Federalist Press | Defending Liberty — Informing America

Breaking News and Political Commentary

CNN Poll: Democrats Lose Midterm Election Advantage, GOP Has Lead

By Leave a Comment

Pelosi1During and after the government shutdown, the committed leftists and other assorted hysterics hailed the demise of the GOP. Democrats rejoiced at their prospects in 2014, pretending that a government shutdown was the worst thing that could happen to a nation. They believed the GOP was dead in the water, but as it turns out, the only thing more unpopular than the government shutdown is Obamacare.

As Democrats continue to go down with the sinking ship that is Obamacare, the latest polls indicate that they have surrendered their projected 8-point lead over Republicans that they enjoyed two months ago.

Further, the polls indicate that President Obama, once the superstar of the Democrat Party, has become so unpopular that he is dragging down the approval ratings of Democrat congressional candidates.

CNN reports,

A CNN/ORC International survey released Thursday also indicates that President Barack Obama may be dragging down Democratic congressional candidates, and that the 2014 midterm elections are shaping up to be a low-turnout event, with only three in 10 registered voters extremely or very enthusiastic about voting next year.

Two months ago, Democrats held a 50%-42% advantage among registered voters in a generic ballot, which asked respondents to choose between a Democrat or Republican in their congressional district without identifying the candidates. That result came after congressional Republicans appeared to overplay their hand in the bitter fight over the federal government shutdown and the debt ceiling.

But the Democratic lead evaporated, and a CNN poll a month ago indicated the GOP holding a 49%-47% lead. The new survey, conducted in mid-December, indicates Republicans with a 49%-44% edge over the Democrats.

The 13-point swing over the past two months follows a political uproar over Obamacare, which included the botched rollout of HealthCare.gov and controversy over the possibility of insurance policy cancellations due primarily to the new health law.

As Obama and his merry band of tax-and-spenders tried to paint the government shutdown as a product of Republican recalcitrance, the fact is that the partial government shutdown served as a greater illustration of what is on the line in 2014. While the inability of our government to function as it should was certainly unfortunate, the government shutdown was necessary to show Democrats that things in Washington must change if we are going to survive as a nation. Unfortunately, Republicans were unable to muster the courage to stand strong and caved to Democrat demands once again.

Though Democrats hoped that the move would spell doom for the GOP’s midterm prospects, the polls indicate that while the shutdown proved unpopular with voters, the people have lost patience with the big-government proponents who repeatedly assured America that an augmented government can provide for the people, but have failed across the board to do so.

Democratic voters seem particularly unenthusiastic about voting, and that is likely to benefit the GOP. Thirty-six percent of Republicans say they’re extremely or very enthusiastic about voting. That number drops to 22% among Democrats.

Another GOP advantage is the President’s standing with the public: 55% of registered voters say that they are more likely to vote for a congressional candidate who opposes the President than one who supports him and four in 10 say they are likely to vote for a candidate who supports Obama.

“Those kind of numbers spelled early trouble for the Democrats before the 1994 and 2010 midterms, and for the GOP before the 2006 elections,” Holland said.

December 27, 2013 By Greg Campbell

PAYMENT FREEZE: States Retaliate Against ObamaCare Site Contractors

By Leave a Comment

ObamacareSeveral states that paid millions to set up ObamaCare exchange websites but got error-plagued systems in return are starting to fight back, halting payments to the contractors and weighing legal options.

The same contractor that shouldered a large part of the blame for botching the federal HealthCare.gov is also under fire at the state level, where the company had an array of contracts to set up local ObamaCare exchange sites. CGI Group is facing angry officials in Massachusetts and Vermont who are cutting off payments in retaliation for widespread website problems.

Massachusetts — whose government was one of the staunchest supporters of ObamaCare, and whose health plan arguably was the model for the law — is refusing to pay any more until a working website is delivered.

A spokesman for the Massachusetts exchange told FoxNews.com that CGI’s system is “far from where it needs to be” and the state will apply “nonstop pressure” to fix the problems.

Spokesman Jason Lefferts explained that while people who are not seeking subsidies can apply online, the system still can’t properly calculate subsidies for those who are. The state, then, had to create an alternate system to send those individuals additional paperwork with information about subsidies and plans. Plus, the site continues to experience error messages and log-in issues, among other problems.

Massachusetts has paid $11 million of its $69 million contract.

Vermont, too, is withholding $5.1 million to CGI over its failure to meet deadlines, according to a report in the Boston Globe.

The fight over payments comes as officials weigh their legal options, and some expect a rush of lawsuits once the major problems with the various exchanges sites are addressed. Vermont is investigating CGI and, according to the Globe, Massachusetts officials will present a plan in January to ensure “accountability” for the website problems.

Massachusetts has lagged far behind on enrollment, after severe website problems that forced the state to go to its alternate system.

CGI was also the contractor in Hawaii, where the executive director of the exchange recently resigned amid meager enrollment. CGI won the Hawaii contract even after the state Senate president warned the state exchange director not to hire the firm.

CGI has had a better time with the Affordable Care Act sites in states like California and Kentucky. California registered more than 100,000 enrollees in the first two months of open enrollment.

But the troubles at the state level and with HealthCare.gov have put the heat on CGI. Aside from its various state contracts, its federal contract was worth nearly $94 million — and then soared to $290 million.

During a Capitol Hill hearing in October, officials with CGI Federal and other contractors working on the site pointed fingers over the problems with the roll-out. They claimed overall “end-to-end” testing was the responsibility of an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services, as was the decision to go live on Oct. 1.

They suggested more time was needed to work out the kinks.

“We would have loved to have months,” said CGI vice president Cheryl Campbell, though she earlier claimed no amount of testing could have flagged all the problems.

Asked whether there were concerns the site was not ready to go live, she said: “It was not our position to tell our client whether they should go live or not go live.”

Oregon, too, is beginning to confront its lead contractor. The state has had more trouble than any other getting its system online, resorting to paper applications after failed attempts to start the website.

Oracle Corp. was the primary contractor developing the exchange technology in this case. Cover Oregon officials have said previously they’ve withheld about $20 million in payments from Oracle and hired a law firm to review the state’s contract with the technology company.

FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Imminent and Prolonged Collapse of Society

By 2 Comments

gay_men_marryI know that this post won’t make some people happy.

I guess that is OK, as events of late in my chosen state of residence don’t make me particularly happy.

This past Friday US District Judge Robert J. Shelby declared Amendment 3 to Utah’s constitution to be unconstitutional. The news of the ruling and Shelby’s subsequent refusal to grant a temporary injunction has reverberated around the world; the fact that it occurred in conservative Utah simply served as a catalyst for that reverberation.

Judge Shelby’s decision came as a surprise to many. It didn’t necessarily come as a surprise to me. I’ve been able to see such decisions on the horizon for the better part of the past decade. And I’ve been troubled by them.

I’m reminded of R.E.M.’s 1987 hit, It’s the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine). Except I don’t feel fine. I feel troubled. I am bothered by where we are heading.

I have a friend who, every time an advance in “gay rights” comes about, looks at me, smiling, and says “see, the world didn’t end.” But worlds don’t end in a moment. They morph, over time, to something entirely unrecognizable until, one day, you wake up and wonder how things got to that point. We are all just frogs in a slowly warming bucket of water.

I took time to read through all 53 pages of Judge Shelby’s decision. I found it interesting reading, but it all hinges on what the judge sees as incontrovertible fact, something that is beyond reproach and unassailable in its conclusion. As he states:

The Plaintiff’s testimony supports their assertions that their sexual orientation is an inherent characteristic of their identities. Forty years ago, these assertions would not have been accepted by a court without dispute. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association still defined homosexuality as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III), and leading experts believed that homosexuality was simply a lifestyle choice. With the increased visibility of gay men and lesbians in the past few decades, a wealth of new knowledge about sexuality has upended these previous beliefs (pg. 24).

In other words, Judge Shelby’s decision is only possible in light of a foregone conclusion that same-sex attraction is an “inherent characteristic” of some individuals’ identities.

And this is where the sticking point is for so many people. Is it nurture (choice and/or environment) or nature? The judge throws out the former (nurture) as “upended” “previous beliefs” and his decision asserts that it is the latter (nature).

There are millions of people (yes, including me) who think that this basis is not a foregone conclusion and that making decisions as if it is makes for bad legal decisions.

The Peril of Acceptable Science

Is it an uncontested fact that same-sex attraction is an inherent characteristic of individuals? Perhaps, but we may never know in our lifetimes. Why? Because some science simply isn’t socially acceptable to examine. The effect is that those who would contest such “facts” are almost entirely shut out of the all-necessary funding to conduct research to examine the assumptions.

As just a single example, Nature reported in October 2013 that sexuality was considered a “taboo” research area, particularly if the research involves searching for “environmental influences that might affect the trait” of homosexuality. Genetic researcher Eric Vilain wants to study just that, but his work cannot obtain funding. He feels that if it were funded, “it could upset some gay rights activists who have seen their cause benefit from the ‘hardwiring’ theory.”

And yet Judge Shelby has just decided law based on that very theory of “hardwiring.” That is infuriating to those of us who believe that minds should still be open while there is research to do. The problem is that Judge Shelby’s decision cannot be undone if research is one day done which evidences that the basis underlying his decision is a shaky one.

The Dictum of “Me First”

I am old enough to remember the sexual revolution at the end of the 1960s. The Summer of Love (1969) was touted as evidence of a societal transformation for the better. That revolution promoted the mantra of “if it feels good, do it.” Stephen Stills released a song in 1970 titled Love the One You’re With. This wasn’t an anthem to everyone getting along; it was a license to free love: “If you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with.”

Free love. Free from strings, free from shame, free from guilt, free from responsibility. The entire concept flew in the face of millennia of human development, but it was accepted within the course of a decade by people who thought that they knew better than the entirety of human history before them. The individual and his or her desires was elevated, for the first time in history, above the needs of the society in which the individuals functioned. Kennedy’s famous call in 1961 to “ask not” and thereby put your country before yourself was replaced at the end of the decade with a flock of mindless seagulls screaming “mine, mine!” And they have been supported in their desires to make the individual supreme by courts both Supreme and not.

What they wanted, they wanted. And they wanted it now. And they got it. And they got everything that came with it. And it opened the door to many of the societal decisions that have followed, including the ill-founded acceptance of same-sex attraction as normative.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

Unintended consequences always follow any social revolution. Always. By definition they cannot be foreseen or mitigated by prior action. Would the sexual revolution have been as enticing or as gleefully embraced if one had foreseen the advent of Madonna, Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, or dozens of act-alikes? Would it have seemed as much a nirvana if we knew that it would lead to increased marital infidelity or higher levels of teen sexuality and rates of pregnancy? Would the reality of sexting or twerking have changed how we felt?

There is an old adage that states that when you make a decision you also accept everything that goes with that decision, regardless of where it leads. “Love the one you’re with” may sound good and “freeing,” but it does nothing for trust and building strong character. It doesn’t build relationships; it destroys them.

In 1969 those crying for what has come to be known as “marriage equality” were few and far between. But they were there, in the background. And they were constantly and vigilantly looking for ways to overturn the public’s sense of abhorrence of homosexuality. They obviously have succeeded, despite the fact that in 1969 the public feeling was that such would never happen. Where we are today is an unintended consequence of the sexual revolution, pure and simple.

While Judge Shelby considered and copiously cited the law in his ruling, he gave no thought to the law of unintended consequences. Such considerations just don’t exist in his prose—I looked for it, but it isn’t to be found. And that worries me. A lot.

Why does it worry me? Because we don’t know where these decisions will lead. The quiet background voices of the 1960s are today enacting laws to normalize what was then considered wrong. Should one, perhaps, pay attention to the quiet background voices one hears today? Should one be concerned about them?

For instance, well-known biologist Richard Dawkins has minimized the effect of “mild pedophilia” on children and believes that, at least in his case, it should not be considered abusive. Other voices are starting to state that perhaps sex between teachers and students should be decriminalized because it should be expected.

Just anecdotes? Perhaps. Remember, though, that we don’t know where the law of unintended consequences leads—we can’t know. But we must accept where it leads, nonetheless.

Wrong is Wrong. Still.

Judge Shelby’s ruling is understandable, but it is bad. It is bad for my grandchildren. It is bad for society. It is based on inconclusive science. It is bad for social trends. It attempts to make the abnormal normal.

And it is wrong. The law of unintended consequences will come into play and, along with the law of the harvest, mold an environment that we would not recognize today. I guarantee—from first-hand knowledge—that the world we live in today is not one that people would have recognized in 1969. Yet here we are. Frogs in a collective bucket.

I would much rather have my grandchildren raised in the uptight-yet-somehow-more-virtuous environment that held sway through the early years of the 1960s than in the anything-goes-as-long-as-I-can-do-what-I-want era in which we now live. Judge Shelby (and others providing similar rulings) are pandering to the desires of the seagulls and contributing to that era with their ill-advised rulings.

What Is One to Do?

First, I believe that anyone in public office who has had a hand in where we find ourselves today should be kicked out of office or, at the least, voted out of office at the next election. (Yes, that includes arch-conservative Orrin Hatch.) They should be replaced with those who hold views compatible with our vision of what society should be.

I think that nothing short of a huge public outcry, sustained over decades, will make a difference. It is what made the difference for gay activists, so why shouldn’t it make a difference for those with different visions of how society should be shaped?

I started out this post by saying that it wouldn’t make some people happy. But it still needed to be said. I have no doubt that my words, although carefully chosen, may cause some people to jump to the wrong conclusions about me. I can’t help that.

I understand that such judgment or (if you prefer) stereotyping is normal, as it is a way to excuse the listener from understanding and, perhaps, accepting what I may have to say.

So be it; there are plenty of other voices crying in the public square. I’m sure that those who reject what I have to say can find a voice more to their liking in any number of echo chambers that line that square. But at the same time, those who assure the crowing crowds that “all is well” still cannot escape the twin laws I mention (unintended consequence and harvest).

In the meantime, if you agree that Judge Shelby and others who base decisions on incomplete science are wrong, say something. Don’t be quiet. Make your voice heard respectfully yet forcefully. Make sure that people cannot misunderstand your position on this important issue.

By Allen

All I Want For Christmas: America Back

By 1 Comment

nativity_jesus_christWe who have known something more than out of control spending, debt, unemployment, poverty, government regulation and political correctness saw a different America than most Americans today have seen.

This once-great nation was founded on principles of individual liberty, honor, and being responsible for one’s own family. These were principles taught long ago by the Lord of all humanity, and venerated in all of our teaching for the first 100 years–which coincides with the explosive growth of the American economic system. Everything grew exponentially during that initial time, and nothing could possibly derail the steady progress of our nation, except a menace that began to overtake the earth in the late Nineteenth Century–socialism.

Socialists pandered to the upwardly-mobile working class to gain a power base, promising people rewards for which they had not risked their own labors or capital. Socialism swept through the Soviet Union, then across China, and socialist leaders ordered the murders of millions of “rich,” who in China happened to be anyone with more than 1 acre of land, so that their property could be redistributed. In fact, most of that property was merely seized and kept under the control of the socialist ruling class. No one gained anything more than they had before–except for the leaders.

The family unit, which had been a necessary component of the American nation’s rise from obscurity to global greatness, and indeed, under those principles this nation became great, was seen as an enemy to the spread of socialism. The family unit reminds people of their spiritual nature, and makes family members rely on one another. This is abhorrent to socialists, because the state must be one’s only family, and one’s only god. Indeed, Obama’s socialistic government propaganda teaches American women to be like their “Julia” character, who depends on her husband, the government, for everything she needs, from cradle to grave.

Because Americans were reaping the tremendous rewards of liberty and capitalism for the first 100 years (capitalism is liberty’s economic engine), it was  impossible for socialists to make significant inroads in the US. However, in the early 1900s they began to find weaknesses in America’s working class, and began to infiltrate labor, then government. Their plan was simple–exploit the weak and the ignorant–by creating a sub-class of American citizens and by taking over the education system and media outlets.

Progressives, as they called themselves, fought civil rights for America’s blacks, forcing the newly liberated (by Republicans) citizens into long-term poverty. When Republicans tried to force through voting and other civil rights for blacks and other minorities, it wasn’t until Progressives adopted them as poster children for vastly expanded government spending that they went along with these Republican ideals, now claiming that they were the ones who had fought for civil rights. That promised liberty was never realized, however, because Progressives immediately used the underclass they had created to begin pulling the entire capitalist nation down with the Great Society they  launched in 1964.

It is now the end of 2013 and in a very short time we have seen our country go from wealth to poverty, from morality to immorality, from Christian to agnostic; and what do we have to show for these ‘progressive’ inroads? As we said at the outset, we have an ignorant nation with no understanding of where we came from or how we got to be the greatest nation in the world. Our teachers and journalists have re-educated our children and rewritten our history to the point that the man on the street believes the KKK was made up of Republicans, no one has to pay for gifts given by a generous government,  and guns should be banned because they are abused at times.

I, like a fellow Republican, have a dream. One in which morality and reality retake their rightful place at the head of the Christmas table. Where the Lord Jesus Christ is our only Sovereign, and those whom we elect are public servants who diligently toil to uphold our Constitution and protect and defend it from all enemies, foreign and domestic. My dream is that our children will learn nobility through selflessness, instead of what they learn from these self-centered, self-serving socialists who have infiltrated our fair nation and brought it to the brink of total bankruptcy–economic and moral.

My wish for Christmas is that my fellow Americans, brothers and sisters of every race, color and creed, will look back to see where we came from and how we got here, and join me in restoring this nation to its former glory–before the socialists took it over and prepared it for final destruction.

Surely, an enemy hath done this. He who has an ear, let him hear.

PUBLIUS

Christmas a Day of Terror for Christians in Iraq

By Leave a Comment

Christmas_IraqWhile millions of Christians around the world prepare to celebrate Christmas, a dwindling number of believers in Iraq will be forced to mark the birth of Christ in private, if at all.

Christians are afraid to put up a Christmas tree or other decorations, according to one Christian pastor in Iraq. Such displays of faith in an increasingly extremist nation can bring threats and violence, say human rights groups. Christian churches must be regularly guarded, but congregants are even more on edge during their holiest days.

“There’s a culture of fear that has developed there that makes it hard for people to want to go to church to express their faith, especially at the holiday season,” David Curry, president and CEO of the organization, told FoxNews.com. “These extremist groups desire religious cleansing and they’re increasing in number particularly in northern Iraq” — once considered a safe haven for Christians.

Iraq, which was once home to more than 1 million Christians, has seen an exodus as persecution has risen, according to Open Doors, a human rights group which monitors treatment of Christians in the Middle East. There are now an estimated 330,000 Christians in Iraq, and the nation ranks No. 4 on Open Doors’ 2013 list of nations considered the worst persecutors of Christians. North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan rank as the top three.

“We’re deeply concerned that Christianity is being squeezed out to extinction maybe in the next decade or so in the Middle East.” – David Curry, Open Doors

“We’re deeply concerned that Christianity is being squeezed out to extinction maybe in the next decade or so in the Middle East,” Curry said. “Some of these countries, especially Iraq, have environments that are very hostile because of extremists in the region.”

Curry said the consequences for practicing Christianity range from threats and harassment to homes attacked and businesses ransacked, to physical assaults on worshippers — violence that continues to force Christians to flee the country.

On Sept. 22, a bomb was detonated outside the home of Christian politician Emad Youhanna in Rafigayn, part of the Kirkuk province, wounding 19 people, including three of Youhanna’s children.

Open Doors is in contact with various church leaders on the ground, many of whom report that there are attacks on Christians every two or three days.

A pastor in Iraq, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said common Christian traditions, such as purchasing a Christmas tree or decorating a home, are no longer observed out of fear of persecution. Many Christians have even lost their jobs over their faith, according to the pastor and others on the ground.

One of the group’s field workers, identified only as William, said, “It remains urgent to pray for the future of Christianity in this country. If the present trend continues, there might be no Christian left in the whole of Iraq by 2020.”

Last week, Archbishop of Baghdad Louis Raphael I Sako told a conference in Rome that the West must help stem the “mortal exodus” of Christians from the Middle East.

“Suffering became an everyday struggle for all Iraqis, but especially for Christians,” Sako told a conference called “Christianity and Freedom: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives.”

Since 2003, more than 1,000 Christians have been killed in Iraq, and more have been kidnapped and tortured, Sako said. Some 62 churches and monasteries have been vandalized or even destroyed, he said.

A fraction of the 1.2 million Christians who lived and worshipped in Iraq in 1987 remain, Sako said, adding that the “numbers continue dropping.”

The United Nations Committee for Refugees recently stated that 850,000 Iraqi Christians have left since 2003.

Phil Robertson: “I Will Not Give or Back Off From My Path”

By Leave a Comment

Duck Dynasty Season 3Phil Robertson is not backing down. Despite the Duck Dynasty patriarch’s controversial interview with GQ and subsequent suspension from the A&E smash series, the reality TV star shared during a Bible study group in West Monroe, Louisiana on Sunday, Dec. 22, “I will not give or back off from my path.”

“We are a bunch of rednecks from Louisiana, but I am not uneducated, I have a degree from Louisiana Tech. But this week I have been called an ignoramus,” the Duck Dynasty star, 67, shared with the group, as reported by The Daily Mail.

“This week I have been asked, ‘Is this the first time you have brought up sin?’” he recalled during the religious meeting. “I said, ‘Are you kidding? I have been traveling to and fro spreading this message.’ Then he said, ‘Well do you invite yourself to go and get your Bible and tell people what you are now sharing with us?’ I said, ‘No they are inviting me.'”

Robertson added, “I love all men and women. I am a lover of humanity, not a hater.” He then lead the group in prayer and shared, “I will not give or back off from my path because you conquered death, Father, so we are not worried about all the repercussions.” The bearded television figure made no direct mention of A&E, which placed Robertson on hiatus from filming “indefinitely,” the network told Us Weekly.

As previously reported, the duck hunter sparked controversy last week after he made several homophobic and racially-charged remarks in an interview published in the Janurary 2014 issue of GQ.

After the network placed the father of four on suspension, his family released a statement on their website in support of him. “We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm,” the Robertson family wrote. “We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty.”

This article originally appeared on Usmagazine.com: Phil Robertson Breaks His Silence After Controversial Remarks: “I Will Not Give or Back Off From My Path,” Duck Dynasty Star Says

America to A&E: ‘Duck You!’

By Leave a Comment

duck_Dynasty_starsHave you heard the joke about the family of duck hunters that took down an entire billion-dollar TV network?

It’s no joke. A&E just stepped in duck poop. They made the biggest mistake in the history of Hollywood – they showed us how leftists in Hollywood (and D.C.) really think.

And America said, “DUCK YOU!”

That has to make tyrants and control freaks like Obama, Hollywood, and the leftist thought police scared to death.

Something amazing is happening in America. An awakening. More people showed support for the star of “Duck Dynasty” in 24 hours than signed up for Obamacare in its first few months. Which means at this point in time, Americans are starting to come to the conclusion we’d be better off with a duck hunter in the White House than Obama. Heck, we couldn’t possibly do any worse.

In other words, the tables have turned and middle America is waking up from the shock, disarray, intimidation and distractions of the Obama years. It’s amazing to even say it out loud, but middle America, conservatives, and…gulp…Christians are coming out of the closet.

A duck hunter has inspired us.

What they are saying out loud is, “We have rights too. We deserve free speech too. We’ve had enough of your oppression and intolerance towards our values and beliefs- and we’re NOT going to take it anymore.”

This Nov. 7, 2013 file photo shows Phil Robertson, the Duck Commander, holding the 1 millionth duck call assembled for 2013 at company’s warehouse in West Monroe, La. (AP Photo, The News-Star/Margaret Croft)

A&E claims the “indefinite suspension” (ie firing) of Phil Robertson is about “branding.” What they are insinuating is they couldn’t possibly allow a close-minded, Neanderthal gay basher to remain as the face of their billion dollar brand.

Well guess what? The new brand for A&E is “the Christian-hating, Bible-bashing, intolerant TV network.”

Sorry, but that brand won’t sell. The brand of intolerance towards Christians, in a nation still dominated by Christians who actually believe in God, guns and the Bible, is not a viable brand. In other words, the tables have turned and A&E is “DUCKED.”

Let me first explain my background. I’m a lifelong Republican conservative. My heroes are Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater. I’m a leading conservative commentator and bestselling conservative author of “The Ultimate Obama Survival GuideAmerica Has Said Duck You! to A&E.”

Yet I’ve always differed from my fellow conservatives on one issue – gay rights. Like my hero Barry Goldwater, I have no problem with gays. Goldwater is the father of the modern day conservative movement, yet he too was pro-gay rights. He once said of gays in the military, “I don’t care if they’re straight, I only care if they shoot straight.”

Ronald Reagan was also open-minded towards gays, as a result of a lifetime spent in Hollywood in the acting business. I’ve always been pro-gay rights. I believe what people do in their private bedrooms is none of government’s business.

But this isn’t a gay rights issue. The firing of Phil Robertson, star of “Duck Dynasty” is a free speech issue. It’s symbolic of the biased, one-sided way the media and leftist elites treat free speech. People have every right to express opinions considered “progressive” or “politically correct” nowadays. But the same rules don’t apply to salt-of-the-earth, apple-pie, middle Americans who believe in God, country, guns, and yes, the Bible.

You mean Christians and conservatives don’t have the right to free speech just like Hollywood leftists?  You mean Christians or conservatives don’t have the right to express their views in the workplace, without fearing for their jobs?

Phil Robertson only expressed his personal opinions. Those opinions are shared by millions of Christians not only in America, but across the globe. Agree or disagree, he had every right to express that opinion, without losing his job. I may disagree with the exact words he chose, but I stand arm-in-arm with Phil to support his right to say it.

Oh by the way, Phil is a reality TV star. His success and popularity is based on his opinions. A&E fired a reality star for having controversial opinions? Are you kidding me? I suggest A&E executives need to visit a psychiatrist’s couch.

The Duck Dynasty scandal is about intolerance. But the intolerance is on part of Hollywood and A&E. The star of a reality show is allowed to have opinions. If you don’t like them, you have no right to ban them. That’s tyrant’s behavior. That’s McCarthyism. That’s the attitude of police states we find in countries run by tyrants like Stalin, or Fidel Castro, or Huge Chavez, or the old East Germany. Is this what America has become under Obama?

I don’t have to agree with Phil Robertson to stand behind him. I support free speech. If it can happen to Phil, it can happen to anyone of us. I’m a TV and radio personality. I have opinions. I won’t change them, or back down. If you don’t like them, change the channel. That’s called FREEDOM.

Defenders of A&E and Hollywood claim this is about “branding.” They say a private business (like A&E) has the right to decide it’s brand and fire anyone hurting its brand.

That would be true if this was a fair two-way street. I too support private property rights for business owners (like me) to run our businesses anyway we want. Only the CEO should decide who works for his company, not government.

But this is not the way the rules currently work in America. Because if any private business said “I won’t serve a customer because of his race or sexual orientation”- would that decision be allowed by government?

If a businessman, in his own private business, decided to fire any employee that supports gay marriage, would that decision be allowed? If a CEO fired employees because they were atheist, would that decision be allowed? If a CEO fired a woman because she was an outspoken supporter of abortion, would that decision stand?

How about if a CEO concerned about his brand said, “You’re fired because your outspoken support of gay rights is killing my business”- would that decision be allowed?

More specifically, how about a TV network firing the star of a reality TV show because they made remarks in an interview supporting abortion or gay marriage or stem cell research. Would government, courts, or Hollywood accept that decision? Leftists and gay rights organizations would beg government to intervene. And we’d see $100 million class action lawsuits galore.

So it’s a lie to say that private businesses have a right to fire who they want. The law is only used to protect leftist and “progressive” views. This was never about “branding.” It was about the shock and horror when people who drink Obama-Kool-Aid realized that their biggest TV star actually believes in something they don’t. They had to rush to silence him.

Why? Because Obama, Hollywood and the leftists are petrified of free thought. They keep their modern day Tammany Hall going through intimidation. They cannot afford to allow conservative or Christian values to be affirmed by a pop culture celebrity- for fear it might start a trend. It might stir up the masses. It might encourage conservatives to speak out. It might embolden Christians to quote the Bible without fear. Hollywood cannot allow that. Americans might actually be inspired to fight back. Someone might escape the thought-police plantation.

A duck hunter may have just lit the spark that started a revolution. Phil Robertson just went from TV phenomenon to American hero. Americans are now unchained. We are free to speak our minds. Here’s what we have to say to control freak tyrants like Obama the Hollywood elite thought police.

“DUCK YOU!”

By Wayne Allyn Root, The Blaze

Animal Cruelty Sparks Outrage

By Leave a Comment

terrified-cowAnimals Australia has released footage that it says was filmed in the Gaza Strip in October.

The Department of Agriculture has been investigating a possible breach of the live export regulatory regime for more than a month.

In a statement the department said it believed, based on appearance, some cattle in the footage are Australian.

“However, we are working to determine the circumstances surrounding this incident including verifying the source, date, time and location of the footage,” the statement said.

“The department, as the regulator or the livestock export trade, takes all reports of animal welfare breaches seriously, and investigates all complaints against the relevant regulatory framework.”

Labor’s agriculture spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon has seen the footage and says the Department of Agriculture should act quickly.

“I’m calling upon the department to seriously consider very quickly issuing ‘just cause’ notices to any company it’s investigating as a result of these allegations,” he said.

“The ‘just cause’ notice of course will put the onus on company to show cause why their licence should not be suspended until that investigation is complete.

“My concern is that there is no indication that investigation will be complete by the end of this year and indeed it’s likely to be well into the new year before the department comes to any conclusions.”

Greens MP Adam Bandt has also seen the video, and says his party will re-introduce legislation to end the live export trade and shift to processed meat exports.

“I think anyone who watches this footage and sees images of Australian cattle being stabbed in the eye, having their throats slit while still alive and being taunted and tortured would understand that now is the time to end the live export trade,” he said.

Animals Australia says it has distributed the footage to all members of Parliament.

Footage part of a ‘vendetta’, graziers say

But Nationals MP Andrew Broad says he has not seen the video.

“Let’s be clear about this. We live in the real world, the world where we’ve got to export products, where we provide meat for developing countries,” he said.

“Some countries in the world such as Jordan, a very high proportion of their red meat protein comes out of live exports and we’re always there, always trying to lift the standards of animal welfare.”

Meanwhile, the WA Pastoralists and Graziers Association (PGA) says it believes much of the footage released by animal welfare groups showing alleged mistreatment of Australian livestock overseas was a “constructed set-up”.

Singling out Animals Australia, PGA president Rob Gillam said while the revelations were disturbing, there was a good chance it was part of a “vendetta” against livestock producers.

“It always seems to come from Animals Australia and we don’t seem to hear them having much of a problem with how animals in the rest of the world are treated,” he said.

“It would appear that Animals Australia seem to be carrying out a worldwide vendetta against Australian livestock exporters and farmers.

“They always seem to be able to come up with some dreadful footage and I’m not so sure that a lot of this stuff is not set up.”

ABC News

Robertson Family Makes Statement

By 1 Comment

Duck Dynasty Season 3We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate.

We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right. Wphil_robertson_familye have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.

Outrage: ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Phil Robertson Suspended by A&E

By 1 Comment

duck_dynasty_Phil_Robinson“Duck Dynasty” dad Phil Robertson has been suspended indefinitely by the A&E Network following his recent comments on homosexuality, the network announced Wednesday night.

“We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series ‘Duck Dynasty’,” the network said in a statement.

“His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely.”

Earlier Wednesday, Roberston had responded to critics who had slammed him for very graphic statements he made about his preference for heterosexual sex over homosexual sex.

“I myself am a product of the 60s; I centered my life around sex, drugs and rock and roll until I hit rock bottom and accepted Jesus as my Savior,” he said in a statement sent to FOX411.

“My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together.

“However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.”

We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity – Phil Robertson

In a wide-ranging interview with GQ, Robertson didn’t hold back when sharing his thoughts about homosexuality and sinning.

“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong… Sin becomes fine,” he said. “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.”

Paraphrasing Corinthians he added: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

The gay and lesbian rights group GLAAD was quick to criticize Robertson for his comments and called on A&E to take action.

“Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe,” said GLAAD rep Wilson Cruz. “He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans – and Americans – who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples. Phil’s decision to push vile and extreme stereotypes is a stain on A&E and his sponsors who now need to reexamine their ties to someone with such public disdain for LGBT people and families.”

Robertson also told GQ his family has lost its privacy since they were thrust into the limelight as the stars of the hit show, but it was well worth it because the series has given him a platform to spread his religious beliefs.

“For the sake of the Gospel, it was worth it… All you have to do is look at any society where there is no Jesus. I’ll give you four: Nazis, no Jesus. Look at their record. Uh, Shintos? They started this thing in Pearl Harbor. Any Jesus among them? None. Communists? None. Islamists? Zero. That’s 80 years of ideologies that have popped up where no Jesus was allowed among those four groups. Just look at the records as far as murder goes among those four groups.”

Still, he doesn’t expect his fame to last forever.

“Let’s face it, three, four, five years, we’re out of here. You know what I’m saying? It’s a TV show. This thing ain’t gonna last forever. No way.”

Though the network did not officially fire the Robertson patriarch, many fans are taking news of his suspension to mean his job as a reality star is done for good.

FoxNews.com

Colorado Shooter Anti-Gun Socialist-Press Tries to Hide It

By Leave a Comment

colorado-school-shooter-anti-gun-socialistThe Associated Press noted that classmates of Karl Pierson, said the 18-year-old who walked into his suburban Denver high school with a shotgun Friday, held communist views.

There’s now word that in a Denver Post profile of Pierson, a classmate calls the shooter “a very opinionated Socialist.” But when the story was updated, the article onluy describes Pierson as just “very opinionated.”

What happened to the “Socialist” adjective is anybody’s guess.

The Post’s story nevertheless contains some eye-opening information about Pierson and his views:

In one Facebook post, Pierson attacks the philosophies of economist Adam Smith, who through his invisible-hand theory pushed the notion that the free market was self-regulating. In another post, he describes himself as “Keynesian.”

“I was wondering to all the neoclassicals and neoliberals, why isn’t the market correcting itself?” he wrote. “If the invisible hand is so strong, shouldn’t it be able to overpower regulations?”

Pierson also appears to mock Republicans on another Facebook post, writing “you republicans are so cute” and posting an image that reads: “The Republican Party: Health Care: Let ‘em Die, Climate Change: Let ‘em Die, Gun Violence: Let ‘em Die, Women’s Rights: Let ‘em Die, More War: Let ‘em Die. Is this really the side you want to be on?”

The Blaze

Colorado School Massacre Averted by Armed Bystander

By Leave a Comment

colorado_massacreYou heard it right, gun grabbers. The recent shooting in Colorado at Arapahoe High School happened to have a Deputy Sheriff on school grounds who was working as a school resource officer, according to a CNN report. He was in the vicinity of the shooter when the rampage began and was able to end the violence in 80 seconds. The initial reports were stating that the police took 14 minutes to arrive on the scene, but we are now learning that wasn’t what ended the shooting.

The rampage might have resulted in many more casualties had it not been for the quick response of a deputy sheriff who was working as a school resource officer at the school, Robinson said.

Once he learned of the threat, he ran — accompanied by an unarmed school security officer and two administrators — from the cafeteria to the library, Robinson said. “It’s a fairly long hallway, but the deputy sheriff got there very quickly.”

The deputy was yelling for people to get down and identified himself as a county deputy sheriff, Robinson said. “We know for a fact that the shooter knew that the deputy was in the immediate area and, while the deputy was containing the shooter, the shooter took his own life.”

He praised the deputy’s response as “a critical element to the shooter’s decision” to kill himself, and lauded his response to hearing gunshots. “He went to the thunder,” he said. “He heard the noise of gunshot and, when many would run away from it, he ran toward it to make other people safe.”

Not even 24 hours ago, we posted an article discussing what we’ve learned since Sandy Hook and what we’re doing about it. Well, this is a perfect example of something we should be doing across the country.

While you’re here, this is a perfect opportunity to revisit The Illusion of the Gun Free Zone, as it fits like a perfectly matched puzzle piece.

We’re tired of being polite. This needs to be common practice.
ALLOW LEGALLY ARMED STAFF TO CARRY ON SCHOOL GROUNDS.
END GUN FREE ZONES.

Share this with as many people as you can, because these are the stories that don’t stay in the headlines for very long. It’s extremely important that people see these mass shootings when they end in this fashion. The media tends to give much more attention to the shootings that have a higher death toll. The reality is, the story above should have more coverage because of the low death toll and praise the officer for defusing a horrible situation that would have been much worse.

Concealed Nation

FBI Arrests Man Planning to Bomb Wichita Airport

By Leave a Comment

wichita_airportAuthorities have arrested a man who planned to detonate a car bomb at Wichita’s Mid-Continent Airport.

The charges against the man, identified as 58-year-old Terry Lee Loewen, included an attempt to use a weapon of mass destruction.

Loewen, who worked at the airport, was arrested this morning on the airport’s tarmac with a vehicle he thought contained explosives. U.S. Attorney for Kansas Barry Grissom said the man had been under surveillance since earlier this year and had been given inert explosives by authorities during the investigation.

Officials with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Federal Bureau of Investigation announced the arrest at a news conference Friday afternoon at the Epic Center in downtown Wichita. Gov. Sam Brownback also attended the news conference, his office said.

Earlier Friday, Wichita Police Chief Norman Williams described the case as “a major situation for our city that was averted” through a collaborative investigation.

By Tim Potter / The Wichita Eagle

Obama Abandons American Pastor Held by Iran

By Leave a Comment

saeednewThe wife of an American pastor and father of two imprisoned for his faith in Iran blasted the Obama administration Thursday on Capitol Hill for ignoring her husband’s worsening plight while striking a deal with Iran over its nuclear program.

Naghmeh Abedini, whose husband, Saeed Abedini, is serving an eight-year prison term in Iran after being arrested more than a year ago while visiting his homeland, told a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee his health is failing in prison.

“My husband is suffering because he’s a Christian and he’s an American, but his own government did not fight for him when they were sitting across the table from his captors,” Naghmeh Abedini said, referring to a newly signed deal between the U.S. and Iran over its nuclear program.

“I never anticipated that I would have to [battle] my own government” to secure her husband’s freedom,” she said.

“His condition has worsened and the kids and I fear his life,” she said, before holding up a photograph of her children on their first day of school. “Tears were streaming down my face as I got the kids ready for school with their father missing.”

Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., who chairs the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, said “time is running out” for Abedini, who experts believe would be unlikely to survive eight years in Iran’s brutal prison system.

“Arrested and sentenced to eight years in prison for somehow ‘undermining the security of Iran’ by pastoring to Christian churches, U.S. citizen Saeed Abedini has endured imprisonment, solitary confinement, beatings, and untreated internal bleeding,” Smith said.”“The United States has appealed to Iran at the highest levels, and Iran responded early last month by moving Pastor Abedini to an even more dangerous prison, housing him with violent criminals. This hearing will examine the effort to save him before it is too late.”

Abedini “went to Iran to build an orphanage for Iranian children last year” and “remains in an absolute hell-hole prison,” Smith told the committee.

Also testifying was Jordan Sekulow, of the American Center for Law and Justice, which has served as the Abedini family’s legal advisors.

Abedini, an American citizen who lives in Boise, Idaho, with his wife and two children, converted from Islam to Christianity more than a decade ago, and was previously sanctioned for evangelizing in Iran. But the 34-year-old father of two claims he had only returned to his native land to help establish an orphanage when authorities pulled him off a bus in August of 2012 and threw him into the notorious Evin prison in Tehran.

He was later sentenced to eight years and has since been moved to Rajai Shahr Prison in Karaj, a prison known to house Iran’s most violent criminals. His supporters say he has been beaten and tortured in the prison. According to reports, Rajai Shahr Prison was built to accommodate 5,000 inmates, but at present houses about 22,000, which has led to severe overcrowding and inhumane conditions.

Naghmeh Abedini told Fox News last month that her family was “devastated” after learning the Obama administration did not try to secure the release of her husband as part of the newly signed deal on Iran’s nuclear program. The talks over Iran’s nuclear program were seen by his family and those representing them as one of the most promising avenues yet for securing his release.

She said her children were praying to have him home for the holidays. “It’s unbearable,” she said, “to think of another Christmas without him and see my kids not have him home for Christmas.”

FoxNews.com

Obama Parties with Communists and Socialists at Mandela Funeral

By Leave a Comment

selfie_shot_ObamaAn unexpected handshake. A selfie. A seat change.

President Barack Obama’s gestures at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service in Johannesburg were widely scrutinized on the world’s stage Tuesday.

First, Obama shook hands with Cuban President Raul Castro as the U.S. president approached the podium at the soccer stadium to address Mandela’s mourners. The brief exchange, captured on video and photographs, sparked an immediate reaction online and on TV, with cable news pundits and Twitter users debating the significance of warmth shown between leaders of countries that have not had formal diplomatic relations since 1959.

The handshake also drew some sharp GOP criticism. Sen. John McCain likened it to shaking hands with Adolf Hitler.

“Why should you shake hands with somebody who’s keeping Americans in prison?” McCain told Public Radio International, adding: “Neville Chamberlain shook hands with Hitler.”

“This wasn’t a preplanned encounter,” an Obama aide told Yahoo News on Tuesday. “Above all else, today is about honoring Nelson Mandela, and that was the president’s singular focus.”

At another point, President Obama posed for a “selfie” from his seat at the memorial with British Prime Minister David Cameron and Denmark’s Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt. First lady Michelle Obama, seated to the group’s left, did not participate.

Tuesday’s event was not a funeral. But that didn’t stop the “Selfies at Funerals,” which documented the aforementioned trend, from categorizing the world leaders’ selfie as one.

“Obama has taken a funeral selfie,” Jason Feifer, the site’s creator, wrote. “So our work here is done.”

“Dear Obama,” Mashable’s Christine Erickson wrote. “Funerals are no place for selfies.”

Earlier, the first lady appeared to be less-than-thrilled with the president’s conversation with Thorning-Schmidt, and at some point, she switched seats with him.

It’s unclear whether the seat change occurred before or after the selfie, or if it came during Obama’s speech.

Before his handshake with Castro, Obama also shared a handshake and a kiss with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, who has angrily condemned U.S. spying in her country.

Obama Shocks Observers by Shaking Castro’s Hand

By Leave a Comment

obama-castroCuban-American lawmakers voiced disappointment Tuesday over President Obama shaking the hand of Raul Castro during the memorial service for Nelson Mandela, calling it a “propaganda coup” for the Cuban government.

“It is nauseating,” Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., who fled Cuba with her family when she was a child, told Fox News.

Speaking later at a hearing with Secretary of State John Kerry, the congresswoman held up photos of the handshake and said political dissidents would be “disheartened” by them.

“Sometimes a handshake is just a handshake, but when the leader of the free world shakes the bloody hand of a ruthless dictator like Raul Castro, it becomes a propaganda coup for the tyrant,” she said.

Distrust of the Castro government runs deep in the Cuban-American community, particularly in Florida where many refugees still live.

Obama’s brief encounter with Castro, though — unlike the historic phone call earlier this year between Obama and Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani — was described as spontaneous.

An administration official said “this wasn’t a pre-planned encounter,” adding: “Above all else, today is about honoring Nelson Mandela, and that was the president’s singular focus at the memorial service.”

At the hearing on Tuesday, Kerry said Obama “didn’t choose who’s” at the Mandela ceremony. Asked by Ros-Lehtinen if Castro is upholding basic human rights, Kerry answered: “No. Absolutely not.”

Obama shook Castro’s hand as he made his way down a line of dignitaries, including South African President Jacob Zuma and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, on his way to deliver an address honoring the late South African leader.

In the speech in Johannesburg, Obama praised Mandela as the “last great liberator of the 20th century.”

“He changed laws, but he also changed hearts,” Obama said.

Ros-Lehtinen said afterward that Castro should have listened to Obama’s message about how some leaders praise Mandela without respecting human rights. “I think that was a message to Raul Castro,” she said, calling him a “thug.”

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., also released a statement saying: “If the president was going to shake his hand, he should have asked him about those basic freedoms Mandela was associated with that are denied in Cuba.”

The handshake came amid a memorial service that lauded Mandela’s spirit of reconciliation. It’s unclear whether more will come of the gesture, as efforts by the Obama administration to thaw relations between Cuba and the U.S. have been slow-going.

The U.S. government in 2011 eased the embargo on the island by allowing some Americans to travel there. But the U.S. freeze on Cuba, dating back to when Fidel Castro took power, largely has remained in place – and Cuba’s human rights record, particularly its intolerance of political dissent, continues to draw the scorn of rights groups and western governments.

FoxNews.com

Top Hospitals Excluded from ObamaCare

By Leave a Comment

ObamaCare_WebsiteWith the Dec. 23 deadline looming for signing up for health insurance under ObamaCare, consumers rushing to purchase new coverage may be in for a rude shock if they focus principally on finding the least expensive premiums, according to experts.

That’s because many people buying coverage on the federal exchanges either to replace old policies or to obtain coverage for the first time could get hit with deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs much higher than is typical in employer-sponsored health plans.

Perhaps more importantly, they may find themselves excluded from some of the best hospitals in the country and their affiliated doctors.

Deductible Sticker Shock

Gail Wilensky, a senior fellow for Project HOPE and the Medicare director for the first Bush Administration, said on Monday that consumers should be as mindful of deductibles and the hospitals and doctors in network as the monthly premium costs in shopping around.

“What you’re buying is not just the benefits specified in the law but whom you will have access to in getting the service delivered,” she said in an interview. Many of the policies being offered on the federal and state exchanges carry annual deductibles that often top $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a couple, according to The New York Times.

“Right now, most of the focus has been on the cost of the monthly premium and occasionally people have remembered to . . .look at what the deductible and the co-insurance is, because that is as important as the premium,” she added. “Whether a hospital is in or out of network is really the third piece: don’t forget to look at what you’re buying.”

Like most insurance policies, the lower the premium the higher the deductible. For example, in El Paso, Tex., for a couple both age 35, one of the cheapest plans on the federal exchange, offered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield, has a premium of less than $300 a month but an annual deductible of more than $12,000, according to the Times. In the case of a 45-year-old couple purchasing insurance on the federal exchange in Saginaw, Mich., a policy with a premium of $515 a month carries a deductible of $10,000 a year.

Some of the Best Hospitals Are Off Limits
Americans purchasing health insurance on the federal and state exchanges may be in for an even bigger shock when they discover some of the best hospitals in the country out of reach, even when those hospitals were previously available to them under their personal policies. That’s because most of the top hospitals in the country will accept insurance from only one or two companies operating under Obamacare.

Obamacare regulations and government subsidies are likely to make insurance more affordable for millions of Americans, as President Obama and senior aides have repeatedly boasted. But many insurers have responded to Obamacare caps on premiums by offering top-tier hospitals and physicians far less money for services rendered. And they’re responding by strictly limiting the number of policies they will accept.

Watchdog.org  recently looked at the top 18 hospitals nationwide as ranked by U.S. News and World Report for 2013-2014 – contacting each hospital to determine their contracts and policies. The government watchdog group found that many of the best hospitals in the country were simply opting out of Obamacare – much to the detriment of people in search of the best or most specialized health care.

Both Ohio and California have a dozen insurance companies on their exchanges, yet two of the states’ premier hospitals — Cleveland Clinic and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center — have only one company in their respective networks.

A few, such as top rated Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, are mandated under state law to accept all insurance companies. Other than that, the hospital with the largest number of insurance companies is University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland with just four. Fully 11 of the 18 hospitals had just one or two carriers, according to Watchdog.org.

Amid a drive by insurers to limit costs, the majority of insurance plans being sold on the new health care exchanges in New York, Texas and California will not offer patients access to Memorial Sloan Kettering in New York City or MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, two top cancer centers, according to the Financial Times.

“We shouldn’t be surprised by this,” Wilensky said. “There was a lot of pressure that exchanges placed on insurance plans to keep premiums low, and the benefits are specified in law for each of the four levels of health care plans. If the benefits are specified and the premiums are pressed low – sometimes lower than the insurance companies thought was appropriate, a major way to try to accommodate that financial pressure is to limit the number of physicians and hospitals.”

“And by limiting the number of physicians and hospitals, you may get those that you include to accept a lower reimbursement,” she added.

Consumers have until Dec. 23 to enroll in new health insurance under Obamacare to qualify for coverage beginning Jan. 1. However, open enrollment will continue through the end of March.

By Eric Pianin

Pulitzer Winning Journalist: Obama Lied About Syria

By Leave a Comment

File photo of U.S. President Obama speaking about continuing government shutdown during White House news conference in WashingtonPulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has dropped yet another bombshell allegation: President Obama wasn’t honest with the American people when he blamed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for a sarin-gas attack in that killed hundreds of civilians.

In early September, Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States had proof that the nerve-gas attack was made on Assad’s orders. “We know the Assad regime was responsible,” President Obama told the nation in an address days after this revelation, which he said pushed him over the “red line” in considering military intervention.

But in a long story published Sunday for the London Review of Books, Hersh — best known for his exposés on the cover-ups of the My Lai Massacre and of Abu Ghraib – said the administration “cherry-picked intelligence,” citing conversations with intelligence and military officials.

A former senior intelligence official told me that the Obama administration had altered the available information – in terms of its timing and sequence – to enable the president and his advisers to make intelligence retrieved days after the attack look as if it had been picked up and analysed in real time, as the attack was happening. The distortion, he said, reminded him of the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, when the Johnson administration reversed the sequence of National Security Agency intercepts to justify one of the early bombings of North Vietnam. The same official said there was immense frustration inside the military and intelligence bureaucracy: ‘The guys are throwing their hands in the air and saying, “How can we help this guy” – Obama – “when he and his cronies in the White House make up the intelligence as they go along?”’

Here’s what Hersh alleges:

The administration buried intelligence on the fundamentalist group/rebel group al-Nusra. It was seen, Hersh says, as an alarming threat by May, with the U.S. being aware of al-Nusra member able to make and use sarin, and yet the group – associated with the rebel opposition in Syria – was never considered a suspect in the sarin attacks. Hersh refers to a top-secret June cable sent to the deputy director of the Defense Intelligence Agency that said al-Nusra could acquire and use sarin. But the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of the Defense Intelligence Agency could not find the document in question, even when given its specific codes.

Syrian refugees

Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, told a press conference: ‘It’s very important to note that only the [Assad] regime possesses sarin, and we have no evidence that the opposition possesses sarin.’

It is not known whether the highly classified reporting on al-Nusra was made available to Power’s office, but her comment was a reflection of the attitude that swept through the administration.

The administration was learning about the attack at roughly the same speed civilians were. Hersh says the thorough daily intelligence briefings in the days surrounding the gas attack did not make a single mention of Syria, even as videos and photos of the attack went viral across the Internet. He added that there was revealed a sensor system in Syria that had, in December 2012, shown sarin production at a chemical weapons depot arranged by the Syrian army. Though it was unclear whether this was a simulation or not – all militaries, Hersh says, practice simulations of such things – Obama promptly warned Syria that use of sarin gas would be “unacceptable.”

‘If what the sensors saw last December was so important that the president had to call and say, “Knock it off,” why didn’t the president issue the same warning three days before the gas attack in August?’

Syria's civil war

The media succumbed to confirmation bias in response to a UN report on the attack. That report, which is less than certain in its terms, said that the spent weapon “indicatively matches” the specifics of a 330mm calibre artillery rocket. MIT professor Theodore Postol and other munitions experts later reviewed the photos and said that it was improvised, likely made locally, didn’t match anything in the Syrian arsenal and would not have been able to travel the nine kilometres from the Syrian army base that the media presumed it was fired from.

Postol and a colleague, Richard M. Lloyd, published an analysis two weeks after 21 August in which they correctly assessed that the rockets involved carried a far greater payload of sarin than previously estimated. The Times reported on that analysis at length, describing Postol and Lloyd as ‘leading weapons experts’. The pair’s later study about the rockets’ flight paths and range, which contradicted previous Times reporting, was emailed to the newspaper last week; it has so far gone unreported.

Though a UN resolution nullified the chances of American military intervention, the impact would be significant if the allegations hold up; recall that President George W. Bush’s legacy was deeply tainted by charges that the U.S. had no proof of nuclear weapons in Iraq when they said they did. Hersh hints at the seriousness of the charges himself: “The cherry-picking was similar to the process used to justify the Iraq war.”

By Adrian Lee

Obama Losing Latinos

By Leave a Comment

TEXASPOLLINGHispanics are the most disappointed by President Barack Obama, according to a new Gallup Poll.

While the president’s job approval rating dropped 12 percent among the general population over the last year, declining from 53 percent last December to 41 percent in November, it plunged twice as much among Latinos.

Obama’s approval rating dropped 23 points among Latinos, from 75 percent in December, 2012 to 52 percent in November.

Latinos played a critical role in the president’s re-election, with 71 percent of the community’s voters casting their ballots for him.

The report on the poll results noted that the waning support for Obama among Latinos may spell trouble for Democrats running for office in 2014.

“It is…a troubling sign for the Democratic Party, given that Hispanics represent an increasingly important segment of the electorate,” the Gallup report said.

SUMMARY

While Republican resistance to his policies have played a part in President Barack Obama’s failure to move forward on various issues, Latinos have placed blame on the president for not doing a better job of fighting for immigration reform or making sure Spanish-speaking residents can sign up for the health care plan.

Latinos, the report said, have varied the most of any group on their feelings about Obama during the course of his presidency.

“That means their views of him are less firmly anchored than those of other groups, which may help explain why their opinions of the president soured more than any other group’s in recent months,” it said. “Despite the significant decline in their approval ratings over the past 12 months, a majority of Hispanics, 52 percent, still approve of the job Obama is doing.”

Still, Latinos have showed that they are willing to support Republicans.

Former President George W. Bush won about 44 percent of the Latino vote in 2004. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie won 51 percent of the Latino vote in his recent re-election bid.

Obama’s approval rating showed above-average declines among low-income Americans, nonwhites, moderates, and moderates who identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party.

Obama was re-elected with a 50 percent job approval rating, rising to 53 percent a month later.
Battles with Republicans in Congress soon followed, hampering his ability to push forward policies and measures – such as immigration reform and the Affordable Care Act – that he had described as priorities.

“As a result, his job approval declined to 41 percent in November, matching the lowest monthly average of his presidency to date,” the Gallup report said.

While Republican resistance to his policies, to be sure, have played a part in Obama’s failure to move forward on various issues, Latinos have placed blame on the president for not doing a better job of fighting for immigration reform or making sure Spanish-speaking residents can sign up for the health care plan.

Many have been particularly critical of the record number of deportations that have occurred during Obama’s presidency. Latinos account for the vast majority of people who have been deported.

On Thursday, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a Democrat from Illinois, and Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona, held a press conference in Washington D.C. in which they said Obama can take steps, on his own, to stem the deportations.

 

Nelson Mandela dies at 95

By Leave a Comment

nelson-mandelaNelson Mandela, who spent 27 years as a prisoner in South Africa for opposing apartheid, then emerged to become his country’s first black president, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and an enduring symbol of integrity, principle and resilience, died Thursday at 95.

The announcement was made by South African president Jacob Zuma, who said in a nationally televised address,” Our nation has lost its greatest son. Our people have lost a father. Although we knew that this day would come, nothing can diminish our sense of a profound and enduring loss.”

Mandela  had spent almost three months in a Pretoria hospital after being admitted in June with a recurring lung infection.

Mandela, who once said, “the struggle is my life,” was a beloved hero of both South Africa and the world itself. His face was instantly recognizable in virtually any country, his story famous enough that he was portrayed in movies at least four times – by Morgan Freeman (“Invictus”), Sidney Poitier (“Mandela and de Klerk”), Danny Glover (“Mandela”) and Dennis Haysbert (“Goodbye Bafana”).

Stamps were issued with his likeness, songs written about him, statues erected in his honor everywhere from Johannesburg to London and more than 50 universities around the world awarded him degrees. Even a species of spiders was named in his honor.

Mandela, who had been in increasingly frail health in recent years, retired from public life in 2004. He is survived by his third wife, Graca Machel, three daughters (three other children died) and multiple grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

U.S. President Barack Obama, during a stop in Senegal, called Mandela a personal hero, saying his legacy will “live on throughout the ages.”

In one of his last public appearances, televised in May 2012, Mandela sat in an armchair with a blanket pulled over his lap at his rural home in Qunu and received a symbolic flame to mark the centenary of the African National Congress.

Ironically, the leader hailed as a symbol of peace at one point was on a U.S. terror watch list because of his affiliation with the ANC, which was designated a terrorist organization by South Africa’s apartheid government. He was finally taken off the list in 2008.

Mandela, although initially committed to non-violence, had, in fact, once been involved with the militant wing of the ANC, which was founded in association with the South African Communist Party and carried out a campaign of violence against government targets.

The man who died an anti-apartheid hero, world statesman and symbol of the strength of the human spirit was born Rolihlahla Mandela in a village near Umtata in the Transkei on July 18, 1918. Rolihlahla literally means “pulling the branch of a tree” but more colloquially, “troublemaker.”

His father was primary councilor to the Acting Paramount Chief of Thembuland and after his father’s death, the 9-year-old Mandela became the chief’s ward. He received the English name Nelson from a primary school teacher at his mission school.

He attended the University College of Fort Hare, a prestigious residential college for blacks in South Africa, where he was expelled over a student boycott, and then ran away from home to Johannesburg to avoid an arranged marriage.

He eventually completed his bachelor’s degree via correspondence courses, studied law and joined the African National Congress in 1942.

After 20 years of leading a non-violent campaign against the South African government, his philosophy switched to armed struggle. In 1964 he was sentenced to life imprisonment for plotting to overthrow the government by violence.

For 18 of his 27 years in prison, he was inmate #46664 on Robben Island, a notorious maximum security facility off Cape Town, where he became a worldwide symbol of resistance to racial oppression.

In 1982, he was moved to Pollsmoor Prison, on the nearby mainland, where he spent much of his time in solitary confinement. In 1985, President P. W. Botha offered to release him if he would renounce armed struggle but he refused, saying “only free men can negotiate. Prisoners cannot enter into contracts.”

Finally released from this third prison, Victor Verster – an event broadcast internationally – on February 11, 1990 , he was elected president of the ANC in 1991.

In 1993 he and President Frederik Willem De Klerk were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and in 1994, at the age of 75, he was inaugurated as the first black president of South Africa.

Mandela served as president until 1999, when he retired and became an advocate for a number of human rights organizations and also a spokesman for the fight against AIDS. In 2001 he was treated for prostate cancer.

His philosophy of learning to love instead of hate made him one of the moral leaders of his era.

“No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion” he wrote in his autobiography.

“People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for loves comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”

Mandela was married three times. His first wife was Evelyn Ntoko Mase, from 1944-1957, and they had four children – one son died in a car crash, one son of AIDS and one daughter as an infant.

His second wife was Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (1958-1996) and they had two daughters before divorcing. On his 80th birthday in 1998 he wed Graca Machel, widow of Samora Machel, the former Mozambican president.

But his nation was his beloved offspring as well. “My daughter Zinzi says,” he once observed, “that she grew up without a father, who, when he returned, became a father of the nation…for me, there is no place like home.”

FoxNews.com

Economy

Elections

Foreign

Crime

Science Tech

Reader Responses