Thursday, August 13, 2015
House Committee Calls EPA’s Gina McCarthy Testimony ‘False and Misleading’
Republican members of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology wrote to Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy and called her testimony at a hearing in July “false and misleading.”
On July 9, McCarthy testified to the House Committee on the transparency of the EPA’s regulatory agenda. Members of the committee asked McCarthy about the “secret science” that goes in to justifying EPA regulations because they want to ensure the data is available to the American people.
Rep. Frank Lucas (R., Okla.) asked McCarthy whether the agency had made data that was used to craft the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule public. While McCarthy said that the information was “available,” the Committee maintains that EPA did not provide any scientific or legal justification for the figures Lucas asked for.
“Your statement that the information and data requested in Mr. Lucas’ question was publicly available in the EPA docket was false and misleading,” the committee wrote. “Based on the Corps’ memorandum, it is apparent that the figures outlined in EPA’s final WOTUS rule were completely arbitrary and not based on any science.”
The letter cites three more examples during questioning at this particular hearing where the Committee deemed McCarthy’s statements either false or misleading.
It was at this same hearing that McCarthy said she did not know the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere, information fundamental to EPA’s regulations.
“Providing false or misleading testimony to Congress is a serious matter,” the committee wrote. “Witnesses who purposely give false or misleading testimony during a congressional hearing may be subject to criminal liability.”
“With that in mind, we write to request that you correct the record and to implore you to be truthful with the American public about matters related to EPA’s regulatory agenda going forward.”
Members who wrote and signed the letter to McCarthy include Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), Rep. Frank Lucas (R., Okla.), Rep. Randy Hultgren (R., Ill.), Rep. Bill Posey (R., Fla.), Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R., Okla.), Rep. Randy Weber (R., Texas), Rep. Bill Johnson (R., Ohio), Rep. John Moolenaar (R., Mich.), Rep. Steve Knight (R., Calif.), Rep. Bruce Westerman (R. Ark.), Rep. Gary Palmer (R., Ala.), Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R., Ga.), and Rep. Ralph Lee Abraham (R., La.).
“We will review and respond to the letter,” said Liz Purchia, deputy associate administrator at the EPA.
Editorial: EPA’s double standard
Sure accidents happen — it’s why we call them accidents. But you can bet if some oil company had been responsible for filling a Colorado river with toxic sludge — rather than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — the Obama White House would be all over it. The Justice Department would likely have already launched an investigation and company officials marched into federal court.
But the EPA — which in its zealotry to rid our air of pollutants wants to ride herd over every coal- and oil-fired plant in the nation — took 24 hours just to notify the residents of nearby Durango of their major-league screw up.
An EPA crew assigned to clean up the Gold King mine high in the San Juan mountains of southern Colorado accidentally opened up a passage from an old tunnel in the mine, allowing millions of gallons of yellow toxic sludge to spill into a creek, and from there into the Animas River. As of Monday it had already traveled 100 miles south into New Mexico. And from there who the hell knows because it’s still flowing, heading toward Utah, including Lake Powell — an area along with Durango itself jammed with tourists this time of year.
Local officials are furious because it took the EPA 24 hours to warn anyone of the arsenic and lead-laden stew headed their way. And the earlier estimate of a 1 million gallon spill later measured at least 3 million gallons.
Yes EPA officials have apologized, but then so did those BP officials after the Gulf Coast oil spill — before they were given the boot. And there are a host of questions still not answered by EPA officials — such as why was the EPA using heavy machinery in an area known to be filled with toxins. Why was the community not notified in a timely fashion. And who will compensate businesses along the route.
Remember the latter was a key requirement in the wake of the BP oil spill.
So where do the victims of the EPA’s incompetence go to have their lives and businesses made whole in the wake of this environmental disaster?
Report: Democrats in panic over Hillary Clinton’s criminality
Actually, they are in a near panic over her getting caught as they have been fine with her criminality for a couple of decades. From The Hill, Dems near Clinton panic mode:
Democrats are worried that the furor over Hillary Clinton’s private email server will be prolonged and intensified after her sudden move to hand it to the FBI.The Clinton campaign’s decision to give up the server and a thumb-drive containing back-up copies of emails left Democrats scratching their heads as to why the former secretary of State had resisted turning over the server for months.Coupled with new polls that suggest Clinton is vulnerable, Democrats are nearing full-on panic mode.“I’m not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second,” said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous.…Separately, Media Matters for America — the liberal watchdog group founded by Clinton ally David Brock — sent out a statement under the subject-line “Myths and Facts about Hillary Clinton’s email.” The first fact it listed was that “none of the emails sent to Clinton were labeled as classified or top secret.”
It goes without saying that aging pederast David Brock’s nasty little neo-Nazi propaganda machine is just an arm of the Clinton machine. But I was intrigued as to what possible defense they could offer. These are their points. I’m not providing a link because I don’t link to hate sites.
Rarely does one encounter such a brazen example of lying. Actually not a single fact in this is true.
Fact. At least two documents were imagery from the Talent Keyhole satellite and they were clearly marked.
Fact. Retroactive classification aside (though the Obama administration persecuted NSA whistleblower Tom Drake by retroactively classifying documents), the documents in question were and remain highly classified.
Fact. Actually the experts cited only debunked a comparison IF Hillary unknowingly stored classified information. That is not the case.
Fact. The only kind of referral from an Agency IG to the FBI is a criminal referral. The FBI does not investigate acts which are only administrative glitches. In fact, the initial Justice Department press release called it a “criminal referral” before Hillary’s campaign strong-armed the agency into calling it a “security referral for counterintelligence purposes.”
The problem for the Democrat establishment is getting more interesting by the day. The national mood demands change but their front runners are white, social security eligible, party apparatchiks who haven’t had an original thought in decades. The nation distrusts government and 57% of the nation doesn’t trust Hillary Clinton (I don’t even want to imagine where they found the 43% who do). Other polls find that in swing states EVERY GOP CANDIDATE either lead Hillary or is well with the MOE of the poll. More importantly, the nation is united in its dislike of Clinton:
This profile with a burgeon investigation that dovetails nicely with your main weakness is not what any candidate needs. While I’m stocking up on popcorn, the Democrats find themselves very late in the election cycle with a candidate who isn’t liked, isn’t trusted, and may very well see her inner circle indicted if she isn’t indicted herself. Do they convince her to step aside? Do they encourage more palatable alternatives to get in the race? Do they pull a Torricelli at some later point and replace her with another nominee? The only thing certain is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to see how Clinton stays in the race much less wins the White House…unless the GOP does what it does best…
[VIDEO] NBC Nightly News isn’t even buying the Hillary spin on the e-mail server
You’re telling me the Camp Hillary virtuoso of spin, Jennifer Palmieri, went to the trouble of sending out an op-ed length nonsense-gram to Hillary supporters today and she couldn’t even sway the network news? She may indeed be in trouble.
As Ed wrote earlier, Palmieri’s weak attempt at justifying Hillary’s conduct when it came to State Department e-mail, had many, many lies in it. It also had the tone of a teenager prepping Mom and Dad for a crap report card— “So, guys, you’re gonna hear some things in the near future…but I don’t want you to be alarmed.”
Peter Suderman at Reason ran over the lies in detail. Perhaps now Chris Matthews will understand why Carly Fiorina feels secure saying Hillary Clinton is lying about her e-mails. It’s because pretty much everything she’s said about her e-mail situation has turned out not to be true. She didn’t only use one device. She didn’t turn over everything work-related. She didn’t mostly send e-mails to government employees so they were immediately archived. She didn’t avoid classified information in corresponding over her private e-mail account. The classified information found by IGs in her relinquished e-mails was not classified after the fact but when she sent it. Oh, and there was a subpoena.
I can’t believe something put together by this consummate communications professional wouldn’t have worked like a charm. Here’s Palmieri earlier this year explaining the difference between ’08 Hillary and ’12 Hillary:
“I can’t talk — I wasn’t part of — ’08 was a very different race in terms of, uh — there was like extraordinary interest on the Democratic side and I think it’s hard just to compare the two situations,” Palmieri said. “But she’s talked about this at times. Obviously, she’s written about it in her books. But it’s true that a lot of people just don’t know it about — and I talked to reporters yesterday about this. And they said she does — you think people don’t know it? No, we don’t. We don’t think people know it. And we do think that, uh, she — she’ll talk about it tomorrow. We’ll do more of that. She has been doing it too. And it is, I think it illuminates, if you think that you need this kind of fighter in the White House, it illuminates why. And it’s true that it hasn’t taken, and I think that this is a different campaign in terms of, you know, what the press might focus on with her, and we’ll stay at it.”
And yet, NBC Nightly News declares Hillary Clinton in “damage control” tonight, with Andrea Mitchell reporting the story.
[VIDEO] Coulter: 'Immigrant': The New N-Word by Ann Coulter
After I pointed out on “Fox News” that the dispute between Sen. Rand Paul and Gov. Chris Christie over spying on “Americans” was entirely a problem of immigration, “Fox Insiders” put these two sentences together:
“[Coulter] explained that halting illegal immigration would help solve other key issues such as the economy and national security. ‘Don’t make terrorists citizens through immigration, and we’ll have a lot less of a national security problem,’ Coulter said, pointing to the attacks at the Boston Marathon and in Chattanooga.” (Emphasis added.)
Were those guys illegals? Did Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev swim across the Rio Grande to get to Boston? Did Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez hire coyotes to sneak him across the border so he could shoot four Marines and a sailor in Chattanooga?
No. Our government invited them in.
Some of our other beloved legal immigrants include:
— Anwar al-Awlaki, the man whose death in Afghanistan provoked Rand Paul to stage a 13-hour filibuster in opposition to the use of drones against — I quote — “American citizens”;
— the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan;
— the attempted Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad;
— all those Somali immigrants living in Minnesota, bloc-voting for Al Franken before flying to Syria to fight with ISIS;
— Sirhan Sirhan;
— the 9/11 hijackers;
— the Pakistani terrorist Daood Sayed Gilani, American anchor baby, responsible for four days of bombings in Mumbai in 2008;
— the New York subway bomb plotter, Najibullah Zazi;
— Pakistani terrorist Aafia Siddiqui, who shot a U.S. Army captain in 2010;
— the “local man” arrested this week for trying to organize an army of ISIS fighters in New York and New Jersey, Nader Saadeh — anchor baby “American citizen.”
ALL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR CHILDREN! Why were any of them in this country? What are we getting out of this?
It’s not just the Fox website. Wherever I go on this book tour, I find people injecting “illegal” into the discussion, as if they’re being polite, like saying “Jewish” instead of “Jew.” But all these “homegrown,” “American” terrorists aren’t Americans, at all — except as a result of recent government policy.
This week, Sens. Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz have sent a letter to the Obama administration asking how many “non-citizens, naturalized U.S. citizens and natural-born U.S. citizens have been involved in terrorist-related activity since 1993.” National Review’s headline? “Cruz, Sessions: How Many ‘Homegrown’ Terrorists Were Illegal Immigrants?” (The headline was later changed, after complaints.)
It’s a national neurosis! People simply refuse to see what’s right in front of their faces.
Admittedly, the media hide the evidence, but did anyone read this 2010 New York Times headline, “2 New Jersey Men in Terrorism Case Go Before a Judge,” and think, Oh my gosh! What is America coming to?
The “New Jersey men” were Mohamed Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte. Alessa, born to legal immigrants from Jordan and the Palestinian territories, told his Boy Scout troop, “Osama bin Laden is a hero in my family” and expressed a desire to mutilate homosexuals and subordinate women. (He was the first member of his troop to earn a merit badge in female circumcision.)
Alessa’s co-conspirator, Almonte, is a legal immigrant from the Dominican Republic. (Raising suspicions, he doesn’t play baseball.) He could be heard on a wiretap saying that he wanted U.S. troops to come home “in caskets.”
He also attended an anti-Israel rally with a large sign reading “DEATH TO ALL JUICE” — which he posted to his Facebook page, a social media platform created by a juice. (Naturalization officials must have high-fived one another when they got that guy.)
CNN was so relieved to have a “homegrown” terrorist who wasn’t a Muslim, the network abandoned its own rule book and identified Almonte as the child of “Latino immigrants” — amid fulsome descriptions of him as “an all-American kid” and an “all-American altar boy.”
So the good news is: Not all “American” terrorists are Muslim immigrants. Some are Latino immigrants — who typically become radicalized after coming into contact with one of our prized Muslim immigrants.
In addition to “DEATH TO ALL JUICE” Almonte, there was Bryant Neal Vinas, whose parents were legal immigrants from Argentina and Peru. Vinas fought with al-Qaida in Afghanistan and, in 2008, plotted to bomb New York’s Penn Station.
At least he’s not one of those icky illegal immigrants!
I have a word limit, so I’ve limited today’s discussion of legal immigrants to the terrorists. But I note that the big news this week is about an illegal immigrant, Victor Aureliano Martinez Ramirez, who raped, then murdered 64-year old Marilyn Pharis with a hammer at her home in Santa Maria, California. Has anyone noticed that Martinez Ramirez’s co-conspirator in the rape-torture-murder was legal immigrant Jose Fernando Villagomez?
It’s getting to the point where we’re going to need cattle prods and shock collars to break people of the neurotic compulsion to slip “ILLEGAL” in front of the word “immigrant.” The reality of legal immigration cannot make a dent in the elite’s make-believe world, where legal immigrants are only hot Swedish models, Rupert Murdoch and Sergey Brin.
Instead of Christie and Paul sparring over government policy on search warrants in a post-9/11 world, could we reconsider the government policy of admitting legal immigrants who need to be spied on?
Copyright 2015 Ann Coulter
Via: Daily Caller
Continue Reading......
[OPINION][VIDEO] Hillary Clinton, what are you thinking? We don't need another education subsidy
If elected president, Hillary Clinton has promised to spend $350 billion to make college "more affordable." The U.S. already has an $18 trillion debt (and growing by the day), but Clinton wants to add to it. That's not affordable.
Too many young people are graduating from universities unable to find jobs, or are underemployed. Slate.com references a 2014 study of youth joblessness by the Economic Policy Institute. It found "...roughly 8.5 percent of college graduates between the ages of 21 and 24 were unemployed. That figure is based on a 12-month average between April 2013 and March 2014, so it's not a perfect snapshot of the here and now. Still, it tells us that the post-collegiate job market, just like the rest of the labor market, certainly isn't nearly back to normal. (For comparison, the unemployment rate for all college grads over the age of 25 is 3.3 percent, which is also still higher than normal.) More worrisomely, the EPI finds that a total of 16.8 percent of new grads are 'underemployed,' meaning they're either jobless and hunting for work; working part time because they can't find a full-time job; or want a job, have looked within the past year, but have now given up on searching."
The problem isn't just at the university level; it's at the jobs level where Obamacare, higher taxes and overregulation have reduced incentives to hire people, or forced many to accept part-time work.
When I entered American University as a freshman in 1960, tuition was $450 a semester. Today you probably can't get out of the bookstore for that amount. I received no federal subsidies. My father paid for the first year and I paid for the rest by working and getting a small student loan from the bank, which I quickly repaid.
Census: Record 42.1 million immigrants in U.S., Mexicans drive latest surge
A new analysis of legal and illegal immigrant counts by the Census Bureau revealed Thursday that there is a record 42.1 million in the United States, an explosion that is being driven by Mexicans flooding across the border.
In a report provided to Secrets by the Center for Immigration Studies, the total immigrant population surged 1.7 million since 2014. The growth was led in the last year by an additional 740,000 Mexican immigrants.
The 42.1 million tabulated by Census in the second quarter represent over 13 percent of the U.S. population, the biggest percentage in 105 years.
What's more, the numbers of immigrants coming and going from the U.S. is actually higher since many return home every years, said the report. "For the immigrant population to increase by one million means that significantly more than one million new immigrants must enter the country because some immigrants already here return to their homeland each year and natural mortality totals 250,000 annually," said the Center.
The stunning growth is sure to pour fuel on the already white-hot immigration debate in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail.
"Illegal immigration came up in the presidential debates, but there has been little discussion of the level of immigration; this at a time when total immigration is surging according to the latest data," said Steven Camarota, co-author of the report and the Center for Immigration's director of research.
"The rapid growth in the immigrant population was foreseeable given the cutbacks in enforcement, our expansive legal immigration system, and the improvement in the economy. But the question remains, is it in the nation's interest?" he added.
Some key findings in the new report:
• The nation's immigrant or foreign-born population, which includes legal and illegal immigrants, grew by 4.1 million from the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2015 — 1.7 million in just the last year.
SANCTUARY STATE IS A HAVEN FOR CRIMINALS
Another murder, another undeported illegal, another law unenforced.
I am not remiss to say that from Washington, D.C., to Sacramento, there is a blood trail to Marilyn Pharis’ bedroom,” Santa Maria, California police Chief Ralph Martin charged last week. On July 24, two burglars allegedly broke in to Pharis’ home as she slept. They sexually assaulted and beat her. Pharis, 64, a U.S. Air Force veteran, died in the hospital Aug. 1. It turns out that one of the two men charged for the crime, Victor Aureliano Martinez Ramirez, 29, is an undocumented immigrant against whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement issued a detainer in 2014. Ramirez has pleaded not guilty.
The case seems like Kate Steinle all over again. On July 1, Steinle was strolling on Pier 14 in San Francisco with her father, when a bullet pierced her heart. Authorities charged Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, a seven-time convicted felon and undocumented immigrant who had been deported five times, with murder. He pleaded not guilty. If the San Francisco sheriff had honored an ICE detainer, Lopez-Sanchez would not have been in San Francisco on July 1.
I always thought there was a covenant with those who come to this country, legally or illegally. They’re supposed to be on their best behavior as a condition of staying. I thought President Barack Obama understood that when he promised to focus on deporting “felons, not families, criminals, not children, gang members, not a mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids.” But the administration has overly narrowed its view of criminal behavior, such that ICE targets only felons and undocumented immigrants convicted of three or more serious misdemeanors.
To me, racking up misdemeanors should make an immigrant who is here illegally a suitable subject for deportation — but the law has evolved.
Santa Barbara, California, law enforcement first booked Ramirez in 2009 for driving without a license. In May 2014, authorities booked Ramirez on felony sexual assault and drug possession. The charge was changed to misdemeanor battery. It was not reduced, Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley told me. “The standard for arrest is probable cause.”
Last month, authorities charged Ramirez with felony possession of a concealed dirk or dagger and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia. On July 20, he pleaded “no contest” to a misdemeanor knife charge; he was supposed to start serving a 30-day sentence in October.
For his part, the Santa Maria police chief is steamed because he has watched state and federal law work together to undermine law enforcement. The voter-approved Proposition 47 downgraded classification for drug possession, shoplifting, and theft from felonies to misdemeanors. And a 2013 California law, the TRUST Act, prevents local law enforcement from honoring ICE detainers absent a serious or violent felony conviction. (Ramirez has no prior felony convictions.) “We’re a sanctuary state,” explained Michael Rushford, president of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento.
There is a cascade effect: Washington relaxes standards for deportations, and Sacramento cranks out bills and ballot measures to reduce the number of crimes classified as felonies. Deportation is not the law enforcement tool it once was. When there are laws against laws, the immigration and criminal justice systems are destined to fail.
Beware of Union-Led Anti-Republican Politicking in Your Kids’ Classrooms
“I watched the GOP presidential debate because my students are counting on me” is the title of a piece posted on the National Education Association website by “guest writer” Tom McLaughlin, a high school drama teacher from Council Bluffs, IA. He claims that “… in addition to this debate, I had an obligation to watch future debates, take notes, and share the truth. I have a responsibility to do that for my students.” (Hmm – just why is a drama teacher delving into politics with his students? Brought back memories of a Che Guevara poster prominently displayed in the music teacher’s class at my former middle school.)
So in any event, I’m thinking this will be a commentary about Common Core, since it garnered the only discussion of education at the first Republican debate in Cleveland last Thursday. In reality, that issue provoked a brief back-and-forth between Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio which really didn’t shed much light on the subject. But the words “Common Core” never appear in the piece by McLaughlin. Instead, the drama teacher’s “truth sharing” includes comments like:
Many of the candidates on last night’s stage have clear records of draining critical funding away from public schools to give to private schools, supporting charter schools that are unaccountable to students, parents and taxpayers, and slashing education funding and those programs that serve students and help them in the classroom.As educators and trusted messengers in our communities, we must make sure the public is informed and not fooled by presidential candidates who say they believe in a world-class education system but have a history of starving our public schools of critical funding and supporting flawed so-called reforms that don’t work.
Obviously McLaughlin never intended to report on the debate, but rather to deliver a diatribe infused with standard teacher union talking points against any and all who favor reform and dare have an “R” after their names. (Curiously, Chris Christie, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush all took shots at the teachers unions during the debate and there was no mention of them in McLaughlin’s critique.)
Over at the “NEA Votes” Facebook page, the union faithful were having a field day with McLaughlin’s post and the debate. With one or two exceptions, the comments were posted by pro-union mouthpieces using the same tired talking points that the union elite use. Perhaps the loopiest of all was a post that equated conservatism with Fascism:
The scary part of all this is that these teachers, who don’t seem to have an objective bone in their collective bodies – and are proud of it – have a captive audience of children, many of whom will be the recipients of their teachers’ anti-reform, anti-school choice and anti-Republican rhetoric leading up to the presidential election in 2016.
If you are a Republican parent (or just a fair-minded one of any political persuasion), please be ready for the political onslaught supporting the Big Government-Big Union complex (aka the Blob) your kids may be in for. When the indoctrination starts, don’t be shy about speaking up. Please mention to anyone who is spouting the union party line (and your kids) that in Jeb Bush’s Florida, there are more than 40,000 teachers who do not work for school districts and 14,000 of them have chosen to work in charter schools. They’ve made these choices for the same reason parents do – because charters offer a better fit for their individual needs.
Tell them that despite McLaughlin’s absurd comment, charter and private schools are indeed accountable … to parents. If parents aren’t happy with those schools, they close, unlike traditional public schools which are accountable to no one and typically get more money thrown their way if they are failing.
Tell them that we have tripled our public education funding nationally – in constant dollars – over the last 40 years and have nothing to show for it.
Tell them that Wisconsin’s test scores have risen since the teachers unions’ favorite Republican punching bagScott Walker has been governor.
Tell them that homeschooling is advancing across the country – especially in big cities – because parents of all political stripes are tired of a one-size-fits-all Blob education.
Tell them that in California, the Blob is under attack and that the effort is bipartisan. The Stull, Reed andVergara lawsuits, all of which have successfully challenged Blob work rules like tenure and seniority and fought to get a realistic teacher evaluation system in place, have seen Republicans and Democrats working together to undo the mess that McLaughlin and his ilk have helped to create.
Perhaps most importantly explain that when it comes to education policy reform, the battle is not typically between Democrats and Republicans or liberals and conservatives, but rather between those who defend the status quo and those who are demanding reasonable reforms to an outsized, outdated, outmoded and out-of-touch educational system.
When I was growing up, I never had a clue what my teachers’ politics were. They understood they were not there to indoctrinate me. Accordingly, I followed suit when I taught public school for 28 years. But there are many now who have decided not to check their politics at the classroom door, instead bringing it to their students with a religious zeal that makes Elmer Gantry look like a wallflower. Many teachers now take their cue from the likes of National Education Association Executive Director John Stocks who, at the recent NEA convention, told his flock that teachers need to become “social justice warriors.”
Silly me, all along I thought teachers were there to teach.
Larry Sand, a former classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers and the general public with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues. The views presented here are strictly his own.
Changing Stores For Trans-People Just Backfired BIG TIME On Target
This would normally seem like a social experiment that was conjured up in a liberal college classroom, but it is now an unfortunate reality and tragic sign of the times. Target has bowed down to a small minority of whiners who want to blur the line between boys and girls, making everyone and everything equal, so gender-confused people don’t get their feelings hurt. While they made a few people happy, the majority are not. Christians are fighting back and defending what is right, by responding en mass to Rev. Franklin Graham’s battle cry to believers.
Following Target’s recent announcement that they are “moving away from gender-based signs” in their children’s toy department, bedding, home decor, and more, the son of Rev. Billy Graham has come out with a request for all his fellow Christians and/or patriots to take action. Target’s progressive decision was way off target, as it was made in an effort to prevent guests or their families from feeling “frustrated or limited by the way things are presented,” the retailer’s official statement read in part. Now, the store will feel the frustration for that absurd decision.
Changes in stores are effective immediately and customers will start seeing them over the next few months, as liberalism reigns supreme in one of America’s favorite stores. At the bequest of Franklin Graham, he’s urging all who morally disagree with this ridiculous new corporate policy to boycott the stores.
The religious leader posted his strong position on the matter on Facebook, stating, “I think Target may be forgetting who has made their stores strong. It’s not gender-neutral people out there – it’s working American families, fathers and mothers with boys and girls they love.”
Then he delved right into God’s word on the issue, noting that in the Book of Matthew that God created just two clearly different genders, male and female. There is no in between or combination of the two — you’re either one or the other, and it’s okay for a sign to state that in a store.
Target has stuck it to their most dedicated customers to appease a group that doesn’t frequent the suburban stores the way families do. For that, Graham is urging every Christian to call the store and complain about their un-American policy, the Political Insider reported.
His request didn’t go unnoticed. Over 100,000 Americans “liked” Graham’s post, and many will respond to the retailer as the Reverend suggested they do. No company should be given our hard-earned money, made in a country built on Christian values, when they represent ideas that we strongly disagree with. That is like feeding the hand that flips you off.
So, will you put your money where your beliefs are, by not spending it at a store that goes directly against what is moral and right? As much as I love Target, they missed the mark on this one, and I will shop for my traditional family, created by a man and a woman, somewhere else.
Obama Admin Threatens Alabama and Louisiana After They De-Fund Planned Parenthood
According to the Medicaid provider contract between DHH and Planned Parenthood, along with relevant Louisiana law, either party can choose to cancel the contract at will after providing written notice.
The Obama administration is threatening two states after they made the decision to cut funding to the Planned Parenthood abortion business in the wake of a series of videos exposing how Planned Parenthood sells aborted babies and their body parts.
Alabama became the third state to de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business in the wake of five videos exposing how the abortion giant sells the body parts of aborted babies for research. The state followed Louisiana, which is revoking a contract with Planned Parenthood using state Medicaid dollars, and New Hampshire, which zapped $650,000 in state taxpayer funding.
In Alabama, Governor Robert Bentley sent a letter to the head of the Planned Parenthood abortion business in Alabama notifying it of his decision. In Louisiana, the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals informed Planned Parenthood it is exercising its right to terminate Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid provider agreement.
According to the Medicaid provider contract between DHH and Planned Parenthood, along with relevant Louisiana law, either party can choose to cancel the contract at will after providing written notice.
But the Obama administration wrote threatening letters to each state claiming their move to de-fund Planned Parenthood violates federal law. As The Hill reports:
But the White House points out that federal law says Medicaid beneficiaries may obtain services from any qualified provider and that cutting Planned Parenthood out of the program restricts that choice.The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicare Services (CMS) has contacted Louisiana and Alabama about the issue.“CMS has notified states who have taken action to terminate their Medicaid provider agreements with Planned Parenthood that they may be in conflict with federal law,” Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Ben Wakana said in a statement.“Longstanding Medicaid laws prohibit states from restricting individuals who have coverage through Medicaid from receiving care from a qualified provider,” he said. “By restricting which provider a woman could choose to receive care from, women could lose access to critical preventive care, such as cancer screenings.”
But Louisiana is not backing down.
When Louisiana cut Planned Parenthood fnuding Jindal’s office said, “Governor Jindal and DHH decided to give the required 30-day notice to terminate the Planned Parenthood Medicaid provider contract because Planned Parenthood does not represent the values of the State of Louisiana in regards to respecting human life. Pending the ongoing investigation, DHH reserves the right to amend the cancellation notice and terminate the provider agreement immediately should cause be determined.”
The governor said the state health department has “concerns that Planned Parenthood could be acting in violation of Louisiana law that states no person or group contracting with the state or receiving government assistance shall require or recommend that any woman have an abortion. The state investigation into Planned Parenthood remains ongoing.”
The Hill reports that, “Mike Reed, a spokesman for Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R), indicated the state and its Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) are standing by its decision.”
He cited a provision in the state Medicaid contract allowing either party to cancel it at will, with 30 days notice.“CMS reached out to DHH after we canceled the Medicaid provider contract with Planned Parenthood,” Reed said. “DHH explained to CMS why the state chose to exercise our right to cancel the contract without cause.”
The abortion giant praised the Obama administration saying it will “do everything in our power to protect women’s access to health care in all fifty states.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
'It's A Great Opportunity For Me Personally, It's Great Opportunity For Our State' ASBURY PARK, N.J. (CBSNewYork) –... -
President Joe Biden is hiding a myriad of information on the more than 75,000 Afghans his administration has brought to the United States ...
-
Jerusalem is “unpleasantly surprised” that, as of Thursday afternoon, the Obama administration had not unequivocally condemned vicious anti...
-
Gov. Jerry Brown today advanced a budget proposal that apparently is balanced for fiscal year 2014-15, which begins on July 1. It would s...
-
One of Barack Obama's recent ads for his re-election campaign purports to feature Republican women who have turned away from the GOP t...
-
Donald Trump went on the offensive Monday, hitting the airwaves to fire back at claims from New York's attorney general that his Trump U...
-
A series of leaked emails authored by House Speaker John Boehner’s chief of staff Mike Sommers show that the Speaker may have coordinated w...
-
Since Obamacare made its debut, discussions have focused on Ted Cruz' efforts to defund the law and the shockingly bad functionality of...
-
A new Obama campaign television ad accuses Mitt Romney of being "dangerous" for women's health. "Mitt Romney'...
-
As Cory Booker looks set to win the junior Senate seat in New Jersey Wednesday, his supposed neighbors in Newark say Mayor Booker doesn’t l...
