Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘The Obama Administration’

At least 12 released Guantanamo detainees implicated in attacks on Americans

Authored by Adam Goldman and Missy Ryan of The Washington Post

URL of the original posting site: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/at-least-12-released-guantanamo-detainees-implicated-in-attacks-on-americans/ar-AAgOn2m?ocid=spartanntp

An American flag flies behind the barbed and razor wire at the Camp Delta detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The Obama administration believes that at least 12 detainees released from the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have launched attacks against U.S. or allied forces in Afghanistan, killing about a half-dozen Americans, according to current and former U.S. officials.

In March, a senior Pentagon official made a startling admission to lawmakers when he acknowledged that former Guantanamo inmates were responsible for the deaths of Americans overseas. The official, Paul Lewis, who oversees Guantanamo issues at the Defense Department, provided no details, and the Obama administration has since declined to elaborate publicly on his statement because the intelligence behind it is classified.

But The Washington Post has learned additional details about the suspected attacks, including the approximate number of detainees and victims involved and the fact that, while most of the incidents were directed at military personnel, the dead also included one American civilian: a female aid worker who died in Afghanistan in 2008. The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, declined to give an exact number for Americans killed or wounded in the attacks, saying the figure is classified.

Lewis’s statement had drawn scrutiny on Capitol Hill, where some lawmakers see the violence against Americans as further evidence that the president’s plans for closing the prison are misguided and dangerous. They also describe the administration’s unwillingness to release information about the attacks as another instance of its use of high levels of classification to avoid discussion of a politically charged issue that could heighten political opposition to its plans.

One U.S. official familiar with the intelligence said that nine of the detainees suspected in the attacks are now dead or in foreign government custody. The official would not specify the exact number of detainees involved but said it was fewer than 15. All of them were released from Guantanamo Bay under the administration of George W. Bush

The official added: “Because many of these incidents were large-scale firefights in a war zone, we cannot always distinguish whether Americans were killed by the former detainees or by others in the same fight.”

Military and intelligence officials, responding to lawmakers’ requests for greater details, have provided lawmakers with a series of classified documents about the suspected attacks. One recent memo from the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), which was sent to the House Foreign Affairs Committee after Lewis’s testimony, described the attacks, named the detainees involved and provided information about the victims without giving their names.

But lawmakers are prohibited from discussing the contents of that memo because of its high classification level. A similar document provided last month to the office of Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), a vocal opponent of Obama’s Guantanamo policy, was so highly classified that even her staff members with a top-secret clearance level were unable to read it.

“There appears to be a consistent and concerted effort by the Administration to prevent Americans from knowing the truth regarding the terrorist activities and affiliations of past and present Guantanamo detainees,” Ayotte wrote in a letter to Obama this week, urging him to declassify information about how many U.S. and NATO personnel have been killed by former detainees.

Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.), who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has also written legislation that would require greater transparency surrounding the transfer of Guantanamo detainees. Royce and Ayotte are among the lawmakers who opposed a road map for closing the prison that the White House submitted to Congress earlier this year. That plan would require moving some detainees to U.S. prisons and resettling the rest overseas.

“The administration is releasing dangerous terrorists to countries that can’t control them, and misleading Congress in the process,” Royce said in a statement. “The president should halt detainee transfers immediately and be honest with the American people.”

Just under 700 detainees have been released from Guantanamo since the prison opened in 2002; 80 inmates remain.

Secrecy about the top-security prison, perched on an inaccessible corner of Cuba, is nothing new. The Bush administration for years refused provide a roster of detainees until it was forced to do so in a Freedom of Information Act case in 2006. To this day, reporters have never been able to visit Camp 7, a classified facility that holds 14 high-value detainees, including the five men on trial for organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Both the Bush and Obama administrations have provided only limited information on current and former detainees; most of what the public knows about them comes from defense lawyers or from documents released by WikiLeaks.

According to a 2012 report from the House Armed Services Committee, the Defense Intelligence Agency ended the practice of naming some suspected recidivists in 2009 when officials became concerned that it would endanger sources and methods.

National Security Council spokesman Myles Caggins said it was difficult to discuss specific cases in detail because the information was classified.

“But, again, we are committed to being forthcoming with the American people about our safe and responsible approach to Guantanamo detainee transfers, including about possible detainee re-engagement in terrorist activities,” he said.

One Republican aide who has reviewed the classified material about the attacks on Americans said the information has been “grossly overclassified.”

Administration officials say that recidivism rates for released Guantanamo inmates remain far lower than those for federal offenders. According to a recent study, almost half of all federal offenders released in 2005 were “rearrested for a new crime or rearrested for a violation of supervision conditions.” Among former Guantanamo detainees, the total number of released detainees who are suspected or confirmed of reengaging is about 30 percent, according to U.S. intelligence.

Nearly 21 percent of those released prior to 2009 have reengaged in militancy, officials say, compared with about 4.5 percent of the 158 released by Obama.

Human rights activists say the statistics are suspect and cannot be verified because the administration provides almost no information about whom it is counting and why.

Most of those suspected of re-engagement are Afghan, reflecting the large numbers of Afghans detained after the Sept. 11 attacks and the ongoing war there. More than 200 Afghan prisoners have been repatriated from the prison.

Officials declined to identify the woman killed in Afghanistan in 2008. But there are two female aid workers killed that year who might fit the description. Cydney Mizell, a 50-year-old employee of the Asian Rural Life Development Foundation, was abducted in Kandahar as she drove to work. Her body was never recovered, according to a former colleague who said he was told about a month later that she had died.

Another woman, Nicole Dial, 30, a Trinidadian American who worked for the International Rescue Committee, was shot and killed the same year south of Kabul, along with two colleagues. Relatives of Mizell and Dial said they have not been in touch with the FBI for years. Dial’s brother said he was unaware of a former Guantanamo detainee being involved in his sister’s killing. Mizell’s stepmother said she was never told the exact circumstances of her daughter’s death or who abducted her.

“She was definitely killed,” Peggy Mizell said. “I figured she was shot.”

Julie Tate contributed to this report.

true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Islamic News, Political

Tagged with:

Obama’s Transgender Bathroom Decree Appears To Violate Multiple Federal Laws

Authored by Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson May 14, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://www.westernjournalism.com/299574-2/

The Obama Administration has done it again. In an effort to strip school children of their modesty and morals, Obama has issued new instructions governing use of rest rooms, locker rooms, and showers in every government-funded school in the country. And, in predictably lawless fashion, Obama has violated not one, but two federal laws. First, he took a 1972 law, Title IX, which was designed to prevent sex discrimination in education, and says that as of today, the word “sex” in the statute does not mean the “sex” you were born with. It means whatever “gender” you feel like on a given day. And, if that was not bad enough, the manner in which the Obama Administration acted was to legislate by letter, not just usurping legislative power, but Obama violating another federal law — the Administrative Procedures Act.

Purporting to act according to what are known as official “good guidance” practices, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education issued a transgender “good guidance” letter, dated May 13, 2016. Such a “good guidance” letter can only be issued if it does not add requirements to applicable law, but provides information and examples to inform recipients about how the Departments evaluate whether covered agencies are complying with their legal obligations.

However, like a newly enacted statute or promulgation of a new regulation, the May 13 good guidance letter includes list of new terms, never previously adopted by Congress or the Administration. Not only that, but the letter contains rules governing the interpretation of those new legal terms. For example, the letter defines “gender identity” to be “an individual’s internal sense of gender,” but then forbids the use of any objective standard – such as “medical diagnosis or treatment” — to verify any individual claim. One’s gender identity is, thus, established solely by a person’s subjective claim. And that claim can change from day to day.

Additionally, the good guidance letter indicates that the rules governing “sex segregated activities and facilities” are not the same. As for restroom and locker use, “transgender students “must have access to such facilities consistent with their gender identity,” but with respect to “athletics,” gender identity is not the sole determinant of access. That is, for athletics, a boy who feels he should be a ‘transgender girl” could be excluded from the girl’s basketball team, but not put out of the girl’s locker room.

None of these examples merely “provides information and examples” of existing regulations — which is all that guidance letters may do lawfully. This letter presents brand new interpretations of the word “sex” and new applications of new terms. And, they are binding. The guidance letter reads: “The Departments treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for the purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations. This means that a school must not treat a transgender student differently from the way it treats other students of the same gender identity.”

According to the federal government’s own rules for Agency Good Guidance Practices, guidance letters may not be used to establish “new policy positions that the agency treats as binding. Rather, the government agency must apply with the APA’s notice-and-comment requirements.” OMB Final Bulletin for Agency Good Guidance Practices at 3.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has observed that such guidance letters can be abusive, for under them: “Law is made, without notice and comment, without public participation, and without publication in the Federal Register or the Code of Federal Regulations.” Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 208 F.3d 1015 (D.C. Cir. 2000). That is not law — it is “fiat.”

Moreover, the DOJ and DOE guidance letter misleads. Masquerading as a “Dear Colleague” letter, the two departments act as if they are just co-workers with the nation’s college presidents and university provosts, school superintendants and principals — laboring together “to make educational programs and activities safe, and inclusive for all students.” In fact, however, this “dear colleague” letter represents a threat, not an invitation. If it were collegial, it would have been penned and signed only by the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the Department of Education, the federal co-worker. Instead, the letter is also signed by the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney for Civil Rights in the Department of Justice — the federal enforcer.

Both signers pretend that the newly hatched transgender student policy is not worthy of public debate and decision by the people’s elected representatives in Congress. Rather, it is a done deal. It is time for the people to call on their elected state officials and representatives to fight for their rights not to be governed by two leftist unelected bureaucrats. Now, the only question is whether the supposedly sovereign states will cave to federal threats, and whether the federal courts will look the other way, as they have done all too frequently in the past.

Just Tuesday, we filed an amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit case of G.G. v. County of Gloucester. This brief was filed for Public Advocate of the United States, the United States Justice Foundation, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund. Our brief was in support of an effort to have the Fourth Circuit reconsider its decision upholding the Obama Administration’s order that the boys’ restrooms in Gloucester County, Virginia schools be opened to girls, and, by the logic of the decision, would open the girls’ restrooms to boys. One would have thought that the Obama gang would have awaited a decision from the Fourth Circuit, but it was not to be. The Obama Administration sees that with each turn of the calendar there are fewer and fewer days to remake America, as President Obama promised in his inaugural address. So much damage to be done, and so little time to do it.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Herbert W. Titus taught Constitutional Law for 26 years, and concluded his academic career as the Founding Dean of Regent Law School. William J. Olson served in three positions in the Reagan Administration. Together they have filed over 85 briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court, and dozens more in lower courts, addressing important public policy issues. They now practice law together at William J. Olson, P.C. They can be reached at wjo@mindspring.com or twitter.com/Olsonlaw.

PC Trans true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Obama reinstates ‘catch-and-release’ policy for illegal immigrants

Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, told Congress that Homeland Security was embarrassed by the number of illegal immigrants not showing up for their deportation hearings, but instead of cracking down on the immigrants, the department ordered agents not to arrest them in the first place — meaning they no longer need to show up for court.

Mr. Judd said the releases are part of President Obama’s “priorities” program, which orders agents to worry chiefly about criminals, national security risks and illegal immigrants who came into the U.S. after Jan. 1, 2014. Mr. Judd said illegal immigrants without serious criminal convictions have learned that by claiming they came before 2014 — without even needing to show proof — they can be released immediately rather than being arrested.

“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions,” Mr. Judd testified to the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “That fact is well known in other countries.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol, did not deny Mr. Judd’s claim but said agents have been instructed to prioritize whom they arrest.

“The Border Patrol’s resources are most effectively focused on the border — prioritizing the apprehension and removal of individuals attempting to unlawfully enter the United States,” said Michael Friel, a CBP spokesman. “Our removal numbers reflect that. Border Patrol agents are issuing notices to appear, consistent with law, regulation and the department’s enforcement priorities.”

The White House declined to comment. Spokesman Josh Earnest said he hadn’t seen the testimony. Illegal Immigration Giant

Mr. Obama has pushed for Congress to grant citizenship rights to most illegal immigrants, but after Capitol Hill failed to deliver he took action on his own to carve most illegal immigrants out of danger of deportation.

He and Mr. Johnson said deportation and border agents should worry chiefly about dangerous immigrants and new arrivals. Those with deeper ties to the U.S. who have not amassed criminal records should be passed over, Mr. Obama said.

Mr. Judd said there are holes in that policy. He said agents have been ordered not to ask for proof when an immigrant says he or she has been in the U.S. since 2013, and migrants have quickly learned to assert that claim without having to worry about having it challenged.

He said on the northern border, where he is stationed, agents arrested an illegal immigrant who had recently been charged with felony domestic violence. He had to be released because he hadn’t gone to trial yet, so he hadn’t been convicted.

“Under the law, he should have been set up for removal proceedings, but under the policy he was let go,” Mr. Judd testified. “And he was let go even though he first proved that he cared so little about our laws that he entered the United States illegally, and once here, he proved further disdain by getting arrested for a serious violent act against another.”

Mr. Judd was testifying at a hearing called to examine the surge of illegal immigrants — unaccompanied children and families traveling together — who have overwhelmed agencies. After peaking in early summer 2014, the numbers dropped. But 2016 is on pace for a record year. Mr. Judd and Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said criminal cartels are using the families and children to flood the border to distract agents and create chances to smuggle drugs. The cause of the surge is heatedly debated

Immigrant rights advocates said the children and mothers are fleeing horrific violence and should be considered asylum-seekers, not illegal immigrants. The advocates point to spiking homicide rates. El Salvador leads the Western Hemisphere with 103 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Honduras is third worst with a rate of 57 homicides, and Guatemala is fifth worst with 30 per 100,000 people. San Pedro Sula in Honduras recorded 885 homicides out of a population of just less than 800,000 people last year, according to a Mexican nongovernmental organization that tracks the statistics. San Salvador, the capital of El Salvador, recorded 1,918 homicides among its 1.8 million people — a rate of 109 per 100,000.

The U.S. city with the highest homicide rate per capita, St. Louis, recorded a rate of 59 per 100,000 inhabitants.

Wendy Young, president of Kids in Need of Defense, which handles cases of children applying for protection in the U.S., detailed horrific stories of children being enslaved by gangs, tracked down if they try to leave and being killed as retribution for crossing the gangs.

She recounted the story of one 14-year-old girl who was abducted by a gang and gang-raped for four days before she escaped. Her family fled to another location inside the country, but the gang tracked her down, and her family sent her north to the U.S.

“These children are doing the only thing they can — they are running for their lives,” Ms. Young said.

Mr. Judd said children wanting to claim asylum can go to a border entry point and present themselves to CBP officers. Instead, the cartels deliver them to some of the remote parts of the border before sending them to find Border Patrol agents, keeping the agents occupied while the cartels smuggle their goods, the agent said.

Border Patrol agents used to interview the children and ask them why they came, and the overwhelming majority said they believed enforcement was lax and they would be allowed to stay.

Ms. Young said the children were likely frightened by agents and officers in uniforms, so the information they gave was not to be trusted. Regardless, Mr. Judd said, agents have now been banned from asking those questions. Leftist Propagandist

stupid In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Cartoon: An Omnibus Chistmas

Commentary By Glenn Foden / @GlennFo / December 18, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/18/cartoon-an-omnibus-chistmas/?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRovuK7BZKXonjHpfsX74%2BokW6S2hYkz2EFye%2BLIHETpodcMTcZiMr7YDBceEJhqyQJxPr3NLtQN191pRhLiDA%3D%3D

Several Heritage Foundation researchers gave their reaction to the spending bill that was announced this week:

Early Wednesday morning, the House Rules Committee posted text for the Consolidated Appropriations Act of the 2016 fiscal year (FY). This $1.1 trillion spending package, known as the omnibus, shows Washington at its worst.

Lawmakers are being asked to sign off on 2,200 pages (with an additional 1,000 pages of explanatory materials), at the 11th hour, without having had sufficient time to analyze its contents.

The House plans to begin consideration of the bill on Friday morning, with final votes expected to come Friday afternoon before the House leaves town until Jan. 5. Exact timing of when the Senate will vote on the bill is unclear, but lawmakers are expected to wrap up consideration quickly and begin their vacation, perhaps as early as Friday night. In the meantime, another short-term continuing resolution will be necessary to avoid a government shutdown at midnight.

The omnibus spending package, along with the tax extenders package, is full of provisions that were negotiated behind closed doors.

Heritage experts have combed through the bill’s numerous provisions and have provided their analysis on several key issues below:

Higher Spending

War Account as Slush Fund

Even Higher Spending With Gimmicks

Sanctuary Cities Spared

No Additional Assurances on Vetting Refugees

Risk Corridor Bailouts Avoided

Planned Parenthood Affiliates Still Funded

Failure to Protect Conscience Rights

More Bad Than Good on Energy Provisions

Failure on WOTUS (EPA Water Rule)

Funding Barred for Unrelated Dietary Guidelines

Repeals Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling

Small Steps on School Lunch Funding

Congress Is at It Again With Tax Extenders

Obamacare’s Taxes

Higher Spending

Once again, Congress has missed a critical opportunity to abide by the Budget Control Act spending caps and will not rein in wasteful and excessive spending. Base spending for the omnibus comes in at $1.066 trillion, the level agreed upon in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015. The defense and non-defense subcategories are at the agreed upon levels as well.

Overall, FY2016 base discretionary spending in the omnibus is $50 billion higher than the original Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) levels.

The Bipartisan Budget Act set a maximum amount of discretionary spending, not a spending goal that had to be obtained. Since its enactment in 2011, the Budget Control Act caps set by the law have been exceeded each year.

With the Bipartisan Budget Act’s revised FY2017 spending level already set to bust the caps and be above the FY2018 cap, unless Congress starts making the tough spending decisions and abiding by the Budget Control Act, we are poised to continue this trend in the future.

War Account as Slush Fund

Funding for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) is also at the $73.7 billion level agreed upon in the Bipartisan Budget Act, with defense receiving $58.8 billion and non-defense receiving $14.9 billion in FY 2016. The Bipartisan Budget Act increased Overseas Contingency Operations funding by $16 billion for each of the next two years.

The $8 billion designated for non-defense is likely to be used to cover base budget needs of the State Department rather than for continuing war efforts, once again using Overseas Contingency Operations money as a slush fund to increase non-defense discretionary spending up to the president’s requested level while defense remains underfunded.

Even Higher Spending With Gimmicks

On top of the base discretionary funding and Overseas Contingency Operations funding agreed upon in the Bipartisan Budget Act, the omnibus also includes other above-the-cap spending for purposes such as disaster and emergency declarations and program integrity initiatives.

The bill includes $7.1 billion in disaster spending, which funds responses to presidential declarations for natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes, and wildfires, among other purposes.

The omnibus also provides $1.5 billion for program integrity initiatives that aim to combat Medicaid waste, fraud, and abuse. An additional $698 million is also appropriated to the Department of the Interior for emergency declarations. While some of these may be worthwhile and necessary purposes, these expenses (which recur almost every year) should be accounted for in the base budget. Funds in excess of the discretionary cap should be appropriated only when a true emergency or unforeseen disaster occurs. They should not be used as another gimmick to circumvent the spending caps.

The omnibus also relies on Changes in Mandatory Programs (CHIMPs) to bust through the (already inflated) spending caps. These are changes to mandatory spending and entitlements that affect current-year budget authority and are treated as changes in discretionary spending for the purpose of scoring appropriations bills.

Sometimes these are real savings and may be used as an acceptable offset, but most of the time they are simply a way to increase discretionary spending in the current year with no real savings ever being realized.

The FY2016 Conference Budget Resolution took a first step in reining in CHIMPs spending by limiting the total amount that could be used as an offset over the each of the next four years. However, the agreement still allows for over $19 billion in additional spending this fiscal year. This is purely additional discretionary spending over the agreed upon budget caps. Moving forward, the use of CHIMPs should be eliminated completely.

—Justin Bogie, senior policy analyst, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

Sanctuary Cities Spared

The omnibus does not restrict Department of Homeland Security or Department of Justice grants to cities that resist the enforcement of federal immigration law, also known as sanctuary cities. Federalism gives local governments some latitude in choosing to oppose or not assist the federal government in enforcing immigration law, but the federal government does not have to reward or pay for the results of such policies.

No Additional Assurances on Vetting Refugees

The omnibus also does not request additional assurances, intelligence assessments, or risk-based plans for the refugee process. If Congress is genuinely concerned about the vetting of refugees, then it should have requested additional information with which to oversee such vetting programs.

Similarly, while the bill makes small improvements to the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), it also adds largely unhelpful and even counterproductive restrictions to the program by denying Visa Waiver Program to individuals who have travelled to Iraq, Syria, or other countries. Importantly, it also does not expand the program in order to reap additional security benefits.

—David Inserra, policy analyst for homeland security and cybersecurity, Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy

Risk Corridor Bailouts Avoided

The bill also continues a provision to prohibit the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Program Management funds from being used to make payments under Obamacare’s risk corridor program. This will prohibit the administration from using undedicated funds to bail out unprofitable qualified health insurance plans in the individual and small group markets.

Planned Parenthood Affiliates Still Funded

The trillion-dollar budget deal would continue to allow hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds, from both discretionary funding under Title X and from Medicaid reimbursements, to flow to Planned Parenthood Federation of America affiliates—despite recent disturbing videos showing Planned Parenthood officials haggling over the price of body parts of aborted babies.

No federal funds should be going to Planned Parenthood Federation of America or any of its affiliates or health centers. Disqualifying Planned Parenthood affiliates from receiving Title X family planning grants, Medicaid reimbursements, and other federal grants and contracts should not reduce the overall funding for women’s health care. The funds currently flowing to Planned Parenthood affiliates should be redirected to health centers that offer comprehensive health care without entanglement in abortion on demand. Members of Congress had the opportunity with the year-end funding bill to end both mandatory and discretionary federal funding of Planned Parenthood and end taxpayer entanglement with the largest abortion provider in the country, but they failed to do so.

Failure to Protect Conscience Rights

While long-standing pro-life riders are included in the omnibus, a much-needed policy to address serious conscience violations is missing from the spending bill.

In August 2014, the Department of Managed Health Care in California mandated that almost every health plan in the state include coverage of elective abortions, including those plans offered by religious organizations, religious schools, and even churches. The Weldon Amendment prohibits federal, state, and local governments that receive certain federal funds from discriminating against health care entities, including health care plans, that do not “provide, pay for, provide coverage of or refer for abortions.” While that policy has been included in appropriations bills since 2004 (including the current omnibus), enforcement of the conscience policy is left to the discretion of officials in the Department of Health and Human Services, which has a poor track record of moving quickly (if at all) on complaints. The Obama administration has so far effectively ignored requests to HHS for help obtaining relief from California’s mandate.

In response to this urgent problem, Congress should provide victims of discrimination the ability to defend their freedom of conscience in court, not leave them to wait on bureaucrats in the Obama administration. The Abortion Non-Discrimination Act would do just that. The act is currently part of the Health Care Conscience Rights Act, H.R. 940, a bill that would address other conscience issues in Obamacare.

—Sarah Torre, policy analyst, DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society

More Bad Than Good on Energy Provisions

If you were to put a jelly bean for each energy provision on a two-sided scale, one side being good free-market provisions and the other being corrupt energy provisions, the bad side of the scale would be hitting the floor.

The good provision is a very good provision, indeed. Lifting the crude oil export ban would generate more jobs for Americans, supply the United States and the world with more affordable energy, and provide important geopolitical benefits for Washington and its allies.

But the numerous bad provisions waste taxpayer money and provide targeted tax credits to politically connected companies. They include:

A five-year extension of the wind production tax credit (PTC). The wind PTC, which has been around since 1982, artificially propped up an industry, advanced special interests, and allocated labor and capital away from more competitive uses in the marketplace.

A five-year extension of the solar investment tax credit (ITC), which companies can now take when they begin construction rather than when they start producing power. Solar companies would be better off in the long run without the ITC. They would understand their true price point to be competitive in the short and long run.

A ramp up in Department of Energy spending for renewables, energy efficiency provisions, fossil fuels, and nuclear. The Department of Energy has ballooned by subsidizing and forcing energy technologies into the marketplace. The private sector has demonstrated countless times that it is far better equipped than government to allocate resources and develop commercially viable technologies.

A handout for the oil industry. The legislation would provide a targeted tax credit for small, independent refiners and allow independents to exempt 75 percent of transportation costs when calculating their Section 199 manufacturing deductions. This is nothing more than obvious compensation for lifting the ban on crude oil exports. Further, the energy tax provisions in the omnibus speak to the need for the federal government to stop using the tax code to pick winners and losers for all energy sources and technologies.

A three-year extension of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The massive amount of land owned and managed by the U.S. government has resulted in land mismanagement, stifled opportunities for recreation and resource production, and poor environmental stewardship. Reauthorizing the LWCF is a recipe for prolonging mediocre and often poor federal control of America’s land. Permanently eliminating the LWCF is recognition that improved economic growth and environmental quality are born not out of Washington, but in the states.

Absent from the text are provisions that would block the Obama administration’s climate change regulations, regulations that will drive up energy costs no climate benefit. Instead, the federal government has hundreds of millions of dollars to dole out internationally through the Climate Investment Fund and Strategic Climate Fund. Notably missing from the omnibus spending bill is a provision prohibiting spending on the Green Climate Fund.

This is no compromise, but instead a large extension of government intrusion in energy markets where it does not need to be.

—Nick Loris, Herbert and Joyce Morgan fellow, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

Failure on WOTUS (EPA Water Rule)

The omnibus bill fails to prohibit funding for the Environmental Protection Agency’s and Army Corps’ controversial “waters of the United States” rule, which would greatly expand the types of waters that could be covered under the Clean Water Act, from certain man-made ditches to so-called waters that are actually dry land most of the time.

In addition to this rule being an attack on both property rights and the states’ role in protecting the environment, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) just ruled that the EPA broke the law in developing it.

The policy problems and the agency overreach should have been more than enough to block funding for the rule. Both the House and the Senate have already passed different bills that would repeal the rule (the same bill still needs to be passed by both chambers). Attorneys general and agencies from at least 31 states are suing the federal government regarding the rule. Even environmental groups are suing.

If it somehow wasn’t a no-brainer to block funding for the water rule before, then it certainly should have been after the GAO’s opinion. The GAO found that the EPA violated the law when developing the rule by trying to inappropriately gin up support for the rule through improper lobbying activities and covert propaganda. Their illegal actions, according to GAO, were focused not just on the regulatory process, but also on encouraging opposition to legislation that would have blocked efforts to undermine the rule. The legislative process itself, and the work of many members of Congress, was itself being undermined by EPA’s actions. Yet Congress still allowed the rule to go forward. If Congress won’t use the power of the purse to block this rule, when will it ever use the power of the purse to block any rule?

Funding Barred for Unrelated Dietary Guidelines

Every five years, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services issue dietary guidelines to advise the public on healthy eating. The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) submitted its scientific report, which helps to inform the final guidelines, in February. Throughout the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee process, there has been a focus on non-dietary issues such as sustainability, climate change, and other environmental factors.

The omnibus bill does prohibit funding for guidelines that are not limited to nutritional and dietary information (Division A, Sec. 734). It would also direct the Secretary of Agriculture to work with the National Academy of Medicine to study the Dietary Guidelines process (Division A, Sec. 735). The problem, though, is that any new Dietary Guidelines, even if claimed to be based on nutritional and dietary factors alone, will have no legitimacy, because the process was dominated by environmental concerns, not dietary concerns.

Repeals Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling

The mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for certain meat products has been the subject of significant controversy. Both Canada and Mexico have correctly alleged that COOL has a discriminatory effect on their livestock exports to the United States, violating trade obligations. COOL is merely a non-tariff trade barrier, having nothing to do with health or safety, which is supposed to provide consumers information.

Yet the government doesn’t need to impose such a requirement if consumers value such information; the market will respond accordingly. As it turns out, consumers don’t value this information. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has repeatedly agreed with Canada and Mexico. After just receiving WTO authorization, Canada and Mexico are about to impose over a billion dollars in retaliatory tariffs on the United States. The omnibus bill would repeal COOL before this costly retaliation is imposed on a wide range of industries (Division A, Sec. 759).

—Daren Bakst, research fellow in agricultural policy, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

Small Steps on School Lunch Funding

The omnibus continues funding for the USDA’s new school lunch standards, which were implemented as part of the Healthy and Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010.

However, these standards have been burdensome to schools and should not be funded. For example, a January 2014 report by the GAO shows that since the implementation of the new standards, participation in the school lunch program has declined, there has been an increase in food waste among students, and some schools have dropped out of the program at least partially due to the new standards.

The new standards have also imposed greater costs on schools, such that some have even have had to draw from their education funds to cover them.

The omnibus takes small steps in the right direction by

1) allowing states to exempt schools from the whole grain requirement if a state can “demonstrate hardship, including financial hardship, in procuring specific whole grain products which are acceptable to the students and compliant with the whole grain-rich requirements,” and by

2) prohibiting funds to go toward rules that would require a reduction in sodium in school meals until scientific research can establish that such a decrease is beneficial to children.

The decision of what children eat is best left to parents, not bureaucrats in Washington. Congress should prohibit any funding from going toward these costly and heavy-handed standards.

—Rachel Sheffield, policy analyst, DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society; and Daren Bakst, research fellow in agricultural policy, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

Congress Is at It Again With Tax Extenders

The tax extenders are a yearly exercise that Congress is long overdue to end. Lawmakers should go through the various policies in the package, extend those that are sound policy, and eliminate those that are not, all in a revenue-neutral manner. Once again, Congress did not follow this sensible approach.

To its credit, Congress made several policies permanent. Importantly, it made the Research and Development Credit, section 179 expensing for small businesses, and the exemption from subpart F income of active financing income permanent. These are all necessary policies, given the dilapidated state of the tax system. It will be a relief in future years that they are no longer set to expire.

The price of these permanent extensions was steep. Congress also made permanent the stimulus’ expansions of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), the Child Tax Credit, and the American Opportunity Credit. These permanent expansions increase spending by nearly $160 billion over the next 10 years. Congress should have offset this spending with spending cuts in other areas.

The bill also extends bonus depreciation, better called 50 percent expensing, for five years. It would have been better had Congress made it permanent, too, but a five-year extension is better than a two-year continuance.

Disappointingly, Congress also included a five-year extension of other policies that are not sound, including the New Markets Tax Credit and the Work Opportunity Credit. These policies are examples of Congress using the tax code to pick winners and losers. They should have been among the first extenders to be permanently excised instead of receiving an expanded extension.

The rest of the extenders get the at-this-point standard two-year extension. Since the extenders were expired for 2015, the two-year bill extends them retroactively for 2015 and through 2016. Congress will be back at this game either in the lame duck session at the end of 2016 or sometime in 2017.

Obamacare’s Taxes

A two-year moratorium on Obamacare’s medical device tax, for 2016 and 2017, is also included in the tax bill. It is a bad tax, but suspending it should not be confused with repealing Obamacare.

Strangely, the omnibus spending bill includes a two-year delay of the beginning of the Cadillac tax on high-cost health insurance plans from 2018 to 2020, as well as the delay of the tax on health insurers, and an extension of various alternative energy credits, including the production tax credit. The policies should not have been extended, especially since Congress did not adopt equivalent Obamacare spending cuts.

Delaying the start of the Cadillac tax was the wrong approach, especially since Congress did not adopt equivalent Obamacare spending cuts. Congress should instead use it as a pivot to capping the tax exclusion of employer-provided health insurance.

Even though it is long past time for Congress to end its practice of dealing with the extenders semiannually, it did make certain important policies permanent. That will make the extenders easier to deal with next time and lowers the revenue baseline for tax reform. These are steps in the right direction after years of standing still.

Curtis Dubay, research fellow for tax and economic policy, Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies

burke In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Obama Admin Will Not Reveal to Congress Number of Americans Killed By Iran

BY: Adam Kredo / September 18, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/obama-admin-will-not-reveal-to-congress-number-of-americans-killed-by-iran

John Kerry / AP

In a series of on-the-record responses obtained exclusively by the Free Beacon, and provided in written form to Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), Kerry sidestepped the questions on all of the three separate occasions he was asked to provide the figures. The questions come as the United States prepares to unfreeze more than $100 billion in Iranian assets under the terms of the recently inked nuclear deal. Experts fear the Islamic Republic will funnel the cash windfall into its rogue terror operations and proxy groups.

Lawmakers and experts also have expressed concern about portions of the deal that will lift international sanctions on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as well as Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s financial empire.

In the list of questions submitted to Kerry, Rubio asks: “How many U.S. citizens have been killed by Iran, including by Iran’s terrorist proxies, since 1979?”

The secretary of state declined to provide an answer, instead saying that the administration takes the murder of American citizens “very seriously.”

“The death of any U.S. citizen due to acts of terrorism is a tragedy that we take very seriously,” Kerry writes. “As the President said in his Aug. 5 speech, a nuclear-armed Iran is a danger to Israel, America and the world.”

“The central goal of the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is to eliminate the imminent threat of a nuclear-armed Iran,” Kerry continued.

When asked a second time by Rubio to specify “How many U.S. troops and soldiers were killed by Iranian-provided weapons or by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Kerry said, again sidestepping the question.

“We are extraordinarily grateful for the service of the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, and we mourn the loss of every service member,” Kerry writes. “The JCPOA is not about a change in the broader U.S. relationship with Iran. It is about eliminating the biggest and most imminent threat—a nuclear-armed Iran.”

When separately asked to detail “how many Israelis have been killed by Iran, including by Iran’s terrorist proxies since 1979,” Kerry again declined to respond.

“The central goal of the JCPOA is to eliminate the imminent threat that Iran will acquire a nuclear weapon,” Kerry said. “But the JCPOA cannot erase decades of Iranian anti-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric and actions.”

A State Department official told the Free Beacon that no further information on these questions could be provided beyond what Kerry wrote.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R., Texas) told the Free Beacon that the administration’s reluctance to provide information about Iran’s efforts to kill Americans is “unconscionable.” “It is a fact that Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and that they have killed and maimed thousands of upstanding military men and women at the hands of sheer hate,” said Gohmert, who has been a vocal critic of the Iran deal.

“It is unconscionable that the Obama administration is refusing to answer questions on just how many Americans have been killed or maimed by Iran,” the lawmaker said. “One thing we know— Iran says they will continue their efforts to destroy the United States and its people so one hundred billion dollars will allow Iran to kill and maim multiples of the numbers of Americans they already have killed and maimed, making the Obama administration knowing accessories.”

Michael Pregent, director of the advocacy organization Veterans Against the Deal, called it shocking that the administration would not release these figures.

“We find it absurd that the Obama administration and the State Department would deny information on Iran’s direct role in the deaths of Americans in Iraq from sitting U.S. senators,” said Pregent, whose organization has released several ads highlighting Iran’s terror operations against U.S. soldiers.

“For the State Department to protect Iran by keeping information detrimental to Iran’s Quds force and [IRGC Leader] Qasem Soleimani from the American people is an affront to veterans affected by this enemy and service members currently in harms way in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Pregent said.

Recent estimates by U.S. intelligence officials put the number of American soldiers killed by Iran in Iraq and Afghanistan at around 500.

The issue of Iran’s terror funding has emerged as a key concern among critics of the nuclear accord.

A Free Beacon report revealed that Iran has been spending billions of dollars to pay the salaries of terrorists. This includes potentially millions of dollars in monthly payments to pro-government forces in Syria, more than $1 billion in military aid to fighters in Iraq, and about $20 million annually to Hamas terrorists, according to a private report commissioned by Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.).

The report was assembled following a request by Kirk for the Obama administration to disclose its estimates of “Iranian military spending, as well as Iranian assistance to Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, the Assad government, Hezbollah, and Hamas,” according to a copy of that report.

Kerry additionally discloses in his responses to Rubio that Iran is permitted to test fire ballistic missiles under the nuclear accord.

“It would not be a violation of the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] if Iran tested a conventional ballistic missile,” Kerry disclosed in the document.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Obama Punishes Kansas for De-Funding Planned Parenthood by Cutting Its Medicaid Funding

Reported by Steven Ertelt Aug 26, 2015 | Washington, DC

URL of the original posting site: http://www.lifenews.com/2015/08/26/obama-punishes-kansas-for-de-funding-planned-parenthood-by-cutting-its-medicaid-funding

The Obama administration has punished the state of Kansas for cutting taxpayer funds for the Planned Parenthood abortion business by cutting its federal Medicaid funding by the same amount. The moves comes at the same time the abortion giant is facing intense criticism over its sales of aborted babies and their body parts. In 2011, pro-life Governor Sam Brownback signed a bill signed into law a bill that would shift funding away from the Planned Parenthood abortion business and stops abortion funding in health insurance programs. The Kansas Senate passed the measure on a 28-10 vote and the state House followed suit with an 86-30 vote.

The measure has the state budget directing over $300,000 in Title 10 money to local full-service health clinics instead of Planed Parenthood and it places $300,000 into the Stan Clark grant-matched fund for pregnancy support and adoption counseling. The funding cuts eventually resulted in the Planned Parenthood abortion business closing one of its centers.

Now, the Obama administration, in the wake of additional states cutting Planned Parenthood funding following the massive scandal, is going after one state that already cut tax-funding to the abortion company. According to an AP report: “The federal government reduced its Title X funding to the state by about the $370,000 annually in Title X money that two Planned Parenthood facilities in Wichita and Hays and an unaffiliated clinic in Dodge City had been receiving.”

While Kansas revoked taxpayer dollars for an abortion business, the Obama administration’s decision hurts women’s health and deprives them of legitimate medical and health care.

As AP reports, “Medical providers say that means low-income patients are finding it harder to access birth control, cancer screenings and other reproductive health care services. People have fewer places to go, and for those with limited means that may make utilizing those services even more difficult,” said J’Vonnah Maryman, director for public health at the Sedgwick County Health Department.

In terms of the pro-life law de-funding Planned Parenthood, the insurance portion of the legislation prohibits private health insurance companies from forcing enrollees to pay for abortions and it makes those who want to potentially have abortion coverage pay for an insurance rider. It also ensures abortions can’t be paid for with taxpayer dollars through the state exchanges set up under the federal Obamacare health care law.

ACTION: Thank Governor Brownback at https://governor.ks.gov/

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Revealed: 276 ‘sanctuary cities’ let 8,145 illegal offenders free in just 8 months, 17,000 total

By Paul Bedard • 7/13/15

URL of the original posting site: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/276-sanctuary-cities-let-8145-illegal-offenders-free-in-just-8-months/article/2568121

: Illegal immigrant Francisco Sanchez is charged with murdering Kate Steinle in San Francisco. AP Photos

Some 276 “sanctuary cities,” nearly 50 percent more than previously revealed, released over 8,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records or facing charges free despite federal requests that they be turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation, according to an explosive new report. The Center for Immigration Studies, revealing new numbers it received under the Freedom of Information Act, said that those releases from cities that ignored federal demands came over just eight months and are just part of an even larger release of 17,000 illegals with criminal records.

RELATED: Map — Over 200 ‘sanctuary cities’ in 32 states and D.C.

Author Jessica M. Vaughan, director of policy Studies for the center, also reported that many of those illegals have been rearrested after their release and charged with nearly 7,500 new charges, including child sex abuse.

: Francisco Sanchez, right, is lead into the courtroom for his arraignment in the shooting death of 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle. (Michael Macor/San Francisco Chronicle via AP, Pool)

The report, titled “Ignoring Detainers, Endangering Communities State/local agencies release criminals rather than obey law,” provided to Secrets, is expected to fuel U.S. anger over sanctuary cities and the murder by one freed illegal of a San Francisco woman earlier this month.

“The Obama administration has given sanctuaries free rein to ignore detainers by ending the successful Secure Communities program and replacing it with the Priority Enforcement Program. This new program explicitly allows local agencies to disregard ICE notifications of deportable aliens in their custody by replacing detainers with ‘requests for notification,'” wrote Vaughan. “The only truly effective and lasting solution is for Congress to spell out in federal law that local law enforcement agencies must cooperate with ICE by complying with all detainers or face sanctions in the form of disqualification from certain kinds of federal funding,” she added.

The new federal documents show that there are at least 276 sanctuary cities, more than the 200 previously believed, and are in 43 states, also more than previously revealed. Instead of turning illegal immigrants facing criminal charges over to ICE under its “detainer” rule, the sanctuaries simply ignore the request in many cases let the illegals go. Many of those released had more than one ICE “detainer” request.

The majority, 5,132, had past criminal records, like Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, the illegal previously deported five times and now charged with murdering 32-year-old Kate Steinle. Of those, 2,984 had a prior felony conviction or charge. And, 1,867 offenders who were released were re-arrested, accumulating 7,491 new charges, including child sex abuse. Vaughan’s report found that 10 percent of the new charges involved dangerous drugs and seven percent were for driving under the influence of alcohol.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Gay Marriage Decision: A Communist Goal Realized

Posted On 29 Jun 2015; By :Instigator News Network

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://instigatornews.com/gay-marriage-decision-a-communist-goal-realized

By David Risselada

While I have written many articles on the topic of the 45 communist goals, it can’t be stressed enough that achieving “marriage equality” for homosexuals was definitely one of them. The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday, June 26 was no surprise to many of us, and in many ways it was used to continue the moral degradation of our society.

The Obama Administration, as surely we have all seen by now, took the pleasure of flaunting their victory by posting pictures of the White House lit up with the colors of the homosexual’s rainbow flag. This was a “stick in your face gesture” as they know that the vast majority of Americans disapprove of the homosexual agenda, and there is an agenda. This was also a symbolic gesture in the eyes of the left because they view this as the replacement of the old culture with a new one.

It was no coincidence, in my opinion, that this gay marriage decision happened at the same time there was all-out war declared on the Confederate flag. We are after all, dealing with communists whose entire agenda revolves around breaking down the moral standards by which many of us live our lives. Make no mistake America, this ruling pushes the United States one step further away from liberty, and one step closer to all-out communism. Many people have a difficult time understanding this concept; after all, granting protection to homosexuals to marry allegedly embodies the ideals of liberty and justice for all. This is a misguided worldview, what it actually does is open the floodgates to the deprivation of humanity, as I will explain in this article. From the 45 communist goals entered in to the congressional record in 1963 –

25) Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”

One of the main goals of communism has always been the destruction of the Judeo-Christian worldview. Man will not allow himself to become subservient to an all-powerful state as long as he believes in, and follows the laws of God. The Bible commands us to follow God’s law and not the ways of men, so in order to enslave the mind, belief in God must be discredited.

The communists themselves don’t care about marriage equality; the issue is used as a means of demoralizing society. In fact; it is not at all uncommon for communist regimes to brutally oppress homosexuals, if not outright murder them. Many people find themselves wondering why the left is silent as Islamonazis continue to throw gays from rooftops, and burn them alive. It would seem that any organization truly dedicated to gay rights would acknowledge these atrocities while pointing out the safety most homosexuals enjoy in the United States.

The goal, as mentioned previously, is not to give gay people equal rights, but to demoralize society in order to make us susceptible to an all out communist takeover. In order to do this, religion must be destroyed.

This was admitted by one of the leaders of the gay rights movement. Homosexual activist and journalist Masha Gessen admitted in a radio interview that the goal is to destroy the institution of marriage, not to become a part of it. She admits thatthe whole argument being made to push their agenda for equality is a lie, and what they truly seek to do is destroy traditional societal values.Here is what she recently said on a radio interview:

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.” – Illinois Family Institute

Again, this is a concept many people have a difficult time understanding. The goal is to completely remake society in the image of communism. Sadly, homosexual activists fail to realize that they are no more than “psychopolitical dupes,” or useful idiots being used to push an agenda that in the end will strip them of all humanity as well.

To understand this further we need to once again, refer to the Soviet Manual on Pyschopolitics. The whole communist agenda can be best summed up saying that they are attempting to label America as a sick society in need of mental healing. For centuries, men looked to the clergy in order to solve problems of the mind and spirit. Communists despise this because they want to rule over man, and as mentioned previously, men who follow Gods laws cannot be ruled by men.

Consider this quote from page 60 of the Soviet manual.

“You must work until religion is synonymous with insanity. You must work until the officials of the city, county and state governments will not think twice before they pounce upon religious groups as public enemies.”

The attack on Christianity is in full swing in almost all aspects of our culture. The homosexuals are being used in an effort to label Christians as being bigoted and homophobic while simultaneously tearing at the moral fabric of our society. Unfortunately, as many of us are well aware, the gay marriage issue is just the beginning and it is the symbolic “slippery slope” leading to the unimaginable.

In my book, “Not On My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education,” I included some text from a research paper I did while in the Masters of social work program at the University of Oklahoma. The social work agenda is big on gay rights, and in social work education the issue of heterosexual privilege is synonymous with white privilege.

Heterosexual privilege is defined as:

Benefits derived automatically by being (or being perceived as) heterosexual that are denied to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, queers and all other non-heterosexual sexual orientations.

To be against homosexuality is now viewed as a bigoted position. Those who enjoy the benefits of marriage are now considered the oppressors of those who are allegedly being denied these privileges. This spans well beyond the scope of just gay marriage as the issue of pedophilia is making its way into the main stream. If you remember, not too long ago Rutgers-Camden professor Margo Kaplan declared that pedophilia is not a crime, rather a condition one might be born with. This is how the argument was made that homosexuality might in fact be normal. She also declare that pedophilia should be considered a human right because people who identify as having sexual orientations towards young children are often marginalized because they have to keep these orientations to themselves.

Many people have warned that the issue of gay marriage would open a floodgate; well that floodgate is indeed open. The efforts are well underway to repeal the age of consent laws, as was the topic of my research paper, and to redefine the term pedophile with the term “minor attracted person.” The overall goal here is to normalize sex with children. In fact, in 1998 the American Psychological Association issued a report claiming that child sexual abuse was not as harmful to children as previously believed. Also, they went on to suggest that sexual relationships between men and young boys could actually develop into strong caring relationships.

Furthermore, they suggested that harmful effects from sexual abuse would only result if the child was forced into having sex with an adult, not if the child chose freely to do so. This is sick beyond comprehension; however it serves as further proof of a communist agenda.

Once again we need to refer to quote from the Soviet Manual, page 62.

“Technical papers should exist as to the tremendous number of cures effected by psychiatry and psychology, and whenever possible, percentages of cures, no matter how fictitious, should be worked into legislative papers, thus forming a back ground of evidence which would immediately rebut any effort to actually discover anyone who had ever been helped by psychiatry or psychology.”

What this quote is essentially admitting is that communists lie. They have subverted every aspect of our culture and submit false evidence that attempts to discredit the Judea Christian worldview and turn the minds of men towards communistic solutions, through the social sciences. Issues that can be disguised as human right struggles are being used to actually denigrate society in an effort to demoralize the nation, making us ripe for conquering.

Homosexual rights, the “black lives matter” campaign, racism, feminism and wealth inequality are all being used in this manner, and the activists pushing these issues are nothing but the proverbial “useful idiots” of our time. If we do not reverse course now, we will certainly follow the same path as other communist countries before us. Once men have become completely demoralized they no longer have a leg on which to stand to defend their nation.

David Risselada writes a blog called The Radical Conservative: Exposing the fallacy of liberalism/progressivism.

Article reposted from www.ForTruthsSake.com with permission.

Marxist Strategy & Communist Goals from “The Naked Communist”: Shocking!

Posted by Scott Osborn — June 7, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://joeforamerica.com/2015/06/communist-goals-naked-communist

Communist Goals from “The Naked Communist” was read on the floor of the House of Representatives on January 10th, 1963 by U.S. Congressman Albert S. Herlong, Jr. of Florida.

The Naked Communist was written by ex-FBI agent Cleon Skousen in 1953. He describes the Marxist strategy during the Cold War.

Maybe we need someone to read these communist goals again. Send this article to your Senators and Congressmen and ask them to read this on the floor of both houses.

Communist Goals from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen

U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
Do away with all loyalty oaths.
Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
Gain control of all student newspapers.
Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. 26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”
Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
Internationalize the Panama Canal.
Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

The Naked Communist was written by ex-FBI agent Cleon Skousen in 1953. He describes the Marxist strategy during the Cold War.

President Ronald Reagan said of the book: “No one is better qualified to discuss the threat to this nation from communism. You will be alarmed, you will be informed and you’ll be glad you heard him.”

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Supreme Court Rules Same-Sex Couples Have Right To Marry Nationwide

June 26, 2015 12:15 PM

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/06/26/supreme-court-rules-same-sex-couples-have-right-to-marry-nationwide

WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — The Supreme Court declared Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States. Gay and lesbian couples already could marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court’s 5-4 ruling means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage. Gay rights supporters cheered, danced and wept outside the court when the decision was announced.

The outcome is the culmination of two decades of Supreme Court litigation over marriage, and gay rights generally. In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that same-sex marriage must be allowed under the United States Constitution.

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

“From their beginning to their most recent page, the annals of human history reveal the transcendent importance of marriage. The lifelong union of a man and a woman always has promised nobility and dignity to all persons, without regard to their station in life. Marriage is sacred to those who live by their religions and offers unique fulfillment to those who find meaning in the secular realm. Its dynamic allows two people to find a life that could not be found alone, for a marriage becomes greater than just the two persons. Rising from the most basic human needs, marriage is essential to our most profound hopes and aspirations,” Kennedy wrote.

Kennedy also wrote the court’s previous three major gay rights cases dating back to 1996. It came on the anniversary of two of those earlier decisions. As Kennedy read his opinion, spectators in the courtroom wiped away tears after the import of the decision became clear. One of those in the audience was James Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court fight. Outside, Obergefell held up a photo of his late spouse, John, and said the ruling establishes that “our love is equal.” He added, “This is for you, John.”

President Barack Obama placed a congratulatory phone call to Obergefell, which he took amid a throng of reporters outside the courthouse.

Kennedy was joined by the four liberal justices of the court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer.

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented, and all wrote separate dissents.

Alito wrote, “Today’s decision usurps the constitutional right of the people to decide whether to keep or alter the traditional understanding of marriage.”

Roberts said gay marriage supporters should celebrate, but don’t celebrate the Constitution.

“If you are among the many Americans—of whatever sexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it,” Roberts wrote.

Scalia wrote his dissent “to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.”

“Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves,” Scalia wrote.

Thomas wrote, “Aside from undermining the political processes that protect our liberty, the majority’s decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect.”

Obama called the ruling a “big step in our march toward equality.” In a statement in the Rose Garden, Obama said that justice arrived like a thunderbolt. “This ruling is a victory for America,” Obama said. The president thanked gay rights supporters who worked tirelessly for this cause. “America’s a place where you can write your own destiny,” he said.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton weighed in, calling the ruling a “historic victory for marriage equality.”

Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said in a statement that the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to decide. “Guided by my faith, I believe in traditional marriage. I believe the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to make this decision. I also believe that we should love our neighbor and respect others, including those making lifetime commitments,” the former Florida governor said. “In a country as diverse as ours, good people who have opposing views should be able to live side by side. It is now crucial that as a country we protect religious freedom and the right of conscience and also not discriminate.”

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser celebrated the ruling saying the court’s recognition of same-sex marriage as a right in every state “affirms our democratic values, that each of us is equal.”

The ruling will not take effect immediately because the court gives the losing side roughly three weeks to ask for reconsideration. But some state officials and county clerks might decide there is little risk in issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The cases before the court involved laws from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Those states have not allowed same-sex couples to marry within their borders and they also have refused to recognize valid marriages from elsewhere.

Just two years ago, the Supreme Court struck down part of the federal anti-gay marriage law that denied a range of government benefits to legally married same-sex couples. The decision in United States v. Windsor did not address the validity of state marriage bans, but courts across the country, with few exceptions, said its logic compelled them to invalidate state laws that prohibited gay and lesbian couples from marrying.

The number of states allowing same-sex marriage has grown rapidly. As recently as October, just over one-third of the states permitted same-sex marriage.

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

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

(TM and © Copyright 2015 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2015 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

White House unveils hostage policy review, takes heat for opening door to terror ransoms

Published by FoxNews.com June 24, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/24/enriching-enemy-administration-under-fire-for-opening-door-to-terror-ransoms

Watch the latest video at <a href=”http://video.foxnews.com”>video.foxnews.com</a>

The Obama administration was accused Wednesday of giving terrorists an incentive to kidnap as it unveiled a hostage policy overhaul allowing families of U.S. hostages to pay ransom — and allowing the U.S. government to help families communicate with captors. “This doesn’t fix anything,” Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a leading critic of the administration’s hostage policy, told Fox News. “The money that we’re going to be paying ISIS is going to be used to buy arms and to buy equipment to fight Americans and to fight the Iraqis.”

But the White House said the changes are being unveiled with the families and victims in mind. “We’re not going to abandon you. We’re going to stand by you,” Obama said of hostages’ families, speaking at the White House on Wednesday. The policy review was formally released shortly before noon, and includes a host of changes beyond the clarifications on ransom discussions — notably, the creation of a new bureaucratic structure for handling hostage cases. The White House plans to establish a Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell responsible for coordinating the recovery of hostages; a Hostage Response Group responsible for coordinating hostage policies; and the position of “special presidential envoy for hostage affairs.” Obama said this is being done to sync up various efforts, citing past coordination problems.

This framework is also being met with mixed reviews, but much of the attention is on the newly clarified policies for communicating with terrorists. The White House sought the policy review last fall after the deaths of Americans held hostage by Islamic State militants. The families of some of those killed complained about their dealings with the administration, saying they were threatened with criminal prosecution if they pursued paying ransom in exchange for their loved ones’ release.

In response, the administration made clear Wednesday that officials will no longer threaten hostages’ families with prosecution for dealing with and paying ransoms to terrorist captors. The Justice Department said in a written statement: “The department does not intend to add to families’ pain in such cases by suggesting that they could face criminal prosecution.” There is not expected to be any formal change to the law. However, the administration made clear that the Justice Department has never prosecuted anyone for paying ransom and that will continue to be the case. The White House said in a statement that the government still takes a “no concessions” approach, and it continues to be U.S. policy to “deny hostage-takers the benefits of ransom.” But the same statement says this policy does not “preclude engaging in communications with hostage-takers.”

The White House made clear the U.S. government may, then, help facilitate communications with terrorists on behalf of the families. The directive said the U.S. “may assist private efforts” to communicate with hostage-takers, and may even “itself communicate with hostage-takers” to try to rescue hostages. White House counterterrorism adviser Lisa Monaco said the U.S. government, though, would not specifically facilitate ransom payments.

The announcements still amount to a shift in the U.S. approach to hostages. It was considered a major break from past practice last year when the Obama administration traded five Taliban leaders for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. The latest policy changes could open the door to more deals, even if they are only struck with families of hostages.

Critics worry they could also encourage more kidnappings, while effectively aiding the enemy.

“The concern that I have is that by lifting that long-held principle [of not paying ransoms], you could be endangering more Americans here and overseas,” House Speaker John Boehner said. “You’re going to have to have the government now facilitating payments from the families here to the terrorists there while at the same time we have troops on the ground … fighting the same people that we’re paying money to,” Hunter said Wednesday. “You’re worth more captured now than you would be otherwise.” Former House intelligence committee chairman Mike Rogers also voiced concern on a local talk radio station Tuesday evening that this would encourage more hostage-taking and ransom demands.

Obama, though, stressed Wednesday that the U.S. government itself would not be paying ransoms.

Four Americans have been killed by the Islamic State since last summer: journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff and aid workers Peter Kassig and Kayla Mueller. After the release of gruesome videos showing the beheadings of some hostages, Obama approved an airstrike campaign against the Islamic State in both Iraq and Syria.

The families’ anguish has been deepened by the fact that European governments routinely pay ransom for hostages and win their release. The U.S. says its prohibitions against the government and private individuals making any concessions to terrorist demands are aimed both at preventing more kidnappings and blocking more income for terror groups. However, the Obama administration did negotiate with the Taliban last year to win the release of Bergdahl. White House officials say those negotiations were permissible because Obama sees a special responsibility to leave no American service member behind on the battlefield.

Elaine Weinstein, whose husband Warren Weinstein was accidentally killed by a U.S. drone strike in April while being held hostage by Al Qaeda, argued Tuesday against the government making such distinctions between U.S. citizens. “The people who take American citizens working abroad as hostages do not discriminate based on their job or employer, and neither should our government,” Weinstein said in a statement.

The White House invited the families of 82 Americans held hostage since 2001 to participate in the review, and 24 agreed to do so. The National Counterterrorism Center, which oversaw the review, also consulted with hostage experts from the U.S. and other countries. As part of the review’s findings, the White House announced the creation of a hostage recovery “fusion cell” that will coordinate the multiple government agencies involved in such issues. The new office aims to address family frustrations about getting contradictory information from different agencies by creating a single point of contact.

The administration is not acquiescing to the requests of some families to house the fusion cell in the White House’s National Security Council. Instead, the office will be at the FBI, and the director will be affiliated with the FBI. The cell will include representatives from the State Department, Treasury Department, CIA and other key agencies.

Obama also announced the creation of a State Department special envoy post that will head the administration’s dealings with foreign governments on hostage matters.

Fox News’ James Rosen and Doug McKelway and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The US is close to making a huge announcement about Cuba

Reported by Reuters , Jun. 12, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-exclusive-us-cuba-deal-expected-in-early-july-to-restore-ties-reopen-embassies—sources-2015-6#ixzz3cz7fKRVU

: Thomson Reuters; Cuban-themed murals adorn SW 8th Street in Little Havana, Miami

The two sides hope to conclude the deal by the first week of next month, clearing the way for Secretary of State John Kerry to visit Havana soon afterwards for a flag-raising ceremony to upgrade the U.S. Interests Section to a full-scale embassy, the sources said.

Since a breakthrough between the two former Cold War rivals announced in December, negotiators have settled all but a few differences and were confident they would soon be resolved, several sources told Reuters. They said the exact timetable for the formal embassy opening was unclear because of Kerry’s recovery from a broken leg suffered in a May 31 biking accident in France, as well as the looming June 30 deadline for a final nuclear deal with Iran, which would dominate Kerry’s schedule over the next weeks.

Restoration of relations would be the latest phase in a normalization process, which is expected to move slowly because of lingering problems over issues such as Cuba’s human rights record. A U.S. embargo will remain in place, and only Congress can lift it. The sources said the administration hoped to formally notify Congress within the next two weeks of its intention to reopen the Havana embassy. The State Department is required by law to give Congress at least 15 days’ notice of such an action.

Cuba’s Communist government is likely to act in sync with the United States on reopening of the embassies, issuing its own announcement on restoring ties, one source said. But it was unclear how fast the two sides would act in naming ambassadors. As part of its preparations to turn its interests section in Washington into a full-fledged embassy, Cuba erected a large flagpole on the front lawn of the building on Wednesday. The flag itself will await the formal announcement of relations. Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro pledged full restoration of ties on Dec. 17. The two leaders met in Panama in mid-April.

: REUTERS/Peru Presidency Cuba’s President Raul Castro (L) stands with his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama before the inauguration of the VII Summit of the Americas in Panama City April 10, 2015.

Major issues resolved, officials say

Cuba was formally removed from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism late last month, a critical step toward rapprochement 54 years after Washington cut off relations at the height of the Cold War and imposed an economic embargo. U.S. and Cuban negotiators have resolved all but a few minor differences since the last round of high-level talks in May in Washington, the sources said. The main obstacles had been U.S. demands for relative freedom of movement for their diplomats on the island, comparable to that in Russia and Vietnam, while the Cubans had objected to U.S. training courses in journalism and information technology given at the U.S. interests section in Havana.

Negotiators are now settling issues such as how many shipping containers will be allowed into Havana for renovating the U.S. mission there.

U.S. officials say there is little, if any, chance that hardline anti-Castro lawmakers in Congress would be able to block the restoration of ties.

The White House declined comment on the timing of any announcements. There was also no comment from the Cuban government.

(Editing by David Storey and Ken Wills)

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘The Obama Administration’

Authored by Adam Goldman and Missy Ryan of The Washington Post

The Obama administration believes that at least 12 detainees released from the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have launched attacks against U.S. or allied forces in Afghanistan, killing about a half-dozen Americans, according to current and former U.S. officials.

“The administration is releasing dangerous terrorists to countries that can’t control them, and misleading Congress in the process,” Royce said in a statement. “The president should halt detainee transfers immediately and be honest with the American people.”

Nearly 21 percent of those released prior to 2009 have reengaged in militancy, officials say, compared with about 4.5 percent of the 158 released by Obama.

Human rights activists say the statistics are suspect and cannot be verified because the administration provides almost no information about whom it is counting and why.

Share this:

Like this:

Authored by Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson May 14, 2016

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Share this:

Like this:

By Stephen Dinan/

Dave Boyer contributed to this report.

– The Washington Times – Thursday, February 4, 2016

The Obama administration has revived the maligned illegal immigrant “catch-and-release” policy of the Bush years, ordering Border Patrol agents not to bother arresting and deporting many new illegal immigrants, the head of the agents’ labor union revealed Thursday.

“Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions,” Mr. Judd testified to the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee. “That fact is well known in other countries.”

Mr. Judd said there are holes in that policy. He said agents have been ordered not to ask for proof when an immigrant says he or she has been in the U.S. since 2013, and migrants have quickly learned to assert that claim without having to worry about having it challenged.

Border Patrol agents used to interview the children and ask them why they came, and the overwhelming majority said they believed enforcement was lax and they would be allowed to stay.

Share this:

Like this:

Commentary By Glenn Foden / @GlennFo / December 18, 2015

Higher Spending

War Account as Slush Fund

Even Higher Spending With Gimmicks

Sanctuary Cities Spared

No Additional Assurances on Vetting Refugees

Risk Corridor Bailouts Avoided

Planned Parenthood Affiliates Still Funded

Failure to Protect Conscience Rights

More Bad Than Good on Energy Provisions

Failure on WOTUS (EPA Water Rule)

Funding Barred for Unrelated Dietary Guidelines

Repeals Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling

Small Steps on School Lunch Funding

Congress Is at It Again With Tax Extenders

Obamacare’s Taxes

Share this:

Like this:

BY: Adam Kredo / September 18, 2015

In the list of questions submitted to Kerry, Rubio asks: “How many U.S. citizens have been killed by Iran, including by Iran’s terrorist proxies, since 1979?”

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by Steven Ertelt Aug 26, 2015 | Washington, DC

Share this:

Like this:

By Paul Bedard • 7/13/15

RELATED: Map — Over 200 ‘sanctuary cities’ in 32 states and D.C.

Share this:

Like this:

Posted On 29 Jun 2015; By :Instigator News Network

“You must work until religion is synonymous with insanity. You must work until the officials of the city, county and state governments will not think twice before they pounce upon religious groups as public enemies.”

Heterosexual privilege is defined as:

Benefits derived automatically by being (or being perceived as) heterosexual that are denied to gays, lesbians, bisexuals, queers and all other non-heterosexual sexual orientations.

Share this:

Like this:

June 26, 2015 12:15 PM

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

Alito wrote, “Today’s decision usurps the constitutional right of the people to decide whether to keep or alter the traditional understanding of marriage.”

Roberts said gay marriage supporters should celebrate, but don’t celebrate the Constitution.

Scalia wrote his dissent “to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.”

Thomas wrote, “Aside from undermining the political processes that protect our liberty, the majority’s decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect.”

Share this:

Like this:

Published by FoxNews.com June 24, 2015

Critics worry they could also encourage more kidnappings, while effectively aiding the enemy.

Share this:

Like this:

Reported by Reuters , Jun. 12, 2015

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration is expected to announce an agreement with Cuba in early July to reopen embassies and reopen embassiessevered more than five decades ago, U.S. sources familiar with the matter said on Friday.

Major issues resolved, officials say

Share this:

Like this:

In His Service

Email Subscription

Recent Posts

Family

NEWS

Opinion