Obama Hit By Storm Backlash

Natural disasters usually follow the same political trajectory: First the incumbent experiences a bounce as he tours the impacted area, shows his concern, and pledges help to his beleaguered constituents. But then reality sets in and the shortages, delays, mishaps, deaths, and devastation becomes apparent and people turn against the incumbent.

George W. Bush had his Katrina.

And now Barack Obama has his Sandy.

Last week, Obama asserted a kind of ownership of the storm by touring New Jersey in the now infamous embrace of Republican stalwart Governor Chris Christie. Now that we are all appalled by the lack of food, gas, water, heat, and the basic essentials of life throughout the storm zone, Obama’s government doesn’t look so good anymore.

Why didn’t FEMA stockpile food, water, and gasoline? We had a week’s notice to prepare for Sandy. There was no shortage of time. Did the government not realize that people needed to eat, drink, and drive?

All throughout America, we are asking these questions of our television sets as we watch the evolving story of human misery.

Meanwhile, Obama has resumed the campaign trail, pounding the opposition in the same relentless and partisan style which he used before the storm. When Obama said that voting was “the best revenge,” he threw away whatever presidentiality he displayed in touring storm damage earlier in the week.

As he entered the last week before the Congressional election of 1994, President Clinton returned to the U.S. after having presided over the signing of a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. He called me on his return and asked where he should campaign? Which incumbent Democrats should he try to help get re-elected?

Via: Dick Morriss

Continue Reading...

Romney by a landslide

A deeply troubled and deeply troubling administration that will do anything, no matter how cynical and venal, to protect its hold on power

When it comes to predicting the outcome of presidential races most pundits refuse to go out on a limb in predicting probable outcomes. Let’s face it; it’s a risky business that could leave one’s face covered with egg. However, in the case of the current election I will happily stick my neck out and risk being seen as a blowhard who believes himself up to predicting the future.

n a word, I predict a Romney landslide and here’s why: despite the fact that the famous 47% who to whatever degree depend on the government for their daily bread is expected to look for more of the same, I believe that if this percentage could have their druthers, they’d opt for having a well-paying job that left them self-sufficient, rather than dependent on the government.

I think that at some level most people in America understand that socialization would result in an overall lower standard of living. I also believe that despite all the class envy and hatred that’s been ginned up against the 1% by this administration, there is a basic understanding that private business, not the government, creates wealth. In my experience, most Americans understand that socialism doesn’t so much “spread the wealth” as it imposes equal degrees of misery.

Obama has incurred close to $6 trillion in new debt through deficit spending, the majority of which has gone to “stimulate” the economy. Counting the massive $821 billion stimulus bill and several additional stimulus bills and three Quantitative Easing initiatives (that’s government speak for printing extra money), the net effect has been that the American economy remains in the doldrums with unemployment in real terms approaching 15%. But even that failure might be forgiven if Obama hadn’t taken his role as messiah so seriously and make grandiloquent promises that could never be kept. I recall writing in these pages on November 11, 2008:

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading...

Politics: Terrific: More Americans are getting government health care than are working

When you really think about it, it’s a stunning fact. There are now more people in America receiving government health care benefits – Medicare and Medicaid – than there are full-time workers in the economy.

It’s an eye-opener, but it’s more than that. It’s also evidence that we have a system that, by definition, cannot be sustained.

Medicaid and Medicare had a gross combined enrollment of 119,249,000 in 2011. At the same time, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics said that 112,556,000 people worked full-time in the United States in 2011, including 17,806,000 who worked for all levels of government and 94,750,000 who worked for the private sector.

Who do you think pays for the benefits enjoyed by Medicare and Medicaid recipients? Private-sector workers, of course. Now of course, government workers pay taxes too. But where do you think the money comes from to the pay the salaries of government workers at every level of government? From private-sector workers! Without private-sector workers first paying taxes, there would be no government salaries from which to withhold taxes.

The bottom line is that private-sector producers ultimately must generate all the wealth that’s needed to support government at every level. We already know that the federal government is spending 25 percent of the nation’s entire $14 trillion economy, but when you include state, county and local governments, then add in local school districts all across the country, government is actually spending more than 40 percent of GDP.

President Obama likes to say that we have such a large deficit because the rich don’t pay enough taxes. No. The reason we have such a large deficit is that there are not enough people producing in the private-sector to pay for the size of government, and one of the biggest costs in government is the health care benefits we’re paying to 119 million people – more than a third of the entire population. It’s true that many of the current recipients have paid into the system during their lives, some for many years. But the bottom line remains that such a system is unsustainable.

Via: CainTV

Continue Reading...

Minnesota Schools Close So Teachers Can Play With Dolls, Learn About Teaching Islam

Each year, Minnesota government schools close for two days (just before the weekend, of course) so teachers’ union members can gather at a conference organized by their union.

It’s meant to “inspire teachers,” EAGnews.org reported, and the conference includes a session titled, “Using Persona Dolls to Promote Social Emotional Intelligence and Acceptance of Diversity.”

The union describes it this way: “Used around the world, persona dolls are lifelike dolls with personalities and stories you create. The dolls become members of your classroom community and children learn by empathizing with the dolls and giving them heartfelt advice on the same kinds of situations they struggle with daily in the classroom and on the playground.”

That’s weird. Teachers are taking time away from the classroom to learn how to play with dolls?

The conference also includes a workshop on how to teach about Islam. The union says about the session:

“An expert panel will present information on teaching about Islam in the context of social studies and world religion. They will share perspectives on how educators can help improve intercultural communication and well-being for immigrant and refugee students and families from Muslim countries.”

That sounds nice. Who’s betting they won’t hear anything about the September 11, 2001 hijackers’ jihad or suicide bombers blowing up American soldiers or Israeli children? And why the focus on only one religion?

And of course no teachers union conference would be complete without a session about the importance of the upcoming presidential election (it will become an Obama rally), and a discussion about how education reform efforts are misguided and dangerous.

Couldn’t the union hold this session during the summer, or on a weekend, when there are no classes to interrupt? They have to annually take time out of the school calendar to hold their union pep rally and play with dolls?

Is it any wonder American students are trailing behind their counterparts in South Korea, Estonia and Luxembourg? Is it too much for union teachers to remain in in the classroom and focus on the basics, instead of cancelling classes to talk about their ideas of “social justice” and promote their union’s political agenda?

Via: Townhall

Continue Reading...

REPORT: NEARLY HALF OF CONGRESS VULNERABLE TO FRAUDULENT, FOREIGN ONLINE DONATIONS

A startling report by the Government Accountability Institute finds that almost half (47.3%) of congressional campaign donation websites lack basic anti-fraud credit card security systems common on most e-commerce websites. That, says Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer, leaves federal House and Senate elections vulnerable to illegal foreign or fraudulent credit card contributions.

“Fraudsters and foreign governments have long sought to illegally influence U.S. elections,” Schweizer said in an interview with Breitbart News. “From the Shah of Iran funneling money to Richard Nixon’s campaign, to Johnny Wong and Charlie Trie shuttling funds to Bill Clinton’s election coffers, campaign donor fraud is a bipartisan problem with a long history. But in the Internet age, the threat is now just a click away.”

There are 380 members of the House of Representatives seeking reelection that have active donation pages on the web, and 194 have campaign websites that require donors to enter their credit card security code, known officially as the Card Verification Value (CVV). Of the remaining 186 members of the House of Representatives who lack basic anti-fraud protections, 125 are Democrats and 61 are Republicans.  

In the Senate, 25 senators’ campaign donation websites were found to lack basic credit card protections; four are Republicans, 20 are Democrats, and one is an Independent. 

The Government Accountability Institute report, titled America the Vulnerable: Are Foreign and Fraudulent Online Contributions Influencing U.S. Elections?, also investigated the donation websites of the two major presidential candidates. Gov. Mitt Romney’s website requires donors to enter the credit card security code.  President Barack Obama’s website does not.   

“Here’s the good news: it’s a one click solution,” says Schweizer. “Federal candidates simply need to tell their webmasters to do the right thing and turn on CVV protection. The FEC should also require candidates to use basic anti-fraud protection and make publicly available all campaign donations, including those under $200 that are currently kept private.”

To find out if your senator or congressperson is vulnerable to foreign or fraudulent online donations, visit the Government Accountability Institute’s interactive map at www.campaignfundingrisks.com.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

BOMBSHELL: OBAMA.COM OWNED BY BUNDLER IN SHANGHAI WITH BUSINESS TIES TO CHINESE GOVERNMENT

In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).

Breitbart News obtained an advance copy of the bombshell report which reveals that the Obama.com website is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Obama bundler Robert Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China. Roche is the chairman of a Chinese infomercial company, Acorn International, with ties to state-controlled banks that allow it to “gain revenue through credit card transactions with Chinese banks.”

There’s more.

The unusual Obama.com website redirects traffic directly to a donation page on the Obama campaign’s official website, my.barackobama.com, which does not require donors to enter their credit card security code (known as the CVV code), thereby increasing the likelihood of foreign or fraudulent donations. The website is managed by a small web development firm, Wicked Global, in Maine. One of Wicked Global’s employees, Greg Dorr, lists on hisLinkedIn page his additional employment with Peace Action Maine and Maine Voices for Palestinian Rights. According to the GAI report, 68 percent of all Internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign visitors. 

And still more.

In 2011, Mr. Roche obtained one of the most sought-after pieces of real estate in Washington, DC: a seat at the head table for President Obama’s State Dinner for Chinese President Hu Jintao. How Roche—a man whose infomercial company hawks fitness equipment, cell phones, and breast enhancement products—landed a seat alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, Sen. John Kerry, former President Jimmy Carter, and Chinese President Hu Jintao remains unclear.  

Since 2009, White House Visitor Logs list the name Robert Roche at least 19 times, despite the fact Mr. Roche’s primary residence is in China.  

Mr. Roche, who is originally from Chicago, is a co-chair of the Technology Initiative for the Obama campaign. 

According to Acorn International’s prospectus, the success of Mr. Roche’s company hinges on maintaining access to state-run media and “preferential tax treatments and subsidies” doled out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC):  

Our business depends on our access to TV media time to market our products and services in China….PRC law is vague and is subject to discretionary interpretation and enforcement by PRC authorities…Loss of these preferential tax treatments and subsidies could have material and adverse effects on our results of operations and financial conditions.

In addition to the Obama.com redirect revelation, the Government Accountability Institute report—America the Vulnerable: Are Foreign And Fraudulent Online Contributions Influencing U.S. Elections?—exposes myriad gaping online security holes that stand to threaten the integrity of House, Senate, and presidential elections.  

Stay tuned to Breitbart News for continuing coverage…

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

Congressional Budget Office Confirms FY 2012 Deficit Exceeds $1 Trillion

Fiscal year 2012 concluded with a $1.1 trillion deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s monthly budget review released today. It marks the fourth year of trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Anyone can see that these massive, continued deficits are hardly sustainable. Despite claims that tax hikes are the solution to reduce the deficit, the fact remains that too much spending is the root cause of federal budget deficits.

The federal government is currently spending about 23 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), well above the historical average level of 20.2 percent of GDP. Current spending levels follow even greater spending excesses recorded during years saturated with stimulus spending. Conversely, revenues are temporarily low due to the recession, but they will rise and even surpass their historical level of 18.1 percent of GDP as the economy recovers and more Americans return to work. (continues below chart)

Prompted by presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer about deficit-reduction proposals, President Obama chimed in with an all-too-familiar refrain: “There has to be revenue in addition to cuts.” When Washington’s spending addiction is the problem, why hike taxes on Americans? Doing so would hurt a fledgling economy trying to recover.

Via: The Foundry

Continue Reading...

TRICKLE-DOWN GOVERNMENT: JOBS NUMBERS INFLATED BY PUBLIC SECTOR HIRES

Cash-strapped state governments and the federal government added thousands of jobs in July, August and September, boosting overall jobs numbers. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced today that it had revised jobs numbers for July and August upwards, with revised gains coming from public sector jobs.

According to the BLS, government jobs grew 18,000 in July, 45,000 in August, and 10,000 in September, accounting for nearly 17% of total gains. Those government increases reverse the trend of recent years, in which public sector jobs had been cut while the private sector had experienced modest job growth. 

Update: In addition, the revisions meant that instead of shrinking by 28,000 jobs in July and August, as previously reported, state and federal governments grew by 63,000 across the same period--a net shift of 91,000.

The total number of jobs added in September was 114,000, according to the BLS--well below the monthly average in recent years, and far below the July jobs increase, which had been described as good. 

Economists had predicted a rise of 111,000 to 113,000 jobs--but that rise would have meant a rise in the unemployment rate from 8.1% to 8.2% (Update: given long-term labor force trends). 

With the large revisions from the BLS--revising private sector jobs down, and public sector jobs up--the modest rise in September jobs coincided with an unusually dramatic drop in the unemployment rate, causing some experts to greet the new numbers with puzzlement.

Government jobs are an important part of the explanation.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

U.S DEBT ADDED MONDAY GREATER THAN TOTAL DEBT ACCUMULATED IN COUNTRY'S FIRST 166 YEARS

On the first day of fiscal year 2013, the federal government added more debt than was accumulated between the nation’s founding and sometime in October 1942, about ten months after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, a span of about 166 years. 

CNS News noted the $93,245,605,914.16 added to the debt on Monday “equaled about $816 for every American household.” And “since median household earns about $138.36 per day over a 365-day year,” the median household would need to give up all of the money it earns for nearly six days to pay off its share of the debt accumulated on the first day of fiscal year 2013.

According to CNS News, on September 30, 1944, “the total debt of the U.S. government was $91,057,523,886.72,” and by Oct. 31, 1942, it was $97,168,867,541.93.

The $93,245,605,914.16 in debt the country incurred on Monday also was "the second-largest increase on the first day of a fiscal year in the history of the country. The record ($99,500,170,215.20) was set on the first day of fiscal year 2009 when the country was mired in a banking crisis that resulted in massive government bailouts. 

Below is how Monday's debt increase compares with how much the debt increased on the first day of the last eight fiscal years:

FY 2013:$93,245,605,914.16

FY 2012: $46,758,942,639.56

FY 2011: $49,224,554,918.30

FY 2010: $10,690,160,807.67

FY 2009: $99,500,170,215.20

FY 2008: $54,899,028,094.15

FY 2007: $41,410,211,399.05

FY 2006: $37,814,341,549.00

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

How Public Unions Exploit the Ruse of 'Official Time'

Imagine thousands of government employees reporting to work each morning at their government offices and then doing no government work. They use government workspace, government telephones and government computers, all while working on projects unknown and unidentified to their government employers. They receive hefty taxpayer-funded salaries, promotions, bonuses and benefits, plus generous government pensions when they retire—all without doing any work on behalf of the taxpayer. Instead, they work as paid political operatives for powerful government unions.

Welcome to the common practice of "official time." Sometimes called "release time," it's a mechanism by which the government pays union officials to work on union matters during their government workdays. This mechanism—enshrined in law and contracts—is an enormous subsidy to public-employee unions, who defend it fiercely.

The Office of Personnel Management reports that federal employees spent over three million hours on official time in 2010, costing the taxpayers about $137 million in salary and benefits costs.

At the federal level, about 77% of official time (as reported to the OPM) is spent on "general labor-management," a broad catchall for union activity other than contract negotiations or dispute resolution, which are the activities most directly related to employee representation. But when more than three-quarters of all official time is used for unspecified activities, red flags should be raised.

Via: Wall Street Union

Continue Reading...

The Fannie and Freddie Fee Machine Federal government now collecting Fannie and Freddie profits

The federal government, in order to wind down mortgage giants, is collecting all profits generated by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—a move some say may backfire by providing the federal government a source of revenue that Congress will be hard-pressed to let go.

The Treasury announced in August that it would take all profits from the two housing giants in “a quarterly sweep of every dollar of profit that each firm earns.”

This “quarterly sweep” is an effort to recoup money that the federal government has loaned Fannie and Freddie, starting with the 2008 bailout. The federal government took over Fannie and Freddie in September of 2008, in the middle of the housing crisis that brought down the economy. Since then, the two firms have struggled to regain profitability, only recentlymaking money on their investments.

The federal government has loaned the two firms almost $200 billion, with the expectation that they would eventually repay the money. The Treasury argues that the policy shift, along with mandatory portfolio reductions, is a step toward ensuring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will “not be allowed to retain profits, rebuild capital, and return to the market in their prior form.”

However, a former Fannie Mae official pointed to a potential problem in the “quarterly sweep”: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could become a revenue source for the government, making it very difficult politically to end the two institutions.

Edward Pinto, former chief credit officer at Fannie Mae and a housing finance expert at the American Enterprise Institute, warned that because the money will be flowing into the Treasury, “If you don’t do something quickly, Congress could get used to this.”

Congress has used Fannie and Freddie’s profits to fund their legislation in the past, Pinto said. He pointed to legislation from Congress late last year that raised fees at Fannie and Freddie for 10 years in order to fund a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut.

Via: WFP

Continue Reading...

Crowder: A Selfish Millennial's Guide To The 2012 Election

Yes, I am a Millennial. Unfortunately I’m a part of the “self-esteem” era, where people my age tend to be very selfish. Not only that, but I’ve been raised with a generation of people who’ve often never been taught the constitutional parameters of government nor it’s originally intended role in American society.

Certainly not in school anyway.

So when it comes to the United States government, it’s only natural for young people to want more free crap. We’ve seen this simple ideal spur an entire movement of fickle young people through the recent Occupy protests.

Enter President Obama, the king of promising #MoreFreeCrap! So it makes sense that most young people voted for him in 2008 and that many plan to do so again this November.

Listen, I love free stuff. I’m a buffet’s worst nightmare. My picture is still on the wall at the Bellagio. I don’t, however, believe that we should vote based on the ideal of #MoreFreeCrap. 

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...

Obama's Quasi-Tax Increases

When most people think about taxes, the first thing that comes to mind are federal and state taxes.  Some will remember sales taxes, Social Security taxes, and Medicare taxes. 

What unites all of these taxes are that they are burdens placed by government on the citizens of America.  When we talk about the full tax burden Americans endure, it behooves us to count all of the ways in which the government forces us to spend our money.

To understand the full tax burden of Americans, we need to look at all the government does that directly financially impacts each American.  For example, since 9/11, every time you fly, you have to allocate an extra hour or more to deal with security.  That hour you lose is a burden imposed by the government that does not show up on your regular tax bill, but since time is money, that hour does impact your life.

Any sort of government imposed non-tax financial burden can be called a quasi-tax in that it takes money out of the pockets of Americans, but it is not levied in the manner normal taxes are, and the money does not necessarily go directly to the government.

These quasi-taxes can have a huge impact on both the economy and the financial well-being of every American.  Additionally they can be extremely regressive and disproportionately target those Americans with the least money.

Obama has imposed a number of highly regressive quasi-taxes on Americans since he assumed office in 2009.

The price of gas has doubled under Obama.  While that entire price change is not Obama's fault, his support for dramatic reductions in new drilling permits on federal lands and his inept foreign policy in the Middle East have contributed to reducing the oil supply and hence increasing the price of gasoline.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading...

Ouch: 6 Million Uninsured Americans Will Pay 'Obamatax'

Months out from the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act, and Americans bombarded by mile-a-minute election coverage, it's easy to forget that ACA implementation is creeping up on us. But today, in a great reminder of the real struggles that we'll still face after November 6th, the Congressional Budget Office released a new estimate of how many will be paying taxes for going without insurance. And, fitting the holding pattern, the number is higher than previously expected.

Overall, 6 million Americans will pay "Obamatax," as some have called it. These are middle class individuals, without insurance because their employer may dropped it owing to expenses, and they're unable to afford it themselves. Furthermore, they're just a sliver of the 30 million Americans who will still have zero health insurance to speak of, affordable or otherwise. The remainder of the uninsured, to whom the tax doesn't apply, either are illegal aliens (so the ACA doesn't apply to them), or they don't make enough to pay income taxes.

The agency said the government will collect about $7 billion from the tax in 2016, and $8 billion a year thereafter.

The projections apply to 2016, the point at which most of President Obama’s health care law will be implemented and the penalty for failing to buy coverage will have risen to its full amount of $695 per person or 2.5 percent of household income, whichever is greater.

The agency gave several reasons for revising its projections. For one thing, Congress has passed legislation requiring Americans to pay back more health insurance subsidies if they’re overpaid, making buying coverage less attractive.

And some low-income Americans may have less access to expanded Medicaid programs than originally expected. Several states are expected to opt out of expanding Medicaid, after the Supreme Court ruled in June that the government can’t respond by stripping away all their funding for the program.

The economy is also improving more slowly than expected, leading to lower wages and salaries that could make it harder to buy coverage.

Since 10% of the country still won't be insured, and a number of those people will be paying the government billions a year in taxes -- thereby costing them more money they don't have -- it's safe to say this law hasn't actually made "care" any more affordable. (Scare quotes employed because, of course, the law's premise was widely flawed in conflating "care" with the very different concept of "insurance," the issue it actually addresses.) It's just another broken promise, which does almost nothing to fix the country's still-broken healthcare system.

Via: TownHall

Continue Reading...

Majority in U.S. Still Say Government Doing Too Much

But fewer Americans now say government has too much power

PRINCETON, NJ -- A majority of Americans (54%) continue to believe the government is trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses, although that is down from the record high of 61% earlier this summer. About four in 10 Americans (39%) say the government should do more to solve the nation's problems.

Track the 2012 race and compare it to past elections >

Only a few times in Gallup's 20-year history of asking this question has a higher percentage of Americans said the government should do more to solve the nation's problems than said the government is doing too much. Two of these were in the fall of 1992 and again in early 1993, as Bill Clinton ran for and took office as president. Another was in October 2001, just after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and at a time when Americans were especially supportive of government and its efforts to help the nation recover from the attacks and retaliate against those who were responsible.

Americans have been most likely to say the government was attempting to do too much during the middle years of the Clinton administration, and in recent years during the Obama administration.

Via: Gallup

Continue Reading...

Morning Bell: Our Constitution Is Under Fire

Today, the federal government has acquired an all but unquestioned dominance over virtually every area of American life. It acts without constitutional limits and increasingly regulates our most basic activities, from how much water is in our toilets to what kind of light bulbs we can buy.

So while we face many challenges, the most difficult task ahead—and the most important—is to restore constitutional limits on government. Forty visionaries signed a piece of paper 225 years ago today that became one of the most vital documents in the world: the U.S. Constitution.

By design, it limited the power of government under the rule of law, created a vigorous framework that expanded economic opportunity, protected national independence and secured liberty and justice for all. But how is that limitation of powers working today?

The Judicial Branch. The rise of unlimited government is most familiar and most prominent in the form of judicial activism. The Founders called the judiciary the “least dangerous branch,” but progressive judges have usurped the functions of the other two branches and transformed the courts into policymaking bodies with wide-ranging power. We need judges who take the Constitution seriously and follow it faithfully.

The Legislative Branch. For its part, Congress has long legislated without regard to limits on its powers. As a result, decisions that were previously the constitutional responsibility of elected legislators are delegated to executive branch administrators. Congress is increasingly an administrative body overseeing a vast array of bureaucratic policymakers and rule-making bodies. Congress should stop delegating to bureaucrats and actively take responsibility for all the laws (and regulations) that govern us.

The Executive Branch. Meanwhile, the President has unique and powerful responsibilities in our constitutional system as chief executive officer, head of state, and commander in chief. But the idea that the president— who is charged with the execution of the laws—doesn’t have to wait for the lawmaking branch to make, amend, or abolish laws, but can and should act on his own is toxic to the rule of law. It violates the spirit, and potentially the letter, of the Constitution’s separation of the legislative and executive powers of Congress and the President.

Via: The Foundry (BLOG)

Continue Reading...

Fat, Poor, Liberal, and Stupid

A recent study of obesity in children suggests that being overweight when young reduces the child’s intelligence. Researchers at the NYU Langone School of Medicine claim to have found that obese toddlers wind up being, well, stupid teenagers.

I would be apt to dismiss this Federally-funded study (see abstracthere ) as junk science, since the researchers do not simply claim a statistically small difference in I.Q. between obese children and their peers but a whopping 5 to 15% test score difference. Still, it does dovetail with other studies that give similar results, so for the sake of argument let us assume it is accurate.

(Interestingly enough, little was made of a recent study showing similar effects on children from high levels of fluoridation of water.)

The research was funded by the National Institute for Health and the lead author is founder of the BODY Project :

“Dr. Convit’s focus on combating and raising awareness about the impact of childhood obesity led him to create the The BODY Project, a program that works with New York City schools and parents to evaluate students’ height, weight, blood pressure, test for insulin resistance and record other measures of health, giving parents an overview of their child’s health status”

Which leads one to believe that perhaps Dr. Convit and his team are perhaps crusaders. Increasingly, science - particularly government funded science - serves political purposes and finds what the paymasters want them to find. This is particularly evident in Climatology where researchers produce voluminous bodies of work showing that the world is doomed when the actual world conditions show nothing of the sort. The way it works is simple; liberal activists get into controlling positions in science journals and professional organizations and reject papers that do not comport with their views, while promoting those that do. Once a paper is published it is used as a building block for another piece of research finding the same results, and the whole house of cards grows like a cancer, with no rebuttals allowed in the establishment system. Researchers understand this, and tailor their work to fit the new paradigm. It ultimately goes back to an excess of government funding.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading... 

Unemployment Drops To 5.1%-For Government Workers, Lowest Among All Industries

(CNSNews.com) - There was good news for American workers in August—if government was their employer.

The unemployment rate for government wage and salaries workers dropped from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August. At the same time, the number of government wage and salary workers counted as unemployed dropped by 123,000 people from 1,182,000 in July to 1,059,000 in August.

The overall national unemployment rate was 8.1 percent in August.

A year ago, in August 2011, there were 1,271,000 unemployed government wage and salary workers. So, the number of unemployed government workers has dropped by 212,000 since then.

The unemployment numbers for government workers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are not seasonally adjusted.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics counts someone as a government wage and salary worker if they are not in the military and they are currently employed by any level of government—local, state or federal—or they are unemployed, they are looking for work, and their last job was for any level of government.

The 5.1 percent unemployment rate for government workers was the lowest unemployment rate for any of 17 different categories and subcategories of industries for which employment is tracked and published on a month-to-month basis by the Department of Labor. These include nonagricultural private wage and salary workers; mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction workers; construction workers; manufacturing workers; durable goods manufacturing workers; nondurable goods manufacturing workers; wholesale and retail trade workers; transportation and utilities workers; information workers; financial activities workers; professional and business services workers; education and health services workers; leisure and hospitality workers; workers in other services; agricultural and related private wage and salary workers; and self-employed, unincorporated and unpaid family workers.

Via: CNSNews

Continue Reading...

EXCLUSIVE: GOP Platform includes Internet Freedom, language indicates influence of Rand Paul and libertarian-Republicans

Republicans could soon champion the protection of Internet Freedom as an official party issue, The Daily Caller has learned. Language in the final draft of the Internet freedom proposal was obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller.

The language was finalized on Tuesday, a source in the Republican Party told The Daily Caller, but it awaits party approval next week at the upcoming Republican National Convention.

Approval of the newly finalized draft language, however, would make the party the first of the two dominant political parties to fully and officially embrace Internet freedom. It also signals what Republicans view as important and necessary to keep the Internet open and free.

“Internet Freedom”, according to the finalized draft language, would entail the removal of “regulatory barriers” for technology businesses, resistance to international governance of the Internet and the “constitutional protection” of personal data.

“We will remove regulatory barriers that protect outdated technologies and business plans from innovation and competition, while preventing legacy regulation from interfering with new technologies such as mobile delivery of voice and video data as they become crucial components of the Internet ecosystem,” said the finalized draft.

“We will resist any effort to shift control away from the successful multi-stakeholder approach of Internet governance and toward governance by international or other intergovernmental organizations,” it said.

“We will ensure that personal data receives full constitutional protection from government overreach and that individuals retain the right to control the use of their data by third parties,” it said.

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading...