Monthly Archives: February 2015

Latest Polls Show Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose the FCC’s Internet Takeover

Via the Progressive Policy Institute:

According to a survey conducted over the weekend by Hart Research Associates, a leading
Democratic polling firm, the American people by a wide margin oppose President Obama’s plan to
regulate the Internet. Moreover, they overwhelmingly believe that the Federal Communications
Commission should make the plan available to the public before any vote. Among the key findings:
56% of Americans do not believe that the government should take a stronger and more active
role in overseeing and regulating the Internet
Only 33% favor such government action 53% of Americans believe that it would be harmful for the FCC to do what President Obama has requested and regulate the Internet using the same authority it has used to regulate telephone service.
Only 32% believe taking that step would be helpful.
79% of Americans believe that the exact wording and the details of the plan to regulate the Internet should be made public before the FCC votes on it. Only 13% of Americans oppose making the plan’s exact language public prior to the vote.
Only 9% of Americans believe that the FCC should pass the proposed regulations as they currently stand.
85% support either delaying the vote until the full plan is made public or oppose any new regulations.

Disturbing Poll: Nearly Half of Democrats Think it is OK for Obama to Ignore Law as he Sees Fit

Via The Daily Caller:

A disturbing new survey by Rasmussen Reports found that nearly half of Democrats surveyed support the idea of a president ignoring a court ruling against them if he thinks it is “important for the country.”

Only 26 percent of likely voters surveyed agreed with the concept of an imperial presidency, but fully 43 percent of Democrats do.

Rasmussen finds:

But perhaps more unsettling to supporters of constitutional checks and balances is the finding that 43% of Democrats believe the president should have the right to ignore the courts. Only 35% of voters in President Obama’s party disagree, compared to 81% of Republicans and 67% of voters not affiliated with either major party.

Fifty-two percent (52%) of all voters believe, generally speaking, that court challenges of actions approved by the president and Congress help protect the rights of U.S. citizens. Thirty percent (30%), however, consider such challenges mostly nuisances that stand in the way of good policy. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure.

On the issue of preserving the concept of co-equal branches of government and checks and balances, Rasmussen finds:

Thirty-one percent (31%) think it is more important for government to operate efficiently than it is to preserve our system of checks and balances. Nearly twice as many (59%) place more importance on maintaining checks and balances. Eleven percent (11%) are undecided.

The percentage of Democrats supporting the concept of an executive ignoring the courts would undoubtedly drop significantly were the president a Republican, just as Republican support for the concept would probably rise.

There are significant differences in support for executive branch powers when it comes to age and gender.

Women and younger voters feel more strongly than men and those 40 and older that the president should have the right to ignore federal court rulings. Black voters believe that more than whites and other minority voters do.

CBO: Deficit set to Explode When Obama Leaves Office

Via Townhall:

Federal deficits may have been falling since the end of the recent recession, but thanks to spending increases in major health care programs, including Obamacare, deficits are set to explode in 2017, according to a new report by the Congressional Budget Office.

Thanks to the recent recession and President Obama’s trillion dollar stimulus, the federal budget deficit reached an all time $1.4 trillion high in 2009. Then, as the economy slowly improved and Obama’s stimulus trickled to end, the deficit began to fall. According to the CBO, the deficit will continue to fall to $467 billion in 2016.

Immediately after Obama leaves office, however, deficits are expected to rise steadily thanks mostly to growth in mandatory health care spending programs like Obamacare. By 2025 the CBO estimates that our nation’s federal deficits will again top $1 trillion a year. For comparison’s sake the highest deficit ever under President Bush was $458 billion.

According to the CBO, in 2017 the federal government will be spending $384 billion a year on Medicaid, almost double what it spent before Obama became president. Spending on Obamacare’s insurance exchanges is also set to rise from $15 billion in 2014 to $93 billion in 2017.

Despite this deficit time bomb, Obama only wants to spend more. Asked whether Obama’s 2015 budget would hike spending over current levels, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters earlier this month: “The President has been pretty clear about the fact over the last two weeks that now is exactly the right time for us start making some policy decisions that will invest in middle class families.”

Outgoing IPCC Chief Admits: “[Climate Change] is my Religion”

Via Climate Depot:

IPCC Chair Pachauri forced out at UN climate panel after sexual harassment complaint

Pachauri’s resignation letter on religion: ‘For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.’

UN IPCC critic Journalist Donna Laframboise responds: ‘Yes, the IPCC – which we’re told to take seriously because it is a scientific body producing scientific reports – has, in fact, been led by an environmentalist on a mission. By someone for whom protecting the planet is a religious calling.’

[…]

Continue Reading

 

 

US Home Ownership Rate at 2-Decade Low, and Falling

Via CNS News:

(CNSNews.com) – The homeownership rate in the United States dropped to a 20-year low of 64.5 percent in 2014, according to new data released by the Census Bureau.

The homeownership rate is the percentage of households that own the home in which they live. “It is computed,” says the Census Bureau, “by dividing the number of households that are owners by the total number of occupied households.”

The last time the annual homeownership rate was lower than 64.5 percent was in 1994, when it was 64.0%, according to Table 15 in the Census Bureau’s “Housing Vacancies and Homeownership” data.

In the years since 1984, which is the first year reported on Table 15, homeownership peaked at 69.0 percent in 2004. In the last decade, according to the Census Bureau, the annual homeownership rate has steadily declined.

Among the 50 states, New York’s 2014 homeownership rate of 52.9 percent was the lowest in the nation. California was second lowest with 54.2 percent. Nevada was third lowest with 56.0 percent. Hawaii was fourth lowest with 58.4 percent. Rhode Island was fifth lowest with 61.8 percent.

The District of Columbia—with a homeownership rate of 41.5 percent—was lower than any state.

West Virginia—at 75.6 percent—had the highest homeownership rate in 2014. Delaware had the second highest with 74.3 percent. Michigan had the third highest with 73.8 percent. Vermont had the fourth highest with 73.5 percent. And Mississippi had the fifth highest with 73.2 percent.

Among the 75 largest metropolitan statistical areas in the nation, as reported in Table 16 in the Census Bureau’s “Housing Vacancies and Homeownership” data, the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana area had the lowest homeownership rate in 2014. At 49.0 percent, it was the only one of the top 75 metropolitan statistical areas that had a homeownership rate of less than 50 percent.

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island had the second lowest homeownership rate at 50.7 percent. Bakersfield was third lowest with 52.8 percent. Las Vegas-Paradise as fourth lowest with 53.2 percent. Fresno was fifth lowest with 53.9 percent.

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont was sixth lowest with 54.6 percent.

The Richmond, Va., metropolitan area had the highest homeownership rate at 72.6 percent. Birmingham-Hoover, Ala., was second highest with 71.9 percent. Grand Rapids-Wyoming, Mich., was third highest with 71.6 percent. Detroit-Warren-Livonia was fourth highest with 71.2 percent. And St. Louis, Mo., was fifth highest with 71.1 percent.

Report: Obama Refused Aid to Fight Boko Haram Until Nigeria Formally Endorses Homosexuality, Birth Control

Via Aleteia:

VATICAN CITY — “African values are not on sale,” the new Chairman of Communications for the African bishops has said.

But Bishop Emmanuel Badejo of Oyo, Nigeria, is convinced they are under threat from what Pope Francis has called an “ideological colonization” that is seeking to destroy the family.

It’s so bad, he says, that the United States has made clear it will not help Nigeria fight the Boko Haram terror group unless the country modify its laws regarding homosexuality, family planning and birth-control.

[…]

Continue Reading

ISIS reaping $1million+ a day in oil black market

Via The Daily Mail:

Islamic State militants are raking in money at a remarkable rate, earning about $1 million a day from black market oil sales alone, a Treasury Department official said on Thursday.

David Cohen, who leads the department’s effort to undermine the Islamic State’s finances, said the extremists also get several million dollars a month from wealthy donors, extortion rackets and other criminal activities, such as robbing banks.

In addition, he said the group has taken in at least $20 million in ransom payments this year from kidnappings.

[…]

Democrats refuse DHS funding bill amendment requiring deportation of illegal alien felons

Via the Blaze:

Dozens of House Democrats on Wednesday voted against a legislative proposal aimed at ensuring that illegal immigrants convicted of domestic violence, sexual abuse or child abuse are a priority for deportation.

The vote suggests that immigration-related issues trump other traditional Democratic priorities, such as efforts to protect people from sex or violence-related crimes, especially against women.

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) proposed the language as an amendment to the Department of Homeland Security spending bill. He argued it was needed because Obama’s executive action on immigration created different priorities for deportation that need to be adjusted.

For example, illegal immigrants suspected of terrorism or espionage or other felonies are top priorities for deportation. But illegal immigrants who are convicted of three or more misdemeanors, or one “significant” misdemeanor such as sexual abuse or domestic violence, are on a second tier priority for deportation.

On Wednesday, House Republicans put forward the DeSantis amendment to prioritize the deportation of illegal immigrants convicted of domestic violence, sexual abuse or child abuse. But they were met by significant Democratic opposition, including from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is widely seen as a champion of women’s issues.

Pelosi explained that she opposed the amendment because it was opposed by the National Catholic Conference of Bishops. That group said generally that it opposed all efforts to stop the Obama administration from implementing its immigration plan, and that it could somehow create obstacles to the reporting of domestic violence among immigrants.

“While presented as a measure that helps domestic violence victims, we fear that it actually would discourage many such victims from reporting abuse,” the group wrote, in a letter Pelosi read on the House floor.

Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) also explained that in many domestic violence cases involving illegal immigrants, police arrest both the abuser and the victim, and both can end up pleading to a misdemeanor just to speed up the process. “This happens all the time, all around the country,” she argued.

As a result, she said the GOP language could end up hurting victims as well as abusers.

Those arguments were met with disbelief from Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), who sponsored the amendment. DeSantis said he was “perplexed” why anyone would vote against the amendment.

“Why would we have any tolerance for child molesters?” Desalts said. “If you’re not in our country legally, and you get convicted of an offense like that, you should be gone. We shouldn’t even be discussing this.”

“I think the people who are going to vote ‘no’ on this are basically saying, ‘we don’t want a zero-tolerance policy against child molesters and sexual offenders,’ ” he added.

In the end, the House approved the DeSantis amendment 278-149 vote. Thirty-five Democrats voted with Republicans on this measure, and one Republican voted against it.

But that left 148 Democrats voting against it. Below are all the “no” votes on the DeSantis amendment — all but one of them, Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), are Democrats:

Screen Shot 2015-01-14 at 1.20.11 PM

Muslim Brotherhood: We Met with White House Reps at State Department

Via the Washington Free Beacon:

A Muslim Brotherhood member who recently was hosted at the State Department along with several of the Islamist group’s key allies now claims that a White House official also was present in that meeting, according to recent remarks.

Abdel Mawgoud al-Dardery, a Brotherhood member and former Egyptian parliamentarian, was in the United States late last month along with a delegation of fellow Brotherhood leaders and allies.

The Brotherhood-aligned delegation caused an international stir after the Washington Free Beacon revealed that it had been hosted for a meeting with several State Department officials.

Another member of the group, a Brotherhood-aligned judge in Egypt, posed for a picture while at Foggy Bottom in which he held up the Islamic group’s notorious four-finger Rabia symbol.

While the State Department initially misled reporters about the meeting, it was eventually forced to admit that several Obama administration officials—including a deputy assistant secretary for democracy, human rights, and labor—and State Department officials met with the delegation.

Al-Dardery now claims that in addition to these State Department representatives, a member of the White House also participated in the sit-down.

“The trip started for the [Egyptian] community in New York and New Jersey,” al-Dardery said in a recent interview with the Arabic language pro-Muslim Brotherhood El Sharq TV.  “Then during the trip we undertook to meet with some from the ‘establishment,’ the administration, in the United States.  And we met at the State Department and there was a representative there from the White House.”

A State Department official said that it could not speak to the White House’s involvement in any meetings and referred any questions to it. The White House declined multiple requests for comment about the meeting and whether it was involved.

In addition to Al-Dardery, the delegation included Gamal Heshmat, a leading member of the Brotherhood, and Waleed Sharaby, a secretary-general of the Egyptian Revolutionary Council and a spokesman for Judges for Egypt, a group reported to have close ties to the Brotherhood.

News of the meeting between the Brotherhood allies and the Obama administration caused anger among many in the Egyptian government, which is fighting furiously to crackdown on the Islamist group and its supporters.

“These statements are incomprehensible to me, we do not understand that there will be such a communication with the elements involved in terrorist acts to intimidate the Egyptians,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shukri was quoted as saying in the regional press following the Free Beacon’s initial report.

“The Brotherhood is not a political party,” but “a terrorist organization,” Shukri said.

The Obama administration found itself in more hot water after questions were raised about its initial statements regarding the meeting.

State Department Spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki initially claimed that the Brotherhood-aligned delegation was sponsored by Georgetown University, a claim that turned out to be false.

“Unfortunately, I didn’t have the accurate information on one small piece. The meeting was set up by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, a nonprofit. So the visit was not funded, as you know, by us or the U.S. Government, but it was also not funded by Georgetown,” Psaki said last week, under renewed questioning from reporters about the meeting.

Psaki went on to say that the Obama administration remains comfortable entertaining the Brotherhood.

“Are you—is the building comfortable with continuing to do business with this center, this group?” a reporter asked.

“Yes. Yes,” Psaki responded.