Chuck Todd rips NBC entertainment division, calls Clinton mini-series ‘a nightmare’

On Thursday’s “Morning Joe,” NBC News political director and White House correspondent Chuck Todd vented his frustration with his own network’s decision to air a mini-series about former Secretary of State and potential 2016 Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton.

The mini-series is one example of a larger rivalry between NBC’s news division and NBC’s entertainment division, Todd said.

“The two entities are sometimes at war with each other,” he said. “I can’t tell you how many fights we’ve had internally about whether to cover — you know, we want to cover some live news event and those, you know, guys on the West Coast, they want to, you know, run some rerun of ‘Parks and Recreation’ or whatever because they’ll make money that way. And you know actually, the relationship is bad. It’s never great. It’s either OK or really bad.”

“Entertainment hates news,” he said. “All we do is take up precious time that they could sell out ads, you know, promoting ‘America’s Got Talent.’ … Actually, please, NBC Entertainment, can you please make some money? Thank God for all of the cable channels, right? Yay, Bravo, yay, USA.”

Todd explained to his fellow panelist on “Morning Joe” that the public doesn’t differentiate between the different divisions at NBC and argued that was problematic for him and the news division of the network.

“But the real issue is — the fact that Nicole [Wallace] didn’t know that — that’s somebody that’s well-informed about the machinations of how the media works,” Todd said. “This is why this mini-series is a total nightmare for NBC News. We know there’s this giant firewall, we have nothing to do with it, we know that we’d love probably to be as critical, or whatever it is going to be, if it comes out. But there’s nothing we can do about it.”

“And we’re going to only own the negative,” he continued. “Whether it’s negative because it’s the Clinton people are upset that it’s too tough on them, or negative because the Republicans think it’s this glorification of her. No matter what, only we are going to own it, because people are going to see the peacock and NBC, and they see NBC News, and they think: ‘Well, they can’t be that separate.’”

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Just how corrupt is the Obama administration?

In the final part of his interview with The Daily Caller, Tom Fitton — President of the non-partisan group Judicial Watch — discusses President Obama’s legacy and highlights the corruption that has taken place in the administration.

“Everyone says that his corruption or the corruption in the Obama administration isn’t personal to him. I don’t agree with that. We investigated his mortgage for instance. He got a sweetheart mortgage, his big house in Chicago was bought by working with Tony Rezko, who Obama knew at the time was under criminal investigation…. Obama played the Chicago game just as much as any Chicago politician you think of in terms of bad Chicago politicians.”

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading.....

Obamacare installs new scrutiny, fines for charitable hospitals that treat uninsured people

A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.

Charity for the uninsured is one of the factors that could discourage enrollment in Obamacare, which requires all Americans to purchase heath insurance or else face new taxes themselves from the IRS.

“It requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file additional paperwork with the IRS every three years. This is to prove that the charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by Obamacare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats,” said John Kartch, spokesman for Americans for Tax Reform.

“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status. The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax — hence the positive revenue score” for the federal government, Kartch said. “Obamacare advocates turned over every rock to find as much tax money as possible.”

Additionally, the rise in the number of insured Americans under Obamacare will make it more difficult for tax-exempt hospitals to continue meeting required thresholds for treating the uninsured, driving more hospitals into the for-profit category and yielding more taxable money for the federal government.

“The requirements generally apply to any section 501(c)(3) organization that operates at least one hospital facility,” according to a “Technical Explanation” report of new Obamacare provisions prepared by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) on March 21, 2010, the day Obamacare passed.

Obamacare’s new requirements could slam hospitals with massive $50,000 fines if they fail to meet bureaucrats’ standards.

Via:The Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Fast Food Still Major Part of U.S. Diet

Most Americans believe fast food is not good for you!!

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Eight in 10 Americans report eating at fast-food restaurants at least monthly, with almost half saying they eat fast food at least weekly. Only 4% say they never eat at fast-food restaurants. But slightly fewer Americans eat fast food weekly now than did so in 2006, when Gallup last asked about it.

These findings come from Gallup's annual Consumption poll, conducted July 10-14, 2013, and seem to suggest that many Americans are reducing, but not totally eliminating, their fast-food intake.

Fast food has long been a staple of many Americans' diets, but widespread concerns related to the nutritional value of the food linger. On that point, 76% in the U.S. think the food served in fast-food restaurants is "not too good" or "not good at all for you," the same percentage who said so in 2003.

Twenty-eight percent say the food is "not good at all for you." Fewer, 20%, believe food purchased at fast-food restaurants is "fairly good for you," while 2% say it is "very good for you."

Via: Gallup

Continue Reading....

Government Tax Credits for Things You Don’t Want

Suppose you are offered a bargain on a pair of well-made shoes. You can have the new footwear at half price. The catch? They don’t fit and the discount is partially paid for through your tax dollars.

This is the kind of deal the public is being offered on some alternative energy vehicles. It is estimated that the Chevy Volt costs General Motors as much as $89,000 to manufacture, while it sells for $39,995. But the actual cost to the consumer is further reduced after a $7,500 federal income tax credit, and for California residents, another rebate of $2,500 from the state.

The Volt was introduced in 2010, with much ballyhoo, as the first plug-in U.S. hybrid. But Chevy has sold barely 20,000 vehicles. The public remains skeptical about this and other plug-in vehicles that take hours to charge, have short range and are served by few public charging stations. These cars don’t look nearly so good when their still high price — even after subsidies — is considered and they are compared with the newer more fuel efficient and reliable gasoline powered vehicles. The fact is that there is only a minuscule market for these plug-ins even when sold at below their cost to manufacture.

Some like to point to the all-electric Tesla as a success story, but a fully equipped model can cost north of $100,000 and even after heavy taxpayer subsidies, it is well beyond the budget of most of the motoring public.

Currently the Legislature is mulling over additional tax incentives of nearly a $1,000, to further stimulate the purchase of electric vehicles, which raises a question for taxpayers. As alternative fuel vehicle companies continue to flounder, how far should government go in committing tax dollars to subsidize technology that is not market ready? Those in government, who seem to be blind to the wishes of their constituents, as well as economic principals, will argue that they are merely legislating progress and that subsidizing behavior with taxpayers’ hard-earned money is appropriate.

Via: CA Political Review

Continue Reading.....

Republicans revive 'Penny Plan' as sequester alternative to balance budget

As Congress faces a fast-approaching deadline on passing a federal spending bill, Republican lawmakers are reviving a Tea Party-backed plan with a catchy title that they claim could balance the budget.

The so-called "Penny Plan" would, according to its sponsors, balance the federal budget in two years by using just a 1 percent reduction in spending.

The lawmakers are pitching the plan in the simplest terms -- cutting a penny from every dollar the government spends so that spending will soon equal revenue. They cast the plan as a pick-and-choose alternative to the sequester's across-the-board budget cuts.

"Everybody should be able to live with one percent less in order to help bring this country back from the brink of catastrophic failure," bill sponsor and Wyoming Republican Sen. Mike Enzi said in submitting the legislation just before August recess.

Enzi is joined by fellow GOP Sens. Rand Paul, of Kentucky; John Barrasso, of Wyoming;  Jim Risch, of Idaho; David Vitter, of Louisiana; Johnny Isakson, of Georgia; and Marco Rubio, of Florida. Republican Georgia Rep. Austin Scott introduced similar legislation in the House.

Senate sponsors warn that federal spending over the past 11 years has increased from 18 percent of the country's GDP to nearly 23 percent. And without intervention, they say, the national debt will go from roughly $16 billion to $25 billion by 2023, increasing interest payment so much that balancing the budget will go "beyond the reach of Congress.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading...