Tuesday, August 11, 2015

'Pro-Science' Democrats Reject Biotechnology

I crush GMOs!
Imagine if Congress voted on whether or not to teach evolution and climate change in school. And imagine that 73% of Republicans voted against it. The backlash would be easy to predict: The national media, and science journalists in particular, would spend a week making somber declarations of impending educational and scientific collapse that would reverberate across the cosmos.
As it so happens, Congress did just vote on something of tremendous scientific importance: Biotechnology. And, as it so happens, 73% of Democrats voted against the bill. Yet, the national media remained deafeningly and hypocritically silent. 
On July 23, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill, H.R. 1599, that, among other things, would block states from requiring foods containing genetically modified ingredients to carry special labels. From a scientific viewpoint, this is the correct policy. Yet, the Democratic Party, which has branded itself the "pro-science" party over the last two decades, overwhelmingly opposed it.
Why? Well, it's hard to say, though the fact that places like the GMO-hating Whole Foods tending to be located in counties that voted for Barack Obama might have something to do with it.
In the final vote tally, 94% of House Republicans supported the bill, while a stunning 73% of Democrats voted against it. Even Democrats who represent districts with a large biotechnology constituency voted against the bill: Nancy Pelosi (CA-12), Jackie Speier (CA-14), Mike Honda (CA-17), and Anna Eshoo (CA-18) -- all from the Bay Area -- as well as Boston's Michael Capuano (MA-7) and Stephen Lynch (MA-8) and Seattle's Jim McDermott (WA-7).
The vote pattern made it abundantly clear: On the needlessly hot-button issue of genetic modification, Democrats sided with fearmongers and organic foodies, while Republicans sided with the medical and scientific mainstream.
And yes, just like vaccines, evolution, and anthropogenic climate change, GMOs are mainstream and non-controversial in the scientific community. Indeed, the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (PDF) -- organizations that represent our nation's finest doctors and scientists -- reject GMO labels.
But don't just take their word for it. A massive literature review published in 2013 in the journalCritical Review of Biotechnology, which examined 1,783 papers on the topic, found that GMOs were safe for humans and the environment. In other words, the scientific community is solidly united behind the science of genetic modification; in fact, the toxic C-word, "consensus," is entirely appropriate.
Unfortunately, Democratic politicians aren't the only ideologues who are opposed to GMOs. The $72-billion organic food industry is, too. And anti-GMO activists, such as Gary Ruskin, use the legal system to harass academic scientists. His group, U.S. Right to Know, abuses FOIA requests in order to smear the reputation of honest biotech scientists. And who serves on hisBoard of Directors? None other than former Democratic Party apparatchik, Lisa Graves, who is now Executive Director of the far left-wing propaganda outlet, Center for Media and Democracy.
Our food is precious. Labels are meant for nutritional and health purposes, not for scoring political points against Monsanto or buttressing Luddite protests against biotechnology.
Let us hope that President Obama and the U.S. Senate can unite behind a bipartisan victory for science and approve the House bill.

Clinton Foundation Donor Wants His $1.5M Back In Sex Abuse Case

Hillary Clinton, left, and John Podesta, her Democratic presidential campaign chairman, right, are players in an emerging scandal involving Swiss billionaire Hans Wyss, center. (Sources: Clinton/Podesta, Getty. Wyss, Forbes.com)
Attorneys representing Clinton Foundation donor and Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss are seeking his pound of flesh from Jacqueline Long, a woman who has publicly accused him of sexual abuse.
The high-profile Democratic donor’s attorneys filed a petition Aug. 4 seeking “harsh sanctions” against the Colorado woman following a June 8 The Daily Caller News Foundation article that reported her allegations. They claim Long violated the confidentiality provision of a $1.5 million settlement agreement the two signed in May 2013.
The Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia has scheduled a hearing this morning to determine the next step in the long-running saga.
The latest chapter began last December when Wyss gave a $5 million commitment to the Clinton Foundation’s No Ceilings project to help women and girls, an effort personally championed by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
At the time, no one knew that Wyss had executed a $1.5 million settlement, in part over Long’s allegations he had sexually abused her.
Wyss’ attorneys asked the Philadelphia court to order Long to reimburse him for the $1.5 million he paid in the settlement, as well $68,000 in attorney fees, and a daily fine of $200 until payment is completed. Wyss also asked the court to imprison Long if she fails pay in full within 30 days.
Neither Wyss nor his lawyers have publicly denied Long’s abuse charges. Wyss attorney Carolyn Short merely described Long as a “disgruntled employee.”
Long was an employee of his HJW Foundation and his California vineyard. Her attorney alleged a week before the 2013 settlement that the case was about “personal physical injuries and physical sickness she suffered literally at the hands of Mr. Wyss.”

DR. BEN CARSON: THE PEOPLE WILL RISE UP AND REGAIN CONTROL OF GOVERNMENT

GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson joined Breitbart News Sunday on SiriusXM Patriot Channel 125 with host Stephen K. Bannon, Breitbart News’ Executive Chairman, who asked Carson about his numbers and support increasing after the first GOP presidential primary debate last week in Cleveland, Ohio.

A recent NBC poll after the debate noted that Carson is right behind GOP frontrunner Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Also following the debate, the Carson campaign posted on Facebook, “Even more, it’s clear that the people were listening – we gained over 100,000 friends and patriots on Facebook during the debate.”
Bannon asked Carson if he thought the fact that he didn’t get much talking time from Fox News in the beginning of the debate had anything to do with being underestimated by some critics as a top tier candidate.
“The traditional world of political punditry and political experts think that the possibility of someone like me being successful is zero. That’s been their attitude from the very beginning,” Carson answered.
He continued, “They’ve forgotten about the most important thing and that is the people. For decades now, we’ve kind of forgotten about the people. It was Thomas Jefferson who said that in the end just before we turn to another form of government, the people will rise up and will speak and we will regain control of government – they need to read those passages.”
Carson went on to explain why he believes his message is resonating with voters.
“I think one of the things is integrity. People have lost faith in their government, you know, whatever the government says, you pretty much say, well you know, it must be the opposite of that… that’s not what this country was designed to be,” he said. “The government works for the people and not the other way around.”
In order to get the government back to where it should be – working for the people – Carson said, “We have to reestablish the priorities and we must get back to the Constitution.”
“They’re also very concerned about our fiscal ineptitude and I don’t know if very many people other than myself are really talking about the danger that we’re in in terms of the fiscal gap – the amount of money we actually owe and the implications for the future,” he added.
On the topic of the type of questions Fox News asked the candidates, Carson in a previous interview with Breitbart News appeared disappointed the candidates didn’t receive more pressing questions on issues like national security and foreign policy.
“I would have rather seen something a little more serious and directed really more toward the gigantic issues that are going to destroy this nation if we don’t do something about it,” he told Bannon. “I would have liked to have seen a situation where everybody had an opportunity to respond because the electorate must have an opportunity to compare apples to apples.”
Bannon asked Carson about his plan for immigration, which was a topic Carson said he wished he had been asked about during the debate.
“It is a big problem and it’s perfectly solvable by sealing all of the borders… not just the southern border because we have to worry about the jihadists who want to destroy us and are infiltrating our society… it’s not just fences and walls, it’s electronic surveillance and drones,” Carson explained about protecting the borders, adding more personnel could help keep the border safe.
Carson went on to explain what he plans to do once the borders are secured.
“You also have to turn off the spigot that dispenses the goodies. If there were no goodies to come here for, what would be the point of risking going through all of that barrier just to get here for noting – and you have to make the hiring of people who are not here legally a criminal offense,” he explained. “Then, you still have the 11 million people who are here – many of whom don’t know any other place, so where are you going to send them back to?”
He said it is “not practical” to round up and deport all 11 million people.
“What we have to do is provide them an opportunity to become guest workers, provided that they pay their back tax penalty, pay taxes going forward…they’re not eligible for any benefits that citizens of America get – and if they want to become an American citizen, they have to get in the back of the line and they have to go through the same process as anybody else. That’s the way I think you take care of it,” he said, adding this plan wouldn’t collapse the farming and hotel industries among others.
Bannon asked Carson if he thought the influx of illegal immigrants are taking away from American jobs, especially in places like Baltimore where the African American unemployment rate is high.
Carson said it does make it worse, but “if you make people register and become guest workers, you have much more control over that.”
On the topic of being soft spoken and usually a voice of reason among a crowded field of GOP candidates, Carson said, “It was Teddy Roosevelt that said walk softly and carry a big stick… people that believe that just because you’re not jumping all over the place and yelling and screaming, that you don’t have resolve and backbone. You know, they need to read my autobiography and see what kind of resolve and backbone I do have.”
“People, who have to raise the decibel level of what they say, frequently don’t have anything to say,” Carson stated. “When people start actually listening to what I’m saying, I think if they have common sense they will be able to resonate quite effectively with it.”

China Rattles Markets With Yuan Devaluation

A tourist holds 100 yuan bank notes in Beijing, China.
China devalued the yuan by the most in two decades, a move that rippled through global markets as policy makers stepped up efforts to support exporters and boost the role of market pricing in Asia’s largest economy.
The central bank cut its daily reference rate by 1.9 percent, triggering the yuan’s biggest one-day drop since China ended a dual-currency system in January 1994. The People’s Bank of China called the change a one-time adjustment and said its fixing will become more aligned with supply and demand.
China Rattles Markets With Yuan Devaluation - Bloomberg Business
The announcement suggests policy makers are now placing a greater emphasis on efforts to combat the deepest economic slowdown since 1990 and reduce the government’s grip on the financial system. Authorities had been propping up the yuan to deter capital outflows, protect foreign-currency borrowers and make a case for official reserve status at the International Monetary Fund.
“The one-off devaluation of the fix and allowing more market-based determination takes us into a new currency regime,” said Khoon Goh, a Singapore-based strategist at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. “It looks like this is the end of the fixing as we know it.”
The yuan dropped 1.8 percent to close at 6.3231 per dollar in Shanghai. It slid 2.6 percent to 6.3790 in Hong Kong’s offshore trading, the biggest discount to the onshore spot rate since 2011. The central bank allows the Shanghai rate to diverge a maximum 2 percent from its daily fixing, which was set at 6.2298.

Global Impact

China's devaluation jolted global markets, with the currencies of South Korea, Australia and Singapore falling at least 1 percent amid bets other countries will seek weaker exchange rates to keep exports competitive. Shares of Chinese airlines sank on concern dollar debt costs will rise, while commodities retreated amid speculation yuan weakness will erode the buying power of Chinese consumers. U.S. Treasuries gained on growing demand for dollar assets.
Exchange-rate intervention contributed to a $300 billion slide in China's foreign-exchange reserves over the last four quarters. It also made the yuan the best performer in emerging markets, a factor behind last month’s 8.3 percent slide in exports.
The yuan’s real effective exchange rate -- a measure that’s adjusted for inflation and trade with other nations -- climbed 13 percent over the last four quarters and was the highest among 32 major currencies tracked by Bank for International Settlements indexes.

Market Forces

Effective immediately, market-makers who submit prices for the PBOC’s reference rate will have to consider the previous day’s closing spot rate, foreign-exchange demand and supply, as well as changes in major currency rates, the central bank said in a statement. Previous guidelines made no mention of those criteria.
“The new fixing will be quoted based on the previous day’s closing, which is a real market level,” said Becky Liu, a Hong Kong-based senior strategist at Standard Chartered Plc. “The band will become the real band. This is a big step, and bolder than we expected.”
Tuesday’s devaluation was a one-off adjustment and shouldn’t be interpreted as a sign that the yuan will enter a depreciation trend, PBOC chief economist Ma Jun was cited as saying in a Caixin report. The central bank said it will stabilize market expectations and ensure the new reference-rate mechanism will take effect “in an orderly manner.”

Capital Flows

China has to balance the need to boost exports against the risk of capital outflows, Tom Orlik, chief Asia economist at Bloomberg Intelligence, wrote in a note. He estimates that a 1 percent depreciation in the real effective exchange rate boosts export growth by 1 percentage point with a lag of three months. At the same time, a 1 percent drop against the dollar triggers about $40 billion in outflows.
“The risk is that depreciation triggers capital flight, dealing a blow to the stability of China’s financial system,” Orlik said. China’s leaders may be calculating that they can manage those risks with their $3.69 trillion of foreign currency reserves, he said.
A tourist holds 100 yuan bank notes in Beijing, China.
The PBOC said Tuesday that a strong yuan puts pressure on exports and cited a high effective exchange rate as a factor behind the devaluation. July’s export slump was deeper than economists predicted, while the nation’s index of producer prices declined 5.4 percent, the most since 2009.

[VIDEO] MSNBC Tries to Blame ‘Locals,’ Not EPA, for River Pollution

On MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts Monday afternoon, environmental reporter Tony Dokoupil described the Environmental Protection Agency causing three million gallons of toxic waste to spill into a Colorado river as “good intentions leading to a bad outcome.” He explained: “This mine has been leaking sludge for a long time and EPA was on the scene in hopes of cleaning it up.” 

Moments later, Dokoupil seemed to suggest local citizens were really the ones to blame for the massive pollution:
...this is one mine, but in fact, there are dozens and maybe even hundreds of them in the area. And the EPA has been saying, “We want to make this a Superfund site.” Which means they want to dedicate a special amount of money to clean this really super toxic thing up. They haven’t had the political support to get that done because locals, believe it or not, want more mining in the area, they want more development.
Dokoupil lectured: “After this, I think they may revisit the conversation.” Roberts replied: “May be a little conflicted.”
Here is a transcript of the August 10 exchange:
2:52 PM ET
THOMAS ROBERTS: We want to show you what's happened in Colorado. A discolored sludge that is traveling down the Animas River in the mountain states of Colorado, also to New Mexico as well. And as you can see, it started in the southwestern Colorado gold mine and has now reached New Mexico. There are even fears it could spread to the Grand Canyon. About three million gallons of waste water began spilling on Wednesday, when a cleanup crew breached a dam. The crew was being supervised by the EPA. Which is amazing when you think about it.
Tony Dokoupil’s a reporter for MSNBC and the host of Greenhouse on Shift by MSNBC. So Tony, when people hear that, that this was being observed by the EPA, how could this happen?
TONY DOKOUPIL: Well, it's good intentions leading to a bad outcome. This mine has been leaking sludge for a long time and EPA was on the scene in hopes of cleaning it up. But what they inadvertently did was knock the dam loose and the whole thing came down the river. So they thought it was one million gallons, it turned out to be three million gallons. And the stuff is heavy metal, it’s arsenic, it’s lead, it’s cadmium, at 300 to 3,000 times the normal level. And they're still in a containment phase of this. They don't know what the cleanup’s going to be because they're still trying to cap it again.
    
(...)

DOKOUPIL: The big question now is, you know, how did this happen and how do we avoid having it happen again?
ROBERTS: In the future.
DOKOUPIL: Because, you know, this is one mine, but in fact, there are dozens and maybe even hundreds of them in the area. And the EPA has been saying, “We want to make this a Superfund site.” Which means they want to dedicate a special amount of money to clean this really super toxic thing up. They haven’t had the political support to get that done because locals, believe it or not, want more mining in the area, they want more development. After this, I think they may revisit the conversation.                                 
ROBERTS: May be a little conflicted.
DOKOUPIL: Yeah.

'They're not going to get away with this': Anger mounts at EPA over mining spill

Anger was mounting Monday at the federal Environmental Protection Agency over the massive spill of millions of gallons of toxic sludge from a Colorado gold mine that has already fouled three major waterways and may be three times bigger than originally reported.
An 80-mile length of mustard-colored water -- laden with arsenic, lead, copper, aluminum and cadmium -- is working its way south toward New Mexico and Utah, following Wednesday's accidental release from the Gold King Mine, near Durango, when an EPA cleanup crew destabilized a dam of loose rock lodged in the mine. The crew was supposed to pump out and decontaminate the sludge, but instead released it into tiny Cement Creek. From there, it flowed into the Animas River and made its way into larger tributaries, including the San Juan and Colorado rivers.
“They are not going to get away with this.”
- Russell Begaye, president of the Navajo Nation
"They are not going to get away with this," said Russell Begaye, president of theNavajo Nation, which intends to sue the EPA.
Visible from the air, the toxic slick prompted EPA Region 8 administrator Shaun McGrath to acknowledge the possibility of long-term damage from toxic metals.
"Sediment does settle," McGrath said. "It settles down to the bottom of the river bed."
McGrath said future runoff from storms will kick that toxic sediment back into the water, which means there will need to be long-term monitoring.
The toxic waste passed through Colorado's San Juan County on Saturday, heading west. People living along the Animas and San Juan rivers were advised to have their water tested before using it for cooking, drinking or bathing. That was expected to cause major problems for farmers and ranchers, who require large quantities of water from the river for their livelihoods.
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez inspected the damage in Farmington over the weekend and came away stunned.
"The magnitude of it, you can’t even describe it," she said. "It’s like when I flew over the fires, your mind sees something it’s not ready or adjusted to see."
The EPA and the New Mexico Environment Department plan to test private wells near the Animas to identify metals of concern from the spill. Tests on public drinking water systems are handled by the state environment department, the agencies said.
Begaye said Saturday at a community meeting in Shiprock, N.M., that he intends to take legal action against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the massive release of mine waste into the Animas River near Silverton, Colorado.
"The EPA was right in the middle of the disaster and we intend to make sure the Navajo Nation recovers every dollar it spends cleaning up this mess and every dollar it loses as a result of injuries to our precious Navajo natural resources," Begaye said. "I have instructed Navajo Nation Department of Justice to take immediate action against the EPA to the fullest extent of the law to protect Navajo families and resources."
Begaye said the plume of sludge has made its way into the San Juan River and is wending through the Navajo Nation, the nation's largest Indian reservation. It is expected to reach the heavily used Lake Powell by Wednesday.
David Ostrander, an EPA spokesman, said last week the agency is taking responsibility for the incident.
"We typically respond to emergencies, we don't cause them, but this is just something that happens when we are dealing with mines sometimes," Ostander said.
The infiltration of toxic material is a haunting memory for the Navajos who are still reeling and experiencing the adverse health effects of a uranium waste spill into a river outside of Gallup, N.M., some 36 years ago. On July 16, 1979, a dam failed in a uranium waste pond spilling 1,100 tons of solid radioactive mill waste and approximately 93 million U.S. gallons of acidic and radioactive tailings solution into a nearby river tributary.
There have been claims the amount of radiation released in the Churchrock incident exceeded Three Mile Island.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION SPARKING BUZZ, BUT ODDS STILL LONG

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- With Republicans controlling more than half the state legislatures across the country, some want to use that power to push for a federal spending limit through a mechanism unused since George Washington's day.

Their plan: Persuade enough states to call a national constitutional convention so that a federal balanced budget amendment can be added to the Constitution.

It would be a historic move. The United States has not held a constitutional convention since Washington himself led the original proceedings in Philadelphia in 1787.

"Everywhere I'd go at town hall meetings, people would say, `What are we going to do? There's no hope. How do we fix our country?' And the fact is, this gives great hope," said former U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, an outspoken budget hawk and longtime supporter of a federal balanced budget amendment.

There also are risks if the movement succeeds. A convention could expand to take on myriad issues beyond the federal budget, including campaign finance reform and other changes sought by Democrats.

Calling such an assembly would require approval from 34 states. The GOP now controls both legislative chambers in 30.

Convention proposals were introduced or discussed in about three dozen legislatures this year and approved by three of them. Over the past four decades, 27 states have endorsed the idea at one time or another.

"There's definitely people who are very serious about it," said Michael Leachman, director of state fiscal research at the Washington-based nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "We're seeing these resolutions get debated in state legislatures around a decent portion of the country."

Still, successfully calling a constitutional convention is a longshot.

Unlike other parts of the conservative agenda that have sailed through GOP statehouses, the convention debate is complicated because it involves three separate proposals that have overlapping - but not identical - goals. And even some leading Republicans consider a possible convention too unpredictable to support.

Backers of the idea hope the presidential race will stir more interest. Five of the Republican candidates have spoken favorably about it.

GOP hopefuls Bobby Jindal, Mike Huckabee and John Kasich all have recently endorsed convening a constitutional convention. Rand Paul has said he "wouldn't have a problem" with the states calling one under Article V. Ted Cruz said via Twitter in 2013 that "the possibility grows more and more" for a constitutional convention.

"It's becoming a presidential issue," said Mark Meckler, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots. "Candidates are being asked about it."

Every state except Vermont has a legal requirement for a balanced budget, but Congress does not.
Under Article V of the Constitution, adding an amendment can be done via a two-thirds vote of Congress and then ratification by three-fourths of states, or 38. That's the way all the current constitutional amendments came about, but few could imagine Congress passing a balanced budget amendment.

That leaves a second option: calling a constitutional convention. Two-thirds of the states, or 34, would have to request a national assembly to draft amendments. Any amendments would subsequently have to be ratified by at least 38 states to go into effect.

Three different proposals seeking a constitutional convention have been circulating in statehouses.
The one discussed most often this year was the "Convention of States" plan supported by Coburn and Meckler. It seeks an assembly with an agenda that would include the balanced budget amendment, term limits for offices that include the U.S. Supreme Court and broad caps on congressional taxation authority.
Alabama this year became the fourth state to approve it, and it was discussed in at least 35 legislatures. But the risk that Democratic priorities also could be considered during a constitutional convention was too scary for some, including in Texas, where the proposal died in the state Senate this session after passing the House.

"I was surprised at how strong the fear of a runaway convention was," said state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, a Houston Republican who sponsored the proposal.

A more limited effort, named the Compact for America, is backed by the American Legislative Exchange Council, which provides model legislation for conservative lawmakers. It includes only the balanced budget amendment, which, at least theoretically, could discourage amendments on other topics. So far, it has been passed in Alaska, Georgia, North Dakota and Mississippi.

The third initiative is the oldest and closest to its 34-state goal, but also is the most unpredictable. In May, North Dakota became the 27th approving state. But that group also includes Democratic-leaning states that would like to overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision from 2010, which allows corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts during political campaigns.

Also, some states approved the initiative decades ago, when their political composition was much different. That means some of them could rescind their approval if the initiative draws closer to the 34-state threshold.

"There's too many unknowns," said Pat Carlson of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum. "There are people who are far to the left and they are waiting for this. Once the convention is convened, there will be no control over it."

But even if none of the proposals ultimately succeeds, Coburn said, they could scare Congress into action.

"Whether it's the Convention of States, or the compact or the balanced budget amendment, when they get close, Congress is going to be looking over its shoulder," he said. "They'll say, `We'd better get this done or we're going to lose some of our power.'"

Via: AP

Continue Reading...

Poll: Obama wouldn't win third term

New Poll Finds Obama Would Get Crushed If He Ran For Third Term…

Poll: Obama wouldn't win third term | TheHill
In a Monmouth University poll released Monday morning, President Obama’s claim that he could win a third White House term if he were to run in 2016 is put to the test — and fails.
"Under our Constitution, I cannot run again,”Obama told members of the African Union during a recent trip to Ethiopia, adding, “I think if I ran, I could win.”
According to the Monmouth poll, Obama should be glad he can’t run again.
Sixty-eight percent of respondents said they would vote for someone else, while only 26 percent said they would be willing to give the president four more years.
Though an understandably low number of Republicans would cast their vote for a third Obama term (5 percent), he polls at just 23 percent with independents. Even Democrats aren’t so sure they’d want Obama back in the Oval Office: 43 percent would vote for another candidate.
Meanwhile, Obama’s job approval rating appears to be holding steady with Democrats — 79 percent versus 80 percent in Monmouth’s July poll.
But his disapproval ratings are up with both Republicans (85 percent versus 80 percent) and independents (52 percent versus 48 percent). 

Popular Posts