Conservative Happenings

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Benghazi Panel to Hear from Clinton Friend Blumenthal in Private Testimony

Long-time Hillary Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal is set to be interviewed on June 16 by the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

The committee, in announcing Blumenthal's appearance Friday, said his deposition will be conducted in a closed session. The media will be barred from coverage.

Blumenthal has become a focus of the House Select Committee on Benghazi since revelations he has been sending Clinton what she called "unsolicited" memos about Libya, where he was trying to arrange business deal, while she was secretary of state.

Special: Simple Trick Eliminates Up to 15 Years of Mortgage Payments..

[VIDEO] Industry on edge as EPA prepares to regulate airline emissions

The Environmental Protection Agency will soon announce it plans to regulate airline emissions, asserting they contribute to global warming and endanger public health, according to industry and environmental groups.

Those findings will prompt a regulatory process for the EPA to determine and enforce aircraft emissions limits, following a similar effort to limit emissions by cars, trucks and power plants.

But conservatives say higher airplane efficiency standards will only force airlines to raise ticket prices or install more seats on already cramped flights.

"Airlines already have a tremendous incentive to reduce fuel burn, and reduce CO2 emissions right now," said Sam Batkins, the director of regulatory policy at the American Action Forum. "Airplanes themselves are already efficient and are already getting more efficient each year."

Airlines are among the most efficiency-minded transportation industries. Normally tight-margin companies, the less fuel airlines burn, the more money they make.

"There's not a market failure in airline efficiency," said Batkins.

However, environmental groups contend airlines are failing to realize their full fuel-efficiency potential.

"They can be doing things a lot more efficiently than they are now. And they've reached the peak of their incentive -- now they need a little push from the federal government to extract increased reductions," said S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. "If the president is serious about hitting his climate target, which is reducing greenhouse gases by 28 percent in 2025, below 2005 levels, he can't ignore imposing additional greenhouse gas reductions on this uncontrolled industry."

Becker said the industry could use lower-carbon fuels, idle engines less and further upgrade its systems.

Via: Fox News

Friday, June 5, 2015

Trouble in Dem-land as unions freeze cash contributions

For decades, labor unions have floated the Democratic Party with massive contributions (based on money taken out of the paychecks of members who are forced to join as a condition of employment) and donations of manpower, expecially useful in get-out-the-vote efforts. And for decades, private-sector unions have shrunk in the face of competition from overseas, as the Democrats court fat-cat donors from Wall Street.

Is that era coming to an end? Emily Cahn and Emma Dumain of Roll Call report:

The AFL-CIO, along with some public sector unions, announced a campaign finance freeze in March. Unions hoped the threat of withholding contributions would scare Democratic lawmakers out of supporting President Barack Obama’s Trade Promotion Authority, or “fast track,” to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership — a trade agreement labor groups say would hurt manufacturing jobs in the U.S.

The freeze is across the board, intended to punish the party as a whole, not individual members. This must reflect frustration over being taken for granted and withering on the vine. Naturally, there are howls of protest:

“I could understand withholding money from people who are on the fence — sure, great,” said one House Democratic chief of staff who asked not to be identified. “But for the people who are with them who also really need the help, I just don’t know that’s a smart strategy. I think that there’s plenty of people who they trust to be with them who could really use their help in deterring an opponent by showing some strength at this point in the cycle, and they’re not helping with that.”
Other Democrats are beginning to lose trust in unions coming through with campaign contributions at all, as House Democrats look to make inroads into a historic House majority.

Opposition to the TPP cuts across party lines.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading....

CA Senate Passes Bill to Raise Legal Smoking Age to 21

Adding another bill to its reputation as a trend-setting Legislature, Sacramento has taken a big step toward raising the statewide smoking age to 21. By an overwhelming tally of 26 to 8, the state Senate voted to prohibit sales of tobacco products to those aged 18-20.

By the numbers

According to the bill’s supporters, the ban would be instrumental in dramatically reducing not only teen smoking but smoking in general. “Sen. Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, said he introduced the bill, SB151, out of concern that an estimated 90 percent of tobacco users start before age 21,” the Los Angeles Times reported.

That statistic emerged from a recent Institute of Medicine study making the rounds in policy circles. Researchers suggested that “teen smoking could be curbed by 12 percent if the age limit was raised to 21,” as LA ist noted, “making it harder for minors to find somebody to buy cigarettes for them.” In real numbers, the study concluded, the age-21 limit would ensure “more than 200,000 fewer premature deaths nationally for those born between 2000 and 2019.”

Although critics have pointed out that people older than 18 are adults eligible to be drafted and bound to signed contracts, the Times observed, momentum has gathered to raise the legal smoking age for reasons unrelated to consistency in the treatment of individual rights and responsibilities.

Via: California Political Review

Lincoln Chafee May Be Hillary's Biggest Problem

In a field of Democratic presidential long shots, former Rhode Island senator and governor Lincoln Chafee, who announced his candidacy on Wednesday, may be the longest shot of all. As an authentic, uncompromising progressive, Bernie Sanders is poised to grab the bulk of those Elizabeth Warren enthusiasts who can’t reconcile themselves to Hillary Clinton. As the handsome, articulate, two-term governor of a mid-size state, Martin O’Malley at least looks like a plausible contender one day. Chafee, by contrast, in the words of Quinnipiac University’s Monica Bauer, “has the charisma of Walter Mondale wrapped in the political instincts of a small town city councilman, which he once was, and perhaps would have remained, if he hadn’t been the son of a famous political dynasty. He is George W. Bush with more intelligence but far less political talent.” And like Bush, Chafee was, until very recently, a Republican.

But Chafee could prove Hillary’s most intriguing challenger. It’s not because he’ll garner enough support to give her a scare. If anyone does that, it will likely beSanders, who according to the New York Times is already “gain[ing] momentum in Iowa.” What makes Chafee’s candidacy intriguing is that he’s attacking Hillary on the issue on which she may be most vulnerable: her vote to authorize war with Iraq.

“I don’t think anybody should be president of the United States that made that mistake,” Chafee told The Washington Post in April. “It’s a huge mistake, and we live with broad, broad ramifications today—of instability not only in the Middle East but far beyond and the loss of American credibility.”

A version of this attack helped Barack Obama topple Hillary in 2008. That’s not likely to happen again, since Democrats care far less about Iraq this time.

But Republicans do. While foreign policy has been largely absent from the Democratic presidential campaign thus far, it’s been central to the Republican debate. And this reflects a divide in the country as a whole. A May Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that “national security/terrorism,” which was the top concern of only eight percent of likely GOP primary voters three years ago, now ranks first, at 27 percent. Among likely Democratic primary voters, by contrast, it’s less than half that.

Via: The Atlantic

Fox’s Greta Slams NY Times for Article on Rubio’s Traffic Citations

Fox New’s Greta Van Susteren has taken issue with a Friday article from the New York Times, describing the piece as “snarky” and a bit of “bad journalism.”

The Times piece, titled “Marco Rubio and his Wife Cited 17 times for Traffic Infractions,” describes Rubio’s history of citations for “speeding, driving through red lights and careless driving.” The article also describes multiple instances where the Rubios sought a lawyer’s help in order to challenge citations and avoid having their licenses suspended.

Van Susteren conceded that it was fair to examine a presidential candidate’s driving record, but took issue with the article’s presentation. She noted that the article, written by three people, was covered in a way that “jacked [its] number up” order to increase it’s own newsworthiness. She pointed to the headline, saying that it pinned all 17 citations on Mr. Rubio, when he only had 4 to his wife’s 13.

“Why are Mrs. Rubio’s driving infractions pinned on him? He wasn’t driving those 13 times, she was! The headline is written to pin her driving record on him. Headlines matter — that is what most people read and then stop. Collapsing the two driving records in that one headline smears the candidate. She is the one with the driving problem”

In one paragraph, the article described a 1997 citation Rubio received for careless driving, which was followed 12 years later by a ticket for speeding. Van Susteren questioned the use of Times resources here, saying that there was a difference between 12 years and 12 weeks, as well as how these infractions were far less serious than charges like drunk driving.

“Is the NYT going to scramble to every DMV and get stories on all the candidates’ stale driving records and the driving records of their spouses,” asked Van Susteren.

Van Susteren concluded her piece by saying that it was written neither for nor against the senator’s campaign. She also admitted to regrets in her own career in reporting, but urged the media to take use good judgment. “The media has limited resources (every news organization has cut back) and we should attempt to use them wisely – and fairly.

Via: Mediaite

[VIDEO] Nearly Half of U.S. Can’t Afford Unexpected $400 Bill – Forgo Medical Treatment

(CNSNews.com)- Nearly half of American households would not be able to afford a $400 emergency, according to a recent report from the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2014 says that 47 percent indicate that they would have great difficulty handling an unexpected $400 expense.(CNSNews.com)- Nearly half of American households would not be able to afford a $400 emergency, according to a recent report from the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2014 says that 47 percent indicate that they would have great difficulty handling an unexpected $400 expense.

“Specifically, respondents indicate that they simply could not cover the expense (14 percent); would sell something (10 percent); or would rely on one or more means of borrowing to pay for at least part of the expense, including paying with a credit card that they pay off over time (18 percent), borrowing from friends or family (13 percent), or using a payday loan (2 percent),” the report says.

Even though it has been over 5 years since President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law, 47 percent of Americans responding to the Federal Reserve study claimed that they “avoided medical treatment because of the cost.”

While medical care was avoided, work hours were sought after. With over 8 million Americans currently unemployed, even many of those with work, would like more hours at the job, according to the report.

“It does seem there is some pent up demand for additional work if it was available,” David Buchholz Assistant Director of Consumer and Community Affairs for the Federal Reserve says in a federal video produced for the report.

“We asked people if they would prefer to work the work about the same amount of hours they are working now, more, or fewer – if that work were available at the same rate of pay. About a third of full time workers and half of part-time workers tell us they would prefer to work more hours if they could."

Via: CNS News

‘Go Sue Your Own People': Kasich Rips Hillary’s Ohio Voting Laws Lawsuit, Cites Hypocrisy

Ohio Gov. John Kasich accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of engaging in “demagoguery” one day after she delivered a speech on voting rights, citing her hypocrisy on the issue and her opposition to Ohio’s voting laws.

In a Friday interview with Fox News’ Bill Hemmer, Kasich blasted Clinton, saying that rather than worrying about Ohio’s laws, which has 27 days of early voting, she should worry about her own state of New York, where early voting just isn’t a thing.

In her Thursday speech in Houston, Clinton accused Republicans of “systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.”

“First of all, I think it’s demagoguery. And secondly, if she wants to sue somebody, let her sue New York,” Kasich said. “In Ohio, we have like 27 days of early voting. OK, 27 days, a couple hundred hours. In New York, the only early voting — there is none. The only voting that occurs is on Election Day? What is she talking about?”

“I like Hillary, but I gotta tell you — the idea that we are going to divide Americans and we’re going to use demagoguery, I don’t like it,” Kasich said. “Now, I haven’t said a word about Hillary, but to come into the state of Ohio and say we are repressing the vote when New York has only Election Day and we have 27 days, what’s she — come on! That’s just silliness. I’m disappointed in her, frankly.”

Clinton’s campaign lawyer is part of an ongoing lawsuit going after voting laws in both Ohio and Wisconsin, though the campaign is not technically part of the suit.

“Don’t be coming in and saying we are trying to keep people from voting when her own state has less opportunity for voting than my state — and she is going to sue my state? I mean, come on, that’s just silly, that’s not an attack, that’s just silly,” Kasich said.

Via: The Daily Caller

BLACK UNEMPLOYMENT NEARLY DOUBLE NATIONAL RATE, TWICE AS HIGH AS WHITE UNEMPLOYMENT

The unemployment rate for African Americans was nearly twice the national average and more than double the unemployment rate for whites last month, according to new jobs data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

According to the BLS, African Americans experienced an unemployment rate of 10.2 percent in May, up from 9.6 percent in April.

Meanwhile, the national average was 5.5 percent in May with whites experiencing an unemployment rate of 4.7 percent. Unemployment for Latinos was around the middle at 6.7 percent and Asians boasted the lowest unemployment rate with 4.1 percent.

While unemployment for African Americans remained high, the civilian labor force among African Americans expanded by 31,000 to 19,428,000 in May. The BLS reports that 17,441,000 African Americans were employed while 1,988 were unemployed. Another 11,898 were not in the labor force.

Whites also saw the level of participation in the labor force increase, with the civilian labor force growing by 365,000 to 123,875,000. Of that 118,048 were employed and 5,827 were unemployed with 72,798 out of the workforce.

Nationally the civilian labor force increased by 397,000, reaching 157,469,000 in May. Of those participating 148,795,000 had a job and 8,674,000 were unemployed. Some 92,986,000 were outside the labor force.

Via Breitbart

Think Piece: Tax Democrats

RUSH: Folks, what is more dangerous, smoking or living in Baltimore? No, no, no. It's a serious question. Tobacco is taxed. Why is it taxed? Tobacco is taxed for a plethora of reasons. It's taxed to discourage people from using it, because it is said it can lead to an early death. It can lead to other problems. It kills. We also tax tobacco in order to pay for (and in a couple of cases entirely fund) children's health care programs.

You're aware of that? The taxes derived from the sale of tobacco, that revenue is used to pay for children's health care programs. I've always said that smokers deserve a special thanks, despite all the obstacles they face. I mean, we don't ban the product. We make it available. You can sell it, you can buy it, but you can't use it very many places in America anymore without running the gauntlet. Yet these people continue to buy the product, they continue to use it, and they pay higher and higher prices, just astronomically high prices.

They continue to buy the product, they pay the price, and the taxes go to children's health care programs. So if tobacco is taxed to discourage from using it because it can lead to an early death and other problems -- and that's the primary reason it's taxed -- let's face it, the prices are designed to dissuade people from using the product. That would be the primary purpose that nannies in life and the social do-gooders would give you.

Using that logic, should we not be taxing Democrats? Their policies, look at Democrat policies. They ruin families. Democrat policies spread ignorance in the schools. Democrat policies make health care unaffordable. This results in great stress from unemployment and underemployment, and Democrats have created and maintained dangerous cities with horrible crime and death rates.

It's arguably more dangerous living in Baltimore than it is to smoke cigarettes. Look at the death rate. I'm not joking. It's a way to make a point, and I think it would be a perfect opportunity to say we need to tax registered Democrats the way we tax tobacco, because Democrats are causing illness. Democrats cause strife. Democrat policies are ruining cities. Democrat policies have ruined families. Just a little think piece.

Via: Rush Limbaugh

The Trifecta Of Bad News From The Obama Era

Three fresh headlines in recent days represent the status of the big issues that will shape the 2016 elections:

“U.S. economy shrinks in first quarter, raising questions about underlying strength” from The Washington Post.

“Exclusive Interview: Ian Bremmer says America is no longer ‘indispensable’” from the Telegraph.

“The New Nationwide Crime Wave” from the Wall Street Journal.
A weak, slow or no-growth economy; diminished capacity and lack of resolve on a dangerous and threatening world stage; civil order breaking down as a result of political leadership mismanaging our police forces — these realities are a product of President Obama’s tone and policies, and they reflect his worldview.

In an article in The Post, “Obama’s new patriotism,” Greg Jaffe analyzed “how Obama has used his presidency to redefine ‘American exceptionalism’” in a “new and radical form.” He says that Obama’s six-plus years in office have led him to “a patriotism that embraces the darker moments in American history.” Well, I guess when you don’t take pride in America’s traditional accomplishments and you don’t believe that America’s forceful presence in the world is essential, then you have to shape a narrative that declares the “dark moments” are actually what define us.

Many in the media try to twist the president’s failures into a tortured definition of how America should be or declare that Obama’s non-patriotism is just a new way to show fealty to our country. Liberals seem to be more than willing to declare the president’s failures as victories and herald any outcome as a result of the president’s sophisticated thinking. But the headlines don’t lie, and the growing anxiety about our country’s future is real.

Via: Washington Post

JOBS DATA: 92,986,000 PEOPLE NOT IN THE WORKFORCE

The month of May saw 92,986,000 people not participating in the workforce, according to new data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals.

May’s total represented slight decline compared to last month’s record, which saw 93,194,000 people outside the workforce.

The BLS defines those not in the labor force as people ages 16 and older who are neither employed nor “made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week.”

The labor force participation rate came in at 62.9 percent, a slight uptick compared to April’s 62.8 percent.

According to the BLS, the civilian labor force itself rose by 397,000, reaching 157,469,000 in May.

Of those participating in the workforce, 148,795,000 had a job and 8,674,000 were unemployed.

The overall unemployment data from the BLS saw payroll employment rise in June by 280,000 and the official jobless rate at 5.5 percent.

Via: Breitbart

Obama paid late parking tickets Racked up penalties while at Harvard

Barack Obama is no longer a scofflaw, at least in Cambridge and Somerville.

Two weeks before the US senator from Illinois launched his presidential campaign, he paid parking tickets he received while attending Harvard Law School, officials said yesterday.

Obama received 17 parking tickets in Cambridge between 1988 and 1991, according to the city's Traffic, Parking & Transportation Department.

Of those tickets, he paid only two while he was a student and paid them late, said Susan Clippinger, the office's director.

In January, about when the Globe began asking local officials about Obama's time at Harvard, including any violations of local laws, someone representing the senator called the parking office to inquire about the decades-old tickets.

On Jan. 26, the remaining $375 in fines and fees were paid by credit card using the city's website, Clippinger said. She said she didn't know who paid them.

"I think it's fabulous he finally paid them," Clippinger said by phone yesterday. "I think others who owe us money should pay us, too."

Jen Psaki, a spokeswoman for the Obama campaign, said last night that the senator paid for the tickets out of a personal account.

She would not comment on why it had taken him so long to pay the tickets and fees. "All I can do is confirm that he paid all the tickets and late fees in full," she said.

Clippinger said her records show that Obama received the tickets between Oct. 5, 1988, and Jan. 12, 1990, for violations including parking in a resident-only area, blocking a bus stop, and failing to put money in meters.

He received most of the tickets in fall 1988, in his first year at Harvard Law School, a grueling trial for many of the students. A meter violation then cost only $5; the penalty for not paying promptly tacked on another $15. At times, he received multiple tickets in the same day for exceeding the time limit at a meter.

In total, he incurred $140 in fines and $260 in late fees. In February 1990, he paid two of the tickets, one for $10 and the other for $15.

"He's certainly not our worst ticket scofflaw," Clippinger said. "Unfortunately, it's not that abnormal. It's actually pretty run of the mill."

Obama's payment of the Cambridge tickets was reported yesterday by The Somerville News.

The Globe reported in January that in Somerville, where Obama lived while attending Harvard, the senator still owed the city $73 in excise taxes and $45 in late penalties for parking in a bus stop in 1990 and in a street-sweeping zone in 1991. Both of the tickets had been paid.

Tom Champion, a spokesman for the city of Somerville, said he called Obama's office after receiving a query about the late fees from the Globe in late January.

By the next Monday, Jan. 29, he said, the penalties were paid.

"He had no idea he had outstanding charges," Champion said. "The Globe, by raising the issue, called it to his attention, and then he paid them immediately."

Via: Boston Globe

Survey: $15 Minimum Wage Could Shutter 1 in 5 NY Fast Food Joints

BY: Bill McMorris
June 5, 2015 3:20 pm

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D.) promised minimum wage hikes for fast food New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D.) promised minimum wage hikes for fast food restaurants could shut down one out of every five chain restaurants in the state, according to a new survey.

The Employment Policies Institute, a free market think tank and critic of minimum wage hikes, surveyed nearly 1,000 self-described fast food entrepreneurs about how they would respond to statewide, industry-specific wage hikes. More than 20 percent of respondents said they were “very likely” to go out of business if the state raises the minimum wage for fast food joints to $15, a 70 percent increase from the current $8.75 statewide minimum wage.

Such a hike could spur higher costs for customers and reduced employment opportunities and hours for workers. Business owners responded overwhelmingly that such policies would hurt the very workers that Cuomo and activists claim to want to help.

Only 5 percent of respondents said they were “unlikely” to raise prices to cope with a $15 wage; 70 percent said they were very likely. In order to retain customers and remain competitive, a majority of the owners said they would be forced to cut employee hours or curb hiring.

“Low single-digit profit margins, which are typical for the fast food industry, explain why business owners in the state report considering a series of off-setting measures to adapt to a $15 minimum wage,” the report says.

Cuomo is seeking to increase wages on the fast food industry through a three-member board that is debating a potential $15 wage at chain restaurants. EPI analyst and report author Michael Saltsman attended Friday’s hearing, criticizing both Cuomo’s methods and also the policy.

“Our survey shows that a dramatic minimum wage hike would have the same negative effect in New York that it’s having on the west coast. Employers and employees should hope the wage board can tune out the noise and take a careful look at the consequences,” Saltsman said. “An unelected board hearing where proponents shout down the other side—is this what democracy looks like?”

Via: WFB

Immigrants do jobs Americans won't do. Except at Disney.

Disney is firing tech employees and replacing them with (legal) foreigners.

[A]bout 250 Disney employees were told in late October that they would be laid off. Many of their jobs were transferred to immigrants on temporary visas for highly skilled technical workers, who were brought in by an outsourcing firm based in India. Over the next three months, some Disney employees were required to train their replacements to do the jobs they had lost.

But the layoffs at Disney and at other companies, including the Southern California Edison power utility, are raising new questions about how businesses and outsourcing companies are using the temporary visas, known as H-1B, to place immigrants in technology jobs in the United States.

According to federal guidelines, the visas are intended for foreigners with advanced science or computer skills to fill discrete positions when American workers with those skills cannot be found. Their use, the guidelines say, should not “adversely affect the wages and working conditions” of Americans. Because of legal loopholes, however, in practice, companies do not have to recruit American workers first or guarantee that Americans will not be displaced

As you can see, illegal aliens are not the only problem we face. But rather than getting into a debate about legal immigration, I want to touch on a different point.

Big business wants amnesty, and the reason it wants amnesty is because it wants a cheap labor force.

Everyone wonders why the Republicans have been so timid about challenging Obama's illegal massive amnesty. After all, the Republican House and the Republican Senate fully funded Obama's Department of Homeland Security (now named ironically), with no restrictions on their ability to legalize aliens en masse.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading.....

America needs a rebirth of freedom

Your freedom is slipping away as Washington’s power grows. Your freedom is undermined by a more intrusive government, which increasingly dictates how you run your life. The principles of America’s Founding have never been more at risk.

Washington is taking over your health care. Encouraging illegal immigration as a political force to suppress your freedom. Raising your taxes. Enslaving your family by national debt. Coddling dictators and gutting our national defenses. While some “conservatives” may have abandoned principle or compromised needlessly, The Heritage Foundation is confronting the crisis with a bold plan to give America a new birth of freedom.

To meet the crisis, Heritage is launching Reclaim America, a revolutionary campaign—unprecedented by any policy organization—to rapidly restore the constitutional rule of “We the People.”

Reclaim America will use four revolutionary strategies to drastically reduce Washington’s power. We will liberate Americans from big government, dethrone the special interests that hold sway over both parties, and end the chokehold the Left has on America.

Reclaim America’s aim is simple: Change America’s trajectory. Beginning right now.

Via: Heritage.com

Continue Reading....

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Friday, June 5, 2015

By the numbers

The unemployment rate for African Americans was nearly twice the national average and more than double the unemployment rate for whites last month, according to new jobs data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Popular Posts