Leftists FURIOUS After #Ferguson Police Officer Posts How He Spent His “Mike Brown Bonus” Cash

Leftists are FURIOUS after a Ferguson police officer posted how he spent his “Mike Brown bonus” cash this week with his wife.

Bakula and his wife took a bike ride, had dinner and stayed at a bed-and-breakfast.

They needed the downtime after the hectic week.

WTOP reported, via Free Republic:

St. Louis County police are investigating a Facebook post in which one of its officers discusses how he spent his “annual Michael Brown bonus.”

The Guardian (http://bit.ly/1LdORpa ) reports that Officer Todd Bakula posted on his Facebook page that he took his wife to a bed and breakfast using money earned for staffing the protests this week in Ferguson, where Brown was fatally shot by a white officer last year.

St. Louis County Sgt. Shawn McGuire told the newspaper that Bakula is a patrolman and the post would be investigated.

He also said the department understands the post is “controversial.”

The officer has taken down his facebook page.

Via: Gateway Pundit

Continue Reading....

Ghosts of Obama: Hillary Clinton's Foreign Policy Problem

In a major speech a few days ago, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton laid out the likely parameters of her foreign policy argument for 2016. Decrying what she calls the “cowboy diplomacy” and “reckless warmongering” of Republicans, she advocates “progress” and “fresh thinking” against the GOP’s supposedly “out-of-date” and “partisan ideas,” where “ideology trumps evidence” on international as well as domestic issues.

Clinton’s most fervent supporters claim with great confidence that foreign policy will strongly favor Hillary against any conceivable Republican in November 2016. But they may be whistling past the graveyard. The reason can be summed up in two words: retrospective voting.

Retrospective voting refers to the fact that in presidential elections, American voters cast a judgment on the domestic and international policy record of the past four years, whether or not the incumbent president is on the ballot. Depending upon the popularity of an outgoing president, this can either help or hurt the nominee from the same party. So, for example, retrospective voting helped George H.W. Bush following Ronald Reagan in 1988; hurt John McCain following George W. Bush in 2008; and was more or less a wash for Al Gore following Bill Clinton in 2000. Of course, retrospective voting is hardly the only factor determining presidential elections. But it is powerful, and very real.

Barack Obama, to put it mildly, is no Ronald Reagan. In fact the current president’s popularity is not even comparable to Bill Clinton’s. And on foreign policy in particular, Obama’s approval ratings have been on average 38 percent or 39 percent for the past two years—which is where they stand today. To put this into perspective, that’s about the same foreign policy approval rating George W. Bush had at this point in his presidency. Of course, both Hillary Clinton and Obama would love to change the subject back again to George W. Bush next year. The only problem is we’ve had this other president, Obama, for several years now, and voters will probably want to reflect on how he’s done. For Hillary, this is a negative.

Ideology trumps evidence

Why do so many Americans disapprove of Obama’s foreign policy these days? Perhaps they increasingly see, to use a phrase of Hillary’s, that he has followed a foreign and national security policy where “ideology trumps evidence.”

Via: The National Interest

Continue Reading....

FDA Regulations Could Wipe Out 99 Percent Of E-Cigarette Industry

The e-cigarette industry could be all but wiped out thanks to regulations coming down the pipeline from the Food and Drug Administration.

Most damaging of all, e-cigarette makers will have to retroactively submit marketing applications for all their products, with the costs running into the millions.

Manufacturers of e-cigarettes could also be banned from advertising the reduced risk from substituting smoking for vaping unless they can convince the FDA otherwise.

In 2009, e-cigarettes came under the purview of the FDA and may face many of the restrictions placed on the tobacco industry, such as issuing health warnings and stopping sales to minors.

The e-cig industry is still relatively young, with the first e-cigarette invented in China in 2007. Despite there being close to 20 million Americans regularly using e-cigarettes, the FDA’s regulations could bankrupt the vast majority of producers.

Speaking to The Hill, Jan Verleur, co-founder and CEO of VMR Products, said as much as 99 percent of the industry could be wiped out. “This makes it so any product released after the grandfather date would require premarket approval,” said Verleur.

He added that ”the process could cost us half a million to million dollars,” per individual product. With more than 500 e-cigarette products, VMR Products would have to pay five times the company’s revenue.

His comments echo those of the president of the American Vaping Association Greg Conley who told the L.A. Times Monday that 99 percent of the small businesses in the industry could close their doors.

There is as of yet no fixed date for when the rules come into force. The FDA has said it will give companies two years to submit their applications and they will be able to sell the products under review during that time.

Follow Guy on Twitter

Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....

AT&T Helped N.S.A. Spy on an Array of Internet Traffic

The National Security Agency’s ability to spy on vast quantities of Internet traffic passing through the United States has relied on its extraordinary, decades-long partnership with a single company: the telecom giant AT&T.

While it has been long known that American telecommunications companies worked closely with the spy agency, newly disclosed N.S.A. documents show that the relationship with AT&T has been considered unique and especially productive. One document described it as “highly collaborative,” while another lauded the company’s “extreme willingness to help.”

AT&T’s cooperation has involved a broad range of classified activities, according to the documents, which date from 2003 to 2013. AT&T has given the N.S.A. access, through several methods covered under different legal rules, to billions of emails as they have flowed across its domestic networks. It provided technical assistance in carrying out a secret court order permitting the wiretapping of all Internet communications at the United Nations headquarters, a customer of AT&T. 

Continue reading the main story

DOCUMENT

Newly Disclosed N.S.A. Files Detail Partnerships With AT&T and Verizon

These National Security Agency documents shed new light on the agency’s relationship through the years with American telecommunications companies. They show how the agency’s partnership with AT&T has been particularly important, enabling it to conduct surveillance, under several different legal rules, of international and foreign-to-foreign Internet communications that passed through network hubs on American soil.

The N.S.A.’s top-secret budget in 2013 for the AT&T partnership was more than twice that of the next-largest such program, according to the documents. The company installed surveillance equipment in at least 17 of its Internet hubs on American soil, far more than its similarly sized competitor, Verizon. And its engineers were the first to try out new surveillance technologies invented by the eavesdropping agency.

One document reminds N.S.A. officials to be polite when visiting AT&T facilities, noting, “This is a partnership, not a contractual relationship.”

The documents, provided by the former agency contractor Edward J. Snowden, were jointly reviewed by The New York Times and ProPublica. The N.S.A., AT&T and Verizon declined to discuss the findings from the files. “We don’t comment on matters of national security,” an AT&T spokesman said.

It is not clear if the programs still operate in the same way today. Since the Snowden revelations set off a global debate over surveillance two years ago, some Silicon Valley technology companies have expressed anger at what they characterize as N.S.A. intrusions and have rolled out new encryption to thwart them. The telecommunications companies have been quieter, though Verizon unsuccessfully challenged a court order for bulk phone records in 2014.

At the same time, the government has been fighting in court to keep the identities of its telecom partners hidden. In a recent case, a group of AT&T customers claimed that the N.S.A.’s tapping of the Internet violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. This year, a federal judge dismissed key portions of the lawsuit after the Obama administration argued that public discussion of its telecom surveillance efforts would reveal state secrets, damaging national security.

The N.S.A. documents do not identify AT&T or other companies by name. Instead, they refer to corporate partnerships run by the agency’s Special Source Operations division using code names. The division is responsible for more than 80 percent of the information the N.S.A. collects, one document states.

Via: New York Times

Continue Reading....

 OPEN DOCUMENT

Poll: 23% of Americans View Boehner Favorably; 22% View McConnell Favorably

CNSNews.com) – A new Gallup poll on Congress and its leaders shows that only 23% of Americans view House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) favorably, and only 22% view his Senate counterpart, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) favorably.

Gallup further reports that Boehner’s ranking is similar to that of then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in October 2010, when only 26% of Americans viewed her favorably. Also, for then-Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in October 2014, he was viewed favorably by only 21% of Americans.

When looking specifically at Republicans, Gallup found that only 37% had a favorable view of Boehner, and only 34% had a favorable view of McConnell.

Boehner has been the Speaker of the House of Representatives since January 2011. McConnell became the Senate Majority Leader in January of this year.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Hillary ‘Hissy Fit': ‘I Wouldn’t Get Down In The Mud With Republicans’, Claims She’s Being Investigated Because Of ‘Politics’

In an angry moment at the Iowa Democratic Wing Ding on Friday, Hillary Clinton said she will not “get down in the mud” with Republicans who she claims are trying to exploit her use of a private email server and the Benghazi attacks for political gain.

“[Republicans will] try to tell you this is about Benghazi, but it is not,” Clinton told an audience at the event, her voice fraught with anger and her finger wagging in the air.

“Benghazi was a tragedy. Four dedicated public servants lost their lives,” she added. “And we have to be focused on how to prevent future tragedies.”

She said that seven congressional investigations have “already debunked all of the conspiracy theories” about the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

It’s not about Benghazi,” Clinton bellowed to applause.

“And you know what, it’s not about emails or servers, either,” she continued. “It’s about politics.”

Clinton’s remarks are her most direct and hostile on the issue of her private email and private server use. The aggression comes at the same time that the FBI has opened an investigation into the server she used as secretary of state. The FBI seized the server this week from Platte River Networks, a Denver-based cybersecurity company Clinton hired in 2013 to manage the system.

But Clinton, as she’s done all throughout the scandal, which commenced in March due to the investigative work of the Republican-controlled House Select Committee on Benghazi, tried to portray herself as taking a proactive part in the inquiry. She said that she has insisted that the State Department publish the 55,000 pages of emails she turned over in December “as soon as possible.” She also said that she has offered to answer questions before Cognress “for months.”

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading.....

FORGET EL NIÑO: ‘PDO’ COULD FLOOD CALIFORNIA

Evan / Flickr / CC / Cropped

by DANIEL NUSSBAUM13 Aug 2015631

While climatologists keep an eye on what could be an historic El Niño on the West Coast this winter, another, less-well-known weather pattern currently developing in the Pacific Ocean could end California’s drought and then some–leaving the Golden State up to its ears in rainfall for up to a decade.

Scientists are noticing a change in the “PDO,” or Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a climate index based on sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean dating back to 1900.

Paul Chakalian at GlacierHub explains the nature of the PDO:

The PDO is primarily a sea surface temperature phenomenon that oscillates in the Pacific Ocean, usually switching from a warm or positive phase to a cool or negative phase every 20-30 years. In the positive phase the Eastern Pacific, along the West coast of the Americas is unusually warm, while the Western Pacific along the East coast of Asia is unusually cool. During the negative phase the opposite occurs.

The PDO is often described as a long lasting ENSO-like event. ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation) is what is commonly referred to as El Niño and La Niña, a sea surface temperature oscillation in the southern Pacific Ocean that is a strong predictor of precipitation anomalies, and therefore drought or flooding, around the globe.

According to Southern California Public Radio’s KPCC, scientists believe PDO could be entering its “warm phase,” which means water temperature along the Pacific coast heats up while the larger ocean cools down. When that happens, southern California and northern Mexico experience excessive rainfall, and the Pacific Northwest becomes dry.

Bill Patzert, a climate scientist at Pasadena’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, says that the PDO has likely been in a “cool phase” since 1998, which has helped contribute to the state’s current record drought.

And with the likelihood that even a “super El Niño” wouldn’t pull the Golden State out of drought, Patzert says it is more critical than ever that the PDO continue to switch to the warm phase. Patzert said the data indicating the switch has already been present for the past 19 months.

“Perhaps in the long term, rooting for a [warm] PDO…is probably the most important thing for California and the American West,” Patzert told SCPR. “In the long run, these decadal or multi-decade variations in the Pacific are really the key to sustaining California agriculture and California civilization.”

In the meantime, California will look to conserve as much water as possible until the rain comes. So far, the state is on track to meet or even exceed Gov. Jerry Brown’s order for a mandatory 25 percent cutback in water usage statewide.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading.....

5 THINGS AMERICA HAS LOST IN CUBA

Today the Obama administration raised the American flag above the U.S. embassy in Cuba. It is unclear what, if anything, the U.S. has won in exchange for normalizing relations with the Castro regime–one of the world’s most  oppressive tyrannies. It is clearer what we have lost.

1. We lost the struggle with Castro. The U.S. won the Cold War, but lost the battle against Fidel Castro, who sided with the Soviet Union and who has opposed the U.S. in Latin America and around the world. The ailing dictator will die knowing that he won, and America lost.

2. We lost an opportunity to free Cubans. Isolating Cuba failed because other countries retained links to the regime. But ties with the U.S. were always a bargaining chip to be offered in exchange for progress on human rights and democracy. Now that leverage is almost gone.

3. We lost an important deterrent against future enemies. From Russia to Iran, our enemies–who are often Cuba’s allies–tell each other America is too cowardly to fight for long. We confirmed that in Havana: every foe knows all they have to do is resist us for long enough.

4. We lost our self-respect. It is beyond stomach-churning to hear Secretary of State John Kerry say he feels “very much at home” in a place thousands cannot leave. It is beyond offensive to hear him talk about “GPS” in a country where people cannot even use the Internet.

5. We lost our place as leaders of the free world. Obama has helped consolidate the Cuban dictatorship–just as he is doing in Iran. We did not even invite Cuban dissidents to the ceremony, even as Kerry claimed “Cuba’s future is for Cubans to shape.” A shameful day.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading.....

More California babies born addicted to drugs

A growing number of California infants are born addicted to drugs, according to a Bee review of new state data.

About 1,190 California newborns were diagnosed with drug withdrawal syndrome last year, up more than 50 percent from a decade earlier, according to hospital discharge data from the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. That translates to about one addicted newborn for every 400 births.

Makenzee Kennedy is looked over by recreational therapist Adrienne Blizzard while waiting for a visit from her mother at Mount Washington Pediatric Hospital. The hospital has a department that specializes in weaning newborns off of heroin and other drugs. A nationwide increase in babies born addicted to drugs has hit California hard. Bill O’Leary The Washington Post

The increase comes as the number of California births has dropped sharply.

Neonatal drug withdrawal syndrome generally occurs when mothers use drugs, particularly opiate painkillers, for an extended period during pregnancy. Its symptoms are similar to what addicts often experience when stopping a drug: sweating, fever, restlessness, poor appetite, vomiting and tremors.

The rise in babies addicted to drugs corresponds with a sharp increase in ER visits and hospitalizations due to overdoses involving prescription drugs, heroin and other opiods, state figures show.

Neonatal withdrawal, while painful, generally does not have a severe, long-term effect on infant health, so long as proper care is received. More concerning in the long run are other consequences of maternal drug abuse, particularly congenital abnormalities and developmental problems often associated with preterm birth. Newborns addicted to drugs are also more likely to be born prematurely.

Illicit drug use is not always the cause of drug withdrawal syndrome in newborns. Doctors sometimes legitimately prescribe strong painkillers to expectant mothers suffering from an injury or painful pregnancy. In these cases, doctors weigh weaning an infant off painkillers against the possible danger posed to the pregnancy if a mother remains in pain.

When the syndrome is caused by illicit drug use, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2003 requires doctors to report it to child welfare.

Via: Sacramento Bee

Continue Reading....

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/site-services/databases/article31114208.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/site-services/databases/article31114208.html#storylink=cpy

What If Martin O'Malley or Bernie Sanders Disobeys the DNC on Debates?

When the Democratic National Committee first announced in May it would sanction six primary debates in 2016 and punish candidates who went to unsanctioned events, the party said the schedule was “consistent with the precedent set by the DNC during the 2004 and 2008 cycles.”

In both of those cycles, the DNC also only sanctioned six debates. But those elections were filled with dozens of unsanctioned debates, too, that started at least six months earlier than the DNC plans to kick off its debate season this year, on Oct. 13.

That frenzy is what the committee is trying to prevent from happening this year, and it's what lower-ranking candidates, who would benefit from more chances to appear in nationally televised debates on the same stage as front-runner Hillary Clinton, are rebelling against. Senator Bernie Sanders said he’s “disappointed” with the schedule, while former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley called it “unprecedented” and “outrageous.”

“The DNC may threaten to keep somebody out of a future debate, but it isn’t their invitation.”

Alan Schroeder, a journalism professor at Northeastern University

Maybe the solution for lower-polling candidates isn’t to push the DNC to sanction more debates, says Kathleen Jamieson, a University of Pennsylvania professor of communications who has studied and written about presidential debates and political rhetoric. “O’Malley’s attacking the wrong villain,” Jamieson said. “If anyone wants to stand up and sponsor a debate and the candidates want to go to it, you’ll have a debate that the DNC hasn’t sanctioned.”

For example, if a Spanish-language television network said it was going to host two debates, one for Democrats and one for Republicans, Jamieson says it is likely the candidates would ignore the rules set by their committees. “They would accept and go, regardless of whether the RNC and DNC said yes or no, because they want to reach the Hispanic vote,” she said. 

O’Malley appears to be hinting he would do just that. In a memo released Tuesday, O’Malley legal counsel Joe Sandler challenged the DNC's exclusion rule, which says that if a candidate attends an unsanctioned debate, they will be barred from future DNC primary debates. The rule is “legally unenforceable,” Sandler said, and if candidates attended an unsanctioned debate, “it is highly unlikely that any of those sponsors of the sanctioned debates would ultimately be willing to enforce that ‘exclusivity’ requirement.” 

Alan Schroeder, a journalism professor at Northeastern University and the author of Presidential Debates: 50 Years of High-Risk TV, agrees, noting that on the Republican side, it has been the debate hosts, not the Republican National Committee, that set the rules for the debates. “The DNC may threaten to keep somebody out of a future debate, but it isn’t their invitation,” he said.

Via: Bloomberg Politics

Continue Reading....

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU REGULATIONS HURT JOB CREATION

Ask most business owners and they’ll tell you: complicated, burdensome regulations are one of the biggest impediments to job growth. But instead of cutting through this job-killing red tape, employers are only getting entangled in it further.

Nowhere is this more evident than with the regulations created by the Dodd-Frank Act and its centerpiece, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Last month marked the fifth anniversary of Dodd-Frank, and so far its rules have imposed more than $24 billion in regulatory costs and 61 million paperwork burden hours on businesses.

At the same time, the CFPB, a federal agency tasked with going after “bad actors” in the financial services industry and protecting consumers from “unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices,” has shown a willingness to zealously enforce its goals regardless of whether it has solid data or the necessary statutory authority to carry out its actions.

Consider how it’s gone after racial discrimination in auto lending. Lenders who provide car loans can’t ask a borrower’s race, so the CFPB can’t simply look at loan document to determine whether a lender may potentially be offering higher rates or less favorable terms to minority borrowers. To get around this, the CFPB created a system in which it estimates borrowers’ races based on zip codes and last name.

That methodology has been seriously questioned—a study commissioned by the American Financial Services Commission compared the agency’s data with data collected on mortgage applications (which do allow applicants to self-report race and ethnicity). The study found that the CFPB only correctly identified a borrower as African-American 24% of the time. These measurement errors mean it’s very likely the agency significantly inflated the number of cases of illegal discrimination.

Such flawed data hasn’t stopped the agency from going after auto lenders for racial discrimination. Ally Financial, for instance, paid nearly $100 million to settle such charges. Ironically, CFPB regulations like these have their heaviest impact on small lenders, which disproportionately provide minorities with loans, exacerbating the lack of financial capital already available to minorities.

Using bad data to fine businesses is bad enough, but now consumer-focused non-profits want the CFPB to flex its regulatory muscles and go above and beyond the powers Congress gave the agency.

In a recent op-ed, a director at the Pew Charitable Trusts wrote, “Can the CFPB effectively move beyond areas where it was specifically instructed to take action… The bureau’s long-term reputation — and perhaps the overall success of Dodd-Frank — may well be judged on whether the answer is ‘yes.’”

The op-ed goes on to call on the agency to limit the amount financial institutions can charge for services without squeezing consumer access to credit. Essentially, he’s calling for the agency to breed unicorns.

Businesses have to have a way to earn a profit for the services they provide. Rules issued by CFPB (and other federal agencies) limiting the amount companies can charge for products force them to either find new ways to make that money or offer fewer services to fewer consumers. That means businesses have less credit available to expand and consumers have less money to spend on our products.

Dodd-Frank and the CFPB were supposed improve things for consumers and businesses, but imposing byzantine rules restricting credit simply isn’t a way to create the well-paying jobs Americans need.

Alfredo Ortiz is President and CEO Of Job Creators Network.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

As John Kerry Celebrates Embassy Opening, Cuban Dissidents Are Barred From Attending

The American flag was raised next to the U.S. embassy in Havana for the first time in 54 years Friday, but Cuban dissidents who have influenced U.S.-Cuban relations for decades were barred from the event.

Secretary of State John Kerry justified the exclusion by telling Telemundo the symbolic opening was a “government-to-government moment, with very limited space.”

The State Department conceded the ceremony was not limited to government officials, extending invitations to select private individuals.

Notably, James Williams, president of the prominent anti-embargo lobbying group Engage Cuba, and Zane Kerby, president and CEO of the trade association American Society of Travel Agents, were both invited to the flag-raising ceremony.

“It truly shows the administration’s priorities when there’s space at the flag-raising ceremony for business interests and anti-embargo lobbyists, yet there’s no space for Cuban dissidents. Who in fact are we really supporting with this new policy?” said Ana Quintana, an analyst specializing in Latin America policy at The Heritage Foundation.

Kerry said he would meet with dissidents during a reception at the chief of mission’s residence following the embassy ceremony, after it was demanded he explain how normalized relations will improve human rights standards.

“I look forward to meeting whoever I meet and listening to them and having, you know, whatever views come at me,” Kerry said.

John Suarez, the international secretary at the Cuban Democratic Directorate, said under President Barack Obama’s diplomatic policies with Cuba, human rights have “deteriorated.”

Since Obama announced the U.S.’s plan to normalize relations with Havana in December, Suarez said violence against activists has escalated, nearly 4,000 politically motivated arrests have occurred as a result of dissident demonstrations, and “Cubans continue to be killed for trying to leave the island.”

“The current U.S. policy on Cuba will strengthen and legitimize the dictatorship and is undercutting Cuban democracies,” he said.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who is the son of Cuban exiles, called the State Department’s decision to exclude dissidents in the ceremony a “slap in the face” and said it marked the event as “little more than a propaganda rally for the Castro regime.”

Kerry highlighted opponents’ concerns during the ceremony, calling for a “genuine democracy” in Cuba that includes free elections, freedom of religion and speech, and human rights improvements.

Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona joined Kerry’s delegation in Havana, splitting from the majority in his party to laud the embassy opening.

“The United States will be able to do much more to protect and serve U.S. citizens in Cuba and encourage a better future for the Cuban people with an American flag flying over our embassy in Havana,” he said in a statement.

Via: Daily Signal

Continue Reading....