3 prominent House Dems vow to skip Netanyahu's congressional address

 
                                                                   G.K. Butterfield

WASHINGTON –  Three prominent House Democrats are vowing to skip Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress next month, saying they disapprove of House Speaker John Boehner's decision to invite the Israeli leader without consulting President Barack Obama.
Reps. John Lewis of Georgia, G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina and Earl Blumenauer of Oregon said they won't attend Netanyahu's March 3 speech.
The White House also hinted Thursday that Vice President Joe Biden may not attend Netanyahu's speech, which is expected to focus on Iran. Spokesman Josh Earnest said Biden takes "very seriously" his responsibilities as Senate president, including his ceremonial duty to attend joint sessions of Congress. However, Earnest noted that Biden missed a joint session in 2011 because he was traveling abroad.
Earnest said the vice president's travel schedule for early March has not been finalized.
He told reporters that Obama "does believe it is up to individual members of Congress to make their own decision about whether or not to attend."
Lewis, a hero of the civil rights movement, said Thursday that Boehner's unilateral invitation to Netanyahu was "an affront to the president and the State Department" that cannot be ignored. Butterfield, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said Thursday he was "very disappointed that the speaker would cause such a ruckus" among members of Congress. He called the speaker's actions "unprecedented."
Blumenauer, a well-known liberal views and advocate of alternative energy, called on Boehner last week to cancel the joint session with Netanyahu. If the speech goes forward, "I will refuse to be part of a reckless act of political grandstanding," Blumenauer said.
The Constitution vests the responsibility for foreign affairs in the president, Blumenauer said, adding that "it's deeply troubling that the speaker is willing to undercut diplomacy in exchange for theatrics on the House floor."
Butterfield also criticized Netanyahu, saying that by accepting Boehner's invitation without talking to Obama, the prime minister had "politicized" his visit to the United States.
Netanyahu's speech is expected to focus largely on Iran — and its nuclear program — amid delicate negotiations involving the United States, other Western powers and Tehran. Netanyahu's acceptance of Boehner's invitation has infuriated the White House and many congressional Democrats.
Netanyahu is a critic of administration negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, and some Democrats fear the Israeli leader will use the opportunity to embarrass Obama and further his own campaign for re-election.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said she plans to attend the speech.
"It is really sad that it has come to this," Pelosi said Thursday, adding that "as of now, it is my intention to go."
Butterfield and Lewis both said their decisions to skip the speech were personal and were not part of an organized boycott.
"I can emphatically say it is not an organized effort," Butterfield said, adding: "The only thing I can control is my attendance."

People Jailed for Owing Less Taxes Than Al Sharpton

Serial tax avoidance appears to be a hallmark of Al Sharpton’s operations. But there’s a warning here: Others have gone to prison for lesser amounts. The list includes rock legend Chuck Berry, Grammy winner Lauryn Hill, Ron Isley of the Isley Brothers, Survivor reality star Richard Hatch, hotel queen Leona Helmsely, and baseball’s Pete Rose (see below).
According to a New York Times' review of government records last fall, the MSNBC host and civil rights activist personally faces federal tax liens for more than $3 million in back taxes owed, and state tax liens of $777,657. So in total, Sharpton reportedly owes more than $3.7 million in back taxes. His other two for-profit businesses, Raw Talent and Revals Communications, (both now defunct) owe anywhere from $717,000 to more than $800,000, based on state and federal tax liens, reports from the Times and National Review indicate. Revals Communications also either didn’t file its tax returns, or underpaid its tax bills from 1999 to 2002.
Sharpton’s National Action Network also owed more than $813,000 in federal back taxes as of December of 2012, according to the nonprofit’s recent filings. At one point, the National Action Network's tax liability more than doubled last decade, jumping from $900,000 in 2003 to almost $1.9 milion in 2006. In 1993, Sharpton also had entered a guilty plea for the misdemeanor of failing to file his New York State income-tax return. Sharpton has also said the National Action Network had once given him a loan to pay for his daughters’ tuition, which is a violation of the law.

Sharpton has heatedly denied the tax evasion claims. “The (New York Times’) story is at best misleading and totally out of context,” Sharpton has said, adding, “Every time there's a Sean Bell or a Ferguson or a Trayvon Martin, we go through my taxes.” 
Sharpton also said of the Times article: “I think it’s political…a lot of people don’t like the fact that President Obama is president. A lot of people don’t like the fact that Bill de Blasio won for mayor. And they certainly don’t like the fact that I’m still here.” A Times spokesperson has said:  “We stand by our story.”
Sharpton indicated he has accrued these tax bills, but he has said he is either disputing the amounts owed or has been paying off his personal federal income taxes in installments. He has said his nonprofit, the National Action Network, also has been paying off its tax liability. Individual IRS tax returns and records are not publicly available, they are subject to privacy laws, as are documentation of fights between taxpayers and the agency. However, state and federal tax liens against Mr. Sharpton and his businesses appear to remain active, which indicates the bills have not been completely paid off.
It’s an open secret in Washington, DC and among IRS revenue agents and auditors that the IRS's decentralized operation often results in disparate treatment of taxpayers. Even though there exists a large body of administrative law that says federal agencies must exercise their discretion in a consistent manner, tax lawyers have argued that does not necessarily apply to the IRS. Reason: In many cases, the IRS argues it is actually not exercising any discretion, but instead is hewing to the law and its directives.
However, reality is often different. For instance, in one 2010 IRS case, a manufacturer alleged the agency unfairly slapped his company with a federal excise tax that his competitors did not have to pay. But the company lost in the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Juan R. Torruella wrote for the court. “The goal of treating similarly situated taxpayers consistently is general, not strict.”
That certainly has been the experience of others who have gone to prison for tax avoidance--a red flag for Sharpton and his operation:
Chuck Berry ($200,000)
In 1979, the rock legend served a five-month sentence at California’s Lompoc Prison Camp after he was found guilty of evading $200,000 in taxes. Berry was also ordered to do 1,000 hours of community service upon his release.
Pete Rose ($354,968)
In 1990, the former Cincinnati Red star and manager pleaded guilty to two felony charges of filing false federal tax returns. Rose spent five months in a Marion, Ill., federal prison; he was also fined $50,000. Rose had failed to report on his tax returns $354,968 in income from selling memorabilia and autographs, as well as personal appearances (his gambling resulted in a lifetime ban from baseball).
Richard Hatch ($1 million+)
In 2006, this “Survivor” reality star was convicted of tax evasion and tax fraud for failing to pay taxes on his $1 million-plus in “Survivor” winnings. Hatch was sentenced to 51 months in federal prison. He served just over three years before his release in 2009. Hatch was then ordered to refile his 2000 and 2001 tax returns, but did not do so. He was eventually ordered back to jail in 2011 to serve nine months, and left jail on supervised release. By that time, together with penalty and interest, Hatch owed close to $2 million in back taxes.
Leona Helmsley ($1.7 million)
In 1992 a federal judge sentenced Leona Helmsley to four years in prison (an initial 16-year sentence was reduced on appeal) after her tax evasion conviction. The billionaire real estate heiress was charged with avoiding $1.2 million in taxes after claiming $2.6 million in ineligible business expenses, including personal items. Helmsley also was ordered to do 750 hours of community service and was slapped with a $7.1 million fine. Helmsley served 21 months and was released in January 1994. She was quoted by her maid at trial as saying: “We don’t pay taxes, only little people pay taxes.”
Lauryn Hill ($1.8 million)
In 2012, Hill pleaded guilty to three counts of failure to file tax returns on $1.8 million in earnings between 2005 to 2007. Even though the founding member of the Fugees had argued she nearly paid off her taxes before sentencing, Hill was sentenced to three months in prison. Her sentencing also took into account unpaid state and federal taxes in 2008 and 2009, which brought the total owed to roughly $2.3 million. Hill served her three-month sentence in a federal prison in Danbury, Conn. in 2013. Upon release, she also spent three months in home confinement as part of her parole.
Ron Isley ($3.1 million)
In 2006, the lead singer of The Isley Brothers (“Who’s That Lady”) was found guilty of five counts of tax evasion and one count of willful failure to file tax returns for tax years 1997–2002, amounting to $3.1 million not reported. Isley was sentenced to three years and one month, served three years behind bars, and was released in April 2010. Isley’s attorney had pleaded for leniency because Isley had been attempting to pay down his IRS debt. Defense attorney Anthony Alexander also had argued that the 65-year-old singer should receive probation instead of prison time because of complications from a stroke and a bout with kidney cancer. But the judge on his case, U.S. District Judge Dean Pregerson, declined to sentence the R&B singer to less time than called for under federal guidelines. "The term serial tax avoider has been used. I think that's appropriate," Pregerson said.

NBC's Tom Brokaw reportedly wants Brian Williams fired over fabricated Iraq helicopter story

Longtime "NBC Nightly News" anchor Tom Brokaw reportedly wants his successor, Brian Williams, thrown out of the big chair after he admitted  fabricating key portions of a story he repeatedly told about his reporting experience during the Iraq War in 2003. 
The New York Post, citing sources at the network, reported that Brokaw, 74, has been "making a lot of noise at NBC that a lesser journalist or producer would have been immediately fired or suspended for a false report."
Brokaw was the anchor of NBC's flagship evening newscast when Williams filed his initial report in March 2003. In it, Williams described how he was traveling in a group of helicopters forced down in the Iraq desert. On the ground, Williams said, he learned the Chinook in front of him "had almost been blown out of the sky"; he showed a photo of the aircraft with a gash from a rocket-propelled grenade.
Williams succeeded Brokaw as the "Nightly News" anchor following the 2004 presidential election, and his story evolved over time. 
In a 2008 blog post, Williams said that his helicopter had come under fire from what appeared to be Iraqi farmers with rocket-propelled grenade. He said a helicopter in front of his had been hit.
Then, in a 2013 appearance on David Letterman's "Late Show" on CBS, Williams said that two of the four helicopters he was traveling with had been hit by ground fire, "including the one I was in."
On Wednesday, Williams recanted that story, claiming he was that he was flying in a Chinook helicopter behind the formation that took fire. However, on Thursday, the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, which broke the story, reported that Williams was actually flying with a different helicopter company altogether, in a different direction, and linked to the attacked unit only by radio.
Adding to the intrigue, the Post reported that Brokaw and former NBC News president Steve Capus, who left the network in 2013, knew that Williams' updated version of his tale was not true before the anchor's admission Wednesday evening. The paper also says NBC News executives had counseled Williams to stop telling the story. 
Despite Brokaw's campaign, the paper says NBC will take no action against Williams, believing that his on-air apology Wednesday will suffice. 
"He is not going to be suspended or reprimanded in any way," one source told the paper. "He has the full support of NBC News."

White House says Obama will ask Congress to authorize military force against ISIS

President Obama is expected to formally ask Congress to authorize the use of military force against the Islamic State terror group in the coming days, even as lawmakers said crafting and passing such a measure would be a challenge.
The U.S. has been carrying out airstrikes against the terrorists, most commonly known as ISIS, in Iraq and Syria since August and September, respectively. In doing so, Obama has been relying on congressional authorizations that President George W. Bush used to justify military action after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Critics have called the White House's use of post-9/11 congressional authorizations a legal stretch, though Obama has previously argued that a new authorization isn't legally necessary. 
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Thursday that the administration is dedicated to getting a new authorization with bipartisian support. He declined to comment on specific provisions, including how long the authorization will last, what geographical areas it will cover and whether it will allow for the possibility of ground troops. Earnest said those details were still being worked out. 
"When it comes to fighting a war, the Congress should not tie the president's hands, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters Thursday morning. However, Boehner later added, "It's also incumbent on the president to make the case to the American people on why we need to fight this fight. This is not going to be an easy lift."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said talks with the administration are focusing on an authorization time frame of three years, while the other issues are still being worked out. Pelosi added that she ultimately expects a compromise on the outstanding issues to be reached and added that she hopes Congress will repeal the 2002 congressional authorization for the war in Iraq while retaining the 2001 authorization for military action in Afghanistan.
"I'm not saying anybody's come to an agreement on it," Pelosi said. "I think it's going to be a challenge, but we will have it."
The developments come after Islamic militants released a grisly video of the murder of a Jordanian Air Force pilot by burning him alive. Pelosi also said that the U.S. should "move quickly" to steer military aid to Jordan, which has begun a stepped-up campaign against the militants, including a series of air strikes in Syria.
Republicans generally want a broader authorization of military action against the militants, who have overrun wide swaths of Iraq and Syria, than Democrats have been willing to consider. Obama has said he does not intend to have U.S. "boots on the ground" in combat roles, while many Republicans believe that option ought to be available to the military.
Secretary of State John Kerry has testified that any new authorization should not limit U.S. military action to just Iraq and Syria or prevent the president from deploying ground troops if he later deems them necessary. Kerry also said that if the new authorization has a time limit, there should be a provision for it to be renewed.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House intelligence panel, has already introduced legislation rather than wait for Obama's version. His bill would authorize the use of force against ISIS in Iraq and Syria for three years, but prohibit the use of ground forces in a combat mission in either nation. He has said if the president later decided to deploy ground troops, he could return to Congress to ask for new authority.
"It is my hope that the administration will be willing to accept important limits in a new authorization as well as the sunset or repeal of the old [authorizations], as this will be necessary to ensure strong bipartisan support and meet the goals the president set last summer of refining and repealing the prior authorizations," Schiff said in a statement Thursday, using the acronym for authorization for use of military force.

Overreact Cartoon

Republicans warn EPA plan would give feds ‘free reign’ to regulate almost all waterways

Republican lawmakers warned Wednesday that a complex EPA proposal in the works would give the federal government "free reign" to regulate virtually any waterway or wetland in the country. 
In a rare joint House-Senate hearing, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy was called to explain the plan, which has prompted complaints from farmers and agriculture groups, as well as local environmental officials who worry the EPA is claiming authority that should be left to the states. 
House transportation committee chairman Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., said that if the policy takes effect, "It will open the door for the federal government to regulate just about any place where water collects." 
Shuster claimed the proposal would "trample the rights" of state governments and hurt the middle class by driving up prices through additional regulation. 
"This rule is an end-run around Congress and another example of overreach by the administration," he said.   
Since 2013, the EPA has floated new rules that would define what kinds of waterways fall under its jurisdiction. The Clean Water Act already gives the EPA the ability to regulate "U.S. waters," but Supreme Court rulings have left the specifics unclear when it comes to waters that flow only part of the year. 
To address that, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers want to define that authority -- and are eyeing waterways deemed to have some significant connection to major rivers, lakes and other systems. This would include, according to the EPA, "most seasonal and rain-dependent streams" as well as wetlands near rivers and streams. The EPA has assured, though, that most farming activity would not require a permit. 
The EPA is planning to release a final rule in the spring of this year. 
McCarthy said Wednesday that the point is to make the rules "easier to understand" and more "consistent." She said the EPA is working to address the concerns of farmers and others, and stressed that the final rule "will not change in any way" those who are already exempted from the Clean Water Act. Speaking to farmers' concerns, she said the new plan would even reduce the law's jurisdiction over features like ditches. 
"We are in fact narrowing the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act," McCarthy said. EPA officials clarified at Wednesday's hearing that groundwater would not be covered under the new rule, potentially allaying some concerns. 
But several GOP lawmakers were not convinced, worried that the new EPA language would be used to force people and businesses to obtain "costly permits" for their land. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo. -- citing the case of a Wyoming family that was threatened with $75,000 a day in fines over a stock pond built on their property without a federal permit -- said he would introduce legislation along with Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., to "stop this bureaucratic overreach."
Republicans, as well as farmers and other groups, say the plan could endanger private property rights by giving the EPA a say over temporary waterways like seasonal streams, under the Clean Water Act. Critics warn this could create more red tape for property owners and businesses if they happen to have even small streams on their land. 
The EPA claims, though, this does not expand its authority, and only clarifies it. 
"Let's set aside fact from fiction," Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said at the hearing. She rejected the notion that the regulation might allow the government to claim jurisdiction over miniscule water bodies. 
"Puddles, swimming pools, stock ponds are not regulated," she stressed.

CEO of Gallup calls jobless rate 'big lie' created by White House, Wall Street, media

The chairman of the venerable Gallup research and polling firm says the official U.S. unemployment rate is really an underestimation and a “big lie" perpetuated by the White House, Wall Street and the media.
What CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed in his blog Tuesday about how the Labor Department arrives at the monthly unemployment rate is no secret -- including that Americans who have quit looking for work after four weeks are not included in the survey.
The department's current rate of 5.6 percent unemployment is the lowest since June 2008, with President Obama using his State of the Union address and campaign-style stops across the country to tout an economic recovery.
“Our economy is growing and creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999,” Obama said in the opening lines of his January 20 address before Congress.“Our unemployment rate is now lower than it was before the financial crisis.”
Clifton says the “cheerleading” for the 5.6 number is “deafening.”
“The media loves a comeback story,” he writes. “The White House wants to score political points, and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.”
Since the start of the Great Recession, which economists largely agree began in late 2007, the unemployment rate peaked at 10 percent in October 2009 and finally got under 6 percent in September 2014.
Clifton says Americans out of work for at least four weeks are “as unemployed as one can possibly be” and argues that as many as 30 million of them are now either out of work or severely underemployed.
He points out that an out-of-work engineer, for example, performing a minimum of one hour of work a week, even mowing a lawn for $20, also is not officially counted as unemployed.
In addition, those working part time but wanting full-time work -- the so-called “severely underemployed” -- also are not counted.
“There's no other way to say this,” Clifton says. “The official unemployment rate … amounts to a big lie.”
His arguments are similar to those made by Washington Republicans after the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the rate each month during the height of the recession. However, Gallup is an 80-year-old, nonpartisan firm.
The bureau did not return a request for comment.
Clifton suggests the biggest misconception about the official rate is that it doesn’t denote “good” full-time jobs.
“When the media, talking heads, the White House and Wall Street start reporting the truth -- the percent of Americans in good jobs; jobs that are full time and real -- then we will quit wondering why Americans aren't ‘feeling’ something that doesn't remotely reflect the reality in their lives. And we will also quit wondering what hollowed out the middle class,” he said.

Republicans unveil new ObamaCare replacement plan

Congressional Republicans are unveiling what they say is a new plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare, but the ‘blueprint,’ as they call it, looks an awful lot like what’s been floated before.
The Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility and Empowerment – or CARE – Act was crafted by Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich.
The first bicameral proposal of the 114^th Congress calls for the outright repeal of President Obama’s signature health care law, and with that, the individual mandate to buy insurance or pay a fine.
It provides for targeted tax credits to individuals and families up to 300 percent above the poverty line to encourage people to buy plans in the market place.
It also allows insurers to sell plans across state lines and caps the amount of monetary damages that can be awarded in medical malpractice litigation. 
Like the Affordable Care Act, dependents are able to stay on their parents’ healthcare plans until they’re 26, and no one can be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions - although this plan calls for a specific ‘continuous coverage’ protection where individuals moving from one plan to another cannot be denied.
Gone, however, are age-rating ratios banning insurance companies from charging older Americans more than three times what they charge younger individuals. The new federal baseline would be five-to-one, essentially lowering costs for younger, lower risk consumers.
To pay for it, Burr, Hatch and Upton propose taxing the value of health insurance plans above $30,000 a year as regular income. 
If these proposals sound familiar it’s because most of them are. Many are based on an outline pitched last year by Burr, Hatch, and former Senator Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
“One of the reasons that you don't see massive changes is we thought we had a decent product last year based on feedback as we've talked with governors, with industry,” an aide familiar with the plan said. “A lot of industry frankly thinks this is a very durable sustainable, credible alternative from a market perspective, and they think it's operationally viable.”
Even if it’s viable don’t expect a vote - in either chamber - anytime soon. Aides are very quick to point out that this should not be hailed as the “GOP Plan.” 
“It’s just one plan,” as one adviser put it, and more input from governors and legislators will be needed before anything moves forward. Even hearings haven’t yet been discussed.
Same old song and dance we've been seeing for years, critics say.
Still pressure for viable alternatives is increasing.  
There currently is a case about to come before the Supreme Court challenging ObamaCare’s subsidies for private insurance for people who don’t have access to it through their jobs. If that provision is struck down, millions of consumers could drop coverage.
“As soon as we get feedback we are going to keep updating our proposal because now there is a different sense of urgency being in the majority to try to put something together, especially as we are headed to 2017," one Republican aide said.  “Not to mention what the Supreme Court may decide on June 30th.”
A larger bill will almost certainly wait until there is a new occupant in the White House.
“Let's all be realistic, the president, who the law is named after, he's not repealing his bill. So what we are doing is putting a very credible idea out there because what our bosses were sick and tired of hearing is the Republicans have no ideas," one aide said.  
“Will this whole thing happen before 2017, I find that hard to believe, but we're going to prepare for 2017.”

Shocked Jordanians rally behind king, against ISIS after video of pilot's killing

The shocking images of a Jordanian Air Force pilot being burned alive in an outdoor cage by ISIS terrorists have galvanized the country, once seen as possible fertile recruitment ground for the group, behind King Abdullah II's calls for a stepped-up military campaign.
Jordan's monarch has vowed to wage a "harsh" war against ISIS after consulting with his military chiefs Wednesday. Abdullah cut short his scheduled trip to the U.S. after the video showing the killing of Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh was released Tuesday.
In a statement, the king said Jordan is waging a war of principles against the militants. He said that Jordan's response to the killing of the pilot "will be harsh because this terrorist organization is not only fighting us, but also fighting Islam and its pure values."
Abdullah pledged to hit the militants "hard in the very center of their strongholds."
Jordanian officials have not presented details of their response, but said they would be working closely with their allies in the anti-IS coalition.
The New York Times reported that the king was greeted warmly upon his return Wednesday by thousands of people who lined the main roads to and from the airport. The paper reported that many waved flags and displayed pictures of both the king and the pilot.
The Guardian reported that radio and television station played patriotic songs and F-16 jets performed flyovers over the capital and al-Kaseasbeh's hometown. 
"I swear to God we will kill all those pigs," one man said of the terror group. "Whatever it takes to finish them is what we will do."
"We are all Hashemites and we are following the government with no reservations in this fight against these godless terrorists," a cafe patron, Yousf Majid al-Zarbi, told the paper. "Have you seen that video? I mean really, how in humanity could this be a just punishment for any person?"
Jordan had previously been thought to be home to thousands of supporters of ISIS. The kingdom is beset by several social problems, including a sharp economic down turn that has led to high unemployment among young men, who are typically a reservoir of potential ISIS recruits. Adding to a potentially destabilizing mix are the presence of hundreds of thousands of war refugees from Iraq and Syria who have poured across the border in the preceding decade. 
In recent months, Jordanian authorities have rounded up dozens of suspected ISIS supporters. In an early response to the grisly video, Jordan executed two Iraqi Al Qaeda prisoners, Sajida al-Rishawi and Zaid al-Karbouly, before sunrise Wednesday.
In Washington, lawmakers from both parties have called on the Obama administration to speed up deliveries of aircraft parts, night-vision equipment and other weapons to Jordan.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he expected his panel to swiftly approve legislation calling for increased aid. He repeated his criticism that the Obama administration has "no strategy" for dealing with the Islamic State group, and said he hoped the video of al-Kaseasbeh's death will galvanize not only U.S. leadership but "the Arab world."
All 26 members of the Senate Armed Services Committee wrote in a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that Jordan's situation and the unanimity of the coalition battling the extremists "demands that we move with speed to ensure they receive the military materiel they require."
At the White House, spokesman Josh Earnest said the administration would consider any aid package put forward by Congress, but that the White House would be looking for a specific request from Jordan's government.

TaxPayer Cartoon

Pro-Palestinian students heckle Cal-Davis opponents with cries of 'Allahu Akbar!'

I thought that the University of California was located in America, guess I was mistaken!

Anti-Israel activists at the University of California, Davis heckled Jewish students and shouted “Allahu Akbar” at them during a vote last week on a resolution endorsing a boycott of the Jewish state, according to video of the event obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
The commotion erupted late Thursday evening as pro-Israel students attempted to counter a student government resolution to divest from Israel as part of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
Activists waving Palestinian flags shouted at the Jewish and pro-Israel students as they left the meeting room ahead of an eight to two vote in favor of the divestment resolution, which is part of a larger movement by anti-Israel groups to attack Israel and pro-Israel students on campus.
“Allahu Akhbar!” a large group of activists shouted in unison as the pro-Israel students filed out of U.C. Davis’ meeting room, according to video provided by a member of Aggies for Israel, a pro-Israel student group at Davis.
Following the vote, which was championed by the pro-Hamas group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), unknown vandals spray-painted swastikas on a fraternity house belonging to the Jewish AEPi organization.
Additionally, Azka Fayyaz, a member of the U.C. Davis student senate, posted on her Facebook page a triumphant message following the vote: “Hamas & Sharia law have taken over UC Davis.”

GOP-led House votes to repeal ObamaCare

WASHINGTON –  The House voted Tuesday to repeal the Affordable Care Act, getting Republicans on record in favor of overturning the law for the first time since the party took control of Congress.
The bill passed on a 239-186 vote. 
President Obama already has threatened to veto the legislation -- and like past bills to repeal ObamaCare, it is unlikely to go far under the current administration, despite Republicans now controlling the Senate and having a bigger majority in the House.
But the vote serves as an opening shot in the 114^th Congress’ efforts to chip away at the law. Several lawmakers have introduced bills to change or undo parts of the Affordable Care Act, and some could garner bipartisan support. 
"We need health care reform that makes the system more responsive to patients, families and doctors -- reforms that preserve and protect the doctor-patient relationship. Right now, ObamaCare is moving our health care system in the exact opposite direction where the American people are paying more and getting less," Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said in a statement after the vote. "In the House of Representatives, we are saying we need to get rid of this law that's not working and focus on solutions that will embrace the principles of affordability, accessibility, quality, innovation, choices, and responsiveness." 
Prior to the vote, Obama questioned the logic behind it.
“So my understanding is the House scheduled yet another vote today to take health care away from folks around this table,” Obama said during a meeting with 10 people who have written him letters about how the ACA has helped them.
He added, “I’ve asked this question before. Why is it that this would be at the top of their agenda? It was maybe plausible to be against the Affordable Care Act before it was implemented. But now it has been implemented and it is working.”
The House has voted more than 50 times in the past two years to repeal all or parts of the law.
The legislation would go next to the Republican-controlled Senate.
While some say the vote is a symbolic gesture, the push to repeal ObamaCare comes as the Supreme Court weighs the King v. Burwell case, which challenges the legality of some subsidies offered through the president’s signature health care law. If the Supreme Court upholds a lower court’s verdict, it could severely undermine the law and fuel GOP efforts to at least change it. 
Republicans, as their next major step, are planning to draft legislation offering an alternative to the ACA. The bill approved Tuesday also directs House committees to begin work on an alternative plan, in case the Supreme Court rules against the law.

Secretary of Defense nominee Ashton Carter says he'll focus on ISIS, may expand counterterror operations

Ashton Carter, President Obama's nominee to replace Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense, will tell Senators at his confirmation hearing Wednesday that counterterror operations may need to be expanded to stem the tide of foreign fighters joining up with the ISIS terror group. 
"I believe foreign fighters pose a threat to the U.S., and that this threat is exacerbated by the ongoing political and security instability in Libya," Carter says in remarks prepared for testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee and obtained by The Washington Times. "If confirmed, I will focus attention on the foreign fighter flow as the department works with regional partners in North Africa to address the challenge posed by the terrorist safe haven in Libya and broader counterterrorism issues."
Carter will face the panel one day after the terror group released a grisly video showing a captured Jordanian Air Force pilot being burned alive. In response to written questions from the committee, Carter said that he is aware of reports that ISIS may try to expand into Afghanistan, and that he will work with NATO coalition partners to ensure that does not happen. 
Carter also said he would consider changing plans for withdrawing all U.S. troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2016 if security conditions worsen. About 10,600 U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan.
Wednesday's hearing is likely to focus as much on Obama's foreign policy as on Carter's own vision for the Defense Department, with the 60-year-old likely to face questions on Russian actions in Ukraine, Iran's nuclear ambitions, and Obama's push to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, among other issues.
Another thorny issue Carter faces is an uncertain outlook for the defense budget. In his remarks, Carter is expected to acknowledge that the Pentagon must end wasteful practices that undermine public confidence even as he criticizes the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration.
  "I cannot suggest support and stability for the defense budget without at the same time frankly noting that not every defense dollar is spent as well as it should be," Carter says in his remarks. "The taxpayer cannot comprehend, let alone support, the defense budget when they read of cost overruns, lack of accounting and accountability, needless overhead and the like."
If confirmed, Carter would be the fourth Secretary of Defense to serve under Obama, after Robert Gates, Leon Panetta, and Hagel. The relationship between the White House and the Pentagon has often been strained, with some officials in the department saying Obama views the military skeptically and centralizes decision making in the West Wing. Hagel, in particular, is said to to have grown particularly frustrated with the policymaking process overseen by national security adviser Susan Rice. Gates and Panetta have publicly aired their grievances with what they saw as White House micromanagement.
Carter served twice previously in Obama's Pentagon, most recently as deputy defense secretary from 2011 to 2013. He was assistant secretary of defense for international security policy during the administration of President Bill Clinton.
Carter would be the first defense secretary who has not served in the military or Congress since Harold Brown, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter and led the Pentagon from 1977 to 1981.

Jordan hangs 2 Al Qaeda prisoners after ISIS video shows Jordanian pilot burned alive

Jordan executed two Al Qaeda prisoners early Wednesday in response to a graphic video released by the ISIS terror group that showed a captured Jordanian pilot being burned alive in a cage. 
The release of the video sparked outrage and anti-ISIS demonstrations in Jordan, while Syrian activists reported that the terrorists gleefully played the grisly footage on big-screen televisions in their de facto capital, Raqqa.
Government spokesman Mohammed al-Momani confirmed to the Associated Press that Jordan had executed Sajida al-Rishawi and Ziad al-Karbouly, two Iraqis linked to Al Qaeda. Another official told the AP that both prisoners had been hanged. The executions took place at Swaqa prison about 50 miles south of the Jordanian capital of Amman. At sunrise, two ambulances carrying the bodies of al-Rishawi and al-Karbouly drove away from the prison with security escorts.
Jordan had previously expressed willingness to trade al Rishawi for the pilot, Lt. Muath Al-Kaseasbeh, but froze the swap after failing to receive any proof that he was still alive. Jordanian TV reported that al-Kaseasbeh was killed as early as Jan. 3, though that could not be immediately confirmed. 
Al-Rishawi had been sentenced to death after her 2005 role in a triple hotel bombing that killed 60 people in Amman orchestrated by Al Qaeda in Iraq, the predecessor of the Islamic State group. Al-Karbouly, a former aide to top Al Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was sent to death row in 2008 for plotting terror attacks on Jordanians in Iraq. Al-Zarqawi was killed in 2006. 
In the video, viewed by Fox News, al-Kaseasbeh, showing signs of having been beaten and clad in an orange jumpsuit, speaks under clear duress. A narrator speaking in Arabic blasts Arab nations, including Jordan, for taking part in U.S.-led airstrikes against ISIS. The final five minutes of the video show the caged pilot, his clothing apparently doused in gasoline as the fuel is lit. His screams are audible as he collapses to his knees. After being killed, the burned man and the cage are buried by a bulldozer. The video ends with ISIS offering "100 golden Dinars" for any Muslims in Jordan who kill other Jordanian pilots, whose names, pictures and hometowns are shown.
Sources told Fox News it demonstrated the highest production values of any tape to date, suggesting it took considerable time to shoot and produce.
In Washington, President Obama spoke with Jordan's King Abdullah II in a hastily arranged meeting at the White House. Jordan is a member of the U.S.-led coalition that has been striking ISIS in Syria since this past September. 
"It's just one more indication of the viciousness and barbarity of this organization," Obama said. "And I think it will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of the global coalition to make sure that they are degraded and ultimately defeated.”
In a statement before his meeting with Abdullah, Obama vowed the pilot's death would "redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of our global coalition to make sure they are degraded and ultimately defeated."
"Lieutenant al-Kaseasbeh's dedication, courage and service to his country and family represent universal human values that stand in opposition to the cowardice and depravity of ISIL, which has been so broadly rejected around the globe," Obama said, using another acronym for the terror group.
Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr., R-Ca., said after a meeting with congressional lawmakers and King Abdullah that the Jordanian monarch had been visibly angry and promised swift and certain retaliation against Islamic State group militants.
"They're starting more sorties tomorrow than they've ever had. They're starting tomorrow," Hunter told the Washington Examiner in an interview published online Tuesday night.
Hunter added the king also said: "The only problem we're going to have is running out of fuel and bullets." 
Jordan faces increasing threats from the militants. Jordan borders areas of the group's self-declared caliphate in Syria and Iraq, while there are have been signs of greater support for the group's militant ideas among Jordan's young and poor.
After word spread that the pilot had been killed, dozens of people chanting slogans against the Islamic State group marched toward the royal palace to express their anger. Waving a Jordanian flag, they chanted, "Damn you, Daesh!"  -- using the Arabic acronym of the group -- and "We will avenge, we will avenge our son's blood."
"There is no religion [that] accepts such act," Amman resident Hassan Abu Ali said. "Islam is a religion of tolerance. (ISIS) have nothing to do with Islam. This is [a] criminal act."
Jordanian Army spokesman Mamdouh al-Ameri said the country would strike back hard. "Our punishment and revenge will be as huge as the loss of the Jordanians," he said.
Protesters marched in the pilot's home village of Ai and set a local government office on fire. Witnesses said the atmosphere was tense and that riot police patrolled the streets.
The pilot's father, Safi Yousef al-Kaseasbeh, was attending a tribal meeting in Amman when news of the video surfaced, and he was seen being led from the session. Other men were seen outside, overcome with emotion.
The Islamic State group has released a series of gruesome videos showing the beheading of captives, including two American journalists, an American aid worker and two British aid workers. Tuesday's was the first to show a captive being burned alive.
David L. Phillips, a former State Department adviser on the Middle East, said he believes the pilot's killing could backfire, antagonizing Sunnis against the extremists, including Sunni tribes in Iraq.
"They need to have a welcome from Sunni Arabs in Anbar Province (in Iraq) to maintain their operations," said Phillips, director of the Program on Peace-building and Human Rights at Columbia University.
He said the extremist group's recent military setbacks may have fueled the killings. "They need to compensate for that with increasingly gruesome killings of prisoners," he said.
The latest video was released three days after another video showed the purported beheading of a Japanese journalist, Kenji Goto, who was captured by the Islamic State group in October.
The militants had linked the fates of the pilot and the journalist. A second Japanese hostage was apparently killed earlier last month.
The U.N. Security Council in a statement condemned the "brutality of ISIL, which is responsible for thousands of crimes and abuses against people from all faiths, ethnicities and nationalities, and without regard to any basic value of humanity."

Debt Cartoon

GAS PAINS? Union strike could spell end of $2 gas

Just when gas prices began slipping below $2 a gallon, a new issue is threatening to bring back pain at the pump.
Members of the United Steelworkers Union at refineries that produce nearly 10 percent of U.S. gasoline, diesel and other fuels, were on strike for a second day on Monday as they pushed for a new national contract with oil companies covering laborers at 63 plants, The Wall Street Journal reported. If a new deal isn't reached and the strikes continue, drivers at the pump could take a hard hit.
"You can forget about $2 gasoline," Carl Larry, director of oil and gas at consulting firm Frost & Sullivan, told the newspaper. "It’s going to be a big deal. People are going to be freaked out."

"You can forget about $2 gasoline."- Carl Larry, director of oil and gas at consulting firm Frost & Sullivan

After contract negotiations broke down over salaries and safety, USW told its members at nine refineries and chemical plants to walk out until a new deal is settled, according to the newspaper. The strike, which affects 3,800 workers, began on Sunday.
Reuters reported that the walkouts were the first in support of a nationwide pact since 1980 and targeted plants with a combined 10 percent of U.S. refining capacity. 
Companies affected by the strike, including Royal Dutch Shell, Tesoro, Marathon and LyondellBasell Industries, vowed to keep plants operating under contingency plans such as using nonunion labor, according to The Journal.
One refinery, however, was being shut down. Tesoro's Martinez, Calif., refinery, was being closed during the strikes because of planned maintenance work, Reuters reported.
Gas prices had been falling for more than six months, as the price of a barrel of oil plunged from more than $100 to about $40. A variety of factors were credited for the price drop, including a huge rise in U.S. production and Saudi Arabia's refusal to lower production to boost prices.
Bloomberg reported that oil was poised to rise again Monday, after surging more than 8 percent on Friday. It had previously fallen to its lowest point in almost six years.

Obama budget includes $2T in tax hikes

President Obama has packed more than 20 new tax increases into his proposed 2016 budget, which Republicans roundly blasted Monday as a tax-and-spend agenda that won't get their support. 
Together, the tax increases total more than $2 trillion over the next decade. The president plans to use much of that to fund new middle-class tax cuts, as well as ambitious spending programs for highway construction, education benefits and more. 
The biggest money-maker for the federal government would be a change allowing top earners to take tax deductions at the 28 percent rate, even if their income is taxed at the top 39.6 percent rate. This is projected to bring in $603.2 billion in revenue over the next 10 years. 
In addition, top earners would see an increase in capital gains rates -- to 28 percent, up from the current 24.2 percent rate. The change would raise nearly $208 billion. 
Some of the biggest tax hikes in the budget also include a 14 percent, one-time tax on previously untaxed foreign income (raising $268.1 billion); a 19 percent minimum tax on foreign income (raising $206 billion); and a fraction-of-a-percent fee on the 100 financial firms with assets of over $50 billion (raising $111.8 billion). 
The budget plan, while gearing tax hikes toward the wealthy and tax benefits toward the middle class, wouldn't exclusively hit the top tier. It would also hit smokers of all kinds, who under the president's plan would see the per-pack tax rise from $1.01 to $1.95, bringing in an additional $95 billion in revenue. 
In a message accompanying the massive budget books, Obama said his proposals are "practical, not partisan." But even before the books were delivered, Republicans found plenty to criticize. 
"The president is advocating more spending, more taxes and more debt," said House Speaker John Boehner. "A proposal that never balances is not a serious plan for America's fiscal future." 
Boehner and other GOP leaders said that the budget they produce this spring will achieve balance within 10 years, curb the explosive growth of government benefit programs and reform the loophole-cluttered tax code. 
Of Obama's $4 trillion proposal, Boehner said: "Like the president's previous budgets, this plan never balances -- ever." 
The budget shows a $474 billion deficit for fiscal 2016. Obama's budget plan never reaches balance over the next decade and projects the deficit would rise to $687 billion in 2025. Administration officials say their goal is to hold the deficit to a small percentage of the total U.S. economy -- but not necessarily to eliminate it. 
"President Obama promised in the State of the Union to deliver a budget filled with 'ideas that are practical, not partisan.' Unfortunately, what we saw this morning was another top-down, backward-looking document that caters to powerful political bosses on the Left and never balances-ever," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement. "We're asking the President to abandon the tax-and-spend ways of yesterday and join us in this practical and future-oriented approach." 
As part of his budget, Obama is proposing a six-year, $478 billion public-works program for highway, bridge and transit upgrades, with half of it to be financed with the one-time, 14 percent tax on U.S. companies' overseas profits. 
The tax would be due immediately. Under current law, those profits are subject only to federal taxes if they are returned, or repatriated, to the U.S., where they face a top rate of 35 percent. Many companies avoid U.S. taxes on those earnings by simply leaving them overseas. 
The tax is part of a broader administration plan to cut corporate tax breaks and increase taxes on the country's highest wage-earners to pay for projects to help the middle class. 
Members of the GOP-controlled Congress and other fiscal conservatives have dismissed the overall plan since elements of it were announced several weeks ago. 
The administration contends that various spending cuts and tax increases would trim the deficits by about $1.8 trillion over the next decade, leaving the red ink at manageable levels. Congressional Republicans say the budgets they produce will achieve balance and will attack costly benefit program like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. 
Obama's budget emphasizes the same themes as his State of the Union address last month, when he challenged Congress to work with him on narrowing the income gap between the very wealthy and everyone else. 
Higher taxes on top earners and on fees paid by the largest financial institutions would help raise $320 billion over 10 years which Obama would use to provide low- and middle-class tax breaks. 
His proposals: a credit of up to $500 for two-income families, a boost in the child care tax credit to up to $3,000 per child under age 5, and overhauling breaks that help pay for college. Obama also is calling for a $60 billion program for free community college for an estimated 9 million students if all states participate. It also proposes expanding child care to more than 1.1 million additional children under the age of 4 by 2025 and seeks to implement universal pre-school. 
Obama's budget also proposes easing painful, automatic "sequester" cuts to the Pentagon and domestic agencies with a 7 percent increase in annual appropriations, providing an additional $74 billion in 2016, divided between the military and domestic programs. 
Many Republicans support the extra military spending but oppose increased domestic spending.

UN official says North Korean regime must be 'dismantled' for human rights to thrive

A campaign within the United Nations to haul North Korean leader Kim Jong Un before an international court for crimes against humanity has touched off a defensive fury in Pyongyang, where it's being treated like a diplomatic declaration of war -- an aggressive act aimed not only at shutting down prison camps but also at removing Kim and dismantling his family's three-generation cult of personality.
More paranoia?
Actually, according to the U.N.'s point man on human rights in North Korea, that is not too far off the mark, though he stressed no one is advocating a military option to force regime change.
"It would be, I think, the first order of the day to get these 80,000 to 100,000 (prisoners) immediately released and these camps disbanded," Marzuki Darusman, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on human rights in North Korea, said in an interview with The Associated Press. "But that can only happen if this cult leadership system is completely dismantled. And the only way to do that is if the Kim family is effectively displaced, is effectively removed from the scene, and a new leadership comes into place."
Such blunt words from a high-ranking U.N. official are unusual, although common among American officials.
Darusman said previous proposals submitted to the U.N. trying to persuade or force North Korea to improve its human rights record were mostly "rhetorical" exercises.
But he said this resolution, passed by the General Assembly in December, is more significant because it holds Kim responsible based on a 372-page report of findings presented last year by the U.N.-backed Commission of Inquiry that detailed arbitrary detention, torture, executions and political prison camps.
"This is a sea change in the position of the international community," Darusman said during a recent visit to Tokyo. The North Koreans "are in their most vulnerable position at this stage, whenever the culpability and responsibility of the supreme leader is brought out in full glare of the international public scrutiny."
North Korea's intense response has included threats of more nuclear tests, mass rallies across the country, a bitter smear campaign against defectors who cooperated in the U.N. report and repeated allegations that Washington orchestrated the whole thing in an attempt at speeding a regime change. Its state media last week railed yet again against the U.N. findings, saying "those who cooked up the `report' are all bribed political swindlers and despicable human scum." It called Darusman, the former attorney general of Indonesia, an "opportunist."
In a rare flurry of talks, North Korean diplomats at the U.N. lobbied frenetically to get Kim's culpability out of the resolution without success. The proposal is now on the agenda of the Security Council, which is expected this year to make a decision on whether the issue should be referred to the International Criminal Court at The Hague.
Just before the resolution passed the General Assembly, the North Korean diplomatic mission to the U.N. sought a meeting with Darusman to get the wording deleted. During the meeting with Ri Hung Sik, North Korea's ambassador-at-large, the North Koreans indicated their future was at stake, Darusman said.
"They said that other people will take over, and the hardliners will be taking over," Darusman said, suggesting a schism may already be forming between factions scrambling to prove themselves more loyal and more effective in protecting the leadership. "They wouldn't have to mention that to us, but I don't know. I'm taking it at face value."
But here's the reality check about the resolution: The likelihood of criminal proceedings against Kim is minuscule. It would likely be shot down by China or Russia, which have veto power on the Security Council. Also, while more than 120 countries support the International Criminal Court, the United States isn't one of them, so it is somewhat awkward for Washington to push that option too hard.
But even without bringing Kim to court, Darusman said, the placement of North Korean human rights on the Security Council agenda means Pyongyang will face increasing scrutiny from the international community. He said ally China will be under pressure to either distance itself from Pyongyang or lose credibility.
"It may seem remote, but at some stage it is conceivable that China cannot afford to be continuously associated with a regime that is universally sanctioned by the international community," he said. "Something will give."
Washington, meanwhile, is turning up the heat following the massive cyberattack on Sony Pictures.
"We are under no illusions about the DPRK's willingness to abandon its illicit weapons, provocations, and human rights abuses on its own. We will apply pressure both multilaterally and unilaterally," Sung Kim, Washington's special representative for North Korea policy, testified in Congress last month. "The leadership in Pyongyang faces ever-sharper choices."
North Korea's official name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Extricating North Korea from the personality cult of the Kim family would be a genuine challenge under any circumstances.
The country's founder, Kim Il Sung, and his son and successor, Kim Jong Il, permeate every facet of daily life. Citizens wear Kim lapel pins everywhere they go. Portraits and statuary of the father and son are everywhere. In Pyongyang at midnight every night, a ghostly dirge commemorating the elder Kim blares from loudspeakers through the darkness.
According to the U.N. commission's findings and the testimony of many defectors, North Koreans who dare criticize the Kim family are punished severely and face horrific treatment in prison camps around the country. North Korea says that isn't true, and routinely accuses defectors of being "human scum" and criminals.
Officials vociferously deny speculation of disunity within their ranks.
In an interview with the AP in Pyongyang in October, two North Korean legal experts attempted to discredit the U.N. campaign and its findings -- which they called an "anti-DPRK plot" -- and defended the prison system that has long been the core area of concern.
"In a word, the political camps do not exist in our country," said Ri Kyong Chol, director of the international law department at Pyongyang's Academy of Social Sciences. "The difference between the common and the anti-state criminals is that the anti-state criminals get more severe punishment than the common criminals."
But Ri said common and anti-state inmates are not segregated.
"I think every country has prisons to imprison those criminals who have committed crimes against the state," he said. But in North Korea, "there are no different prisons for that."

Chris Christie, Rand Paul under fire for vaccine remarks

Two potential candidates for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 came under heavy criticism late Monday for stating that parents should have input about whether to vaccinate their children.
The remarks by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul were not a departure from previously stated positions, but drew widespread attention as public health officials try to cope with a major measles outbreak that has infected over 100 people in several states.
Christie, who spoke Monday after making a tour of a biomedical research lab in Cambridge, England, said that he and his wife had vaccinated their children. However, the governor added, "I also understand that parents need to have some measure of choice in things as well. So that's the balance that the government has to decide."
Later Monday, Paul said in a radio interview that he believed most vaccines should be voluntary. 
"I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," Paul, an eye doctor, said in a subsequent interview while suggesting vaccines were "a good thing." ''But I think the parents should have some input. The state doesn't own your children."
Both men's staffs later sent out statements clarifying their remarks. Christie's spokesman said the governor believed that "with a disease like measles there is no question kids should be vaccinated." The statement from Paul's office pointed out that the senator's children have all been vaccinated and added that Paul "believes that vaccines have saved lives, and should be administered to children.
Hillary Clinton, the leading Democratic contender for the party nomination in 2016, couldn't resist taking a dig at the GOP hopefuls on Twitter.
"The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork. Let's protect all our kids. #GrandmothersKnowBest."
Medical experts and political consultants from both sides joined in the criticism.
"When you see educated people or elected officials giving credence to things that have been completely debunked, an idea that’s been shown to be responsible for multiple measles and pertussis outbreaks in recent years, it’s very concerning," Amesh Adalja, an an infectious-disease physician at the Center for Health Security at the University of Pittsburgh, told The Washington Post.
GOP operative Rick Wilson told the paper that he thought Christie's remarks could have been a clumsy play to win over conservative voters suspicious of government mandates.
"There’s only one of two options," Wilson said of Christie. "Either he’s so tone-deaf that he doesn’t understand why saying this is bad for him, or this is a considered political strategy. And that would be even more troubling."
In fact, Christie pledged to fight for greater parental involvement in vaccination decisions during his first campaign for New Jersey governor in 2009. 
All states now require children to get certain vaccinations to enroll in school, although California and New Jersey are among 20 states that let parents opt out by obtaining a waiver. Parents in New Jersey seeking such a waiver for medical reasons must submit a written statement from their doctor or registered nurse.
The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly urges parents to get their children vaccinated against measles and other childhood diseases. The New Jersey health department's guidelines on vaccines say that objections "based on grounds which are not medical or religious in nature and which are of a philosophical, moral, secular, or more general nature continue to be unacceptable."
Concerns about autism and vaccinations are often traced to a 1998 study in the British journal Lancet. While the research was later discredited and retracted by the journal, legions of parents abandoned the vaccine, leading to a resurgence of measles in Western countries where it had been mostly stamped out. Last year, there were more than 4,100 cases in Europe, according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Measles is a highly contagious disease that spreads through the air, with symptoms that include fever, runny nose and a blotchy rash. The measles-mumps-rubella vaccine is 97 percent effective at preventing measles, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"Choosing not to vaccinate your child could also endanger the health of other children in your community," CDC director Tom Frieden said Monday.
New Jersey requires the vaccine for children between 12 months and 15 months old, and then a second dose between ages 4 and 6. Such mandated vaccinations are a point of irritation among some conservatives, notable in the early voting state of Iowa, where Christian home-school advocates constitute an influential bloc of voters who take part in the Republican presidential caucuses.
Barb Heki, a leader in Iowa's home-school advocacy network, said such parents "adhere to the idea that it's the parents' right to make the decision on vaccinations.
"More important than a candidate's stance on vaccinations, I'm more concerned for parents' rights to make decisions about their own children, period," she said. "That's paramount."
Louise Kuo Habakus, a radio host who runs a nonprofit group opposed to state-required vaccinations, said she helped arrange a meeting between parents and Christie on the issue in 2009 and saluted him for standing up for the "rights of parents to direct the health, welfare and upbringing of their children."
"He's been absolutely constant and I believe courageous and principled on this issue," she said.

Nuclear Cartoon

Why does the GOP have a problem with conservatives?

Establishment Republicans want our votes, not our values.
That's the topic of Friday's "Todd's American Dispatch," as Todd Starnes reacted to the National Review accusing former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee of trying to emulate Larry the Cable Guy.
"The fact is, the down-home values of the gun-toting, Bible-clinging, cast-iron skillet cooking crowd are just not welcome in the hoity-toity world of martini-sipping, country club Republican rubes," Starnes said.

In midst of measles outbreak, Obama tells parents to get their kids vaccinated

WASHINGTON –  In the midst of a measles outbreak, President Obama is telling parents to get their kids vaccinated.
Obama says those who don't get their shots can pose a risk to infants and other people who can't get vaccinated.
The president spoke in an interview with NBC Sunday. The interview is airing Monday on The Today Show but the network released excerpts in advance.
More than 100 cases of the measles have been reported in the U.S. since last month. Many cases have been traced directly or indirectly to Disneyland in Southern California.
Obama says measles outbreaks are preventable. He says he understands that some families are concerned about vaccinations, but the science on them is "pretty indisputable."
Obama says a major success of civilization is the ability to prevent diseases that have been devastating in the past.

Walker, eyeing 2016 White House bid, says he's open to sending US troops to fight ISIS

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, said Sunday he is open to sending U.S. troops to the Middle East to defeat Islamic State fighters -- a bold foreign policy statement in contrast with the Obama administration’s position.
Walker told ABC’s “This Week” that he wouldn’t rule out sending troops, as Islamic State appears to grow and strengthen despite U.S.-led efforts to destroy the radical Islamic group.
“I wouldn't rule out anything,” Walker said. “When you have the lives of Americans at stake ... we have to be prepared to do things that don't allow those measures, those attacks, those abuses to come to our shores."
In a wide-ranging interview in which Walker also made a case for a potential 2016 run, he suggested an Islamic State attack on U.S. soil is "a matter of when .. not if."
And he suggested that the administration, which has U.S. troops helping to train government-backed forces in Iraq, is not doing enough.
Secretary of State John Kerry and other top U.S. officials said last week that coalition forces have launched 2,000 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria that have killed Islamic State leaders and thousands of its fighters. However, Walker suggested the U.S. must do more.
“We must take the fight to ISIS and other radical Islamic groups,” he told ABC.
The administration is reluctant to send troops to the Middle East to fight the militant group, considering the move would be unpopular among Americans, after recent U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Walker leads all potential GOP candidates, according to a Bloomberg Politics/ Des Moines Register Iowa Poll released this weekend. He has 15 percent of the vote, with Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul in second with 14 percent, following Walker's rousing speech last weekend at the Iowa Freedom Summit.
“You can make all of the speeches you want,” Walker also told ABC. “But people want new, fresh leadership.”
He also suggested that he or perhaps Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, another potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, could beat presumptive Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton because they each are a “name for the future.”
He suggested the Clinton name is now synonymous with 20th century ideas and Washington, top-down government.
"Former Secretary of State Clinton embodies all the things that we think of Washington," Walker said. "She lives here, she's worked here, she's been part of the Washington structure for years, not just as a Democrat, but across the spectrum."
Walker has won three elections in the past four years, but Wisconsin has not voted for a Republican president in the past three decades.
On the issue of immigration, Walker said Sunday he opposed “amnesty” for people who have entered the U.S. illegally, but appeared to suggest that deporting the millions now in this country is not a practical solution.
Walker was in Washington this weekend meeting with potential campaign aides and donors. And last week, he announced the formation of a political nonprofit group ahead of a potential White House bid.

In new budget, Obama proposing 14 percent tax on overseas profits to fund infrastructure projects

President Obama will on Monday give Congress his $4 trillion spending plan for fiscal 2016 that includes a request for billions of dollars in much-needed public works projects -- an idea that has bipartisan support but little backing for the proposed tax increases to fund such efforts.
Obama will propose a six-year, $478 billion public-works program for highway, bridge and transit upgrades, with half of it to be financed with a one-time, 14 percent tax on U.S. companies’ overseas profits.
The tax would be due immediately. Under current law, those profits are subject only to federal taxes if they are returned, or repatriated, to the U.S., where they face a top rate of 35 percent. Many companies avoid U.S. taxes on those earnings by simply leaving them overseas.
The tax is part of a broader administration plan to cut corporate tax breaks and increase taxes on the country’s highest wage-earners to pay for projects to help the middle class.
Members of the GOP-controlled Congress and other fiscal conservatives have dismissed the overall plan since elements of it were announced several weeks ago -- part of a White House strategy to win support prior to the president's State of the Union address, in which more details were released, and a campaign-style tour in several states ahead of Monday’s release.
Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan, the new chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, told NBC's "Meet the Press,” as he has said in recent weeks, that he was willing to work with the administration to see if both sides can “find common ground on certain aspects of tax reform."
However, he disapproved on the president’s budget plan.
"What I think the president is trying to do here is to, again, exploit envy economics," Ryan said. "This top-down redistribution doesn't work."
Obama's budget proposal for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 will offer an array of spending programs and tax increases that Republicans now running Congress have already dismissed as nonstarters.
White House officials were not authorized, by name, to discuss the budget, but described the proposal to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity.
The proposal improves on an idea that the administration has pushed since the summer of 2013. The administration's budget last year proposed a smaller four-year bridge-and-highway fund. While it paid for it by taxing accumulated foreign earnings, it did not specify a formula.
This time, the budget will call for the one-time tax on the up to $2 trillion in estimated U.S. corporate earnings that have accumulated overseas. That would generate about $238 billion, by White House calculations. The remaining $240 billion would come from the federal Highway Trust Fund, which is financed with a gasoline tax.
The former chairman of the House Ways and Means, now-retired Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., proposed a similar idea last year with a lower mandatory tax, but the plan did not make headway in Congress.
At issue is how to get companies to bring back some of their foreign earnings to invest in the United States. The current 35 percent top tax rate for corporations in the United States, the highest among major economies, serves as a disincentive and many U.S. companies with overseas holdings simply keep their foreign earnings abroad and avoid the U.S. tax.
Under Obama's plan, the top corporate tax rate for company profits earned in the U.S. would drop to 28 percent. While past foreign profits would be taxed immediately at the 14 percent rate, going forward new foreign profits would be taxed immediately at 19 percent, with companies getting a credit for foreign taxes paid.
Most U.S. companies and Republican lawmakers prefer a "territorial" tax system employed by most developed countries, in which companies are taxed only on income earned within a country's borders. That difference could be a major hurdle to a broad overhaul of corporate taxes.
Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., have proposed paying for highway and bridge fixes by letting companies voluntarily pay taxes on foreign earnings at a one-time low rate of 6.5 percent. The White House opposes such voluntary "tax holidays," however, and critics say that without broader tax fixes, such holidays simply encourage companies to park their foreign profits overseas.
Other lawmakers have proposed boosting the Highway Trust Fund with a higher gasoline tax, an idea considered more palatable now that gas prices are low. However, the president is opposed to that idea.
The Obama plan proposes a 75 percent increase in funding for projects such as light rail and other public transportation systems. It also would nearly double spending on grants for local road, rail, transit and port projects. Since 2009, Congress has approved more than $4.1 billion for the competitive grants; the budget asks for $7.5 billion over six years.
Obama is releasing his budget as the federal deficit drops and his poll numbers inch higher. Though Republicans will march ahead on their own, they ultimately must come to terms with the president, who wields a veto pen and has threatened to use it.
Obama is proposing to ease painful, automatic cuts to the Pentagon and domestic agencies with a 7 percent increase in annual appropriations. He wants a $38 billion increase for the Pentagon that Republicans probably also will want to match. But his demand for a nearly equal amount for domestic programs sets up a showdown that may not be resolved until late in the year.
Another centerpiece of the president's tax proposal is an increase in the capital gains rate on couples making more than $500,000 per year. Obama wants to require estates to pay capital gains taxes on securities at the time they are inherited. He also wants to impose a fee on the roughly 100 U.S. financial companies with assets of more than $50 billion.
Obama would take the $320 billion that those tax increases would generate over 10 years and funnel them into middle-class tax breaks, expanded child care and a free community college program.
Altogether, the White House calculates that Obama's tax increases and spending cuts would cut the deficit by about $1.8 trillion over the next decade, according to people briefed on the basics of the plan. For 2016, the Obama budget promises a $474 billion deficit, about equal to this year. The deficit would remain less than $500 billion through 2018, but would rise to $687 billion by 2025 -- though such deficits would remain manageable when measured against the size of the economy.

Pipsqueak Cartoon