• Home
  • Mission
  • Federalist Papers
  • Foundation
  • U.S. Constitution
  • Bill of Rights

Federalist Press | Defending Liberty — Informing America

Breaking News and Political Commentary

  • All Stories
  • Economy
  • Elections
  • Entitlement
  • Ethics
  • Foreign
  • Gender
  • Religion
  • Sci-Tech

Supreme Court Upholds Gay Marriage in all 50 States

June 26, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Gay_MarriageThe Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry nationwide, in a historic decision that invalidates gay marriage bans in more than a dozen states.

Gay and lesbian couples already can marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. But in a 5-4 ruling, the court held that the 14th Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses for same-sex couples and to recognize such marriages performed in other states.

The ruling means the remaining 14 states that did not allow such unions, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, just as he did in the court’s previous three major gay rights cases dating back to 1996.

“No union is more profound than marriage,” Kennedy wrote, joined by the court’s four more liberal justices.

He continued: “Under the Constitution, same-sex couples seek in marriage the same legal treatment as opposite-sex couples, and it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right.”

The outcome is the culmination of two decades of Supreme Court litigation over marriage, and gay rights generally. Cheers broke out outside the Supreme Court when the decision was announced.

President Obama tweeted: “Today is a big step in our march toward equality.”

But other justices argued that the court should not be able to order states to change their marriage definition. Chief Justice John Roberts, in a dissent joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, called the ruling an “extraordinary step.”

“Many people will rejoice at this decision, and I begrudge none their celebration. But for those who believe in a government of laws, not of men, the majority’s approach is deeply disheartening,” they wrote.

“The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment.”

Each of the four dissenting justices also wrote a separate dissent.

The ruling will not take effect immediately because the court gives the losing side roughly three weeks to ask for reconsideration. But some state officials and county clerks might decide there is little risk in issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The cases before the court involved laws from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Those states have not allowed same-sex couples to marry within their borders and they also have refused to recognize valid marriages from elsewhere. They previously had their bans upheld by a federal appeals court.

Just two years ago, the Supreme Court struck down part of the federal anti-gay marriage law that denied a range of government benefits to legally married same-sex couples.

There are an estimated 390,000 married same-sex couples in the United States, according to UCLA’s Williams Institute, which tracks the demographics of gay and lesbian Americans. Another 70,000 couples living in states that do not currently permit them to wed would get married in the next three years, the institute says. Roughly 1 million same-sex couples, married and unmarried, live together in the United States, the institute says.

The Obama administration backed the right of same-sex couples to marry. The Justice Department’s decision to stop defending the federal anti-marriage law in 2011 was an important moment for gay rights and Obama declared his support for same-sex marriage in 2012.

FoxNews.com/The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Gender, Religion

Trump Announces White House Bid

June 16, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

New York real estate mogul and reality TV star Donald Trump on Tuesday declared himself a candidate for the Republican nomination for president, launching his against-the-odds campaign after teasing one for years.

“I am officially running for president of the United States,” Trump said from inside his signature Trump Towers in midtown Manhattan. “We are going to make our country great again.”

Trump flirted with a White House run in 2012 but ultimately did not enter the race. Though Trump is a first-time political candidate, he has become an influential voice in conservative political circles. He has spoken at political events in early-voting states, and makes frequent appearances on Fox News, among other outlets.

Trump has for months shown signs that he intended get into the White House race this time.

He has formed a presidential exploratory committee and has made numerous visits this year to early-voting states Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Also, he has remained competitive in early polling.

Trump said he will file a financial statement showing his net worth is $8.73 billion, though several of his ventures have declared bankruptcy. All president candidates are required to file a financial disclosure.

The 69-year-old Trump joins the field of 11 other GOP candidates, with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker expected to enter the race in mid-July and several other hopefuls still considering. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush announced his bid a day earlier.

Most polls have Trump in the top 10 in the field of Republican candidates and hopefuls, which would qualify him for the nationally televised GOP primary debate in August hosted by Fox News.

His unabashed businesses success will likely position him as a candidate riding a strong free-market, pro-business platform. It would also set him apart from candidates pitching a populist message, and trying to make themselves relatable to middle-class voters.

Trump, who was born in Queens, inherited his father’s successful real estate company in 1972 and has since grown and diversified the business to include Trump Entertainment Resorts as well as a clothing and fragrance line.

Trump’s extravagant lifestyle and brash manner is frequently on display during episodes of his long-running ABC TV show, “The Apprentice,” which the network in February approved for another season.

Trump, popularly known as “the Donald,” married for the third time in 2005 and has a total five children and seven grandchildren. He attended the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.

FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Rachel Dolezal, Fake Black NAACP Leader Quits

June 15, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

racheldolezal-newsSPOKANE, Wash. –  The leader of the NAACP in Spokane is facing calls to step aside after her parents said the 37-year-old activist falsely portrayed herself as black for years.

Rachel Dolezal canceled a chapter meeting Monday where she was expected to speak about the furor sparked over her racial identity. But other members of the organization said they still planned to gather Monday evening.

Dolezal sent out an email Sunday canceling the monthly membership meeting “due to the need to continue discussion with regional and national NAACP leaders.”

Shortly after her announcement, the head of the chapter’s executive committee, Lawrence Burnley, questioned whether Dolezal had the right to arbitrarily cancel the meeting, KREM-TV in Spokane (http://is.gd/sdOyLy ) reported, quoting an email thread mailed to NAACP members.

“I don’t see any language in the bylaws that empowers you, or any one member, to arbitrarily cancel/postpone tomorrow’s meeting,” Burnley wrote in his email Sunday.

Some are planning a demonstration Monday night calling for Dolezal to step down.

rachel-dolezalKitara Johnson, a member of the chapter, organized an online petition calling for Dolezal to take a leave of absence.

“It’s not about race, it’s about integrity,” she said. “If you’re a leader, you have to have integrity. She clearly lacks integrity. The other piece is credibility.”

Johnson said she and others plan to peacefully protest outside Monday’s membership meeting, but they will not attend the meeting.

Attempts to reach Dolezal by telephone were unsuccessful Sunday.

Dolezal was elected president of the local NAACP chapter about six months ago.

Rachel-Dolezal-10The NAACP issued a statement Friday supporting Dolezal, who has been a longtime figure in Spokane’s human-rights community and teaches African studies to college students.

Ruthanne Dolezal, Rachel Dolezal’s mother, said the family’s ancestry is Czech, Swedish and German, with a trace of Native American heritage. She produced a copy of her daughter’s Montana birth certificate listing herself and Larry Dolezal as Rachel’s parents.

The city of Spokane is investigating whether Dolezal lied about her ethnicity when she applied to be on the police board. Police on Friday said they were suspending investigations into racial-harassment complaints filed by Dolezal, including one from earlier this year in which she said she received hate mail at her office.

Dolezal had said in a statement Friday that she would address the controversy at Monday’s meeting.

“As you probably know by now, there are questions and assumptions swirling in national and global news about my family, my race, my credibility, and the NAACP,” her statement said.

Associated Press

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Obama Gets Handed Stinging Loss on Trade Deal

June 12, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_pelosiPresident Obama suffered a major defeat to his Pacific Rim free trade initiative Friday as House Democrats helped derail a key presidential priority despite his last-minute, personal plea on Capitol Hill.

The House voted 302 to 126 to sink a measure to grant financial aid to displaced workers, fracturing hopes at the White House that Congress would grant Obama fast-track trade authority to complete an accord with 11 other Pacific Rim nations.

“I will be voting to slow down fast-track,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on the floor moments before the vote, after keeping her intentions private for months. “Today we have an opportunity to slow down. Whatever the deal is with other countries, we want a better deal for American workers.”

The dramatic defeat could sink the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a sweeping free trade and regulatory pact that Obama has called central to his economic agenda at home and his foreign policy strategy in Asia. Obama’s loss came after a months-long lobbying blitz in which the president invested significant personal credibility and political capital.

Republican leaders, who had backed the president’s trade initiative, pleaded with their colleagues to support the deal or risk watching the United States lose economic ground in Asia.

“The world is watching us right now,” Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said before the vote.

Obama had rushed to Capitol Hill for the first time in nearly two years Friday morning to make a last-ditch plea to an emergency meeting of the Democratic caucus. The president urged members to vote with their conscience and “play it straight,” urging them to support the financial package for displaced workers, which Democrats have long supported.

“I don’t think you ever nail anything down around here,” Obama told reporters on his way out of the Capitol. “It’s always moving.”

But anti-trade Democrats pushed hard to block the financial aid plan, knowing that its defeat would also torpedo a companion measure to grant Obama fast-track authority to complete the TPP. That bill could not move forward after the aid package was defeated.

Lawmakers said the White House has pushed harder on trade than any legislative issue since the health-care reform effort during his first year. After keeping trade on the back burner, Obama joined forces with business-friendly Republicans after the midterm elections in pursuit of a rare bipartisan deal and launched a fierce effort to win support from his usual Democratic allies over the intense opposition of labor unions.

“The president and his counselors understand that this is a legacy vote for his second term,” Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.), who supported the fast-track bill said Thursday. “It’s a philosophical battle, a political battle and an economic battle. The president finds himself in the crossfire with the base.”

Obama made an impassioned plea during his visit to Capitol Hill. But he appeared not to have changed many minds among fellow Democrats. After the president departed, two anti-trade Democrats, Louise Slaughter of New York and Gene Green of Texas, came out of the meeting determined to oppose Obama.

“I don’t want this trade bill to go through,” Slaughter, who represents the economically depressed area of Rochester, said of the fast-track bill.

Several members said Obama took no questions and received applause on several occasions when discussing his previous efforts to deliver on Democratic priorities.

The debate among Democrats has at times been raw and personal, and it has exposed old divisions on trade as the party attempts to coalesce around a common agenda ahead of the 2016 campaign to select Obama’s successor. Other Democratic leaders, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), have questioned Obama’s commitment to workers and the middle class, while union officials accused the president of marginalizing them.

“I would ask that you not mischaracterize our positions and views — even in the heat of a legislative battle,” AFL-CIO President Richard L. Trumka wrote this week in a letter to the president. “You have repeatedly isolated and marginalized labor and unions.”

White House officials had cast the dispute with labor as a difference of opinion that does not reflect a deeper divide within a party focused on stemming the nation’s growing wealth divide. Obama has framed the 12-nation TPP as a way to lock in rules to ensure U.S. economic primacy in the fast-growing Asian-Pacific region against increasing competition from China. In the president’s view, that would benefit American workers as the world’s economy shifts toward high-tech industries in which the United States maintains an advantage.

A failure on fast-track could lend weight to Chinese claims that the United States does not have staying power in Asia.

The president’s pitch was met with widespread skepticism among Democrats who blame past trade deals for killing jobs and depressing wages for Americans in traditional manufacturing work.

Inside the West Wing, Obama’s advisers bet that pushing forward on trade made the most sense, politically and practically, after Republicans won control of both chambers of Congress last November. Some Democrats have suggested that the president should have opened his final two years with legislative efforts on tax reform and infrastructure bills.

But fundamental, and perhaps irreconcilable, differences remain between the parties on those fronts. A failed year-long bid to pass comprehensive immigration reform had left Washington as polarized as ever, especially after Obama moved forward with a series of high-profile executive actions late last year.

In the scrambled politics of trade, Obama would quickly win the backing of his GOP adversaries and face what aides believed would be better odds to win over his own party on an ambitious, though risky, legislative gambit. But unlike in 2009 and 2010, when Obama relied on Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to help wrestle the Affordable Care Act through Congress with Democratic majorities on a party-line vote, the president would have to essentially go it alone on trade.

The effort, by all accounts, was exhaustive.

Obama phoned and met with key Democratic lawmakers, promised to campaign for them against primary challenges and invited them aboard Air Force One. He traveled to Oregon in May to give a trade speech at Nike in the home state of Sen. Ron Wyden (D), who offered crucial support to win passage of the fast-track legislation in the Senate.

Cabinet secretaries have fanned out across the capital, and Secretary of State John F. Kerry visited a Boeing plant in Seattle to tout the merits of the trade pact. U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman has been a “nonstop” presence on Capitol Hill, said Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Tex.), a prime target of the administration who has not disclosed his position on the trade bill.

On Thursday night, Obama made a surprise visit to the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity at Nationals Park to woo Pelosi and other Democrats.

“The president is personally engaged on this,” Wyden said Thursday. “He’s all in.”

Despite the intensive campaign, however, Obama struggled to convince more than a sliver of House Democrats to back his push for the fast-track authority. The legislation would have allowed him to submit the trade pact to Congress for a vote in a specified timetable without lawmakers being able to amend it.

The White House has called such powers crucial to persuading the other 11 nations involved in the TPP negotiations to put their best offers on the table in the final round of talks this summer.

But opponents said they feared that approving the fast-track measure would be akin to ratifying a pact that is still being negotiated and whose terms have been kept largely hidden from public view. (Lawmakers are permitted to read draft sections of the agreement in a classified setting and are prevented from talking about specifics in public.)

On Thursday, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other Obama aides huddled with House Democrats in a bid to alleviate objections.

But at each turn, the administration was met by a determined coalition of opponents, made up of labor unions, environmental groups and progressive Democrats. Led by Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.), the coalition has been meeting for two years with individual Democrats, and with small groups, to pressure them to oppose a fast-track bill.

Trumka met with the same House Democrats on Thursday soon after the White House officials had departed.

By David Nakamura and Paul Kane. Mike DeBonis and Kelsey Snell contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

NJ Supreme Court Upholds Gov. Christie on Pension Modifications

June 9, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

supreme_courtNew Jersey’s top court has sided with Gov. Chris Christie in a fight with public worker unions over pension funds.

The state Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned a lower-court judge’s order that told the Republican governor and the Democrat-controlled Legislature to work out a way to increase pension contributions for the current fiscal year. That ends June 30.

In a 5-2 ruling, the court says there wasn’t an enforceable contract to force the full payment.

One of Christie’s signature achievements as governor has been a 2011 deal on pensions for public workers. Employees had to pay more and the government was locked into making up for years of skipped or reduced contributions.

Christie reduced the state’s payment last year amid a surprise tax revenue shortfall.

Associated Press

chris_christie

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Obama Blisters Supreme Court for Its Audacity to Even Review Obamacare

June 8, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Obama_worriedPresident Obama bluntly challenged the Supreme Court over a pending ruling on the validity of ObamaCare subsidies, complaining Monday that the court should never have taken up the case — and warning that a ruling against subsidies would be a “twisted interpretation” of the law.

The president and his administration’s legal team for months have fought the Affordable Care Act court challenge, which is over whether people who enrolled through the federal HealthCare.gov are entitled to subsidies.

But the president’s comments on Monday, during a press conference on the sidelines of the G-7 summit in Germany, were perhaps his toughest to date. He strongly suggested the court would be running afoul of established legal guidance if it rules against the administration, and took the rare step of saying the court should have stayed out of this fight.

“This should be an easy case. Frankly, it probably shouldn’t even have been taken up,” Obama said.

The administration has argued in court that the subsidies are valid through both state-run exchanges and exchanges run through HealthCare.gov. Foes argue that the Affordable Care Act stipulates subsidies are only intended for those buying insurance on state-run exchanges.

The court decision, expected any day, could have far-reaching implications because millions would lose their insurance if the court rules against the administration.

Yet the Obama administration has faced criticism for declining the spell out what its contingency plan is if the court rules that way, instead voicing confidence that the Supreme Court will keep the program as is.

Obama again voiced that confidence on Monday, and urged the court not to rule otherwise.

Supreme_Court_GayHe said it’s safe to “assume” the court will do what most legal scholars expect and “play it straight.” Obama said it has been well-documented that Congress never intended to exclude people who went through the federal exchange.

To rule the other way, the president said, would be a “contorted reading of the statute” and a “twisted interpretation.”

But if that does happen, Obama said, “that throws off how that exchange operates” and millions of people would lose subsidies.

“It’s a bad idea,” Obama said.

The president went on to mount a robust defense of the law itself, saying “none” of the alleged “horrors” associated with ObamaCare have “come to pass.”

FoxNews.com/The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

DHS Releases 3,700 illegal immigrant ‘Threat Level 1’ criminals

June 5, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Immigration_releaseMost of the illegal immigrant criminals Homeland Security officials released from custody last year were discretionary, meaning the department could have kept them in detention but chose instead to let them onto the streets as their deportation cases moved through the system, according to new numbers from Congress.

Some of those released were the worst of the worst — more than 3,700 “Threat Level 1” criminals, who are deemed the top priority for deportation, were still released out into the community even as they waited for their immigration cases to be heard.
Homeland Security officials have implied their hands are tied by court rulings in many cases, but the numbers, obtained by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, showed 57 percent of the criminals released were by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s own choice, and they could have been kept instead.

“Put aside the spin, and the fact is that over 17,000 of the criminal aliens released last year were released due to ICE discretion, representing 57 percent of the releases,” said Mr. Goodlatte. “The Obama administration’s lax enforcement policies are reckless and needlessly endanger our communities.”

In a statement to The Washington Times, ICE said it takes release decisions seriously and makes a judgment in each case. That holds true even for Threat Level 1 criminals.

“Not all Level 1 criminal aliens are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond,” the agency said, pointing to mitigating circumstances that can convince agents to release the most serious criminals.

“ICE personnel making custody determinations also take into consideration humanitarian factors such as deteriorated health, advanced age, and caretaking responsibilities. All custody determinations are made on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the totality of circumstances in each case,” the agency said.

ICE officials insist that those who are released are still monitored, often by electronic ankle bracelets but also through a system of phone checks or by paying a bond.

However, nearly all of those released under electronic monitoring broke the terms of their release, according to ICE numbers.

In fiscal year 2014, ICE put about 41,000 immigrants through electronic monitoring, and more than 30,000 of them broke the terms of their release — many of them racking up multiple violations. All told, they notched nearly 300,000 violations in one year alone, or an average of 10 instances per violator.

The rate has gone down slightly so far in fiscal year 2015. Of the 34,002 immigrants put into electronic monitoring, 27,317 have broken the rules a combined 162,322 times.

ICE said violations can include what they deem minor problems, such as someone lacking a strong enough cell signal for voice verification by phone or someone calling in too early or a few minutes late. Low batteries or jostling an electronic bracelet during sports can also cause a monitoring alarm to go off incorrectly, ICE said.

Of the more than 30,000 detainees who broke the conditional terms of their release and monitoring in 2014, only 2,420 were deemed to have been serious enough breaches to rearrest them.

Part of ICE’s problem is that it doesn’t have enough beds to go out and pick up violators, according to an inspector general’s report released earlier this year.

immigrants_criminalsAgency officials said they would like to be able to hold those who willfully break the rules, but they haven’t requested more beds. Indeed, Mr. Obama’s 2016 budget request actually asked for fewer beds to hold detainees next year, arguing that he wants to put more emphasis on the very alternatives that are being violated.

ICE’s treatment of those awaiting their deportation proceedings has been controversial for several years.

In 2013, the agency released 36,007 convicted criminals who were awaiting the outcome of their deportation cases. Those released had amassed 116 homicide convictions, 15,635 drunken driving convictions and 9,187 convictions stemming from what ICE labeled involvement with “dangerous drugs.”

The total dropped to about 30,000 in 2014 — but the seriousness of the offenses increased, with 193 homicide convictions among the detainees and 16,070 drunken driving convictions. There were also 426 sexual assaults and 303 kidnapping convictions, ICE said.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and ICE Director Sarah Saldana said the numbers were unacceptable and imposed new rules requiring releases to be vetted by senior agency officials to make sure they were correct.

Both Mr. Johnson and Ms. Saldana also said many of the releases are required and give them little discretion — particularly those made under a 2001 Supreme Court decision known as the Zadvydas case, when the justices ruled that immigrants couldn’t generally be detained indefinitely.

That means that if a home country won’t take someone back, ICE must release them after about six months.

But the new numbers obtained by Mr. Goodlatte suggest Zadvydas-related releases were fewer than 2,500 in 2014, or only about 8 percent of the total — compared to the 57 percent that ICE admits were completely discretionary.

The rest of the releases were divided between cases where an immigration judge ordered bond or where ICE was unable to obtain travel documents but it wasn’t considered a mandatory release under the Zadvydas ruling.

By Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

4 Million Federal Employees Hacked–Major Cybersecurity Breach

June 4, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

cybersecurity-1The Office of Personnel Management was hit by a massive data breach that could have compromised the personal data of at least 4 million current and former federal employees, the Obama administration confirmed Thursday.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) said in a statement that in April it detected a “cyber-intrusion” that compromised its systems, and that it was sending notifications to approximately 4 million individuals whose personally identifiable information (PII) may have been accessed.

However, the agency that acts as the human resources department for the federal government and conducts more than 90 percent of federal background checks acknowledged that more individuals could have been affected.

“Since the investigation is on-going, additional PII exposures may come to light; in that case, OPM will conduct additional notifications as necessary,” the agency said in a statement.

The Associated Press, which first reported the breach, cited officials saying that the Interior Department had been hacked, while another official said that the breach could potentially affect every federal agency.

The Washington Post reported that the hack was believed to have originated in China, which would make the incident the second major breach from the Chinese in less than a year.

“Protecting our Federal employee data from malicious cyber incidents is of the highest priority at OPM,” OPM Director Katherine Archuleta said in a statement. “We take very seriously our responsibility to secure the information stored in our systems, and in coordination with our agency partners, our experienced team is constantly identifying opportunities to further protect the data with which we are entrusted.”

The agency advised those affected to monitor their bank accounts for unusual activity, and to request a credit report along with other safeguards against fraud.

The FBI said in a statement that it was working with interagency partners to investigate the breach.

In November, a former Department of Homeland Security official disclosed another cyberbreach that compromised the private files of more than 25,000 DHS workers and thousands of other federal employees.

FoxNews.com/The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

EPA: No Widespread Water Pollution From Fracking

June 4, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

A long-awaited Environmental Protection Agency report released Thursday found no signs of “widespread, systemic” drinking-water pollution caused by fracking — a conclusion that offers a victory to the oil and gas industry and a major blow to a wave of grass-roots anti-drilling movements sprouting across the country.

The results of EPA’s years-long fracking study should bolster natural gas producers, who have benefited from Obama administration climate and environmental policies that have shrunk the coal industry’s hold on the electricity industry. The findings also touch on one of the great paradoxes of Barack Obama’s presidency, in which he has championed an ambitious green-energy agenda while loudly hailing the benefits of the fracking-spurred oil and gas boom.

The oil and gas industry was quick to praise the report, while green groups seized on EPA’s acknowledgment that it has found isolated incidents in which water pollution can be blamed on fracking.

“After more than five years and millions of dollars, the evidence gathered by EPA confirms what the agency has already acknowledged and what the oil and gas industry has known,” said Erik Milito, a director at the American Petroleum Institute. “Hydraulic fracturing is being done safely under the strong environmental stewardship of state regulators and industry best practices.”

The green group Earthworks said it was drawing the opposite conclusion. “Today EPA confirmed what communities living with fracking have known for years, fracking pollutes drinking water,” the group’s policy director, Lauren Pagel, said in a statement. “Now the Obama administration, Congress, and state governments must act on that information to protect our drinking water, and stop perpetuating the oil and gas industry’s myth that fracking is safe.”

Fracking, which saw major technical advances in the past decade, uses high-pressure injections of water and chemicals underground to break up rock formations and free trapped oil and gas supplies. The technique has helped turn the U.S. into an energy superpower, but it’s also set off a wave of attacks from greens and other local activists.

GaslandFueled by the Oscar-nominated 2010 documentary “Gasland,” which told the story of a flaming tap-water and well-water contamination in a Pennsylvania town, communities across the country have enacted fracking bans — including the state of New York as well as Pittsburgh and Denton, Texas. Scientists have also raised concerns about the greenhouse-gas impacts of methane leaks from gas drilling sites, and about a spread of small-scale earthquakes apparently linked to the underground disposal of fracking waste.

But environmentalists have had little success in curbing fracking on a large scale — and have been unable to get either Obama or Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton to embrace their cause. Clinton has hailed natural gas as playing “an important bridge role in the transition to a cleaner energy economy,” despite calling for curbs on methane leaks. Obama has repeatedly praised the gas boom, including during his State of the Union addresses, and has even lumped together “wind, solar and natural gas” as the centerpieces of the nation’s energy strategy.

Natural gas dovetails with Obama’s climate agenda because the fuel generally produces half the greenhouse gas impact of coal. But some green groups dismiss gas as a crutch, saying the U.S. should be moving faster to carbon-free energy sources like solar and wind.

The EPA’s findings do not fully dismiss environmentalists’ concerns that fracking could imperil the water supply, pointing to “potential vulnerabilities in the water lifecycle that could impact drinking water” — along with “specific instances where one or more of these mechanisms led to impacts on drinking water resources, including contamination of drinking water wells.”

Still, the EPA said: “We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States. … The number of identified cases where drinking water resources were impacted are small relative to the number of hydraulically fractured wells.”

The agency acknowledged that lack of data may lead to the risks being underestimated.

Among the possible areas of risk from fracking, according to EPA’s study, are “water withdrawals in areas with low water availability; hydraulic fracturing conducted directly into formations containing drinking water resources; inadequately cased or cemented wells resulting in below ground migration of gases and liquids; inadequately treated wastewater discharged into drinking water resources; and spills of hydraulic fluids and hydraulic fracturing wastewater, including flowback and produced water.”

The EPA study, first requested by Congress during the fiscal 2010 appropriations cycle, is not designed to evaluate the effectiveness of existing fracking regulations or suggest new rules for the practice. The agency conducted a comprehensive peer review of existing studies on fracking’s drinking-water impacts.

By Elana Schor

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

House Committee Knows Of Hillary Email Server Whistleblower

June 3, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

hillary-nad-humaThe House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform recently heard new information that could blow the lid off of the Hillary Clinton private email server scandal and shed new light on a consulting job Huma Abedin held while working as Clinton’s aide at the State Department.

The Daily Caller learned of a three-hour May 1 meeting two State Department whistleblowers held with the general counsel and staffers for the Oversight Committee, which is led by Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz.

According to a copy of notes from that meeting, State Department whistleblower Richard Higbie and another whistleblower told of an inspector-turned-whistleblower with State’s office of the inspector general who claims his investigation into Abedin’s work with Teneo Holdings, a consulting firm, led to the discovery of Clinton’s private email server.

According to the notes, the whistleblower also told Higbie that the investigation was shut down by Harold Geisel, the former acting inspector general for the State Department whose tenure was marked by accusations of political favoritism.

TheDC confirmed the May 1 meeting with both Higbie and the second whistleblower in attendance. Notes from the meeting were shared with TheDC on the condition that the whistleblower with knowledge about Clinton’s server not be named. The Oversight Committee declined to comment, saying it doesn’t comment on matters involving whistleblowers.

According to the notes, the whistleblower in question “was the case agent on a criminal investigation pertaining to Huma Abedin and outside employment/income. The investigation involved the unlawful use of the clintonemail by Abedin to conceal their activity.”

While investigating Abedin’s gig with Teneo, a firm founded by former Bill Clinton adviser Doug Band, the inspector “identified the HRC email server and its use as part of his investigation. This developed into evidence implicating HRC,” according to the notes.

The whistleblower reportedly has his own notes and recordings to back his claims and says that the evidence shows that Clinton was “criminally culpable” to some degree.

The whistleblower could not provide more information to Higbie because of the non-disclosure agreement the State Department forced him to sign, according to the notes. The inspector still works for the agency, though in a different capacity. The whistleblower is willing to share his information if subpoenaed by Congress, the notes read.

Abedin’s arrangement with Teneo has been widely criticized for its appearance of a conflict of interest.

It was reported in May 2013, months after Clinton and Abedin left their posts, that the staffer failed to report income she earned while consulting for Teneo. Abedin was granted special government employee status to work at Teneo even as she work as an aide to Clinton.

While at State, both Clinton and Abedin used Clinton’s private email account, which was hosted at the domain clintonemail.com. Hillary used two addresses, HDR22@clintonemail.com and hrod17@clintonemail.com while Abedin, who is married to former New York U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, reportedly used the email address huma@clintonemail.com. It is unclear how often Abedin might have used the Clinton email address. A trove of emails released last month by the State Department show that she did often use her official State Department email account, unlike Clinton.

According to the notes, the inspector told Higbie after initial reports surfaced in March about Clinton’s private server that “only half of the hard truth was out.”

hillary-clinton-emailsClinton’s server, which was registered to her Chappaqua, N.Y. residence, has been the subject of intense intrigue. Clinton and her team have been vague about its existence and about how it was set up. She has also refused to turn it over to both the State Department and to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Her attorney, David Kendall, told that committee that the server has been wiped clean, though he did not specify when that occurred.

If the new whistleblower’s information pans out, it could pose a brand new headache for not just Clinton and Abedin but the State Department and its inspector general.

It was reported in April that State’s current inspector general, Steve Linick, informed Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley that his office was investigating Abedin’s past arrangement with Teneo.

In a letter to Grassley, stated that “based on my staff’s current knowledge, the OIG was not aware of Secretary Clinton’s and Ms. Abedin’s use of a private email system until recent media reports.”

Asked if former acting inspector general Geisel ever quashed an investigation into Clinton’s email server, a spokesman for the internal watchdog said that there was “no information to offer that would be responsive” to the inquiry.

By Chuck Ross

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Joseph Biden III Dead

May 30, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Joseph_Biden_IIIJoseph R. Biden III, Vice President’s Son, Dies at 46

WASHINGTON — Joseph R. Biden III, the former attorney general of Delaware and the eldest son of Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., has died of brain cancer, his father announced on Saturday. The younger Mr. Biden was 46.

Mr. Biden had spent more than a week receiving treatment at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Washington.

In a statement Saturday night, the vice president said: “It is with broken hearts that Hallie, Hunter, Ashley, Jill and I announce the passing of our husband, brother and son, Beau, after he battled brain cancer with the same integrity, courage and strength he demonstrated every day of his life.”

“In the words of the Biden family: Beau Biden was, quite simply, the finest man any of us have ever known.”

In 2010, the younger Mr. Biden, known as Beau, had suffered what officials described as a mild stroke. Three years later, he was admitted to the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston after what White House officials described at the time as “an episode of disorientation and weakness.”

Mr. Biden’s death marks a second tragic loss for the vice president, whose first wife, Neilia, and 13-month-old daughter, Naomi, were killed in a car accident in 1972. 

Officials said in 2013 that the doctors in Texas had removed a small lesion from his brain.

Mr. Biden’s death marks a second tragic loss for the vice president, whose first wife, Neilia, and 13-month-old daughter, Naomi, were killed in a car accident in 1972 when the station wagon they were driving in to go Christmas shopping was hit by a tractor-trailer. Beau Biden and his brother, Hunter, were also injured in the crash, but both survived.

A popular Democratic politician in his home state who was known to be very close to his father, Mr. Biden served two terms as Delaware’s top law enforcement official before announcing last year that he would not run for a third term so he could make a bid for governor in 2016.

Bidens

“What started as a thought — a very persistent thought — has now become a course of action that I wish to pursue,” Mr. Biden wrote in an open letter to his constituents in April 2014.

As recently as late February, some Delaware politicians close to Mr. Biden told news organizations that they still believed Mr. Biden planned to run for governor in 2016.

But Mr. Biden’s health had apparently declined in recent weeks, and he was taken to Walter Reed on May 20.

A handsome, energetic politician whose broad smile mirrored that of his father, Mr. Biden appeared to be a natural to follow his father’s path toward national political success.

A lawyer by training, Mr. Biden joined the Delaware National Guard in 2003, serving as a major in the Judge Advocate General Corps. His unit was deployed to Iraq in 2008, while his father was running for vice president.

In a short, emotional speech introducing his father at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, Mr. Biden recalled the tragedy that had touched his family, describing the moments after the crash.

“One of my earliest memories was being in that hospital, Dad always at our side. We, not the Senate, were all he cared about,” Mr. Biden said. “He decided not to take the oath of office. He said, ‘Delaware can get another senator, but my boys can’t get another father.’ However, great men like Ted Kennedy, Mike Mansfield, Hubert Humphrey — men who had been tested themselves — convinced him to serve. So he was sworn in, in the hospital, at my bedside.”

Many in Delaware expected Mr. Biden to run for his father’s Senate seat after the 2008 election, but the younger Biden, who was elected attorney general in 2006, declined, saying he was still needed in his state as he pressed ahead on a major child molestation case his agency was pursuing against a pediatrician.

“I have a duty to fulfill as attorney general, and the immediate need to focus on a case of great consequence. And that is what I must do.”

Instead, he ran for re-election in 2010, serving a second term before deciding to seek higher office.

Mr. Biden is survived by his wife, Hallie, and two children.

President Obama said in a statement that he was grieving for the vice president and his family.

“For all that Beau Biden achieved in his life, nothing made him prouder, nothing made him happier, nothing claimed a fuller focus of his love and devotion than his family,” Mr. Obama said. “Just like his dad.”

Mr. Obama called the vice president “one of the strongest men” he had ever known and offered a quote from the poet, William Butler Yeats. “I have believed the best of every man,” Yeats wrote, “and find that to believe it is enough to make a bad man show him at his best or even a good man swing his lantern higher.”

“Beau Biden believed the best of us all. For him, and for his family, we swing our lanterns higher.”

New York Times

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Clinton Would Show Up For Lifetime Achievement Award, Only if Paid $500G

May 29, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

clinton_500kThe Clinton camp was hit Friday with yet another bombshell report on the family foundation, even as the Democratic power couple launched a counteroffensive against critics of the foundation’s dealings.

The New York Times reported Friday on a questionable arrangement last year involving Bill Clinton’s attendance at a fundraising gala thrown by a school-building charity.

According to the report, Clinton agreed to accept a lifetime achievement award at the June 2014 gala, hosted by the Happy Hearts Fund, only after founder Petra Nemcova offered to give $500,000 to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

Sue Veres Royal, the group’s executive director at the time who was later “dismissed,” alleged that this amounted to a “quid pro quo.”

She told the Times the foundation had rejected an invitation from the Happy Hearts Fund “more than once.” That changed, she said, when “there was a thinly veiled solicitation and then the offer of an honorarium.”

NEW YORK CITY- SEPTEMBER 22: Former US President Bill Clinton (R) stands on stage with his wife Hillary Rodham Clinton (L), Secretary of State, and their daughter Chelsea Clinton during the closing Plenary session of the seventh Annual Meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) at the Sheraton New York Hotel on September 22, 2011 in New York City. Established in 2005 by former U.S. President Bill Clinton, the CGI assembles global leaders to develop and implement solutions to some of the world's most urgent problems. (Photo by Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)

Representatives for Nemcova and the foundation countered that the money was not solicited — and would be used for projects in Haiti.

The revelations are the latest to raise questions about possible favor-trading at the foundation, as Hillary Clinton mounts her run for the Democratic presidential nomination and her supporters try to tamp down controversy surrounding the family charity.

The fundraiser in question was initially meant to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Indian Ocean tsunami — Nemcova, a well-known Czech model, founded the charity after surviving the 2004 disaster, while in Thailand.

The Times reported that the fund first asked Bill Clinton to be an honoree in 2011, and again in 2013. They were turned down. But another invitation letter was reportedly sent in August 2013, offering to work around Clinton’s schedule, and shifting the focus from Indonesia to Haiti.

The invitation added that the fund “would like to also share the proceeds of the event with the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, committing at least $500,000 in partnership on a joint educational project in Haiti, of your selection.”

He accepted.

The Times report pointed out that the foundation donation effectively rerouted money raised at the gala to an organization with a significantly larger budget. According to the Times, the $500,000 donation was worth almost a quarter of the event’s net proceeds and could have funded the construction of several schools in Indonesia.

Charity experts told the Times it is rare for such honorees to get money from a gala’s proceeds.

The former president and aides to Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, are pushing back on some of the critical reports surrounding the foundation.

On Friday, the former president said in a letter to supporters that the foundation remains a “non-partisan” philanthropy and he’s determined to continue its mission.

The former president said in the letter that “it’s the political season in America” and the impact of the organization has “largely been ignored” recently.

Top aides to Hillary Clinton also said late Thursday they see no permanent damage to her campaign over questions about the Clinton Foundation and other ethics issues, while acknowledging they expect an extremely competitive general election fought on other issues like the economy next year.

One top Clinton campaign official said they have a good story to tell about the philanthropic work of the Clintons and will make that case in the days ahead. The aides spoke at a briefing with reporters at Clinton’s campaign headquarters in Brooklyn.

Fox News’ Ed Henry and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Harf Leaving State Dept. Spokeswoman Post for Promotion

May 27, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Marie-HarfFrom suggesting combating ISIS with jobs to dismissing questions about Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s conduct as “rumor,” spokeswoman Marie Harf has woven a rich tapestry as the voice of the State Department.

But she’s moving on.

The department announced late Tuesday that starting June 1, Harf will be moving out of the briefing room and beginning a “new role” as senior adviser for strategic communications to Secretary of State John Kerry. (Ex-Pentagon spokesman John Kirby has already assumed the role of spokesman, while former deputy spokesman Mark Toner is moving into his old job.)

Here’s a look back at some of Harf’s more memorable moments:

June 3, 2014: In response to questioning by Fox News at the briefing, Harf downplayed criticism of the recently announced trade of five Taliban fighters for Bergdahl.

She downplayed “conflicting reports” and “rumor” when asked about accounts from Bergdahl’s platoon-mates that he walked off base.

“There’s a lot of rumor and telephone game that’s being played here,” she said.

After continued questioning, she said: “It happened five years ago.”

Bergdahl would later be charged with desertion. Former commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan Gen. Stanley McChrystal also told Fox News this week it was his initial understanding as well that Bergdahl walked off his base before he disappeared.

Sept. 25, 2014: Harf was asked, in an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly, to respond to a warning that the U.S. would lose if President Obama did not approve ground troops to fight the Islamic State in Iraq.

“I’m not exactly sure what ‘lose’ means,” Harf said, arguing the solution is “targeted military action.” She said the prior U.S. engagement in Iraq, with tens of thousands of U.S. troops on the ground, couldn’t prevent terrorism.

Feb. 16, 2015: Speaking on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” Harf suggested that jobs programs are needed to help take on the Islamic State.

“We’re killing a lot of them, and we’re going to keep killing more of them. … But we cannot win this war by killing them,” she said. “We need … to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs, whether –”

Harf was interrupted by host Chris Matthews, who pointed out, “There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going to be poor Muslims.” She acknowledged there’s “no easy solution” and said the U.S. would still take out ISIS leaders. But Harf said: “If we can help countries work at the root causes of this — what makes these 17-year-old kids pick up an AK-47 instead of trying to start a business?”

Feb. 17, 2015: Responding to critics of her remarks on helping fight terror by creating jobs, Harf said her statements were just “too nuanced” for her critics.

“Longer term, we cannot kill every terrorist around the world, nor should we try,” Harf said on CNN. “How do you get at the root causes of this? Look, it might be too nuanced an argument for some, like I’ve seen over the past 24 hours some of the commentary out there, but it’s really the smart way that Democrats, Republicans, military commanders, our partners in the Arab world think we need to combat this.” Harf went on to say the approach doesn’t fit “into a sound bite.”

March 6, 2015: Fielding questions at the briefing about ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of private email, Harf was asked if the department would release a 2011 cable — obtained by Fox News — showing her office told employees not to use personal email for security reasons.

“I think everyone can read it at FoxNews.com,” she quipped.

She then assured, “That was in no way an endorsement,” before adding: “I don’t mean to be flip about it.”

Everyone can still read it at FoxNews.com, here.

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Fed Appeals Court Stops Obama’s Executive Actions on Immigration

May 26, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Obama_worriedA federal appeals court refused Tuesday to lift a temporary hold on President Obama’s executive action that could shield from deportation as many as 5 million immigrants illegally living in the U.S.

The U.S. Justice Department had asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse a Texas judge who agreed to temporarily block the president’s plan in February, after 26 states filed a lawsuit alleging Obama’s action was unconstitutional. But two out of three judges on a court panel voted to deny the government’s request.

It wasn’t immediately clear if the government would appeal, either to the full appeals court in New Orleans or to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The states suing to block the plan, led by Texas, argue that Obama acted outside his authority and that the changes would force them to invest more in law enforcement, health care and education. But the White House has said the president acted within his powers to fix a “broken immigration system.”

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen sided with the states and, from his court in Brownsville, Texas, issued a temporary injunction on Feb. 16 to block the plan from taking effect while the lawsuit works its way through the courts.

Justice Department lawyers sought a stay while they appealed the injunction. They argued that keeping the temporary hold interfered with the Homeland Security Department’s ability to protect the U.S. and secure the nation’s borders. They also said immigration policy is a domain of the federal government, not the states.

But, in Tuesday’s ruling, 5th Circuit judges Jerry Smith and Jennifer Walker Elrod denied the stay, saying in an opinion written by Smith, that the federal government lawyers are unlikely to succeed on the merits of that appeal. Judge Stephen Higginson dissented.

children_border_1

Obama announced the executive action in November, saying lack of action by Congress forced him to make sweeping changes to immigration rules on his own. Republicans said Obama overstepped his presidential authority.

The first of Obama’s orders — to expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children — was set to take effect Feb. 18. The other major part, extending deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for some years, had been scheduled to begin May 19.

Hanen issued his injunction believing that neither action had taken effect. But the Justice Department later told Hanen that more than 108,000 people had already received three-year reprieves from deportation as well as work permits. Hanen said the federal government had been “misleading,” but he declined to sanction the government’s attorneys.

The Justice Department has also asked the 5th Circuit to reverse Hanen’s overall ruling that sided with the states. A decision on that appeal, which will be argued before the court in July, could take months.

Along with Texas, the states seeking to block Obama’s action are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

The Associated Press

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

FBI Launches Investigation Into Hillary Clinton Bribery Case

May 21, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2009.  (AP Photo/Jeff Christensen)After several weeks of speculation whether the Department of Justice would investigate wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton and former president Bill Clinton in their “Pay for Play” scheme through their family’s foundation, the FBI has in fact launched a formal investigation.

At stake is more than $100 million purportedly paid to the Clintons through their foundation–The Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. Reports have surfaced that the foundation served as nothing more than a pool into which bribes were paid, soliciting political favors from Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State.

The fraud was first exposed in Peter Schweizer’s upcoming book “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.”

Over the past six weeks, Wall Street financial analyst and investor Charles Ortel has reported the results of his six-month, in-depth investigation into what he characterizes as an elaborate scheme devised by the Clintons to enrich themselves.

NEW YORK CITY- SEPTEMBER 22: Former US President Bill Clinton (R) stands on stage with his wife Hillary Rodham Clinton (L), Secretary of State, and their daughter Chelsea Clinton during the closing Plenary session of the seventh Annual Meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) at the Sheraton New York Hotel on September 22, 2011 in New York City. Established in 2005 by former U.S. President Bill Clinton, the CGI assembles global leaders to develop and implement solutions to some of the world's most urgent problems. (Photo by Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)By Mrs. Clinton’s own admission, she has attempted to hide communications about the personal enrichment schemes by failing to turn over her email communications to the State Department upon her exit from office, and subsequently attempted to wipe her personal email server clean to destroy all traces of evidence.

FBI investigators will be focusing on retrieving evidence from the wiped hard drives of the email server, as well as quid pro quo exchanges of money and favors between the Clintons and foreign and business interests. FBI spokesmen are not yet confirming that the investigation has been launched, but sources close to the story affirm that the FBI is indeed investigating.
PUBLIUS

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Allen West: Liberals Responsible for Black Genocide

May 21, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

Black_FamilyWhen we look at the failures in the black community today, there seem to be lots of “activists” who want to tell us the problem lies in poor police relations — militant policing and presence. About two weeks ago I was on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show. The issue was about the black community and the other guests ranted on about everything other than what the real problem is — the decimation of the black family. Now, I must apologize because I’ve been sharing that the illegitimacy rate in the black community was 72 percent. I was wrong. It’s now 75 percent.

As Dr. Walter E. Williams writes for CNSnews.com, “Hustlers and people with little understanding want us to believe that today’s black problems are the continuing result of a legacy of slavery, poverty and racial discrimination. The fact is that most of the social pathology seen in poor black neighborhoods is entirely new in black history. Let’s look at some of it. Today the overwhelming majority of black children are raised in single female-headed families. As early as the 1880s, three-quarters of black families were two-parent. In 1925 New York City, 85 percent of black families were two-parent. One study of 19th-century slave families found that in up to three-fourths of the families, all the children had the same mother and father.”

“Today’s black illegitimacy rate of nearly 75 percent is also entirely new. In 1940, black illegitimacy stood at 14 percent. It had risen to 25 percent by 1965, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action” and was widely condemned as a racist. By 1980, the black illegitimacy rate had more than doubled, to 56 percent, and it has been growing since. Both during slavery and as late as 1920, a teenage girl raising a child without a man present was rare among blacks.”

“Much of today’s pathology seen among many blacks is an outgrowth of the welfare state that has made self-destructive behavior less costly for the individual. Having children without the benefit of marriage is less burdensome if the mother receives housing subsidies, welfare payments and food stamps. Plus, the social stigma associated with unwed motherhood has vanished. Female-headed households, whether black or white, are a ticket for dependency and all of its associated problems. Ignored in all discussions is the fact that the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994.”

lbj-dead-nytThose are facts and there is only one group that MUST be held responsible for this degradation and decimation of the black family — white liberal progressive socialists. It was fifty years ago when President Lyndon Johnson came up with the brilliant idea of the government giving a check to a woman having a child out of wedlock. But worse, the checks would continue to come as long as no man was to be found in the home.

So Johnson delivered a one-two punch: he told mainly young black girls having babies out of wedlock and not as part of a family was a financially beneficially course of action, and he told young black men they weren’t responsible or accountable for the most basic of tasks — being a father.

Now, here is the alternative that the white liberal progressives would present — just kill the child — again, promoting an utter disregard and disrespect for the sanctity of life in the black community.

But then again, Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, had some very interesting thoughts on this topic, in her “Plan for Peace” from Birth Control Review (April 1932, pp. 107-108) “Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code shall be to provide for a better distribution of babies… and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit. Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit…Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.”

Or how about this from Woman, Morality and Birth Control: “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Doggone, I guess I’m one of those “more rebellious members.”

My point is that it seems the liberal progressive socialists have had a dedicated objective to destroy the once strong black family. It is a two-pronged assault — either through the expanded welfare nanny-state or by the outright murder of black babies. And sadly, Sanger was correct, white liberal progressives found colored ministers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson who have placated the black community into advancing its own suicide.

And so the unemployment rate skyrockets and the education opportunities dwindle — thanks to the white liberal progressive teachers unions, NEA/AFT. It’s truly as Jason Riley asks in his book Please Stop Helping Us.

And so we have the first black first lady, Michele Obama, who instead of talking about resurrecting Booker T. Washington’s three point agenda — education, entrepreneurship, and self-reliance — has bought into the white liberal progressive socialist message of black victimhood and dependence, instead of black success, achievement, and victory. Instead of addressing these horrific statistics in which she and President Barack Obama exist, that only 25 percent of black children have a two-parent home, they choose to be the messengers of the white liberal progressives and help keep the black community on the 21st century economic plantation.

And tell me, who are the “sellouts?”

By Allen West

allen_west_3

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Federal Court Rebukes Obama’s NSA Phone Records Collection

May 7, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

nsa-spyingThe National Security Agency’s bulk phone record collection program was dealt a blow Thursday as a federal appeals court said the controversial program exceeds what Congress has allowed and urged lawmakers to step in.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan permitted the National Security Agency program to continue temporarily as it exists, and all but pleaded for Congress to better define where the boundaries exist.

“In light of the asserted national security interests at stake, we deem it prudent to pause to allow an opportunity for debate in Congress that may (or may not) profoundly alter the legal landscape,” the opinion written by Circuit Judge Gerald Lynch said.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch and other Obama administration officials said they are reviewing the decision, while civil liberties-minded lawmakers cheered the ruling.

“This is a monumental decision for all lovers of liberty,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a Republican presidential candidate, said in a statement.

The ruling comes at a key time, with relevant provisions of the Patriot Act set to expire June 1 and Congress debating potential changes.

Paul on Thursday reiterated his call for Congress to repeal the relevant Patriot Act provisions. The House is planning a vote on the USA Freedom Act, a bill that would effectively end bulk data collection and curb other provisions of the Patriot Act. But in the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he’s pursuing a “clean” extension of the law.

Thursday’s ruling said that if Congress decides to authorize the collection of data as it is done now, “the program will continue in the future under that authorization.”

But the judges added: “If Congress decides to institute a substantially modified program, the constitutional issues will certainly differ considerably from those currently raised.”

NSA_SnowdenThe appeals judges said the issues raised in a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union illustrated the complexity of balancing privacy interests with the nation’s security.

A lower court judge in December had thrown out the case, saying the program was a necessary extension to security measures taken after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The appeals court, which heard two hours of arguments by lawyers in December, said the lower court had erred in ruling that the phone records collection program was authorized in the manner it was being carried out.

During the December arguments, the judges said the case would likely be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A spokesman with the White House National Security Council said they are “evaluating the decision. ”

The spokesman stressed that President Obama “has been clear that he believes we should end the Section 215 bulk telephony metadata program as it currently exists by creating an alternative mechanism to preserve the program’s essential capabilities without the government holding the bulk data,” and said, “We continue to work closely with members of Congress from both parties to do just that.”

In 2013, secret NSA documents were leaked to journalists by contractor Edward Snowden, revealing that the agency was collecting phone records and digital communications of millions of citizens not suspected of crimes and prompting congressional reform. Snowden remains exiled in Russia.

A spokeswoman for government lawyers in New York declined to comment Thursday.

The ACLU did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

‘Jade Helm’ Military Exercise Causing Political Firestorm

May 6, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

jade_helmA massive military exercise planned in states across the American West has touched off a political firestorm, with several top Texas officials now questioning the military’s plans – if only to calm the Internet and constituent furor surrounding it.

The seven-state war simulation exercise, known as “Jade Helm 15,” is planned for this summer. It involves training exercises on private and public land – while such exercises are hardly unique, even the military acknowledges the “size and scope” of this one sets it apart.

While the White House and Pentagon are downplaying concerns, this hasn’t stopped a barrage of blogs and tweets warning about whether the federal government is preparing for “martial law.” Even actor Chuck Norris is keeping his “eyes of a ranger” on the situation.

Western-state officials are now caught between a desire to calm their residents – and yet not appear to stoke any conspiracy theories.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott already has asked the State Guard to monitor the training exercises, after officials faced worried residents at a packed town hall meeting.

This alone triggered accusations that the Republican governor is “pandering to idiots.”

On Monday, the governor defended his actions. “There was, frankly, an overreaction to the simple fact that someone has to be in charge with gathering and disseminating information,” said Abbott, speaking to reporters. “We stepped in to play that role, which is a role to be applauded.”

On Tuesday, Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert also released a lengthy statement saying his office has been “inundated” with calls on the matter.

“This military practice has some concerned that the U.S. Army is preparing for modern-day martial law,” he said. “Certainly, I can understand these concerns.”

At the same time, Gohmert said he understands why military officials want to test whether Special Forces groups can move around a civilian population and handle various threat scenarios.

Gohmert explained that his concerns stem from the way the military is approaching the exercise. He cited a widely circulated map which details the seven states that are part of the exercise – California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado and Texas. The map has Utah and Texas colored red and labels them “hostile.” It labels other states as “permissive,” leaning hostile” and “leaning friendly.”

Gohmert said he was “rather appalled” that the “hostile” areas “have a Republican majority, ‘cling to their guns and religion,’ and believe in the sanctity of the United States Constitution.”

He called this an “affront” to residents there and urged the military to change its approach and tone. “The map of the exercise needs to change, the names on the map need to change, and the tone of the exercise needs to be completely revamped so the federal government is not intentionally practicing war against its own states,” he said.

And Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican presidential candidate, told Bloomberg he’s reached out to the Pentagon to “inquire about this exercise.” He said he has no reason to doubt the Pentagon’s assurances, but he understands residents’ concerns – and backs Abbott’s actions.

But the White House and Pentagon are pushing back. Last week, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said he has “no idea what [Abbott is] thinking.”

“In no way will the constitutional rights or civil liberties of any American citizen be infringed upon while this exercise is being conducted,” Earnest said.

Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren likewise said it “poses no threat” to civil liberties.

“This is a several weeks long training exercise with the purpose to refine the skills of our special operations forces,” he said, while batting back “strange Internet conspiracy theories” and “wild speculation” about the operation.

Special Operations Command said in a March press release that the exercise, from July 15 through Sept. 15, will only take place on “pre-coordinated” public and private lands – with permission from landowners and officials. Much of it would be in “remote areas,” though residents may see an uptick in “vehicle and military air traffic and its associated noise.”

An official with Special Operations Command also told Fox 13 Salt Lake City that the purpose was to replicate “potential terrain” soldiers might find themselves in overseas. As for labeling states like Utah “hostile,” the official said that was part of the design. “It is fictional and is not intended to represent any belief that the state of Utah is hostile,” the official said.

The politics have gotten tricky for western state lawmakers, however, as it puts them between concerned residents and America’s soldiers.

In Texas, Democratic Party Deputy Executive Director Manny Garcia called on Abbott to apologize to the military, accusing the governor of giving “credence to conspiracy theorists by ordering the Texas State Guard to monitor U.S. military operations.”

Meanwhile, Chuck Norris, a.k.a. “Walker, Texas Ranger,” is backing up the governor.

Writing on the conservative website WorldNetDaily, he said: “Concerned Texans and Americans are in no way calling into question our brave and courageous men and women in uniform. They are merely following orders. What’s under question are those who are pulling the strings at the top of Jade Helm 15 back in Washington. The U.S. government says, ‘It’s just a training exercise.’ But I’m not sure the term ‘just’ has any reference to reality when the government uses it.”

By Ashton Edwards and Max Roth, The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Embarrassing Climate Change Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry

May 5, 2015 By Editor 3 Comments

a_gore_fraudIt is often said that non-scientists must rely on “expert opinion” to determine whether claims on alleged “catastrophic man-made global warming” are true. Putting aside the fact that there is no global-warming “consensus” among experts, one does not have to be a scientist, or even proficient in science, to be able to review past predictions, and then form an informed opinion regarding the accuracy of those predictions.

Suppose, for example, you regularly watch a local TV weatherman forecast the weather for your area. Would you need a degree in meteorology in order to decide for yourself how reliable, or unreliable, the weatherman’s forecasts are?

Warnings have been issued for many decades now regarding catastrophic climate change that forecasted certain trends or occurrences that we should already have witnessed. Yet such predictions have turned out to be very, very wrong. This was certainly the case with the alarmist predictions of the 1960s and ’70s that man’s activities on Earth were causing a catastrophic cooling trend that would bring on another ice age. And it is also the case with the more recent claims about catastrophic global warming.

What follows is a very brief review of these predictions compared to what actually happened.

Global Cooling?

Americans who lived through the 1960s and ’70s may remember the dire global-cooling predictions that were hyped and given great credibility by Newsweek, Time, Life, National Geographic, and numerous other mainstream media outlets. According to the man-made global-cooling theories of the time, billions of people should be dead by now owing to cooling-linked crop failures and starvation.

New_Ice_Age“If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000,” claimed ecology professor Kenneth E.F. Watt at the University of California in 1970. “This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Of course, 2000 came and went, and the world did not get 11 degrees colder. No ice age arrived, either.

In 1971, another global-cooling alarmist, Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich, who is perhaps best known for his 1968 book The Population Bomb, made similarly wild forecasts for the end of the millennium in a speech at the British Institute for Biology. “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people,” he claimed. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.” Of course, England still exists, and its population was doing much better in 2000 than when Ehrlich made his kooky claims. But long before 2000, Ehrlich had abandoned global-cooling alarmism in favor of warning that the Earth faced catastrophic global warming. Now he is warning that humans may soon be forced to resort to cannibalism.

To combat the alleged man-made cooling, “experts” suggested all sorts of grandiose schemes, including some that in retrospect appear almost too comical to be real. “Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climate change, or even to allay its effects,” reported Newsweek in its 1975 article “The Cooling World,” which claimed that Earth’s temperature had been plunging for decades due to humanity’s activities. Some of the “more spectacular solutions” proposed by the cooling theorists at the time included “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers,” Newsweek reported.

Of course, the big alleged threat hyped in recent decades has been global warming, not global cooling. But the accuracy of the climate-change predictions since the cooling fears melted away has hardly improved.

United Nations “Climate Refugees”

In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by “man-made global warming” would lead to massive population disruptions. In a handy map, the organization highlighted areas that were supposed to be particularly vulnerable in terms of producing “climate refugees.” Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas.

The 2005 UNEP predictions claimed that, by 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from those regions of the globe. However, not only did the areas in question fail to produce a single “climate refugee,” by 2010, population levels for those regions were actually still soaring. In many cases, the areas that were supposed to be producing waves of “climate refugees” and becoming uninhabitable turned out to be some of the fastest-growing places on Earth.

In the Bahamas, for example, according to the 2010 census, there was a major increase in population, going from around 300,000 in 2000 to more than 350,000 by 2010. The population of St. Lucia, meanwhile, grew by five percent during the same period. The Seychelles grew by about 10 percent. The Solomon Islands also witnessed a major population boom during that time frame, gaining another 100,000 people, or an increase of about 25 percent.

In China, meanwhile, the top six fastest growing cities were all within the areas highlighted by the UN as likely sources of “climate refugees.” Many of the fastest-growing U.S. cities were also within or close to “climate refugee” danger zones touted by the UN

Niagra_Falls_FrozenRather than apologizing for its undisputable mistake after being first exposed by reporter Gavin Atkins at Asian Correspondent, the global body responded in typical alarmist fashion: with an Orwellian coverup seeking to erase all evidence of its ridiculous predictions. First, the UNEP took its “climate refugees” map down from the Web. That failed, of course, because the content was archived online prior to its disappearance down the UN “memory hole.

Then the UNEP tried and failed to distance itself from the outlandish claims, despite the fact that the map was created by a UNEP cartographer, released by UNEP, and repeatedly hyped by the outfit in its scaremongering campaigns. Eventually, as more and more media around the world began picking up the story, a spokesperson for the UN agency claimed the map was removed because it was “causing confusion.”

It was hardly the first time UN bureaucrats had made such dire predictions, only to be proven wrong. On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press ran an article headlined: “UN Official Predicts Disaster, Says Greenhouse Effect Could Wipe Some Nations Off Map.” In the piece, the director of the UNEP’s New York office was quoted as claiming that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” He also predicted “coastal flooding and crop failures” that “would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.”

Other UN predictions were so ridiculous that they were retracted before they could even be proven wrong. Consider, as just one example, the scandal that came to be known as “Glaciergate.” In its final 2007 report, widely considered the “gospel” of “settled” climate “science,” the UN IPCC suggested that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 or sooner. It turns out the wild assertion was lifted from World Wildlife Fund propaganda literature. The IPCC recanted the claim after initially defending it.

Pentagon Climate Forecasts

Like the UN, the Pentagon commissioned a report on “climate change” that also offered some highly alarming visions of the future under “global warming.” The 2003 document, entitled “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” was widely cited by global-warming theorists, bureaucrats, and the establishment press as evidence that humanity was facing certain doom. It also served as the foundation for the claim that alleged man-made “climate change” was actually a “national security concern.” However, fortunately for the taxpayers forced to pay for the study, the Pentagon report turned out to be just as ridiculous as the UN “climate refugees” forecasts.

MoS2 Template MasterBy now, according to the “not implausible” scaremongering outlined in the report for a 10-year time period, the world should be a post-apocalyptic disaster zone. Among other outlandish scenarios envisioned in the report over the preceding decade: California flooded with inland seas, parts of the Netherlands “unlivable,” polar ice all but gone in the summers, and surging temperatures. Mass increases in hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters were supposed to be wreaking havoc across the globe, too. All of that would supposedly spark resource wars and all sorts of other horrors. But none of it actually happened.

The Pentagon report even claimed there was “general agreement in the scientific community” that the extreme scenarios it envisioned could come to pass, and reporters treated it as if it were a prophecy delivered to climate sinners by God Himself. However, when interviewed by the Washington Times for a June 1, 2014 article, consultant and report co-author Doug Randall expressed surprise at how often the now-debunked forecasts were parroted. Yet he still defended the hysterical fear peddling. “When you are looking at worst-case 10 years out, you are not trying to predict precisely what’s going to happen but instead trying to get people to understand what could happen to motivate strategic decision-making and wake people up,” Randall said. “But whether the actual specifics came true, of course not. That never was the main intent.”

The first article about the climate report appeared in early 2004, when the report was leaked to the U.K. Observer, under the sensationalistic title: “Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us.” In a bullet-point summary at the top of the Observer article, journalists Mark Townsend and Paul Harris added: “Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war” and “Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years.” The rest of the article was just as outlandish, going even beyond what the now-discredited Pentagon report claimed. Other reporters took their cue from the Observer article, which in retrospect would have been a hilarious piece of writing if it had not been taken so seriously at the time.

No More Snow?

For well over a decade now, climate alarmists have been claiming that snow would soon become a thing of the past. In March 2000, for example, “senior research scientist” David Viner, working at the time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he was quoted as claiming in the article, headlined “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.”

heat-cartoonThe very next year, snowfall across the United Kingdom increased by more than 50 percent. In 2008, perfectly timed for a “global warming” legislation debate in Parliament, London saw its first October snow since 1934 — or possibly even 1922, according to the U.K. Register. “It is unusual to have snow this early,” a spokesperson for the alarmist U.K. Met office admitted to The Guardian newspaper. By December of 2009, London saw its heaviest levels of snowfall in two decades. In 2010, the coldest U.K. winter since rec­ords began a century ago blanketed the islands with snow.

In early 2004, the CRU’s Viner and other self-styled “experts” warned that skiing in Scotland would soon become just a memory, thanks to alleged global warming. “Unfortunately, it’s just getting too hot for the Scottish ski industry,” Viner told The Guardian. Another “expert,” Adam Watson with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, told the paper that the skiing industry in Scotland had less than two decades left to go. Yet in 2013, too much snow kept many Scottish resorts closed. “Nevis Range, The Lecht, Cairngorm, Glenshee and Glencoe all remain closed today due to the heavy snow,” reported OnTheSnow.com on January 4, 2013. Ironically, by 2014, the BBC, citing experts, reported that the Scottish hills had more snow than at any point in seven decades. It also reported that the Nevis Range ski resort could not operate some of its lifts because they were “still buried under unprecedented amounts of snow.”

The IPCC has also been relentlessly hyping the snowless winter scare, along with gullible or agenda-driven politicians. In its 2001 Third Assessment Report, for example, the IPCC claimed “milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms.” Again, though, the climate refused to cooperate. The year 2013, the last year for which complete data is available, featured the fourth-highest levels on record, according to data from Rutgers University’s Global Snow Lab. Spring snow cover was the highest in a decade, while data for the fall indicate that it was the fifth highest ever recorded. Last December, meanwhile, brought with it a new high record in Northern Hemisphere snow cover, Global Snow Lab data show.

Blame Global Warming?

After the outlandish predictions of snowless winters failed to materialize, the CRU dramatically changed its tune on snowfall. All across Britain, in fact, global-warming alarmists rushed to blame the record cold and heavy snow experienced in recent years on — you guessed it! — global warming. Less snow: global warming. More snow: global warming. Get it? Good.

The same phenomenon took place in the United States just last winter. As record cold and snowfall was pummeling much of North America, warming theorists contradicted all of their previous forecasts and claimed that global warming was somehow to blame. Among them: White House Science “Czar” John Holdren. “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues,” he claimed.

That assertion, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the UN “settled science” IPCC predicted in its 2001 global-warming report, which claimed that the planet would see “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change.” Ironically, perhaps, Holdren warned decades ago that human CO2 emissions would lead to a billion deaths due to global warming-fueled global cooling — yes, cooling, which he said would lead to a new ice age by 2020.

Ridiculous forecasts have been made by other “climate scientists” who, like Holdren, continue to reap huge amounts of U.S. taxpayer dollars in salaries, grants, and benefits despite being consistently wrong. James Hansen, for instance, who headed NASA’s Goddard Institute for three dec­ades before taking a post at Columbia University, is one of the best known “climatologists” in the world — despite his long and embarrassing record of bad forecasting spanning decades.

In 1988, Hansen was asked by journalist and author Rob Reiss how the “greenhouse effect” would affect the neighborhood outside his window within 20 years (by 2008). “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water,” Hansen claimed. “And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change…. There will be more police cars … [since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” In 1986, Hansen also predicted in congressional testimony that the Earth would be some two degrees warmer within 20 years. In recent years, after the anticipated warming failed to materialize, alarmists have cooled on predicting such a dramatic jump in temperature over such a short period of time.

Separately, another prominent alarmist, Princeton professor and lead UN IPCC author Michael Oppenheimer, made some dramatic predictions in 1990 while working as “chief scientist” for the Environmental Defense Fund. By 1995, he said then, the “greenhouse effect” would be “desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots.” By 1996, he added, the Platte River of Nebraska “would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” The situation would get so bad that “Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”

When confronted on his failed predictions, Oppenheimer, who also served as former Vice President Al Gore’s advisor, refused to apologize. “On the whole I would stand by these predictions — not predictions, sorry, scenarios — as having at least in a general way actually come true,” he claimed. “There’s been extensive drought, devastating drought, in significant parts of the world. The fraction of the world that’s in drought has increased over that period.” Unfortunately for Oppenheimer, even his fellow alarmists debunked that claim in a 2012 study for Nature, pointing out that there has been “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.”

Arctic Ice

Perhaps nowhere have the alarmists’ predictions been proven as wrong as at the Earth’s poles. In 2007, 2008, and 2009, Al Gore, the high priest for a movement described by critics as the “climate cult,” publicly warned that the North Pole would be “ice-free” in the summer by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made global warming.”

Speaking to an audience in Germany five years ago, Gore — sometimes ridiculed as “The Goracle” — alleged that “the entire North Polarized [sic] cap will disappear in five years.” “Five years,” Gore said again, in case anybody missed it the first time, is “the period of time during which it is now expected to disappear.”

The following year, Gore made similar claims at a UN “climate” summit in Copenhagen. “Some of the models … suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore claimed in 2009. “We will find out.”

Yes, we have found out. Contrary to the predictions by Gore and fellow alarmists, satellite data showed that Arctic ice volume as of summer of 2013 had actually expanded more than 50 percent over 2012 levels. In fact, during October 2013, sea-ice levels grew at the fastest pace since records began in 1979. Many experts now predict the ongoing expansion of Arctic ice to continue in the years to come, leaving global-warming alarmists scrambling for explanations to save face — and to revive the rapidly melting climate hysteria.

Gore, though, was hardly alone in making the ridiculous and now thoroughly discredited predictions about Arctic ice. Citing climate experts, the British government-funded BBC, for example, also hyped the mass hysteria, running a now-embarrassing article on December 12, 2007, under the headline: “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’.” In that piece, which was still online as of July 2014, the BBC highlighted alleged “modeling studies” that supposedly “indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.” Incredibly, some of the supposed “experts” even claimed it could happen before then, citing calculations performed by “super computers” that the BBC noted have “become a standard part of climate science in recent years.”

“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” claimed Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, described as a researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School who was working with co-workers at NASA to come up with the now-thoroughly discredited forecasts about polar ice. “So given that fact, you can argue that may be [sic] our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.” (Emphasis added.) Other “experts” quoted in the BBC article agreed with the hysteria.

In the real world, however, the scientific evidence demolishing the global-warming theories advanced by Gore, the UN, and government-funded “climate scientists” continues to grow, along with the ice cover in both hemispheres. In the Arctic, for example, data collected by Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft pointed to about 9,000 cubic kilometers of ice volume at the end of the 2013 melt season. In 2012, which was admittedly a low year, the total volume was about 6,000 cubic kilometers.

Indeed, in 2007, when Gore and others started making their predictions about imminent “ice-free” Arctic summers, the average sea-ice area extent after the summer melt for the month of September was 4.28 million square kilometers. By 2013, even on September 13, the minimum ice-cover day for the whole year, ice levels were way above the 2007 average for the month — by an area almost the size of California. The lowest level recorded on a single day during 2013 was 5.1 million square kilometers. By late July 2014, Arctic sea-ice extent was almost at its highest level in a decade, and scientists expect even less melting this summer than last year.

Despite parroting the wild claims five years ago, the establishment press has, unsurprisingly, refused to report that Gore and his fellow alarmists were proven embarrassingly wrong. No apologies from Gore have been forthcoming, either, and none of the “scientists” who made the ridiculous predictions quoted by the BBC has apologized or lost his taxpayer-funded job. In fact, almost unbelievably, the establishment press is now parroting new claims from the same discredited “experts” suggesting that the Arctic will be “ice-free” by 2016.

Antarctic Ice

Even more embarrassing for the warmists have been trends in the Southern Hemisphere. Of course, all of the “climate models” and “climate experts” and “scientists” predicted that rising CO2 emissions would increase global temperatures, which would melt the ice in Antarctica — by far the largest mass of frozen H2O on the planet. Indeed, the forecasts were crucial to many of the other predictions about surging sea levels and related gloom and doom.

The problem for global-warming theorists is that the opposite happened. Indeed, sea ice in Antarctica is off the charts, consistently smashing previous record highs on a near-daily basis. Sea-ice area in the south is now at the highest point since records began — by a lot — and the warmists are searching frantically for an explanation. Some are, incredibly, considering their past forecasts, trying to blame global warming. But the fact remains: Their predictions for Antarctica were as wrong as they possibly could be. Instead of melting as forecasted, ice levels are surging to new and unprecedented heights. As of early July, an area of the southern oceans the size of Greenland is frozen that, based on the average, should currently be open waters. If both poles are considered together, there is about one million square kilometers of frozen area above and beyond the long-term average.

Even UN warmists have been forced to concede that they do not know what is going on or why their “climate models” that predicted melting have been proven so wildly off the mark. “There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the observed increase in Antarctic sea ice extent since 1979, due to … incomplete and competing scientific explanations for the causes of change,” the IPCC admitted in its latest report. For now, the warmists have simply been trying their best to keep the public from noticing or examining the phenomenal growth in Antarctic ice.

As The New American reported earlier this year, the desperation and denial among warmists was illustrated perfectly in December. A ship full of global-warming alarmists led by a “climate scientist” went on a mission to study how “global warming” was melting Antarctic ice. Instead of completing their mission, they ended up getting their vessel trapped in record-setting levels of sea ice.

Obama Claims

In his second-term inaugural address, Obama also made some climate claims, saying: “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and powerful storms.” Ironically, all three of the examples he provided of what he called the “threat of climate change” actually discredit his argument.

As Forbes magazine pointed out last year, the number of wildfires has plummeted 15 percent since 1950, and according the National Academy of Sciences, that trend is likely to continue for decades. On “droughts,” a 2012 study published in the alarmist journal Nature noted that there has been “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.” The UN’s own climate alarmists were even forced to conclude last year that in many regions of the world, “droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter.”

Regarding hurricanes and tornadoes, it probably would have been hard for Obama to choose a worse example to illustrate the alleged threat of man-made warming. Contrary to predictions by global warmists, hurricanes and tornadoes have been hitting in record-setting low numbers. “When the 2014 hurricane season starts it will have been 3,142 days since the last Category 3+ storm made landfall in the U.S., shattering the record for the longest stretch between U.S. intense hurricanes since 1900,” noted professor of environmental studies Roger Pielke, Jr. at the University of Colorado, who last year left alarmists who had predicted more extreme weather linked to alleged global warming silent after pointing out the facts in a Senate hearing. “The five-year period ending 2013 has seen two hurricane landfalls. That is a record low since 1900.” After adjusting the data for trends such as population growth and better reporting, it appears that 2013 also featured the lowest number of tornadoes in the long-term record.

In June 2008, Obama declared: “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children … this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” He was referring, of course, to his own election, as if he were some sort of savior here to save humanity from its carbon-climate sins. In the real world, though, despite his grandiose and bombastic view of himself as global climate messiah, Obama has no more power to stop the “climate” from changing than his legions of discredited “experts” have demonstrated to successfully predict it.

Also ironically, perhaps, is that there had been no global warming since long before he took office. Worldwide, the disastrous forecasts by climate alarmists have proven to be similarly embarrassing. By now, anybody who follows “climate” news knows that “global warming” has been on what alarmists call “pause” for 18 years and counting, despite ongoing increases in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. The stubborn refusal of temperatures to rise (and accelerate) as forecasted by all of the UN’s 73 “climate models” has discredited the models, the UN, and the alleged “science” behind the computer forecasts. Every single model predicted more warming than has occurred, an atrocious record that defies explanation. Even a monkey rolling the dice or a scam artist pretending to read the future from a crystal ball would have a better record, based only on the laws of probability.

Of course, alarmists have come up with at least a dozen excuses for the failure of temperatures to rise in accordance with their debunked models. The Obama administration’s favorite: the theory of “The Ocean Ate My Global Warming.” Last year, the Associated Press, citing leaked documents, reported that the U.S. government had pressured the UN IPCC to incorporate that excuse, for which there is not a scintilla of observable evidence, into its most recent global-warming report.

A Prediction

The website Watts Up With That (WUWT), run by meteorologist and climate researcher Anthony Watts, highlighted the embarrassing record in late 2013 following a particularly devastating year for “climate” predictions. “It seems like every major CAGW [Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming] prediction has failed in 2013,” the article explains, citing a vast trove of scientific data debunking alarmist forecasts. “Regardless of efforts to nebulize CAGW to explain all forms of climatic and weather variation, in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed. The apparent complete failure of the CAGW narrative in 2013 could make the most fundamentalist agnostic wonder if Mother Nature sometimes takes sides, aka the Gore Effect.” Perhaps the Almighty has a sense of humor.

Few people would make an important decision based on next week’s weather forecast. When it comes to “climate,” though, the $360 billion-per-year climate establishment is telling humanity that civilization must be reorganized from top to bottom based on failed models purporting to make predictions decades and even centuries in advance. Flawed predictions aside, a great deal of evidence suggests accuracy or truth was never the intent — generating fear to seize more money and power was (and is). Many top alarmists have admitted as much, with some responding to the implosion of their theories with calls for censorship or, more extreme still, the imprisonment, re-education, and even execution of “climate deniers.”

The Earth’s climate has always changed, and very likely will continue to change, regardless of what humans do. What is now clear, though, is that the establishment has no idea what those changes will be — much less what drives the changes or how to control them.

By Alex Newman

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

‘Think For Yourself’: Dr. Ben Carson Trashes Dems, GOP, Media as He Opens His 2016 Campaign

May 4, 2015 By Editor Leave a Comment

ben-carson_runConservative author and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson officially launched his 2016 White House bid by trashing politicians from both major parties, and urged voters to trust their own judgment.

“I think it’s time for the people to rise up and take the government back,” he said on a stage in Detroit.

Conservative author and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson officially launched his 2016 White House bid by trashing politicians from both major parties, and urged voters to trust their own judgment.

“I think it’s time for the people to rise up and take the government back,” he said on a stage in Detroit.

“The political class won’t like me saying stuff like that,” Carson said. “I’ll tell you a secret, the political class comes from both parties.”

Carson cited the decision by both parties to allow the national debt to rise as a chief of example of how the entrenched political class has robbed America of its future. He criticized politicians for applauding slower increases in the national debt, which is already far too high.

“They are completely out to lunch. We have got to drive that thing back down,” he said.

“You need to know who your representatives are, and you need to know how they voted, not how they said they voted,” he said. “And if they voted to keep raising that debt ceiling, to keep compromising the future of our children and our grandchildren, you need to throw them out of office.”

Carson also warned that the modern press has played a role in selling the broken government to the public. He said politicians and the press have conspired to convince people that unemployment is not a major concern today, even though millions of people don’t count as unemployed simply because they have stopped looking for work.

“Unless you understand those kinds of things, it’s eminently possible for slick politicians and biased media to convince you that everything is wonderful when your eyes tell you something different,” he said.

“I’m saying to people around this nation right now, stop being loyal to a party or to a man, and use your brain to think for yourself,” he said.

Conservative author and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson officially launched his 2016 White House bid by trashing politicians from both major parties, and urged voters to trust their own judgment.

“I think it’s time for the people to rise up and take the government back,” he said on a stage in Detroit.

“The political class won’t like me saying stuff like that,” Carson said. “I’ll tell you a secret, the political class comes from both parties.”

Carson cited the decision by both parties to allow the national debt to rise as a chief of example of how the entrenched political class has robbed America of its future. He criticized politicians for applauding slower increases in the national debt, which is already far too high.

“They are completely out to lunch. We have got to drive that thing back down,” he said.

“You need to know who your representatives are, and you need to know how they voted, not how they said they voted,” he said. “And if they voted to keep raising that debt ceiling, to keep compromising the future of our children and our grandchildren, you need to throw them out of office.”

Carson also warned that the modern press has played a role in selling the broken government to the public. He said politicians and the press have conspired to convince people that unemployment is not a major concern today, even though millions of people don’t count as unemployed simply because they have stopped looking for work.

“Unless you understand those kinds of things, it’s eminently possible for slick politicians and biased media to convince you that everything is wonderful when your eyes tell you something different,” he said.

“I’m saying to people around this nation right now, stop being loyal to a party or to a man, and use your brain to think for yourself,” he said.

He later delivered a special message to the press, noting that it’s protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution because it was seen as an entity on the side the people.

“Our founders envisioned a press that was on side of the people, not a press that was on the side of the Democrats or the Republicans, or the Confederates or the anti-Confederates,” he said.

“This is a direct appeal to media,” he said. “You guys have an almost sacred position in a true democracy. Please don’t abuse it.”

Carson, an unabashed conservative, followed more than 30 minutes of live gospel music, and said Americans need a leader who is able to tap into the individualism of America that has been repressed by the government. He said social spending is one area he wants to fix if he were to win the White House.

“I have no desire to get rid of safety nets for people who need them. I have a strong desire to get rid of programs that create dependency in able-bodied people,” he said. “We’re not doing people a favor when we pat them on the head and say, ‘There there, you poor little thing, we’re going to take care of all your needs.’”

He said a Carson presidency would lead to a much more efficient government, a sentiment that seems to reflect his decades of being in business, not in politics.

“We are going to change the government into something that looks more like a well-run business than a behemoth of inefficiency,” he said. He also quickly dismissed the idea that he isn’t qualified to be president because he hasn’t worked in politics.

“I don’t have a lot of experience busting budgets,” he said. “I can name a lot of people in politics who’ve been there all their lives, and you probably wouldn’t want them to polish your shoe.”

By Pete Kasperowicz

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Federalist Press Dispatch

Get breaking political news, investigations, and uncensored analysis delivered directly to your inbox.

Please wait...

Thank you for subscribing to the Federalist Press Dispatch.

Get free info to help your life

Get free info to help your life

Simple bite-sized guides for life, money, civics, and more . . . because some stuff school just didn’t cover.

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

Brit Axton Mysteries is a series of young adult adventure novels that lead young Brit Axton and her friends on whirlwind adventures to uncover hidden secrets and long lost treasures.

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

Byrna offers non-lethal self protection at an affordable price. Watch the short video, or click to learn more!

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

Understanding Cryptocurrency serves as a definitive guide for novice investors looking to understand the world of cryptocurrency and harness its potential for financial growth and prosperity.

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation is a comprehensive guide on navigating the real estate market, offering strategies and insights for successful investing, during high inflation and interest rates.

Follow us

  • parler
  • welcome-widgets-menus
  • facebook
  • envato

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Economy

When Bill Maher Starts Worrying About Socialism, Democrats Should Pay Attention

Democratic Socialists and Democrats: Is there any Difference?

Stop Financing Degrees That Cannot Repay Their Loans

Elections

The Politics of Envy: Why “Tax the Rich” Is an Economic Dead End

When Bill Maher Starts Worrying About Socialism, Democrats Should Pay Attention

Democratic Socialists and Democrats: Is there any Difference?

Foreign

May Day in America: A Radical Marxist Tradition Reemerges

Negotiations Slow, Tensions Rising: Where U.S.–Iran Talks Stand

Did AOC Really Say Republicans Want to “Rig Elections” by Allowing Only U.S. Citizens to Vote?

Crime

When Bill Maher Starts Worrying About Socialism, Democrats Should Pay Attention

Democratic Socialists and Democrats: Is there any Difference?

Envy Is the Fuel of Socialism

Science Tech

Peace Through Strength: Trump Forces Iran into Submission

The Climate Scare Revisited: What Happened to the Predictions?

Trump’s Third UFO File Dump Raises the Stakes Again

Reader Responses

  • Linda Livaudais on Trump’s UFO Disclosure Has Changed the Conversation — But Not Yet Answered the Biggest Question
  • T059736 on Trump and Musk Announce Plans to Shut Down USAID
  • C.Josef.D on ‘Pay to Play’ at Clinton Foundation Under Investigation
  • John D Cole on Biden Says ‘You ain’t black’ If You Don’t Vote for Him
  • Ed on U.S. Attorney Huber Moving to Indict Clintons and Others

Copyright © 2026 by Federalist Press · All rights reserved · Website design by RoadRunner CRM · Content Wiriting by GhostWriter · Log in