Conservative Happenings

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

DONALD TRUMP TAKES BIG DROP IN LATEST NATIONAL POLL, FIORINA SURGE IS FOR REAL

Rasmussen has come out with a new national poll that shows The Donald, while keeping the lead, dropping almost 10 points down to 17% among likely Republican voters. The Fiorina surge appears to be for real as she has jumped from nearly nothing to 9%, tied with Walker for 3rd who took a 5 point tumble. Rubio gained 5 points to put him in 2nd place with Jeb.

Cruz didn’t gain or lose, but is now behind Fiorina:

Here’s the info about the poll:

The national telephone survey of 651 Likely Republican Primary Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports on August 9-10, 2015. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Via: The Right Scoop

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Tax issue dogs Democrat Melissa Gilbert in new bid for Congress - owes IRS $360,000

Howell — Actress Melissa Gilbert, the "Little House on the Prairie" star whose move to Howell two years ago brought a dash of Hollywood glamour to Livingston County, is more than a half pint short on her federal taxes.

The Internal Revenue Service recently accused her of failing to pay more than $360,000 in federal income taxes, a debt that is emerging one week after Gilbert announced she and her family are moving out of their rented home near downtown Howell.

Gilbert, 51, blamed the tax debt on a stalled acting career, the economy and divorce.

"Like so many people across the nation, the recession hit me hard," Gilbert said in a statement to The Detroit News. "That, plus a divorce and a dearth of acting opportunities the last few years, created a perfect storm of financial difficulty for me."

Gilbert, along with husband and fellow actor Timothy Busfield and two younger boys, are moving into a log house in an unspecified part of Livingston County, or as she wrote in a tweet last week "our own Little House in the Big Woods."

Her husband said the move from Howell is unrelated to the tax debt.

"(The debt) has more to do with the housing crash and divorce in the past," Busfield told The News. "It's a product of what happened with the economy. It's unfortunate and it's been happening a lot. It's not a big deal."

Gilbert said she has negotiated a payment plan with the IRS.

"I've set up an installment plan to fully pay off my debt and will continue to work as hard as I can to erase this debt and dig myself out of this hole," she said. "I am absolutely positive that I can do it."

Gilbert and East Lansing native Busfield — known for television roles in "thirtysomething" and "West Wing" and in the films "Revenge of the Nerds" and "Field of Dreams" — moved to Michigan about three months after they were married in April 2013.

Gilbert has a history of tax problems that followed her from California to Michigan. The state of California has filed $112,527 worth of tax liens against her since 2013.

A tax lien gives the government a legal claim to all of Gilbert's property, everything from vehicles to homes and income.

The IRS filed a $360,551 tax lien against Gilbert on Feb. 3. She owes federal income taxes from 2011, 2012 and 2013, according to the lien, which is filed with the Livingston County Register of Deeds.

According to the IRS, Gilbert owes $219,989 in income taxes from 2011. She owes $99,405 from 2012 — the year she appeared on "Dancing With the Stars" — and $41,157 in taxes from 2013, according to the tax lien.

Gilbert went through a period of change during the three years covered by the tax lien. She filed for divorce from Bruce Boxleitner in 2011 and competed on "Dancing With the Stars" the next year.

Since she and Busfield arrived in Michigan, they have rented a three-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot Victorian home built in 1890 and located two blocks from downtown Howell.

"Oh, my God, they're great," landlord and property owner Brenda Korth said. "It's been fine. It's been fun."

Korth rented the home to Gilbert, thinking the Hollywood couple would stay for one year.

"It turned into two years and that was fine but I'm really ready to move home," the General Motors environmental engineer told The News.

"If they've been having financial problems, that's not known to me," she added. "The rent's always been paid on time. They've been great tenants."

Gilbert and her husband are kind, she said, and have been welcomed by people in Howell.

"I'm so glad they're in town; everybody has been excited about it," Korth said.

Gilbert did not explain what prompted the pending move out of Howell.

"We are moving but we are not leaving," Gilbert tweeted Friday in response to a well-wisher. "We will be around. We love Howell. We love Livingston Co."

While in Michigan, Gilbert has written a cookbook called "My Prairie Cookbook," inspired by the voracious but picky eating habits of her sons. She has done at least one book signing in Livingston County.

The couple also has continued to pursue acting and directing careers. The couple guest starred on a late April episode of the NBC series "The Night Shift" that Busfield also directed.

In January, Gilbert participated in a charity fundraiser in Howell for Yatooma's Foundation For the Kids, a charity that raises money for children who have lost a parent.

"We're thrilled she's here," Bloomfield Hills lawyer Norman Yatooma said. "She's every bit the class act in person that her fans have come to love from the comfort of their couches."

rsnell@detroitnews.com

Via: The Detroit News

How is Government Spending Hidden Tax Revenue?

Especially in California, the word “taxpayer” is frequently preceded by the word “beleaguered.” Given our large tax burden and the tragic level of government waste, perhaps there should be a grammatical rule that these two words must always be combined.

While some California taxes are hidden, most are unfortunately and painfully obvious. But the same is not true for the level of wasteful spending by government. The unstated rule of politicians and bureaucrats is that average taxpayers must be kept in the dark about how their money is being spent.

Ask the average man or woman in the street what they think the 87 cent tax on a pack of cigarettes goes to and they will likely respond that it goes for anti-smoking programs – like those scary TV spots – and for health care.

Because of the detrimental impact of smoking on health, most Californians will agree that there seems a logical connection between what is being taxed and how the money is being spent. However, most of the tobacco tax does not go to these programs. Of the 87 cents, 50 cents goes to children’s programs administered by First Five California, a creation of Proposition 10. Now children’s programs may be a great idea, but many ask why these are not funded openly out of the state general fund instead of having the costs hidden inside the tobacco tax.

Ironically, we have seen First Five California objecting to additional taxes on tobacco products because the number of smokers might decrease and thus reduce revenue to their programs. So what we have, in effect, is an agency that is tacitly supporting what they concede is an unhealthful habit, simply because it wants the revenue.

Then there are parking tickets that in cities like Los Angeles can cost more than $60. While parking fines are imposed, in theory, to make spaces available to all motorists, the real motivation is to satisfy the appetite for revenue. Because Los Angeles has some of the highest paid workers in a state that the federal government says has the highest paid government employees in all 50 states, it desperately needs the revenue to support payroll and benefits. This may help explain some of the city’s confusing signage that makes it difficult for drivers to tell when they can park and where.

More confusion that benefits the public sector, and puts taxpayers at a disadvantage.

But state and local governments do not have a monopoly on confusing or hidden taxes, charges and other revenue enhancements.

Enter Congress and the highway bill. The version being considered by the Senate would place a new tax burden on home buyers by increasing the fees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac charge for their loans. “Not only will it increase the cost of homeownership and make it more difficult for a buyer to purchase a home, it will hinder future efforts at mortgage finance reform,” said California Association of Realtors President Chris Kutzkey.

As bad as that sounds, it is even worse. It is another charge whose purpose is intentionally hidden from the casual observer and where there is a total disconnect between what is being taxed, home loans, and on what the money will be spent, highways. (In California this would be defined as a “special tax” under Proposition 13 and require a two-thirds vote.)

According to the Washington D.C.-based Tax Foundation, America spends more on taxes than on food, clothing and housing combined. In California, the average taxpayer works for government until May 3rd, before they start working for themselves.

It is not too much to demand from politicians that they make clear what taxpayers are being charged and on what the funds are being spent. Maybe then we can remove the modifier “beleaguered” from the word “taxpayer.”

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association — California’s largest grass-rootstaxpayerorganization dedicated to the protection of Proposition 13 and the advancement of taxpayers’ rights.

Originally published at HJTA.org

Via: California Political Review

Frack Now, Pay Later: A New Era in U.S. Oil?

With oil prices now dipping close to six-year lows, the energy sector is getting thumped across the board.

The double-dip will likely cause fresh cuts to spending, drilling, and staff. Last week, Baker Hughes reported a surprise uptick in the number of rigs drilling in North America, which jumped by 10 to 884 for the week ending on August 7.

Oil prices fell even further on the news, with both WTI and Brent dropping by 2 percent to close out the week. Even though the additional rigs are a rounding error when compared to the 1,000 rigs that disappeared over the past year, the markets took the data as evidence that the supply overhang may not balance out in the near term, as new drilling could be taking place before oil production has appreciably declined.

Over the course of the last year, the companies that arguably suffered the worst were those whose business relies on drilling activity. Oilfield service companies offer rigs, drilling completions, equipment, and other services that actually allow drilling to happen. When drilling slows down, their business dries up. They bear the brunt of a market downturn.

The unprecedented crash in the rig count North America, notwithstanding minor gains in recent weeks, inflicted damage most acutely on these oilfield service companies. With exploration facing a prolonged period of lower activity, a few service companies have come up with a novel, if desperate, approach to keep business alive.

Schlumberger and Halliburton, the two largest service firms, have offered operators the option to “frack now and pay later.” According to Reuters, the new offer amounts to the service firms acting as lenders to oil companies.

Halliburton saw its profit for the second quarter fall by more than a half billion dollars from a year before, and backed by $500 million in cash from asset manager BlackRock, Halliburton is looking “at additional ways of doing business with our customers,” Halliburton’s CEO Dave Lesar said recently.

The “frack now pay later” model that Reuters described consists of companies like Halliburton or Schlumberger covering the cost of drilling a well in exchange for a portion of the well’s production. That is not always a preferred option for operators, who may not want to give up a share in the project and would simply opt for a conventional service contract. However, for companies that are running low on cash and may start to see their credit lines shrink, paying later for drilling today sounds like a pretty good option.

“It's just a reflection of do they want to capture more of the value themselves or would they like to outsource all the risk and potentially much more of the upside to us?” Schlumberger Chief Executive Paal Kibsgaard said when reporting second quarter results in July.

Interestingly, much of the focus is on “refracking,” in which wells that have already been fracked once are simply fracked again. Refracking old wells is less expensive than fracking new ones, and while the volume of recoverable oil varies, some of the best refracking examples produce an impressive return.

The reason that the “frack now, pay later” model may be concentrated on refracking operations is because the technique is not well known throughout the industry and is still relatively new. That has wary operators unwilling to shell out the capital for something they are unsure of, especially now that they are safeguarding a shrinking pile of cash.

But Schlumberger is confident in the approach. While reporting first quarter earnings on a conference call with investors, Schlumberger’s CEO Paal Kibsgaard extolled the market potential for refracking. “I think you're talking billions, in terms of revenue opportunities, over an extended period of time,” he said. “And I think the key here is that we're so confident in our ability to identify the right candidates and execute the refracturing work that we're prepared to take significant risks, in terms of how we go about doing this work. In many cases, if we can select the candidates, prepare to foot the entire bill for the refracturing work and then get paid back in production.”

With “lower for longer” suddenly becoming the new prevailing mantra in the oil markets, the oilfield service giants may have to increasingly cover the costs of fracking and refracking as operators scale back.

The original article may be found at http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Frack-Now-Pay-Later-A-New-Era-In-US-Oil.html

Via: Real Clear Energy

ViaL:

[VIDEO] Baltimore Reaches 200 Murders So Far This Year…

Black Lives Matter and their white social justice warrior allies unavailable for comment.

Timothy Smith was shaving the gray stubble from his face Monday afternoon when he heard the gunshots. He dropped the razor and sprinted downstairs and out the door.

The 48-year-old said he’d been inside his Northeast Baltimore home only a moment to get ready for work, temporarily leaving three of his grandchildren riding their bikes in the street outside. His worst fears were assuaged — the pre-teens were OK — but in an alley nearby lay a man, shot to death in Baltimore’s 200th homicide this year.

The city didn’t hit 200 homicides last year until Dec. 7, when police said 19-year-old Tymaine Sellman was gunned down in the 500 block of Edgewood St.

A wave of killings the likes of which hasn’t been seen in four decades followed the unrest over the death of Freddie Gray, with more than 40 people killed in both May and July. So far in August, about one person has been killed per day in Baltimore. Police have partially blamed the influx of prescription drugs stolen from looted pharmacies for the violence.

Via Baltimore Sun:

Taxpayer money being used to teach 'transgendered' men to talk like girls

The University of Connecticut, which received state and federal funding, has a program to teach men who want to be pretend to be women how to talk like girls (and vice-versa, of course -- no discrimination there!).

You would think this would be something easily accomplished without classes, but I guess like thespians, they want to learn from professionals!

Sylvia Wojcik was making reservations for a beach getaway in Maine when the receptionist on the other end of the line called her "ma'am." Nothing could have delighted her more.

Wojcik, 66, is transitioning from male to female. For her, that proof that she sounded like a woman was an important moment.

Wojcik has undergone several years of voice therapy, the past 18 months at the University of Connecticut's Speech and Hearing Clinic, one of a growing number of clinics with programs to teach transgender people how to sound more like the sex they identify with.

They learn not only how to change the pitch of their voice, but also its resonance (males speak more from chest, women from the head) and delivery (men tend to be more staccato, women more fluid).

It involves a lot of voice exercises - humming to find an ideal pitch, naming five words that start with the letter "T."

Five words that start with T? That sounds like the Damon Wayans "Men on Films" gay parody skit from "In Living Color!"

Roberts, a freelance copywriter, has been attending sessions since February. She expects to participate for at least another semester.

As a man, Roberts was a radio personality, voiceover artist and actor. She is now returning to the stage as an actress and doesn't want her voice to impede her winning roles.

A voice actor who will never be seen, who can still easily use a man's voice in his work, still wants his voice changed so he sounds like a girl? No irony there!

It's ridiculous that taxpayer supported foundations are being used to perpetuate people's delusions that they can change gender. This article from the Associated Press is especially Onion-like reporting, given that men can easily raise their voices and women can lower them. The kind of training they are looking for is at the level of spies trying to make their foreign accents sound believable, which makes the entire endeavor even more preposterous.

On the other hand:

The clinic also has served some people who are not transgender, such as men who wish to sound less effeminate -- a topic explored in the new documentary "Do I Sound Gay?"

This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.

Thomas Lifson adds:

I am baffled. Here, the feminists have been telling us for decades that gender stereotypes are invidious relics of the past. But now, the cutting edge of the movement, the transgendered crowd, is striving to emulate those same gender stereotypes.

Via: American Thinker

U.S. House and Senate Each Said They Had Only 45 Employees--Then Signed Up 12,359 for Insurance on Obamacare 'Small-Business' Exchange

(CNSNews.com) – Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives certified that they had only 45 employees each in order to sign up for the District of Columbia’s Small Business Exchange. But 12,359 - or 86 percent of the exchange's enrollees - are members of Congress, congressional staff members, and their spouses and dependents, according to an appeal filed with the D.C. Court of Appeals by Judicial Watch.

The public interest law firm announced Monday that it is appealing the February dismissal of its lawsuit challenging congressional participation in the Obamacare exchange even though the D.C. Exchange Act limits enrollment to small companies with 50 or fewer employees.

“Congress obviously has far more than 50 employees,” Judicial Watch attorney Michael Bekesha pointed out in his opening brief. “It has thousands of employees.”

Congress enrolled in the small business exchange when its previous coverage under the Federal Employee Health Benefits plan was terminated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and congressional employees stood to lose thousands of dollars in “employer contributions” if they enrolled in the District’s individual exchange.

According to documents obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives both certified that they “employ 50 or fewer full time equivalent employees.”

In October 2013, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued a final rule that provides an “employer contribution” covering about three-quarters of the premiums of congressional employees enrolled in the small business exchange starting Jan. 1, 2014.

The OPM rule “allowed at least 12,359 congressional employees and their spouses and dependents to obtain health insurance through the Small Business Exchange…These 12,359 participants represent an astonishing 86% of the Small Business Exchange’s total enrollment,” the appeal states.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit last October on behalf of Kirby Vining, a D.C. resident since 1986, who objected to the expenditure of municipal funds to insure congressional employees in an exchange that was established specifically for small employers in the District.

“Congress authored the law [ACA], and is going to rather questionable lengths to avoid compliance with the law it drafted,” Vining said.

D.C. resident Kirby Vining. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)

Although the D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority conceded that D.C. law limits participation in the exchange to small employers, it argued in court that “the local statute must yield to the extent the federal statute or regulation applies.”

In its motion to dismiss the case, the authority also stated that the exchange “has been funded exclusively by federal grants awarded to the District to establish its Exchange, and more recently, an assessment imposed on health carriers doing business in the District.”

In dismissing the lawsuit, D.C. Superior Court Judge Herbert Dixon ruled that Vining had no standing to challenge the OPM rule because he “has not demonstrated a reasonable inference that municipal taxpayer funds have been appropriated to defendant exchange authority to establish a cognizable injury to maintain standing to bring his underlying complaint.”

However, in a budget report submitted to Congress, the Exchange Authority’s actual budget for Fiscal Year 2013 ($10.9 million) and FY 2014 ($66.1 million) was identified as " ‘municipal monies’ as originating from the District’s General Fund. No monies are identified as Federal Funds, Private Revenue, or Intra-District Funds,” according to the appeal.

“In Fiscal Year 2015, the Exchange Authority’s budget was reclassified from the General Fund to a newly created fund, separate and distinct from ‘Federal Funds’,” it continued.

Dixon also ruled that the OPM rule preempts the D.C. Exchange Act, noting that “allowing members of Congress and their staff to participate in the District’s small business health options program is authorized by federal regulations.”

But Judicial Watch argues in its appeal that the D.C. law cannot be preempted because it is “completely consistent and entirely compatible” with the federal law and in fact its “sole purpose is to implement various provisions of ACA.”

“In reality, the court ruled that a determination by a federal bureaucrat – in this instance, the director of OPM – trumps the 50-employee limit of the Exchange Act, at least with respect to Congress,” the group’s appeal brief stated. “No lawful regulation – much less a regulation that purports to delegate such authority to an agency head – can do that, and the Court cites no legal authority whatsoever for their astonishing conclusion that it can.”

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said that allowing Congress to enroll in an exchange meant for small businesses is both “unlawful and unethical.”

“It is an abuse of District taxpayers to use D.C. funds to subsidize illegal health insurance for Congress,” Fitton said in a statement. “It is unlawful and unethical for District officials to use local dollars to participate in Congress’s Obamacare fraud.

“The highest court in the District of Columbia must affirm the right of District taxpayers to protect their monies from being misappropriated by corrupt District officials.”

Via: CNS News

[VIDEO] Why Chris Christie Wants to Defund Sanctuary Cities

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie says the next president of the United States should make sure federal dollars don’t flow to sanctuary cities.

“Withdraw federal funding from cities that don’t or are unwilling to enforce the federal immigration law,” Christie told The Daily Signal at the RedState Gathering this weekend in Atlanta.

The issue of sanctuary cities came up at last week’s GOP debate. Specifically, whether candidates would support mandatory five-year prison sentences for illegals that are deported and then come back to the United States.

There’s also been plenty of discussion about the need to defund sanctuary cities. Christie believes stopping the flow of money is important but he also raises the larger issue of actual law enforcement, something some sanctuary city officials clearly don’t get.

“They need to understand our laws that our federal government makes are not optional. They’re not based upon your personal preference. They are about the laws made by the people we elect to make them.”

Christie made clear that he’d love to get rid of certain laws he doesn’t like but can’t. As for President Obama, he thinks he’s playing games.

“I don’t get to pick and choose. This president picks and chooses and we should not permit that to happen.”

Via: Daily Signal

State by State, Democratic Party Is Erasing Ties to Jefferson and Jackson

WASHINGTON — For nearly a century, Democrats have honored two men as the founders of their party: Thomas Jefferson, for his visionary expression of the concept of equality, and Andrew Jackson, for his populist spirit and elevation of the common man.

Political candidates and activists across the country have flocked to annual Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners, where speeches are given, money is raised, and the party celebrates its past and its future.

But these time-honored rituals are colliding with a modern Democratic Party more energized by a desire for racial and gender inclusion than reverence for history. And state by state, Democratic activists are removing the names of Jefferson and Jackson from party gatherings, saying the two men no longer represent what it means to be a Democrat.

The Iowa Democratic Party became the latest to do so last weekend, joining Georgia, Connecticut and Missouri. At least five other states are considering the same change since the massacre in June at an African-American church in Charleston, S.C.

“The vote today confirms that our party believes it is important to change the name of the dinner to align with the values of our modern-day Democratic Party: inclusiveness, diversity and equality,” said Andy McGuire, the Iowa Democratic chairwoman.

For all the attention this summer to the fight over the Confederate battle flag, the less noticed moves by Democratic parties to remove Jefferson and Jackson from their official identity underscore one of the most consequential trends of American politics: Democrats’ shift from a union-powered party organized primarily around economic solidarity to one shaped by racial and sexual identity.

The parallel forces of class and identity, at times in tension and at times in unison, have defined the Democratic Party in recent decades. But the country’s changing demographics, the diverse nature of President Obama’s coalition and the animating energy of the Black Lives Matter movement have also thrust fundamental questions about race, gender and economic equality to the center of the Democratic presidential race.

The shift can be seen as Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a Democratic socialist whose campaign is shaped by class-oriented progressive politics, has been confronted by black activists demanding answers for how he would address inequities they believe are derived entirely from racial discrimination. Mr. Sanders, who is 73, is trying to adjust to a changing party, sometimes uncomfortably. He is now speaking more explicitly about policing, has hired an African-American spokeswoman and has added more diversity on stage at his heavily attended rallies.

The move to erase Jefferson and Jackson is not being welcomed by all Democrats. Some of them fear the party loses what has long been its unifying philosophy by removing the names of founders, whose virtues and flaws illuminated the way forward. And they worry that as the labor movement declines, cultural liberalism is beginning to eclipse a fundamental message of economic equality that brought about some of the party’s most important achievements, from the New Deal to Medicaid.

Via: New York Times

Hillary Clinton Cracks Down On For-Profit Colleges After Cashing In

Hillary Rodham Clinton's plan would direct law enforcement agencies to crack down on for-profit colleges that engage in deceptive marketing, fraud, and other illegal practices. (Associated Press)

When Hillary Rodham Clinton, the 2016 presidential candidate, unveiled her college affordability plan on Monday, she sounded every bit the critic of for-profit universities. But Mrs. Clinton, the spouse, benefited to the tune of millions of dollars from that same industry in a business relationship her husband enjoyed as recently as this spring.

Former President Bill Clinton collected more than $16 million from 2010 to 2014 as honorary chancellor of Laureate Education, a for-profit company that runs 80 education institutions around the globe, according to recently released tax returns. Four of its six U.S. colleges were flagged on the Education Department’s list of schools whose access to federal financial aid was being monitored out of concern over financial irresponsibility.

The Clinton Foundation also lists Laureate International Universities as one of its donors, giving $1 million to $5 million during the first half of this year. Mr. Clinton praised the company when he stepped down in late April, less than two weeks after his wife officially entered the presidential race.

Over the years, Mrs. Clinton collected political donations from Laureate’s CEO, Douglas Becker, including a $2,000 donation in 2005 to her Senate re-election campaign and $2,300 in 2007 to her first presidential campaign, Federal Election Commission records show.

On Monday, Mrs. Clinton said if elected president she would get tough on federal aid that flows to those kinds of for-profit institutions, strengthening the “gainful employer rules” that requires schools to adequately prepare students for the workforce.

“There are students who take out loans to pay for an expensive degree from a for-profit institution — only to find little support once they actually enroll, or they graduate and discover that, when it comes to finding a job, their degree isn’t worth what they thought,” Mrs. Clintonsaid in a message posted on Medium.com.

Her plan also would direct law enforcement agencies to crack down on for-profits that engage in deceptive marketing, fraud, and other illegal practices.

The for-profit crackdown is part of a much broader $350 billion proposal to make college more affordable by having the federal government pick up costs, chiefly by offering taxpayer money to states to keep their public schools’ costs lower.

She proposed $175 billion over a decade in grants to states that keep costs low enough that students wouldn’t need to go into debt to cover tuition at four-year public schools and private nonprofit colleges. States and colleges would be responsible for holding down costs as part of the deal.

More funding would go to 25 million borrowers, helping them refinance their student loans with lower interest rates, and the rest would go to an “innovation fund” to support new models of higher education.

“No family and no student should have to borrow to have to pay tuition at a public college or university,” Mrs. Clinton told reporters. “Everyone who has student debt should be able to refinance it at lower rates. Cost won’t be a barrier, and debt won’t hold you back under my plan.”

Mrs. Clinton plans to pay for her plan by capping the itemized deductions that wealthier families can claim on tax returns.

Via: Washington Times

Herman Cain: Trump, Fiorina, Carson Are All in 'My Pick 6'

Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina, and Ben Carson will still be in the 2016 presidential race months from now, former GOP candidate Herman Cain predicted Tuesday.

"They are proposing bold solutions and they are tapping in to the anger that's on Main Street America," Cain told Fox News' "Fox & Friends." "That's why I believe they are moving up in the polls, so Trump, Fiorina, and Carson are in my 'pick six,' as I call it, who will still be standing."

Such non-politicians can be successful in politics, said Cain, because Americans are looking for leaders, and Trump, a billionaire businessman, Fiorina, a former Hewlett-Packard CEO, and Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, are showing leadership ability.

"Ben Carson may not have run a big company, but he targets and hits the problem right on the head when he's asked a question, based upon how he did in the debate," said Cain. "Carly Fiorina and Donald Trump, they have substantial leadership experience.

"The American people are tired of people who have a great political resume, but they get to Washington and they don't do anything."

But Cain said he doesn't think this cycle would have been a good time for himself to run, even with the wider number of non-politicians seeking office.

"I think I ran when I was supposed to," he told Fox News. "I felt it was the best time for me to run. I got sabotaged by accusations."

While Cain was a front-runner early in the 2012 race, five months into his campaign he was accused of inappropriate behavior and sexual misconduct. Despite repeatedly denying the allegations, Cain dropped out of the presidential race in December 2011.

Once that kind of "media frenzy" starts, Cain said Tuesday, "it's difficult to run a campaign, defend yourself in court and answer all of the frenzy questions.

"That's what they have been trying to do with Donald Trump, but so far he has withstood the attempt to get caught up in a media frenzy."

Via: Newsmax

‘Even-Keeled’ White House Staffer Arrested After Shooting At Boyfriend With His Own Gun

AND WILL NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE IT WAS SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT!!

Screen Shot 2015-08-10 at 9.18.46 PM

An assistant to President Obama who was recently described by a White House official as “even-keeled” has been arrested after she allegedly stole her U.S. Capitol Police officer boyfriend’s service weapon and fired one shot in his direction during a heated argument this weekend.

Police say that Barvetta Singletary, who currently serves as special assistant to the President and House legislative affairs liaison, invited her boyfriend over to her home in Upper Marlboro, Md. on Friday.

According to NBC Washington, charging documents show that after Singletary and her boyfriend had sex, she confronted him about cheating on her.

Singletary asked her boyfriend to go to his vehicle and inside the car asked to search his cell phone. When he refused, Singletary allegedly reached into his bag, grabbing two cell phones and his .40-caliber Glock 23 service weapon.

According to NBC Washington, charging documents show that after Singletary and her boyfriend had sex, she confronted him about cheating on her.

Via: Daily Caller

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Popular Posts