Slow start for program to reduce vets' waits at Veterans Affairs facilities, offer private medical care

Far fewer veterans than expected are taking advantage of a new law aimed at making it easier for them to get private health care and avoid the long waits that have plagued Department of Veterans Affairs facilities nationwide.
Only 27,000 veterans have made appointments for private medical care since the VA started mailing out "Choice Cards" in November, the VA said in a report to Congress this month. The number is so small, compared to the 8.6 million cards that have been mailed out, that VA Secretary Robert McDonald wants authority to redirect some of the $10 billion Congress allocated for the program to boost care for veterans at the VA's 970 hospitals and clinics.
Republicans and Democrats insist the problem is the department and that it needs to do a better job promoting the choice program. They also want to change a quirk in the law that makes it hard for some veterans in rural areas to prove they live at least 40 miles from a VA health site.
The government measures the distance as the crow flies, rather than by driving miles, leaving thousands of veterans ineligible.
"Veterans put their lives on the line to defend this country. The very least we can do is ensure they don't have to jump through hoops to receive the care they need and have earned," said Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., whose vast state has just one VA hospital.
The choice program was a key component of last year's sweeping law approved in response to reports that dozens of veterans died while waiting for appointments at a VA hospital in Phoenix, and that appointment records were manipulated to hide the delays. A series of government reports said workers throughout the country falsified wait lists while supervisors looked the other way, resulting in chronic delays for veterans seeking care and bonuses for managers who falsely appeared to meet on-time goals.
The law, signed by President Barack Obama in August, allows veterans who have waited more than 30 days for an appointment to get VA-paid care from a local doctor. It also allows veterans who live at least 40 miles from a VA hospital or clinic to get private care and makes it easier to fire VA employees accused of wrongdoing.
The choice program expands an existing program that allows veterans to get outside care for emergencies or procedures not available at the VA. Veterans have long complained about waiting months or even years to be reimbursed for private care, and many are skeptical the choice card will alleviate those problems, despite promises by the VA.
"I don't believe any of us thought that there would be a wholesale rush to leave the VA system at all, but we are still early in the program," Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, told reporters during a recent tour of the VA.
McDonald's bid to shift the money has met a bipartisan wall of opposition in Congress, where leaders said the landmark law they adopted last summer to overhaul VA has not been fully implemented. Taking money away from the choice program just three months after it was launched is premature, even irresponsible, lawmakers and veterans advocates said.
Miller called the plan a complete nonstarter. His Senate counterpart, Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., called it unacceptable. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the law's chief authors, said Congress not only would reject the idea "but refuse to even consider" it.
Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the senior Democrat on the Senate veterans panel, said in an interview he would oppose any reallocation of funds "so long as there are delays and issues with quality of care" at VA.
McDonald counters that the proposal, which has not been formally submitted to Congress, would help ensure that "every veteran receives the care they have earned and deserve regardless of where they choose to get it from."
McDonald, who took over as VA secretary in July, said he never intended to "gut the choice program or somehow eliminate" it. Instead, he said, he simply seeks the kind of budget flexibility he enjoyed as Procter & Gamble CEO.
"Imagine your household. You are hungry, but you can't move the money from the gasoline account to the food account. Well, that is the situation I face," he said at a Feb. 11 budget hearing before the House Veterans Affairs Committee.
Louis Celli, director of veterans affairs and rehabilitation at The American Legion, the largest veterans service organization, called McDonald's explanation disingenuous.
"Draining funds from the bill short-circuits the program and ultimately hurts vets," Celli said, noting that VA officials had pushed for the choice program as a short-term way to expand patient access to care.
Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., said a veteran in his rural district drives 340 miles one-way for cardiology treatment at a VA hospital in Kansas City.
"If the VA choice program can't provide something closer for him, then we need to relook at how we are implementing that," Huelskamp told McDonald at the Feb. 11 hearing.
McDonald said VA officials are willing to look at the 40-mile rule to see if it needs to be changed. The VA is committed to doing all it can to "make sure the program is robust," he said.

GOP governors in Maryland, Tennessee offer voluntary employee buyouts to reduce government

Republican governors in two states -- Maryland and Tennessee -- are offering voluntary employee-buyout programs as a way to reduce government beyond furloughs and cutting programs.
In Maryland, newly elected Gov. Larry Hogan is offering state employees in agencies in the executive branch a lump sum payment of $15,000, according to a letter dated Wednesday. They also would receive an additional $200 for each year of service.
The program is part of Hogan's balanced budget plan that was released last month and closed a budget shortfall of about $750 million.
"The goal of the program is to reduce the size of the state workforce by allowing employees to elect to voluntarily leave state service," David Brinkley, Hogan's budget secretary, wrote in the letter.
He also said that closing the shortfall “required some very tough decisions” but that the budget still managed to be structurally balanced without eliminating agencies and programs, imposing furloughs or eliminating filled state positions.
In Tennessee, Gov. Bill Haslam mentioned a voluntary buyout program during a budget presentation earlier this week. And the administration’s Department of Human Resources provided more details in a follow-up email to state employees.
According to the email, only those employees determined eligible for the buyout will be invited to participate in the program. Each department and agency is working to determine what classifications will be considered eligible.
A website, telephone line and email address have been established to update and inform people about the program, as well as give them an opportunity to ask questions.
Town hall meetings are also planned across the state to provide assistance to those interested.
In the Maryland program, the deadline to apply is March 13. People who apply and are selected by the state would have to leave no later than April 28.
The plan aims to save about $30 million.
Former Gov. Martin O'Malley included voluntary early separation in a package of budget cuts approved by the state’s Board of Public Works last month.
A Hogan spokesman said the governor is “simply following through with it."
O'Malley also offered voluntary separation in 2010 to help address a budget shortfall. More than 600 people accepted it in 2010.

Obama policy to bring Syrian refugees into US raises concern among Republicans, intelligence community

An Obama administration plan to allow Syrian refuges into the United States is raising concerns within the intelligence community and on Capitol Hill -- with one GOP House leader calling it a “federally sanctioned welcome party” to potential terrorists.
The State Department has defended the plan to welcome refugees from the war-ravaged western Asia country, saying the U.S. was founded on the principles of helping such people.
However, House Republicans are concern about members of The Islamic State, whose de facto headquarters is in Syria, infiltrating the refugee system and getting on American soil.
Mike McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said Friday night on Fox News’ “Hannity” show that the policy is “dangerous and reckless.”
The Texas lawmaker said he also recently wrote National Security Adviser Susan Rice about the policy, which includes brining in refugees from neighboring Turkey, where millions of Syrians have fled because of their civil war.
In the letter, he and fellow Republicans raised concerns about the U.S.’s screening process, which is hindered by the intelligence-gathering challenges in Syria.
"You have to have information to vet,” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach, said in a Feb. 11 House homeland security hearing. “Databases don't [have] the information on those individuals, and that's the concern.”
McCaul suggested at the hearing that allowing Syrian refugees into the U.S. would be a “huge mistake.”
“Most of (the refugees) are women and children, but there are male actors that concern me,” he said. “This would be a federally sanctioned welcome party, if you will, to potential terrorists in the United States.”
An estimated 7 million Syrians are seeking refugee status, and 500 have reportedly already been allowed into the U.S.
"It's clearly a population of concern," Nicholas Rasmussen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said at the hearing.
Said Steinbach: "I'm concerned. We'll have to take a look at those (terror watch) lists and go through all of the intelligence holdings and be very careful to try and identify connections to foreign terrorist groups."
Steinbach and Rasmussen were joined at the hearing by Francis Taylor, who runs the Department of Homeland Security’s intelligence office.
Taylor acknowledged his agency was concerned about any group that might be coming to the U.S. for “nefarious purposes.” However, he said he was “not in a position” to agree or disagree with the refugee policy because it was under the offices of the secretary of State.
The State Department did not send a witness to the hearing. But Larry Bartlett, an agency director for refugee admission, told ABC News that the vetting process is "intensive," deliberate and includes information and guidance from the Defense Department and other U.S. intelligence agencies.
"We have a very slow process of moving refugees through our pipeline, and part of it is because of the security vetting component," he said.
Despite the concerns of Rasmussen and the others who testified, they vowed that the screen process would be as rigorous as possible.
"Any tasking we're given ... will be as thorough as we can make it," Taylor said.
Rasmussen said the U.S. intelligence community would put its “full weight” behind vetting refugee candidates.

Mother Jones' Trash Spout

ISIS Cartoon

State lawmakers weigh ending ‘unnecessary’ car inspections

Broken taillight? Soon, it might not be a problem. 
State lawmakers are revving up efforts to abolish or roll back car inspections -- arguing that the government-mandated check-ups amount to little more than a hassle and a tax. 
The Mississippi state Senate recently passed a bill that would eliminate vehicle inspections completely. 
State Sen. John Polk, a Republican and supporter of the bill, said states are going this way because they've found the inspections "unnecessary." 
"Cars have become much more reliable today," Polk said. The measure heads next to the Mississippi House for a vote. 
While safety advocates argue the inspections are still important, the proposal follows other efforts at the state level to roll back inspections. New Jersey, for example, eliminated their safety inspections back in 2010. And some Pennsylvania lawmakers are pushing anew to get rid of inspections for cars less than two years old. 
There are two types of regulated inspections: safety and emissions. A handful of states -- including Florida, Alabama and Hawaii -- don't require any. Today, at least 18 states require periodic safety inspections, and roughly three-dozen states require emissions inspections. 
Those considering moving away from inspections argue they're antiquated. 
In Mississippi, the inspections cost drivers $5 per year. The penalty for not having a valid inspection sticker is $50. 
Mississippi Lt. Gov. Tate Reeves believes the stickers are used to essentially collect a "$5 tax." 
"Many states are eliminating the inspection sticker as vehicles are manufactured with improved safety features, and I think we should join them," Reeves said in a written statement. He also complained that state troopers have to spend time inspecting inspection stations, when they are trained to "protect Mississippians' safety on the road." 
But some drivers think the inspections are worth it. "I think they're a good thing. They keep broken-down cars off the road, for safety reasons. It's not expensive either," said Long Beach, Miss., resident Cameron Hatch. 
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Mississippi had more than 2 million registered vehicles -- which puts the state's annual revenue from safety inspections at more than $6 million. That's a tiny fraction of the state's budget, expected to be more than $6 billion for 2016. 
"This is not about money," state Sen. Billy Hudson told The Clarion Ledger. "I don't care if we are losing money on it or making money. It's a public safety issue." 
But AAA Public Affairs Vice President Mike Wright said some safety inspections are not worth it. 
"Nobody can prove with any degree of certainty that spending the money, suffering the inconvenience of getting your vehicle inspected, actually produces desired results," said Wright, who added only the smallest portion of car accidents are caused by motor vehicle defects. Driver error is the biggest cause, Wright said, while stressing that drivers should still get their vehicles inspected periodically. 
The Department of Transportation created a vehicle inspection program after Congress passed the Highway Safety Act in 1966. But in 1976, Congress allowed states to abandon their inspection programs. 
The safety inspection typically involves a driver bringing a car to an authorized shop for testing on the brakes, steering, suspension and headlights, among other factors. Drivers get a sticker on the windshield to show their car has passed. 
In Pennsylvania, state Sen. John Wozniak, a Democrat, is leading an effort to eliminate safety inspections for cars less than two years old. 
"When you look at accidents and crashes of states that have inspections to those that do not, their accident rates are not much different," said Wozniak, who plans to introduce a bill.   
Wozniak also wants to toss out emissions inspections in his state; he said there is a 99 percent passing rate for emission tests. "If you had your kids in school and that's the kind of grades they were bringing home, you'd say well done ... we don't need these inspections anymore," he said. 
An EPA spokesperson disagreed, saying: "The Clean Air Act's inspection programs are important tools for protecting public health by reducing smog pollution. Although newer vehicles have better emissions control technologies, a significant number of vehicles do not pass their emissions test -- up to 10 percent or more of the tested fleet." 
Some car maintenance shop owners say the inspections are just good for business. 
"A lot of [auto shops] don't do it because they think it's a nuisance, but I like them," said Hal Mardis, owner of the Goodyear Auto Service Center in Ridgeland, Miss. "It brings in a lot of traffic for me. We do 1,600 a month." 
But if Mississippi gets rid of the safety inspections, Mardis thinks his business won't be affected: "We are well-established enough that I don't think we're going to drop a lot of business because of it."

Biden Cartoon

CDC discovers new virus in Kansas

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced Friday the discovery of a new virus that may be spread through tick or insect bites. The virus may have contributed to the 2014 death of a Kansas man who was otherwise healthy.

Working with experts from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and University of Kansas Medical Center (UKMC), researchers found that the virus is part of a group of viruses called thogotoviruses. The virus was named Bourbon virus for the county in which the patient lived. The case is the first time a thogotovirus has been shown to cause human illness in the U.S. and the eighth known case of it causing symptoms in people.
According to the report, the patient, who was over 50 years old, was working outside on his property in late spring 2014 when he received several tick bites and
found an engorged tick on his shoulder. Several days later, he fell ill with nausea, weakness and diarrhea. The next day, he developed a fever, anorexia, chills, headache, myalgia, and arthralgia. The patient visited his primary care physician on the third day, at which point he was prescribed an antibiotic for a presumed tickborne illness.  The next morning, his wife found him experiencing reduced consciousness and we was taken to the local hospital.
Test results for many infectious diseases came back negative and a sample of the patient’s blood was sent to the CDC, which found evidence of an unidentified virus. Researchers used Advanced Molecular Detection (AMD) and determined it was a new virus.
According to the news release, the CDC is working with KDHE and UKMC to identify additional cases of Bourbon virus disease, determine who gets sick and with what symptoms, and how people are getting infected. CDC experts are also working to better understand the virus itself to potentially prevent and control Bourbon virus.
CDC researchers believe other undiscovered viruses are likely causing illness, with this finding and recent discoveries of Heartland virus in Missouri and severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome viruses in China.

Beagle Cartoon

GOP senators demand answers over disclosure of mission to oust ISIS from Mosul

Top Republican senators Friday demanded answers after a military official revealed “detailed operational information” about a looming Iraqi mission to retake Mosul from the Islamic State, saying the disclosure has put the mission at risk.
“Never in our memory can we recall an instance in which our military has knowingly briefed our own war plans to our enemies,” Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a letter to President Obama.
“These disclosures not only risk the success of our mission, but could also cost the lives of U.S., Iraqi, and coalition forces.”
The senators asked who was responsible for the briefing, conducted Thursday by a military official, and whether they had White House approval. “Those responsible have jeopardized our national security interests and must be held accountable,” they wrote.
The letter follows criticism in other corners that the military may have revealed too much detail in previewing the operation.
On Thursday, the U.S. military official outlined plans to retake Mosul and said the “shaping” for the battle is currently underway. He said the Iraqi military hopes to begin operations in the “April, May timeframe” with the goal of retaking Mosul before Ramadan begins on June 17.
The official then went a step further and leaked that five Iraqi Army brigades will be used in the fight, as well as several smaller brigades, composing a total force of up to 25,000 Iraqi troops. Three brigades of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters will participate as well. 
But the details, disclosed at the close of a White House summit on combating violent extremism, raised some concerns. 
"That is pretty amazing that that information's out there," retired Gen. Jack Keane, former Army vice chief of staff and a Fox News military analyst, said Friday.  
A current and former military intelligence officer also told Fox News that the decision to publicly announce the plan was counterintuitive because it "telegraphs" the timing and number of units involved. The officers said it would allow Islamic State, also known as ISIS, or ISIL, to prepare for the battle by laying improvised explosive devices.
Both officers questioned whether political considerations on the part of the Obama administration factored into the decision to announce the offensive. 
The Obama administration wasn't the first to discuss plans to retake Mosul, however. Iraqi government leaders previously had talked about the looming offensive, and Defense officials are pushing back on the notion that anything tactical was revealed on Thursday. 
CENTCOM sources also stressed that the briefing on Thursday came from the military, not the White House. 
Keane suggested there should be nothing surprising about the fact that Iraqi forces are looking to retake Mosul before Ramadan. 
"ISIS is not stupid," he said, adding that their fighters already know that Mosul is the key to any counteroffensive and have likely been preparing for weeks. "This is not something new to ISIS."
However, Keane said the details about the force size and other elements were "surprising" to hear. 
ISIS militants overtook Mosul last June, as the group marched across large sections of Iraq and Syria, sending Iraqi forces fleeing. At this point, officials estimate there are between 1,000 to 2,000 ISIS insurgents in the city of Mosul. Military leaders have been talking about retaking the city for some time, but they have said they won't launch the operation until the Iraqi troops are ready.
Included in the force would be a brigade of Iraqi counterterrorism forces who have been trained by U.S. special operations forces. The brigades include roughly 2,000 troops each.
The CENTCOM official said the U.S. will provide military support for the operation, including training, air support, intelligence and surveillance. The official said there has been no decision made yet on whether to send in some U.S. ground troops to help call in airstrikes.
"But by the same token, if they're not ready, if the conditions are not set, if all the equipment they need is not physically there and they (aren't) trained to a degree in which they will be successful, we have not closed the door on continuing to slide that to the right," he said.
The official also revealed for the first time that Qatar has agreed to host a training site for coalition forces to train moderate Syrian rebels who would return to Syria to fight the Islamic State forces there. Other sites are in Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

Arab governments reportedly concerned about terms of Iran nuke talks

Arab governments are privately expressing their concern to Washington about the emerging terms of a potential deal aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear program, according to Arab and U.S. officials involved in the deliberations.
The direction of U.S. diplomacy with Tehran has added fuel to fears in some Arab states of a nuclear-arms race in the region, as well as reviving talk about possibly extending a U.S. nuclear umbrella to Middle East allies to counter any Iranian threat.
The major Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, have said that a final agreement could allow Shiite-dominated Iran, their regional rival, to keep the technologies needed to produce nuclear weapons, according to these officials, while removing many of the sanctions that have crippled its economy in recent years.

'At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal,'- Arab official

Arab officials said a deal would likely drive Saudi Arabia, for one, to try to quickly match Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
"At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal," said an Arab official who has discussed Iran with the Obama administration and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks.
The Obama administration initially said its policy was to completely dismantle Tehran's nuclear infrastructure as a means to protect Washington's Mideast allies.
Now, however, U.S. officials say it is no longer plausible to eliminate all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, suggesting that any final deal would leave some nuclear capability in place. Iran denies that it is seeking to build a nuclear bomb, but a final deal providing for nuclear enrichment capacity could prompt a competition.
Arab officials have increasingly spoken about a possible nuclear arms race in the Mideast as the negotiations have continued for 18 months, having been extended twice.
U.S. officials have declined to publicly disclose terms of the deal being negotiated with Iran. But they stress that they have closely consulted with Washington’s Arab allies about the diplomatic process.
The Obama administration believes an agreement with Iran will curtail the potential for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast, rather than fuel one.
"Only a good negotiated solution will result in long-term confidence that Iran won't acquire a nuclear weapon," a senior U.S. official said. "Given Iran already has the technical capability, our goal has always been to get to one-year breakout time and cut off the four pathways under a very constrained program."

Pipeline Cartoon

Newark mayor backs students occupying superintendent's office

Students holed up since Tuesday in the office of the Newark, N.J., school superintendent in an effort to force her to meet with them or resign gained a powerful ally Thursday -- the city's mayor.
"They're obviously frustrated about not being able to have a voice in what happens around their own education," Newark Mayor Ras Baraka said at a news conference outside of school district headquarters Thursday.
"As the mayor of this state's largest city, I am also frustrated that I do not have a say-so in what is happening in the education of the children that exist and live in these communities," he said.
At least eight students, who call themselves the Newark Student Union, seized Superintendent Cami Anderson's office Tuesday night during a public schools advisory board meeting, and have remained on the floor where Anderson and other administrators have offices. They're protesting Anderson's leadership of the school district, including school building assignments and her support for charter schools.
The students claim the district is trying to "starve out" the Newark Student Union by purposely depriving them of food.
"For anyone tuning in right now, right now we're giving a live stream explaining what's going on. We have a food situation," one student is heard saying in the background of the live stream. "They haven't given it to us yet."
Another student said the protesters are surviving on chips and candy they brought in themselves Wednesday night.
"They are knowingly detaining our food," the student says. "As students, as people, we have a right to food. And we have a right to protest in this office."
In a letter to parents on Wednesday, however, Assistant Superintendent Brad Haggerty said the district "will continue to provide her with water, food, and access to a bathroom until you retake custody of your child."
A phone call placed to the superintendent's office by FoxNews.com on Thursday went unanswered. Spokespeople for the district and state Department of Education didn't immediately return calls Thursday from The Associated Press seeking comment.
Shortly after 10 a.m. Thursday, three female students appeared on a live stream from the superintendent's office, stating their mission in a brief statement. They urged anyone listening in the Newark area to join them in protest.
The district, meanwhile, said it hand-delivered letters Wednesday to parents of six students to ask them to pick their children up. Newark public schools spokeswoman Brittany Chord Parmley said Tuesday night that the district has tried to engage and listen to the students' concerns for the past several months.
"Despite our best efforts to work together, they have repeatedly ignored district requests to meet and engage in a constructive dialogue," she said in a statement. "While we appreciate their passion, this is not the appropriate forum to engage in productive conversation."
Former television talk show host Montel Williams tweeted a copy of one of the letters and claimed the district had Newark police officers deliver them to parents.
"Great job #camianderson - u have cops deliver threatening letters to parents of @NewarkStudents #occupynps ? Wow," Williams tweeted.
"Newark School Superintendent response to MASS student/teacher protest is bizarre. Students this fired up about their education = commendable," Williams wrote.
The students' remarks were met with chants from others in office, yelling, "Cami's got to go!" and, "Tell me what democracy looks like! This is what democracy looks like!"  
At least one organizer of the student group is a college student from Rutgers University.
New Jersey has run Newark schools since 1995, and Baraka has said he wants New Jersey to return the district to the city's control. Anderson's administration and the One Newark plan involving the expansion of charter schools have met skepticism from city officials and Baraka.
Anderson, an ally of former Newark Mayor Cory Booker, was appointed by Gov. Chris Christie in 2011. On Thursday, Baraka said her contract was renewed Wednesday, though he didn't support the claim with specific details about his sources, The Star-Ledger reported.

Judge defies Texas law to wed same-sex couple under one-time order

Defying Texas' longstanding ban on gay marriage, a lesbian couple wed in Austin on Thursday immediately after being granted a marriage license under a one-time court order because one of the women has cancer.
The women said their union was the first legal same-sex marriage since voters approved the ban in the fiercely conservative state in 2005, though Texas' attorney general immediately appealed to the state Supreme Court. The court later issued an emergency stay that blocks other gay couples from obtaining marriage licenses but didn't address the Austin marriage.
Thursday's license was issued exclusively for and Suzanne Bryant and Sarah Goodfriend, who has ovarian cancer, in liberal-leaning Travis County. The Austin couple requested the license two days after a local probate judge ruled in an unrelated estate case that Texas' gay-marriage ban was unconstitutional. The couple — together for more than 30 years — cited the estate case, saying it should allow them to get married.
State District Judge David Wahlberg sided with the couple and directed the Travis County clerk to stop relying on "the unconstitutional Texas prohibitions against same-sex marriage as a basis for not issuing a marriage license." County Clerk Dana Debeauvoir said she issued the license, but that any other licenses must be court ordered.
Courts made a similar exception in Indiana for a lesbian couple in April because one of the women was dying of cancer and wanted her partner's name on her death certificate. A federal appeals court overturned Indiana's ban in September.
Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican who took office in January, filed for an emergency stay Thursday morning and took the unusual step of asking Texas Supreme Court justices to rule within the hour. Justices didn't heed the request.
"A stay is necessary to make clear to all county clerks that Texas marriage law remains enforceable until there has been final appellate resolution," Paxton wrote.
Texas' ban on gay marriage was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge in San Antonio last year, but the judge put the ruling on hold amid the ongoing court fight. The state's appeal is currently before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
"We are all waiting for a final decision on marriage equality," Debeauvoir said. "However, this couple may not get the chance to hear the outcome of this issue because one person's health."
Goodfriend, policy director for state Rep. Celia Israel, said during a midday news conference that her last chemotherapy treatment was four and a half months ago. But, she added: "All of us wonder if the cancer grows back along with the hair growing back."
Bryant, an Austin lawyer who works on adoptions for same-sex couples, said the couple's two children were legally adopted by both her and Goodfriend years ago. But she said a legal marriage would affect their finances and property rights, and if one of them dies, the other would inherit the other's property and be able to make medical decisions and funeral arrangements for the other.
"Financially now, we're intertwined, and we will have community property that we will share," she said.
Bryant said she and her wife couldn't control what the attorney general does. "If they want to come in and try to nullify this, they will," she said. "But we have a valid marriage license, and I don't think they can."
Still, the women said they hoped other couples would follow their lead. Their advice: "Have hope and have faith."
The couple was joined by their two teenage daughters when they married Thursday morning in a ceremony presided over by a rabbi. Bryant later released a statement saying they wanted to open the door for all families to have the right to marry in Texas.
Mark Phariss, who along with his partner are among those fighting the ban in federal court, said he was "thrilled" by news of the nuptials even though it's unlikely to impact the federal lawsuit. But he said the marriage could prompt other same-sex couples to seek similar exceptions, saying Bryant and Goodfriend's case "is evidence of the harm the ban is having on the state."
Before the state Supreme Court ruling, two same-sex couples had inquired about getting a marriage license in Travis County, chief deputy clerk Ronald Morgan Jr. said. Morgan said both couples were told that Thursday's order applied only to the one couple, but that the office was "committed to abiding by any future court orders related to this issue."

Giuliani defends Obama criticism, says president doesn't believe in American exceptionalism

Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani adamantly defended Thursday his controversial criticism of President Obama, one day after saying he does "not believe that the president loves America."
Giuliani made the remarks Wednesday at a private fundraiser for Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who is widely considered to be a prospective candidate for president in 2016. He added: “(Obama) doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country."
The comments drew widespread criticism from Democrats and liberals.
But Thursday night on "The Kelly File," when host Megyn Kelly asked Giuliani if he wished to apologize, the 2008 presidential candidate doubled down on his criticism.
"Not at all. I want to repeat it," Giuliani said. "The reality is, from all that I can see of this president, all that I’ve heard of him, he apologizes for America, he criticizes America. ... This is an American president I’ve never seen before."
Giuliani said he doesn't think Obama believes in American exceptionalism, citing the president's remarks on police tactics in the wake of the Ferguson shooting, western atrocities in the name of religion and Obama's longtime association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a controversial Chicago pastor.
But, Kelly countered, "a lot of liberals don't believe in American exceptionalism, but that doesn't mean they don't love America."
"I don't feel it," Giuliani said. "I don't feel this love of America (from Obama). I believe his initial approach is to criticize this country, and then afterwards to say a few nice things about it."
Giuliani, however, said he wasn't questioning the president's patriotism.
"I know patriotism. Patriots can criticize. They’re allowed to criticize," he said. "But I don’t hear from him what I heard from Harry Truman, what I heard from Bill Clinton, what I heard from Jimmy Carter, which is these wonderful words about what a great country we are, what an exceptional country we are."

US military official outlines plan to retake Iraqi city of Mosul

A U.S. military official on Thursday outlined plans to retake the key Iraq city of Mosul from Islamic State terrorists as early as April -- an unusual move that immediately drew criticism from two U.S. intelligence officers.
A senior U.S. Central Command official said that the "shaping" for the battle is currently underway. The Iraqi military hopes to begin operations in the "April, May timeframe" and retake the city before Ramadan begins on June 17.
The official, who was not authorized to discuss the operation publicly and spoke with reporters on condition of anonymity, said five Iraqi Army brigades will be used in the fight, as well as several smaller brigades, adding up to a total force of up to 25,000 Iraqi troops.
Three brigades of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters will participate as well.
But two military intelligence officers told Fox News that the decision to publicly announce the plan was counterintuitive because it "telegraphs" the timing and number of units involved. The officers said it would allow Islamic State, also known as ISIS, or ISIL, to prepare for the battle by laying improvised explosive devices.
Both officers questioned whether political considerations on the part of the Obama administration factored into the decision to announce the offensive.
ISIS militants overtook Mosul last June, as the group marched across large sections of Iraq and Syria, sending Iraqi forces fleeing. At this point, officials estimate there are between 1,000 to 2,000 ISIS insurgents in the city of Mosul. Military leaders have been talking about retaking the city for some time, but they have said they won't launch the operation until the Iraqi troops are ready.
Included in the force would be a brigade of Iraqi counterterrorism forces who have been trained by U.S. special operations forces. The brigades include roughly 2,000 troops each.
The CENTCOM official said the U.S. will provide military support for the operation, including training, air support, intelligence and surveillance. The official said there has been no decision made yet on whether to send in some U.S. ground troops to help call in airstrikes.
"But by the same token, if they're not ready, if the conditions are not set, if all the equipment they need is not physically there and they (aren't) trained to a degree in which they will be successful, we have not closed the door on continuing to slide that to the right," he said.
The official also revealed for the first time that Qatar has agreed to host a training site for coalition forces to train moderate Syrian rebels who would return to Syria to fight the Islamic State forces there. Other sites are in Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

Hillary Clinton's ties to corporate donors, lobbyists while Secretary of State scrutinized

Hillary Clinton's ties to large corporations have come under more scrutiny after it was revealed that dozens of companies that have donated millions to her family's foundation also lobbied the State Department during her tenure as Secretary of State. 
The Wall Street Journal reports that the 60 companies who lobbied Clinton's State Department between 2009 and 2013 donated over $26 million to the Clinton Foundation in that period. The donors include instantly recognizable names like General Electric, Exxon Mobil, and Boeing.
The Journal also reports that at least 44 of the 60 companies participated in philanthropy projects valued at $3.2 billion set up by the Clinton Global Initiative, which is a wing of the foundation. At least 25 of the companies also contributed to 15 public-private partnerships created by Clinton and coordinated by the State Department. 
While there is no evidence that any laws were broken, the connections do raise potentially thorny ethical questions as Clinton prepares for a likely 2016 run for the Democratic presidential nomination. 
Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill told the Journal that she "did the job that every secretary of state is supposed to do and what the American people expect of them—especially during difficult economic times. She proudly and loudly advocated on behalf of American business and took every opportunity she could to promote U.S. commercial interests abroad." 
The latest report comes on the heels of the disclosure that donations from foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation have increased considerably following the removal of a self-imposed ban on such contributions during Hillary's time as Secretary of State. Experts have said that the donation ban should be immediately re-imposed until Clinton formally decides one way or another whether she will seek the White House. On Thursday, the foundation said it would consider whether to accept such contributions should Clinton decide to run, but would not commit to rejecting such donations in the future. 
The Journal report cites several examples of Clinton promoting eventual donors to the Foundation and its various activities. For example, in October 2012, she lobbied the Algerian government to contract General Electric to build power plants in that country. The following month, the Foundation approached the company about expanding a health-access initiative. An eventual partnership was formed, to which the company contributed between $500,000 and $1 million. The Algerian government awarded GE the power plant contract in September 2013. 
Other efforts were less successful. In 2010, Clinton announced cooperation between the U.S. and Poland on a scheme to develop shale gas deposits in eastern Europe. After several years of false starts, Exxon Mobil and Chevron gave up their Polish plans. 
In 2012, Clinton persuaded Bulgaria's government to issue a five-year license to Chevron allowing conventional gas exploration. That, too went nowhere. The following year, the Journal reports, Chevron donated $250,000 to the foundation. Exxon Mobil, for its part, has donated at least $18.8 million to various initiatives, including a nonprofit women's group called vital voices. 
In at least one case, a sizable corporate monetary promise was made before a Clinton overseas trip. In 2012, Wal-Mart, a company with whom the Clintons have ties going back to their days in Arkansas, pledged $12 million to various causes supporting woman in Latin America. $1.5 million of that money went toward a Clinton Foundation public-private partnership and another $500,000 went to Vital Voices.
A month later, Clinton lobbied the Indian government to reverse a ban on multibrand retailers, opening up a potentially lucrative market for several U.S. companies, including Wal-Mart. The effort was unsuccessful.

Global Warming Cartoon

Where in the Hell is Al Gore?

Emails reveal sensitive info left exposed after US pullout from Yemen

Internal State Department emails reviewed by Fox News reveal that as security unraveled in Yemen, U.S. personnel were scrambling to finalize their exit plan and were so uncertain about what would happen that procedures for safeguarding sensitive information were bypassed -- with permission from Washington. 
The unclassified emails reveal staff on the ground in Yemen, as well as senior department executives in Washington, were concerned the evacuation might go bad and left a communication network running at the embassy in case staff had to return. The emails point to uncertainty on the ground amid fast-moving developments, even as the Obama administration downplayed any irregularities. 
"It wasn't hasty," State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki insisted on Fox News' "The Kelly File" on Feb. 12, a day after the evacuation. 
But one email reviewed by Fox News showed genuine concern -- even panic -- in Washington, that an unclassified system exposing emails and day-to-day operations was left up and running at the embassy in Sanaa. 
"We need to quickly think about the plan for destroying/sanitizing the OpenNet data that is still in Sanaa," the email from a supervisor said. 
"I am a little worried it is still out there." 
That referred to a main communication link with Washington, known as OpenNet. The emails show that system -- at what was one of the most heavily guarded U.S. embassies in the Middle East -- was not shut down, in what was described to Fox News as a break in standard practice. 
On Feb. 8, Ambassador Matthew Tueller -- with the approval of Under Secretary Patrick Kennedy, one of the State Department's most senior executives -- ordered staff to leave the OpenNet link up, in case the evacuation plan failed and they had to return to the embassy for an indefinite period. 
But the worried email sent three days later showed the ramifications of leaving the system exposed, and it urged officials to implement a plan to destroy or clean up that data "as soon as possible." 
The U.S. joined Britain and France last week in pulling out of Yemen, closing their embassies and removing staff amid a civil war driven by Iran-aligned Shiite rebels. Yemen is also home to one of the most dangerous Al Qaeda affiliates, and the U.S. pullout has raised questions about the future of the U.S. counterterrorism program there. 
But the fact that sensitive information was left at the compound raises additional questions. 
Fox News is told that after the U.S. team fled, it took three days to remotely access and delete the remaining data. Servers containing financial information, as well as passport and visa requests with personal information, also had to be cleared. 
Tony Shaffer, a former military intelligence officer now with the London Center for Policy Research, explained how the information left unguarded at the compound could have posed problems. 
"If they are able to exploit it, that is say break it open and potentially analyze it and categorize it this will give them a great deal of information about how U.S. embassies function," he said. 
Psaki, speaking with Fox News, acknowledged that not everything went as planned. 
But, she said, "We've been planning these for weeks and everybody was following the proper protocol put in place for the advance." 
Psaki's claim that there was a long-standing plan conflicts with email traffic, just days before the evacuation, requesting further guidance and instruction on closing the embassy. 
Also, by Feb. 8, three days before the evacuation, the emails clearly show the plan was to leave on commercial air, and not a U.S. military aircraft, which would have allowed the Marines at the post to take their weapons with them. During the evacuation, military personnel had to destroy or render inoperable their weapons before boarding the aircraft. There is no evidence the State Department tried to charter out to a U.S.-controlled airbase that would have allowed the Marines to stay armed. 
Asked about the emails on Wednesday, Psaki said: "We successfully moved our personnel out. And I think that's what everybody should be focused on."

Lawsuit: Fire chief terminated because of Christian faith

The city of Atlanta fired its fire chief solely because of his religious beliefs about same-sex marriage and homosexual conduct, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court.
The lawsuit was filed by Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys on behalf of former fire chief Kelvin Cochran, one of the nation’s most decorated firefighters and a devout Christian.
Cochran was suspended for 30 days last November and was subsequently fired over a men’s devotional book he authored that included a section on biblical sexual morality.
CLICK HERE TO FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK – FOR CONSERVATIVE CONVERSATION! 
“Every American should be concerned about a government that thinks it can fire you because of what you believe,” ADF senior counsel Kevin Theriot said in a prepared statement. 
One of the leaders in the campaign to fire Cochran was city Councilman Alex Wan.
“I respect each individual’s rights to have their own thoughts, beliefs, and opinions, but when you’re a city employee and those thoughts, beliefs and opinions are different from the city’s, you have to check them at the door,” Wan told the Atlanta Journal Constitution last November.
In other words, if you work for the city of Atlanta and happen to be an evangelical Christian – you may want to start dusting off your resume.
The 54-page lawsuit against the city and Mayor Kasim Reed is a jaw-dropper. Cochran’s attorneys are asking for the chief to be reinstated – and they also want financial damages.
A spokesperson for the city of Atlanta told me they were not aware of the lawsuit. So I sent them a copy. They have yet to reply. You can read their previous responses to the controversy here.
Until last November, Cochran had a stellar record. He was named Atlanta’s fire chief in 2008. He served there until 2009 when he accepted a position in the Obama Administration as a U.S. fire administrator.
He returned to Atlanta in 2010 after Mayor Reed “begged” him to serve as the city’s fire chief. In 2012, Fire Chief magazine named Cochran the “Fire Chief of the Year.”
So what happened?
In the Fall of 2013 Cochran wrote a book, “Who Told You That You were Naked? Overcoming the Stronghold of Condemnation.” The book is not about sexual morality, but it does address the issue on approximately six pages.
Someone from the Fire Department had shown a few of the passages of the book to Councilman Wan, the lawsuit states. The unnamed person told Wan the passages were opposed to his beliefs on the subject.
Even though an investigation concluded that Cochran had not discriminated against anyone – he was fired.
“To actually lose my childhood dream-come-true profession – where all of my expectations have been greatly exceeded – because of my faith is staggering,” Cochran said in a statement. “The very faith that led me to pursue my career has been used to take it from me.”
I’ve had a chance to interview Chief Cochran and I have found him to be a good and honorable man. What happened to him should not happen to any other American.
“Americans are guaranteed the freedom to live without fear of being fired because of their beliefs and thoughts,” ADF senior counsel David Cortman said. “The city of Atlanta is not above the Constitution and federal law. In America, a religious or ideological test cannot be used to fire a public servant.”
Chief Cochran has some high-profile supporters – including a large portion of Georgia’s congressional delegation.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk penned a letter calling on the city to reinstate the fire chief. It was signed by six members of the delegation – including Rep. Buddy Carter, Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, Rep. Tom Price, Rep. Austin Scott and Rep. Jody Hice.
“As fellow Georgians, we are extremely troubled that a capable and long-standing public servant in our state can be targeted for retaliation and dismissal solely because of his religious views,” Loudermilk wrote. “Indeed, in terminating him, the City of Atlanta itself engaged in an act of discrimination, and worse, did so on the basis of his religious beliefs.”
It sounds to me like Mayor Reed and Councilman Wan are bullies who don’t like Christian people. And I hope Chief Cochran gets his day in court – and takes the city of Atlanta for every single penny he can get.

Playing defense: Jeb’s family problem, Hillary’s man problem

Here’s the state of play for the 2016 presidential campaign:
Jeb says he’s not a clone of his brother and father, and Hillary is surrounding herself with … men.
Let’s face it, the press has pretty much decided — for this week at least — that we’re looking at a general-election contest between the third Bush and second Clinton to seek the White House. Yes, we will spill endless barrels of ink on Rand and Ted and Scott and Marco and Mike and Chris, and one of them could catch fire and win the GOP nomination. Bush is stuck at 10 percent in the latest poll in Iowa, tied with Rand Paul, with less than half the support of Scott Walker, at 24 percent.
But media expectations are critical in the framing of a contest this early, and Bush is widely seen as the man to beat. His team showed its savvy by sending reporters excerpts of his big Chicago speech Wednesday, making this the obvious lead:
“I love my father and my brother. I admire their service to the nation and the difficult decisions they had to make. But I am my own man – and my views are shaped by my own thinking and own experiences.”
That sounded a heckuva lot better than Jeb ducking a question about Iraq by saying he’s not going to “relitigate” the past. Iraq and ISIS loom too large in this campaign for that kind of dodge to work.
Bush went on to bash the Obama team’s foreign policy — always a safe bet for a Republican — with such language as “with grandiosity, they announce resets and disengage. Hashtag campaigns replace actual diplomacy and engagement.”
Jeb’s hashtag here would be #I’mNotEitherGeorge.
He did go there in a Q&A session, saying “there were mistakes made in Iraq, for sure,” but offering this balancing sentiment: “My brother's administration through the surge which was one of the most heroic acts of political courage.” Another way in which the Iraq war will loom over his campaign is Jeb’s decision to tap foreign policy advisers who worked for the Bushes — though that would be somewhat hard to avoid, since those were the last two Republican administrations.
His family lineage, obviously, is both his greatest strength and greatest weakness. Jeb was a two-term Florida governor, but it’s his family that gives him instant credibility and access to a vast fundraising and political network — along with the baggage of a brother who invaded Iraq and presided over a massive financial crisis.
Jeb’s ability to convince voters that 45 would not be like 43 or 41 — that he is, in fact, his own person — is the first major test of his candidacy.
One sign that the press views Jeb as formidable is this tweet from Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin: “I'm not predicting this or putting out odds, but it is now not impossible that Jeb effectively locks up his nomination before Hillary does.” Another is this How He Did It piece in Politico about the Bush camp’s last year:
“Their strategy was to publicly downplay his interest in the race and avoid media attention, while quietly laying the groundwork for a launch that would catch much of Washington  —  and many of his potential rivals  —  flat-footed. While the much of the political world focused on Chris Christie, Rand Paul and even Bush’s fellow Floridian Marco Rubio, Bush was quietly collecting political chits, developing a cohesive platform, and preparing for a fundraising blitz intended to grab the front-runner’s chair, scare potential competitors like Mitt Romney and Christie, and put Bush on such a firm financial footing that he could devote more time to retail politics when it really counted.”
Meanwhile, Hillary (who has her own asset and liability in Clinton 42) is keeping a low profile, but that hasn’t stopped the pundits from analyzing and opining on the makeup of her rapidly growing campaign staff. Which led to this question in the Daily Beast:
“Does Hillary Clinton need binders full of women?”
Yes, the Beast is worried that the woman who would shatter the ultimate glass ceiling hasn’t hired enough chicks and could be running a “white dude fest.” Unlike in 2008, when the likes of Patti Solis Doyle and Maggie Williams were in charge, the top strategists so far include the likes of John Podesta, Robby Mook, Joel Benenson and on and on. (There are some female members of the inner circle, such as Huma Abedin and Mandy Grunwald, and Obama aide Jennifer Palmieri just signed on as communications director.)
The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank makes the most of this:
“This surely wasn’t Clinton’s intent, but her decision to re-brand Obama’s frat house as her own puts out a message quite at odds with her candidacy: that women can’t run a presidential campaign…
“From what I’ve heard, Clinton lieutenants were surprised by the reaction to the early slate of male hires. They say they blundered in putting out the names of several men at once and were not making a fundamental shift from the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pantsuit to the Obama towel snappers …
“The woman who would be the first of her gender to reach the presidency has decided that it takes a whole lot of testosterone to win the White House.”
This is silly-season stuff. A more important issue, in my view, is the Wall Street Journal reporting that donations from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Austria and Germany are flowing to the Clinton Foundation now that it’s lifted a ban on accepting money from foreign governments.
The average voter doesn’t care who’s working in Hillaryland. But she and Jeb are are going to draw flyspecking coverage as long as the media handicappers see them as leading the field.

UCLA says 179 people were exposed to 'superbug', 7 infected

UCLA reported Wednesday that nearly 180 patients were exposed to a potentially deadly "superbug" on contaminated medical instruments that infected seven patients and may have contributed to two deaths. 
A total of 179 patients at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center were exposed to antibiotic-resistant carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, or CRE, during endoscopic procedures between October and January, the university said in a statement. The patients who may have been infected are being sent home-testing kits, which the university will analyze.
Similar outbreaks of CRE have been reported around the nation. They are difficult to treat because some varieties are resistant to most known antibiotics. By one estimate, CRE can contribute to death in up to half of seriously infected patients, according to the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The bacteria can cause infections of the bladder or lungs, leading to coughing, fever or chills. CRE infections have been reported in every state except Idaho, Alaska and Maine, according to the CDC.
UCLA said infections may have been transmitted through specialized endoscopes used during the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic and bile-duct problems. The instruments are inserted into the patients' throats. The outbreak was discovered late last month during tests on a patient. 
The two medical devices may have carried the bacteria even though they were sterilized according to the manufacturer's specifications, UCLA said.
The devices have been removed, and decontamination procedures upgraded, the university said.
"We notified all patients who had this type of procedure, and we were using seven different scopes. Only two of them were found to be infected. In an abundance of caution, we notified everybody," said Dale Tate, a University of California, Los Angeles spokeswoman.
A similar outbreak occurred in Illinois in 2013. Dozens of patients were exposed to CRE, with some cases apparently linked to a tainted endoscope used at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital. The hospital later changed its sterilization procedures.
A Seattle hospital, Virginia Mason Medical Center, reported in January that CRE linked to an endoscope sickened at least 35 patients, and 11 died, although it was unclear whether the infection played a role in their deaths.
Experts say the cases represent a disturbing surge.
"This bacteria is emerging in the U.S. and it's associated with a high mortality rate," Dr. Alex Kallen, an epidemiologist in CDC's Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, told the LA Times. "We don't want this circulating anywhere in the community."

Obama says world should address ‘grievances’ that terrorists exploit

WASHINGTON –  President Obama defended his administration’s approach to the terror threat at a White House summit Wednesday, standing by claims that groups like the Islamic State do not represent Islam -- as well as assertions that job creation could help combat extremism.
Obama, addressing the Washington audience on the second day of the summit, said the international community needs to address “grievances” that terrorists exploit, including economic and political issues.
He stressed that poverty alone doesn’t cause terrorism, but “resentments fester” and extremism grows when millions of people are impoverished.
“We do have to address the grievances that terrorists exploit including economic grievances,” he said.
He also said no single religion was responsible for violence and terrorism, adding he wants to lift up the voice of tolerance in the United States and beyond.
Obama’s address came as Republican lawmakers and others criticized the administration for declining to describe the threat as Islamic terrorism.
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf has also come under fire for suggesting several times this past week that more jobs could help address the terrorism crisis.
On Tuesday, Rob O'Neill, former Navy SEAL Team 6 member who claims to have fired the shot that killed Usama bin Laden, told Fox News: "They get paid to cut off heads -- to crucify children, to sell slaves and to cut off heads and I don't think that a change in career path is what's going to stop them."
Obama also called on Muslim leaders to “do more to discredit the notion that our nations are determined to suppress Islam, that there is an inherent clash in civilizations.”
Obama acknowledged that some Muslim-Americans have concerns about working with the government, particularly law enforcement, and that their reluctance “is rooted in the objection to certain practices where Muslim-Americans feel they’ve been unfairly targeted.”
He said it was important it make sure that abuses stop and are not repeated and that “we do not stigmatize entire communities.” He also said it was vital that “no one is profiled or put under a cloud of suspicion simply because of their faith.”
Although Obama called for a renewed focus on preventing terrorists from recruiting and inspiring others, some thought his message seemed to miss the mark.
“He was meandering, unfocused and weak,” said Richard Grenell, former U.S. spokesman at the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration and a Fox News contributor. “He was talking about isolating terrorists. He doesn’t understand the threat that we face… People are being burned in cages and he’s talking about more investments?” 
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in an interview with Fox News, called Obama an "apologist for radical Islamic terrorists." And he mocked the president for recently comparing modern-day atrocities to those committed during the Crusades. 
"I don't think it's too much to ask the president to stay in the current millennia," Cruz said, describing the rhetoric as "bizarre politically correct double-speak."
Leaders from 60 different countries traveled to Washington for the summit.
Community leaders from Boston, Minneapolis and Los Angeles were also in attendance and discussed how their cities could help empower communities to protect themselves against extremist ideologies.

ceasefire cartoon

ISIS closing in? Terror group seizes Iraqi town 5 miles from Marine base

Islamic State has reportedly seized al-Baghdadi, in Iraq’s Anbar Province, 5 miles from an air base staffed by U.S. Marines, as the terror group continues its push beyond its bases in Syria and Iraq in an attempt to establish militant affiliates in other countries.
Hundreds of Islamic State fighters reportedly captured most of al-Baghdadi, which is 55 miles from the capital Ramadi, on Thursday.
On Friday, Iraqi soldiers had retaken several government buildings, but the soldiers withdrew early Saturday, handing the town back to the militants, The New York Times reported, citing local security officials.
One local Iraqi official told Reuters that, "Ninety percent of al-Baghdadi district has fallen under the control of the insurgents."
Militants attacked the town of al-Baghdadi from two directions before advancing inward, Reuters reported.
According to the Pentagon, al-Baghdadi was the first territorial gain by the militant group in months.
On Sunday, a U.S. Central Command spokesman refuted reports that ISIS had taken al-Baghdadi. "Al-Baghdadi has not fallen to ISIL or been seized by them," said U.S. Central Command, in an email to Fox News. Al-Baghdadi is "contested" not "Daesh held," said the email, referring to ISIS as Daesh, the name used by Arab partners to refer to the terrorist group.
On Friday, following the attack on al-Baghdadi, Islamic state fighters led a suicide attack on the Ayn al-Asad air base, where U.S. Marines are training Iraqi troops.
Most of the Islamic State fighters died in the suicide attack, killed either by Iraqi government forces or by detonating their suicide vests, said Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon spokesman.
Kirby said an estimated 20-25 Islamic State militants were involved in the attack on al-Asad air base in Iraq's Anbar province. He said the attack was led by "at least several" suicide bombers, some of whom managed to detonate their bombs, while others were killed by Iraqi troops.
It appeared that most, if not all, of the militants were wearing Iraqi uniforms, Kirby said.
No Iraqi or U.S. troops were killed or wounded, Kirby said, and no U.S. troops were involved in the gunfight.
“This isn't the flu,” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told Greta Van Susteren during “On The Record” Friday. “The fact is those 300 Marines [at al-Asad] are the toughest guys around. And they are well-armed. But the fact that the ISIS attack today didn't work doesn't mean that it couldn't work in the future,” said King.

“We have been given a warning signal, and we must take action.”- Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney

Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney says the United States must use force in the area, seizing control of the key roads Islamic State, also known as ISIS, will need to continue its march toward the capital.
“We have been given a warning signal, and we must take action,” McInerney (Ret.) told Fox News Sunday. “The best defense is a good offense.”
A Defense Department spokeswoman confirmed to Fox News that “heavy fighting” took place in the area on Thursday, but referred questions about the status of al-Baghdadi to the Iraqi government.
“There was no direct attack on the al-Asad air base,” the spokeswoman assured, while acknowledging reports of “ineffective indirect fire in the vicinity of the base.”
The area in Anbar Province has long been a hot zone of fighting as ISIS looks to hold and expand its self-declared caliphate in Iraq and Syria. In January, the Pentagon first confirmed that U.S. troops at the Al Asad base had been coming under regular mortar fire.
To date, those attacks have been described as ineffective. A senior U.S. official told Fox News the base receives “low-scale” indirect fire from time to time.
“We continue to support efforts by Iraqi Security Forces, working in conjunction with tribal fighters, directed against ISIL in the province,” the DOD spokeswoman said Thursday.
Another Pentagon spokesman, Col. Steven Warren, said the U.S. troops were about 2 miles away, in a different section of the base.
According to The Times, American intelligence officials estimate that the terror group’s fighters have reached as many as 31,000 in Syria and Iraq.
U.S. unmanned surveillance aircraft and Army Apache attack helicopters were sent to the scene from Baghdad, but the attack was over before they arrived, so they did not engage in fighting, Warren said.
There are currently nearly 2,600 U.S. forces in Iraq. Of those, about 450 are training Iraqi troops at three bases across the country, including al-Asad.
Forces from other coalition countries conduct the training at the fourth site, in the northern city of Irbil.
The development comes as the U.S.-led coalition continues to launch airstrikes against ISIS, with Jordan taking on a greater role following the brutal execution of a captured Jordanian pilot at ISIS’ hands.

Brown University student wants ROTC ‘criminals’ banned from campus

Ingraham

A Brown University student says the ROTC is guilty of “state-sanctioned violence” and its cadets are “criminals,” in a column published earlier this month.
The column, written by Peter Makhlouf, was written following the Feb. 3 decision by Brown University’s faculty to create a partnership between the school and the Navy and Air Force ROTC programs
Makhlouf is calling for the campus to ban the ROTC programs.
“By outlawing ROTC and its byproducts on our campus, we have the opportunity to maintain and strengthen a tradition of refusing to capitulate to the increasing demands of military engagement in today’s global agenda,” Makhlouf wrote in The Brown Daily Herald.
“It’s a bit disillusioned to think that Brown students should be exposed to every potential career — even more unthinkable to assume that they should be exposed to all potential military careers,” he wrote.

“Name just one criminal act committed by the ROTC?"- Thomas Mag Malaglowicz

The piece continues: “Admittedly, Brown is more active than most schools, though the overwhelmingly centrist nature of our campus’ political discourse should be further reason for opposing military presence. The push for normalizing militarism on our campus needs to be opposed because Brown students are so often unsure of their political leanings.”

Related Image

Expand / Contract

 Peter Makhlouf

The stand by Makhlouf, who expects to graduate in 2016, earned him criticism from readers who posted comments to his Op-Ed.
Rae Shue wrote:  “As one who served, I have this to say to you: those of us who have served or are serving made the choice to serve. We did this because there are evils out there that must be fought and only a select few will answer that call. We serve so you can choose not to. We sacrifice our present and future so you don't have to.”
Many commenters slammed what they deemed Makhlouf’s poor grammar and writing style, while others challenged his facts.
“Name just one criminal act committed by the ROTC. Take your time...I'll wait,” wrote Thomas Mag Malaglowicz.
And Daric Wade wrote, “You completely misunderstand the term "military science", as applied to ROTC. Military Science courses are designed to teach the "science" of military leadership, decision-making, and tactical thinking, in very basic forms, not to invent new weapons. Nobody's building a death ray at Brown.”