Racist Cartoon

Obama vetoes $612 billion defense policy bill in rebuke to GOP

WASHINGTON –  President Obama vetoed a sweeping $612 billion defense policy bill Wednesday in a rebuke to congressional Republicans, and insisted they send him a better version that doesn't tie his hands on some of his top priorities.
In an unusual veto ceremony, Obama praised the bill for ensuring the military stays funded and making improvements on military retirement and cybersecurity. Yet he pointedly accused Republicans of resorting to "gimmicks" and prohibiting other changes needed to address modern security threats.
"Unfortunately, it falls woefully short," Obama said. "I'm going to be sending it back to Congress, and my message to them is very simple: Let's do this right."
The rare presidential veto marked the latest wrinkle in the ongoing fight between Obama and Republicans who control Congress over whether to increase federal spending — and how.
Four years after Congress passed and Obama signed into law strict, across-the-board spending limits, both parties are eager to bust through the caps for defense spending. But Obama has insisted that spending on domestic programs be raised at the same time, setting off a budget clash with Republicans that has yet to be resolved.
To side-step the budget caps, known in Washington as sequestration, lawmakers added an extra $38.3 billion to a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits. The White House has dismissed that approach as a "gimmick" that fails to deal with the broader problem or provide long-term budget certainty for the Pentagon.
Obama also rejects the bill as written due to provisions making it harder for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a key campaign promise that Obama is hard-pressed to fulfill before his term ends. The White House has also expressed concerns over provisions preventing military base closures and funding equipment beyond what the military says it needs.
But Republicans lambasted Obama for prioritizing the domestic spending he seeks over the security of U.S. troops and the nation they protect.
"This is the worst possible time for an American president to veto their national defense bill, and especially to do so for arbitrary partisan reasons," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor.
The veto forces Congress to revise the bill or try to settle the larger budget dispute. Although Republicans have vowed to try to override Obama's veto, the White House insisted it was confident it had the votes to ensure Obama's veto stays in place.

Fruit fiasco: High school students face punishment for "racist" fruit basket

A Texas school district has its kumquats in a twist over a fruit basket they considered to be racially insensitive.
The Humble Independent School District’s fruit fiasco has resulted in investigations, punishments and national media coverage.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN TODD’S AMERICAN DISPATCH – A MUST-READ FOR CONSERVATIVES!
The hullabaloo started on Oct. 16 when the marching bands from Atascocita High School and Summer Creek High School exchanged gifts before a football game.

The youngsters from Atascocita gave their counterparts a Halloween basket that included canned pineapple, a whole coconut, a small watermelon and some candy. An adult sponsor for the band raised concerns and those concerns were forwarded to school administrators.

“It is a tradition for student representatives of competing schools to exchange gifts on the field at varsity football games,” public information officer Robin McAdams said in an email to me.
The youngsters from Atascocita gave their counterparts a Halloween basket that included canned pineapple, a whole coconut, a small watermelon and some candy. An adult sponsor for the band raised concerns and those concerns were forwarded to school administrators.
“School Administrators conducted an investigation and after considering the totality of circumstances, determined that the gift was inappropriate and lacked good sportsmanship,” McAdams told me. “Atascocita High School will not tolerate racial insensitivity.”
My goodness – who knew the Piggy Wiggly produce aisle was wrought with such racial animus?
Several of the students involved told Houston-area television stations they did nothing wrong.
“I’m mixed race,” senior Alyssa Taylor told ABC13. “I don’t take offense to that. How can someone else take offense?”
There are reports that some of the students involved may be kicked out of the band and others may face In School Suspension.
“It’s just not fair, not fair,” parent Hector Andaverde told the television station.
The school district said their investigation determined a few of the students “discussed that the watermelon could be perceived as racially offensive and should not be included in the gift.”
The watermelon? Really? That’s the racially offensive fruit? My money was on the coconut.
Assistant Superintendent Trey Kraemer wrote in a letter to parents that Summer Creek’s band members were “confused by the nature of the exchange.”
“Typically, these gifts contain snacks such as crackers, candy and popcorn that can be readily shared among students and eaten during the game,” he wrote.
Quite frankly, I take offense at the assistant superintendent’s use of the word ‘cracker.’ I prefer to be called a Saltine-American.
School administrators say they are working to implement procedures to prevent future offensive fruit exchanges.
I’m hoping the school district will announce a blue ribbon panel to once and for all determine which fruit is racially acceptable.
Off hand, I’d be suspicious of pomegranate, kiwi and those dancing raisins in the Motown song, “Heard it Through the Grapevine.
And why stop at the produce aisle?
It’s possible that some LGBT students might take offense at a box of Fruity Pebbles. Hispanic band kids could take offense at being served salsa. And what greater insult is there than to serve lactose intolerant kids a bowl of Blue Bell Ice Cream?
This is indeed an issue that must be addressed – lest we offend this perpetually offended generation and their fragile psyches.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

Clinton seeks to turn page on Benghazi after testimony – but can she?

Hillary Clinton, after a grueling day of testimony before the congressional Benghazi committee, made clear she hopes to at last move beyond the controversy that has dogged her presidential campaign.
The former secretary of state -- no doubt looking to avoid missteps that could reverberate on the trail -- was visibly measured Thursday as she spent 11 hours defending her role before, during and after the attacks. And she repeatedly cited past investigations, suggesting there’s little more to uncover.
Whether Clinton gets her wish remains to be seen.
Ultimately, analysts suggested the hearing might not move the dial much either way – Republican critics continued to voice frustration Thursday at her responses, while congressional Democrats spent the better part of the day defending her.
"In the short-term, this has probably not changed the minds of anyone watching the proceedings,” Republican strategist Ron Bonjean said.  
That may have been all Clinton could hope for.
She entered the committee room Thursday at the end of an important week for the campaign – a day earlier, Vice President Biden, who had been considering a 2016 bid and could have posed the biggest primary threat to her candidacy, announced he would not run. This came after she delivered what was widely regarded as a strong debate performance last week.
But even if her testimony doesn’t change many minds, the former secretary of state’s detractors likely will find plenty of fodder in her hearing responses.
Though Democrats complained the hearing turned up nothing new, Clinton did acknowledge Thursday that, even as she received frequent emails from friend Sidney Blumenthal, the late Ambassador Chris Stevens did not have her personal email address.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, also said that as the administration was blaming an anti-Islam video for motivating the attackers, Clinton was telling the Egyptian prime minister they knew the attack was “planned” and had “nothing to do with the film.”
Retired Gen. Jack Keane, a Fox News analyst and former Army vice chief of staff, cited that exchange and said “that’s news that obviously she didn’t believe that the film was part of the motivation for the attack.”
The hearing, though, only muddied the public understanding of what Clinton believes to this day. While Clinton blamed the “fog of war” for confusion in Benghazi, on Thursday she also continued to assert that the video may have motivated some attackers.

Related Image

Expand / Contract

Democratic presidential candidate, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 22, 2015, before the House Benghazi Committee. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

More broadly, though, Clinton drew frustration from Republicans by repeatedly skirting blame for her department’s denial of security requests for Stevens and his team. Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks.
Clinton testified to the Benghazi committee that the security requests were handled by security professionals in the department and not her.
"I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them," she said.
Clinton acknowledged some of his requests were approved, and others were not. But she said Stevens emailed regularly with her close aides and “did not raise security with the members of my staff.”
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee swiped at Clinton on Twitter as she rebuffed accusations before the committee.
“.@HillaryClinton coming clean to #BenghaziCommittee seeming abt as likely as me getting a Che Guevara tattoo on small of my back! #Benghazi,” he tweeted.
Clinton, though, tried to walk a fine line. Even as she denied responsibility for the rejected security requests, she said she’s assumed responsibility in a general sense and tried to make changes at the department before she left.
And she challenged the notion that she was out of touch with the situation on the ground.
“I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together” over Benghazi, she said.
Notable is that while Clinton and her campaign used the run-up to Thursday’s hearing to accuse the panel of being a Republican partisan tool, Clinton mostly avoided a confrontational tone during her testimony.
Instead, she sat back as Democratic and Republican members battled – at times shouted at – each other over the credibility of the committee itself.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., the committee's top Democrat, said the panel was only formed because Republicans "did not like the answers" from prior investigations. So, he said, they established the committee and "set them loose, Madam Secretary, because you're running for president." Cummings called it an "abusive effort to derail" her campaign.
But Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., denied this. Of allegations that the investigation is all about Clinton, Gowdy said Thursday, "Let me assure you it is not."
When asked by reporters at the end of the 11-hour hearing if Clinton's testimony helped reach a conclusion, Gowdy said the work of the congressional Benghazi committee is not yet over.
"I don't draw conclusions till the end, and there are more witnesses to talk to," he said.

‘Obvious flight risk’: Toddler's brutal beating prompts call to withhold bail from illegal immigrants

When Francisco Javier Chavez posted bail on charges of beating a California toddler within an inch of her life in late July, there was little reason to expect the illegal immigrant, who has spent much of his adult life hopping back and forth across the Mexican border, would return to face justice.
Two weeks later, at his scheduled arraignment on Aug. 13, Chavez was a no-show. The 27-year-old career criminal had put up $10,000, or 10 percent of the amount set for his alleged crimes by California's bail schedule. His disappearance is hardly a surprise to critics who believe violent illegal immigrants are, by definition, flight risks who should be denied bail in such serious cases. They say judges, especially in border states plagued by illegal immigrant crime, are naive or worse if they expect suspects who regularly cross in and out of Mexico to take the U.S. justice system seriously.
“Frankly, judges grant bail in cases like these because they are being foolish,” said Hans A. von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department lawyer now at The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. “The judge can consider bail for you when you are charged with a crime, but does not have to let you out on bail. If the state can show you are a flight risk, you should not get bail. If the state can show you are a danger to the public because of a history of violence, you should not get bail.”

“Frankly, judges grant bail in cases like these because they are being foolish.”
- Hans A. von Spakovsky, Heritage Foundation’

While Chavez is in the wind, his alleged victim, the 2-year-old daughter of his live-in girlfriend, is now in foster care, paralyzed from the beating that also left her with both arms and a femur broken. Well before he was arrested in San Luis Obispo County for attacking the child, Chavez had compiled a lengthy criminal record that includes assault and drug convictions and arrests for violent acts such as kidnapping, car-jacking and cruelty to a child. He was deported in February 2014, but as in previous instances, found it easy to sneak back across the border and into the U.S.
Weeks after Chavez slipped out of custody, on Sept. 1, another 2-year-old toddler named Jonathan Montez was run down and killed in San Bernardino County. Illegal immigrant Jose Enrique Vasquez, 53, an unlicensed driver who witnesses said was speeding down the child’s residential street, fled the scene, according to authorities. He was arrested two weeks later, and, like Chavez, was granted bail.
Vasquez also has compiled a lengthy criminal record under various aliases, including charges of spousal abuse, battery of a peace officer, driving without a license, driving under the influence and armed robbery. But other charges in his criminal record might have given a judge pause in considering bail according to critics, including failure to appear in court, possession of false citizenship documents and eight deportations for illegally entering the country.

Related Image

Expand / Contract

Jonathan Montez was just 2 when he was run down and killed in San Bernardino County. An illegal immigrant was charged in his death.

The systems for granting bail in state courts varies from state to state. California's bail system lays out prescribed amounts for various crimes as a guideline for law enforcement and judges, but judges retain discretion to raise the amount in cases where the suspect is a flight risk or a danger to the public and the district attorney can add, drop or change the charges. Two states, Alabama and Missouri, have passed laws that preclude bail for illegal immigrants suspected of serious crimes, while judges in other states -- notably Texas -- weigh illegal status in making their decisions. But last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Arizona's 2006 law banning bail for illegal immigrant suspects violated their right to due process and amounted to punishment before trial. The 11-member panel's decision called the law a "scattered attempt" to deal with the problem of chronic bail-skipping by illegal immigrants. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider the lower court's decision.
Judges everywhere maintain discretion to deny bail to anyone they believe is likely to flee justice, yet they often fail to consider illegal status as a factor, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies. And critics say it should be obvious that someone here illegally and suspected of a violent crime will bolt rather than face justice, especially in border states such as California, where they can be out of the country an hour after posting bail.
“Aliens who commit acts of violence should not be released on bail, because they are clearly a danger to the public, and when we have someone with this kind of deportation history, clearly they are an obvious flight risk,” said von Spakovsky. “These judges are making mistakes granting bail to illegal aliens – reckless mistakes that endangered the public.”
The willingness of judges to grant bail to illegal immigrants charged with serious crimes compounds the ongoing controversy involving so-called sanctuary cities. Such jurisdictions, either by local statute or practice, refuse to inform federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents when an illegal immigrant is detained.
But even jurisdictions that do not implement sanctuary policies believe that two federal court rulings, the 2013 California “Trust Act,” which limits “cruel and costly immigration hold requests in local jails,” and an ambiguous White House policy all bar them from holding illegal immigrants who have posted bail until federal authorities can collect and deport them – even if ICE asks them to via what is known as a “detainer request.”
The American Civil Liberties Union has sued jurisdictions that attempted to honor the ICE detainers, and the Department of Justice has not intervened in the cases to underscore its support of them. As a result, local law enforcement agencies say they have no choice but to let even violent illegal immigrant suspects walk once they are granted bail.
“Yes, the judges who ignore this risk are at fault, but Congress provided ICE with a tool to address the problem -- detainers -- which the Obama administration is not allowing its officers to use,” Vaughan said.
In the cases of both Chavez and Vasquez, ICE issued detainer requests. In Chavez’s case, ICE agents did not arrive prior to bail being posted. In the case of Vasquez, ICE isn’t immediately taking custody or deporting Vasquez, so that he remains in the U.S. at least resolving the legal proceedings surrounding the hit-and-run charge.
Don Rosenberg, who, after his 25-year-old son Drew was killed by an unlicensed immigrant driver in San Francisco five years ago, began closely tracking illegal immigrant crime, said the biggest problem he sees is “people in power don’t care.” He blames judges for granting bail, but also holds law enforcement accountable for caving in to the threat of lawsuits.
“How can anyone who in law enforcement let people like this out of custody who we know will likely hurt someone badly, if not kill them, even if they are threatened with a lawsuit?” Rosenberg said. “It’s pure callous indifference. I don’t know how they live with themselves.”

Syrian Cartoon

Republican mounts uphill bid to be first Navajo in Congress

In a crowded Arizona race, one Republican quietly is trying to make history as the first Navajo elected to Congress.
His name is Shawn Redd, and he faces an uphill battle in the race for Arizona’s 1^st District House seat. Not only is he entering the GOP primary a clear underdog – in a race packed with better-known figures like local Sheriff Paul Babeu – but Navajo historically vote Democrat.
That means Redd can’t necessarily rely on their support in a primary, or a general election. As he explained to Fox News, Redd is taking a chance by running under the GOP flag.
“Republicans have been intimidated by Navajo Nation. They have been unsuccessful campaigning for votes and have given up,” Redd told Fox News. “I’m going extremely hard against the grain, because for people in the 1^st District, voting Democrat is a way of life.”
On the reservation, Redd is known as “Shawn the Republican.”
A 35-year-old small business owner born into a Navajo-Mormon family, he said many in Navajo Nation have encouraged him to run for office – just not as a Republican. But he said “that’s just not who I am.”
The congressional race opened up when Arizona Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat, announced she would challenge Republican Sen. John McCain in his quest for a sixth term in the U.S. Senate, leaving her traditionally GOP-leaning seat in Arizona’s 1^st District up for grabs.
The district is almost 25 percent Native American, and Redd claims he can pick up support from some of them.
“I know our message resonates,” he said. “With the personal relationships that I have with thousands of people among Navajo Nation and the twelve other tribes, there is no doubt that I will fracture the native vote, and if I fracture the native vote, the Democrats will not win.”
But he’d first have to win the primary. And according to Jim Small, editor of the Arizona Capitol Times, he’s an underdog with a big fight ahead.
“He’s got an uphill climb to be competitive in this race, just to put it bluntly,” Small said. “He’s an unknown running as a Republican in that district.” Small described Redd’s task as “incredibly difficult … assuming he can even raise the money to mount a credible campaign.”
Redd is running in the primary against Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu; Arizona House Speaker David Gowan; former Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett; and Gary Kiehne, a 2014 candidate.
Though Redd has not held public office, he claims his legislative experience is extensive within the Tribal Council, specifically in regards to issuing license plates for Navajo Nation.
“The other candidates are established and well-accomplished,” Redd said. “But I think nationwide, the party is looking for new blood.”
Redd says he’d bridge the district’s racial divide and be a champion for economic development needed in rural Arizona.
As for Sheriff Babeu, who is a frequent commentator in the media on immigration enforcement and other issues, he’s launching his second bid for the 1^st District seat.
“I’m looking forward to a spirited race over the next year,” the sheriff told Fox News. “I will put my record as a sheriff committed to reducing crime and illegal immigration against anyone in this race. Now it’s time to send a sheriff to Congress.”
The Republican primary is not open to Democrats. So, as few in Navajo Nation are Republicans, few could actually vote in the GOP primary.
“I don’t think the Navajo Nation will be a deciding factor in the primary,” Small told Fox News. “But in the general election, they can swing it; just like they have done in the past.”

Security officials acknowledge 'risk' in admitting Syrian refugees into US

Top law enforcement and security officials cautioned Wednesday that bringing in 10,000 Syrian refugees as planned carries a terror risk, with Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson acknowledging background checks can only do so much and "there is no risk-free process.”
“The good news is that we are better at [vetting] than we were eight years ago. The bad news is that there is no risk-free process,” Johnson said at a House Homeland Security Committee hearing.
The Obama administration has committed to bringing in 10,000 Syrian refugees in fiscal 2016, as part of a total 85,000 worldwide refugees.
However, at the hearing on “Worldwide Threats and Homeland Security Challenges,” officials said while they are confident about their vetting process, there is a risk in terms of screening refugees who have never crossed the intelligence radar.
“If the person has not crossed our radar screen, there will be nothing to query against so we do see a risk there,” FBI Director James Comey said.
“It is not a perfect process. There is a degree of risk attached to any screening and vetting process. We look to manage that risk as best we can,” Nicholas Rasmussen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said.
“We may have someone who is not on our radar and someone may choose to do something bad after they get here,” Johnson said. “We can only query against what we have collected, so if someone hasn’t made a ripple in the pond, we can check our databases until the cows come home but we have no record on that person.”
However, Johnson said the system in place is “a good system,” and noted that the process also includes a personal assessment for each refugee. “It’s not just simply what’s in a public record,” Johnson said.
The testimony reflects the challenge ahead for the administration, as it tries to respond to a global refugee crisis fueled by the Syrian civil war and other conflicts. Aid groups and other governments had urged the United States to accept more refugees, who mostly have fled to neighboring Middle Eastern countries and Europe, and the administration agreed to accept more.
Republican lawmakers continued to voice concerns at Wednesday's hearing.
“My concern is that you’re relying upon them and what they say or what they write out in an application and you can’t go beyond that,” Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said. “So you’re having to take their word for it.”
South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan said his constituents were "very concerned about our inability to vet properly the refugees that are coming."
“I just want to encourage you all … to rethink the resettlement of refugees in this country, especially in the numbers I’m hearing," Duncan said.
Addressing the ISIS threat more generally, FBI Director Comey also said that the number of Americans going abroad to join ISIS has fallen in recent months. Comey said the FBI is aware of six Americans trying to join the group in the last three-and-a-half months, in contrast to the approximately nine each month they were seeing before that.
However, he said he could not explain the reduction, and noted the group’s use of social media has allowed them to successfully “break the model” of terror recruitment.
“ISIS has used that ubiquitous social media to break the model and push into the United States into the pocket, onto the mobile devices, on troubled souls throughout our country in all 50 states, a twin message, ‘Come or Kill,’” Comey said.