conservative, right wing, republican, neo-con, christian

Other NewsOnly Sites:

Politics
Blue State News Only
Red State News Only

Sports/Fitness
Olympics News Only
Golf News Only
Sailing News Only
NASCAR News Only
Skiing News Only
Yoga News Only
Cricket News Only
Horseracing News Only
Rugby News Only
Tennis News Only

Science/Technology
VoIP News Only
Nanotechnology News
Hybrid Car News Only
Environmental News Only
Lasik News Only
Skin Cancer News Only
Physics News Only
Space News Only
Data Recovery
Web Hosting

Finance
Mortgage News Only
Insurance News Only

Health
Health News Only

Life
Wine News Only
Travel News Only
Gardening News Only
Cooking News Only
Drink Recipes Only
Ten Dollar Tastings
Entertainment News

Alternatives
Paranormal News Only


The latest red state political news, from the most reliable sources, all in one place.


The Patriots News Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:03 GMT  

The National Popular Vote Fallacy
In 2000, out of a total popular vote of 101,455,900, the Gore-Lieberman ticket won a narrow majority, 50,999,900 votes (50.26%) to 50,456,000 (49.74%) for Bush-Cheney.

http://www.cnsnews.com/rss/headlines.xml Sun, 05 May 2013 05:17:45 GMT  


http://www.newsbusters.org/node/feed Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:03 GMT  


http://americandaily.ws/index.php/amdws-rss Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:03 GMT  


Breitbart Feed Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:03 GMT  

Pence: Obama Sent Illegal Aliens To Indiana Without Telling Me

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence wrote to President Barack Obama on Tuesday, asking him to return the illegal alien children his administration sent to Indiana without warning.

“In Indiana last week, we learned from media reports that more than two hundred unaccompanied children had been placed by the federal government with sponsors in our state,” Pence wrote to Obama. “Only after these media reports were published did the state receive notice from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that in fact 245 unaccompanied children had been placed in Indiana during the period from January 1, 2014 through July 7, 2014.”

Pence, a Republican considered to be a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said he has “profound concern” with what he described as “the federal government’s mishandling” of the border crisis.

Pence said for the children’s own sakes, they should be returned to their home countries so they can be reunited with their families. 

“While we feel deep compassion for these children, our country must secure its borders and provide for a legal and orderly immigration process,” Pence said. “Those who have crossed our border illegally should be treated humanely and with decency and respect, but they should be returned expeditiously to their home countries to be reunited with their families rather than being dispersed around the United States in sponsored placement or long-term detention facilities. Failure to expedite the return of unaccompanied children thwarts the rule of law and will only continue to send a distorted message that illegally crossing into America is without consequence.”

Pence told Obama that, given the cost, these illegal aliens will burden the state of Indiana and its taxpayers, and the federal government needs to be transparent about any plans it has with illegal aliens in the future.

“Indiana will be responsible for the costs of education for these unaccompanied children and perhaps other costs related to their health and welfare, and therefore, we require transparency and timely information about their placement in the state,” Pence wrote. “For example, in many districts across Indiana, the 2014-2015 school year starts in just a few days, and school officials need accurate information about unaccompanied children who will potentially be in their classrooms while placed with their sponsors.”








Senator Seeks Probe into Illegal Aliens Sending Cash to Foreign Countries

Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is asking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to probe how many illegal aliens versus legal immigrants send money home to their foreign countries, and how much.

The process, called “remittances,” makes up substantial portions of the gross domestic product (GDP) of foreign nations to which money who receive money from their foreign nationals working in America. Very little is known about the breakdown of illegal aliens sending money home versus legal immigrants. Vitter has a bill called the WIRE Act which would charge a fee to any immigrant who can’t document they’re in the U.S. legally when they’re seeking to wire money home—a fee that would be used to fund border security.

“We have a lot of folks in the United States from other countries—many of them are here legally, many of them are not, they are here illegally—who go to different storefronts and financial institutions to wire money back to their relatives back home,” Vitter said in a phone interview with Breitbart News last week. “That’s not a horrible practice per se, but clearly some of the folks doing this are here illegally. I have legislation proposed, the WIRE Act, that would simply ask the businesses doing the wiring to require documentation of a person’s legal status. If they’re here legally, great. But if they can’t document that they’re here legally, we’d charge a significant fee and that goes to border security and enforcement. I’ve asked the GAO for some data about numbers of people and remittances to help push my WIRE Act.”

Back in 2011, the Congressional Budget Office determined that $38 billion was sent to foreign countries—mostly in Latin America, but substantially to Africa and Asia as well—by immigrants, both legal and illegal. A 2006 report from GAO found that the United States was the largest remittance-sending nation in the world. And in 2010, the anti-amnesty Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) found that $25 billion of remittances sent out of the U.S. were from illegal aliens.

That’s about everything that’s known about remittance statistics on a macro-economic scale, and Vitter thinks it’s time for lawmakers to have concrete facts about the matter so they can make a decision about to how to handle the process—especially when it comes to illegal aliens involved in it.

“This is designed to get a much better update on those figures,” Vitter said of his request of GAO. “We’d like to know: What is the total amount of remittances? What is a guestimate of how many of those folks sending remittances are here legally versus here illegally? It would help determine how much revenue would be raised by my proposed WIRE Act by assessing this fee against the illegals. So how much money could we raise for border security?”

Vitter asked the GAO to determine how much could be raised in fees from illegal aliens engaged in remittance-sending, fees that would go to funding border security, and what other costs would be incurred by U.S. financial institutions to implement the process of having to check IDs of customers. He also asked GAO to determine whether there’s a way to track where the money goes when it leaves the U.S., and if it’s involved in “money laundering risk” and what the current regulations and controls are on that sector of the financial world.

“It could be—who knows?” Vitter responded when asked by Breitbart News if the money being wired back home could be getting funneled into criminal organizations that have received much attention as of late for their role in trafficking people into the United States. “I would guess, though, that the vast majority of it is going to support family members. But yeah, we don’t know exactly where it’s going, so certainly some portion of it could go to some version of those sources you’re talking about.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) recently stated on a local Floridian talk radio network that 13 percent of the GDP of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador—three of the major Central American nations from which many of the illegal aliens comprising the current border crisis came—is made up by remittances from its immigrants in the United States, legal or illegal. That money, Vitter said in his interview with Breitbart News, could be staying inside the United States to help build jobs and the economy as a whole here, but because of the policies of this administration, the money is entering a global economy that brings American citizens down. 

“This shows a big impact on American workers,” Vitter said. “We also always have people say that this enforcement costs lots of money. This is a way to raise funds from people who are clearly part of the problem if they’re here illegally and use that money in a targeted way on the enforcement that we need.”

During his interview, Vitter also focused on the border crisis and the many legislative proposals circulating through Washington at this time. 

“Fixing the 2008 law is important and it’s necessary to get to the right place, but it’s not adequate even of just of itself,” Vitter said of the anti-human trafficking law that may lawmakers are fixated on. “We need to be doing other things: We need to prevent the president from doing these administrative amnesties to make sure that all illegals in this situation are detained and not released into society under the care of a family member, many of whom are also here illegally. There are a handful of significant things we need to do together—that includes fixing the 2008 law, but it’s a somewhat longer list than that.”

Vitter, a cosponsor of the bill authored by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) that would block President Obama from expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) amnesty via executive order, said that Cruz’s bill is worth pursuing. 

“We can pass legislation barring specifically some of the actions he’s taken like the amnesty for minors and that’s what Ted Cruz is trying to do,” Vitter said. “I think the three biggest things we have to do are that, block his executive action that grants big amnesties like that, number two fix the 2008 law and number three stop catch and release—stop any activity of Homeland Security where they actually release illegal aliens into society with a family member or somebody else because the great majority of them never come to court again when they’re supposed to.”

Vitter added that Democrats are trying to frame this battle as a “humanitarian crisis” for a number of reasons that are politically motivated, but that it’s the president’s policies that perpetuate the crisis. 

“It is a ‘humanitarian crisis’—it’s a crisis on a lot of levels, including on a humanitarian level,” Vitter said. “But right now we have a policy that’s encouraging that humanitarian crisis to grow. Any policy like that is not humanitarian. These minors are being put in the hands of dangerous criminal gangs and we have a policy that’s not stopping that, not slowing that down. It’s encouraging more of that and it’s putting more minors in danger. So ultimately, we need a truly humanitarian policy that stops that activity and discourages in a strong way more minors from being put in the hands of dangerous criminal gangs.”

In the long term, if this cycle isn’t stopped and reversed, Vitter said America cannot continue to survive on this path.

“We can’t sustain this as a country,” Vitter said. “These growing waves of illegals have huge effects on America. It’s a national security issue; it’s a border security issue. It’s also an economic issue. We have a very mediocre economy. Folks are struggling to find good jobs and this is clearly going to depress wages and depress job opportunities for Americans. It’s also a big, big drain on our government and public resources whether it’s the immediate border crisis—I mean, President Obama’s asking for $3.7 billion—or long term drains on social services like hospitals and education.”









Poll: Connecticut Republican Gov Candidate Tom Foley Has 9-Point Lead over Incumbent Malloy

A new online poll released Monday by the New York Times, CBS, and London research firm YouGov found Connecticut Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Foley with a nine-point lead over incumbent Dannel Malloy (D-WFP).

According to ctpost.com, the poll found Foley leading Malloy 42-33 in a hypothetical general election match-up. Foley faces an August 12th primary against state Senate Minority Leader John McKinney.

If Foley is ultimately the Republican candidate, the governor’s race would be a rematch for him and Malloy. It was reported that Malloy defeated Foley in 2010 by about 6,400 votes, though the results were scrutinized due to irregularities in procedures.

The poll’s breakdown shows that Malloy had at least a 10-point lead over Foley with women, black, and Hispanic voters.

A Quinnipiac poll in May found Malloy and Foley in a dead heat.

Nathan Gonzales, deputy editor of the Rothenberg Political Report, a nonpartisan political newsletter, said, “Something showing Foley up by almost double digits should give anyone pause. I think the governor’s race in Connecticut is shaping up to be one of the Republicans’ better opportunities around the country.”

Foley and McKinney are both considered to be moderate Republicans. Some media have called Foley “hard to define,” and McKinney, whose district includes Newtown, Connecticut, championed the state’s new gun control laws.

Also running for governor in Connecticut – now as an Independent – is Joe Visconti, who is not hard to define. Visconti, 57, helped to found the Tea Party movement in the state of Connecticut and is an avid gun rights activist. He states he has collected more than enough signatures needed to ensure his place on the November ballot.

In an interview with the New Haven Independent, Visconti, who runs a family construction company, discussed his opposition to the state’s recent minimum wage hike, gun control laws, and income or sales tax increases.

“We need to take the cities back,” he said. “The cities have to be weaned off state money.”

Visconti takes a harder line on amnesty than the establishment Republican candidates. In fact, when the city of New Haven was first to approve ID cards, regardless of immigration status, and ordered police not to ask about immigration status, Visconti attempted a lawsuit to stop approval of the ID card.

“Do you want to follow the Constitution and the force of law? Or do you want to bend your law to your own feel-good [preferences]?” he asks.

Visconti is solidly opposed to the Common Core standards, acknowledging the initiative as a federal intrusion into education, an area reserved by the Constitution for the states. Attacking the controversial standards as “a costly social experiment to federalize education at the expense of your children’s education and future,” Visconti describes the system as one that “further disadvantages the economically disadvantaged and limits the flexibility of teachers to appropriately educate their individual students.”

Regarding gun laws, Visconti once asked New Haven voters, “Has the crime and the gun violence slowed with these new laws?”

“You are never going to take guns out of America,” Visconti said.









2014 Election News - Election Projection Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:04 GMT  

Georgia Senate red again
Today's polling update has produced one party switcher. The Senate race in Georgia turned blue here at EP last Thursday. However, Michelle Nunn's advantage was short-lived. Landmark Communications, whose July 15th poll put the Democratic nominee ahead ...
Weekend projection recap
On Wednesday, I reported Charlie Crist's move ahead of Rick Scott in the Florida governor election. A day later, SurveyUSA released a poll giving Democrat Paul Davis an eye-popping eight-point lead over Kansas incumbent governor, Republican Sam Brownback. ...
Projection updates - good day for Democrats
Last night's Georgia primary runoff election cemented the GOP nominee, David Perdue, and allowed me to move the 2014 Georgia Senate election from a preliminary projection to an official one. As a result, Democrat Michelle Nunn is now ...

DrudgeReportArchives.com Recent Headlines Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:04 GMT  

Hamas Leader's House 'Hit By Missile'...
PAPER: SATAN SYMBOL ON SKIN...
No Quick End...
Israel Escalating Gaza War...

MichelleMalkin.com Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:04 GMT  

Hey, Snotty Bloomberg: Mind your own crumbling city!

Screen Shot 2014-07-11 at 12.31.55 AM
Shooting off his mouth…again

Hey, Snotty Bloomberg: Mind your own crumbling city!
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2014

Some sore losers just don’t know when to pick up their billion-dollar marbles and go away. Far, far away.

I’m looking at you, Michael Bloomberg.

The former New York City mayor mouthed off about my adopted hometown of Colorado Springs and my friends in nearby Pueblo in Rolling Stone magazine this month. He snidely bashed our neighborhoods as backwater holes “where I don’t think there’s roads. It’s as far rural as you can get.”

Snotty Bloomberg is as clueless about geography as he is about the Second Amendment. Colorado Springs and Pueblo are the second and seventh largest cities in the state, respectively. If we’re hee-haw, everyone’s hee-haw. (And what’s wrong with hee-haw, anyway?)

Why such vitriol and hatred for the Rockies from the man who pompously co-founded the “No Labels” movement for “civility” in politics?

Simple: Bloomberg’s still smarting from the ground-breaking losses he and his gun-grabbing East Coast elite pals suffered last fall.

Grass-roots activists — independents, former Democrats, constitutional conservatives and Republicans — successfully recalled two top gun control zealots in our state legislature.

The recall organizers were outspent by a whopping 7-to-1 margin. Bloomberg poured $350,000 into the failed effort to stave off the historic recalls.

Listen up, Bloomie: Butt out of our state and mind your own crumbling city before you bash anyone else’s infrastructure.

You were mayor of New York City for 12 years. How are your roads, bridges and utilities doing, pal?

According to the Center for an Urban Future’s Adam Forman, “1,000 miles of water mains, 170 school buildings and 165 bridges were constructed over a century ago. The city’s public hospital buildings are 57 years old, on average, and 531 public housing towers were built prior to 1950.” The center’s report documented 403 water main breaks last year. And in 2012, “162 bridges across the city—or 11 percent of the total—were structurally deficient,” and 47 of these were deemed “fracture critical.”

Take a Big Gulp of these additional fun facts:

“Thirty seven percent of all subway signals exceed their 50-year useful life, slowing the movement of trains.”

“Approximately 4,000 miles of sewer pipe across the city are made of vitreous clay, a material susceptible to cracking and blockage.”

Meanwhile, 1,500 of the 2,600 public housing buildings do not comply with local standards for exterior and facade conditions.

In Manhattan and Staten Island, less than 60 percent of roads were rated “good” by residents. A “staggering 65.9 percent of streets in West Harlem/Morningside Heights” were in “fair to poor condition.”

Highway maintenance has deteriorated over Bloomberg’s tenure. In 2012, 51 percent of highways were rated poor to fair, compared to 38 percent in 2008. “Conditions have declined in every borough except Brooklyn.”

Oh, and dare I mention to you and your city slicker clique that embarrassing time you had a few Christmas seasons ago dealing with a few feet of snow. Hundreds of ambulances were left stranded. Mass transit was paralyzed. Businesses suffered. Your bungling and AWOL jet setting (Bloomberg was flying to Bermuda while New Yorkers braced for the storm) cost taxpayers the entire $40 million snow removal budget and $30 million in city overtime.

But we’re the bumbling yokels?

Go home, Nanny Bloomberg. Keep your high-and-mighty nose out of our business, your hands off our guns and your money out of our state.

Shooting off his mouth…again Hey, Snotty Bloomberg: Mind your own crumbling city! by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2014 Some sore losers just don’t know when to pick up their billion-dollar marbles and go away. Far, far away. I’m looking at you, Michael Bloomberg. The former New York City mayor mouthed off about my adopted […]
Sen. Patty Murray authors ‘Not My Boss’s Business Act’ to exempt O-care from law she voted for in ’93

**Written by Doug Powers

Sen. Patty Murray has written the “Not My Boss’s Business Act” as a “fix” to get around the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision:

Democrats and women’s health groups believe they have a powerful campaign weapon in pushing back on the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling that Hobby Lobby and other closely held for-profit companies don’t have to comply with the health law’s contraceptive coverage requirement if it violates the owners’ religious beliefs.

The bill was drafted by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a longtime women’s health advocate, and Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who is up for reelection this year. Sen. Mark Begich, a Democrat up for reelection in Alaska, joined them at the press conference to release the bill.

The Democrats’ bill would essentially exempt the Affordable Care Act from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the law that the Supreme Court said the contraception requirement violated.

Some Democrats have Wile E. Coyote’d their way into having to remove another obstacle of their own placing (to read more about this subject, search DADT and DOMA).

Dems, including Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and Patty Murray, overwhelmingly supported the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993, and Bill Clinton signed it into law that same year. Now they’re blaming the Supreme Court for applying a law they helped put into existence. But how many MSM stories about this will point out that little detail?

If anybody finds the idea of politicians attempting to overturn the same laws they voted for a couple of decades earlier to be ridiculous, I suggest term limits.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Band Aids for self-inflicted wounds
Obama’s Immigration Lawyers’ Enrichment Act

Obama’s Immigration Lawyers’ Enrichment Act
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2014

The American Dream is dying for tens of millions of unemployed, underemployed and long-term jobless citizens. But the White House has guaranteed that one sector of the U.S. economy will thrive for decades to come: Open-borders immigration lawyers.

Don’t believe the fibbing D.C. flacks. While the president’s spokesman Josh Earnest promised that “most” of the illegal immigrant youths from Central America flooding across our borders will “likely” be deported, decades of reality expose the White House lie. Our deportation system is designed to fail.

“Due process” in deportation is a euphemism for interminable delay. According to TRAC Immigration, which gathers data on the chronically backlogged immigration court system, there are currently more than 366,000 pending deportation cases with average wait times nationally of nearly 600 days. There are a measly 59 immigration courts staffed by a meager 235 judges to handle all those cases.

Insiders have told me again and again over the years: “It ain’t over ’til the alien wins.”

Democrats, as always, will blame lack of taxpayer funding. But here’s the cold, hard fact: The system is “broken” on purpose. As they clamor for mass illegal alien amnesty, left-wing immigration lawyers and ethnic activists operate a lucrative industry whose sole objective is to help illegal aliens and convicted criminal visa holders evade deportation for as long as possible. Groups such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, and the American Friends Service Committee make their livelihoods off administrative bottlenecks.

The racket’s chief enablers: The federal Executive Office for Immigration Review, which oversees the immigration courts nationwide, and its unaccountable appellate arm, the Board of Immigration Appeals, which routinely puts aliens’ rights over citizens’ safety.

The BIA’s 15 members are politically appointed, career bureaucrats who have the power to overturn deportation orders nationwide. The panel is comprised largely of alien-friendly advocates from immigration-law circles, former Justice Department attorneys and former BIA staff. These meddling activists regularly reopen factual findings of lower trial courts, violating fundamental principles of appellate review and giving illegal aliens more opportunities to press their cases in federal courts than legal American citizens have.

The legal tricks for evading the flimsy immigration dragnet are well known among the immigrant population, as I first reported 12 years ago in a Center for Immigration Studies report on the deportation abyss. “Even if an alien is removable,” an EOIR bureaucrat testified back then, “he or she may file an application for relief from removal, such as asylum, voluntary departure, suspension of deportation, cancellation of removal, adjustment of status, registry or a waiver of inadmissibility.”

Today’s young illegal border surgers have a plethora of litigation bites at the apple that will keep them in our country in perpetuity. As one of countless immigration law firms now advises, “There a several forms of relief that an unaccompanied child may apply for in immigration court.” Voluntary departure is the de facto “catch and release” option that entrusts illegals to deport themselves. Then there’s the scam-riddled asylum application process, which is significantly loosened for minors. Next alternative: the special juvenile immigrant visa which offers lawful permanent resident status to unaccompanied illegal alien children.

Another route: The fraud-friendly U visa. It’s a program for illegal alien victims of trafficking or domestic violence that was supposed to grant temporary legal status if the beneficiaries assisted law enforcement, but has morphed into an ever-expanding path to residency, work authorization and citizenship for virtually anyone who applies.

An attorney who worked as a law clerk in the Fifth Circuit shared his firsthand experience with me several years ago. Nothing has changed. “It was amazing the number of petitions for review of BIA decisions we handled,” he said. “You are absolutely correct that immigration lawyers use the current system of endless appeals to make illegals essentially undeportable. (It amazes me that illegal aliens, unlike American citizens, get TWO appeals as of right — one to the BIA and then another to the Circuit Court of Appeals.)”

One real solution: “Repeal the statutory provisions that provide for judicial review by the Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court,” the lawyer told me. “It is clearly permissible for the Congress to do this under the Constitution. This would eliminate the biggest ‘bottleneck’ in the removal/deportation process. It would also reduce greatly the overburden dockets of our federal appellate courts.”

Another solution: As I first proposed 12 years ago in my book “Invasion,” it’s long past time to abolish the EOIR and BIA and transfer their functions to existing law enforcement officers within the immigration bureaucracy.

Expedient promises by both parties to “secure the border” are worthless unless America shuts down the litigation boondoggle that rewards foreign law-breakers, their saboteur lawyers and their amnesty advocates.

Obama’s Immigration Lawyers’ Enrichment Act by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2014 The American Dream is dying for tens of millions of unemployed, underemployed and long-term jobless citizens. But the White House has guaranteed that one sector of the U.S. economy will thrive for decades to come: Open-borders immigration lawyers. Don’t believe the fibbing D.C. […]

http://kkk.bz/?feed=rss2 Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:04 GMT  


RedState Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:23:04 GMT  

Vox.com’s Ezra Klein Stumbles Bass-Ackward Into a Cogent Point

From Ezra Klein of Vox.com (“Everything you need to know in two minutes, using two brain cells”) comes an analytically-challenged piece with an awkward title: A stunning graph on how money polarizes politics Now, I suppose that what young Ezra is getting at is that there is a large moderate slice of the population that doesn’t donate much money to political causes (as shown in | Read More »

The post Vox.com’s Ezra Klein Stumbles Bass-Ackward Into a Cogent Point appeared first on RedState.

From Ezra Klein of Vox.com (“Everything you need to know in two minutes, using two brain cells”) comes an analytically-challenged piece with an awkward title:

A stunning graph on how money polarizes politics

Now, I suppose that what young Ezra is getting at is that there is a large moderate slice of the population that doesn’t donate much money to political causes (as shown in the graph on the left), so that the extreme believers (especially the donors of more than $200) on both the Left and the Right ends of the spectrum dominate the discussion. That’s the banal, self-evident point that Ezra thinks his “graph is on.”

Unwittingly, though, Ezra has provided us with an insight.

Upon first sight of the graph of large donors (enlarged below), what I found to be noteworthy was its lack of symmetry.

Now, I’m not certain what that horizontal axis represents, but let’s take it at face value that it is a measure of political extremism, zero being neutral, -15 “Very Liberal” and +15 “Very Conservative”. So says Ezra.

So how polarized are the Liberal and Conservative donors? To make that dimension easy to visualize, I merely took the mirror image (absolute value for you math majors) of the Liberal side of the spectrum, shaded it yellow, and plotted it on the positive scale, so that 15 represents “extreme” for both Liberal and Conservative. The resulting graph is below:


OK, so here’s my analysis. Close to half the Liberal large donors score above 10 points, compared to 10 to 12% of the Conservative side of the spectrum. (I don’t have benefit of the underlying data so all values are estimates.) The typical (median) Conservative large donor would appear to be 5 points or more less extreme than the Liberal counterpart.

This fits with the analysis that America is a center-right nation. There are lots of large donors on the Right, but most are not political extremists, as much as Ezra Klein and his Juicevoxers would like to represent them (us) as dangerous and radical.

On the other hand, the Big Money “Progressive” donors (think Soros, Steyer and hard-Left Berkeley radicals) are extreme. The tallest Progressive bar accounts for over 10% of the money represents ideas that are more extreme than those of all but the very most Conservative donors.

My sense for quite some time is that the power and the push (and the President) of the Democratic Party represents thought that is to the Left of 85% of the American people. These graphs pretty much confirm that, and it should be no surprise. Yes, Ezra, these graphs explain much about our polarization, but I don’t think the answer is the one you wanted.

Cross-posted.

The post Vox.com’s Ezra Klein Stumbles Bass-Ackward Into a Cogent Point appeared first on RedState.

Planned Parenthood – They Kill Your Baby And Then Overcharge You For The Service

Under the benevolent auspices of what has to be the most Pro-Abortion administration in American History, Planned Parenthood has grown to be an ultimate crony capitalist partnered with an encouraging government. The organization netted $1.21B in FY13 of which $540.6M was government grant money. $54.7M has been reinvested in lobbying the government that same year. This gives Planned Parenthood an ROI approaching 850% which makes | Read More »

The post Planned Parenthood – They Kill Your Baby And Then Overcharge You For The Service appeared first on RedState.

Blood Money From The Taxpayers

Blood Money From The Taxpayers

Under the benevolent auspices of what has to be the most Pro-Abortion administration in American History, Planned Parenthood has grown to be an ultimate crony capitalist partnered with an encouraging government. The organization netted $1.21B in FY13 of which $540.6M was government grant money. $54.7M has been reinvested in lobbying the government that same year. This gives Planned Parenthood an ROI approaching 850% which makes Big Abortion a business that doesn’t seem to die. It’s not for nothing that they describe themselves as follows.

“We are the most effective advocate in the country for policies that protect access to safe and legal abortion and advance women’s health, actively lobbying in every state legislature ….”

Planned Parenthood has been audited 44 times in 9 different states. This is because as the Alliance Defending Freedom points out in a report entitled “Profit No Matter What,” Planned Parenthood either unintentionally or deliberately fails to police themselves with a proper comptroller system. They may well be the Enron of publically funded NGOs. They first kill your baby, and then overcharge you for the service. Sickening details follow below.

The weight of evidence indicates that waste by Planned Parenthood affiliates may be widespread, and suggests that such policies may be the result of, at a minimum, a policy of benign neglect over billing practices organization-wide by Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s headquarters in New York City. The publicly available audits summarized herein, as well as confidential sources who have inside knowledge of Planned Parenthood’s operations, strongly suggest that Planned Parenthood affiliates systematically take advantage of “overbilling” opportunities to maximize revenues in complex, well-funded federal and state programs that are understaffed and rely on the integrity of the provider for program compliance.

Planned Parenthood has been documented under audit to have overbilled Medicaid Title XIX programs by $8.3M. They were assessed an additional $4.3M in damages for fraudulent billing practices when they lost the court case REYNOLDS V. PLANNED PARENTHOOD GULF COAST. The HHS Office of the Inspector General details $107M in overbilling by Planned Parenthood to a variety of state programs. Ten distinct types of unlawful billing have been identified in audits of the Planned Parenthood organization. They have cheated a variety of Federal and State programs out of money. They have dispensed unnecessary products and drugs and charged the customer. They have performed medically unnecessary services and charged the customer. They have sent duplicate bills and have improperly coded medical services to make bills more expensive. They have kept sloppy and incomplete records and have failed to pay bills for which government agencies have reimbursed them. It’s almost as if an organization that dedicates itself to terminating babies has an ethics problem.

Planned Parenthood presents a moral problem by its very existence. It also exemplifies a moral problem that is endemic in every institution that still functions in our once great nation. The detestable lack of honesty or decency brazenly displayed by Planned Parenthood is what you can pretty much expect from the Jack-Knife Barber. The fact that it reminds us all of so many other organizations taking massive amounts of money from our various governments is even more disturbing. I’m only seeing two differences between Planned Parenthood and Government Motors. Government Motors doesn’t mean to kill people and Planned Parenthood doesn’t get very many recalls.

The post Planned Parenthood – They Kill Your Baby And Then Overcharge You For The Service appeared first on RedState.

Greg Sargent Inadvertently Proves the Halbig Plaintiffs’ Case

Partisan hack and Washington Post writer Greg Sargent has allegedly found a silver bullet that proves that the Halbig decision is erroneous and that the Halbig plaintiffs don’t have a leg to stand on. The gist of Sargent’s point is that an earlier version of the Obamacare bill had language that explicitly provided for subsidies for beneficiaries on Federal exchanges, even though the final version of | Read More »

The post Greg Sargent Inadvertently Proves the Halbig Plaintiffs’ Case appeared first on RedState.

Greg-Sargent-300x254

Partisan hack and Washington Post writer Greg Sargent has allegedly found a silver bullet that proves that the Halbig decision is erroneous and that the Halbig plaintiffs don’t have a leg to stand on. The gist of Sargent’s point is that an earlier version of the Obamacare bill had language that explicitly provided for subsidies for beneficiaries on Federal exchanges, even though the final version of the bill did not include such language:

The first Senate version of the health law to be passed in 2009 — by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee — explicitly stated that subsides would go to people on the federally-established exchange. A committee memo describing the bill circulated at the time spelled this out with total clarity.

***

The disputed language ended up in the final bill because the two versions — both of which intended subsidies in all 50 states, albeit by varying structures — were merged.

Unfortunately for Greg Sargent, anyone who is either a lawyer or a reasonable person will tell you that his evidence proves the exact opposite of what he contends. Since Sargent is neither a lawyer nor a reasonable person, he concludes that this proves that Congressional Intent (insofar as it matters) was to provide subsidies for those on federal exchanges; everyone else understands that this proves the exact opposite.

This is not really a close call or a matter of reasonable dispute. Even for people who take legislative history as a thing that ought to be given great weight, the fact that Congress included a clause in an earlier version of the bill but then changed or removed it in the final version is considered to be conclusive evidence that Congress specifically desired the change in question, not that they intended the earlier version. Let’s say hypothetically that you had a bill that said when it came out of committee, “Congress hereby appropriates $10 million for the funding of studies the mating habits of pink salmon and $5 million for the funding of studies of the mating of silver salmon,” but the final version of the bill merely said “$1o million for the funding of studies of the mating habits of pink salmon,” courts (like reasonable people) come to the inescapable conclusion that the clause about the silver salmon was removed per the deliberate intent of Congress otherwise it would have remained in the bill.

Likewise if a bill comes out of committee that says “The Federal Government and the Several States shall have concurrent jurisdiction over the enforcement of this mandate” but the final bill that gets passed says “The Federal Government shall have jurisdiction over the enforcement of this mandate,” that is considered conclusive, case-ending evidence of Congressional intent to remove State jurisdiction over the enforcement of the mandate in question.

Don’t take my word for it. My colleague Dan McLaughlin has compiled a list of Supreme Court precedents repeatedly making this exact point – see here, here, and here for just a few examples.

Make no mistake; Greg Sargent has made a powerful and compelling point about the Halbig decision. The problem for Sargent is that his point is much, much more likely to be cited by the Halbig Plaintiffs on appeal than by the defendants.

The post Greg Sargent Inadvertently Proves the Halbig Plaintiffs’ Case appeared first on RedState.

Obama Administration Energy Policies Destroying Middle Class

EPA head Gina McCarthy claims the Obama administration is not engaged in a “war on coal.” Nevertheless, the mounting evidence is fairly conclusive: Not only is there a war on coal, but the Obama administration is winning . . . and the collateral damage includes middle and working-class families throughout the country. A brutal story last week in the Washington Post (of all publications) introduced readers to victims of | Read More »

The post Obama Administration Energy Policies Destroying Middle Class appeared first on RedState.

Image Creit Shutterstock

Image Credit:  Shutterstock

EPA head Gina McCarthy claims the Obama administration is not engaged in a “war on coal.” Nevertheless, the mounting evidence is fairly conclusive: Not only is there a war on coal, but the Obama administration is winning . . . and the collateral damage includes middle and working-class families throughout the country.

brutal story last week in the Washington Post (of all publications) introduced readers to victims of federal and state policies that have shuttered coal burning power plants:

Sharon Garcia is stumbling around her dining room in the dark, trying to find Post-It notes.

As she has for years, Garcia wants to affix the notes, marked with dollar signs, to light switches all around her house. The message to her five kids: Light is expensive.

“Why do you need to turn the lights off?” she asks her son, Mariano.

“Because otherwise there’s no money,” he answers, dutifully.

“And when there’s no money?”

“You can’t feed us or take us anywhere.”

Bingo, again.

Remember when Barack Obama said under his plans, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket?”

It’s not hard to figure out: When the cost of electricity rises, people with the fewest financial resources are hurt the most. It gets worse. As the Center for Individual Freedom’s Timothy Lee observes, policies designed to promote energy alternatives – through subsidies – are really available only to the already-well off, who in turn place still more burdens on their less-wealthy neighbors:

Favored homeowners exploit a generous 30% federal tax credit and other bureaucratic incentives to install rooftop solar systems.  Afterward, utility companies must then repurchase the excess power generated by the solar panels at full retail price under a policy known as “net metering.” That, in turn, allows rooftop solar users to enjoy the benefits of traditional electrical generation, and the grid that distributes electricity, without contributing to the broader costs associated with keeping the lights on, so to speak.  Meanwhile, consumers without solar remain on the hook for the maintenance of the electrical grid.

There’s an ugly irony that seems to have escaped most liberals who advocate that system of subsidies.  Namely, most consumers remain unable to exploit the system of handouts because they can’t afford solar in the first place.  Accordingly, liberals have created a government subsidy in which middle-income and lower-income consumers end up subsidizing wealthier homeowners.  How’s that for class warfare?

As one representative from the NAACP (of all organizations) wrote recently:

Right now, the race to a cleaner energy future is playing out like a bad game of dodgeball, with communities of color on the losing side.

This is primarily due to an old rule called net metering, which allows rooftop solar owners to skirt the costs of paying for the electricity grid. Nine times out of 10, these homeowners are wealthier individuals — the only ones who can afford to put a high-priced rooftop solar system on their home.

Rooftop solar panels can’t go on top of community housing or apartments. So the poor and less affluent are hit with the cost of paying for the grid and solar systems for homeowners. And these are considerable added costs to electricity bills — in California, it’s been documented that costs passed along to consumers through net metering amount to a staggering $1.1 billion.

What happens if you work in coal, you’re a miner or you sell or distribute domestic coal to energy producers?  Well, you might be out of luck, too. That because restrictive environmental rules make Russian coal cheaper and easier to burn than our own coal.

What’s a hardworking ratepayer to do?  Register your dissatisfaction with the EPA?  That’s actually harder to do these days than crossing the U.S. border from Mexico. Note the sidebar alert in this notice of a public hearing from the EPA. Because most of these hearings will be held in federal buildings, many citizens will be required to show two forms of identification to enter the “public” hearings.

Sen. Mitch McConnell fired back at the EPA’s McCarthy, calling foul on this sudden moving of the goalposts [pdf]:

I am informed that my constituents face another burden should they have the resources to travel [to the EPA hearings]. I am referring to the fact that they must show two forms of identification (IDs) upon entry into the federal buildings where these hearings are set to take place. Secondary IDs are often not commonplace and may be costly and difficult to obtain.

Imagine the outcry if voters were required to show two forms of ID.

Gina McCarthy insists there’s no “war on coal.” She may be right. The Obama administration’s energy policies are looking more like a “war on the middle class.”

The post Obama Administration Energy Policies Destroying Middle Class appeared first on RedState.


powered by zFeeder
Google


Obama has "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture."
Glenn Beck

What should we do with Obama the racist?
"In Obama's America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering, 'Yay, right on, right on, right on, right on,'
We need segregated buses. This is Obamas America."
Rush Limbaugh

What should we do with Obama the racist?


Where is Dick when we need him?

For the woman in your life, get her something that says what should happen to Obama.

Cook him good...

Share on Facebook

NEED TO REPORT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS?

CLICK HERE FOR IMMIGRATION OFFICE PHONE NUMBERS NATIONWIDE


Other NewsOnly Sites:

Politics
Blue State News Only
Red State News Only

Sports/Fitness
Olympics News Only
Golf News Only
Sailing News Only
NASCAR News Only
Skiing News Only
Yoga News Only
Cricket News Only
Horseracing News Only
Rugby News Only
Tennis News Only

Science/Technology
VoIP News Only
Nanotechnology News
Hybrid Car News Only
Environmental News
Lasik News Only
Skin Cancer News Only
Physics News Only
Space News Only
Data Recovery
Web Hosting

Finance
Mortgage News Only
Insurance News Only

Health
Health News Only

Life
Wine News Only
Travel News Only
Gardening News Only
Cooking News Only
Drink Recipes Only
Ten Dollar Tastings
Entertainment News

Alternatives
Paranormal News Only

Adoption Card

Print a PDF File, sign it and carry it with you.  Notify others in an emergency, that you do not want your children adopted or cared for by homosexuals.

Click Here

Order an Info Pack Today

Get a big info pack and learn more about The Knights.

Comes with back issues of The Crusader, cards, stickers, literature, a magnet and a DVD!

Share with family and friends

 Great for school reports too!

Click Here to order


Other NewsOnly Sites:

Politics
Blue State News Only
Red State News Only

Sports/Fitness
Olympics News Only
Golf News Only
Sailing News Only
NASCAR News Only
Skiing News Only
Yoga News Only
Cricket News Only
Horseracing News Only
Rugby News Only
Tennis News Only

Science/Technology
VoIP News Only
Nanotechnology News
Hybrid Car News Only
Environmental News
Lasik News Only
Skin Cancer News Only
Physics News Only
Space News Only
Data Recovery
Web Hosting

Finance
Mortgage News Only
Insurance News Only

Health
Health News Only

Life
Wine News Only
Travel News Only
Gardening News Only
Cooking News Only
Drink Recipes Only
Ten Dollar Tastings
Entertainment News

Alternatives
Paranormal News Only

Red State News Only is a subsidiary of News Only.org, a NoWolf Publishing division.
2010. All rights reserved.