Conservative Blogger
Thursday, September 24, 2015
What will Francis say? DC in suspense over pope's address to Congress
Pope Francis will become the first religious leader to address a joint meeting of Congress Thursday morning, concluding what has been a wildly successful first leg of his six-day, three-city trip to America.
That this will not be an average speech by a typical foreign dignitary has been made clear by a letter to lawmakers from congressional colleagues sent earlier this week. The letter specifically asks legislators to refrain from attempting to shake hands or make conversation with Pope Francis when he arrives in the House chamber.
Lawmakers of all political backgrounds and religious affiliations have thrilled to the pope's arrival, pledging to pause from the bickering and dysfunction that normally divide them and hear him out Thursday morning. Tens of thousands of spectators will be watching from the West Lawn of the Capitol and many more on TV from around the world as the pope addresses a House chamber packed with Supreme Court justices, Cabinet officials, diplomats, lawmakers and their guests.
After the sergeant at arms announces him by bellowing "Mr. Speaker, the pope of the Holy See," Francis will enter the chamber and climb to the dais where the president delivers the annual State of the Union address and monarchs and heads of state have addressed Congress. Behind him will sit Vice President Joe Biden and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, the first and second in line to the presidency, both Catholics.
Ahead of Francis' remarks lawmakers of both parties have busily sought political advantage from his stances, with Democrats in particular delighting in his support for action to overhaul immigration laws and combat global warming and income inequality. One House Republican back-bencher announced plans to boycott the speech over Francis' activist position on climate change, which the pontiff renewed alongside President Barack Obama on Wednesday.
But Boehner, a former altar boy who invited Francis to speak after trying unsuccessfully to bring his two immediate predecessors, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, to the Capitol, has dismissed concerns that the politically engaged Francis will stir the controversies of the day.
For Congress and Boehner, the pope arrives at a moment of particular turmoil, with a partial government shutdown looming next week unless lawmakers can resolve a dispute over funding for Planned Parenthood related to the group's practice of providing fetal tissue for research. Boehner himself is facing a brewing revolt from Tea Party-backed members who've threatened to force a floor vote on whether he can keep his job.
Francis is certain to steer clear of such controversies, though his opposition to abortion could bolster Republicans in their efforts against Planned Parenthood. And for members of Congress his visit may prove little more than a brief respite from their partisan warfare, offering moments of unusual solemnity, uplift and pomp, but without fundamentally shifting the intractable gears of the U.S. political system.
Indeed there's little sign on Capitol Hill of significant action on the social issues dear to Francis' heart. But on Wednesday the pope said simply that in addressing Congress "I hope, as a brother of this country, to offer words of encouragement to those called to guide the nation's political future in fidelity to its founding principles."
Francis enjoys approval ratings that any U.S. politician would envy as he's singlehandedly remade the image of the Catholic Church toward openness and compassion, yet without changing fundamental church doctrine. Addressing a chamber full of elected officials Thursday, he may be the most adept politician in the room.
After speaking in the House chamber Francis will visit the Capitol's Statuary Hall and its statue of Father Junipero Serra, the 18th-century missionary whom Francis elevated to sainthood Wednesday in the first canonization on U.S. soil. He will then briefly step out onto a Capitol balcony to address the crowds on the West Front. From there he will stop at St. Patrick's Catholic Church and the Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington, and then depart for New York for more prayer services and a speech to the United Nations.
Iran deal open for debate? Tehran presses new ayatollah demand
Thanks Mr. President
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier this month demanded that sanctions be lifted entirely, not just suspended. A top Khamenei adviser reiterated that demand over the weekend -- ahead of potential informal talks on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.
Secretary of State John Kerry plans meet in the coming days in New York with his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. According to Iran's Fars News Agency, Iranian officials also plan to meet with all members of the P5+1 group, which negotiated the deal, in New York on Sept. 28.
These reported plans prompted one group, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), to question whether talks were being "reopened," in order to address Khamenei's concerns.
Asked about the speculation, a State Department official said there is no further negotiation and the U.S. expects the deal to be implemented "in good faith."
"We've long said that we're not going to comment on or react to every statement attributed to the Iranian leadership," the official told FoxNews.com. "Our focus is on implementing the deal, and verifying that Iran completes its key nuclear steps under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. There is no renegotiation, and the nuclear-related sanctions relief that Iran will receive once the IAEA verifies that it has completed its nuclear steps is clearly spelled out in the text of the [agreement]."
But at the least, the ayatollah's demands show the post-deal debate shifting now from Washington back to Tehran, leaving some uncertainty in the air as the U.S. and U.N. prepare to move forward.
In Washington, congressional critics have been unable to muster the votes to even send President Obama a resolution disapproving the deal. But in Tehran, the ayatollah on Sept. 3 renewed concerns about the nature of the deal's sanctions relief.
He said in a statement that sanctions should be lifted entirely, not just suspended -- and said "there will be no deal" unless this is done.
According to MEMRI's translation, he warned that if sanctions are only suspended, Iran, in turn, will only "suspend" nuclear activities cited in the deal. He also called for a parliamentary vote on the deal, though it's unclear whether that will happen.
Iran's Fars News Agency over the weekend quoted ayatollah adviser Ali Akbar Velayati saying Khamenei's views "should be materialized." He added: "It is understood from the Supreme Leader's remarks that balance is necessary in the two sides' measures and in case of imbalance, nothing will be done."
The text of the Iran nuclear agreement actually refers to the "lifting" of sanctions. But the White House has said that sanctions "will snap back into place" if Iran violates its end, indicating they indeed see the sanctions relief as reversible.
MEMRI wrote that the upcoming meeting could be a forum for all parties to "discuss the Iranian demand for further concessions." MEMRI, though, warned that outright lifting sanctions "would constitute a fundamental change" to the deal. "This is because lifting the sanctions, rather than suspending them, will render impossible a snapback [of sanctions] in case of Iranian violations."
The nature of the discussions being held next week is unclear.
On Sept. 20, Kerry said he planned to meet with his Russian and his Iranian counterpart, "regarding Iran and other things." But he indicated the meeting would cover a range of topics, including the Syrian civil war.
While Fars reported that the Iranians will meet with P5+1 representatives in New York on Sept. 28, the State Department has not announced such a meeting.
Earlier this month, after Iran's Supreme Leader spoke out against the process for sanctions relief in the deal, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest put the onus on Iran to follow through with its end before sanctions relief is even implemented.
"We've been crystal-clear about the fact that Iran will have to take a variety of serious steps to significantly roll back their nuclear program before any sanctions relief is offered," he said. "... And only after those steps and several others have been effectively completed, will Iran begin to receive sanctions relief. The good news is all of this is codified in the agreement that was reached between Iran and the rest of the international community."
Watchdog: EPA official flew home nearly every weekend on taxpayer’s dime
An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official flew nearly every weekend from his office in San Francisco to his home in southern California, amassing $69,000 in “excessive trips,” according to the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
A new audit found that the former Region 9 Administrator also charged taxpayers nearly $4,000 for ineligible travel costs, as the official made 88 trips that he said were work related in just three years.
“The former Region 9 Administrator made excessive trips to Southern California and claimed ineligible travel costs,” the OIG said. “He made 88 trips in total from October 2006 through January 2009. For 51 of the 88 trips (58 percent), the former Region 9 Administrator traveled to Orange County/Los Angeles County (OC/LA), California, near the former Region 9 Administrator’s residence, at a cost of approximately $69,000.”
The former official lived in Aliso Viejo, Calif., in Orange Country, though he mainly worked out of the Region 9 headquarters in San Francisco. The audit found that the official “traveled almost every weekend” to Orange County.
“Our analysis noted that the former Region 9 Administrator traveled to the OC/LA area almost every weekend,” the OIG said. “Most of the time, his flight departed from Oakland International Airport (OAK) to John Wayne Airport (JWA), located approximately 11 miles from his Aliso Viejo residence.”
The official also claimed meal and mileage expenses while he was home. The OIG noted that junior employees were responsible for approving his travel and questioned whether “subordinates would adequately review their supervisor’s travel.”
Fox News Poll: Outsiders rule 2016 GOP field, support for Biden nearly doubles
Most Republicans feel betrayed by their party -- and show their displeasure by supporting outsiders over establishment candidates in the GOP presidential race.
Real-estate mogul Donald Trump and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson are the favorites in the Republican race in the latest Fox News national poll on the 2016 election. Neither has held elected office before and yet the two of them -- together with businesswoman Carly Fiorina -- capture the support of more than half of GOP primary voters.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE POLL RESULTS
On the Democratic side, support for Vice President Joe Biden -- who is still considering a run -- has almost doubled since August. But make no mistake: Hillary Clinton remains the frontrunner.
Trump stays on top with 26 percent among GOP primary voters, followed by Carson at 18 percent. Fiorina and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio are next, tied at 9 percent. All four have gained ground. After the August Fox News debate, Trump had 25 percent, while Carson had 12 percent, Fiorina 5 percent and Rubio 4 percent.
Trump holds his leader status even though he was once again rated in the poll as having done the worst job in the debate. Fiorina, Rubio and Carson receive positive marks for their performances.
The appeal of outsiders comes from significant dissatisfaction with the party establishment: 62 percent of Republican primary voters feel “betrayed” by politicians in their party, and another 66 percent say the recent Republican majorities in Washington have failed to do all they could to block or reverse President Obama’s agenda. For comparison, 40 percent of Democratic primary voters feel betrayed by their party.
Frustration with party leaders has been a recurring theme for one sitting GOP senator in the race, Ted Cruz of Texas, who is next in the poll at eight percent. He was at 10 percent in August.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush garners seven percent, a new low for him in the Fox News poll. He had 15 percent support as recently as early August.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is up a couple ticks to five percent and Ohio Gov. John Kasich gets four percent. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee receives three percent and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul two percent. All other candidates receive one percent or less.
The favorites among white evangelical Christians voting in the Republican primary are Trump (29 percent), Carson (21 percent) and Cruz (12 percent).
The top picks among self-described “very” conservatives voting in the GOP primary are Carson (23 percent), Trump (22 percent), Cruz (13 percent) and Rubio (11 percent).
Straight talk is part of Trump’s outsider appeal -- but does he go too far? Not for GOP primary voters: 65 percent of them say Trump just tells it like it is, compared to 30 percent who think he is “too mean and blunt” to be president. Trump’s style may be a liability in the general election, though. Overall, 49 percent of voters find him too mean and blunt, while 44 percent say we need his directness.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry dropped out of the race in the last two weeks. In announcing his decision, Walker made clear his desire to oust Trump. He called on other Republicans to also get out so “voters can focus on a limited number of candidates who can offer a positive, conservative alternative to the current front-runner.”
But what would happen if the “current front-runner” aka Trump were out? The Fox poll asks voters their second choice candidate, which allows us to look at what happens to the race if someone were to get out. For instance, if Trump gets out, Carson takes the top spot (24 percent), followed by Rubio (12 percent), Fiorina (11 percent), Cruz (11 percent) and Bush (10 percent).
Trump supporters go for Carson (23 percent), Bush (14 percent), Cruz (12 percent) and Rubio (10 percent) as their second-choice picks.
Among all GOP primary voters, the second choice favorites are: Fiorina (14 percent), Carson (13 percent), Trump (12 percent), Bush (10 percent) and Rubio (10 percent).
Clinton sits atop the Democratic pack with the support of 44 percent of primary voters. Yet that’s a new low for her -- down five points since last month. She was at 61 percent in June. Clinton is holding on to her advantage despite 58 percent of all voters -- and 31 percent of Democratic primary voters -- believing she is lying about her emails.
Clinton’s closest rival is still Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who holds steady at 30 percent. Biden gets a record high 18 percent. A month ago he was at 10 percent.
The remaining Democratic candidates are at two percent or less, including the newest entrant -- Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig -- who made it official September 9.
Without Biden in the race, it’s Clinton 56 percent and Sanders 32 percent.
Clinton also maintains her advantage over GOP front-runner Trump in a potential 2016 matchup: 46-42 percent. Last month, it was Clinton over Trump by 47-42 percent.
Who do voters think will be the next president? When asked to name who will win next November, without the aid of a list, a plurality says Clinton (28 percent) followed by Trump (20 percent). But the electorate isn’t always great at predicting the outcome (at least not this far out). Eight years ago, by almost four-to-one, voters said Clinton would be the next president (44 percent), followed by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (12 percent). Barack Obama came in third at six percent (October 2007). The new poll finds Sanders third at five percent, with Biden and the remaining GOP candidates splitting the rest of the respondents.
This is fun: when all the names are tallied by party, about the same number of voters says the name of a Democrat they think will be the next president (37 percent) as says the name of a Republican (36 percent).
How many debates should there be?
Some of Clinton’s lesser-known competitors, as well as some high-profile Democrats like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, think there should be more Democratic Presidential debates than the six currently scheduled. Yet Democratic primary voters seem fine with that number: 58 percent say that’s “about right,” while another 25 percent think it’s “too many.” Just 14 percent say six is “too few.” Sanders supporters (20 percent) are more likely than Clinton supporters (13 percent) to want more debates.
Republicans plan to hold at least nine debates and 50 percent of GOP primary voters thinks that’s “about right.” Another 41 percent say that’s “too many” and 7 percent say “too few.”
The poll also asks voters who did the best and who did the worst in the September GOP debates hosted by CNN in California. Debate watchers give the highest net performance score (best job minus worst job) to Fiorina (+34 points), followed by Rubio (+7), Kasich (+2) and Carson (+1). These are the only candidates to receive net positive scores for their debate performance -- and they are the same four who garnered the highest scores after the first GOP debate last month.
The lowest scores among debate watchers go to Trump (-13 points), Paul (-7 points) and Bush (-4 points). Trump also got the lowest net score after the first debate (-13 points).
Fiorina received a score of +12 points in August, even though she was in the early debate for second-tier candidates. She participated in the top tier debate this month and improved her net score by 22 points.
Pollpourri
In this year of the outsider, the poll asks voters what would make them more worried about the state of American democracy: a November match-up between another Clinton and another Bush or a race between upstarts Sanders and Trump?
By a 53-39 percent margin, voters say Sanders vs. Trump would be a worse sign for our democracy.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,013 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from September 20-22, 2015. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters, and 5 points for Democratic and 4.5 points Republican primary voters.
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
Biden’s running! (Or not!) But what is his rationale against Hillary?
Joe Biden is inching closer to a presidential run—or is he?
With media speculation raging out of control, perhaps the better question is: How would he fare against Hillary Clinton if he indeed jumps in?
I doubted the vice president would take the plunge, especially after he engaged in the public therapy of grieving for his late son and saying he didn’t have the emotional bandwidth for a White House campaign. Now it’s clear his team is setting up an operation that would give Biden the option of a late launch if he decides to hit the go button.
Perhaps the clearest indication is this leak to the moderator of “Meet the Press”:
“Jill Biden, sources tell NBC's Chuck Todd, is 100 percent on-board with a presidential run, despite reports indicating her hesitation is part of what's keeping Biden from jumping into the race.” The second lady’s office even put out a statement saying she is behind her husband if he chooses to make the race.
This followed a Wall Street Journal piece quoting “people familiar with the matter” as saying:
“Vice President Joe Biden’s aides in recent days called Democratic donors and supporters to suggest he is more likely than not to enter the 2016 race, and their discussions have shifted toward the timing of an announcement.” But there was a caveat: “Unless they change their minds.”
And that, in turn, followed a Journal piece in late August saying Biden “is increasingly leaning toward entering the race if it is still possible he can knit together a competitive campaign at this late date.”
But now Biden is telling the Catholic magazine America: “We’re just not there yet, and I may not get there in time to make it feasible to be able to run.”
So I’m a little dizzy. But I do know that Biden can’t wait much longer. A series of state filing deadlines is approaching, and if he’s going to run, he should be on stage at the first Democratic debate on Oct. 13.
A new CNN poll gives Hillary a nice bump to 42 percent among Democrats—maybe doing more interviews wasn’t such a bad move—with Bernie Sanders at 24 percent and Biden at 22. That’s impressive for a guy who isn’t running, but keep in mind it also reflects that he isn’t being attacked.
Let’s say Biden makes his third bid for the presidency. What is his rationale, other than that Hillary’s campaign is faltering?
As the veep complains about income inequality and the middle class getting screwed, how does he explain the Obama-Biden administration’s failure to do more for the last seven years?
Other than Hillary being a bit more hawkish, how does Biden differentiate his record from hers? Is he willing to personally attack the first potential female president—and if not, why is he running?
In a year when voters crave authenticity, Joe is the real deal, a great retail campaigner. But the flip side is that his big mouth has also gotten him into trouble again and again.
Biden knows the toll of the campaign ordeal, and he knows it’s time to decide. Either way it will be a BFD.
Clock controversy risks backfiring for Obama as critics cast doubt on narrative
President Obama’s public backing of a Texas high school freshman, who got national headlines last week when his homemade clock was mistaken for a bomb by teachers, could be causing a headache for the White House and other supporters as questions are being raised about the motives in the case.
Fourteen-year-old Ahmed Mohamed’s father has said he now plans to withdraw the freshman from MacArthur High School, and said Monday that they intend to visit New York City where he says they will meet with dignitaries at the United Nations, before making a pilgrimage to Mecca and later visiting Obama at the White House, The Dallas Morning News reported.
It was not immediately clear which dignitaries had requested a meeting with Mohamed.
Mohamed had received praise and support from figures such as Obama and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in the wake of the incident, in which Mohamed was arrested on bomb hoax charges after bringing the device to school.
However, amid huge support online for the family, there also has been growing criticism and doubts about the motive behind the incident.
Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins linked to a video posted to YouTube by electrical expert Thomas Talbot, which closely scrutinizes a photo of the controversial clock.
In the video, Talbot argues the clock is actually a commercial alarm clock, removed from its casing. Features of the clock such as the printed circuit boards and ribbon cables are indicative of a manufactured product, he explained.
Dawkins asked, “If this is true, what was [Mohamed’s] motive?”
Mohamed’s father has a colorful history of his own. Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed announced in February that he planned to run for president of Sudan, as he also did in 2010, the North Dallas Gazette reported. In 2011, he defended the Koran when controversial pastor Rev. Terry Jones put the book “on trial."
On HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Dallas Mavericks’ owner Mark Cuban also expressed concerns about the family’s involvement. While calling Ahmed a “super smart kid,” he said that when he spoke to Ahmed, "his sister, over his shoulder, you could hear, listening to the question, giving him the answer.”
Maher, a left-wing comedian, also expressed skepticism, saying “the people at the school thought it might be a bomb, perhaps because it looks exactly like a [expletive] bomb.”
Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Napolitano said that if the whole thing was a fraud, and the family was involved, they could be open to legal charges.
“It now appears as though this was a purposeful hoax," Napolitano told Fox News' Megyn Kelly Monday. “If the parents were involved now you have a fraud going on as you have funds going on for him right now,” he said, adding that the two funds to raise money for the family now amount to over $20,000.
Napolitano added that this could turn out to be a politically difficult issue for Obama.
"If this was part of a purposeful stunt and if the parents were involved in this and if everybody from Mark Zuckerberg to President Obama fell for this, this is not good," Napolitano said.
If so, it wouldn’t be the first time Obama has stepped into hot water after jumping into a local debate. In 2009, Obama reacted to initial media reports that black professor Henry Louis Gates had been arrested by Sgt. James Crowley for trying to get back into his own house after being locked out. Obama said at a press conference “the police acted stupidly” and cited a “long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”
It later turned out the arrest was much more complex than it initially appeared, with it being alleged that Gates made offensive comments about Crowley’s mother. Obama came under criticism and later held a “beer summit” with the two in the Rose Garden.
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin blasted Obama over his involvement in the clock controversy on Saturday, saying in a Facebook post his remarks were "about as presidential as a selfie stick."
"By the way, President Obama's practice of jumping in cases prematurely to interject himself as the cool savior, wanting so badly to attach himself to the issue-of-the-day, got old years ago," Palin wrote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
