Monday, June 1, 2015

If You Can't Trust A Clinton, How Can You Trust One Of Them To Run The Country?

With another shoe dropping in the Hillary Clinton scandal nearly every day, America is witnessing an unprecedented spectacle. Never in modern times has a presidential candidate been so tarnished — and yet also so popular.
Oops, there was one other time. Actually, two. Those were the times when Bill Clinton ran for president.
Like her husband, Hillary’s a human Rorschach test. He captured the White House twice without ever winning a majority of the popular vote, and polls paint an eerily similar challenge for her.
Half the country thinks she is fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy. The other half is ready to make her president. One recent survey showed her beating each leading Republican rival head-to-head, but never getting to 50 percent. 

4 Liberal Myths About Ronald Reagan Debunked

Presidential historian H. W. Brands’ new biography of Ronald Reagan and his conclusion that modern American politics is best seen as “The Age of Reagan” has aroused liberals to circulate once again the hoariest myths about the man and his presidency, including the malicious charge that Reagan was deliberately indifferent to the lot of African-Americans and other minorities.
Liberal Myth No. 1: Reagan’s dangerously belligerent foreign policy had little to do with the disintegration of Soviet Communism. Mikhail Gorbachev was the leader most responsible for bringing the Cold War to a non-nuclear conclusion.
Reality: In the 1970s, as presidential scholar Kiron Skinner has written, Reagan formulated four key ideas about U.S.–Soviet relations and the Cold War. One, discussion of Soviet expansionism around the world had to precede any talk about arms control, not the reverse. Two, America was an “exceptional” nation obligated to match deeds with words in the promotion of freedom around the world. Three, because the Soviet Union was an “abnormal” nation with no popular base of support, it was prepared to foment global crises to maintain its control. Four, the Soviet Union’s inefficient economy and inferior technology “could not survive competition” with America. Once elected president, Reagan began carrying out a multifaceted victory strategy based on these ideas.
Reagan ordered an across-the-board buildup of the defense establishment, including land-based weapons, new ships, and new medium-range missiles. He launched a psychological offensive, declaring that the Soviets’ “evil empire” was headed for “the ash heap of history.” He made SDI (the Strategic Defensive Initiative) the cornerstone of the Reagan Doctrine and would not surrender it, even at the Reykjavik summit. He strongly supported anti-Communist forces in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola, and Cambodia.
He carried his crusade for freedom into the disintegrating Soviet empire. Standing before Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate in 1987, he directly challenged the Kremlin, saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” A little more than two years later, the wall came down and Communism in Eastern and Central Europe collapsed. Lech Walesa, Nobel laureate and founder of the Polish trade union Solidarity that confronted the Communist regime, said of President Reagan, “We in Poland … owe him our liberty.”
Democracy triumphed in the Cold War, Reagan wrote in his autobiography, because it was a battle of ideas—“between one system that gave preeminence to the state and another that gave preeminence to the individual and freedom.” The Cold War ended in triumph for the idea of freedom because of Ronald Reagan, not Mikhail Gorbachev, who as late as 1988 quoted the Communist Manifesto when asked his position on private property.
Liberal Myth No. 2: The ’80s were a decade of greed that benefited only the wealthy and overlooked the middle class.
Reality: Reagan inherited a dangerously weakened economy. High tax rates had severely limited jobs and investment and brought in less than expected government revenue. President Reagan reversed the process by cutting personal tax rates and government regulations, stabilizing the economy and encouraging entrepreneurs.

KATHLEEN WILLEY: HILLARY A 'MONEY-HUNGRY HYPOCRITE'

Kathleen Willey
Kathleen Willey

Kathleen Willey, the former White House aide who claims President Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1993 during his first term, now suspects the former president suffers from dementia, and calls Hillary Clinton a “money-hungry” hypocrite who looks “awfully haggard” and is the “worst role model for a wife and a mother and a politician.”
Willey, author of the book “Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton,” made her scathing comments in an interview Sunday night on Aaron Klein Investigative Radio, broadcast on New York’s AM 970 and Philadelphia 990 AM, as well as online.
She is now seriously questioning the mental health of both of the Clintons.
“[Hillary] is really looking awfully haggard these days,” Willey said.
“After watching [Bill's] performance with [NBC News' Cynthia] McFadden, when he said that I’ve gotta pay my bills, I think he’s showing early signs of dementia or something. He’s not the old Bill Clinton that we all remember. I mean, he was all over the place. Now you’re seeing clips of [Hillary] talking to herself all the time. I think that I want somebody in there who knows what they’re doing, and money isn’t the No. 1 issue for them. They have enough money. They made $30 million … in the last 15 months on speaking engagements. Isn’t that enough?”
Speaking of Hillary Clinton’s behavior during those White House years, Klein said, “There’s no way Hillary did not know what was going on, that women were being abused and accosted by her husband. You took it further on my show. You said Hillary was the war on women.”
“She’s absolutely unqualified to run this country,” stated Willey. “Just look at something as simple as her judgment. … I question her judgment on a number of issues when it comes to being the president. She enabled his behavior. It’s as simple as that. She looked the other way. She might throw a tantrum, but she enabled it to happen again and again and again and again. Then she chooses to go after the women that he hooked up with to ruin them again and again and again and again. That’s how it works. I don’t see how anybody can respect a woman like that, especially another woman. She is the worst role model for a wife and a mother and a politician, anything. … She is a hypocrite.”

Via: WND


Continue Reading.....

CA: 2 GOP STATE SENS WANT MORE LIMITS ON WHERE CONCEALED PERMIT HOLDERS CAN CARRY

During the past week. two Republican state senators in California voted to further limit the places in which concealed carry permit holders can carry a gun for self-defense.

Senators Pat Bates (R-Orange County) and Jim Nielsen (R-Roseville) both voted in support of SB 707, a bill which repeals the exemption allowing concealed carry permit holders to carry guns on campus for self-defense.
Neither Bates nor Nielsen cited an illegal use of a gun on campus by a concealed carry permit holder prior to siding with the Democrats to further limit the number of places in which people can defend themselves.
SB 707 is sponsored by senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis).
The Davis Enterprise reported that Wolk believes a ban on concealed carry on college campuses is necessary because concealed permits “are becoming more prevalent and easier to obtain.” Ironically, her statement comes as several lawsuits are filed in California over the difficultly of getting a concealed carry permit in the state.
One of the most prominent suits revolves around California’s “good cause” requirement, which forces law-abiding citizens to demonstrate a need for carrying a gun before being approved for a permit. The continued existence of this requirement automatically limits permit issuance to the few people who can walk into a county sheriff’s office and detail a specific threat against their lives. Only then are they justified in the carrying of a firearm for self-defense in the eyes of California law.
It should also be noted that concealed carry has been legal on Colorado campuses since 2003. In those twelve years, there have been no mass shootings or crimes on campus by permit holders.
In short, the argument that concealed carry permits are too easy to get is demonstrably false, and any concern over the behavior of college-age concealed carry permit holders is answered by Colorado’s example.

Employees Hired To Drive Drunk CA Senators Home At Taxpayer Expense

As a result of too many high profile drunken driver arrests involving California legislators, state senate officials have hired designated driving employees to drive home inebriated lawmakers.

Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León refused to discuss details of the program.  “We’re not going to provide comment, because it’s a security issue,” his spokesman, Anthony Reyes, said.
The Sacramento Bee reported that four lawmakers in the past five years have been accused of driving while under the influence of alcohol.
Known as “special services assistants,” the designated drivers work in the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Office and are responsible for providing “ground transportation for Senate members.”
The Bee reported that the two employees—a retired Assembly sergeant-at-arms and a retiree from the Department of General Services—are paid $2,532 per month, of course at taxpayer expense.
A man who turned down the position said that the job description mandated that he work from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. or 7 a.m. to drive senators home “just if they were drinking too much…  and to pick them up and take them home.”

5 Supreme Court Cases to Watch in June

The Supreme Court's 2014-2015 term will soon reach its finale. By the end of June, when the justices depart for their summer break, the Court is expected to issue a series of blockbuster decisions, including rulings on gay marriage, death penalty drugs, and Obamacare. Here are five cases to watch as another momentous SCOTUS term reaches its peak.
Elonis v. United States
Anthony Elonis claims that he's "just an aspiring rapper" who likes to post violent lyrics and graphic first-person murder fantasies to Facebook. But after numerous Facebook postings in which Elonis wrote about killing his estranged wife, killing his boss, and killing others, including the FBI agent sent to investigate him, a federal jury found him guilty of transmitting "in interstate or foreign commerce any communications containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another." He was sentenced to 44 months in prison.
In Elonis v. United States the Supreme Court will decide whether those Facebook posts constituted a "true threat" of violence or whether they count as constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment.
Glossip v. Gross
The state of Oklahoma employs a three-drug protocol when carrying out the death penalty via lethal injection. The first drug is supposed to render the prisoner totally unconscious and insensate. The second drug is a paralytic. The third drug does the killing. But what if there is a lack of medical consensus about whether or not the first drug actually renders the prisoner unconscious and insensate? What if paralyzed prisoners sometimes suffer excruciating pain in the final minutes before death? Would that lack of medical certainty about the drug's effects violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against imposing cruel and unusual punishments?
Glossip v. Gross centers on such concerns. At issue is Oklahoma's use of the drug midazolam to render prisoners unconscious during execution. According to the petitioners, midazolam "is not approved or used as a standalone anesthetic during painful surgeries, because it is inherently incapable of reliably inducing and maintaining deep, comalike unconsciousness." The Supreme Court is tasked with determining whether or not the lower court got it wrong when it allowed Oklahoma to continue using this potentially unreliable drug.
Horne v. United States Department of Agriculture
The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires the government to pay just compensation when it takes private property for a public use. Yet according to a federal regulation designed to "stabilize" the raisin market, raisin farmers such as Marvin and Laura Horne are required to physically surrender a portion of their crop to federal officials each year without receiving just compensation in return. For example, in 2002-2003, the USDA demanded 30 percent of the annual raisin crop, which amounted to 89,000 tons. In return, the federal government paid nothing back to raisin farmers.
Do the USDA's actions violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment? The Supreme Court will decide in Horne v. USDA.
Obergefell v. Hodges
Do state legislatures have the lawful power to prohibit gay marriage? Or do state bans on gay marriage violate the 14th Amendment, which forbids the states from denying the equal protection of the laws to any person within their respective jurisdictions? In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court confronts the possibility of legalizing gay marriage nationwide.
King v. Burwell
The question before the Supreme Court in King v. Burwell is whether the Obama administration illegally implemented the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) when the IRS allowed tax credits to issue to certain persons who bought health insurance on federally established health care exchanges. According to the text of the ACA, such tax credits should only issue in connection with purchases made via an "Exchange established by the State." According to the Obama administration, however, the phrase "established by the State" is actually a "term of art" that encompasses exchanges established by both the states and by the federal government. The legal challengers, by contrast, maintain that the statutory text is clear and that the health care law means what it says. Depending on how the Court sees it, the long-term survival of Obamacare could be at risk.

Rod J. Rosenstein U.S. Attorney for the District of MARYLAND are you listening?

B4INREMOTE-aHR0cDovLzIuYnAuYmxvZ3Nwb3QuY29tLy1ubU9fY2RaaF9aUS9WV3M0YzZmMVJVSS9BQUFBQUFBQUZxay95aDBCc2hXZW5May9zMzIwLzY2Ni5qcGc=
B4INREMOTE-aHR0cDovLzMuYnAuYmxvZ3Nwb3QuY29tLy1fX0xqcDRDdmE2QS9WV3M0aHhuNEJLSS9BQUFBQUFBQUZxcy9VRmQ4RC1yY1BaUS9zMTYwMC82NjcuanBn
THIS IS WHAT I SEE
At first blush the demeanor of this Baltimore Mayor is GUILT!!!
It’s my gut feel and I always go with it.
If you don’t think drug money isn’t finding it’s way into the Mayor’s coffers you’re kidding yourself.
Drug money is the biggest game in the town of BALTIMORE and liberal black politicians will take it every time.
The liberal black Mayor of New Orleans and many others are now serving time for corruption and she knows it.
That puss of her’s spells “I hope nobody finds out!!!”
Hello hello – Rod J. Rosenstein U.S. Attorney for the District of MARYLAND are you listening???? – N.P.Contompasis

CBS's Moonves expects deal with Apple on TV

Les Moonves at the 2015 Code Conference.
Asa Mathat | Re/Code
Les Moonves at the 2015 Code Conference.
CBS is in talks with Apple about offering content on Apple's revamped TV offering, CBS CEO Les Moonves said Wednesday.
When asked whether he would consider a deal with Apple—which is working to update its Apple TV product—Moonves said he "probably" would.
What would it take? "Money."
Moonves said discussions were ongoing with Apple, and recently met with Eddy Cue, the company's senior vice president of Internet Software and Services.
Moonves' comments came at the second annual Code Conference in Rancho Palos Verdes, California.
"Apple TV is trying to change the universe a little bit as did Sling as is Sony," he said.
What Apple will offer is "a more select group at a lower price. Any one of those groups will need CBS. We have the NFL, which is must have television. Any of those bundles we will be a part of that and we should get a better proportion of the share of that universe than we currently do on cable," he said.
Despite the rapid growth in non-traditional media, and the rise of a generation that thinks of on-demand television as normal, Moonves said he isn't terribly worried about digital and streaming media
Seventy percent or more of people who watch television do so while the show is being broadcast, and the average American still watches 5 hours of television a day, he said.
And, at least for now, network television remains a primary cultural institution in American life.
"For every Chelsea Handler who doesn't want to be on network television, I have a Steve Colbert who does," he said. "I think I've won."

The Supreme Court Could Transfer A Lot Of Political Power Away From Cities

wasserman-feature-eligible-1 (4)
This week, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a lawsuit filed by conservative activists in Texas that could redefine the principle of “one person, one vote” as we know it. And if the Court sides with the plaintiffs, Republicans could stretch their already-historic majorities in the House and state legislatures even wider — the GOP would be helped just slightly in presidential elections.
Is Congress’s job to represent people, or just voters? Currently, all states are required to redraw their political boundaries based on the Census’s official count of total population every 10 years, which includes minors and noncitizen immigrants. But the Texas plaintiffs argue that states should be allowed to apportion seats based on where only U.S. citizens over 18 years of age live.
It seems like a minor detail, but it’s actually a major distinction. The decennial Census doesn’t track citizenship data, but the Census’s American Community Survey does. And although all 435 U.S. congressional districts have roughly equal total populations, the number of eligible voters and rates of actual participation can vary wildly from place to place.
For example, in Florida’s 11th District, home to the largely white retirement mecca of The Villages, 81 percent of all residents are adult citizens. But in California’s heavily Latino 34th District, anchored by downtown Los Angeles, only 41 percent of all residents are eligible to vote. The variations across districts in terms of actual turnout can be even more eye-popping. According to results compiled by Polidata for the Cook Political Report, Montana’s lone House district cast 483,932 votes for president in 2012, more than four times the tally in Texas’s 29th District, 114,901.

The hotel industry is sending a clear signal that the US economy is not grinding to a halt

hotelEthan Miller/Getty ImagesVisitors sit by the pool at the Riviera Hotel & Casino on April 30, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Want a sign that the economy is doing fine? Look no further than the hotel industry. 
First flagged by Bill McBride at Calculated Risk, in April all of the major metrics measuring the hotel industry hit all-time highs.
April had the highest occupancy ever (66.8%) and the highest room demand (99.4 million rooms) ever.
This pushed annualized occupancy (measured as a 12-month moving average) up to 65%.
What does this mean? All key performance indicators (rooms available, rooms sold, revenue, average daily rate, occupancy and revenue per available room) are still at all-time highs.
The broader economic takeaway is simple: If people are moving around the country, be it for leisure or business, the economic engine is still humming along. 
In his report, Freitag also noted that April was the 62nd-straight month that RevPAR, or revenue per available room, increased. What this measure means, most simply, is that hotels are getting more money for each of their rooms, whether via price increases or because each room is booked more often. And right now, it appears the latter is the case. 
In his report, Freitag writes, "Demand was 3 million rooms higher than last year, and supply was only 1.7 million roomnights higher. Ultimately that will change and the industry will sell less new rooms than build new rooms, but we do not expect that to happen until 2017."
So basically, there is a supply shortage in the hotel industry, and it looks like there will be one for some time. 

Via: Business Insider


Continue Reading....

Colleges and Universities Have Grown Bloated and Dysfunctional


Colleges and Universities Have Grown Bloated and Dysfunctional American colleges and universities, long thought to be the glory of the nation, are in more than a little trouble. I’ve written before of their shameful practices — the racial quotas and preferences at selective schools (Harvard is being sued by Asian-American organizations), the kangaroo courts that try students accused of rape and sexual assault without legal representation or presumption of innocence, and speech codes that make campuses the least rather than the most free venues in American society.
In following these policies, the burgeoning phalanxes of university and college administrators must systematically lie, insisting against all the evidence that they are racially nondiscriminatory, devoted to due process and upholders of free speech. The resulting intellectual corruption would have been understood by George Orwell.
Alas, even the great strengths of our colleges and universities are threatening to become weaknesses. Sometimes you can get too much of a good thing.
American colleges, dating back to Harvard’s founding in 1636, have been modeled on the residential colleges of Oxford and Cambridge. The idea is that students live on or near (sometimes breathtakingly beautiful) campuses, where they can learn from and interact with inspired teachers.
American graduate universities, dating back to Johns Hopkins’ founding in 1876, have been built on the German professional model. Students are taught by scholars whose Ph.D. theses represent original scholarship, expanding the frontiers of knowledge and learning.
That model still works very well in math and the hard sciences. In these disciplines it’s rightly claimed that American universities are, as The Economist recently put it in a cover story, “the gold standard” of the world. But not so much in some of the mushier social sciences and humanities. “Just as the American model is spreading around the world,” The Economist goes on, “it is struggling at home.”

Kerry's Broken Leg Comes as Iran Talks Heat Up

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry cut short a trip to Europe to return home to Boston after breaking his right thigh bone in a bicycling accident Sunday in eastern France.

The accident came as the U.S. -- led by Kerry -- five other world powers and Iran have resumed efforts to reach a nuclear accord before a June 30 deadline. It is unclear whether the accident will affect those talks. The accord would curb Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for an easing of economic sanctions.

The top U.S. diplomat met with his Iranian counterpart, Javed Zarif, for about six hours in Geneva on Saturday. The pair’s next meeting was expected to be in about two weeks, which would give Kerry some time to recovery from his injury. Technical experts will hold meetings in the meantime, starting in Vienna within a few days.
Latest News Update
Kerry fell from his bike, apparently after hitting a curb along the roadside near the town of Scionzier, a State Department official said on condition of not being further identified. Kerry, 71, was transported about 40 kilometers (25 miles) by medical helicopter to University Hospital in Geneva, where his injury was evaluated.

“Given the injury is near the site of his prior hip surgery, he will return to Boston today to seek treatment at Massachusetts General Hospital with his doctor who did the prior surgery,” John Kirby, a State Department spokesman, said in a statement. “The secretary is stable and never lost consciousness, his injury is not life-threatening, and he is expected to make a full recovery.”
Thigh Bone

Kirby confirmed that Kerry broke his “right femur.” The bone is commonly referred to as a thigh bone.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading....

Pelosi: We’re Beating Isis – On Twitter

pelosi
Good news, everyone:
We’re out-tweeting ISIS!
And isn’t that what really counts?
Just ask babbling fool foreign policy expert Nancy Pelosi.
Were you there for the Battle of Hashtag Hill? Nancy Pelosi attempts to make the case that the US strategy against ISIS is working somewhere in this exchange with newly minted MSNBC host Patrick Murphy, a former House colleague of Pelosi’s from Florida. The range of choices for examples of victory must be very, very narrow for Pelosi to claim victory — if indeed that’s what she’s doing at all:
FMR. REP. PATRICK MURPHY, MSNBC HOST: This past week, though, when it comes to ISIS, the mixed result — unfortunately, Ramadi was taken over by ISIS. The same time, the army’s delta force captured the money man for ISIS in Syria. so obviously mixed results. So you think the strategy’s working? What else needs to be done?
REP. NANCY PELOSI: It’s an enormous challenge. And we have to fight it on every front, including the front of social media. That’s a place where they have really made more advances than you would have suspected. And that is where we have to fight them, as well. This apprehension in Syria — well, killing of one and taking of his wife, as well as important intelligence information was a success. Again, we have to fight them on all fronts. Communication-wise as well as militarily….

Sunday, May 31, 2015

You Know All Those Obamaphones You've Paid For? You're About To Pay For ObamaSMARTPhones...

You Know All Those Obamaphones You've Paid For? You're About To Pay For ObamaSMARTPhones...
According to this, if you're a taxpayer, you're about to get screwed again.  But if you're a person who gets one of those Obamaphones?  You're about to be as delighted as this young lady:
The FCC is "proposing to expand its Lifeline program to help subsidize Internet service for low-income Americans."  It's a $1.7 billion program, and Republicans are against it, naturally, because there's a crap-ton of "waste and inefficiencies" in it.
I'll wait over here while you stop being shocked at the government wasting your hard-earned money.
The update has been made a "priority" now, because it needs to "adapt to current technology."  Basically, we're talking about upgrades to smartphones, y'all.  
Yep:
One senior FCC official noted...that studies have shown smartphone use is popular with low-income individuals. 
You think they're popular with low-income individuals, FCC?  Really?
I'm super-hoping that they used taxpayer money to do the studies to figure THAT genius information out, because wow.
But at least they're making some reforms to the program:
The commission will ask if establishing a "neutral third party administrator" would be better than having telecom companies handling sensitive customer information they would not otherwise have. The commission will also ask if the overall program should be capped with a budget. 
In the meantime, the proposal would require providers to maintain customers' eligibility information to help with oversight. The proposal would also require companies to retain records for 10 years. 
It's such a huge relief that these customers won't have any of their private information shared with anyone, and I can't believe there is a commission that has to ASK if the program should HAVE A BUDGET.
This is why we can't have nice things ("we" meaning taxpayers...the folks in this program will more than likely get killer smartphones...you know).  
Just thought I'd let y'all know that when you're busy getting ready to go back to work tomorrow (some of us work seven days a week, who am I kidding?), you need to really get fired up and put some pep in that step.  There's a person out there that is depending on you to get them a really awesome smartphone sometime in the near future.
YAY YOU!

Popular Posts