Saturday, July 11, 2015

[VIDEO] Baltimore's Next Police Chief Faces Demoralized Department

Baltimore's next police commissioner will have a daunting to-do list: quell a surge in homicides, rebuild trust between officers and the public, win the confidence of a demoralized and alienated department, and keep the peace when the explosive Freddie Gray case comes to trial.
"It's the toughest job in the United States at the moment," said Eugene O'Donnell, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York and a former New York City police officer.
Commissioner Anthony Batts was fired by the mayor on Wednesday, less than three months after riots erupted over Gray's death from a spinal injury the 25-year-old black man suffered while being bounced around the back of a moving police van. Six officers are awaiting trial in October on charges ranging up to murder.
"You have a confluence of factors: You have an ongoing criminal case that's traumatic for everybody. You have the specter of riots. For the police union and officers, they're alienated, and the concern is that the cops will be further alienated," O'Donnell said. "You need a chief who can, first and foremost, drive everyone toward common ground."
In dismissing Batts, Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said his approach was too divisive and his presence too damaging.
Just hours before his firing, in a sign that the 2,800-officer department's rank-and-file had lost confidence in Batts, the police union issued a report blasting his response to the looting, arson and vandalism that broke out April 27. The report said Batts discouraged officers from wearing protective gear and told them not to engage with rioters. Roughly 200 officers were injured during the unrest.
"The officers characterized the Baltimore Police Department's leadership during the riots as unprepared, politically motivated and uncaring and confusing," said Gene Ryan, president of the police union.
Batts' standing was further damaged by soaring bloodshed in the city in the weeks after the riots.
In May, Baltimore saw its biggest surge in homicides in four decades, while arrests dropped by half compared with the same period a year earlier. The city's homicide total so far this year is 156, a 48 percent increase from the same time last year. And shootings have climbed 86 percent.
Community members have accused police of not doing their jobs in the wake of the Gray arrests. Batts and the police union denied that officers were shirking their duties but acknowledged that police are angry, frustrated and fearful in the wake of the Gray case of being second-guessed and prosecuted.
Peter Moskos, also with John Jay College and a former Baltimore police officer, said the Gray case led police officers to question whether the department had their backs.
"The harm from the Freddie Gray death is it had a chilling effect: Cops were saying, 'That could have been me,'" he said. But he said getting rid of Batts was "a step toward getting things on track."
"Batts was a leader without a following," Moskos said. "If none of the rank and file thinks you're competent, it's as good as being incompetent."
Batts' deputy, Kevin Davis, will serve as interim commissioner until the mayor appoints a permanent replacement. Davis said his first order of business was appointing someone to focus on riot response. Davis added that he would like to remain in the position permanently.

Goodbye, Money-Sucking Empty Buildings. Hello, Better Government?

Money ablaze (Getty)American taxpayers are forking over $1.7 billion a year just to maintain empty federal buildings.
Each year, 12 agencies run 20 programs to study invasive species, to the tune of $1.4 billion a year.
Leaders of the Government Transformation Initiative Coalition, teaming up with members of Congress, want to change that.
They’re behind the Government Transformation Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill., in the House and soon to drop in the Senate, creating a commission to combine or eliminate redundant and wasteful federal programs and agencies.
“We have to honor the American people,” Steve Goodrich, CEO at the Center for Organizational Excellence and one of the coalition’s leaders, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The coalition has some experience in fiscal scrutiny, with other leadership members including David Walker, a former Government Accountability Office head, and Barry Melancon, president at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
But the trick, of course, as with anything in Washington, is making a massive overhaul of the federal government a reality. Ever so often, a new group says it has plans to fundamentally transform the way Washington works, but change comes incrementally, if at all.
In 2010 for example, President Barack Obama created the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, aka the Simpson-Bowles Commission, to shore up the United States’ fiscal future. But, that committee’s members couldn’t reach marshal enough internal support to report its findings to Congress. Fiscal reform supporters applauded the commission’s work, but it went basically nowhere.
Last year, CTI worked on similar legislation, and it failed to gain Congress’ approval. Supporters say this attempt could be different.
The bill requires Congress to take an up-or-down vote on any recommendations-turned legislation from the commission within three days. That would “force the hand of Congress,” as Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, put it.

[VIDEO] AWESOME: BEN CARSON TELLS STORIES OF HOW BLACK INVENTORS CAN INSPIRE TODAY’S YOUTH TO GREATNESS


We haven’t heard much from Ben Carson lately, but I ran across this clip from last month where he’s speaking in the south side of Chicago on how young people think that they can be the next big time player in professional sports when that’s just not the reality. Rather, Carson says stories of black inventors, who really made a difference in this world, can inspire today’s youth if they are simply told their stories.

Watch This:



Friday, July 10, 2015

Obamacare’s Bill Is Due

150709_BLZ_ACAInflation
N
ow that the Supreme Court has once again saved Obamacare, can we have an honest talk about it?
Let me explain. On one side—you don’t need me to spell out which—the Affordable Care Act was demonized. It was going to bankrupt the health care system; destroy the United States’ reputation for excellent service; steal you away from your doctor; and, by some means never quite explained, lead us straight to communism. Today, subsidized health care premiums and an end to pre-existing condition exclusions; tomorrow, Stalin and FEMA detention camps located in semisecret parts of Texas. You know how it goes.
Under this assault, all too many ACA defenders turned into fanboys and fangirls, dismissing any issue raised against the law as inconsequential and exaggerated. And besides, it’s not like legislation to improve any aspect of it would get through our paralyzed, polarized, and now Republican-run Congress anyway.
But this strategy might well come back to bite the Democrats. The bill for the health care expansion is coming due, just as the recipients will be heading to the ballot box to vote in the first primaries for the 2016 election. More than a few are likely to be annoyed. 
Last week Oregon’s insurance commissioner, Laura Cali, announced that the state had approved a 25 percent premium increase for the largest health insurer on the state’s exchanges. The second largest insurer did even better: It received permission to boost its monthly charge to consumers by 33 percent.
Oregon might be the first health insurance exchange equivalent of a penguin getting shoved off an ice floe, but it won’t be alone in the freezing-cold waters for long. For example, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee requested an average 36 percent price increase for the plans it offers—after receiving a 19 percent bump last year. And that sounds like a relative bargain compared with Minnesota and New Mexico, where the BlueCross BlueShield family is looking for increases of more than 50 percent. Even if the final numbers are lower than the asks, it seems quite likely these states will approve substantive premium increases.
The problem is simple. As Trudy Lieberman reported this month in Harper’s, the ACA made a decent stab at solving the problem of Americans lacking insurance. Unfortunately, the bargain struck to get the bill to a point where lobbyists for the hospital, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries to sign on, or at least not fight it, did not adequately address the issue of overall medical costs.
And that’s where the consumer comes in. Someone is “it,” the party paying the bill. And that “it” is increasingly you, whether you receive insurance on the exchanges or from an employer.

Can Kate Steinle's Family Sue San Francisco Over Its Sanctuary City Policy?

FILE -- July 2, 2015: Liz Sullivan, left, and Jim Steinle, right, parents of Kathryn "Kate" Steinle, talk to members of the media outside their home in Pleasanton, Calif.
FILE -- July 2, 2015: Liz Sullivan, left, and Jim Steinle, right, parents of Kathryn "Kate" Steinle, talk to members of the media outside their home in Pleasanton, Calif. (Lea Suzuki/San Francisco Chronicle via AP
)Looking for justice? Move to Mexico. When it comes to looking to the U.S. courts for protection, you may have a better chance if you’re from south of the border.
Kathryn "Kate" Steinle was shot dead on July 1, allegedly by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, a Mexican felon who was in the U.S. illegally. Lopez-Sanchez would have been deported but for the fact that San Francisco is a "sanctuary city," which is why officials there chose to release him and ignore an ICE detainer. This effectively put him back on the street. And yet, if Steinle's family tries to sue the city for this travesty, it may be thrown out of court.
Meanwhile, in Arizona, a judge has just denied a motion to dismiss a case brought by the mother of a Mexican teen who was shot by a U.S. Border Patrol agent in a cross-border shooting. You read that right. The teen was Mexican, shot in Mexico, and the judge still ruled that his mother may sue the Border Patrol agent. U.S. District Court Judge Raner Collins opined that "the Mexican national may avail himself to the protections of the Fourth Amendment and that the agent may not assert qualified immunity." The ACLU attorney on the case applauded this ruling, saying, "The court was right to recognize that constitutional protections don't stop at the border."
Perhaps they begin there. If Kate Steinle's family cannot use our laws to get justice in her name, and yet the family of this Mexican teen can, the immigration debate has truly become the twilight zone.

[VIDEO] Megyn Kelly: Why Is Obama Silent on the Murder of Kate Steinle By an Illegal Immigrant?

MEGYN KELLY, HOST, "THE KELLY FILE": Breaking tonight, the young woman gunned down by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco was just laid to rest. Surrounded by friends and family. It does not appear at this hour that anyone from the Obama administration was in attendance.
Welcome to THE KELLY FILE, everyone. I'm Megyn Kelly. Funeral services were held this evening for 32-year-old Katherine Steinle. Her loved ones remembering her as an avid traveler who loved connecting with people until her life was cut short a week ago. That's when Kate was shot and killed while in her father's arms, police say by this man, Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times from this country and had racked up a string of felonies while in the U.S. The San Francisco sheriff had Sanchez in custody as recently as April but released him pursuant to San Francisco's sanctuary city policy where they have rules against handing over anyone to the Feds who might be deported.
This sheriff himself a convicted criminal says, he stands by the city's policy. Kate's murder has since exploded into a national debate on illegal immigrant, sanctuary cities in crime. With the White House ducking the issue of its own acquiescence in these city's decision to flout the federal immigration laws which were duly enacted. When asked repeatedly this week to speak to this case, White House Spokesman Josh Earnest declined to weigh in other than to refer folks to the Department of Homeland Security. A stark contrast to what we saw after Michael Brown was killed in Ferguson, Missouri. A man we now know was attacking a police officer at the time of his death. His funeral saw three Obama officials in attendance, his death drew comments from President Obama personally. And the administration also sent in the DOJ and 40 FBI agents dispatched to Missouri after Michael Brown was killed.
Where is the swarm of agents in San Francisco? Then there was Freddie Gray in Baltimore, a repeat drug offender who was killed in police custody. Here again his funeral was attended by three Obama administration officials and again the President spoke personally to Freddie Gray's death. And again, sent the DOJ in to investigate. When Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida, the President spoke to his death which was later ruled to be in self-defense. But Kate Steinle, nothing. No comments, no swarm of FBI agents, no DOJ investigation, nothing. Why?
Marc Thiessen is a FOX News contributor and the former chief presidential speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Richard Fowler is a nationally syndicated radio host. Thank you for being here, both. Marc, why?
MARC THIESSEN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, the silence from President Obama is absolutely deafening. He had plenty to say when it came to Trayvon Martin, when it came to Michael Brown, when it came to Freddie Gray, but all of the sudden a woman is killed by a criminal alien, and all of a sudden the President is tongue tied. He's got nothing to say. Why is that? The answer is simple. In all of those other cases, he had liberal policy points that he wanted to make about gun control, about police bias, about racial profiling. In this case he has no policy points he wants to make because the policies that he supports are the ones that got this woman killed. His support for sanctuary cities, his support for releasing criminal aliens into the communities. So he doesn't want to highlight this because there's no political gain to be made from it.
KELLY: Richard, do you disagree with any word that Marc just said?
RICHARD FOWLER, NATIONALLY SYNDICATED RADIO HOST: I disagree with about 90 percent of it. I think this president is outraged that we haven't passed comprehensive immigration reform. Since this president is coming to the White House --
KELLY: Where is the comment on Kate Steinle's death?
FOWLER: Over and over and over again about comprehensive immigration reform. This president has said number of times --
KELLY: But if you could just answer my question, Richard? Could you answer my question?
FOWLER: I am answering your question, Megyn.
KELLY: Where is the comment about Kate Steinle's murder?
FOWLER: The reason why Kate Steinle's murder happened, and the White House will tell you the same thing, is because we have a broken immigration system. George Bush tried to fix it and Republicans blocked it. Now, the President has tried to fix it. Marco Rubio even tried. It was so bad that he ran away from it.

As Massachusetts food stamp agency tries to fix flaws, experienced welfare workers retire

Massachusetts welfare officials promised the federal government that they will take steps to correct problems with the state's food stamp program, including hiring more staff. However, the food stamp program just lost around 11 percent of its staff to an early retirement incentive.

"You have truly a brain drain with a system that's extremely new and extremely flawed," said Patricia Baker, senior policy analyst at the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute.
Michelle Hillman, a spokeswoman for the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, said, "We continue to assess the positions vacated due to early retirement and will prioritize based upon need and compliance with our corrective action plan."

The state has the authority to use up to 20 percent of the savings from the retirement incentive to hire new employees to fill critical jobs. It has not yet determined which positions will be filled.

The problems date back to a modernization of the food stamp program, officially called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, instituted in 2014, in response to reports of welfare fraud. The Department of Transitional Assistance created a new electronic management system that checked multiple sources of data to determine a recipient's eligibility, then began to automatically cut off benefits based on the results of online checks. The department instituted a new phone system. It centralized case processing, replacing a regional system.

As The Republican / MassLive.com previously reported, the modernization resulted in a huge drop in food stamp caseloads. Advocates for the poor said people were being needlessly kicked off the program and were having trouble reaching caseworkers to reinstate their benefits.


Candidates call for changes in "sanctuary city" policies

As immigration continues to be a contentious issue on the campaign trail, many politicians are calling for changes in "sanctuary city" policies, reports CBS News correspondent Jan Crawford.
The idea of the policies is to support immigrants and provide assistance if they became involved with minor offenses. But the policies have come under scrutinysince the murder of a San Francisco woman, allegedly by an undocumented immigrant.
"We ought to eliminate 'sanctuary cities,"' former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said.
On this immigration issue, Republican presidential candidates agree.
"One of the things we've talked about in the past, and we've tried to get included with negotiations with Democrats in the past, is the idea of getting rid of the 'sanctuary city' situation," Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said on Fox News.
Now Congress is considering action.
"I don't think you can have whole cities or whole states just not obeying the law," Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said.
It became front-page news after the murder of Kathryn Steinle, allegedly shot and killed by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, a convicted felon who had been deported to Mexico five times.
Lopez-Sanchez was released from jail in April. But he was on the streets because San Francisco officials, under city policy, ignored a request from federal immigration officials to notify them before he was set free.
The crime even has Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton softening their previous support for "sanctuary cities."
"The city made a mistake, not to deport someone that the federal government strongly felt should be deported," she said.
But for Republicans, it's a chance to reset the crucial immigration debate and move away fromDonald Trump's incendiary comments about illegal immigrants.
San Francisco is one of more than 200 sanctuary jurisdictions, including New York, Miami and Los Angeles, that can offer a safe harbor for undocumented immigrants who otherwise might face deportation.

Obama’s Nominee to Head Medicare, Medicaid Agency Faces Questions of Cronyism

An Obama administration official who faces questions surrounding potential conflicts of interest due to his work in the medical services field has been nominated to serve as head of the agency tasked with overseeing Obamacare.
The White House announced yesterday Andy Slavitt’s nomination to permanently head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Slavitt began working as the agency’s acting administrator after Marilyn Tavenner resigned in January.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services, oversees Obamacare and the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov. Slavitt joined the Obama administration in June 2014 as principal deputy administrator at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
His appointment to the post was met with skepticism from Republicans in the House and Senate, as Slavitt worked as group vice president of OptumInsight/QSSI, a technology company, before taking the No. 2 post at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The Department of Health and Human Services awarded Maryland-based OptumInsight/QSSI with a contract to build the federal data hub, part of HealthCare.gov, in January 2012.
Then, following the federal exchange’s disastrous launch in October 2013, OptumInsight/QSSI was tasked with fixing the broken website and continued to serve as a “senior adviser” on the project.
OptumInsight/QSSI is the sister company of UnitedHealthcare, a health insurance provider that offers plans on both the federal and state-run exchanges. Both companies are subsidiaries of UnitedHealth Group.
Typically, government officials who leave the private sector for jobs in the administration must wait at least one year before working with their previous employer. However, Slavitt received an ethics waiver from the White House last year, which allowed him to begin working on matters involving OptumInsight/QSSI, his former company.

CALIFORNIA: Legislature Should Examine Costs of Climate Control Policies

Regardless of differences in opinion about approaches to combatting climate change, California decided in 2006 that the state would have a comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction program. Now, nine years later, the AB 32 programs are beginning to take effect and having a financial impact. That impact is being felt by consumers in their electricity bills and there are strong indications that other cost increases will be coming soon.
The unexpected magnitude of the costs, coupled with the uncertainty about future economic impacts, demand greater evaluation of the costs that will be associated with any new climate change proposals (SB 350, SB 32, and the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan). This is hardly a revolutionary approach Рin fact, cost analysis is an approach the state should prioritize for all new policies Рbut proponents of new climate change proposals seem surprisingly blas̩ about their need.
To be fair, there are several studies: Energy and Environmental Economics, “California State Agency’s PATHWAYS Project: Long-term Greenhouse Gas Reduction Scenarios;” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, “Modeling California policy impact on greenhouse gas emissions;” and Next 10, “California Climate Policy to 2050: Pathways for Sustained Prosperity,” that review cost impacts and conclude that the proposals will actually lower overall consumer costs. Those studies make assumptions about the future costs with many caveats about population and economic growth. They may be correct assumptions or they may be faulty. However, the Wall Street Journal opined on a study in November, 2011, showing that AB 32 would cost the average household $3,857 in increased costs by 2020. So before any legislation moves forward, NFIB/CA is requesting that the legislature not blindly accept these assumptions but fully analyze the cost issues and allow a public debate over these far reaching policies.
Here are some basic questions that small businesses need to know about these proposals:
What will Californians have to pay in increased electric costs to reach the 50% renewable energy goal? Already, many school districts, hospitals, businesses and residents have seen increases in their electricity bills and many of the costs associated with AB 32 have not yet been built into the rates. The California Energy Commission’s own numbers estimate a 28% to 42% increase in electricity rates by 2020. Many of the studies that show consumers will pay less rely on “savings” to offset the higher electricity costs but those savings are vague and there is no indication when those savings will be available to consumers, much less whether they are quantifiable and verifiable. The alternative renewable energy sources being pushed can be several times more expensive than traditional energy sources, particularly since energy from dams and solar roof tops are excluded from the equation, and these costs will constitute half of consumer electricity bills.
What will ratepayers need to pay to transform the state’s electricity infrastructure? According to the studies, the 50% petroleum reduction goal will require the number of Zero Electric Vehicles (ZEVs) to climb from 100,000 to over 7 million. That increase will require a massive new investment in infrastructure to transform the transmission and distribution system and to build charging stations. Who will pay for the billions of dollars of new infrastructure? Are those costs built into economic projections models? And what provisions in the new proposals will prevent all the benefits going to those can afford Teslas and solar panels — and the costs being borne by middle and lower income families and small businesses? And electric cars are often heavier than others, and contribute to serious wear and tear on our highway systems without paying maintenance taxes at the pump.
How much will energy efficiency proposals cost California residents? We’re leaders in energy efficiency, and committed to further efficiencies. But all efficiencies have a cost, and we need to know what we’ll have to pay to make climate change goals feasible. But we do know that we’ll have to increasingly rely on electricity. Do the math: a new electric stove — $800 to $1200. A new electric water heater — $1200 to $2000. A new electric furnace — $600 to $1200. Will California residents and business be required to replace existing appliances? Will restaurants, for example, be required to replace all their gas stoves with electric ones? Will lower income homeowners and qualifying small businesses receive government assistance to convert their property?
These costs matter. They matter to small businesses and they matter to hard-working Californians. If we truly desire to maintain the integrity of the legislative process and protect our businesses and families, we need the legislature to conduct a full cost examination of climate change policy impacts.

Background Check Flaw Let Dylann Roof Buy Gun, F.B.I. Says

WASHINGTON — The man accused of killing nine people in an historically black South Carolina church last month should not have been able to buy a gun, the F.B.I. said Friday in what was the latest acknowledgment of flaws in the national background check system.
A loophole in the check system allowed the man, Dylann Roof, to buy the .45-caliber handgun despite his having previously admitted to drug possession, the bureau said.
“We are all sick this happened,” said the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey. “We wish we could turn back time.”
Mr. Roof now faces murder charges in a case that investigators say was racially motivated. Mr. Roof, who is white, is charged with killing nine people at the Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston.
The F.B.I. operates the background check system, called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and loopholes have been discovered in it before. One allowed thousands of prohibited buyers to legally purchase firearms over the past decade — and some of those weapons were ultimately used in crimes, according to court records and government documents. That problem stemmed from the three-day period the government has to determine whether someone is eligible to buy a gun.
After a 2007 shooting in which 33 people died at Virginia Tech University, investigators discovered that the gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, also should not have been able to buy a gun because a court had previously declared him to be a danger to himself. The shooting led to legislation aimed at improving the background check system.
Via: New York Times
Continue Reading....

Countering Progressives' Assault on Suburbia

The next culture war will not be about issues like gay marriage or abortion, but about something more fundamental: how Americans choose to live. In the crosshairs now will not be just recalcitrant Christians or crazed billionaire racists, but the vast majority of Americans who either live in suburban-style housing or aspire to do so in the future. Roughly four in five home buyers prefer a single-family home, but much of the political class increasingly wants them to live differently.
Theoretically, the suburbs should be the dominant politically force in America. Some 44 million Americans live in the core cities of America’s 51 major metropolitan areas, while nearly 122 million Americans live in the suburbs. In other words, nearly three-quarters of metropolitan Americans live in suburbs.
Yet it has been decided, mostly by self-described progressives, that suburban living is too unecological, not mention too uncool, and even too white for their future America. Density is their new holy grail, for both the world and the U.S. Across the country efforts are now being mounted—through HUD, the EPA, and scores of local agencies—to impede suburban home-building, or to raise its cost. Notably in coastal California, but other places, too, suburban housing is increasingly relegated to the affluent.
The obstacles being erected include incentives for density, urban growth boundaries, attempts to alter the race and class makeup of communities, and mounting environmental efforts to reduce sprawl. The EPA wants to designate even small, seasonal puddles as “wetlands,” creating a barrier to developers of middle-class housing, particularly in fast-growing communities in the Southwest. Denizens of free-market-oriented Texas could soon be experiencing what those in California, Oregon and other progressive bastions have long endured: environmental laws that make suburban development all but impossible, or impossibly expensive. Suburban family favorites like cul-de-sacs are being banned under pressure from planners.
Some conservatives rightly criticize such intrusive moves, but they generally ignore how Wall Street interests and some developers see forced densification as opportunities for greater profits, often sweetened by public subsidies. Overall, suburban interests are poorly organized, particularly compared to well-connected density lobbies such as the developer-funded Urban Land Institute (ULI), which have opposed suburbanization for nearly 80 years. 

[VIDEO] Shock: NBC Actually Goes to U.S.-Mexico Border to Find Ranchers Who Agree with Trump

Amid the ongoing media coverage surrounding Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on illegal immigration, Thursday’s NBC Nightly News surprisingly went down to the U.S.-Mexico border to further understand on the situation. 

 Following a news brief that mentioned a protest at the site of a Trump hotel being built in Washington D.C., anchor Lester Holt explained that even though some are “angered” by Trump’s remarks, they “are striking a cord” “for others” as they “believe he’s calling attention to a vital threat along our border.” 

With surveillance footage of illegal immigrants crossing the border into Arizona being played, correspondent Mark Potter explained how “[f]or several years, hidden cameras in the Arizona desert have captured scenes like these, of drug and immigrant smugglers, sometimes armed, hiking through miles of American ranchland after illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexican border.

” Potter brought Trump into the equation by revealing that the footage just shown “was shot in May, south of Tucson, just two months before Donald Trump complained about boarder security.”  

Concerning ranchers that are confronted with the problem, Potter introduced “John Ladd, whom we visited several times before along the Mexican boarder fence” as he “and others have long complained...about what they say is an insecure boarder that leaves them facing security threats on their own land.”

 Ahead of Trump’s weekend visit to Arizona, Potter noted that, for ranchers like Ladd, “[t]hey applaud Trump for giving their concerns a national voice.” 

Potter then found two soundbites of business owners in Arizona (with one owning a restaurant near the border) who were against Trump’s comments, but their airtime was far less than what was given to both Ladd and fellow rancher Fred Davis.  Later, the NBC correspondent concluded by noting the GOP candidate has “plans to travel to Arizona this weekend, where he's already drawn lots of attention.” - 

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading....

Toledo judge refuses to perform gay marriage


A northwest Ohio municipal judge assigned to a courtroom where civil marriages are performed refused to marry two women less than two weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, the judge’s office confirmed on Wednesday.


Toledo Municipal Judge Allen McConnell was on a three-week rotation assigned to perform civil ceremonies on Monday when Carolyn Wilson and her partner asked to be married. McConnell acknowledged the decision in a Wednesday statement.

“On Monday, July 6, I declined to marry a non-traditional couple during my duties assignment,” he said. “The declination was based upon my personal and Christian beliefs established over many years. I apologize to the couple for the delay they experienced and wish them the best.”

On June 26, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution provides same-sex couples the right to marry, handing a historic triumph to the gay rights movement.

Toledo Municipal Court judges performed 98 marriages in 2014 and 49 marriages so far this year. Deputy court administrator Michael Zenk said the request by the women on Monday was the first time the court was asked to perform a same-sex marriage.

After McConnell refused, Judge William Connelly, Jr. performed the ceremony for the women, Zenk said.

“It is the policy of the court to accommodate wedding requests and we will continue to do that for both opposite and same-sex marriage,” Zenk said.

McConnell said he will continue to perform “traditional marriages” and is, “seeking an advisory opinion from the Supreme Court of Ohio” about whether he can “opt out of the rotation” that would have him perform civil marriages.



Republican Senator: Ted Kennedy ‘Set a Wonderful Example for Us’

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D.-Mass.) and Rep. John Boehner (R.-Ohio) stand behind President Bush as he signs the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002. (White House photo)
(CNSNews.com) - Sen. Lamar Alexander (R.-Tenn.) said on the Senate floor on Wednesday that the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D.-Mass) set a wonderful example for other senators.
“He set a wonderful example for us, and it is nice to be reminded of him,” said Sen. Alexander.
Alexander’s remarks came while the Senate was discussing his proposal to rewrite the No Child Left Behind Act that imposes federal regulations and sends federal money to local public schools. The initial No Child Left Behind Act was co-sponsored by Kennedy and Rep. John Boehner (R.-Ohio) and signed into law in 2002 by President George W. Bush.
During Wednesday’s debate on the No Child Left Behind Act--while discussing whether the law should be amended to require local public schools to do a criminal background check on applicants for teaching jobs--Sen. Dick Durbin (D.-Ill.) recalled that Sen. Kennedy had once been placed on the terrorist No-Fly List:
“It wasn’t that many years ago, our colleagues may remember, that our colleague Senator Ted Kennedy ended up on a no-fly list. He kept saying: Why am I on a no-fly list? It was a mistake. It was a government mistake that identified him as a danger to the country. Mistakes can be made. There needs to be a due process requirement in here so those accused of something that they are not guilty of have a chance to have their day to tell their story as best they can.”
Following on this, Sen. Alexander recalled what “a wonderful example” Sen. Kennedy had been:
“I thank the Senator from Illinois for his remarks. I was thinking, as he was talking about Senator Kennedy, whom we all loved, I think the mistake was that he was on a Republican no-fly list. That was the mistake. But he loved telling that story and enjoyed it very much. It is nice to be reminded of him today because he was chairman of this committee that is producing the fix for No Child Left Behind.
"He would make, in my view, the most outrageous liberal speeches from the back of the Senate, and then he would come to the front of the Senate and would work out a good bipartisan agreement and get a good piece of legislation. He set a wonderful example for us, and it is nice to be reminded of him.

Popular Posts