Tag Archives: Fox News Channel

Holding On To Free Speech By A Thread

Posted on by

The Washington Examiner posted an article today about a recent vote by the Federal Election Commission.

The article reports:

Finally making good on long-harbored anger at conservative media, Democrats on the Federal Election Commission voted in secret to punish Fox News’ sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate, using an obscure law to charge the network with helping those on stage.

It is the first time in history that members of the FEC voted to punish a media outlet’s debate sponsorship, and it follows several years of Democratic threats against conservative media and websites like the Drudge Report.

The punishment, however, was blocked by all three Republicans on the commission, resulting in a 3-3 tie vote and no action.

The article further explains:

One of the candidates left out filed a complaint to the FEC, charging that Fox was essentially making a contribution to the 17 candidates by letting them have a voice in the debate.

CNN did the same thing, but there is no indication that they faced a complaint.

The quote “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” is attributed to Thomas Jefferson. Regardless of who made the statement, the quote applies to today. There are Americans who want to take away our First and Second Amendment rights. We need to watch the votes in Congress and the Congressional appointments and remove those people from office at the first opportunity to vote.

 

Why We Need Careful Vetting Of Refugees

Posted on by

Not all cultures are alike. There are actions and attitudes that are acceptable in Islamic cultures that are simply not acceptable in America–things like marrying a fourteen-year-old girl, female genital mutilation, honor killings, no rights for women, denying freedom of religion, etc. Unless refugees are willing to accept American views on those (and many other) cultural standards, they need to settle elsewhere. There are countries in the Middle East that share their culture. For whatever reason, those countries have not welcomed the refugees from their neighboring countries.

Fox News posted a story today about an incident in a small Idaho town that illustrates the problem of some of the refugee children now in our schools.

The article reports:

An alleged sexual assault on a five-year-old special needs girl has put a small Idaho city at the center of the debate over the Obama administration’s move to take in hundreds of thousands of refugees.

Much of what occurred in the June 2 incident is unclear, clouded by emotion and rumor and sealed from public record due to the suspects’ ages. At a raucous public meeting Monday, dozens of residents of the city of 44,000 voiced their concerns after word had spread that young Syrian refugees had gang-raped a little girl at knifepoint, defiling her in unspeakable ways.

Some of what they had heard was true, some was not and still more remains unconfirmed speculation. But authorities believe something terrible occurred. Two young boys were arrested Friday and remain in custody.

Snopes reports that the story is ‘mostly false,’ but actually confirms some major parts of the story:

Despite the hot-button issue of refugee resettlement, the story has gained little traction with the national media, and Internet fact-check site Snopes.com has labeled the information circulating on the web as “mostly false.” According to Loebs (Twin Falls County Prosecutor Grant Loebs), the three assailants, ages 7, 10 and 14, are not Syrian, but may be refugees. The girl was not raped, but is believed to have been sexually assaulted, he said.

The article further reports:

Twin Falls Police Chief Craig Kingsbury told reporters the suspects are Iraqi and Sudanese. Loebs said he does not know how long they have been living in the United States.

If you read the Snopes report, the website seems to be concerned about the fact that the attackers were not Syrians. That may be, but they are products of a culture that does not value women and where a women would have to have four witnesses to make a rape charge. They are also from a culture where a woman can be stoned because she has been raped. There have been exaggerations of the attack and misrepresentations of the nationality of the attackers, but the nature of the attack and the culture behind the attack are as reported.

One person interviewed in the story stated:

Twin Falls activists say the case and the lack of information from authorities demonstrates the problem with state and federal programs to resettle refugees in cities and towns.

“We’re worried that these are the kids who will be going to school with our kids,” said Odell. “We want to know what is happening.”

There are a lot of parents who feel this way.

Can This Be Fixed?

Posted on by

I have watched Fox News since it arrived on my cable system many years ago. I appreciated Brit Hume, Tony Snow, and watch Bret Baier. The discussion panels up until the past year have been informative and smart. There was also a reasonable balance of liberal and conservative points of view. Starting somewhere last year, there was a change. I am not a Trump supporter, but even I winced at some of the things said about Donald Trump during the week and on the weekend shows. The clips I heard from the other networks were no better. Well, today NewsBusters confirmed my suspicions.

An article posted at NewsBusters today contained the following graph:

SundayShowRoundtableThe article reports:

The difference between liberals and conservatives is still significant when you include anti-Trump GOP guests. While Fox and CNN had equal numbers of Republican and Democratic guests, ABC, CBS and NBC had nearly three times the number of liberal guests (36) compared to either pro or anti-Trump Republicans (13).

The purpose of having four participants is to encourage a wide variety of views in the discussion. By stacking these discussions with liberal journalists in addition to outright Hillary and Sanders surrogates, the networks are steering the narrative in a particular direction.

ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, CBS’s Face the Nation each only had one Trump supporter during that entire time period, meaning that they each had three out of four roundtable discussions with no representative of the presumptive GOP nominee. NBC’s Meet the Press only had two during that time period. This lack of Trump supporters remained unchanged during the Sunday shows on May 29, after Trump had clinched the 1,237 delegates needed to earn the GOP nomination. 

In contrast, CNN’s State of the Union hosted by Jake Tapper featured a Clinton Supporter, Sanders supporter, anti-Trump GOP guest and a Trump supporter consistently on all three of his shows which included panels (his show on May 29 consisted of an hour-long interview with Florida Senator Marco Rubio).

Each Sunday show broadcast had a roundtable discussion with four pundits or journalists, adding up to a total of 73 roundtable participants over a four week period between the five shows. The only exceptions were ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on May 8 which had five guests, CBS’s Face the Nation on May 8 which had eight guests, and CNN’s State of the Union on May 29 which did not have a roundtable discussion.

Over the course of four Sundays, there were 20 anti-Trump GOP roundtable participants: Alex Castellanos (twice), Rich Lowry, Bill Kristol, Ben Domenech, Jennifer Rubin, Russell Moore, Michael Gerson, Ramesh Ponnuru, Brit Hume (four times), Kimberley Strassel, George Will (twice), Ron Fournier, Amanda Carpenter and S.E. Cupp

During the same four weeks, there were nine pro-Trump participants: Tom Cole, Bill Bennett, Matt Schlapp, Kellyanne Conway (twice), Michael Needham, Jan Brewer, Andre Bauer and Marsha Blackburn.

So where do you go to become an informed voter? If you have an internet connection, you can go to alternative news sources. NewsBusters is a very good example of one. But that is not really the point. The media should not be cheerleaders–they should report the news as it is. If they have a bias, they should be open about it from the beginning. People who listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin understand that they are hearing the conservative point of view–first because they represent an informed audience, and second because the point of view of the show’s host is stated. I would love to see that sort of honesty from the mainstream media. The American voter is not informed, particularly the younger generation. They are not taught history in school, and they learn about current events through unreliable sources.

Thomas Jefferson understood the value of education. He stated, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Neither our schools nor our press is keeping the voting public informed. Unless that changes, the America we all love will be no more.

There May Be Another Shoe To Drop

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Fox News reported a recent comment by FBI Director James Comey about the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly stated while on the campaign trail that the FBI is conducting a mere “security inquiry.”

The article at Fox News reported:

But when asked Wednesday by Fox News about Clinton’s characterization of the bureau’s probe, FBI Director James Comey said he doesn’t know what “security inquiry” means — adding, “We’re conducting an investigation. … That’s what we do.”

The FBI director reiterated that he’s “not familiar with the term security inquiry” when told that is the phrase Clinton has used.

As for the timeline for the investigation, Comey, during a briefing with reporters, said he prefers doing the investigation “well” over promptly and said he’s not “tethered” to a schedule.

The people that I know who have held security clearances and handled classified material have all said that there is no question that Mrs. Clinton broke a number of laws during her time as Secretary of State. It will be very interesting to see if she is ever held accountable for her actions.

About That Treaty…

Posted on by

It is no secret that Iran has been a major provider of funds and arms for terrorists in the Middle East and other areas in Asia and Africa. The Iranian nuclear treaty does not seem to have slowed their arming of terrorists or their belligerent attitude.

Yesterday Fox News reported that a U.S. Navy ship stopped a shipment of arms going from Iran and likely headed for Yemen.

This is one of the pictures from the article:

IranianArmsShipmentThe article reports:

The Navy said the shipment included 1,500 AK-47s, 200 rocket-propelled grenade launchers and 21 .50-caliber machine guns.

After the U.S. seized the weapons stash from the dhow, a traditional sailing vessel, the Navy let the crew go. A U.S. official told Fox News current rules do not allow western naval forces to seize the crew in addition to illicit cargo. “You have to find a country willing to prosecute,” the official said. 

A defense official reached by Fox News would not reveal the nationality of the dhow’s crew.

Last month, Iran announced that it tested missiles marked with the phrase “Israel must be wiped out,” in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution tied to the recent nuclear deal. The resolution forbids Iran from working on its ballistic missile program for eight years and bans sales of its conventional weapons.

It is becoming very obvious that the only reason Iran was even willing to negotiate the recent nuclear deal was that it wanted the economic sanctions lifted. It is also becoming very obvious that even stricter sanctions need to be imposed. Iran is acting as a major supporter of terrorism. That needs to stop. Allowing Iran to continue arming terrorists and building a nuclear program to wipe out Israel is simply the suicide of western civilization. To allow Iran to continue its present behavior will have horrible consequences in the not-to-distant future.

More For Me But Less For Thee

Posted on by

Yesterday Fox News reported that President Obama has requested an increase in the appropriations for expenditures of former presidents, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service published Wednesday. In other words, he wants an increase in the amount of money allotted to him to pay for his retirement.

Meanwhile, in October of last year, The Washington Post reported:

Tens of millions of seniors will see no annual cost-of-living adjustment in their Social Security checks in 2016, the government said Thursday, unwelcome news that also will flatten benefit payments for retired federal workers and service members.

It is only the third time in 40 years — all of them during the Obama administration — that the Social Security Administration has not increased its payments. The raises are tied to the consumer price index (CPI).

Lower gasoline prices have kept the CPI low. At the same time, medical costs for senior citizens are going up, but for some reason, the increase in Medicare expenses for seniors did not get factored into the equation.

Also, USA Today reported in January of last year:

The plan calls for Congress to create a hybrid system that includes a smaller defined-benefit pension along with more cash-based benefits and lump-sum payments. A significant portion of troops’ retirement benefits would come in the form of government contributions to 401(k)-style investment accounts, those familiar with the report told Military Times.

Specifically, the proposal calls for automatically enrolling each service member in the federal government’s Thrift Savings Plan, or TSP, an investment account that accrues savings. Individual troops will be responsible for managing their accounts, and the money is typically not available for withdrawal without penalty until age 59.5.

The proposed change to military retirement makes my blood boil. Our military relocates their families approximately every three years, puts their lives in jeopardy, and makes unbelievable sacrifices, and the government wants to change the rules of the contract they signed up under. Military benefits for retirees and their families have already been cut in terms of their healthcare. Changes have also been made to the commissary system that have made it less economical for our military to shop there. Budget cuts have already been made at the expense of our military.  Any further changes should not apply to those currently serving.

At any rate, before we raise the retirement benefits of our Presidents, we need to consider our military and our senior citizens. Our past Presidents seem to do very well with speaking fees, and I am sure they will find a way to make ends meet. For further information, check the net wealth of the Clintons before and since they occupied the White House.

What Did He Say?

Posted on by

I will admit that I am confused. Do we need to grant visas to foreign tech workers or do we not? Last Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article that totally confused me as to what Donald Trump‘s stand on the issue was.

The article reports:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump inexplicably changed his position on the H-1B visa program in Thursday’s Fox News debate, saying Silicon Valley actually does need to import tech workers for jobs instead of hiring Americans.

“We need highly skilled people in this country,” Trump told Megyn Kelly in the debate, when she questioned him about statements he’s made that contradict the policy of reducing access to the visas outlined on his website. “I changed my mind,” he added.

I guess my question is, “Why aren’t American schools and colleges training enough tech workers?”

The article continues:

Disney, Southern California Edison and other companies have been in the spotlight recently after laying off scores or even hundreds of workers and in some cases forcing them to train their foreign replacements on H-1B visas. At the same time, big businesses continue to argue there is a shortage of high-skilled tech workers and are demanding an increased supply.

In his reversal, Trump signaled he now believes their argument, saying Silicon Valley needs “high-skilled” workers, and the country needs to bring in more high-skilled workers.

No. We need to instill a work ethic in our schools and improve our educational standards so that we create more high-skilled workers. This is possible. At one point we had the technical people to put a man on the moon. Classical education gave us those people–people with a work ethic who learned the technical skills needed. This is an education problem within the United States–it is not an immigration problem.

Turning A Debate Into A Cage Match

Posted on by

I will admit that I did not watch the latest Presidential debate. I have seen enough of the debates to feel that they are useless at this point, and I knew that I would hear about it the next day. There were a lot of articles about the debate, but one in particular caught my eye.

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted an article stating that during the debate, Fox News was acting as a super PAC for Marco Rubio.

The article pointed out a few things that lead to that conclusion:

Trump was never asked to attack his rivals. On at least three occasions, Trump’s rivals were invited to attack him.

…On a number of occasions, Wallace and Kelly tossed off their roles as moderators to actually debate Trump, in the hopes of tripping him up or cornering him. As bad as the mainstream media has been to Republican presidential candidates over the years, I have never seen anything like this.

…There were two unbelievable moments even lower than that. The first came from Kelly, who used leaked reports and unsubstantiated rumors surrounding an off-the-record interview Trump supposedly had with the left-wing New York Times.  Apparently, the Times leaked information about the off-the-record interview to the left-wing BuzzFeed, who in turn, without hearing the audio, launched a McCarthy-ite attack against Trump, accusing him of saying one thing to the Times and another to the voters regarding immigration.

The article concludes:

Fox News’s brand and reputation is already in freefall. Thursday night, in service to Marco Rubio and the Republican Establishment, Fox News stooped lower than NBC News or CNN — something many of us never thought possible.

*To justify singling Trump out with graphics and videos, Fox News announced at the beginning that the other candidates had faced these in the debate Trump boycotted.

As I have previously stated, I am not a Trump supporter, but this is ridiculous. Please follow the link to the article to read the transcripts that substantiate the various charges. For whatever reason, FOX has chosen to align itself with the establishment Republican party. Based on some of the programming choices FOX has made in recent years, that should not be a surprise. However, it is unfortunate. FOX News had a chance to truly be an objective news source. Obviously, that is not the path they have chosen.

A Solution Is Needed–I’m Not Sure This Is The Right One

Posted on by

This is not a new article, but I think it is something that needs to be looked at in view of the current presidential campaign.

In October 2015, CNN reported statements made by John Kasich about Social Security. There are some serious problems with Social Security and no obvious solutions, but while we are looking for solutions, young workers in America are still having Social Security deductions taken out of their paychecks despite the fact that they will probably never see a penny of that money. There are a few reasons for the problems with Social Security funding. The first problem is the declining birth rate. We need more workers paying into Social Security to keep the system going. Those workers may never see the money, but we need them paying into the system. That is dishonest, but that is the way it is set up. President Obama and some members of Congress are trying to avoid the problem by importing workers.

In November 2014, Fox News reported:

Illegal immigrants who apply for work permits in the U.S. under President Obama’s new executive actions will be eligible for Social Security and Medicare, the White House says.

Under the sweeping actions, immigrants who are spared deportation could obtain work permits and a Social Security number, which would allow them to pay into the Social Security system through payroll taxes.

No such “lawfully present” immigrant, however, would be immediately entitled to the benefits because like all Social Security and Medicare recipients they would have to work 10 years to become eligible for retirement payments and health care. To remain qualified, either Congress or future administrations would have to extend Obama’s actions so that those immigrants would still be considered lawfully present in the country.

So for ten years we will have more people paying in, and then after ten years many of those people will be looking for money–a temporary solution at best.

Another reason for the problems with Social Security is that there is no Social Security trust fund. Since the 1960’s, Congress has spent the money deducted from paychecks for Social Security. Anyone who served in Congress is responsible for allowing this to continue.

So what does John Kasich say about Social Security. The CNN article reports:

“We can’t balance a budget without entitlement reform. What are we, kidding?” Kasich said when asked about his opponents who say they won’t touch entitlements.

Kasich said he was part of the effort to reform Medicare and Medicaid in the ’90s, and that he also had a plan to change Social Security so that initial benefits were lowered for individuals not yet near eligibility.

He asked audience members to raise their hands if they were far from receiving Social Security, asked them if they knew yet what their initial benefit would be and then asked them if they would be bothered if it were a little lower for the good of the country.

One person said it would be a problem.

“Well, you’d get over it, and you’re going to have to get over it,” Kasich joked.

First of all, Social Security is not an entitlement–the people currently working have been paying into it since they started working. The majority of the people currently collecting it have paid into it during their entire working career. Entitlements are things that people get for free that they never worked for or paid into. I think our welfare programs should be seriously cut before any cuts are made to Social Security. I also think that younger workers should be given the option of setting up tightly controlled individual retirement plans that would be out of the government’s reach when it comes to spending money. A large part of the problem with the current Social Security system is that Congress has not acted in a fiscally responsible way. We cannot change the past, but we can fix the future. I don’t believe I want John Kasich to be the person attempting to fix the future of Social Security.

 

Will We Actually Have Equal Justice Under The Law?

Posted on by

Fox News posted a story today about new information regarding Secretary Hillary Clinton’s email. Some of the emails on Secretary Clinton’s private server were marked “special access programs” (SAP).  This is a label higher than Top Secret. These emails were on her private server, which did not have the layers of security that a State Department server would have had. A private server is much more vulnerable to hacking than a State Department server would have been.

The article reports:

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009. 

Fox News is told that the recent IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and State Department inspector general. 

Representatives for the ODNI and intelligence community inspector general had no comment.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. If Secretary Clinton is not prosecuted for her mishandling of classified information, then the charges against General Petraeus should be dropped.

When Those In Charge Choose To Look The Other Way

Posted on by

Mishandling classified material is a serious crime in government circles. There are severe penalties for infractions. However, it seems like the current administration is taking a vacation from enforcing those rules (other than when the rules involve General Petraeus).

Catherine Herridge has posted a story on Fox News today about documents found on Hillary Clinton’s private server. The story reports that the intelligence community has re-affirmed that two emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server were classified “top secret” when they arrived on the server.

The article reports:

The agencies that owned and originated that intelligence – the CIA and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency or NGA – reviewed the emails to determine how they should be properly stored, as the State Department took issue with their highly classified nature. The subject matter of the messages is widely reported to be the movement of North Korean missiles and a drone strike. A top secret designation requires the highest level of security, and can include the use of an approved safe.

The sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News that while the emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Clinton’s server, one of them remains “top secret” to this day — and must be handled at the highest security level. The second email is still considered classified but at the lower “secret” level because more information is publicly available about the event.

The findings have been transmitted to the State Department, which continues to challenge the intelligence community’s conclusions about the classification of all the emails. But the department has no authority to change the classification since it did not originate the information.

It is time to elect and appoint people to government positions who will put America’s best interests ahead of either political party. Hillary Clinton’s private server was a serious breach of protocol that put sensitive information in the hands of people who are not friendly to America. A private server is much easier for hackers to breech than a government server with layers of security. Putting classified information on a private server was illegal and needs to be handled in a legal matter. I seriously wonder if anyone in the current administration is willing to do that. As of now we do not have equal justice under the law, one of America’s founding principles. That is a serious problem both in this case and in the future.

The Internal Struggles In Iran Have Impacted Another American

Posted on by

Fox News is reporting today that Siamak Namazi, 40-year old Iranian-American has been arrested by Iranian security forces as he was in Iran visiting his family. So why is Iran arresting Americans when they are still in the process of putting together a nuclear agreement with the western nations?

The article reports:

Namazi’s arrest suggests that hard-liners in Iran could be trying to create tension with the United States in the wake of Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers, the Associated Press reported Friday. That agreement reached earlier this year promises Iran relief from crippling economic sanctions in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program.

Iranian hard-liners are opposed to moderate President Hassan Rouhani’s strategy of attempting to improve ties with the West. Internal domestic struggles over the direction of Iran appear to be intensifying ahead of February’s parliamentary elections.

The Washington-based National Iranian American Council said it was troubled by reports of Namazi’s arrest and denied suggestions that his family had a leadership role in the organization, through it acknowledged “Namazi has known members of NIAC’s staff.”

“NIAC is very concerned by the continued detention of multiple Iranian Americans by the Iranian government, and is deeply troubled by the reports that Mr. Namazi may also have been detained,” it said.

The arrest of an unnamed Iranian American businessman was first reported by IranWire, an online publication, on Oct. 15.

I really don’t understand any of President Obama’s foreign policy agenda. We need a President who will stand up and increase sanctions until Americans are released. We also need a President who will not negotiate until American prisoners held in Iran are released. It is becoming obvious that having a weak President endangers Americans all over the world.

 

You Can’t Have It Both Ways

Posted on by

Fox News is reporting today that there is an aspect of the Iranian nuclear deal that conflicts with existing law.

The article explains:

At issue is a passage tucked away in ancillary paperwork attached to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, as the Iran nuclear deal is formally known. Specifically, Section 5.1.2 of Annex II provides that in exchange for Iranian compliance with the terms of the deal, the U.S. “shall…license non-U.S. entities that are owned or controlled by a U.S. person to engage in activities with Iran that are consistent with this JCPOA.”

In short, this means that foreign subsidiaries of U.S. parent companies will, under certain conditions, be allowed to do business with Iran. The problem is that theIran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act (ITRA), signed into law by President Obama in August 2012, was explicit in closing the so-called “foreign sub” loophole.

Indeed, ITRA also stipulated, in Section 218, that when it comes to doing business with Iran, foreign subsidiaries of U.S. parent firms shall in all cases be treated exactly the same as U.S. firms: namely, what is prohibited for U.S. parent firms has to be prohibited for foreign subsidiaries, and what is allowed for foreign subsidiaries has to be allowed for U.S. parent firms.

The President does not have the authority to simply ignore the law and tell corporations to ignore the law. However, based on past experience, the law may not matter. One of the major problems with the Obama Administration is the ignoring of laws–the idea that President Obama can create any law he wants with ‘a pen and a phone.’ If Congress wants to be anything other than irrelevant, it is time for them to step up and act. Either the Iranian agreement is legal or it is not. Based on this news report, it is not.

A Very Interesting Take On The Republican Debate

Posted on by

DaTechGuyBlog posted a really good commentary on the Republican debate and the interaction between Donald Trump and  Megyn Kelly. I happen to know DaTechGuy, and I can tell you from personal experience that he is a total gentleman who treats women very well and would never describe them in the way attributed to Donald Trump. However, he brings out a very interesting point in his article.

The article begins with a quote from “Inherit the Wind“::

Henry Drummond: “Madam, you may vote, but at a price. You lose the right to retreat behind the powder puff or your petticoat.”

The point is simple–if you want to be equal, you need to expect to be treated equally.

In terms of the questioning of Donald Trump, DaTechGuy reminds us:

Anyone who knows me knows that I tend to be polite. I was brought up by people born in the 1920’s. I hold a door for a woman and I tip my fedora to them. I don’t believe in talking about women in the crass way that our culture does today. It’s not what I do, it’s not what I’ve taught my sons an I don’t approve of it.

That being said, I was extremely offended by the questions concerning tweets to Rosie O’Donnell by Megyn Kelly,

The question itself was one of several that had no place on that stage (Showing that the real difference between Fox & the rest of the MSM is not that they are easier on the GOP but are just as hard on Democrats).

The article points out:

As soon as the debate was over every single network was hitting Donald Trump for these remarks and it didn’t stop when the morning came. It was all about how Donald Trump was acting like a misogynist, who women were going to be offended etc etc etc.

That has been the these on every network since last night and the light of day hasn’t made a single change in the argument.

The problem with this argument is three-fold:

1.  Trump’s statement concerning Rosie O’Donnell was not decorous, but it was highly accurate.

2.  The Primary qualification for almost every women on these panels is physical attractiveness

3.  When Megyn Kelly went after Trump this way he reacted the same way he does when anyone attacks him, he punches back.

This is the danger of equality.

Those Pesky E-Mails

Posted on by

Fox News posted an article today about emails from Hillary Clinton that have now surfaced that have been withheld from the Congressional Committees investigating Benghazi.

The article reports:

New documents released by a federal court show President Obama called then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the night of the 2012 Benghazi attack — but the contents are being withheld by the State Department. 

It had previously been disclosed that Clinton and Obama spoke the night of the terror attacks. But the documents offer additional information about the timing of the call — after the initial attack on the U.S. consulate, but before the second wave where mortars hit the nearby CIA annex and killed former Navy SEALs Ty Woods and Glen Doherty. 

The contents of the call, however, are being withheld, not because the information is classified but because the administration claims they represent internal deliberations about the 2012 terror assault. 

The claim comes as Clinton also faces accusations that she withheld Benghazi-related emails from her private server in the trove of emails handed over to the State Department. 

The article points out that the email in question was discovered as the result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Judicial Watch.

The article also reports the political agenda involved in characterizing the attack at Benghazi as a result of a video:

Other emails from Judicial Watch lawsuits have, separately, shown Rhodes (Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes) played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her Sunday show appearances that weekend where she blamed protests over the Internet video. 

In that Sept. 14 email, Rhodes specifically draws attention to the video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere in the region. 

The email lists the following two goals, among others: 

“To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” 

“To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.”

Thank God for Judicial Watch. It is unfortunate that most Americans will remain totally unaware of any of this and many who are aware will not care about the integrity of a major Presidential candidate.

It’s Not The Fault Of The American Military

Posted on by

Fox News posted an article today quoting President Obama’s statement that “When a finalized plan is presented to me by the Pentagon, then I will share it with the American people. We don’t yet have a complete strategy.” The statement was made in reference to training Iraqis to fight the Islamic State.

It’s very hard for me not to go totally ballistic on this. Has President Obama forgotten that he ignored the requests of the military to leave American troops there to prevent the takeover of Iraq by Iran (which is essentially what has happened–if we fight against ISIS, we are fighting with Iran)? The American military leaders saw this coming–President Obama chose to ignore their advice. I have no doubt they are continuing to advise the President. I also have no doubt that he is continuing to ignore that advice.

As someone with a family member in the military, I don’t want to see any of our military put in harm’s way unless the rules of engagement are in our favor and unless there is a planned strategy. President Obama’s policies have offered neither.

Military leaders are all about plans for all contingencies and possibilities. President Obama is relying on the ignorance of the American people to avoid taking responsibility for the mess he has made of the Middle East.

The Justice System Works–Sometimes The People In It Don’t

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted a rather blunt statement by Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke (D). He stated that the charges brought against six police officers in the death of Freddie Gray were “George Zimmerman and the Duke Lacrosse case all over again” and said “these cops are political prisoners, offered up as human sacrifices, thrown like red meat to an angry mob.” He made this statement on Friday’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto” on the Fox News Channel.

This sounds like an inflammatory statement until you really examine it.

The article reports:

Clarke said of the charges, “it’s a miscarriage of justice. This neophyte prosecutor stood up there and made a political statement, Neil, and I say that because she’s chanting or voicing some of the chants from this angry mob. Her job is to tune that out. She said, I hear the voices. She’s not supposed to hear anything as she reviews this case that is not consistent with the rule of law and our system of justice. Look, I’m an experienced and a veteran homicide detective. I’ve had — I’ve participated in charging conferences. There is no way I have ever gotten a criminal charge within 24 hours after taking over all the reports and evidence to a prosecutor. A prosecutor who is thorough needs several days to sift through hundreds of pages of reports. They usually want to interview some of the witnesses themselves, in person, and they have to sift through all of the evidence, piece by piece, and they have to wait for some of the forensics evidence to conclude, to come back and that’s why I say on a minimum, three to four days. She just got this case yesterday. This is political activism. She’ll never prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, and I’m not going to silently stand by and watch my brother officers, offered up as human sacrifices, thrown like red meat to an angry mob, just to appease this angry mob.” And that “she rushed this thing through.”

In case you have forgotten, the Duke lacrosse case occurred in 2006. It involved false charges of rape filed against three members of the Duke lacrosse team. As a result of the accusations, the remainder of the 2006 lacrosse season was canceled. Remember, the charges were false and the men were innocent. Meanwhile, where do they go to get their reputations back (or their athletic scholarships)? We are watching the same thing happen in Baltimore. When the dust clears, it may become obvious that the police may have been negligent in following procedures closely (there are rumors about a seat belt that was not fastened that should have been), but from here it does not look like whatever happened in Baltimore is deserving of the media attention or the protests it is getting.

It is unfortunate that there is injustice in our society, but it has always been there and always will be there. Since the police involved were both black and white, I don’t see how this can be logically seen as a racial issue. It may be seen as a racial issue if one chooses to do so, but I am not convinced there is any logic to that point of view.

If conditions in Baltimore are that bad, the answer is found in the ballot box–not in looting and destroying personal property.

 

Don’t Listen To What They Say, Watch What They Do

Posted on by

Fox News posted an article today about an interesting wrinkle in the Iranian nuclear negotiations. Before I continue this article, I would like to point out that our only ally in the Middle East that has never betrayed us is Israel. It is a shame that we have not always treated them very well.

The article reports:

A State Department official dismissed a plea Friday from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the Iran nuclear agreement include clear recognition of his nation’s “right to exist,” declaring negotiations are “only about the nuclear issue.”

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf, in a terse response to a question about Netanyahu’s concerns, told reporters, “This is an agreement that is only about the nuclear issue” — a comment that indicates the Obama administration is not looking to enshrine Israel’s security into a final agreement. 

Harf, for her part, suggested the talks are complicated enough already.

“This is an agreement that doesn’t deal with any other issues, nor should it,” she said.

Obama administration officials have insisted all along that despite their public disagreement with Netanyahu over the Iran deal framework, the U.S. commitment to Israel’s security is unwavering. Further, White House spokesman Eric Schultz told reporters on Air Force One on Friday that the U.S. would not agree to any deal that would threaten Israel. 

I can’t believe our State Department is that naive. When Iran obtains a nuclear weapon (which it will under the terms of the agreement negotiated), their first target will be Israel, their second target will be America. This agreement is a fool’s attempt at peace.

It seems to me that asking Iran to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist would reveal how serious Iran is about the negotiations. If Iran is not even willing to acknowledge the right of an American ally to exist, why are we negotiating with them at all? Also, why are we negotiating with a country that is currently holding an American citizen in prison (Pastor Saeed Abedini) without demanding his release as a precursor for the negotiations? President Obama lacks the necessary negotiation skills to sit down with Iran–he is playing tiddlywinks while they are playing chess. Does he not realize that it is not only Israel’s right to exist in question, but eventually it will be America’s right to exist?

Free Speech Is In Danger In America

Posted on by

I have DISH cable tv. Currently I am very unhappy that I don’t have Fox News on my cable. Fortunately, I also have Sirius internet, so I can still listen to Special Report and the Journal Editorial Report even though I can’t watch them. I do not have the option of changing cable service, because it is part of the community I live in. However, if FOX News does not come back soon, I may begin to look into other ways I can get it. So what is this fight between DISH and FOX News about?

On January 13, mrctv posted an article about the ongoing battle between DISH and FOX News.

The article reports:

Dish Network dropped Fox News and its sister network Fox Business Channel at the end of last year and the network still remains blacked out for Dish’s 14 million subscribers.

Dish Network claims that they dropped the nation’s number one cable news network because of a contract dispute.  Fox News disagrees, claiming that the move is an effort by Dish Network to censor their content. 

While it’s not entirely clear who’s in the right in this matter, digging into the background of Dish Network’s  founder and chairman Charles Ergen may help to illuminate why animosity between Dish and FNC has reached such epic proportions.

The article explains that Charles Ergen donated $64,000 to the Democratic Senatorial campaign Committee in 2014. The main recipients of the donation were Kay Hagen(NC), Mark Pryor (ARK.),  Mark Warner (Va) and Mark Begich (Alaska). That in itself is not a problem, but the story continues:

In 2012, a federal complaint was filed against Ergen in which several company executives alleged that he had intimidated them into making contributions to specific candidates, the majority of which were Democrats.

The claim was filed by an unnamed company insider who accused Ergen of “forcing” Dish Network’s Chief Operating Officer Bernard Han to donate to a Democratic Party candidate in the 2009/2010 election cycle.

The complaint also claimed that Han was “encouraged” to attend Democratic functions and fundraisers and that other Dish employees were strong-armed by Ergen in a similar way.

According to the insider, Ergen insinuated to Han that he would still have his job if he declined to make the contribution, but would suffer consequences if he refused.

This does not sound like someone who is interested in either free speech of a balanced playing field.

Our community will review its cable tv choice this spring. If FOX News is not back on DISH, I hope we will change providers.

More Prisoner Releases From Guantanamo

Posted on by

Fox News posted an article today about the Obama Administration’s plans to transfer more prisoners out of Guantanamo in the coming weeks.

I believe that the story at Fox News buried the headline, which I believe is included in this paragraph:

The transfers come shortly after the announcement of the resignation of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who was criticized by administration officials who spoke to The Wall Street Journal for moving too slowly to certify detainees for release.

Senior officials at the White House are impatient as the president’s term in office draws nearer to its end with the promise of the closure of Guantanamo unfulfilled, according to the Wall Street Journal.

In February 2012, The Hill posted an article about a report issued by the House Armed Service Committee’s Oversight and Investigations subcommittee that stated 27 percent of detainees released from Guantanamo Bay could be reengaging in terrorist activities.

The article reports:

The report found that “the Bush and Obama administrations, in reaction to domestic political pressures, a desire to earn goodwill abroad, and in an attempt to advance strategic national security goals, sought to ‘release’ or ‘transfer’ GITMO detainees elsewhere.”

“The key is making sure we don’t allow detainees to areas where they rejoin the battle,” Wittman said. “The analysis of the policy cuts across both administrations, making sure the process is such that these detainees are not returning to the battlefield and seeking to harm Americans, seeking to kill Americans.”

Democrats said the GOP’s report ignored the national security value of closing Guantanamo down.

The prison “is a black eye for our on nation abroad, serving as a powerful recruiting tool for terrorists,” said Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the House Armed Services panel.

Does anyone really believe that Guantanamo is responsible for the increasing amount of terrorists? ISIS is recruiting in the United States on the basis of their victories in Iraq–not Guantanamo. Unfortunately, the one thing that the terrorist mind understands is power–if you show weakness, you lose. Closing Guantanamo would be the ultimate victory for terrorists and would encourage them to believe they have defeated the Western world. If President Obama closes Guantanamo, he will put Americans at a higher risk of future terror attacks–both from the prisoners released from Guantanamo and from radicalized American Muslims who see the closing as a sign that they are winning. Hopefully Congress can prevent the release of any more terrorists.

Who Is Setting Up The Voting Machines?

Posted on by

Last Wednesday I posted an article (rightwinggranny.com) about voting machines in Schaumburg, Illinois, registering a Republican vote as a Democrat vote. That story was based on a Fox News story. Yesterday the Examiner posted a story about voting machines in Maryland that are refusing to let voters vote for Republican candidates.

The article reports:

“When I first selected my candidate on the electronic machine, it would not put the ‘x’ on the candidate I chose — a Republican — but it would put the ‘x’ on the Democrat candidate above it,” reported Donna Hamilton.

“This happened multiple times with multiple selections. Every time my choice flipped from Republican to Democrat. Sometimes it required four or five tries to get the ‘x’ to stay on my real selection,” the Frederick, Md., resident said Thursday.

…two voters in Anne Arundel County experienced the same problem: A touchscreen voting machine switched their Republican votes to Democrats. The voters had to cancel theirs votes and start over.

Joe Torre, election director in Anne Arundel, called it a “calibration issue” involving a single machine.

Hamilton said she notified officials of the problem she encountered at the Frederick County Center, where she voted. “I’m not sure what was done about it. If someone is not paying close attention, they could end up voting for the wrong candidate,” she said.

No kidding. This is not a Republican or Democrat issue–this is an honest elections issue. Both parties need to make sure voting machines are calibrated correctly so that votes get counted correctly. As Americans, we need to be able to trust the integrity of our elections.

How Does This Help Anyone?

Posted on by

On Friday the Huffington Post reported that starting next summer, Berkeley, California, residents with incomes below $32,000 per year will be able to fill their prescriptions for medical marijuana at no cost.

I am not opposed to medical marijuana. I am opposed to the fact that it is over-prescribed in places where it is legal. If you pick up a Sunday paper in California, you will find multiple pages of advertisements for doctors who prescribe medical marijuana for headaches, flat feet, stress, etc. Historically, when medical marijuana is legalized in a state, the results are not significantly different from simple legalization of marijuana.

The article reports:

Under a law passed unanimously by the city council, dispensaries must set aside 2 percent of their pot for distribution to the poor.

Not everyone is on board with the plan.

“It’s ludicrous, over-the-top madness,” Bishop Ron Allen, head of the International Faith Based Coalition, told Fox News. “Why would Berkeley City Council want to keep their poverty-stricken under-served high, in poverty and lethargic?”

A website called drugfreeworld lists the effects of marijuana:

SHORT-TERM EFFECTS

  • Sensory distortion
  • Panic
  • Anxiety
  • Poor coordination of movement
  • Lowered reaction time
  • After an initial “up,” the user feels sleepy or depressed
  • Increased heartbeat (and risk of heart attack)

LONG-term effects of marijuana

  • Reduced resistance to common illnesses (colds, bronchitis, etc.)
  • Suppression of the immune system
  • Growth disorders
  • Increase of abnormally structured cells in the body
  • Reduction of male sex hormones
  • Rapid destruction of lung fibers and lesions (injuries) to the brain could be permanent
  • Reduced sexual capacity
  • Study difficulties: reduced ability to learn and retain information
  • Apathy, drowsiness, lack of motivation
  • Personality and mood changes
  • Inability to understand things clearly

I have never used marijuana, so I cannot personally verify this information; however, as a parent, I have known teenagers who have used the drug. My personal experience with one particular teenager was that heavy marijuana use in high school totally ruined his ambition and his hope for achieving the things he was capable of achieving. I believe that marijuana has a negative impact on ambition and drive for success. Someone needs to explain to me how giving people living in poverty free access to marijuana is actually going to help anyone.

President Nixon Would Be Green With Envy

Posted on by

On Friday the Associated Press posted an article stating that emails have been lost from five more Internal Revenue Service (IRS) workers who are being investigated in relation to the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups.

Today, Townhall.com posted the reaction of the lawyer who is representing those conservative groups.

Townhall.com quotes Attorney Mitchell’s reaction:

Attorney Cleta Mitchell, who is representing many tea party and conservative groups targeted by the IRS, isn’t impressed and not surprised about the latest round of “lost” emails.

“I have gotten to the point where this is like one of those infomercials where they say ‘wait, wait, there’s more!’ I mean just when you think you’ve heard it all, you find out more things about the IRS and frankly I think what Congressman Camp said is absolutely right that there is no way we are getting anywhere close to the truth about what happened and the DOJ has become, in my opinion has become complicit in trying to cover-up what’s been going on. I think we have to have a special prosecutor if we are ever going to get to the bottom of it,” Mitchell said in an interview with Fox News. 

Attorney Mitchell was recently interviewed on Fox News. You can watch the interview at the Townhall.com link above.

 

This Is Disturbing

Posted on by

Below is the video posted at Fox News of a U.S. security team stationed in Benghazi in September 2012 telling their story of what happened the night of the attack on the CIA annex in Benghazi.

As you will see in the video, all three men claim that had they been allowed to go to the annex when the attack started, they believe the outcome of the battle would have been different. The men claim to have been told to ‘stand down’ by the top CIA officer in Benghazi. After waiting for thirty minutes, the men went to the annex without orders. They asked their CIA superiors to call for air support, but that support never came.

I have no idea why these men were delayed and not given the necessary support, but it seems to me that almost two years after the event, the American public should have those answers. I hope the Congressional Committee investigating this can provide those answers. I feel very strongly that the American public has been routinely lied to by the Obama Administration about Benghazi and that we are entitled to know the truth about what was going on in the annex and why the American military did not properly respond to the attack.

_