Monday, October 5, 2015

Hillary Clinton Really Wants To Repeal The Second Admendment

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — Just days after a deadly shooting in Oregon, Hillary Rodham Clinton will unveil new gun control measures on Monday aimed at strengthening background checks on gun buyers and eliminating legal immunity for sellers.
During a day-long campaign swing through New Hampshire, Clinton's campaign said she plans to propose a repeal of legislation that shields gun manufacturers, distributors and dealers from most liability suits, even in the case of mass shootings like the one that killed nine students and teachers at a community college on Thursday.
The proposal marks an effort by Clinton to stake out liberal ground against her closest rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. While Sanders has wooed the Democratic base with his liberal positions on issues like income inequality and college debt, he's struggled to defend a more mixed record on gun legislation_a reflection, he says, of his rural, gun-friendly home-state.
After the Sandy Hook shooting in 2013, he backed all the Democratic gun bills brought up in Congress. But in 1993, he voted against the landmark Brady handgun bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period for gun purchasers, and he backed the 2005 legislation granting legal immunity to many in the gun industry.
Sanders now says he supports banning assault weapons and closing the so-called "gun show loophole" that exempts private, unlicensed gun sales from background checks.
Clinton, meanwhile, has made strict gun laws a centerpiece of her presidential campaign. On Monday, she will vow to use executive power to expand background checks for sellers at gun shows and online and back legislation banning domestic abusers from purchasing guns.
She will also back congressional efforts to stop retailers from selling guns to people with incomplete background checks, as happened when Charleston shooter Dylann Roof bought his gun.
Clinton has emerged as one of the fiercest proponents of tougher gun control after a series of shootings over the past several months has reignited debate over gun laws on the presidential campaign
"What is wrong with us, that we cannot stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby, and the gun manufacturers they represent?" Clinton said on Friday in Florida. "This is not just tragic. We don't just need to pray for people. We need to act and we need to build a movement. It's infuriating."

Monday, August 10, 2015

Clinton $350 Billion Dollar College Plan

WASHINGTON — Calling for a "new college compact," Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday will unveil a $350 billion plan aimed at making college more affordable and reducing the crushing burden of student debt.
At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, the state with the highest average student debt in the country, Clinton will propose steps to reduce the cost of four-year public schools, make two-year community colleges tuition-free and cut student loan interest rates, according to campaign aides.
The college affordability plan, a main plank of her policy platform, is an effort to address a major financial stress for many American families and satisfy a central demand of the Democratic party's liberal wing.
The proposal centers on a $200 billion federal incentive system aimed at encouraging states to expand their investments in higher education and cut student costs. States that guarantee "no-loan" tuition at four-year public schools and free tuition at community colleges would be eligible to receive federal funds.
But Clinton doesn't go quite as far as some more liberal politicians and party activists, who've made "debt- free college" an early litmus test for the presidential primary field. In May, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders released his own plan that would eliminate tuition and fees for public universities. The $70 billion annual proposal would be funded by imposing a tax on transactions by hedge funds, investment houses and other Wall Street firms.
While military veterans, lower-income students and those who complete a national service program, like AmeriCorps, would go to school for free in the Clinton plan, others would incur costs for their schooling and living expenses at four-year public universities. "For many students, it would translate into debt-free tuition," said Carmel Martin, executive vice president for policy at the Center for American Progress, who advised Clinton on the plan. "It will depend on the student circumstances and the institution they are going to."
For most students, their families will still be expected to make a "realistic" contribution, say Clinton's aides, and students will contribute wages from 10 hours of work per week.
Those currently repaying loans would be able to refinance their outstanding debt at lower rates, a change Clinton's aides say will save an average of $2,000 for 25 million borrowers over the life of the loan — an amount that's equal to just about $17 month over a 10-year repayment period. She would also expand income-based repayment programs, allowing every student borrower to enroll in a plan that would cap their payments at 10 percent of their income with remaining debt forgiven after 20 years.
Private universities with "modest endowments" that serve a higher percentage of low-income students, including historically black colleges, would also receive federal funds to help lower the costs of attendance and improve graduation rates.
The cost of Clinton's plan would be offset by capping itemized tax deductions for wealthy families at 28 percent, like those taken by high-income taxpayers for charitable contributions and mortgage interest. That proposal, which has long been included in President Barack Obama's annual budget, would raise more than $600 billion in the next decade, according to the Treasury Department.
Clinton's plan would likely face a steep climb in Congress: A $60 billion Obama administration initiative for free community college has gotten little traction.
Even so, college affordability has emerged as a major issue on the presidential campaign trail, as families face the highest debt burden in generations. National student debt is near $1.3 trillion and the average price for in-state students at public four-year universities is 42 percent higher than it was a decade ago, according to the College Board.
In almost every campaign stop, Clinton hears from students and families worried about paying for school. Her team conducted weeks of meetings with experts on the issue to develop the proposal, including policy staffers for liberal leader Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.
"There's something wrong when students and their families have to go deeply into debt to be able to get the education and skills they need in order to make the best of their own lives," she told students and teachers at Kirkland Community College in Monticello, Iowa, in April, shortly after announcing her campaign.
Clinton aides believe their plan will help build enthusiasm for her candidacy with younger voters — whose support twice helped catapult Obama into the White House. The policy rollout is timed for when students return to college campuses. Clinton organizers plan to promote the plan at registration events and other gatherings kicking off the school year, according to a campaign aide, in an effort to galvanize college students.

Friday, July 31, 2015

CMP Leader: Company trying To Block Videos that could prove Aborted Babies Were Born Alive

The leader of the Center for Medical Progress, the organisation exposing Planned Parenthood, told CNN “New Day” this morning that a biomedical company is trying to silence CMP because they are “very scared” of footage coming out that will prove babies were born alive before being “aborted” and having tissue and organs harvested.
California based StemExpress, a company closely allied with Planned Parenthood that provides fetal tissue to researchers, has managed to convince a Superior Court judge to issue a temporary restraining order against CMP.
The order bars the undercover journalists from releasing any more footage of StemExpress officials.
David Daleiden explained why he believes StemExpress is taking such hefty action:
Daleiden noted that the footage shows “a meeting with their top leadership where their leadership admitted that they sometimes get fully intact fetuses shipped to their laboratory from the abortion clinics they work with, and that could be prima facie evidence of born alive infants.”
Babies born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion are protected under the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, enacted in 2002. The legislation defines a “Born alive infant” as “Person, human being, Child, Individual.”
“And so that’s why they’re trying to suppress that videotape and they’re very scared of it.” Daleiden added.
If this is revealed to be true, it raises the bar on the Planned Parenthood scandal to a whole new level – a Kermit Gosnell level.
He also stated “We’ve got anywhere from 8 to 10 more videos — the exact number could vary, but I predict a dozen give or take when everything is said and done.”
The restraining order will remain in effect until a hearing scheduled for August 19th.
Daleiden previously stated that StemExpress was using “meritless litigation” to cover up an “illegal baby parts trade.”

Will Jewish Democracts Save Or Sink Iran Nuke Deal

"Seven Jewish Lawmakers Could Tilt the Scales on Iran Deal," headlines The Times of Israel. The members -- Sen. Charles Schumer, Rep. Steven Israel, Rep. Eliot Engel, Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Nita Lowey, Sen. Ben Cardin and Rep. Ted Deutch -- are all Democrats. They must choose between loyalty to their party's president and concern about what the deal portends for Israeli and American security.
There are long and short answers to the question: "Why are Jews liberal?" The long answer traces back to the Enlightenment in Europe, when parties of the right were monarchist and anti-Semitic, while parties of the left favored pluralism and religious freedom. I don't buy the long argument. Tsar Alexander III, who instigated pogroms against the Jews, is long dead. So is Napoleon, who liberated them. In the meantime, Jews have suffered under communists, who proved just as cruel as the monarchists.
Jewish liberals often explain that their views spring from Jewish tradition, which admonishes the Jewish people to engage in "tikkun olam" or "healing the world." I'm skeptical. Tikkun olam is traditionally understood as adhering faithfully to the commandments (keeping kosher, visiting the sick and observing the Sabbath, for example), the better to prepare the world for the messianic age. Many of those who brandish the Hebrew phrase today have commandeered it to bolster support for same-sex marriage, government-run health care and the rest of the progressive agenda -- an interpretation that would, to quote the immortal words of Tevye in "Fiddler on the Roof," "cross a rabbi's eyes."
No, the short explanation of Jewish liberalism is straightforward. Jewish Americans tend to be disproportionately urban, secular and educated. Each of those categories is highly correlated with liberalism and membership in the Democratic Party -- God (you should forgive the expression) help us. Speaking of Him, Jewish Americans are less likely than any other religious group in America to say they believe in God. A 2013 Pew poll found that 62 percent of Jews reported that their identity was rooted mainly in culture and ancestry rather than religion. Only 34 percent of Jews said they were certain God exists, compared with 69 percent of the general public (though an additional 38 percent say they believe, but without certainty, placing believers in the majority).
While 62 percent of American Christians and 81 percent of Muslims report attending services at least monthly, only 23 percent of Jews do. Fifty-eight percent of Jewish adults are college graduates, compared with 29 percent of the general population. About 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas. This is true of only 4 percent of American Jews.
Even without knowing anything else about Jews, the above statistics would predict what we see: that about 70 percent of American Jews lean Democrat, while 22 percent are Republicans.
Still, for those Democrats pondering what the Iran vote will mean for their own political futures, other statistics should pull them up short. Though comparatively irreligious, 70 percent of American Jews remain strongly or somewhat strongly attached to the State of Israel. Though some liberal Jews may, at times, have been persuaded by Obama administration claims that troubles in relations with Israel are traceable to Bibi Netanyahu's prickly personality, that line is less likely to be effective now that all major parties in Israel have united in opposition to the Iran deal/capitulation.
But here's the kicker that Schumer, Cardin and others will want to bear in mind: The American Jewish world is changing very fast. The older, more secular doggedly liberal Jews are dying off, falling away from organized Jewish life and intermarrying (which means their children are no longer Jewish in most cases). Orthodox Jews, by contrast, are thriving, and they have large families -- having 10 or more children is not uncommon. In New York City, the Orthodox accounted for 33 percent of Jews in 2002, but 40 percent only 10 years later. In 2012, 74 percent of Jewish children in New York were growing up in Orthodox homes. The religious/cultural conservatism of these observant Jews affects their political affiliation. Fifty-seven percent of Orthodox Jews are Republicans, and huge majorities are very concerned about Israel.
They might forgive a vote for Obamacare. But a vote to provide billions of dollars to the paymasters of Hezbollah and Hamas; a vote to permit the Iranian regime to acquire missiles, stealth aircraft and more with which to kill Americans and Israelis; a vote that, in essence, accepts the eventual nuclearization of Iran without any corresponding concessions from the mullahs? Do Democrats want to chance it?

Cellphones Can Cause Cancer "Radiation Study"

The scientists were right — your cell phone can give you cancer.
There have long been whispers of a cancer connection from your cell — and a new study backs up the claims.
"These data are a clear sign of the real risks this kind of radiation poses for human health," study author Igor Yakymenko said.
Yakymenko’s meta-study — basically a study of hundreds of other studies — reveals many findings of previous researchers into how radiofrequency from your phone can damage DNA.
That damage can add up over time and cause a variety of health problems, like cancer, headaches, fatigue and even skin problems.
For example, using your phone for just 20 minutes a day for five years increased the risk of one type of brain tumor threefold, and using the phone an hour a day for four years upped the risk of some tumors three to five times, Yakymenko said.
Cell phone-induced health problems could take decades to develop. David Paul Morris/Getty Images

Cell phone-induced health problems could take decades to develop.

But even though the risk of brain and related cancers is low — in 2012, there were 6.4 cases per 100,000 U.S. adults — Yakymenko says we should be on alert because ailments can take up to 30 years to develop.
“(Our) data were obtained on adults who used cell phones mostly up to 10 years as adults,” he said. “The situation can dramatically differ for children who use cells phone in childhood, when their biology much more sensitive to hazardous factors, and will use it over the life.”
To minimize your risk, use your phone less and go hands-free to keep the frequency away from your head, Yakymenko said.