GOP Targets Alaska’s Mark Begich Over Carbon Tax

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

The National Republican Senatorial Committee Wednesday will launch a robo-call campaign in Alaska targeting Sen. Mark Begich for his support of a carbon tax.

NRSC plans to call nearly 70,000 households statewide about what it calls the Alaska Democrat’s “steadfast support for the costly carbon tax,” according to a script of the calls provided to POLITICO. A carbon tax means “more EPA red tape regulation,” says the script, which cites National Association of Manufacturers’ data to contend it would increase electricity, natural gas and gasoline prices and hurt Alaskan jobs.

“Sen. Begich didn’t paint that picture for you did he?” says the script. “Higher taxes, higher energy costs and Sen. Begich just don’t work for Alaska.”

The NRSC is aiming the calls at all female voters and likely male swing voters across the state.

The claims are based on Begich’s support for a non-binding amendment to this year’s budget resolution by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) that would have called for any revenue generated by a carbon tax to be “returned to the American people in the form of federal deficit reduction, reduced federal tax rates, cost savings or other direct benefits.”

Read more from this story HERE.

The Left Hijacks “I Have a Dream” and Turns it into “I Have a Scheme”

Photo Credit: Irish Central

Photo Credit: Irish Central

A lot has transpired in the 50 years since civil rights activists marched peacefully on Washington DC. to hear Dr. Martin Luther King give his profound and now famous “I Have a Dream” speech.

At the time, it was estimated 250,000 people packed the Washington mall to express their support for equal rights for black Americans.

Dr. Kings message was one of healing, unity and equality for all Americans. His dream for the country was for a citizen to be judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin.

Dr. Kings insisted that his equal rights movement be a peaceful one, even in the face of violence and insults.

But Dr. Kings life was cut short by a snipers bullet 5 years later and he wasn’t able to help steer the civil rights movement in the direction he was hoping.

In the 50 years since Dr. King gave his great speech, the nation responded with civil rights acts, a “war on poverty” and thousands of laws designed to help black families step into the American dream.

During this time, we have had black Supreme Court justices, powerful members of congress and finally a black president. The opportunity has been given to those who strive to achieve the American dream, if they wish to reach out and grab it.

But the government programs created to help black families out of poverty and assimilate into our culture have had a devastatingly negative effect. Once a strong family oriented culture, that ethos was pulverized by government programs that discouraged the presence of a husband in the household.

Somewhere along the way, the left (Democrat Party) hijacked the civil rights “movement” and forgotten is the fact the Republican Party was the champion of civil rights.

The social engineering by the left has resulted in a government dependent class of people where the out of wedlock birthrate is 73% and the rate of abortion is 43%. Crime is rampant and black youth raised in single parent households disproportionately fill America’s prisons.

Many of the black leaders, all members of the Democrat Party, making speeches in the national mall, are wedded to a message that preaches anger, divisiveness and grievance…Just the opposite of what Dr. King wished for. Many of those leaders make big money out of keeping the divisiveness going and capitalizing on the blame game.

Out of all of the speakers at the national mall today, in front of the estimated crowd of 20,000, not one Republican or conservative black leader was invited to speak. Evidently the left doesn’t want to hear another viewpoint. A viewpoint that might have spoken the truth about the plight of the American black family and what the Democrat Party has inflicted on them.

From a Human Events article titled: Why Dr. Martin Luther King was a Republican:

“In order to break the Democrats’ stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party’s economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity.”

Dr. King was a strong believer in an intact American family structure….He would not be pleased to see what has been done to the black family under the guise of: “We’re from the government and we’re here to help you”

_____________________________________

Ed Farnan is the conservative columnist at IrishCentral, where he has been writing on the need for energy independence, strong self defense, secure borders, 2nd amendment, smaller government and many other issues. His articles appear in many publications throughout the USA and world. He has been a guest on Fox News and a regular guest on radio stations in the US and Europe.

Will EPA ‘Force’ Another Decision on Alaska’s Native Communities?

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

Lary Hill grew up in a crowded house surrounded by generations of family deep in the Alaska bush country.

In Iliamna, some 180 air miles southwest of Anchorage, communities hunted and fished to survive.

Hill, 68 and an elder of the community of 120 residents, said his family had no idea they were poor until the federal government told them.

“We always had enough food to eat and a warm place to live, with family all around. We had no understanding of what poor meant,” he said.

Then, through years of government-administered programs in which “being poor meant you could get free stuff,” the destiny of the region’s people seemed to be in the hands of bureaucrats.

Hill knows all too well, though, what the government giveth, it can taketh away.

“There’s been a pattern here for so many years where the federal government once they start giving us all these things, once they do that we pretty much lose control over our own life, our own society,” he said. “If we don’t behave, the government will take the benefits away.”

Poverty prevails in Iliamna and the region, where at least a quarter of the population is unemployed.

Now there is opportunity in Iliamna, and the potential for so much more.

Hill and several others in his community are employees of the Pebble Limited Partnership. The development initiative of London-based Anglo American and British Columbia’s Northern Dynasty Minerals, proposes developing the mine, a multibillion-dollar capital investment that would create thousands of good paying, short-and long-term jobs, according to PLP.

In conversations with Watchdog.org, Hill and other community members on the PLP payroll say they are not yet sold on the project. They want to know more about it. If the large-scale copper and gold mine can’t co-exist with Alaska’s salmon fishing industry — if a mine can’t operate without destroying their tribe’s native land — they don’t want it.

But they also don’t want the government and environmental groups with an ax to grind telling them — again — what’s good or bad for them.

That’s what it feels like to Iliamna community members who worry that the EPA could drop a regulatory hydrogen bomb on the town’s potential — 404(c) of the Clean Water Act, which could pre-emptively kill the mine project before a plan is submitted.

“People aren’t asking us, they are just pushing things on us,” said Lisa Reimers, CEO of the Iliamna Development Corp.

There are a number of residents of Iliamna, many more outside the region, asking the EPA to veto the project. They fear a large-scale mine would ruin the Bristol Bay Watershed, which feeds 50 percent of the world’s sockeye salmon population, critical to the region’s economy.

But critics vehemently opposed to large-scale mining in Anchorage and elsewhere also expressed their dismay that the project may not have the opportunity to be heard and that EPA has the power to strip basic due process.

You’ll have to excuse Pebble officials for feeling a little anxious with the arrival on Tuesday of the EPA’s new administrator, Gina McCarthy.

The last time an EPA administrator came to Alaska to talk about the Pebble project, in late July 2010, then-EPA chief Lisa Jackson apparently forgot to mention to PLP that some Alaska communities and tribes had submitted a petition asking the EPA to impose the pre-emptive veto provision. In February 2011, EPA opted to perform a Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment that predicted massive damage but was criticized by many of the document’s peer reviewers for faulty, hypothetical science.

An EPA official told Watchdog.org that McCarthy is not expected to make any announcements regarding the Pebble project during her stop Tuesday in Alaska.

Mike Heatwole, vice president of public affairs for Pebble Partnership, said Pebble officials are more optimistic about this EPA visit this time around, that the tone of the new administrator seems more open to a “transparent effort.”

The past is problematic, however.

Reimers and other community members say they had tried on several occasions to meet with the former EPA administrator, to no avail. At the same time, Jackson opened her door on several occasions to opponents of the mine proposal.

So, community members like Sue Anelon, who also works for Pebble, have a lot to say to the new EPA administrator.

“We don’t want this regulation (404(c)) enforced upon us,” Anelon said. “We’ll make that decision, not somebody else forcing it on us. We’re going to tell her, this is not fair to our communities.”

Hill said he wants to know just what another outside agency will decide for his community.

“If she invokes the power of the Clean Water Act, that might rob our area of the chance to have an industry that would allow us to do more than survive, but thrive,” Hill said.

___________________________________________

Courtesy of The Franklin Center’s Watchdog Wire

California Pols Could Target Tax Status of Boy Scouts, Youth Groups Over ‘Discrimination’

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

California lawmakers are cruising toward a final vote on a bill that could threaten the tax-exempt status of American-as-apple-pie groups — ranging from the Boy Scouts to Little League — if their membership policies are found to be discriminatory.

If passed, the bill, SB 323, would remove an exemption from state taxes for any nonprofit youth group that discriminates on the basis of “gender identity, race, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or religious affiliation.” Well-known organizations like Girl Scouts of the USA, Boy Scouts of America, and Little League International Baseball and Softball were cited in the bill, which was introduced in February by Democratic state Sen. Ricardo Lara.

Lawmakers are not accusing groups like Little League and the Girl Scouts of having discriminatory policies. The bill appears to be aimed more at the Boy Scouts, as Lara pushed the legislation on the heels of the controversy surrounding the Boy Scouts’ policy to exclude gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people as scouts or adult leaders. The national organization later voted to allow gay youth membership, but maintained its ban on openly gay adult leaders.

Lara told reporters earlier this month that the Boy Scouts’ decision was not good enough for him, and continued to push the bill.

Youth groups say they hope they won’t be affected. Brian McClintock, a Little League International spokesman, told FoxNews.com on Wednesday that the group already does not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, gender, sexual orientation or disability.

Read more from this story HERE.

Does Obama Know he’s Fighting on al-Qaeda’s Side?

Photo Credit: AP

Photo Credit: AP

If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as al-Qaeda.

Quite an alliance! Was it not the Three Musketeers who shouted “All for one and one for all” each time they sought combat? This really should be the new battle cry if – or when – the statesmen of the Western world go to war against Bashar al-Assad.

The men who destroyed so many thousands on 9/11 will then be fighting alongside the very nation whose innocents they so cruelly murdered almost exactly 12 years ago. Quite an achievement for Obama, Cameron, Hollande and the rest of the miniature warlords.

This, of course, will not be trumpeted by the Pentagon or the White House – nor, I suppose, by al-Qaeda – though they are both trying to destroy Bashar. So are the Nusra front, one of al-Qaeda’s affiliates. But it does raise some interesting possibilities.

Maybe the Americans should ask al-Qaeda for intelligence help – after all, this is the group with “boots on the ground”, something the Americans have no interest in doing. And maybe al-Qaeda could offer some target information facilities to the country which usually claims that the supporters of al-Qaeda, rather than the Syrians, are the most wanted men in the world.

Read more from this story HERE.

Rep to Boehner – Call House Back Now (+video)

Photo Credit: Congressional photo

Photo Credit: Congressional photo

Rep. Scott Rigell (R.-Va.)–who served six years in the Marine Corps Reserves, sits on the House Armed Services Committee, and represents the congressional district with the largest concentration of military personnel of any in the nation–said today he is calling on House Speaker John Boehner to call the House back into session to prevent President Barack Obama from usurping Congress’s constitutional authority to authorize—or not authorize—the use of military force in Syria.

“He should be calling the House back right now,” Rigell said of Boehner. “I will be clear on this.”

“I do have a call scheduled with one of our senior leaders this afternoon and I will be making that case,” said Rigell. “I think we’re at this point, and I regret that we’re at this point. But that is where we are.”

Rigell sent a letter to President Obama today—co-signed by a bipartisan group of “over 100” House members–reminding the president that it is “clearly delineated” in the Constitution that the president must seek congressional authorization before using military force unless the use of force is needed to protect the United States from an attack.

“While the Founders wisely gave the Office of the President the authority to act in emergencies, they foresaw the need to ensure public debate—and the active engagement of Congress—prior to committing U.S. military assets,” Rigell wrote. “Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution.”

Read more from this story HERE.

ObamaCare Faces Another Delay, Lawmaker Calls Implementation ‘Train Wreck’

Photo Credit: Fox News

Photo Credit: Fox News

The Obama administration has delayed another component of the federal health care law, leading a Republican lawmaker to call the law’s implementation a “train wreck.”

Reuters first reported that the Department of Health and Human Services informed insurance companies Tuesday it is delaying signing the final agreements between the government and insurance providers whose plans will be sold on federal health insurance exchanges.

The agreements were supposed to be signed between Sept. 5 and 9, but instead will be delayed until mid-September.

The department did not give a clear-cut reason for the delay, but attributed it to the need to be flexible in working with the insurance companies and to resolve unspecified technical issues.

“We remain on track to open the marketplace on time on October 1,” HHS spokeswoman Joanne Peters told Fox Business Network.

Read more from this story HERE.

Wal-Mart Offers Health Benefits to U.S. Workers’ Domestic Partners

Photo Credit: Reuters

Photo Credit: Reuters

Wal-Mart Stores Inc said on Tuesday it will offer health insurance benefits to domestic partners of its U.S. employees starting next year, following the lead of other major companies.

The world’s largest retailer, based in Bentonville, Arkansas, also plans to begin to offer vision care to its eligible employees and their dependents, according to information the retailer sent to workers this week.

Wal-Mart is the single biggest U.S. employer outside of the federal government. More than half of its 1.3 million U.S. employees are on its health-care plans. The company said it does not know how many workers would use the new benefits, which also include free hip and knee joint replacements.

Wal-Mart’s extension of health insurance to domestic partners comes after the U.S. Supreme Court in June forced the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages in states where it is legal. The Supreme Court also paved the way for same-sex marriage in California.

“Since we operate in all 50 states, we thought it was important to develop a single definition for all Wal-Mart associates in the U.S.,” spokesman David Tovar said.

Read more from this story HERE.

Missouri Poised to Enact Measure Nullifying Federal Gun Laws

Photo Credit: Reuters

Photo Credit: Reuters

The Republican-led Missouri Legislature is expected to override Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of a bill that would expand gun rights and make federal gun regulations unenforceable — even as similar laws in other states designed to buck federal gun rules face legal challenges.

Several of Nixon’s fellow Democrats told The Associated Press that they would vote to override his veto when lawmakers convene in September, even while agreeing with the governor that the bill couldn’t survive a court challenge. Many of them noted that in some parts of Missouri, a “no” vote on gun legislation could be career ending.

The legislation would make it a misdemeanor for federal agents to attempt to enforce any federal gun regulations that “infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms.” The same criminal charges would apply to journalists who publish any identifying information about gun owners. The charge would be punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Nixon said the bill infringes on the U.S. Constitution by giving precedence to state law over federal laws and by limiting the First Amendment rights of media.

The legislation is one of the boldest measures yet in a recent national trend in which states are attempting to nullify federal laws. A recent Associated Press analysis found that about four-fifths of the states have enacted local laws that directly reject or ignore federal laws on gun control, marijuana use, health insurance requirements and identification standards for driver’s licenses. Relatively few of those go so far as to threaten criminal charges against federal authorities.

Read more from this story HERE.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s Niece: King Was Pro-Life (+video)

Photo Credit: Life News

Photo Credit: Life News

Today is the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and martin Luther King Jr’s famous “I have a dream speech.” While the pro-abortion giant Planned Parenthood participated in Saturday’s March on Washington, King’s niece says the civil rights leader would have been pro-life on abortion.

Alexis McGill Johnson, Chairman of Planned Parenthood Federation, told rally participants that Planned Parenthood gave King an award.

Read more from this story HERE.