Monday, July 20, 2015

Report: 2.5 million illegal immigrants under Obama, 400,000 yearly

Some 2.5 million illegal immigrants have flowed into the United States under President Obama, with 790,000 rushing in since 2013, according to a new analysis.
Calculations from the Center for Migration Studies and the Pew Research Center indicate 1.5 to 1.7 million aliens joined the illegal population from 2009 to 2013 — either overstaying a temporary visa or sneaking into the country, according to a Center for Immigration Studiesreport out Monday morning.
The immigration watchdog's analysis of Census Bureau data also showed that an additional 790,000 illegals entered from the middle of 2013 to May of 2015, for a total of 2.5 million new illegal immigrants since Obama took office in January of 2009. That is a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 a year.
Illegal immigrants caught at the U.S.-Mexico border. AP Photo
The issue has become explosive under Obama, especially in the last year when tens of thousands of children and young adults joined the regular flow of illegals from Latin America.
It has also embroiled the GOP presidential contest, with Donald Trump blasting Mexico and party leaders worrying about image of Republicans.
But the CIS report written by Steven A. Camarota, director of research, found that illegal immigration was higher under former President George W. Bush, potentially undermining the GOP's bid to sound tough on the issue. Under Bush, 500,000-600,000 illegals surged in a year.
Also, the report found that the overall population of illegals has remained "roughly constant," indicating that the surge in of immigrants is balanced by those going home or getting legal status.
Immigration has become a presidential campaign issue. AP Photo
Other points in the CIS report released Monday:
— Had the United States not allowed so many new illegal immigrants to settle in the country since 2009, the total number of illegal immigrants would have fallen by 2.5 million. But the arrival of so many new illegal immigrants offset this attrition in the illegal population.
— While the level of new illegal immigration is lower than a decade ago, the enormous ongoing scale of illegal immigration is a clear indication that the United States has not come close to controlling it.
— Prior research indicates that roughly half a million illegal immigrants return home on their own each year, are deported, die, or get permanent residence. Those who get legal status each year are not beneficiaries of the president's administrative amnesty known as DACA — which does not give permanent residence, but does provide Social Security numbers, work authorization, and identity documents. Rather it has been long-standing policy to allow those who violate immigration laws to still get green cards (permanent residency) if they qualify in one of the legal immigration categories such as marrying a U.S. citizen.

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Tyrants and Snowflakes

At a time when government and institutional overreach has never seemed more extreme, tyrants at the helm are using every means at their disposal to stifle free speech. Elsewhere -- on alternative media and in universities, in particular -- speech is being censored, ostensibly to protect the tender sensibilities of snowflakes -- those infantile sad sacks who need protection from normal debate and such thoughts as have not before penetrated the bubbles they inhabit.
A. Universities
Universities, under the thumb of federal education bureaucracies, institute Star Chamber proceedings against male students ostensibly to stem the (nonexistent) rape culture on campus, encouraging slanderous attacks on them and discouraging would-be defenders. 
Simultaneously, they are preventing students and teachers from exercising a broad range of free speech. The latest example comes from Portland State University. To illustrate the stupidity of “gun free zones” a student wanted to advertise “murder free zones”. The university considered flyers promoting such zones could be “libelous” and “triggering,” and banned them. How this could be libelous escapes me. “Triggering”, in case, you missed it is a word used often in academic atmospheres to indicate speech or events that might set off fearful or unwanted emotions and feelings. Students of such tender, childish mindsets are to the critics of triggering bans “snowflakes” too delicate for the sometimes-heated world of debate and idea exchange which are essential to democracy. So we are left with this: to preclude heart flutters in those who consider “gun free zones” beyond parody, a student was banned from making fun of them.
I’m in full agreement with University of Chicago Professor Charles Lipson who argues on Facebook:
These are grotesque violations of basic democratic rights to voice alternative viewpoints, which universities should lead the way in protecting. Instead, universities have decided they should be a challenge-free bowl of mush, unwilling to let students grapple with alternative viewpoints. This is not just wrong. Protecting the students as if they are delicate flowers is a betrayal of universities' basic values."
It has also not escaped my attention that so often what is considered “triggering” and, therefore banned, depends on the orientation of the banners. Have you any substantial doubt that the Portland college banners oppose guns and anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint? 
On campuses throughout the country Jewish students, for example, are assailed, intimidated and even the recipients of death threats in anti-Israeli demonstrations without anyone in any of the overstaffed administration offices intervening. 
In sum, while at the same time ostensibly protecting delicate students, campus administrators are too often stifling students and teachers who oppose their own views and ignoring incidents where some students block free speech by violence and threats of violence. In this way, too, they betray the basic values of their institutions.

Obama collecting personal data for a secret race database

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”
Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.
This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.
Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.
So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.

BREAKING! CHATTANOOGA SHOOTER HAD BEEN SPOTTED AT SHOOTING RANGE WITH 3 MEN BEFORE MASSACRE

A local Chattanooga news station says that they got a tip about the ISIS-inspired murderer that killed 5 marines going to practice shooting at a range. And he wasn’t a lone.
Abdulazeez was reportedly spotted with three other men who were wearing long beards like Abdulazeez. All four were reportedly practice shooting.
The claim has not been confirmed by law enforcement but several sources told WDEF the men were likely spotted at Prentice Cooper Gun Range.
When News 12 arrived at the gun range, several men who were practicing shooting said a man who claimed to be a former Marine arrived at the range Saturday morning and said he was doing his own investigation to see if Abdulazeez had been shooting at that location.
The men said he asked multiple groups of people who were at the range.
CBS News is also reporting that Abdulazeez told his co-workers that he and a group of guys recently went shooting at a gun range. CBS News got its information from law enforcement sources who interviewed Abdulazeez’s co-workers.
According to a published CBS News report, the men reportedly shot rifles, BB guns and pistols last month.
So was he a “lone wolf” or was he aided in his murderous rampage?

Huckabee, Jindal, Cruz, Graham Bring Family Leadership Summit Crowd to Their Feet

AMES, Iowa:   GOP presidential candidates Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA), 
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
47%
, and 
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
96%
 brought the crowd to their feet several times while speaking at the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa Saturday.

Huckabee told the crowd that the basic unit of government is the family. “A mother and a father and the children being raised to become the next generation, and those parents are there to train that generation to become the replacements for them,” Huckabee explained.
Huckabee also got loud applause when he said he is the only GOP candidate that has run against the Clinton Machine when he ran for office in Arkansas and who “consistently defeated it… and most importantly lived to tell about it.”
The FAMiLY Leader – a pro-life, pro-mariage, pro-family organization – sponsored the event, so it was clear the attendees supported Huckabee— an ordained Baptist minister — for his stance on religious freedom not being usurped by the federal government.
Graham brought the crowd to their feet when he slammed Hillary Clinton on Benghazi. “Where the hell were you when those people needed you the most?” Graham charged at Clinton, “How could you allow it to become a death trap?”
Graham’s attack on the Democratic frontrunner’s handling of Benghazi during her time as Secretary of State got him a standing ovation.
Jindal brought the crowd out of their seats when he said the government shouldn’t be getting into individual’s religious rights or impeding the constitution.
He mentioned how God created the United States of America, and the next president will have to fight the New York TimesWashington Post, the ACLU, and anyone else who gets in the way. This again brought the crowd to their feet.
Jindal said he was ready for certain Democrats to lose their jobs, benefits, and go to prison, which provoked another ovation.
“I’m critical when the mainstream media doesn’t apply the same standards to this president that they apply to the rest of us,” he said. This statement led to the longest crowd ovation of the day.
Cruz also brought the crowd out of their chairs.
He spoke about the need for the people to take the country back – away from a ruling political class — and he also addressed the importance of religious liberty. “Never ever ever shy away from defending religious liberty – ever,” Cruz said.
“And I will tell you what my prayer is in the face of this disgraceful lawless decision,” referencing the recent Supreme Court decision legalizing same sex marriage. Cruz continued, ‘That it will awaken the body of Christ and lift us up to rise up for the …evangelicals…to say we will take this country back.”
Breitbart News spoke to several audience members about whom they favor in the GOP presidential race.
Minnesota resident Linnea Burtch drove two hours to Ames, Iowa with her husband Keith to attend the Family Leadership Summit and hear several of the GOP presidential candidates speak.
She said she lives in a blue state, and she wished the GOP candidates would come campaign there. Burtch told Breitbart News, “I do not like Bush.” She’s also not a fan of Cruz, Jindal or Rubio – but very supportive of Trump. “I love him…he says it the way it is.”
Even though Burtch supports Trump, she said her first pick for president is Dr. Ben Carson, and Trump is her second choice.
When questioned about Trump’s war hero comments about 
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
43%
, Burtch didn’t seem to care, as she isn’t a big fan of McCain. Burtch said she wasn’t there to watch Trump’s speech, so she didn’t see his comment, only heard about it when asked by Breitbart News.

Two 18-year-old voters also spoke to Breitbart News. Both David Bis and Shelby Vroman said they really like Carson, saying he seems more concerned with education. Vroman liked education being discussed, as she attended the event last year and didn’t think it was brought up enough at that time.
Vroman added that she thought the GOP presidential candidates should go speak more at colleges. She said GOP candidates could get the younger vote if they were willing to come to college campuses, but they “don’t think they’ll get the vote, so they don’t,” she complained.
Via Breitbart
Continue Reading....

KKK And New Black Panther Party Clash In South Carolina

Angry clashes have erupted between members of the Ku Klux Klan and the New Black Panther Party as both groups rally at the South Carolina statehouse.

Confederate flags were stolen and ripped up to cheers and applause from the New Black Panther demonstrators - while KKK members stood on the steps of the capitol performing Nazi salutes.

The white supremacists came out in force on Saturday afternoon to condemn the governor's decision to remove the Confederate Flag due to its associations with racial hatred.

Countering their demonstration, around 400 people with links to the New Black Panther Party marched in the name of racial equality - calling on politicians to do more than simply bring down a flag.

Although leaders insisted they would steer clear of one another, disputes were soon breaking out between off-shoots.
Via: Daily Mail

Continue Reading....


6.6 Million People Just Learned the Hard Way How Much It Costs to Be Uninsured Under Obamacare

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known also as Obamacare, was signed into law by President Obama in March 2010, but it didn't go into effect until Jan. 1, 2014. Despite the more than three years for insurers, states, the federal government, physicians, and consumers to prepare for the coming overhaul of our healthcare system, there were still plenty of hiccups (and challenges) when the calendar changed over.
Pretty much from the get-go of the first enrollment period there were technical issues with the online marketplace servers and software that prevented consumers from completing the enrollment process. But even bigger challenges would be fought at the legal level with the constitutionality of the individual mandate penalties coming into question in 2012, and more recently the challenge to the federal government's ability to divvy out subsidies to enrollees on behalf of 34 states. The defense proved victorious in both challenges, which made it to the Supreme Court.
America dislikes the individual mandate penalty
Yet in spite of Congress' ability to levy penalties against consumers, the individual mandate remains one of the most touchy and least-liked components of the healthcare reform law.

The individual mandate is the actionable component of Obamacare that requires individuals to purchase health insurance or face a penalty. The penalty in 2014, the first year Obamacare was fully in effect, was the greater of $95 or 1% of your modified adjusted gross income (MAGI). This year the penalty for not having insurance, which is officially known as the Individual Shared Responsibility Payment (ISRP), jumps to the greater of $325 or 2% of your MAGI. In 2016, another sizable spike to the greater of $695 or 2.5% of your MAGI. In 2017 and beyond the penalties rise on par with the level of inflation.
Why is there even an individual mandate penalty in the first place, you wonder? When Obamacare became the law of the land, one of the stipulations was that insurers could no longer pick and choose who they wanted to become members. In other words, people with preexisting conditions couldn't be turned away. This meant that through the process of adverse selection some sick and elderly consumers who are costly to insurers would be quick to enroll, while healthier young adults, which are needed to help offset the high costs of the elderly and terminally ill, would possibly shun being forced to buy insurance. The individual mandate penalty was put into place in order to encourage younger adults to enroll, otherwise they'd have to pay a penalty come tax time.
Millions of consumers just learned this the hard way
Just how many people were required to pay the penalty in 2014? According to a report released by National Taxpayer Advocate via the IRS, some 6.6 million people owed an ISRP due to not having health insurance. What may have come as a big surprise to many of those who owed was the fact that the penalty was the greater of $95 or 1% of their MAGI, not the lesser. Thus, the average penalty paid by these 6.6 million people was double the lower-bound figure, $190, since their MAGI often came into play when calculating their penalties.

Source: Pictures of Money via Flickr

In addition to the 6.6 million who owed an ISRP, an estimated 300,000 people paid the ISRP unnecessarily. Some $35 million was collected, or about $110 per person, despite these 300,000 individuals qualifying for a low-income exemption. The oddest part of this whole situation is the IRS may not be able to simply give these 300,000 people back their money because it would require an amended tax return, which would probably cost more than $110 if these individuals sought the help of a tax professional. The IRS is undecided on whether to refund these 300,000 people without the need for an amended return, but if it doesn't the $35 million in overpayments may wind up being a "gift" to the Treasury.
National Taxpayer Advocate also noted that some 10.7 million people filed Form 8965, the Health Coverage Exemptions form that allowed them to use one of roughly one-dozen exemptions, such as low income or economic hardships, to get out of having to pay the individual mandate penalty.
It's worth keeping in mind that these figures could change as they were preliminary through the end of April.
Why the individual mandate may not be working as intended
The short story here is that some 6.6 million consumers got a rude awakening of just how much it costs to be uninsured under Obamacare. But the grim reality, in my eyes at least, is that the individual mandate penalty may not wind up working as it was originally intended.

For starters, the IRS is pretty much powerless when it comes to collecting on ISRPs. When an individual doesn't report income on their taxes, the IRS has an entire arsenal of fines and legal tactics it can use to coerce someone to correct the problem. When an individual doesn't pay their ISRP, all the IRS can do is ask nicely to please do so.
Source: Flickr user Reynermedia
You see, the IRS can't garnish wages or seize property to collect on an ISRP, and it isn't likely that the IRS is going to file individual lawsuits against nonpayers and go to court for what amounts to an average of $190 per person. The IRS's only real "weapon" here is that it can withhold the ISRP from a consumer's refund.
In 2014, 91.8 million people received a refund from the IRS out of 126.1 million individual tax returns -- that's nearly three out of four people. Those are pretty good odds for the IRS to collect on ISRPs. But it's also noteworthy that there were three million fewer refunds processed for the most recent tax year despite 500,000 more total returns from the prior year. If there is no refund, there is no way for the IRS to collect the ISRP if a taxpayer doesn't voluntarily pay it. It makes you wonder if we're seeing this shift down in refunds as a result of the individual mandate penalty.
But the bigger issue as I see it is that the cost of paying the penalty, while perhaps a bit higher than some had expected in tax year 2014, is still well below the cost of purchasing health insurance for a full year. In 2015, the average silver plan price across the country was $307. In other words, health insurance for the most commonly chosen tiered plan in the country runs around $3,700 per year without any subsidies. In contrast, the average individual mandate penalty in 2014 was $190. It's a night and day difference.
Source: Flickr user Eric Snopel

Yes, there's the advantage of possibly being able to write off some of your health-premium costs on your taxes by purchasing health insurance, as well as the peace of mind of knowing you're covered in case something happens where you need to seek medical care. But on a comparative basis it's just easier for millions to bite the bullet and take the penalty in order to save thousands of dollars per year. Even in 2016 when the ISRP moves to the greater of $695 or 2.5% of your MAGI, the average payment will still likely be less than half the average cost of a silver plan around the county over the course of a year.
This raises a big question
The big question mark is what this might do to the insurance companies offering Obamacare plans. The individual mandate penalties were expected to begin shuffling the holdouts (which are primarily healthy individuals) toward enrollment by 2015 and 2016, thus helping to offset the higher costs associated with sicker enrollees in the 2013-2014 enrollment period. But with the IRS's hands tied and consumers coming to the realization that the penalties are a drop in the bucket relative to actually purchasing a health plan, I have to wonder if insurers are going to see the margin boost Wall Street has been projecting.

On the flipside, investors should keep in mind that Obamacare enrollment still represents just a small low-to-mid single-digit percentage of the pie for most insurance companies. Employee-sponsored enrollment, Medicaid, and Medicare Advantage plans can often make up a much larger percentage of insurers' total revenue. Thus, even if Obamacare struggles to court younger, healthier adults via the individual mandate penalties, insurers will probably be just fine from the perspective of profitability.

This $19 trillion industry could destroy the Internet
One bleeding-edge technology is about to put the World Wide Web to bed. And if you act quickly, you could be among the savvy investors who enjoy the profits from this stunning change. Experts are calling it the single largest business opportunity in the history of capitalism... The Economist is calling it "transformative"... But you'll probably just call it "how I made my millions." Don't be too late to the party -- click here for one stock to own when the Web goes dark.

AWESOME VIDEO SHOWS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN ARMED ROBBER SHOVES ASIDE A GUY WHO HAPPENS TO BE A FORMER MARINE!

An idiot thug tried to rob a gas station early one morning and pushed aside a man who was in his way. Unfortunately for his dumb ass, the guy turned out to be a firefighter and a former marine. It did not go well for the robber.
Watch below:

SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL

What was worse: the treaty or the press conference?



It is a safe prediction that for years to come the debate over the Obama Iran deal will rage, with one question looming largest; namely, which was worse… the treaty or the press conference?

Actually, it was not a conference but what is known in Washington-speak as a “press availability.” This refers not to the press being available but to the President making himself available to the press and all its relentless scrutiny. For once Obama came through, making himself thoroughly available; all his specious sophistry, all his testy narcissism, all his Freudian solipsism, was on display. To coin a phrase, he had all his centrifuges spinning. And, as Jackie Mason would add, I say this with the highest respect.

In one contentious exchange, Major Garrett of CBS wondered how the President was “content” to leave American hostages trapped in Iran, basting in Hell while he basked in Heaven. Obama contended he was not the least bit content; why, he had even met with some of the families of the hostages!

This sort of non sequitur is terribly revealing. How could we suspect him of not caring when he even made time in his busy schedule to meet with relatives? Surely such intensive efforts will be attended with success, much as the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls saved the two hundred girls kidnapped by Boko Haram in Nigeria? What’s that you say… they were never saved… don’t be ridiculous… we never read about them in the media anymore… they must have been saved!

A man who invests so much into the effort to free our hostages from Iran is just the sort of man we should trust to protect Israel from the threat of nuclear annihilation! Why won’t that right-wing kook Netanyahu quit all his fussing?

There were other juicy tidbits throughout the event. One in particular summed up for me the combination of poor traits that make up the portrait of our young President. Amid the press of the corps, one spunky voice emerged (I paraphrase): “Mr. President, does it disturb you that Prime Minister Assad of Syria and President Rouhani of Iran are making public statements to the effect this deal is a big victory for Iran?”

Obama replied: “It does not concern me that they are spinning the deal in their favor. That is what politicians do!” And he punched the “do” with some real fervor.

At least two very distorted beliefs are revealed in this exchange. The first is a crimp in the true part of the answer; the second stands separately as the false part of the answer. Sure, the answer is partially true. He is right not to be concerned about their spinning because they are liars and tyrants who would tell you they won even if everyone knew they lost, like the guy with blood on his hands and his DNA under the victim’s fingernails who says the jury should acquit because there is “no evidence.” But the way to make that point is by saying: “That is what liars do. That is what tyrants do.” They lie because they are liars, not because they are in a career that makes allowances for wishful interpretation.

So even when his point is valid, his presentation opens a dreary window into his world.
But the false part of his statement is doubly shocking, offensive, misleading, misguiding, corrupting. He tells us that a sitting President or Prime Minister may legitimately regard his role as being “a politician,” thus availing him of the leeway afforded to candidates for office. He may present his actions in matters of life and death to the public in the best possible light. That is what politicians do…

No way! Absolutely cringe-inducingly false!

A candidate is a politician. Once elected he is a governor. A politician may spin things, not to falsify but to magnify, to sell what he believes, to promote a sense of hope and optimism, to set an ideal to which he can aspire. This is a dispensation that must be managed discerningly, but at least it can be defended.

But to spin while in office?! Unconscionable. In office you are a governor, a leader, a representative of the people and every word out of your mouth must be the absolute truth or the closest you can approach it in good faith. The people, the ones who believed your hype, who bought your hope, have placed absolute faith in your judgment, your temperament, your character, your integrity. There is no room at all for manipulating the perceptions of events to create an illusion of success when it is not paralleled by reality.

Mister President, if you think lying to the people while in office is what “politicians do,” pardon us for not trusting you with our lives in negotiating arrangements with rabid haters out to kill us and destroy our way of life.



Obama's Definition of 'Justice' Describes His Liberal Agenda


President Barack Obama speaks at the NAACP's 106th national convention at the Philadelphia Convention Center, on Tuesday, July 14, 2015, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)(

CNSNews.com) - "Justice is not only the absence of oppression, it is the presence of opportunity," President Obama told an NAACP gathering in Philadelphia on Tuesday.

In a speech focusing on crime and punishment, the president spent a few paragraphs defining justice as the embodiment of his liberal agenda:

"What the marchers on Washington knew, what the marchers in Selma knew, what folks like Julian Bond knew, what the marchers in this room still know, is that justice is not only the absence of oppression, it is the presence of opportunity. Justice is giving every child a shot at a great education no matter what zip code they're born into. Justice is giving everyone willing to work hard the chance at a good job with good wages, no matter what their name is, what their skin color is, where they live.

"Fifty years after the Voting Rights Act, justice is protecting that right for every American. Justice is living up to the common creed that says, I am my brother's keeper and my sister's keeper. Justice is making sure every young person knows they are special and they are important and that their lives matter -- not because they heard it in a hashtag, but because of the love they feel every single day -- not just love from their parents, not just love from their neighborhood, but love from police, love from politicians. Love from somebody who lives on the other side of the country, but says, that young person is still important to me. That's what justice is.

"And in the American tradition and in the immigrant tradition of remaking ourselves, in the Christian tradition that says none of us is without sin and all of us need redemption, justice and redemption go hand in hand."


Taking his points one by one, Obama advocates universal preschool for every 3- and 4-year old in America, and he repeated that in his speech on Tuesday.

As for goods jobs with good wages," the president is leading the push for a higher minimum wage; and he said on Tuesday that "continuing...subtle, bigotry" may explain why the unemployment rate for blacks is much higher than that for whites.

Fifty years after passage of the Voting Rights Act, Obama and other Democrats insist that requiring people to show identification at polling places violates their "voting rights."

To help more young people feel the love, Obama in 2014 launched an initiative called "My Brother's Keeper," aimed at "helping more of our young people stay on track."
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/27/remarks-president-my-brothers-keeper-initiative

And in the wake of the race riots in Ferguson, President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing recommended changes in the way police interact with the communities they patrol. Obama has endorsed the recommendation that police officers work with children, taking time to read to them in schools, for example.

In his speech on Tuesday, President Obama said the nation's criminal justice system "isn't as smart as it should be. It's not keeping us as safe as it should be. It is not as fair as it should be. Mass incarceration makes our country worse off, and we need to do something about it."

He wants to end mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders, putting more of them back in the community: "We should pass a sentencing reform bill through Congress this year," he said.)

He wants to improve prison conditions for inmates, ending overcrowding, gang activity, rape, and the "overuse" of solitary confinement. He also wants to boost job-training programs for inmates: "Let's reward prisoners with reduced sentences if they complete programs that make them less likely to commit a repeat offense," Obama said.

He also wants voting rights restored to felons who have served their sentences, and he said employers should "ban the box" asking job candidates about their past convictions.
Obama will highlight his prison-reform agenda when he becomes the first sitting president to visit a federal prison on Thursday.

Media Members Want To Make it Clear They Don’t Know Chattanooga Killer’s Motive

It’s still up in the air to members of the media what compelled 24-year-old Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez, a Muslim, to murder four Marines in Chattanooga, Tennessee on Thursday before being killed in a firefight with police.
As one CNN reporter put it, “he was a nice kid from a nice family, and he was as American as anybody else.”
Chris Cuomo said, “we may never know the exact motive” of Abdulazeez. That sentiment has been repeated across the dial, with pundits and correspondents falling all over themselves to remind viewers we just don’t know the motive.
It has been established he did not hunt, however. Abdulazeez did blog about Islam on July 13, where, according to The Daily Beast, he “uses the hypothetical example of a prisoner who is told he would be given a test that would either take him out of his earthly prison.”

CITIZEN ARMED WITH AR-15 STANDS GUARD OUTSIDE VIRGINIA RECRUITING OFFICES

On July 17, a citizen armed with an AR-15 stood guard outside various military recruitment offices in Virginia.

The man said “fundamental Muslim extremism” is at war with us, but out leaders seem unable–or unwilling–“to put it in perspective and [realize] that the war is here.”
According to Fox 5, the man wishes to remain anonymous, but did shake hands with those who came by to thank him for standing guard.
He said those inside the recruitment offices were glad to see him too:
I went into each office, the ones that were open, and I was received with handshakes and thank yous. They constantly came by, and not only them, but their wives came by in tears thanking me for just being out here. They baked cookies for me and brought lunch by.
The unidentified man said the police stopped and “checked [him] out.” He said they were just “doing their duty” and “It was all good.”
He urged Americans to contact their Representatives and Senators and get the laws changed so Marines, soldiers, and other military personnel can defend themselves.
He said: “People need to call their [Representatives], they need to call their Senators and they need to change these laws that are on the books so these guys can protect themselves so a regular old citizen doesn’t have to go out and do it,” he told us.”
Breitbart News previously reported that Representative Scott DesJarlais (R-TN-4th) will introducing legislation to abolish military gun-free zones on July 20.
DesJarlais’ bill is titled the “Enhancing Safety At Military Installations Act.”
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

[OPINION] Lawmakers did too little for higher education

Many of our current Oregon legislators went to college at a time when our public universities were very affordable and students could cover their costs with summer jobs and part-time work during the school year. As we all are painfully aware, that is no longer the case. Tuition at Oregon's public universities and community colleges keeps heading up and up while our state contribution has fallen so precipitously that we are 47th out of the 50 states in the level of public support for higher education. We leave it to the students to figure out how to pay the difference, and much of that ends up being unsustainable debt, averaging $27,000 for the current graduating class.  

Many students are asking themselves whether college is worth the cost and the debt. Student debt impacts our state's economy as well, as young college graduates can't buy a car, much less a house, can't start a business and have to grab the first job that comes along, often one that doesn't require a college degree, just to meet interest payments on their student loans.  

The Legislature set a very ambitious goal of achieving "40-40-20" by the year 2025 (40 percent with a high school diploma; 40 percent with a community college degree; and 20 percent with a university degree or better). To get there, they eliminated the higher ed board, created the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, eliminated the Oregon University System and spun off the universities to governance by independent boards.  
What have those changes done for the cost of college? In the last few months, those independent college boards raised tuition in amounts ranging from 7.6 percent (Oregon State University), 4.2 percent (Portland State University) to 3.8 percent (University of Oregon), well above the annual rate of inflation rate of minus 0.2 percent. At the same time the University of Oregon's board recently offered a salary of $800,000 to their new president. No wonder they need to raise tuition!  

At the very end of the legislative session, the Ways and Means Committee was able to increase funding for higher education by a substantial 22 percent over the last budget. Although still not back to pre-recession levels, this was a major increase of $700 million for the universities and $550 million for community colleges. The problem is, the Legislature did not mandate that this increase in state support result in any commensurate tuition cuts for students. Rather, the PSU president has said the additional funding might help to lower the planned 4.2 percent increase in tuition and fees. But increase it they will!

Meanwhile the Washington state Legislature took a dramatically different approach. They cut tuition for their public colleges and universities by an immediate 5 percent and by an additional 10 percent to 15 percent in 2016. Any increases thereafter will be tied to increases in Washington's median hourly wage. Oregon needs to do the same.  
Oregon needs to start with a student-centered reinvestment budget, as opposed to an institution-focused reinvestment budget. This would include reining in the universities' sky-rocketing non-academic costs, increasing need-based student aid grants, lowering — or at least freezing — tuition levels and helping students meet tuition payments without incurring unsustainable debt.  

The Legislature did budget $10 million for a much scaled down "free community college" bill. This effort, while helpful to some high school graduates, will not provide any assistance to the older worker coming to community college to get advanced training nor to any students at our four-year universities.  

That's where the "pay it forward" program would have come in. "Pay it forward" offered students the opportunity to go to a public university without paying tuition upfront but, rather, making small, income-based payments after completion. Their payments would not go to out-of-state banks — currently some $200 million in student loan payments leaves the state every biennium —  but would stay right here in Oregon in a fund that would help pay for future generations of students, eventually becoming self-sustaining. Yes, the state would have to come up with the initial funding, but this is a shared responsibility model, and the students would pay back into the fund after they completed their education so that future generations of students could have the same educational opportunity.  

We have to revisit the question of student debt in the next legislative session. It is a problem that haunts the future for all of us.  
Barbara Dudley is senior policy adviser for the Oregon Working Families Party.


Popular Posts