What’s interesting in the news today?

Lots to talk about today.

First off the North Korea mess. Did we just blink? I think we blinked.

From HotAir

“Report: U.S. backing off shows of force against North Korea for fear of what Kim might do”

“This isn’t merely a failure of nerve, it’s a failure of intelligence and a failure to keep operational secrets. The White House had a “playbook,” agreed to by O, Hagel, and John Kerry, on how to rattle its saber at North Korea during the next crisis without rattling it so much that NK would get spooked and do something rash. E.g., first comes some B-52 flights over South Korea, then the B-2s make a cameo, then the F-22s, and so forth. Problem one: Kim’s gone further in his bellicosity than U.S. analysts expected and now they’re unsure if they know where his personal red line is. Problem two: The deployment of two destroyers last weekend to the Pacific wasn’t part of the “playbook” and wasn’t supposed to be publicized. That was a bona fide strategic move, not a show of muscle-flexing designed for North Korean and international consumption. But then the news leaked and the Navy confirmed it, which turned the deployment into an inadvertent, potentially war-sparking audible.

One screw-up on top of another, so now it’s time to cool things off before someone gets nuked.”

____________________________________________________

This one I’m a little confused about. But the atheists and the ACLU aren’t happy about it, so that’s good at least. 🙂

From ChristianityToday

“The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) may have thought it had the upper hand when it filed suit against a North Carolina county for opening its board meetings with explicitly Christian prayers. After all, the federal Establishment Clause of the Constitution prohibits the government from interfering with citizens’ religious exercise.

But a new bill introduced in the North Carolina state legislature would protect the county’s right to prayer in an unconventional way: by nullifying any federal regulations or court rulings regarding religion.

Eleven House lawmakers already have signed on to the bill, which “would [allow North Carolina to] refuse to acknowledge the force of any judicial ruling on prayer in North Carolina—or indeed on any Constitutional topic,” according to WRAL, a local news source.

____________________________________________________

Wait, am I reading this right? In this one the ACLU is on the right side?

From TheDailyCaller

“In an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller, a top lobbyist for the ACLU  announced that the group thinks Reid’s current gun bill could threaten both  privacy rights and civil liberties.

The inclusion of universal background checks — the poll-tested lynchpin of  most Democratic proposals — “raises two significant concerns,” the ACLU’s Chris  Calabrese told TheDC Wednesday.

Calabrese — a privacy lobbyist — was first careful to note that the ACLU  doesn’t strictly oppose universal background checks for gun purchases. “If  you’re going to require a background check, we think it should be effective,” Calabrese explained.”

____________________________________________________

I don’t know why the ACLU is making a big deal of this. Obama and Reid have both assured us this national registry thing won’t happen. Yeah, except once again they’re being dishonest.

From Heritage.org

“As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) must know, Americans who own firearms have a special sensitivity to a “Big Brother” federal government that wants to keep centralized records on who owns what guns and where in America. Loose language in his gun control bill (S. 649) could start America down that slippery slope.

Since the Second Amendment guarantees to the people the right to keep and bear arms, many Americans look askance at efforts to create centralized records that might some day, in some distant future neither wanted nor expected, facilitate a despotic government’s efforts to disarm the populace or ensure that its supporters but not its opponents possess arms. Some Americans look at history and view that concern as far-fetched; others look at history and see careful attention to that concern as essential to maintaining freedom.

Congress has attended carefully to the concern about a federal gun registry in the past.”

“Unfortunately, the Reid legislation deviates from this strong guarantee that protects against misuse of the NICS process to start a national firearms registry.”

____________________________________________________

Meanwhile, more obvious flaws with their approach emerge. They say they want a national conversation on guns, yet they ignore obvious pieces of the conversation. Not shockingly, the part of the conversation that points to Hollywood as part of the problem. Must protect the cash cow.

From TheWallStJournal

“There was something missing from President Obama’s Wednesday speech in Denver about gun violence. He focused almost exclusively on passing gun-control laws, and not at all on one of the nation’s biggest promoters of violence: the entertainment industry.

The president’s campaign against gun violence has produced a stale debate marked by lots of speeches with little achieved. A more creative chief executive would have used this moment to widen the discussion by drawing attention to the increasingly graphic violence so pervasive in television shows, movies and videogames. Mr. Obama is particularly well positioned to challenge Hollywood because of his special relationship with the media world’s elites. They might be more likely to heed criticism coming from Mr. Obama than from any other president or member of Congress.”

Yeah, don’t hold your breath.

____________________________________________________

In ObamaCare news……  

From HotAir

“This sounds remarkably like what we’ve been writing, and it’s nice to see a few Obamacare supporters recognize this reality. Holding Obamacare to its promises is rather important, no matter which side you’re on. On my side, it’s to ameliorate the damage and prevent such debacles in the future. For Klein, it’s to make sure this debacle doesn’t make activist government biting off way more than it can chew competently look, well, incompetent.

“Let me try to understand this: The key incentive for small businesses to support Obamacare was that they would be able to shop for the best deals in health care super-stores—called exchanges. The Administration has had 3 years to set up these exchanges. It has failed to do so.

This is a really bad sign. There will be those who argue that it’s not the Administration’s fault. It’s the fault of the 33 states that have refused to set up their own exchanges. Nonsense. Where was the contingency planning? There certainly are models, after all—the federal government’s own health benefits plan (FEHBP) operates markets that exist in all 50 states. So does Medicare Advantage. But now, the Obama Administration has announced that it won’t have the exchanges ready in time, that small businesses will be offered one choice for the time being—for a year, at least. No doubt, small business owners will be skeptical of the Obama Administration’s belief in the efficacy of the market system to produce lower prices through competition. That was supposed to be the point of this plan.”

____________________________________________________

And despite their best efforts, people ain’t buyin’ what they’re selling. 

From InvestorsBusinessDaily

“The White House recently released details about how it plans to market ObamaCare  to the uninsured. What it reveals is that most of them don’t want what the  administration is trying to force them to buy.”

“Let’s leave aside for a minute the oddity of this effort. Its backers have  endlessly touted ObamaCare as a miracle of modern government that will at long  last bring insurance within reach of 48 million people who desperately want it.  Besides, the law mandates that everyone buy ObamaCare coverage.

So why the need for a big marketing push at all?”

“What they’ve learned since is that more than half of the 48 million who the  government says are uninsured aren’t interested in health insurance, which is  why they don’t bother to buy it in the first place.”

Whaaaaaat……!!!!  I’m 😯 

Yeah, not really. 🙄

____________________________________________________

Here’s a look at the future of medical care.

From FoxDC

“Walgreen Co. has expanded the reach of its drugstore  clinics   beyond treating ankle sprains and sinus infections to handling chronic   diseases such as diabetes, asthma and high blood pressure.

The company, based in Deerfield, Ill., said Thursday  that most of its   370 in-store Take Care Clinics now will diagnosis, treat and  monitor   patients with some chronic conditions that are typically handled by    doctors.

Drugstore clinics, which are run by nurse  practitioners or physician   assistants, have grown popular in recent years as a  convenient way for   patients to get immunizations, physicals and treatment for  relatively   minor illnesses when their regular doctor is unavailable. But the    clinics have been broadening their scope of care: Walgreen’s decision   follows  a move by CVS Caremark Corp. a few years ago to handle chronic   conditions at  most of its 640 MinuteClinics.”

Oh Goody! 🙄

____________________________________________________

And we’ll finish up with some immigration news. And yes, more misleading and false claims from the Obama admin.

From TheLATimes

“Vader, a system originally used to track the Taliban, finds that more immigrants elude capture at the U.S.-Mexico border than previously estimated.”

“The number of “gotaways,” as the Border Patrol calls those who escape apprehension, is both more precise and higher than official estimates.”

“According to internal reports, Border Patrol agents used the airborne radar to help find and detain 1,874 people in the Sonora Desert between Oct. 1 and Jan. 17. But the radar system spotted an additional 1,962 people in the same area who evaded arrest and disappeared into the United States.

In contrast, the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, estimated in January that the Border Patrol had caught 64% of those who illegally crossed into the Tucson sector in 2011.”

They say they catch 64%. The actual numbers are less than 50%.

____________________________________________________

Unlike the Obama admin, the public wants the border secured before reforms begin.

From Rasmussen

“President Obama argues that more border security is not a necessary first step before legalizing the status of illegal immigrants already here. But most voters are willing to support immigration reform only if it includes both border security and a way for some illegal immigrants to remain in the country.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Likely U.S. Voters favor an immigration plan that gives illegal immigrants legal status to stay in the United States provided the border is really secured to prevent future illegal immigration. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 25% are opposed to this plan. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

____________________________________________________

Oh yeah, and the Yankees finally won! 🙂