Tuesday, July 14, 2015
[VIDEO] Lindsey Graham: Iran Deal a 'Declaration of War on Israel, Mideast'
"This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Middle East," the South Carolina Republican and presidential candidate told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program. "You have put every Sunni Arab in a terrible spot ... with the passage of time, this industrial-strength program we have locked in place will become a nuclear program."
In regards to Israel, Graham said, "You have taken their biggest threat on the planet, who constantly chants 'Death to Israel,' and you have created a possible death sentence."
And as for the United States, "you have taken our chief antagonist, people who have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq, toppled pro-American governments throughout the region, including Yemen, and given them capability to become a nuclear nation."
"Any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast, and is voting to give the largest state sponsor of terrorism $18 billion," said Graham. "What do you think they'll do with the money? It's going to go to [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad, to Hezbollah and Hamas."
Graham said he would have been more open to a deal that tied Iran's enrichment programs to a change in its behavior, including inspections and finances.
"I would never relieve inspections until there was a certification that Iran is no longer the state sponsor of terrorism," said Graham, adding that he also would never have agreed to lifting the arms embargo "until they changed their behavior."
The deal is also a "virtual declaration of war against Sunni Arabs," said Graham. "You're making every Sunni Arab nation recalculate. You have locked in an industrial-sized nuclear program on behalf of the Iranians."
Further, the deal ensures that "every Sunni Arab nation who can get a nuclear weapon will because now they must," Graham said. "The goal President Obama set out [to achieve] I shared — to dismantle the program, to give them a nuclear capability consistent with a peaceful power program, and to require them to change their behavior before you gave them weapons or a nuclear capability. The goal has not been achieved."
Instead, he said, "With this deal, you've ensured that the Arabs will go nuclear. You have put Israel in the worst possible box. This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don't push back. You put our nation at risk."
Even though the agreement's details have not yet been made public, Graham said he has been to the Middle East enough to know that the deal is a disaster, as it will "lock in a nuclear program that is mature over time without behavior change because that's going to push every Arab to get a weapon."
Graham said he considers Kerry a "good man," but he and Obama "want a deal so bad" Kerry is not listening to the Arabs or to Israel, as they are "are telling him something he doesn't want to hear."
The deal will now move to the Senate for a 60-day review period, and Graham said he plans to argue to his colleagues that it will initiate a nuclear arms race, and that giving Iran cash means "they're going to put it in the war machine, which puts us at risk."
He said he will also "tell the president to go back and try to get a better deal. Tell them there's a better deal to be had."
Graham also had a warning for Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton: "If you think this is a good deal, you're dangerously naive." But still, he said even she could broker a better deal than the one at hand.
"I think she could negotiate a better deal than this," he said. "I think everybody on our side could, except Rand Paul."
And he said that if the Senate cares about Israel, "you will not put her in this box," and if it cares about the United States, "you will not allow our chief antagonist to become a nuclear threshold nation ... If you care about Americans, you will not give this regime one penny."
Via: Newsmax
Continue Reading....
Hillary’s Tired, Demagogic Economic Proposals
Hillary Clinton is a walking, talking cliche who spouts decades-old sound bites that were bad enough when her husband first delivered them but are painfully anachronistic today. Same old material, same old demagoguery.
You would think a self-styled “progressive” would be less regressive and reactionary, but this woman apparently believes that the Clinton magic of the ’90s can be dusted off and resurrected without the slightest rhetorical modification. The problem with that is that Clintonomics only works on the heels of Reaganomics and liberals have been squeezing every last ounce of Reaganomics out of our system.
In her first major economic policy speech at The New School in New York, Hillary made clear that she wants to revive the shamefully populist Clinton-Gore trope of “trickle-down economics.” This hackneyed slogan is grounded in the lie that Republicans believe that only by stacking the deck in favor of the wealthiest people will the rest of America be able to do better, and then only by catching their breadcrumbs as they trickle down into the general economy.
Hogwash. First, neither conservatives nor Republicans advocate special advantages for the rich. Most propose some level of progressive income taxes, which means stacking the deck against the higher-income groups, not in favor of them. Even those who support a flat tax, by definition, are not favoring the rich over the poor.
Second, conservatives don’t argue that the non-rich succeed only by licking scraps from the rich. They do say that freer markets are conducive to economic growth across the board. Yes, opening up the markets and reducing onerous taxes provide incentives for risk-taking and spur economic growth, and when big and small businesses grow, they have more jobs to offer and people have more money to spend. It’s not a matter of trickling down; it’s that a rising tide lifts all boats. The policies that are conducive to rich people’s succeeding are the same ones that lead to lower- and middle-income earners doing better as well.
Conservatives don’t favor the rich, but liberals discriminate against them and all who succeed or who aspire to achieve. Roughly half of income earners in the United States don’t pay income taxes now, and higher-income earners are responsible for paying a wildly disproportionate share of federal revenues. To claim they don’t pay their fair share is objectively dishonest, and no one with half the brains Clinton’s admirers attribute to her could possibly believe it.
How The Republican Presidential Candidates Are Responding To The Iran Deal
The Republicans running for president are blasting the Obama administration over the nuclear deal announced with Iran Tuesday.
“President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran will be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures,” said Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. “The deal allows Tehran to dismantle U.S. and international sanctions without dismantling its illicit nuclear infrastructure—giving Iran’s nuclear weapons capability an American stamp of approval.”
“This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast,” South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
“Shame on the Obama administration for agreeing to a deal that empowers an evil Iranian regime to carry out its threat to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ and bring ‘death to America,’” former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said. “John Kerry should have long ago gotten up on his crutches, walked out of the sham talks, and went straight to Jerusalem to stand next to Benjamin Netanyahu and declared that America will stand with Israel and the other sane governments of the Middle East instead of with the terrorist government of Iran.”
“I have said from the beginning of this process that I would not support a deal with Iran that allows the mullahs to retain the ability to develop nuclear weapons, threaten Israel, and continue their regional expansionism and support for terrorism,” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said. “Based on what we know thus far, I believe that this deal undermines our national security.”
“The nuclear agreement announced by the Obama Administration today is a dangerous, deeply flawed, and short sighted deal,” said former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. “A comprehensive agreement should require Iran to verifiably abandon – not simply delay – its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.”
“The deal threatens Israel, it threatens the United States, and it turns 70 years of nuclear policy on its head,” New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said. “I urge Republicans and Democrats in Congress to put aside politics and act in the national interest. Vote to disapprove this deal in numbers that will override the President’s threatened veto.”
“If Secretary Clinton goes along with President Obama’s efforts to appease Iran, it will make our enemies stronger, endanger our ally Israel and trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that will destabilize the region,” said Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
“The Iran deal announced today with fanfare and another heaping dose of false hope is almost certain to prove an historic mistake with potentially deadly consequences,” former neurosurgeon Ben Carson said.
“President Obama’s decision to sign a nuclear deal with Iran is one of the most destructive foreign policy decisions in my lifetime. For decades to come, the world will have to deal with the repercussions of this agreement, which will actually make it easier for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,” said former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
President Obama made an early morning statement at the White House, saying: “Today, because America negotiated from a position of strength and principle, we have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region.”
Liberal Boston Mayor Says Trump Is Not Welcome
Boston’s liberal mayor Martin Walsh told the Boston Herald on Monday that he would do everything he could to block a Trump hotel or real estate project in Boston because of Republican Donald Trump’s remarks regarding illegal immigrants during his presidential campaign announcement last month.
“I didn’t criticize him; I just don’t agree with him at all,” Walsh said to the Herald. “I think his comments are inappropriate. And if he wanted to build a hotel here, he’d have to make some apologies to people in this country.”
Yet this morning Walsh tweeted “we are committed to retaining our talent and by working together to create a thriving innovative #Boston” in regards to an event coming to Boston.
Trump has received widespread condemnation from many on the left and some on the right for his remarks.
“They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us [sic]. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,” Trump said in his campaign kickoff speech.
Trump has remained firm in his immigration views, asking for an apology from the media because of the escape of drug lord ‘El Chapo’ from a Mexico Prison over the weekend. Trump believes that the escape validates his remarks.
‘The Law Is the Law!': Megyn Kelly, Jose Antonio Vargas Face Off over Sanctuary Cities
Fox’s Megyn Kelly and journalist Jose Antonio Vargas tussled tonight over “sanctuary cities” and whether cities with those laws need to be changed following the death of Kate Steinle.
Vargas said the issue here squarely comes down to ICE not acting when they could have issued a warrant for the killer’s arrest. He pointed out that sanctuary cities are beneficial for immigrants who “can actually report to police.”
Kelly still insisted, “The law is the law, and fidelity to the law is what binds us together.”
Vargas––who has made it clear he wants the media to start calling out Donald Trump on this issue––made it clear that the San Francisco killer doesn’t represent millions of other illegal immigrants. Kelly agreed that anyone making that leap is “engaging in hyperbole,” but still called sanctuary cities “lawless.”
Watch the video below, via Fox News:
Persecuting Christians, attacking free speech
My parents immigrated to the United States in 1951, after surviving the tyranny of Nazi Germany and Soviet communism.
It never would have occurred to them that any American, such as Aaron and Melissa Klein of Oregon, would have their freedom to speak, their right to live their lives according to their religious beliefs and their ability to practice their chosen profession taken away by an unapologetic, self-righteous government bureaucrat in basic disregard of the most fundamental tenets of the First Amendment.
But that is exactly what has happened to the Kleins, who committed what is these days the socially unacceptable faux pas of refusing to bake a wedding cake for Laurel and Rachel Bowman-Cryer. Instead of going to one of the dozens of other bakers who would have baked them a cake, this lesbian couple filed a claim for “emotional damages” against the Kleins with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI).
BOLI is run by Commissioner Brad Avakian, a generous financial supporter of Basic Rights Oregon, the largest homosexual rights group in Oregon. This means he has an inherent conflict of interest in the matter.
In fact, emails obtained through a public records request show Avakian and other employees at BOLI worked behind the scenes with the gay lobbying group to organize the persecution of the Kleins through the administrative hearing process. The Kleins lost their bakery business because of a boycott and the burden of defending themselves in the administrative process that lacked the due process protections of a court, where Avakian himself was the final judge, jury and executioner.
On July 2, just days before we celebrated the Declaration of Independence and the fight for our liberties, Avakian issued a final resolution of the complaint. He ordered the Kleins to pay Laurel and Rachel Bowman-Cryer $135,000 for “emotional” damages.
Apparently, not getting the cake they wanted caused them “acute loss of confidence,” “doubt,” “excessive sleep,” “shock,” “uncertainty,” “high blood pressure,” “impaired digestion,” and a host of other symptoms. Of course, they didn’t lose their jobs, their profession, or their ability to make a living as the Kleins did.
But Avakian didn’t stop there. He found it unacceptable that the Kleins defended themselves in the media and -- horrors -- on their Facebook page! Apparently, talking about how they try to live their lives in accordance with their religious beliefs was too much.
By “repeatedly appearing in public to make statements” about the complaint, the Kleins are “liable for any resultant emotional suffering experienced by” the lesbian couple. Therefore, Avakian ordered the Kleins to “cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing, or displaying” any communication about their beliefs about sexual orientation and public accommodations. He overruled the hearing officer’s recommendation to dismiss this part of the claim.
America was founded on the basis of religious freedom and free speech. Freedom from persecution like that instigated by Avakian drew many to America, from the pilgrims to the Huguenots. Those principles were embedded in our First Amendment and ingrained in American culture -- until now.
The issue here is not same-sex marriage, a fiercely debated social issue, or whether you approve of it. The issue is that all Americans have the right not only to live their life according to their religious principles without the government dictating what social mores are acceptable, but also the right to speak freely -- particularly when they are being hounded by the government.
Benjamin Franklin once wrote that “freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.” With this unfair, unjust, and unwarranted judgment and gag order against the Kleins by an unprincipled government official, that pillar has just been destroyed in Oregon.
- Hans von Spakovsky is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a former Justice Department attorney.
Can Court Clerks Decline to Do Gay Marriages? How It’s Playing Out in the States
A few cases of public employees who cite their faith in declining to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples have grabbed media attention, but similar concerns exist in scores of courthouses across America, a lawyer for a prominent Christian legal organization says.
“In most instances the government can accommodate the religious beliefs of the objecting person,” @AllianceDefends’ Jeremy Tedesco
A suit against a Kentucky court clerk was scheduled to be heard today by a federal judge, and county commissions were set to vote on the resignations of clerks in Tennessee and Texas.
The cases, the lawyer told The Daily Signal, are just three examples of difficult choices created by the Supreme Court’s5-4 ruling legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the nation.
“I think the bottom line is, in most instances the government can accommodate the religious beliefs of the objecting person,” said Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom.
An ultimatum of “comply or lose your job” by some LGBT activists and their supporters, he said, runs counter to “our rich history of religious freedom and religious accommodation.”
Civil disobedience to the ruling, and to instructions issued by governors and other state authorities, initially occurred among clerks and other court employees in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas.
However, Tedesco said the offices of Alliance Defending Freedom, or ADF, have been “inundated” by calls and emails from courthouse employees and officials who aren’t sure what their office will do, want to understand their rights, or have asked for an accommodation for their faith but haven’t yet gotten one.
>>> For more on religious liberty and same-sex marriage, see Ryan T. Anderson’s new book, “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom.”
In some cases, clerks and other court employees have resigned rather than issue licenses for same-sex nuptials.
CALIFORNIA: LADWP Proposes 30 Percent Utility Rate Increase
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is proposing a 25% to 30% increase in our utility rates over the next five years. This $1.2 to $1.4 billion in new revenues will be used to replace aging infrastructure, improve the reliability of service, expand our local water supply, transform our sources of power, improve customer service, and support the Department’s $13 billion, five year capital expenditure program.
This hefty rate hike of 5% a year over five years does not appear to be unreasonable based on presentations by DWP’s senior management. This is also an improvement over the 8% annual increase that was floated several months ago that would have cost Ratepayers over $2 billion a year.
Over the next four months, DWP management will put on a full court press to sell this substantial rate increase to Ratepayers who have serious doubts about the Department and its domineering union. But even more so, we have a hard time trusting the Herb Wesson, the City Council, and Mayor Eric Garcetti when it comes to our hard earned cash.
One area of concern is DWP’s Stormwater Capture Master Plan which appears to be an attempt by the Bureau of Sanitation and City Hall to dump a significant chunk of the $8 billion urban runoff program onto the Ratepayers.
Last month, the DWP Board of Commissioners approved a $15 million stormwater plan that will cost Ratepayers an estimated $3,000 an acre foot, a significant premium to the $600 that the Metropolitan Water Department charges for untreated water. At the same time, Sanitation, which has the primary responsibility for stormwater, is not putting any upfront money into the deal.
The Department must also justify selected pet projects, including the $20 million Griffith Park South Water Recycling Project that will end up costing Ratepayers close to $4,000 an acre foot. Once again, DWP is financing a project that is the responsibility of another City department, in this case, Recreation and Parks.
There are numerous other pet projects, including, but not limited to, the Los Angeles River, the Arts District Clean Tech campus, fire hydrants, below market leases, and the Silver Lake Reservoir.
There are also questions regarding the local solar programs involving the efficiency of the Feed-in-Tariff program, net metering, and utility built solar. According to the Ratepayers Advocate, the Feed-in-Tariff program is expected to ding Ratepayers more than $250 million extra over the next twenty years compared to other solar alternatives. And the DWP built solar facility at the Port of Los Angeles is expected to cost 60 cents per kilowatt hour, four times the retail price of electricity.
This raises serious concerns about the efficacy of Garcetti’s $2.5 to $3 billion proposal to construct over 600 megawatts of DWP built solar power within the City of Los Angeles.
This rate review is also an opportunity to address DWP’s major problem: City Hall and the way it treats the Department as an ATM and a favor bank.
As a result of this interference, the LA 2020 Commission recommended the establishment of The Los Angeles Utility Rate Commission that would have direct authority to determine DWP policy, appoint the General Manager, set rates, and work with the GM and her staff to oversee the operations of the Department. While this recommendation has yet to see the light of day thanks to City Council President Herb Wesson, we need to have a serious conversation about the governance of this City enterprise that is vital to our local economy.
The Ratepayers will also be hit up for about $200 million in taxes on Power System revenues as a result of the 8% Transfer Fee and the 10% to 12% City Utility Tax. But rather than pocketing this back door tax increase, the City Council and Mayor Garcetti should reinvest this windfall in the power system’s infrastructure since they are in large part responsible for the deteriorating infrastructure because of their unwillingness to make the tough decision to raise rates.
The economics of the proposed 25% to 30% rate increase do not appear to be unreasonable based on management’s presentations. Whether DWP is deserving of this $1.2 to $1.4 billion revenue hike depends on the willingness of DWP and City Hall to address the Ratepayers’ concerns, protect our wallets, and reform the governance of our Department of Water and Power.
UCLA provides internship opportunities to illegal immigrants
Illegal immigrant students in California are actualizing their dreams this summer.
The UCLA Labor Center’s Dream Resource Center is allowing undocumented students to apply for Dream Summer, a ten-week summer program that provides paid internship opportunities for immigrants in California, regardless of their immigration or insurance status. The program will encourage them to advocate for immigration reform and promote universal health care access regardless of immigration status.
UCLA is among the growing number of University of California schools, including UC San Diego and UC Berkeley, to provide academic scholarships and opportunities for exclusively for illegal immigrants. Tweet This
The Center says the program began in 2011 after the U.S. Senate failed to pass the DREAM Act in 2010, which would have given a path to citizenship to illegal immigrants who came to the United states before the age of 16. The program claims to have provided 418 internship opportunities to immigrant youth throughout the nation.
UCLA is among the growing number of University of California schools, including UC San Diego and UC Berkeley, to provide academic scholarships and opportunities exclusively for illegal immigrants, some of whom move on to become active spokesmen for immigration reform.
The US Census Bureau reports that as of July 1, 2014, Hispanics were the predominant ethnic population of California’s roughly 14.99 million residents. An estimated 68 percent of the state’s undocumented population is Mexican-born.
Seth Ronquillo, a spokesman for the Dream Resource Center, told the Daily Bruin, “Many of the participants in the program go on to become the leaders of the immigration reform movement. By working in social justice organizations, they are given the resources they need to continue in activism.”
For international students, the requirement is more stringent. “Students have to get credit for paid as well as unpaid internships to stay in the U.S. on an educational F-1 visa with approval from the Dashew Center for International Students and Scholars,” the Daily Bruin reports.
“I feel that UCLA as a public institution in California was established to educated the citizens of California as well as the U.S. and legal international students, not illegal immigrants. By only offering these paid internships to illegal immigrants UCLA is not only hurting law abiding citizens who are of all ethnicities including Hispanic, but they are also promoting and sponsoring people who are breaking the laws of our state and country. [This] is ironic since some of their funding comes from the state in which they are advocating for people to break this state's law,” Alexis Moran, a second-year Hispanic student at UCLA told Campus Reform,
Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @PardesSeleh
GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES SLAM OBAMA’S DEAL WITH IRAN
GOP presidential candidates are slamming the Obama Administration’s deal with Iran that was announced Tuesday.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) said:
Shame on the Obama administration for agreeing to a deal that empowers an evil Iranian regime to carry out its threat to “wipe Israel off the map” and bring “death to America.” John Kerry should have long ago gotten up on his crutches, walked out of the sham talks, and went straight to Jerusalem to stand next to Benjamin Netanyahu and declared that America will stand with Israel and the other sane governments of the Middle East instead of with the terrorist government of Iran.
Huckabee addded: “As president, I will stand with Israel and keep all options on the table, including military force, to topple the terrorist Iranian regime and defeat the evil forces of radical Islam.”
Carly Fiorina appeared on CBS Tuesday morning and discussed President Obama’s comments on the deal.
“He says it makes a nuclear arms race less likely – our Arab allies have said just the opposite, so has Israel. So… there is reason for suspicion here that is not partisan.”
Fiorina said the allies think it makes an arms race more likely because Iran has demonstrated bad behavior for more than 30 years and both China and Russia have an interest in opening up Iran’s economy. Fiorina said the Administration caved.
Meanwhile, “This is not going to sell to the Congress or the American people, it won’t sell to the Arabs, certainly not going to sell to the Israelis,”
said on CNN’s “New Day.”
echoed Graham on Congressional approval saying, “I expect that a significant majority in Congress will share my skepticism of this agreement and vote it down.”
Rubio posted on Twitter, “It will be left to the next President to return us to a position of American strength and re-impose sanctions on this despicable regime.”
The most recent GOP candidate to enter the race – Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) – said this deal would be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures:
The deal allows Tehran to dismantle U.S. and international sanctions without dismantling its illicit nuclear infrastructure—giving Iran’s nuclear weapons capability an American stamp of approval. In crafting this agreement, President Obama has abandoned the bipartisan principles that have guided our nonproliferation policy and kept the world safe from nuclear danger for decades. Instead of making the world safer, this deal will likely lead to a nuclear arms race in the world’s most dangerous region. What’s worse, the deal rewards the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism with a massive financial windfall, which Iran will use to further threaten our interests and key allies, especially Israel.
Walker called on Congress and all presidential candidates – including Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton – to repudiate the deal.
Iran’s Supreme Leader should know that a future American president will not be bound by this diplomatic retreat. Undoing the damage caused by this deal won’t be easy. But when the United States leads, and has a president who isn’t eager to embrace Iran, the world will follow. In order to ensure the safety of America and our allies, the next president must restore bipartisan and international opposition to Iran’s nuclear program while standing with our allies to roll back Iran’s destructive influence across the Middle East.
CNN reported that former Pennsylvania Gov. Rick Santorum responded to the deal by saying:
We’ve legitimized them. We’ve given them legitimacy in the international community something that they deeply wanted here, and they’ve done basically nothing in exchange for that. They come out of this a much, much stronger and I believe more virulent state with very, very few responsibility, in fact nothing in this deal curbs their terrorism. There’s nothing that says that they have to cease any type of terrorist activity.
Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) said Obama has made two years of humiliating concessions – including the deal with Iran.
“He should have walked away. Iran joins the sad list of countries were America’s red lines have been crossed. The president is playing a dangerous game with our national security, and the deal as structured will lead to a nuclear Iran and, then, a nuclearized Middle East. The deal threatens Israel, it threatens the United States, and it turns 70 years of nuclear policy on its head,” Christie posted on Twitter.
Christie urged Congress to reject the deal.
Dr. Ben Carson did not post an update on Twitter as of Tuesday morning on the final Iran deal, but on Sunday Carson posted, “Reagan:”Trust, but verify”. Re: #IranTalks, we need to verify @POTUS concessions! @BarackObama come clean, show all cards to#WeThePeople.”
Gov. Jeb Bush (R-FL) also did not comment as of Tuesday on the final deal, but posted on Twitter Monday, “The Obama Administration’s negotiating strategy with Iran is called appeasement. We should walk away.”
The deal now goes to Congress which has 60 days to review and either approve or reject the final deal with Iran.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
The White House says Americans can't draw any conclusions yet about just how screwed up is the Department of Veterans Affairs medical ...
-
Donald Trump ruled out a third-party run for president on Thursday, announcing in the lobby of his landmark Trump Tower in New York tha...
-
California's Democratic governor signed a law on Wednesday that will allow nurses and midwives to perform some abortions, a move aimed a...
-
Union bosses do — at the expense of good teachers, children, their parents and taxpayers. In a tribute to Labor Day, the California Tea...
-
As Democrats survey a troubled 2014 political landscape, it's easy to forget how optimistic they seemed less than a year ago. ...
-
Benghazi. Snooping on reporters. The IRS and NSA. The White House dismisses them as phony and fake scandals. Americans do not. A Fox Ne...
-
WASHINGTON — An estimated one in four people who signed up for health insurance through the troubled HealthCare.gov website in October a...
