Tag Archives: post office

"I Got Nothing Against Being Gay…"

I was standing in line at the Las Vegas post office. It was a long line stretching out the door and only one window was open. (And the fools in charge of the post office wonder why they’re going broke.) A tall, rural-looking man had just finished buying his stamps and he stepped away from the window. All of us in line took a step forward.
A moment later the man returned, standing off to the side of the line. He called back to the postal worker at the window with a rangy twang, “I hate to bother you, but could I get some different stamps instead of the ones you gave me?”
“Sure,” said the postal worker. Then he asked, “Which ones did I give you?”
The man answered, “Gay pride.”
I busted out laughing, followed by everyone else in line. The man explained himself. “I got nothing against being gay,” he said with that rangy voice. “I just don’t want it on my mail.”
The line chuckled and the postal worker said, “I understand.” He then exchanged the man’s stamps.
As for me, I bought a sheet of Batman stamps. I don’t want it on my mail either.

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Obama Targets Anti-Fraud Voter ID Law

Let me ask you a simple question:

When you go to the DMV to get a driver’s license, don’t you have to show identification proving you are who you say you are?

When you go to the Post Office to get a passport, don’t you have to show valid identification proving you are who you say you are?

When you go buy something in a store without using cash, don’t you have to show your driver’s license to prove you are who your credit or debit card says you are?

Then why is it that when we go to the voting booth to exercise one of the most important acts as an American citizen, we shouldn’t produce valid ID to prove we are who we say we are? And if you favor voter ID, you’re called a racist?
To prevent voter fraud, many states have passed voter-ID laws. Some of those states even provide a valid identification for free to residents who do not have a driver’s license.
The Supreme Court has upheld those voter ID laws.
But the Obama administration is attacking those exact same laws, using the contorted justification that asking for voter ID discriminates against minorities.
Really? Does Obama have such a low opinion of America’s racial/ethnic minorities that he thinks they’re too stupid to know how to acquire a voter ID card?
Judicial Watch reports, Dec. 7, 2011, that the Obama Administration is once again utilizing the Department of Justice (DOJ) as a political tool, this time to challenge voter identification laws.
The powerful chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz) is calling ID laws a “full-scale assault” on minority voters designed to “rig” elections for Republicans.
Eight states have strict laws that require a voter to provide picture identification in order to cast a ballot. All but two of the states—Georgia and Indiana—passed their measures this year. But the DOJ’s bloated civil rights division says those measures are “discriminatory” in purpose or effect. Targets of the DOJ’s discrimination probe are Kansas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Mississippi.
Reiterating the administration’s “commitment to robust civil rights enforcement,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez confirmed last week that DOJ lawyers are reviewing some of the recently-enacted state laws to ensure that they are not racially discriminatory. “We have received numerous inquiries about recently enacted state laws relating to voter identification requirements, voter registration requirements and changes to early voting procedures,” Perez said, adding that “we are carefully reviewing these laws.”
In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, ruling that the state’s interest in protecting the integrity of the voting process outweighed the insufficiently proven burdens the law may impose on voters. “There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters,” the nation’s highest court said in its decision.
The ruling makes the DOJ’s aggressive intervention all the more questionable, like some of its other politically-motivated actions. Earlier this year Judicial Watch obtained internal government records that show political appointees at the DOJ ordered a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party dismissed. Clad in military attire and armed with weapons, members of the radical group intimidated white voters with racial insults and profanity during the 2008 presidential election and were scheduled to be prosecuted.
H/t beloved fellow Tina.


Democrats have engaged in voter fraud in 2008 and, most recently, in 2010. Head of the DOJ and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder even admitted that he wouldn’t prosecute the New Black Panthers ’cause they’re “his people.” It’s high time we start calling the DOJ under Obama the Department of Injustice.
Maybe that’s why, more than a year ago, the DOJ changed its website’s banner from the red-white-and-blue to this ominous black:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Zombies At the Post Office

Yes, Virginia, there really are zombies!
H/t my friend Bob W.
~Eowyn

Zombies Are Real!
By Jon Coupal – Howard-Jarvis Taxpayers Association – Dec 6, 2010
Last week I received the notice that every American fears most at this time of year. It was a slip of paper informing me that the United States Postal Service had attempted to deliver a package.
The item was needed ASAP so the next morning I entered the post office shortly after it opened. There were eight people in front of me. In twenty-five minutes finely it was my turn.
Smiling, I approached the window with my slip of paper. I was greeted with dead eyes. I had seen that look before at DMV or the city clerk’s office. Thoughts of zombies flashed through my mind. I explained my mission.
She stared at my scrap of paper a few seconds saying nothing, and then, with what seemed a great effort, got up from her stool and meandered to an unseen location in the back. I glanced around. There were now nearly 50 people in line behind me. No one spoke. Somewhere in an unseen area on the other side of the counter, two postal employees were discussing who would take a break and when.
After what seemed an eternity, the woman returned and informed me that her computer showed that my package had been delivered. Despite my protestations, she just shook her head. Leaving without success, I took the time to count the number victims of postal service now in line — sixty-three.
Is bad service from a monopolistic government controlled provider a unique experience? Just ask yourself the last time you had direct contact with a government agency and remarked how efficient and polite the employees were. Rarely.
Clearly private businesses, whose management knows their customers have the option to go elsewhere, make a greater effort to please. And in an effort to survive in a competitive marketplace, they are under constant pressure to provide good service at a reasonable price.
So here is the question: Why aren’t our elected representatives constantly looking for ways to provide better public services at a lower cost by using the initiative and resourcefulness of the private sector?
Are there savings to be had? Here is one example: A study of privatizing some prison related services conducted by the Reason Foundation and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation earlier this year revealed $1.2 billion in potential annual savings. Every other function of state government should be reviewed in an aggressive manner for similar economies.
There is serious potential to save taxpayer dollars as well as improve customer satisfaction for those who must deal with state government, by increasing the participation of private firms in providing government services.
We hope (newly-elected Gov.) Jerry Brown is listening to these words.

Please follow and like us:
error0