What’s interesting in the news today?
1. Trey Gowdy hammered the Obama admin from the House floor yesterday, in protest of the President refusing to enforce legally passed laws.
________________________________________
2. John Kerry has issued a warning and deadline to the Russians.
From TheWashingtonExaminer “Secretary of State John Kerry warned of serious repercussions for Russia on Monday if last-ditch talks over the weekend to resolve the crisis in Ukraine failed to persuade Moscow to soften its stance.
Kerry will travel to London for a Friday meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov ahead of a Sunday referendum vote in the Crimea region to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation.
U.S. and European officials argue that Moscow is orchestrating the referendum and waging an intimidation campaign with thousands of Russian troops controlling the region. If Russian-backed lawmakers in Crimea go through with the Sunday referendum, Kerry said the U.S. and its European allies will not recognize it as legitimate under international law.”
_________________________________________
3. I don’t think the Russians are intimidated.
From TheNYTimes “With a referendum on secession looming in Crimea, Russia massed troops and armored vehicles in at least three regions along Ukraine’s eastern border on Thursday, alarming the interim Ukraine government about a possible invasion and significantly escalating tensions in the crisis between the Kremlin and the West.
The announcement of the troop buildup by Russia’s Defense Ministry was met with an unusually sharp rebuke from Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, who warned that the Russian government must abandon what she called the politics of the 19th and 20th centuries or face diplomatic and economic retaliation from a united Europe.”
_________________________________________
4. Why am I not surprised?
From TheWashingtonExaminer “Make no mistake, there is always a deeper agenda whenever a seemingly innocent campaign pops up overnight.
On Sunday, Facebook’s Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg launched a new campaign, known as ‘Ban Bossy,’ which would – as you can imagine – encourage people to ban the word “bossy.”
Is there some kind of epidemic of that word being used to keep girls from achieving? Many of the surveys cited by the Ban Bossy campaign are decades old, and a more recent survey by the Girl Scouts of America found that girls are more likely than boys to see themselves as a leader or have the desire to be a leader.
So, why start a national campaign? For starters, Sandberg is an ally of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016.”
Astroturf sold as grassroots.
________________________________________
5. Looks like it’s gonna be your typical Democrat/Clinton campaign.
From TheAmericanSpectator “Hillary Clinton has her own private NSA.
American Bridge PAC spent last week spying on the private conversations of attendees at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).”
“American Bridge was founded by Clinton ally David Brock and is funded by longtime Clinton supporter and billionaire George Soros. American Bridge PAC president Brad Woodhouse boasted that the group’s “trackers” at CPAC had been “in the hallways capturing conversations and that kind of thing.” Meaning? Meaning Hillary’s American Bridge is about invading privacy. CPAC’s today, someone else’s tomorrow. Yours.
“The group has been transformed from an ordinary political action committee into the political version of the NSA, its staffers working out of a room littered with computer monitors that will flash the latest privacy invasion for dissemination.”
________________________________________
6. More illegal changes from the Obama admin, this time to the sequester deal, but for the benefit of ObamaCare.
From NationalJournal “The Obama administration has decided that the sequester’s mandatory spending cuts no longer apply to part of Obamacare.
The health care law provides subsidies to help low-income people cover some of their out-of-pocket costs. Last year, the administration said those subsidies were taking a 7 percent cut because of the sequester, which imposed across-the-board reductions in federal spending.
But now, the White House has changed its mind. It removed the cost-sharing subsidies from its list of programs that are subject to the sequester, eliminating the 7 percent cut for 2015.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which noticed the change, said the reversal would likely restore about $560 million to the subsidies—and require $560 million in cuts to other programs to make up for it.”
_________________________________________
7. Sure. Why not? After all, they’ve seen the type of access, influence, and policy writing capabilities this has gained them with this administration. So why not put all the money in one big pile and see what it can buy ya’? I guess terrorist funding groups and sympathizers need lobbyists too nowadays. 🙄
From CNSNews “Ten U.S. Islamic organizations have formed a new umbrella group to serve as a “representative voice” for American Muslims, and one of their first tasks will be to carry out a census of the community.
Other focus areas for the new U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), according to speakers at the body’s launch in Washington on Wednesday, include enhancing Muslim political engagement and participation in forthcoming elections, civil rights issues, combating “Islamophobia” and having an impact on U.S. foreign and domestic policy.
Participating organizations include high-profile groups that have been dogged by controversy, such as the Muslim American Society (MAS), founded by Muslim Brotherhood members, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was named by the Justice Department in 2007 as “unindicted co-conspirators” in its case against the Holy Land Foundation in Texas, subsequently found guilty of raising money for Hamas.”
““The new national council’s first priority will be to build on Muslim citizenship rights by conducting a census of American Muslims to create a database that will be used to enhance civic and political participation in upcoming elections,” USCMO said in a statement.”
_________________________________________
8. And last for today, an interesting story. A judge in NJ has said fathers do not have the right to be present during the birth of their children. I could see why in some cases it might not be appropriate, but like with abortion, it’s not fair that the father has no say in the matter.
From Philadelphia/CBSLocal “A New Jersey court decision makes it clear, it may take two to tango but not to give birth. “It’s well established under federal and state law that there is a privacy right when a woman’s in labor.”
Rutgers professor and family law expert Sally Goldfarb says a Passaic County judge made the right call last November in his decision, which was published this week, when he sided with pregnant woman that her ex-fiancee had no legal right to be in the delivery room.
“What this man was seeking to do was really interfere with the woman’s ability to exercise her own choices about giving birth in privacy and that to me falls outside of the rights that a father is legitimately entitled to.”
In the decision, believed to be the first of its kind, the father was also told he didn’t have a right to know when the baby was born.”
So never mind his rights to visitation? Is he supposed to wait until the child support papers show up and that can be like a birth announcement? Even if he can’t be present, he should have the right to be notified, and to visit the child in the hospital. Thoughts?
_________________________________________
Wandering Views 