you earn, you get to keep. All rights are God given!
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . .” — Alexander Solzhenitsyn
“From my cold dead hand” is more than a bumper sticker. It’s a challenge to any would be genocidal tyrant.
“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” — apocryphal unsourced quote attributed to Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
So too, you can disarm the American people without their own cooperation.
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Tagged: Gun Control, Rights, RKBA, second amendment, self-defense, tyranny, VICTIM DISARMAMENT | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
Border Patrol agents rescued a Guatemalan family of four before they drowned to death attempting to cross the U.S. southern border. A forceful current swept a woman and her three children, ages 2, 4 and 15, downriver when they attempted to cross the Rio Grande on March 28.
Source: Border Agents Rescue Migrant Mother And Her Three Kids Right Before They Drowned In The Rio Grande
# – # – # – # – #
In case anyone hasn’t figured it out, this is a slow motion national and humanitarian disaster all cause by the welfare / warfare Gooferment!
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
The doomed Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max that crashed and killed 157 people last month reportedly had its angle-of-attack sensor damaged on takeoff from a foreign object or bird.
Source: Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 had sensor damaged by foreign object at takeoff | Daily Mail Online
# – # – # – # – #
Pretty bad engineering if a bird strike can know a plane out of the air.
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Constitution does not guarantee a “painless death” for condemned murderers, deciding that a Missouri inmate may be executed by a lethal injection despite a rare, severe condition that could cause him to suffocate.By a 5-4 vote, the court rejected Russell Bucklew’s claim it would be cruel and unusual punishment to inject him because it could trigger a hemorrhage and choking. He maintained the state must seek out another method of execution, such as lethal gas, to carry out his execution.
Source: Supreme Court says the Constitution does not ensure a ‘painless’ execution – Los Angeles Times
# – # – # – # – #
Doesn’t KILLING SOMEONE fit the standard of “cruel and unusual”?
And, as we have learned from Project Innocence, mistakes happen for which we do not yet have a “pencil eraser”. Oh well, too bad for you.
As a little L libertarian pro-lifer, where does the Gooferment gets its “authority” to kill citizens, or for that matter anyone?
As we can see from the actions of past “Presidents”, human life means very little when it stands in their way. Need a list? It’s left for an exercise to the reader to itemize the Presidents who have killed this way.
(Hint: Good old Honest Abe ordered the killing of non-combatant citizens and destroying their livelihoods during the War of Norther Aggression. That was a FIRST in the annals of civilized warfare! Argh!)
— 30 —
Permits to carry a concealed firearm are allowed under California law but it’s up to local police chiefs and sheriffs to decide if an applicant has a valid reason to obtain one.
The plaintiffs in the 1994 case, called Assenza, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al., sued because the LAPD had a long-standing practice of simply denying every applicant.The City settled and promised in 1995 the LAPD would issue permits to the 30 plaintiffs, according to court records.
“The City should keep its word,” said attorney Burt Jacobson, a former federal prosecutor and one of the plaintiffs in the case. “They wanted a settlement, and they wrote the settlement!” Jacobson said he’s faced recent threats as a result of court cases that ended many years ago.
Source: LAPD Wants To Cancel Citizens’ Concealed Carry Permits
# – # – # – # – #
So, the “City” sought and agree to a settlement and now wants to abrogate it.
You can’t trust the “gun grabbers” … … EVER.
No compromise ever.
— 30 —
Leave a Comment » | ADHOC | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
2019-Apr-01
Secession: The Reasonable Option Everyone Resists | Tom Woods
Published on Jan 30, 2015
The growing number of secession movements around the world gives rise to our topic: breaking away from current government structures that do so much harm to liberty, peace, and prosperity. Recorded at “Breaking Away: The Case for Secession”—the Mises Circle in Houston, Texas, on 24 January 2015.
# – # – # – # – #
Is it reasonable that 320M+ people are ruled from one city and handful of “elite” politicians and bureaucrats?
I think not.
The USA needs to devolve back to the “United States of America”.
“If this be treason, make the most of it.” — Patrick Henry “Virginia Resolves” May 30, 1765
# – # – # – # – #
Leave a Comment » | SECESSION | Permalink
Posted by reinkefj
You are currently browsing the Reinke Faces Life blog archives for April, 2019.
-
-
FJohn Reinke
Consultant at Technology Legacies LLC
Advisor, Computer Governance Committee at Manhattan College
Editor / Publisher at Jasper Jottings
Greater New York City Area
JJ Positraction JJ Endnotes Downsize DC
Philosophy of Liberty
I have NOT received any gagged governmental information requests
Reinke Faces Life 