Unfortunately, This Didn’t Come From A Satire Site

As the debate on fracking continues, the discussion coming out of New York State has gotten ridiculous. I guess the political left is desperate to frame every issue as a ‘war on women‘ issue that can be used to help Hillary Clinton in her quest for the presidency.

The Washington Times posted an article yesterday about the debate on the impact of fracking.

The article reports:

A key figure behind New York’s statewide ban on hydraulic fracturing says that losing out on oil and gas jobs is no big deal because the industry only creates work for women as prostitutes and hotel maids.

In an April 6 lecture at the University of Pittsburgh, biologist Sandra Steingraber of New Yorkers Against Fracking described the fight over oil and natural gas development as a feminist issue.

“Fracking as an industry serves men. Ninety-five percent of the people employed in the gas fields are men. When we talk about jobs, we’re talking about jobs for men, and we need to say that,” Ms. Steingraber says in a video posted on YouTube by the industry-backed group Energy in Depth.

“The jobs for women are ‘hotel maid’ and ‘prostitute,’” she says. “So when fracking comes into a community, what we see is that women take a big hit, especially single women who have children who depend on rental housing.”

What about single women who get paid more because the economy in the area begins to grow and employers pay more because their profits increase? What about the fact that cheaper energy costs will help single women balance their budgets?

The article refutes the claim that women will not benefit from fracking:

Supporters of the industry swung back by citing a 2014 report from the American Petroleum Institute, which found that women filled 226,000 oil, gas and petrochemical industry jobs, or 19 percent of those jobs.

The article lists some of the arguments the opponents are making–even going so far as comparing fracking to rape. If this is the level to which the opponents of fracking have stooped, I wonder if they actually have any scientific evidence to back their concerns.
Please follow the link above to read the entire article. When you find out which groups support biologist Sandra Steingraber of New Yorkers Against Fracking, it is easy to understand why she is saying the things she is saying.

Common Core In North Carolina

Yesterday I attended the Academic Standards Review Commission in Raleigh, North Carolina.

The Academic Standards Review Commission was established by General Assembly of North Carolina Session 2013 Session Law 2014-78 Senate Bill 812.

Section 2(c) of the Bill states:

SECTION 2.(c) The Commission shall:

(1)    Conduct a comprehensive review of all English Language Arts and Mathematics standards that were adopted by the State Board of Education under G.S. 115C-12(9c) and propose modifications to ensure that those standards meet all of the following criteria:

  1. Increase students’ level of academic achievement.
  2. Meet and reflect North Carolina’s priorities.
  3. Are age-level and developmentally appropriate.
  4. Are understandable to parents and teachers.
  5. Are among the highest standards in the nation.

(2)   As soon as practicable upon convening, and at any time prior to termination, recommend changes and modifications to these academic standards to the State Board of Education.

(3)   Recommend to the State Board of Education assessments aligned to proposed changes and modifications that would also reduce the number of high-stakes assessments administered to public schools.

(4)   Consider the impact on educators, including the need for professional development, when making any of the recommendations required in this section.

The Commission shall assemble content experts to assist it in evaluating the rigor ofacademic standards. The Commission shall also involve interested stakeholders in this processand otherwise ensure that the process is transparent.

The Commission is continuing its work, looking at Math and English standards in states such as Massachusetts (before Common Core), Texas, Minnesota, and others. As the Commission does its research, it is becoming obvious that Common Core is not the best way to improve the education of our students in this state. It was also noted by a member of the Commission that despite its claims to the contrary, Common Core does not make students either college or career ready.

It was interesting to me to hear the discussions relating to helping high school students prepare for both careers and college. It was noted that a student may work for a year or two before deciding to attend college, and that student needs to be prepared for college if he decides to attend. Not every high school student goes to college immediately after graduation, but many students do attend later.

I was impressed by the concern of the Commission for the teachers to have a chance to become familiar with any standards that might be adopted. At one point a Commission member noted that ‘we need to determine what is best for North Carolina–not rush into something as was done with Common Core.’

There will be another meeting next month as they continue their investigation.

 

I Never Believed This Could Happen In America

Hot Air posted a story yesterday about a home invasion in Wisconsin. Unfortunately the home invasion was done by people who were supposed to protect Americans–not harass them.

The story reports:

She (Cindy Archer) got the dogs safely out of the house, just as multiple armed agents rushed inside. Some even barged into the bathroom, where her partner was in the shower. The officer or agent in charge demanded that Cindy sit on the couch, but she wanted to get up and get a cup of coffee.

“I told him this was my house and I could do what I wanted.” Wrong thing to say. “This made the agent in charge furious. He towered over me with his finger in my face and yelled like a drill sergeant that I either do it his way or he would handcuff me.”

They wouldn’t let her speak to a lawyer. She looked outside and saw a person who appeared to be a reporter. Someone had tipped him off.

What had she done to cause this invasion by armed police?

The article reports:

Archer participated in the efforts to reform public-employee unions in Wisconsin with the Act 10 proposal. Others noted by French also participated in conservative politics and policy development, all of whom got raided in exactly the same manner — warned not to talk about it, warned not to get a lawyer, all while the government confiscated their papers and computers.

Wisconsin has a John Doe Law, widely used by political types to silence or intimidate political opposition. The law was originally passed as part of campaign finance reform, but unfortunately has become a political weapon.

The article further explains what has happened with the John Doe Law:

The John Doe investigations are a form of domestic lawfare, and our constitutional system is ill equipped to handle it. Federal courts rarely intervene in state judicial proceedings, state officials rarely lose their array of official immunities for the consequences of their misconduct, and violations of First Amendment freedoms rarely result in meaningful monetary damages for the victims. …

Yes, Wisconsin, the cradle of the progressive movement and home of the “Wisconsin idea” — the marriage of state governments and state universities to govern through technocratic reform — was giving birth to a new progressive idea, the use of law enforcement as a political instrument, as a weapon to attempt to undo election results, shame opponents, and ruin lives.

Most Americans have never heard of these raids, or of the lengthy criminal investigations of Wisconsin conservatives. For good reason. Bound by comprehensive secrecy orders, conservatives were left to suffer in silence as leaks ruined their reputations, as neighbors, looking through windows and dismayed at the massive police presence, the lights shining down on targets’ homes, wondered, no doubt, What on earth did that family do?

This was the on-the-ground reality of the so-called John Doe investigations, expansive and secret criminal proceedings that directly targeted Wisconsin residents because of their relationship to Scott Walker, their support for Act 10, and their advocacy of conservative reform.

The United States Constitution states:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The John Doe Law will shortly be reviewed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. Hopefully the Courts will uphold the Constitution. If they don’t, we are in danger of losing free speech in America. As for the issue of money in politics–full disclosure of donors and amounts would do a lot to solve that problem–and it would avoid this sort of lawfare.

 

 

There Are No Words

On Friday, CNN posted a story about Muslim migrants fleeing Libya and trying to get to Italy.

The article reports:

Muslims who were among migrants trying to get from Libya to Italy in a boat this week threw 12 fellow passengers overboard — killing them — because the 12 were Christians, Italian police said Thursday.

Italian authorities have arrested 15 people on suspicion of murdering the Christians at sea, police in Palermo, Sicily, said.

At least Italy is arresting those who are suspected of the killing.

The article further reports:

Thousands of people each year make the dangerous sea journey from North Africa to Europe’s Mediterranean coast, often aboard vessels poorly equipped for the trip. Many of them attempt the voyage to flee war and poverty in Africa and the Middle East.

More than 10,000 people have arrived on Italian shores from Libya since last weekend alone, according to the Italian coast guard.

Many die each year while attempting the voyage, often when boats capsized. Last year at least 3,200 died trying to make the trip. Since 2000, according to the International Organization for Migration, almost 22,000 people have died fleeing across the Mediterranean.

We need to take a closer look at what is happening. People are risking their lives to flee Muslim countries that are at war and yet they are killing the people who are fleeing with them because of their religious beliefs. This is unacceptable. The fact that killing Christians is widely accepted in many Muslim circles should be an alarm for the western world. We have to either deal with the philosophy that condones this killing or find a way to contain all of those people who believe it is their duty to kill Christians. This is a worldwide problem, and those countries who are part of western civilization need to face the problem and deal with it. If those people fleeing Libya and other war-torn Muslim countries want to settle in western countries which are peaceful, they need to leave their ideas about killing Christians back in their home countries.

Any Republican Who Supports This Should Be Voted Out Of Office

The Blaze is reporting today that a group of Republicans and Democrats have proposed legislation to raise the gasoline tax.

The article reports:

“In order to sustain the trust fund in the near-term, the legislation indexes the gas and diesel user fees to inflation — raising roughly $27.5 billion and providing funding for our infrastructure needs for 1.7 years,” they said.

Rep. Jim Renacci (R-Ohio) introduced the Bridge to Sustainable Infrastructure Act with another Republican, Rep. Reid Ribble (Wis.), and two Democrats, Bill Pascrell (N.J.) and Dan Lipinski (Ill.). The bill is the latest attempt to boost the federal highway fund that members say will be empty in the next few months.

The bill again raises the question of whether Republicans will decide it’s time to raise the gas tax, find other sources of new funding, or make cuts to other areas of the federal government. Many Republicans will balk at the idea of raising the gas tax, even as many others see it as a natural way to raise money.

The average American finally gets a break on the cost of gasoline, and Congress immediately plans to mess it up. The gasoline tax impacts lower and middle income families. An increased gasoline tax will probably not make a big difference to those in Congress–there are very few (if any) lower or middle class people in Congress–that is a huge part of the problem.

Any Republican who supports an increase in the gasoline tax should be promptly voted out of office. Massachusetts voters just overturned the idea of indexing gasoline taxes to inflation. American voters should do the same.

The Winston Churchill Of Our Time

Yesterday was Holocaust Remembrance Day. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave the following speech:

Seventy years ago, the bells of freedom rang out across the free world. The horrific nightmare that had engulfed all humanity in blood had come to an end in Europe. But the day the Nazis were vanquished was not only a day of relief and jubilation. It was also a day of great sorrow for our nation, and a day of reflection for the world’s leaders. Leaders of modern countries realized that it was a propitious time to establish a new world order based on defending liberty, eradicating evil and opposing oppression. They articulated the most important lesson of World War II: democracies must not turn a blind eye to the aspirations of tyrannous regimes to expand. A conciliatory attitude toward these regimes only increases their propensity for aggression. And if such aggression is not stopped in time, humanity might find itself in a much bloodier battle.

In the years before World War II, the free world tried to appease the Nazi regime, to gain its trust, to curry its favor through gestures. There were those who warned that this concessionary policy would only whet Hitler’s appetite, but these warnings were ignored due to the natural human desire for calm at all costs. And indeed, the price was exacted not long after, and it was too heavy to bear – six million of our people were slaughtered in the Holocaust, and millions of others were killed in this terrible inferno.

When the war ended, the conclusion was clear: there is no room for weakness when facing tyrannous regimes that send their murderous tentacles in every direction. Only by standing firm and adhering to the values of liberty and tolerance can we ensure the future of humankind.
There are many around the world who claim that the lessons learned then are still valid today. They affirm: “Never again!” They declare: “We will not turn a blind eye to the expansionist intentions of a violent tyranny.” They promise: “We will oppose evil as soon as it begins.” But as long as these announcements are not backed by practical actions – they are meaningless. Did the world really learn a lesson from the inconceivable universal and Jewish tragedy of last century? I wish I could stand here and tell you that the answer to this was yes.

Today, ever more threats challenge human civilization. Radical Islamist forces are flooding the Middle East, destroying remnants of the past, torturing the helpless, murdering innocents. They hope to establish caliphates, more than one, like in the Middle Ages. At the same time, the extremist regime in Iran is oppressing its people; it is rushing forward and submerging the Middle East in blood and suffering – in Yemen, in Syria, in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Gaza and across the border of the Golan Heights.

Just as the Nazis aspired to crush civilization and to establish a “master race” to replace it and control the world while annihilating the Jewish people, so too does Iran strive to gain control over the region, from which it would spread further, with the explicit intent of obliterating the Jewish state. Iran is advancing in two tracks: the first is in developing the ability to arm itself with nuclear weapons and stockpile ballistic missiles; and the second – exporting the Khomeinist revolution to many countries by widely using terrorism and taking over large parts of the Middle East. Everything is out in the open – it is all taking place in broad daylight, in front of the cameras. And yet, the blindness is immense.

“For, behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the peoples,” said the Prophet Isaiah. The determination and lessons that were acquired through blood seventy years ago are now dissipating, and the darkness and fog of denying reality are taking their place. The bad deal that is being made with Iran demonstrates that the historic lesson has not been internalized. The West is yielding in the face of Iran’s aggressive actions. Instead of demanding a significant dismantling of the nuclear program in Iran – a country that clearly states its plans to exterminate six million Jews here and elsewhere, to eradicate many countries and many regimes – the superpowers back down. They are leaving Iran with its nuclear capabilities intact, and even allowing it to expand them later on, regardless of Iran’s actions in the Middle East and around the world.

As the civilized world is lulled into slumber on a bed of illusions, the rulers of Iran continue to encourage subversion and terrorism and disseminate destruction and death. The superpowers turn a deaf ear to the crowds in Iran shouting: “Death to America; Death to Israel.” They turn a blind eye to the executions of those who oppose the regime and of  members of minority populations. And they hold their peace in the face of the massive arming of terrorist organizations. At most, they make a halfhearted statement for the record.

I have heard that in honor of Holocaust Remembrance Day a competition with prizes is soon to take place in Tehran with participants from 56 countries. It is a Holocaust denial cartoon competition. Will we hear protests? At best, a minor condemnation might be heard; that will minimally fulfill their obligation.

Distinguished guests, Israeli citizens and representatives of other countries,
The bubble of this illusion is going to burst. Democratic governments made a critical mistake before World War II, and we are convinced – and I must say that many of our neighbors are too – that they are making a grave mistake now too. It is possible that this partnership with many of our neighbors, the partnership in identifying threats, will be the foundation for the partnership to forge a better, safer and more peaceful future in our region. Meanwhile, we will not flinch. We will continue to insist on the truth, and we will do everything we can to open the eyes that are shut.

I do not want to mislead anyone. We have tests ahead of us. We are in the midst of a great battle against the enervation, the weakness, the denial of reality – we will stand with our full force.

While there are those who refuse to understand our position, there are many others who identify with us. But even if we are compelled to stand alone, we will not be afraid. In any scenario, in any situation, we will safeguard our right, we will maintain our ability, we will keep our resolve to defend ourselves.

Seventy years ago we were war refugees, powerless and voiceless. Today we express what we have to say, and we are determined to safeguard our existence and our future. It is our duty to fight those who wish to destroy us, not to bow down to them or to downplay reality. We will not allow the State of Israel to be a passing episode in the history of our people.

Distinguished guests,
Today in my office I met an 85-year-old  Holocaust survivor, Abraham Niederhoffer. Abraham was born in Romania. When he was 12 years old he witnessed the brutal murder of his relatives by a Romanian soldier. He was taken on a cattle train to Ukraine, where he survived the Holocaust. Due to the persistent refusal of the communist authorities in Romania to permit his emigration, he only came to Israel in 1969. Here he worked as an engineer and supervisor, contributing to the building of the country. He told me his story with great emotion, so much so that he had to pause several times. At the end of the meeting, he beseeched me, “Prime Minister,” he said, “it is your duty to prevent another Holocaust.” And I responded: “That is exactly how I see my responsibility. That is exactly how I see my responsibility.”

Seven decades ago, the survivors emerged from the camps, from the forests, from the March of Death, battered and bruised with nothing but the tattered clothes on their backs. Upon their release, the prisoners of the camps from all nations were asked by the Allied soldiers where each one wished to go. The Poles returned to Poland; the Russians returned to Russia; the Hungarians – to Hungary; the Ukrainians – to Ukraine. But a great many of them had nowhere to return to. They stood hopeless, because they did not have their own country.

Today, we have our own country – a flourishing and modern country; a country that rests on the heritage of our forefathers and stands at the vanguard of global knowledge; a country that disseminates a great light; a country that has taken charge of its destiny. Seventy years after the valleys of death, we revere the living, the vibrant, the creative, the flourishing.

Israel breaks ground on every front of modernization – in science, medicine, technology, agriculture, education and culture. And we do this not only for our people. We do this for the benefit of all humanity. This is what our existence is based upon – on our commitment to the safety and future of Israel, on the deference to our heritage, and on the unity of a nation in which a vast life force shines. The nation of Israel, which has arisen from the hellfire, is ready for any challenge.

“Shake thyself from the dust; put on thy beautiful garments, my people.” The eternal nation has shaken itself from the dust, returned home, stood tall, established an outstanding country and an outstanding army, the Israel Defense Force, in which our brave and courageous sons and daughters serve.

We will remember those who were murdered, we will guarantee life.

I Think This Man Has The Right Idea

Have you ever had a moment when you thought that being a grown-up was a really bad idea and you longed for the days of blanket forts and coloring? Or a moment after you paid your taxes when you decided you wanted to buy a deserted island somewhere and start your own country? Well, somebody did.

Time Magazine reported yesterday that Vit Jedlicka, a member of the conservative Party of Free Citizens in the Czech Republic, has created Liberland (and appointed himself president).

The article reports:

The 3 sq. mi. “country,” where taxes are optional and a military is nonexistent, does not “interfere with the territory” of the two states, according to Liberland’s website.

“The objective of the founders of the new state is to build a country where honest people can prosper without being oppressed by governments making their lives unpleasant through the burden of unnecessary restrictions and taxes,” reads a statement announcing the creation of the new country this week. The country’s motto is: “To live and let live.”

…The project has already received roughly 20,000 applications for citizenship, according to Jedlicka, who estimated that the country will receive as many as 100,000 applications by the end of next week (Liberland’s website has details of how to apply for citizenship, including sending an email of introduction—a C.V. is optional). Jedlicka added that some people already have plans to relocate.

…The Serbian and Croatian Embassies in the United States did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

If someone can find a desert island that will produce food, I’m in.

From The New York Times?

Evidently The New York Times is not entirely supportive of Hillary Clinton’s current political ambitions–they ran a story yesterday that is damaging to her image. It could be that they want to get this out of the way before the campaign heats up or it could be that they have another candidate they prefer. Time will tell.

Yesterday The New York Times reported the following:

Hillary Rodham Clinton was directly asked by congressional investigators in a December 2012 letter whether she had used a private email account while serving as secretary of state, according to letters obtained by The New York Times.

But Mrs. Clinton did not reply to the letter. And when the State Department answered in March 2013, nearly two months after she left office, it ignored the question and provided no response.

The New York Times reports the State Department reply:

In the State Department’s letter back to Mr. Issa, Thomas B. Gibbons, the acting assistant secretary for legislative affairs, described the department’s records management policies and guidelines.

He said “employees may use personal email on personal time for matters not directly related to official business, and any employee using personal email ‘should make it clear that his or her personal email is not being used for official business.’ ”

The State Department offered training on its record management programs to its employees, he said.

There is one particular time period of Hillary Clinton’s emails that Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for.

On March 5, I posted a story that included part of this request and some of the events surrounding the time period:

Judicial Watch submitted its original FOIA request on August 27, 2014. The State Department was required by law to respond by September 26, 2014 at the latest to Judicial Watch’s request for:

  1. Any and all records of communication between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013; and
  2. Any and all records of communication between former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013.

To date, the State Department has not responded.

Ms. Mahmoud threatened Mrs. Clinton after Morsi was ousted.  According to JihadWatch.org:

In the words of El-Mogaz News, Morsi’s wife “is threatening to expose the special relationship between her husband and Hillary Clinton, after the latter attacked the ousted [president], calling him a simpleton who was unfit for the presidency.  Sources close to Nagla confirmed that she has threatened to publish the letters exchanged between Morsi and Hillary.”

This might be a problem.

A Really Bad Idea–Both Politically and Practically

Yesterday, Bloomberg,com reported that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has released his plan to reform Social Security.

The article reports:

Christie, the 52-year-old Republican governor of New Jersey, called for phasing out retirement payments to those with more than $200,000 a year in other income and smaller reductions for those earning $80,000. Together, he said, the overhaul would save $1 trillion over a decade.

“It is about telling all Americans the truth — and without delay,” he said during a 40-minute speech at St. Anselm College in Manchester. “If you believe we should keep this promise, as I do, that all Americans should have access to the economic security these programs provide, then that costs money.”

Spelling out his plans in detail for the first time, Christie proposed:

— Raising the retirement age for Social Security to 69 from 67, for those born in 1960 or later;

— Raising the age to qualify for Medicare by one month per year until it reaches 67 from the current 65.

— Eliminating payroll taxes for seniors who remain in the workforce.

I have some major problems with this idea. Social Security is deducted from almost everyone’s paycheck from the time they begin work. Federal employees, active duty military (and Congress) are exempt. The money was supposed to be put in a lock box where it could accrue interest and grow to meet the increasing need. In 1965 (or so) that lock box disappeared and the money was used to fund the war in Vietnam and the Great Society programs. Since then it has been used to fund welfare and entitlement programs. Generally speaking, these entitlement programs do not have a work requirement and the people collecting the money do not have to do anything to earn the money they receive. In most states welfare recipients are not drug tested (most working people have to pass a drug test in order to get a job). Social Security is not the place to cut the federal budget–the people collecting it have paid money into it–it is not their fault the government chose to spend the money.

Recently my husband and I took a vacation to Iceland and Wales. In Wales I learned something about giving to people who may be in need. My husband and I volunteered in a restaurant run by a church. In America, it would be similar to a soup kitchen. However, there was something about the restaurant (which served dinner once a week) that impressed me. The meals were not free. There was a small charge for dinner and a somewhat limited menu to choose from. If someone came in who could not pay, they were given a free meal, but generally speaking, a diner paid something for his dinner. Somewhere along the line, we have taught a group of Americans that there is a free lunch. It is time for that to end. We are accomplishing nothing by denying benefits to those who have paid for them and giving benefits to those who are contributing nothing. That is the wrong message to send.

As an afterthought–does anyone really believe that once an income limit is set on receiving Social Security there will be no changes to that limit? Governor Christie’s plan has the potential of turning Social Security into a plan that everyone who works pays into but is only available to those making less than $50,000 a year in retirement. His plan will create another entitlement that everyone who is working pays into and everyone who is not working can collect from.

A Waste Of A Talented Athlete

WCVB.com (Boston) is reporting today that former New England Patriots player Aaron Hernandez has been found guilty of first-degree murder in the death of Odin Lloyd. Hernandez will spend the rest of his life in prison without the chance of parole. He will serve his time in MCI Cedar Junction in Walpole, less than two miles from Gillette Stadium.

The article reports:

He was also found guilty of charges of illegal possession of firearm and illegal possession of ammunition.

In Massachusetts, a first-degree murder conviction carries an automatic sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. He will serve his time at MCI Cedar Junction in Walpole.

“Odin was the backbone of the family. Odin was the man of the house.  Odin was his sisters’ keepers,” his mother, Ursula Ward, said in a victim impact statement.

Through tears, Ward said she has forgiven those involved in her son’s death.

“I forgive the hands of the people who had a hand in my son’s murder — both before and after. And I hope and pray that someday everyone out there will forgive them also,” she said.

Hernandez had a bright future in the National Football League. It is a shame that his lack of moral fiber will mean that he spends the rest of his life behind bars.

Who Will Vote In 2016?

On Thursday, the DC Clothesline posted a story quoting J. Christian Adams, a former United States Department of Justice official in the Civil Rights Division on what is happening in states that are issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.

The article quotes Mr. Adams:

“The bigger problem is that when they get those drivers licenses, there’s a government social services agency that is compelled under motor voter to offer voter registration.  For example, I’m representing a client — the American Civil Rights Union. We’re about to file a brief to the Supreme Court that shows actual voter registrations of people who on their voter registration forms that they’re not citizens, but they’re still getting registered to vote.

…“[These will be] the actual voter registrations forms through motor voter.  The point is, because of motor voter in issuing these alien document cards, you’re going to have non-citizens moving on to the voter rolls. It’s inevitable,” said Adams noting, “The Justice Department protects the lawless, because there’s a political benefit to this administration to allow lawlessness to occur. Because if those people who lawlessly are on the voter rolls go to vote, there’s probably a 9 in 10 chance they’re voting for Democrats.”

Unless someone somewhere in government decides to defend the integrity of the American electoral process, this is where we are.

Quote Of The Week (And It’s Only Tuesday)

This quote is from the Conservative Tribune. It is harsh, but I believe it is something to think about when considering the presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton:

It’s a great irony that the first woman to have a reasonable shot at becoming president has gotten there merely by championing the public shaming of women simply unlucky enough to be hit on, if not sexually assaulted, by her own husband.

With all of the hero-worship coming out of the media in the wake of Hillary’s announcement, it’s funny that there was little to no mention of the women whose life she’s played an active part in ruining.

Give it time, though. No matter how complicit the media wants to be, the truth seldom stays buried for long, especially when the Clintons are involved.

The New Medicare Doc Fix Bill Will Hurt Those It Is Supposed To Serve

The Daily Caller posted an article today about the “Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act” (MACR). The bill bears a striking resemblance to the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), a part of ObamaCare designed to cut Medicare costs.

The article explains:

The new payment system MACR creates for Medicare is eerily similar to the IPAB model. Dubbed the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), it will reward or penalize physicians who treat Medicare patients based on various metrics. Two of the metrics that MIPS will use to grade physicians are how well physicians’ patients score on quality measures and how many medical resources physicians use to treat patients. Under MIPS, a physician will receive a composite score, between zero and 100, based on how well he meets the MIPS criteria. Each year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will choose a “threshold” number. If a physician minimizes the use of medical resources while his patients score well on quality measures, he will likely score above that threshold and he will receive a bonus. If he scores below it, he will be penalized with a cut to his Medicare reimbursement.

The intent behind MIPS is consistent with the IPAB mission of lowering Medicare’s cost growth and improving quality. The quality measures and resource use components of MIPS are supposed to promote those goals by rewarding physicians who provide quality care at a lower cost.

Under the new rules, doctors will be encouraged to use the majority of their resources on patients who are moderately ill. To treat too many seriously sick patients will lower a doctor’s “threshold” number and cut his Medicare reimbursement.

The article concludes:

One of the goals of MACR, eliminating the unworkable Sustainable Growth Rate, is a worthy one. Getting rid of this perennial problem, however, should not come by way of a new payment system that will make it harder for sicker patients to obtain physician care. The Senate should remove MIPS. Otherwise, lawmakers risk installing an IPAB-style payment system in Medicare.

Very few people will argue that we need to cut the cost of medical care in America. However, I don’t believe most Americans want to do it at the expense of our chronically ill or aging citizens. This is not the way to cut medical expenses. A free-market system with less government intervention would be much more efficient and have the effect of cutting expenses for everyone.

Defending Free Speech

The Washington Examiner is reporting today that Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch has asked Internal Revenue Service Commissioner John Koskinen not to change the Internal Revenue Service’s rules regarding political speech by nonprofit organizations.

The article quotes Senator Hatch:

“The IRS is just beginning to recover its reputation, and your agency is just beginning to regain trust from lawmakers,” Hatch wrote to Koskinen. “Do not throw all of that away in a quixotic and bizarre mission to regulate the political activity of Americans.”

Hatch said Congress will “have no choice” but to investigate the agency’s motivations if it issues the rules, claiming that it would be viewed as an act of political bias. He asked Koskinen to preserve all communications related to the rulemaking, in case the Obama White House or Treasury Department is playing a role in shaping it.

The IRS is not supposed to be a political organization. Unfortunately under President Obama it has become one. It would be nice to have an IRS Commissioner who would uphold the political neutrality of the IRS. Evidently John Koskinen is not that person.

In Case You Have Been Sleeping Well…

Reuters is reporting today that Russia is clearing the way to send Iran anti-missile systems as soon as the sanctions are lifted on Iran. Doesn’t that news give you hope for peace in the Middle East?

The article reports:

Russia paved the way on Monday for missile system deliveries to Iran and started an oil-for-goods swap, signaling that Moscow may have a head-start in the race to benefit from an eventual lifting of sanctions on Tehran.

The moves come after world powers, including Russia, reached an interim deal with Iran this month on curbing its nuclear program.

The Kremlin said President Vladimir Putin signed a decree ending a self-imposed ban on delivering the S-300 anti-missile rocket system to Iran, removing a major irritant between the two after Moscow canceled a corresponding contract in 2010 under pressure from the West.

This is another reason Congress should demand its constitutional right to review this treaty and a reason to reject the treaty. Once these anti-missile systems are delivered, there will be no way to prevent Iran from going nuclear, assuming that they do not already possess at least one nuclear bomb.

Please follow the link above to read the entire Reuters article. Russia will benefit economically when the sanctions are lifted, and the alliance that is being formed between Russia and Iran will not advance the cause of peace.

 

 

What Hillary Clinton Stands For

Hillary Clinton announced today that she is running for President. Byron York posted an article at the Washington Examiner listing five things she believes about her campaign.

First, Clinton indicated she believes 2016 will be another election about the economy.

Second, Clinton indicated that she doesn’t feel the need to re-introduce herself to the American people.

Third, Clinton indicated that she knows voters suspect she feels entitled to the job.

Fourth, Clinton indicated her campaign will be all about trying to keep the Obama coalition together.

Fifth, Clinton indicated she fully supports gay marriage and will work to win the support of gays unhappy with her slow (for a Democrat) change of mind on the marriage issue.

The decision is in the hands of the American voters.

Lied To Again

California used to be the breadbasket of America–until Nancy Pelosi and crew shut off the water to the Central Valley. Now because of a severe drought, the State is making further decisions about water use that are just as nonsensical as the government’s previous decisions. You can expect the mainstream media to blame this on climate change, but that is not the problem. California has always had droughts–Congress and actions by the State of California have made this drought worse than it should have been.

In 2010, I posted the following vacation picture:

IMG_2957.JPG

In 2010, I quoted the National Review Online in a rightwinggranny article:

The Central Valley’s woes began in earnest in 2007, when the hardline Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) won a lawsuit against California’s intricate water-delivery system, sending farmers like John Harris into a tailspin. In court, the NRDC’s lawyers contended that the vast pumps that help to funnel water from the reservoirs up in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta down to the Central Valley, to Southern California, and to the Bay Area were sucking in and shredding an unacceptable number of smelt — and, the smelt being protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) since 1994, that this was illegal.

The problem has gotten worse since then.

The Wall Street Journal posted an article today about the problem. The article included the following chart:

The line from the article that stands out to me:

The reality is that farm water has already been rationed for more than two decades by the ascendant green politics, starting with the 1992 federal Central Valley Project Improvement Act. Federal protections for the delta smelt, salmon, steelhead and sturgeon (2008-2009) further restricted water pumping at the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, so 76% of inflows, mainly from the Sierra Nevada mountains, spill into San Francisco Bay.

If California is sending three-quarters of the runoff from the mountains into the San Francisco Bay, they deserve to have water problems.

The article in the Wall Street Journal concludes:

Some farmers have also adapted by shifting production to high-value crops. Since 1992 cotton acreage has fallen by about 80%. Roughly 100,000 acres of alfalfa have been torn out in the last four years. Almond acreage has increased by a third over the last decade. While nut trees are water-intensive and cannot be removed from production in dry years, most were planted prior to the Delta’s pumping restrictions. New almond acreage has fallen by 80% since 2005.

In other words, farmers are responding to market forces, which conservatives ought to understand even if the concept is foreign in San Francisco’s Presidio.

Meanwhile, the Bay Area currently imports a large share of its pristine water (among the cheapest in the state) and some of its hydropower electricity from the glacial Hetch Hetchy valley in Yosemite. So its water isn’t diverted to protect fish. But imagine if the government mandated that Hetch Hetchy be restored to its pre-development state. Water and power rates would spike. Marijuana growers and distributors—cannabis consumes about twice as much water as lettuce—would shut down or (horrors) raise their prices.

That won’t happen because of the Bay Area’s clout in Washington and Sacramento. But farmers don’t pack the same punch, so they’re getting fed to the smelt.

This is another example of the state government compounding the previous mistakes of the federal government in order to make a bad situation worse. It’s not about doing what is best for everyone–it’s about who has the most clout in Washington. If we do not change that dynamic in the next election, all of us will be at the mercy or bureaucrats who have no idea of the unintended consequences of their actions.

Who Can You Trust?

It’s fun to gripe about the left wing media. If the left wing media were not so skewed, there would be no need for the right wing media (or bloggers like me). However, when you look at some of the left wing media stories individually and realize some people depend on the left wing media for their sole source of news, you begin to worry.

Breitbart.com posted a story today about three recent lies told by the mainstream media. The first story had to do with the National Rifle Association‘s Convention rules that seek to comply with the laws of the convention venue.

Breitbart.com previously reported:

Breitbart News previously reported that concealed carry is allowed at the NRA convention everywhere that concealed is allowed by state law and local policy. This means concealed carry-loaded handguns are allowed in the Music City Center but not at events in Bridgestone arena.

The ban on concealed carry in Bridgestone arena is not an NRA ban but a local policy.

This is what the New York Times reported:

After all the N.R.A. propaganda about how ‘good guys with guns’ are needed to be on guard across American life, from elementary schools to workplaces, the weekend’s gathering of disarmed conventioneers seems the ultimate in hypocrisy.

Would the New York Times rather the N.R.A. ignore local and state regulations?

The April 11th article at Breitbart.com sums up the logic:

The Times also found it hypocritical that the NRA requested its gun dealers to remove the firing pins from display guns that thousands of conventiongoers will have access to Apparently, the Times finds it just as bizarre when dealers remove the keys from automobiles at car shows and my local WalMart removes the video games from video game boxes.

The second media lie involved Rand Paul, a candidate whom the Democrat party obviously sees as a threat. This lie came from The Guardian and Politico. The lie was that Rand Paul stormed out of an interview and shut out the lights. The truth is rather different. Rand Paul explained to an interviewer from The Guardian that he only had time to answer one more question, which he did. He then left the set and the lights went out. CNN later admitted that they had turned out the lights–Rand Paul did not. However, the lie was already out.

The third media lie came from Bloomberg. Someone at Bloomberg read at The National Report website (a satirical website) that Nancy Reagan had endorsed Hillary Clinton. Because the person did not know that it was a satirical website and did not check to see if it were true, they ran with the story. Eventually they retracted their lie.

Obviously this is not quality reporting. It is a danger to our representative republic–the key to our freedom is informed voters. This sort of news coverage does not produce informed voters. There are a lot of news sources out there. Some are more reliable than others. I strongly suggest that any story coming from the mainstream media needs to be checked against another source. We can no longer trust the press to do its job.

Breaking Faith With America’s Military

Fox News posted a story today about the treatment of the shooting victims of the Fort Hood terrorism attack. The Obama Administration has acknowledged that the people hurt and killed in the attack were victims of terrorism. The Obama Administration has also awarded Purple Hearts to the victims. However, the Obama Administration has also denied benefits for the injuries suffered in the attack.

The article reports:

The 2015 defense budget — known as the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA — included language that meant Fort Hood victims were eligible for the Purple Heart honor because the attack was inspired by a foreign terrorist group, and not workplace violence, as the Defense Department initially labeled it.

 Manning (Shawn Manning), who was seriously injured in the 2009 attack) submitted new paperwork so the Army would recognize his injuries were sustained in the line of duty. But his appeal was rejected by a physical evaluation board, apparently based on a narrow interpretation of the law.

“Section 571 of the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act addresses both the awarding of the Purple Heart to service members killed or wounded in attacks inspired or motivated by foreign terrorist organizations and the Defense of Freedom Medal for those members and civilians killed or wounded during the Fort Hood attack on 5 November 20009,” the April 6 letter states.

“Nowhere in the act, however, does it offer combat benefits for service members permanently disabled in attacks inspired or motivated by foreign terrorist organizations. Although subsequent legislation and guidance may change, currently, the Board has no authority to award V1/V3 (service related) designation to soldiers disabled during the Fort Hood attack. “

Manning said, “it’s a great thing to finally be recognized, to stand up there and say, ‘Hey your sacrifice did mean something.’”

But he said the board’s decision means, on a practical level, his family will lose back pay, and $800 a month in benefits, adding he believes other Fort Hood survivors will face the same treatment. “I think you know it’s a huge let-down. I hope that’s not what the Army had intended to do.”

The people who were injured at Fort Hood were where they were as part of their military service. To deny them the full benefits that are paid to soldiers wounded in combat is a disgrace. Congress needs to correct this situation very quickly. This is another example of the Obama Administration breaking faith with the American military.

 

If You Are Concerned About The Nuclear Deal With Iran, Here Is Your Plan Of Action

Hugh Hewitt posted an article on his website today about the recent developments in the Iranian nuclear deal.

The article reports:

Now that Iran has announced (1) there is no deal unless sanctions are lifted on day one and (2) there will be no “anytime, anywhere” access to military facilities, Democrats up for re-election in 2016 and 2018 face a dilemma even if they are indifferent to national security. Both are deal killers (as should have been the continuation of support for the Iran-backed killer militias of the region and export of existing enriched uranium stockpiles and closing of Fordo.)

…Like the vote on the Iraq war, the vote on the Corker-Menendez will haunt senators for a decade or more to come.  Indeed it will haunt them in history.

The article then lists the Democrats facing re-election in 2016 and 2018 and the phone number to contact them.

The article then lists links to interview Hugh Hewitt has done in recent days regarding the Iranian nuclear deal. I strongly suggest that you follow the link above to the article and read more about the nuclear deal. To agree to this deal should be regarded as treason.

One Way To Deal With The Bullies Among Us

The Ever So Humble Pie Company in East Walpole, Massachusetts, has been getting harassed because they are one of the sponsors of the Howie Carr show, a conservative talk show broadcast in Massachusetts. The leftist thought police would like to see Howie’s show go away, so they are harassing Howie Carr and the sponsors.

The story is told on the Facebook page of The Ever So Humble Pie Company:

“OCCU-PIES!” Are here!
As many of you know, we have been receiving harassing phone calls from someone claiming to be from the “Occupy” movement and the “Boston Chapter of Black Lives Matter”. They made baseless accusations that Howie Carr is a racist and they want him off the air. And because we advertise on his show, they want to hurt us, too. Well, the only way to deal with bullies is to stand up to them! Howie’s listeners suggested we make “Occu-Pies” to poke some fun at them so we did – and 50% of the proceeds will be donated to Fisher House Boston! Pies cost $5.25 eaqch or 4 for $20. Whoopie are $3.50 each or 3 for $10. Here are the pies –
“Bye Bye American Pie “- Apple
“The Harry Reid Black & Blue Pie” -Blackberries & Blueberries
“If you like your pie, you can keep your pie” – Strawberry Rhubarb
“The IMPEACHment Pie” – Peach
“The Moon Bat Pie” – Chocolate Whoopie Pie
Buy a pie and get a FREE copy of Howie’s book RIFLEMAN! (while supplies last).

This is how you handle the thought police.

Making Welfare Work

The budget for food stamps and other public welfare programs has gotten totally out of hand both at the state and the federal level. There are many people who have learned how to take advantage of the welfare system over the years, and the problem has been how to separate those who truly need assistance from those who don’t. Well, it seems as if the State of Maine has found at least a partial answer to the problem.

CNS News reported the following yesterday:

A Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) spokesman tells the Associated Press that 12,000 non-disabled adults were in Maine’s SNAP program before Jan. 1 – a number that dropped to 2,680 by the end of March.

More than 9,000 Maine residents have been removed from the state’s food stamp program since Republican Gov. Paul LePage‘s administration began enforcing work and volunteer requirements.

The article further reports:

State Rep. Scott Hamann (D –South Portland) has introduced a bill that would direct the administration to seek a waiver for certain counties with high unemployment or a lack of jobs.

The measure may not gain support from LePage’s administration. HHS spokesperson David Sorensen says, recipients only need to volunteer for 24 hours a month to comply with the requirements and the administration believes there are enough opportunities even in the most economically depressed regions.

No one wants to deny food to the needy, but the time has come to realize that there are people who are taking advantage of the various welfare programs available. The government really does not help anyone by giving them food without requiring them to work (unless that person is truly disabled in some way). The action that Governor LePage has taken will encourage the work ethic that has been lost in America since the Great Society laws were passed by Congress.

 

Has Anyone In The Obama Administration Actually Read The United States Constitution?

Article II, Section 2, of the United States Constitution states:

He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;

Breitbart.com reported yesterday:

Wednesday on PBS “NewsHour,” Secretary of State John Kerry articulated the administration’s new position on Sen. Bob Corker’s (R-TN) bill demanding Congress get a vote on the merits of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, in light of prominent Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) supporting the bill this week.

Making it clear the bill can not “interfere” with the president’s deal, Kerry said “if it’s changed and adjusted and reflects the respect for the Constitution and the president’s prerogatives,” then Congress can vote.

Kerry said “The president is absolutely correct in making sure that what Congress does, does not assault presidential authority and the Constitution and doesn’t destroy his ability to be able to negotiate this final deal. That’s critical. And the president has said, if the bill is what it is today, written the same way it is today, then he’d veto it.”

So let me get this straight–if Congress passes a law to make sure its constitutional rights are protected, President Obama will veto it. The Constitution states clearly that two-thirds of the Senate must concur with a treaty in order for it to take effect. Has the President (or the current Secretary of State) read the Constitution?

A Bad Deal Only Gets Worse

CNN is reporting today that Iran will not sign any nuclear deal until the economic sanctions are lifted.

The article reports:

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Islamic republic‘s supreme leader, meanwhile, told state-run media outlets he is neither in favor nor against the proposed deal because it isn’t final, and he’s not certain it will become binding because he has “never been optimistic about negotiations with the U.S.”

Six world powers and Iran reached a preliminary deal last week that aims to limit Tehran‘s nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions.

The United States, however, has stressed that if a final deal is reached with Iran, the removal of any sanctions will come in phases.

But work on the agreement isn’t finished.

Negotiators from Iran and the United States, China, Germany, France, Britain and Russia have until June 30 to come up with a final deal.

This is called ‘buying more time.’ I do fear that we will wake up one morning to an announcement from Iran that it now has a stockpile of nuclear weapons–those centrifuges are not spinning for nothing.

The economic sanctions are what brought Iran to the negotiating table. Does anyone actually believe that the Iranian nuclear program will stop once those sanctions are lifted?