What the Latest National GOP Poll Means for Thursday’s Fox Debate

The headline may read “Trump Widens Lead,” but the biggest implications of Monday’s new Monmouth University Poll have much more to do with the candidates towards the bottom of the list.

With Fox News just a little more than 24 hours away from announcing the 10 candidates who will have the honor of appearing on the primetime debate stage in Cleveland, three Republican governors are vying for the bottom two spots.

As of last Thursday, some predictors had Rick Perry as the eleventh name on the list, while others were predicting that current Ohio Governor John Kasich would be left out of the debate in his home state. The third man on that list, Chris Christie, has been acting very confident, but still risked getting cut if he had a particularly bad performance in any new polls.

Assuming Fox decides to take the Monmouth poll into consideration, Christie should be resting easy right about now. With 4.4% in today’s survey, Christie tied Rand Paul and Marco Rubio for seventh place. They are followed by Kasich with 3.2%, while Perry’s name appears even further down the list with just 1.8%. That puts Kasich at #9 and Christie at #10 on Real Clear Politics’ average, both ahead of Perry, who still sits at #11.

If this ends up being the final major poll to be released before Fox announces the 10 candidates Tuesday evening, it is bad news for Perry. In order to avoid what is looking like an inevitable fate, he would have had to outperform Christie and Kasich. Instead, he couldn’t even beat Carly Fiorina, who is already not expected to appear on the main stage.

And yes, as Monmouth’s press release revealed, Trump has opened up his widest lead yet, more than doubling any other candidate with 26%. Jeb Bush (12.2%) and Scott Walker (11.1%) have to settle for second and third place, respectively. While Perry likely won’t get the chance to challenge Trump directly Thursday night, his two closest rivals will be looking to do something — anything — to improve their standing moving forward.

Via: Mediaite

Continue Reading....

Psychopathy in the White House

It’s clear that Barack Obama is a narcissist, so I wasn’t surprised when he paraded around the White House making faces to his selfie stick then stopping to admire his gaunt profile in the mirror the way an insecure teenager might.  Selfie obsession, however, can be a symptom of something more sinister – the Dark Triad of personality traits

The Dark Triad consists of narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy, and it turns out Obama is riddled with all three, especially the darkest category -- psychopathy.  Narcissists generally cause themselves harm, and one could easily argue that to become president one must be a bit self-absorbed, if not cocky.  But psychopathy is particularly pernicious as the perpetrator appears normal, and often quite charming, which even Obama’s detractors admit he occasionally exudes.

Personality psychologists have constructed a “Dirty Dozen” scale to identify the Dark Triad.  Let’s take a look, focusing especially on the behaviors associated with psychopathy, behaviors that Obama exhibits in abundance.

M = Machiavellianism, N = Narcissism, P = Psychopathy.

1. I tend to manipulate others to get my way.  (M)
2. I tend to lack remorse. (P)
3. I tend to want others to admire me. (N)
4. I tend to be unconcerned with the morality of my actions. (P)
5. I have used deceit or lied to get my way. (M)
6. I tend to be callous or insensitive. (P)
7. I have used flattery to get my way. (M)
8. I tend to seek prestige or status. (N)
9. I tend to be cynical. (P)
10. I tend to exploit others toward my own end. (M)
11. I tend to expect special favors from others. (N)
12. I want others to pay attention to me. (N) (…continued below)

Obama would score highly in each measure. For example, for number 5, the Washington Post awarded him the Lie of the Year “award” for “If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it."    Similarly, his real-time obsession with his legacy supersedes most presidents’ conceit -- who heretofore mostly focused on policy first then later massaged it for posterity.

But it is Obama’s proclivity for P which is particularly disconcerting; whereas most politicians have N, and a more devious minority exhibit some M, far fewer wallow in P.  Furthermore, whereas N infects the victim with self-destructive, perhaps supercilious visions of grandeur, P envelops those under his influence in the dark side.

Consider number 2 in the scale:  “I tend to lack remorse.”  Well, politicians at various points along the ideological spectrum may disagree wholeheartedly, but still have remorse should something untoward befall an opponent.

But there is evidence that Obama is remorseless.  Charles Woods, father of a Navy SEAL killed in the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was only looking for some emotional support from the Commander in Chief.  Instead, here’s how he described his meeting with Obama at Andrews Air Force base:  “His face was pointed towards me but he would not look me in the eye," Woods says of meeting Obama. "I could tell he was not sorry. He had no remorse." 

Want more recent evidence of Obama’s lack of remorse?   On 21 July, 2015, he had the impudence to deny that there was anything wrong with the IRS targeting conservative groups.    His lack of remorse that the IRS caused turmoil to American citizens’ lives is pathological because when it seemed politically expedient he condemned the IRS abuses and found the inspector general’s findings “inexcusable.”

Now consider number 4 on the scale:  “I tend to be unconcerned with the morality of my actions.” 

That pretty well captures Obama’s un-American grounding in morality.  Perhaps his umbrage at American exceptionalism was instilled while he was a child in Indonesia, or from lurking on the periphery of American society in Hawaii or in Chicago’s Saul Alinsky-inspired radical community organizations.  Something definitely warped his confused soul to apply this bizarre moral equivalence: Obama compares medieval Christian actions to present-day Islamic barbarism.

Obama’s actions, or lack thereof, in deploying resources to combat radical Islamic jihadists are ultimately immoral.   Another AT author did an exemplary job of exposing his immorality.

Number 6 on the scale is the next measure of psychopathy:  “I tend to be callous or insensitive”

It was truly unbecoming as well as insensitive when Obama, during his 2010 State of the Union address, criticized SCOTUS for their Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision.  The justices were sitting ducks in this unprecedented presidential petulance that sullied an event in which members from all three branches of government are under one roof.  Magnanimity is clearly not in his makeup.

Obama seems to relish the callous and insensitive tactic of attacking others who are constrained from immediate rebuttal.  He also invited Paul Ryan to a budget speech (though Obama later lied about that) then proceeded to criticize his budget plans severely, knowing Ryan couldn’t respond.  At least not until after, when Ryan said this:

“I’m very disappointed in the president. I was excited when we got invited to attend his speech today. I thought the president’s invitation… was an olive branch. Instead what we got was a speech that was excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate and hopelessly inadequate in addressing our country’s fiscal challenges… Rather than building bridges, he’s poisoning wells.”

Obama also demonstrated a callous indifference to the family of Kate Steinle who was shot dead by an illegal immigrant given sanctuary in San Francisco.  Ironically, unlike other personal tragedies where he promptly intruded for political gain, this one actually had some federal policy overtones.

Number 9 on the scale is another measure of psychopathy: “I tend to be cynical.”  Unlike the first three, where Obama occupies rarified territory, this is a bit more common amongst politicians.  Nevertheless, he out-cynics most. 

This headline says it all:  President Obama lied about gay marriage, Axelrod says. This is why we’re cynical

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading....

WH Anticipates 'A Difficult Transition' to 'Clean Power'

(

CNSNews.com) - President Obama will unveil the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan on Monday, imposing stricter-than-expected carbon dioxide limits on the states.

"There's no doubt that this is going to be a difficult transition," Obama's spokesman Josh Earnest told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Monday. "But it's a transition that is clearly in the best interests of our economy, it's clearly in the best interest of the health of children all across the country, and it's in the best interests of the planet."

Earnest said he thinks the EPA Clean Power Plan "is the culmination of what the president talked about in 2007 and 2008."

Even before he became president, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to wean the nation off coal.

"If somebody wants to build a coal fired plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted," Barack Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle in January 2008.

He added later in the same interview, “Under my plan -- electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Rates may skyrocket, but the White House insists customers' bills will come down -- likely because people won't be able to afford as much electricity.

"If we actually make progress in investing in this clean energy, what we're actually going to do, we're actually going to lower costs for consumers," Earnest said on Monday.

The new rules take effect in 2022, and states must meet the carbon dioxide reduction targets -- a 32 percent reduction from 2005 levels -- by 2030. Obama's proposed rule last year called for a 30 percent cut.

"We're going to take the most important, substantial step that our country's every taken to reduce the causes of climate change," Earnest said on Monday. "And what we're going to do, we're going scale back the carbon pollution that our power generators are currently allowed to spew into the atmosphere."

"For too long, we've seen Washington, D.C., putting off and delaying action, serious action, to fight the causes of climate change. And we've seen special interests mobilize to try to fight any effort to do that. And I have no doubt that special interests in Washington, D.C., are going to squeal -- as are the politicians who are in their pocket.

"But the fact of the matter is, these rules are going to do something to finally confront the causes of climate change, it's actually going to have significant benefits for public heatlth, particularly children with asthma, and it's going to accelerate the progress that we've made already in transitioining to a clean energy economy."

As the Associated Press noted, it will be up to Obama's successor to implement the EPA's Clean Energy Plan. The AP also reported that the Obama administration estimated the emissions limits will cost $8.4 billion annually by 2030.

The actual price won't be clear until states decide how they'll reach their targets. But people in the energy industry said the stricter limits make Obama's mandate even more burdensome, costly and difficult to achieve.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading....

HERE’S HOW MANY LIVES WERE TAKEN IN JUST 8 ARMED ATTACKS IN GUN FREE ZONES

Calls for more gun control almost always follow a public crime or terror attack in which the attacker–or attackers–use a gun. Yet many of the most infamous attacks take place in gun free zones–places where law-abiding citizens disarm themselves to comply with the rules while criminals take advantage of disarmed masses and open fire.

What follows are just a few of the many examples of shootings in gun free zones that could be listed. There is not one type of firearm that can be blamed–the weapon used was sometimes a handgun, sometimes a rifle, other times a shotgun–nor is there one specific race that can be pinpointed–the attackers come from various races/ethnicities. Nor is this a situation where expanding background checks would have made even the slightest difference–all the attackers listed but one, Adam Lanza, passed a background check for their firearms. Lanza opted to steal his guns instead.

The common thread is that the attacks took place in areas where the gunman knew he could inflict damage at his own pace, without the threat of reprisal from armed citizens:

Lafayette Grand Theatre: On July 23 John Russell Houser allegedly opened fire with a .40 caliber pistol, killing two people–Mayci Breaux and Jillian Johnson–and injuring nine others in a gun free zone.

Chattanooga: On July 16 Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez opened fire on two military locations–one a recruitment office, the second a Navy Operational Support Center. The attack killed five people–USMC Gunnery Sgt. Thomas Sullivan, USMC Lance Corporal Squire K. Wells, USMC Staff Sgt. David Wyatt, USMC Sgt. Carson Holmquist, and US Navy Petty Officer Randall Smith–in a gun free zone.

Fort Hood (2014): On April 2, 2014, Army Spc. Ivan Lopez opened fired on fellow soldiers, killing Sgt. 1st Class Danny Ferguson, Sgt. Timothy Owens, and Staff Sgt. Carlos Lazaney-Rodriguez, and wounded 16 others in a gun free zone.

DC Navy Yard: On September 16, 2013, Aaron Alexis opened fire with a shotgun, killing 12 people in a gun free zone. WSB-TV reported those 12 included 59-year-old Michael Arnold, 53-year-old Sylvia Frasier, 62-year-old Kathy Gaarde, 73-year-old John Roger Johnson, 50-year-old Frank Kohler, 46-year-old Kenneth Bernard Proctor, and 61-year-old Vishnu Pandit. Eight others were wounded.

Sandy Hook Elementary: On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza opened fire with a rifle in a gun free zone, killing 20 students and 6 unarmed staff. The New York Daily News listed the names of those killed: Charlotte Bacon (DOB 2/22/06), Daniel Barden (9/25/05), Rachel Davino (7/17/83), Olivia Engel (7/18/06), Josephine Gay (12/11/05), Ana M. Marquez-Greene (4/4/06), Dylan Hockley (3/8/06), Dawn Hocksprung (6/28/65), Madeleine F. Hsu (7/10/06), Catherine V. Hubbard (6/8/06), Chase Kowalski (10/31/05), Jesse Lewis (6/30/06), James Mattioli (3/22/06), Grace McDonnell (11/04/05), AnneMarie Murphy (07/25/60), Emilie Parker (5/12/06), Jack Pinto (5/6/06), Noah Pozner (11/20/06), Caroline Previdi (9/7/06), Jessica Rekos (5/10/06), Avielle Richman (10/17/06), Lauren Russeau (6/1982), Mary Sherlach (2/11/56), Victoria Soto (11/4/85), Benjamin Wheeler (9/12/06), and Allison N. Wyatt (7/3/06).

Aurora Movie Theater: On July 20, 2012, James Holmes opened fire with a rifle in a gun free zone at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. He killed 12 innocents and Fox News reported their names as 26-year-old Jonathon Blunk, 18-year-old Alexander Boik, 29-year-old Jessie Childress, 51-year-old Gordon Cowden, 24-year-old Jessica Ghawi, 27-year-old John Larimer, 27-year-old Matt McQuinn, 23-year-old Micayla Medek, 6-year-old Veronica Moser-Sullivan, 27-year-old Alex Sullivan, 24-year-old Alexander Teves, and 32-year-old Rebecca Wingo. 70 additional persons were listed as injured. All killed in a gun free zone that was only “gun free” for law-abiding citizens.

Fort Hood (2009): On November 5, 2009, Nidal Hasan opened fire on his fellow soldiers in a gun free zone at Fort Hood, killing 13. The Huffington Post listed their names: 62-year-old Michael Grant Cahill, 52-year-old Maj. Libardo Eduardo Caraveo, 32-year-old Staff Sgt. Justin M. DeCrow, 56-year-old Capt. John Gaffaney, 29-year-old Spc. Frederick Greene,  22-year-old Spc. Jason Dean Hunt, 29-year-old Sgt. Amy Krueger, 19-year-old Pfc. Aaron Thomas Nemelka, 22-year-old Pfc. Michael Pearson, 51-year-old, Capt. Russell Seager, 21-year-old Pvt. Francheska Velez, 55-year-old Lt. Col. Juanita Warman, and 23-year-old Pfc. Kham Xiong. Hasan shot and injured at least 30 others in the gun free zone.

Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech): On April 16, 2007, Seung-Hui Cho used a handgun to open fire on fellow students in a gun free zone at Virginia Tech. He killed 32 and wounded 17 others.  NBC News listed those killed: Liviu Librescu, Ryan Clark, Kevin Granata, Juan Ramon Ortiz, Ross Abdallah Alameddine, Christopher James Bishop, Brian Bluhm, Austin Cloyd, Jocelyn Couture-Nowak, Daniel Perez Cueza, Kevin Granata, Matthew Gwaltney, Caitlin Hammaren, Jeremy Herbstritt, Rachael Hill, Jarrett Lane, Matthew Le Porte, Henry Lee, G.V. Loganathan, Partahi Lombantoruan, Lauren McCain, Daniel O’Neil, Minal Panchal, Erin Peterson, Michael Pohle, Julia Pryde, Mary Read, Reema Samaha, Waleed Shaalan, Leslie Sherman, Maxine Turner, and Nicole White.

There you have it–eight attacks over the last 8 years in which gunmen opened fire in places where citizens were disarmed by policies that treat law-abiding citizens and criminals alike. The result? 105 innocent lives taken and more than 150 others injured by gun fire in gun free zones.

The bottom line–gun free zones are not gun free for criminals. Rather, they are soft targets that offer an invitation to attackers who do not want to face the possibility of would-be victims shooting back.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading

MARK LEVIN: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WON ITS MAJORITY ON A LIE

Today one of America’s most popular talk radio hosts and best-selling author, Mark Levin, addressed a packed audience at the 37th annual National Conservative Student Conference hosted by the Young America’s Foundation.

The audience, comprised of more than 200 students from around the nation, was thrilled to hear from one of the most influential minds in the conservative movement. In his speech, Levin discussed many of the ideas put forth in his new book, Plunder and Deceit, which is already winning accolades from many notable conservatives.

Prior to his remarks, Levin sat down with Breitbart News and diagnosed the failings of the Republican Party — namely, that “The Republican establishment is the problem.”

Levin explained that the GOP’s problems stem largely from party leadership. In a metaphor invoking the idea of House Speaker 

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

35%

 as a Republican in drag, Levin said:

[Boehner] is essentially delivering for Barack Obama everything Barack Obama wants. Just because you’re dressed up as a Republican doesn’t make it so… By his actions, he has demonstrated that he is not a conservative. He spends his time with [Rep. Kevin] McCarthy (R-CA) and [Rep. Steve] Scalise (R-LA) conspiring against the Tea Party and the more conservative elements of his caucus… I can’t think of one significant advance in the cause of liberty or limited government under John Boehner. When he and [Sen. Mitch] McConnell (R-KY)—who’s equally bad— surrendered the power of the purse right out of the box… they just delivered Obama everything he wanted. So these men have helped Obama oversee the biggest explosion of government both in spending and in power ever.

Levin explained that under current leadership, the Republican Party has been an abject failure:

The Republican Party is a disaster. It has lost its way, I don’t think it even knows what its way is. We have a couple of self-serving powerful politicians at the top—in the House, in the Senate, and in the RNC [Republican National Committee] and various other places that empower themselves, they like exercising power. And they fear conservatives more than the Democratic Party… They hate conservatives, they hate constitutionalists, they hate the Tea Party. They don’t care for the Democrats, but they’ll work with them… They have no strategic vision whatsoever—and, of course, they have no tactical vision at all either—and they keep saying, ‘Vote Republican, Vote Republican.’ But they are doing more to dispirit Republicans and conservatives than Barack Obama, because people go to the polls, they give them the House, then they give them the Senate, and they get nothing. They also seem to think that bipartisanship is the reason they’re in Washington. No, the reason they’re in Washington is to advance the cause of liberty and prosperity and constitutionalism. Why would you want to participate in a bipartisan government when the President of United States is openly usurping the rule of law and openly attack the private sector and individual sovereignty?… Why wouldn’t you do everything you can to throw a wrench in his agenda?

Levin declared that, “The Republican Party won the majority on a lie.” Levin argued that on every issue from Obamacare to executive amnesty to Obamatrade, the establishment Republican Party has refused to represent the interests of Americans.

Perhaps nowhere is this more acutely noticeable than on the issue of immigration. Levin explained:

 I’m offended by this notion that if you’re the child of a foreigner and you’re a foreigner, that you’re a ‘DREAMer.’ Do we talk about American citizen children as ‘Dreamers’?… Do you ever hear [the establishment parties] talk about young American children, or kids graduating college… and the impact that these outrageous policies have [on them]?

These observations led Levin to conclude that above all else, “The one thing the Republican Party can do is insist that its leaders resign.”

When asked whether he thought the efforts to oust Boehner as Speaker — such as those led by Congressman 

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC)

96%

 — would prove successful, Levin was not overly optimistic:

Probably not, but to me that doesn’t matter. You have to start a movement, a force, an effort somewhere. If this were easy, John Boehner wouldn’t be Speaker right now. I expect the entrenched Republicans to do everything they can to trash someone like Meadows… because they are protecting the system, they are part of the system, and [Meadows is] challenging it.

Levin called for the emergence of “a new Civil Rights movement,” in which Americans insist that their leaders represent their interests.

I want to generate a new Civil Rights movement, not led by hucksters, not led by liberal frauds who use that nomenclature to justify every big government agenda item that they can — the left has stolen that phrase, ‘Civil Rights’ — we need to take it back using new media, old media,using every available tactic. It’s time for young people to stand up for themselves.

Levin explains that his new book — whose intended readership includes both what Levin terms as the “governing generation” and the “rising generation”– aims to “counter the textbooks that are pushing the left’s agenda” and “undo the propaganda that media, culture, [and] professors are constantly spewing.” Levin asserts that “Younger people are being manipulated,” and that far too many liberal-indoctrinated youths “are voting for their own demise.” Levin hopes that with this book, he will give Americans the facts they need to generate this new Civil Rights movement and force politicians to represent their interests.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

Obama’s Top Health Care Nominee Was Once Embroiled in Medical Fraud Case

Andy Slavitt — President Obama’s choice to manage Obamacare, Medicare and Medicaid — was linked seven years ago to a massive medical data fraud scheme that resulted in what was then the largest settlement ever by an insurance company.

If he is confirmed by the Senate, Slavitt will head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, which manages the federal government’s three biggest health care programs. He will manage an estimated $1 trillion in benefits that are paid to millions of doctors, patients and hospitals.

Slavitt was CEO of Ingenix, a health data analytics firm at the center of a $50 million settlement in 2009 with then-New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and a $350 million settlement with the American Medical Association.

Cuomo and the AMA charged that Ingenix supplied databases to insurance companies that fraudulently calculated reimbursements for out-of-network medical services provided to policyholders, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

Ingenix was owned by UnitedHealth Group, which did not admit to any criminal wrong-doing in the settlements.

The Ingenix scandal became public in February 2008 when Cuomo filed a “notice of intent to sue” Ingenix and UnitedHealth Group for “rigged” reimbursement rates that forced patients to overpay up to 30 percent for out-of-network doctors and hospitals.

Cuomo charged that Ingenix was running a “scheme” that sought “to defraud consumers by manipulating reimbursement rates.”

The AG told reporters, “This involves fraud in the hundreds of millions of dollars, affecting thousands and thousands of families. Too many people have been hurt. It has to stop.”

It was estimated that years of data manipulation by Ingenix affected as many as 110 million Americans — about one in three patients — who used doctors, labs or hospitals that were out of their insurance network.

Cuomo, who is now New York’s Democratic governor, estimated that patients who used out-of-network providers received between 10 to 28 percent less than they were entitled to because of Ingenix’s flawed data.

The $350 million was to reimburse doctors and patients shortchanged by Slavitt’s company. The $50 million went to establish a database of physician charges to be administered independently by a university. Ingenix also agreed to shutter its entire medical data analytics department.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Who Can Beat Hillary?

Already feeling overwhelmed by the 2016 presidential race? It's understandable with 16 major Republican candidates running for White House. This doesn't count a slew of lesser-known aspirants, including some former governors who would merit attention in a smaller field.

People ridiculed the 1988 Democratic presidential candidates as the "Seven Dwarves." So far, no one has called this group the Sweet 16. Only 10 at a time are expected to appear together onstage for debates sanctioned by the Republican National Committee. Among them are senators, governors, a successful businesswoman, a retired neurosurgeon and author and a billionaire reality TV star.

Can any of them beat Hillary Clinton? They have reason to hope, for the last time Clinton looked inevitable, she lost. Her odds of making it out of the Democratic primaries are much better this time. So far, she has attracted four challengers and only Bernie Sanders, the socialist senator from Vermont, has attracted a meaningful following. Neither Joe Biden nor any other Democratic savior has emerged.

The general election is a shakier proposition for Clinton. She fares well in national polls, frequently beating her Republican rivals by double digits in hypothetical match-ups. But swing state polls tell a different story. In late July, Quinnipiac found her losing Colorado, Iowa and Virginia — they are all states Barack Obama carried twice and George W. Bush won at least once — to the leading Republican candidates.

But if the polls more than a year before the election were determinative, Rudy Giuliani and Richard Gephardt would have been major-party presidential nominees, and John McCain might have been president of the United States. At this point, Clinton looks like a competitive but beatable candidate in the general election. But before any of the Republicans can beat Hillary, they must first defeat the rest of the GOP field.

The Republican race is wide open, with barely 10 points separating first and fourth places in the national RealClearPolitics polling average. Fewer than 20 points separate first place from fifteenth place, a spot occupied in July by a candidate with 0 percent of the vote.

Superficially, the 2016 GOP contest looks a lot like past races. You have an establishment candidate in Jeb Bush. The combined finances of his campaign and super PAC mean Bush is awash in money. He has a good team, solid organization and plenty of endorsements. Then there's a group of candidates competing to be the conservative alternative to Jeb.

Yet the race is, in other ways, like no other in recent memory. Bush is the establishment candidate, yes, but he is not the clear front-runner. He's led in only one major poll in Iowa since May 2014, and after trailing Mike Huckabee in an outlier poll in February, he has at different times lost his national lead to Scott Walker, Marco Rubio and, most recently, Donald Trump.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading...

Maureen Dowd: Starbucks' Howard Schultz Urged to Challenge Hillary

.Howard Schultz, the chairman and CEO of Starbucks, is being urged to challenge Hillary 

Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Schultz, 62, is getting encouragement from supporters because they believe "the time is right for someone who's not a political lifer," New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd said on Saturday. "It may be a tempting proposition."

Raised in low-income housing in Brooklyn, Schultz later graduated from Northern Michigan University. He bought Starbucks in 1988 and built the company to where its operating income totaled $939 million in its most recent quarter, on $4.9 billion in sales.

Schultz also once owned the Seattle Supersonics.

"He has strong opinions, and even position papers, about what he calls the fraying American dream," writes Dowd, who has long criticized Clinton and former President Bill Clinton.

She referenced the book Schultz co-wrote last year, "For Love of Country: What Our Veterans Can Teach Us About Citizenship, Heroism, and Sacrifice."

"While he was promoting his book on veterans last year, he honed a message about making government work again and finding 'authentic, truthful leadership,'" Dowd said.

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading.....

[VIDEO] Week Ahead: July Jobs Report

The July jobs report is the highlight of next week’s economic calendar with the Federal Reserve watching closely for sustained momentum in the all-important labor sector.

The labor market is coming off a string of strong monthly reports with the headline unemployment rate dropping to 5.3% in June, its lowest level in 7 years, and a monthly average of 250,000 jobs created during the past 12 months.

Another positive report is expected – analysts are predicting about 200,000 new jobs in July and that the unemployment rate will tick higher to 5.4%. The report will be released by the U.S. Labor Department on Friday.

“The US economy is expected to add 200,000 jobs in July. Gains will likely be concentrated in healthcare, food services, and professional and business services. The unemployment rate should drift higher as the labor force increases,” said analysts at IHS Global Insight.

But what Federal Reserve policy makers will be watching closely is wage growth. Despite all the otherwise positive data related to labor markets, wage growth has remained stubbornly weak.

Without robust wage growth inflation will have a hard time reaching the Fed’s 2% target level.

Also on tap next week is July automotive sales, a report on construction spending, personal income and outlays data and the ISM Manufacturing Index, all out Monday; a report on international trade is due Wednesday;  and a report on consumer spending is out Friday.

According to analysts at HIS Global Insight: “Both personal consumption and personal income likely rose 0.2% in June. The trade deficit likely widened, to $44.0 billion, as goods exports fell modestly while goods imports increased. Construction spending likely increased by 1.0%, with gains in both private and public construction spending.

Via: Fox Business

Continue Reading.....

Ted Nugent: Jimmy Kimmel Should 'Get a Damn Life'

Rocker and avid hunter Ted Nugent defended the Minnesota dentist who killed Cecil the Lion in Zimbabwe, saying the hunt likely was legal and that such actions are needed to thin the heard and make way for younger populations.

The dentist, Walter Palmer, has been in hiding since word of the kill was reported in the media last week.

Nugent, appearing Sunday on "The Rita Cosby Show" on WABC in New York, said he is dubious of media reports that the lion was lured out of a sanctuary because of the number of untrue statements the media has made about him in the past.

If he could talk to Palmer, Nugent said, "I would say I'm sorry that our society has become so dumbed down and so soul-less, as to threaten you and your family's lives, because you killed a lion that needed to be killed."

Cecil was an older lion by standards in the wild, and his removal made way for the next group of cubs, Nugent said. He compared the killing to hunting for deer or other animals in the United States.

"If we stopped one deer season in any state in America the number of highway casualties, insurance and agriculture compensation and dead human beings would go through the ceiling," he said.

The biggest problem, Nugent said, is that the animal was given a name, which tends to humanize it. But naming wild animals is actually a disservice that robs the animal of its nobility and is the true "criminal act," he said.

"These are wild, magnificent creatures. They’re not petting zoo animals. They’re not cartoons," Nugent said.

The rocker also had little sympathy for fellow celebrities who have decried Cecil's killing.

Jimmy Kimmel got choked up on his show talking about the lion, and urged people to donate to conservation. 

"I would say, 'Jimmy, get a damn life.' Maybe you should cry a few tears for all the millions of aborted babies who Planned Parenthood are selling their organs," Nugent said. 

Further, Zimbabwe's longtime leader Robert Mugabe has killed tens of thousands of his citizens in his decades-long rule, he said. "Did Jimmy Kimmel cry about that?"

Nugent also mocked Mia Farrow, who tweeted out the dentist's address. 

"So she doesn't know that the sushi is dead?" he asked.

Nugent did admit to Cosby that he doesn't know all the details of the hunt, and that if anything illegal did take place the guides and the hunter himself should be held accountable.

Nugent said he plans to talk to Palmer himself once things quiet down. 

Via: Newsmax

Continue Reading.....