I’m not sure what to call this. Gross government incompetence? Sexist victim blaming? Whatever it is, it’s absurd, and it’s an embarrassment to the state of Arizona.
from Washington Times:
A Phoenix man who had sex with a 20-year-old woman at the age of 14 now owes thousands of dollars in back child support for a child he never knew existed.
Nick Olivas became a father in 2006 — a fact he didn’t learn until two years ago when the state served him with papers demanding child support.
“It was a shock,” he told The Arizona Republic. “I was living my life and enjoying being young. To find out you have a 6-year-old? It’s unexplainable. It freaked me out.”
Mr. Olivas said he panicked and never responded to the papers demanding he take a paternity test. The state eventually tracked him down and seized money from his bank account and is now garnisheeing his wages, The Republic reported.
The father owes at least $15,000 plus interest in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, the newspaper said.
Mr. Olivas says he is a victim of statutory rape and was taken advantage of at age 14 by a 20-year-old woman. State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance. Mr. Olivas said he never pressed charges against the woman.
The Department of Economic Security doesn’t exempt such situations, unless the parent seeking child support has been found guilty of sexual assault.
If you just do the math on the date he became a father, it’s clear that he was raped by an adult. The fact that he didn’t press charges should be completely irrelevant. He clearly falls under the legal definition of statutory rape.
What a bunch of hogwash.
So, how does a community organizer respond to the biggest terrorist threat facing our country? We need to organize it, of course!
Here’s the video:
He’s not a Commander in Chief. He is a community organizer, and that’s all he knows how to do.
This is such an astounding admission from the State Department’s
paid liar spokesperson Jen Psaki today.
The Obama administration still refuses to seek a declaration of war against ISIS, but they claim that Obama is using the War Powers Act to bomb ISIS anyway.
from Daily Caller:
During a press briefing at the State Department Tuesday, Rosen artfully guided Psaki into revealing the Obama administration’s contradictory policy in dealing with the terrorist group the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS): while the administration is using the War Powers Resolution to strike ISIS in Iraq, it refuses to say we are actually at war with the group.
See below the transcript of Rosen’s back and forth with Psaki:
Rosen: What is the legal authority under which President Obama has launched the more than 100 air strikes that you just referenced?
Psaki: In Iraq? Well, the Iraqi government has invited the United States in to help them address this threat and that’s the legal authority.
Rosen: And he has reported to Congress on this subject, has he not?
Rosen: Under the aegis of what statute?
Psaki: He does War Powers Acts every time there’s a need to notify Congress.
Rosen: So we have a commander in chief that launched more than 100 air strikes at a given enemy who is reporting to the Congress under the aegis of the War Powers Act.
Who is watching our people beheaded by this enemy, but who for some reason feels queasy about saying that we are in fact at war with this enemy?
Psaki: James, I think — I’m not going to put new words into the mouth of the President of the United States. My point is that his actions to authorize these strikes, his effort to send Secretary Kerry, Secretary Hagel, any resource we have in the United States to lead the building of a coalition speak to his commitment to his commitment to taking on this threat. And of course we want to see ISIL destroyed, but that is not an overnight effort.
In other words, what Obama is doing is totally unconstitutional.
With the anniversary of September 11 coming up, this certainly doesn’t fill me with much comfort.
from Free Beacon:
Islamist militias in Libya took control of nearly a dozen commercial jetliners last month, and western intelligence agencies recently issued a warning that the jets could be used in terrorist attacks across North Africa.
Intelligence reports of the stolen jetliners were distributed within the U.S. government over the past two weeks and included a warning that one or more of the aircraft could be used in an attack later this month on the date marking the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against New York and Washington, said U.S. officials familiar with the reports.
“There are a number of commercial airliners in Libya that are missing,” said one official. “We found out on September 11 what can happen with hijacked planes.”
The official said the aircraft are a serious counterterrorism concern because reports of terrorist control over the Libyan airliners come three weeks before the 13th anniversary of 9/11 attacks and the second anniversary of the Libyan terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the Benghazi attack, which the Obama administration initially said was the result of a spontaneous demonstration against an anti-Muslim video.
Obama won’t be able to call this one a “spontaneous airplane crash.” That’s still not much comfort.
This kind of barbarism is difficult to understand. American journalist Steven Sotloff was beheaded by the same British-born ISIS terrorist who beheaded James Foley.
from Daily Mail:
ISIS has released a video that shows the beheading of U.S. journalist Steven Sotloff and says the murder is retaliation for the Obama administration’s continued airstrikes in Iraq.
Sotloff is the second American journalist to be killed by ISIS, and his death comes two weeks after James Foley was executed in a similar video.
In the video entitled ‘A Second Message to America,’ Sotloff appears in a orange jumpsuit before he is beheaded by an Islamic State fighter.
The executioner appears to be the same man who killed Foley – known as ‘Jihadi John’ - and tells the camera: ‘I’m back, Obama, and I’m back because of your arrogant foreign policy towards the Islamic State.’
He also threatens to kill a Briton held hostage by the group next. The identity of the hostage is widely available online, but MailOnline is not identifying him at the request of the British government.
This afternoon British Prime Minister David Cameron condemned the video, calling it ‘an absolutely disgusting and despicable act’.
Obviously, we’re not going to be posting the video here. I’m not going to give these animals the satisfaction of helping to spread their sick propaganda around the web.
Remember the headline from this Guardian article from 2009?
The article even came with its very own predictive graph to scare people:
Yeah, well, turns out that this prediction was just wrong. In fact, virtually every prediction made by alarmists over the last 20 years has been wrong:
The IPCC has drawn attention to an apparent leveling-off of globally-averaged temperatures over the past 15 years or so. Measuring the duration of the hiatus has implications for determining if the underlying trend has changed, and for evaluating climate models. Here, I propose a method for estimating the duration of the hiatus that is robust to unknown forms of heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation (HAC) in the temperature series and to cherry-picking of endpoints.
For the specific case of global average temperatures I also add the requirement of spatial consistency between hemispheres. The method makes use of the Vogelsang-Franses (2005) HAC-robust trend variance estimator which is valid as long as the underlying series is trend stationary, which is the case for the data used herein. Application of the method shows that there is now a trendless interval of 19 years duration at the end of the HadCRUT4 surface temperature series, and of 16 – 26 years in the lower troposphere. Use of a simple AR1 trend model suggests a shorter hiatus of 14 – 20 years but is likely unreliable.
And here’s the money quote from his conclusion:
In the surface data we compute a hiatus length of 19 years…
My question to alarmists is this: Is there anything, whether it be scientific discovery, certain data or something else, that would make you question the global warming narrative. Do you need a pause in global warming of 19 years? We’ve got that. Do you need for alarmists to be wrong over and over? We’ve got that. Do you need for the polar ice caps to have more ice? We’ve got that. Do you need Polar Bears to not be going extinct? We’ve got that. I could go on and on.
Seriously, it’s a valid question that should be asked. Is there anything that might make you question it?
Look, this data is real. The hiatus is real. The satellite data show that the globe hasn’t warmed in nearly two decades. But it just doesn’t matter to those who have made a decision to believe it. They’ll keep giving us their list of excuses.
There’s a perfect Mark Twain quote that may help explain this:
It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Surely it’s not that government stifles progress, holds people in poverty, invades privacy, wastes enormous amounts of money, regulates businesses into oblivion, attacks religious liberty, and erodes personal liberty. No, it’s just that “cynical geniuses” in the Republican party have tricked you into believing so. Thats why you don’t trust the government, says Barack Obama, the man in charge of the largest government in history.
President Obama on Friday blamed dysfunction in Congress on a Republican Party he said is captive to an ideologically rigid, unproductive and cynical faction, urging like-minded Democrats to show up for November’s midterm elections.
Addressing Democratic donors at a fundraiser in Rhode Island and another in New York, Obama said Republicans had realized that blocking all progress led Americans to become cynical about government. Republicans consider that “a pretty good thing” because they don’t believe in government to begin with, Obama said.
"It doesn’t have to be that way," Obama said during a barbecue in Purchase, New York. "There has been a certain cynical genius to what some of these folks have done in Washington."
Later, at an event in Newport, Rhode Island, he told donors: “The answer to our challenges is actually pretty simple. We need a better Congress.”
Shorter Obama: “All my problems are somebody else’s fault, and if you don’t believe me, you’ve been duped by cynical geniuses.”
"It’s for the children!" "Think of the children!" "We must do everything to educate our children!"
These are the frequent rallying cries of bleeding heart liberals who want to force their big-government policies on private citizens. However, whenever a genuine attempt at providing better education for children comes up, it’s always the liberal groups fighting tooth and nail to prevent it from happening.
Why? Because anything that weakens the teachers unions’ power is a threat.
from Daily Signal:
Washington state’s Supreme Court will determine whether charter schools will be allowed in the state. A hearing is scheduled in October.
The charter school law, approved by Washington state voters in 2012, allows for about 40 charter schools to open during the next five years. This fall, the private school First Place will be the first to serve students as a charter school. It already serves families in extreme poverty by offering counseling, housing, advocacy and access to other resources.
If First Place can operate as a charter school, it could serve more students. A coalition of plaintiffs has sued the state of Washington, hoping to disallow schools such as First Place.
Seven other charter schools have been authorized and are expected to open in the fall 2015. All eight schools are geared toward underserved students who struggle in traditional schools, said Lisa Mcfarlane, spokesperson for Washington Charter Schools Association. The state’s charter law gives priority to schools serving at-risk students, she said.
In 2013, a coalition including the Washington Education Association, the League of Women Voters, El Centro de la Raza, the Washington Association of School Administrators and a few individuals sued the state in an attempt to overturn the charter-school law.
For liberal progressives, it’s not really about doing what’s best for the children. It’s about protecting and expanding their own power. Charter schools have been definitively proven to provide better educational opportunities for students, but teachers unions and their allies always fight them with a vengeance.
A Texas school district just became one of the safest in the nation as teachers are now armed and trained to handle school shootings.
from Fox 23:
The Argyle, Texas Independent School District has armed many of its educators for the upcoming school year.
“Please be aware that the staff at Argyle ISD are armed and may use whatever force is necessary to protect our students,” a sign on all independent campuses reads.
At the Argyle schools, any teacher who wishes to carry a firearm in class must first undergo special weapons training and pass a psychological test, ensuring that he is properly vetted and trained before carrying in the classroom.
While the district won’t release the names and number of teachers carrying in the classroom, it told a local Fox affiliate that training has been continuous since the program was approved last January.
“I think if a tragedy does occur, lives can be saved by guns being in the right hands, and I think the teachers here might be able to stop something like that,” one parent told My Fox 8 of the approved firearms.
God bless Texas.
The situation on the southern border is so dangerous that many ranchers have taken to leading armed patrols on their property to prevent property damage and theft by illegal aliens crossing the border. This is, of course, completely legal as you have the right to protect your property, to carry weapons, and lots of businesses and private citizens use armed security services.
Border patrol came upon such an armed militia member this weekend and proceeded to open fire on him.
A Border Patrol agent pursuing a group of immigrants in a wooded area near the Texas-Mexico border on Friday fired several shots at an armed man who later identified himself as a militia member.
Border Patrol spokesman Omar Zamora said agents had been chasing a group of immigrants east of Brownsville Friday afternoon when an agent saw a man holding a gun near the Rio Grande. The agent fired four shots, but did not hit the man. The man then dropped his gun and identified himself as a member of a militia. Zamora said no other details were immediately available.
Cameron County Sheriff Omar Lucio, whose agency is involved in the investigation, said the incident occurred on private property and it appeared the man had permission to be there. He was not arrested, Lucio said.
The man, whose name has not been released, was wearing camouflage and carrying a long arm that was either a rifle or shotgun, Lucio said. The agent had lost the group of immigrants when he turned around and saw the man holding the weapon.
"Holding a weapon" is not illegal on public or private property. Texas actually has very good open-carry laws that allow citizens to carry their weapons in public. This agent could not have been more out of line to open fire without asking any questions, especially on private property.
It’s like they’ve never even heard of the 2nd Amendment.
This is how utterly insane the British government-run healthcare system is. Parents of a five year old boy were arrested after they took their terminally ill son from a UK hospital because they refused to give him the treatment he needed.
The grandmother of a 5-year-old British boy with a severe brain tumor accused U.K. authorities on Monday of cruelty for seeking an arrest warrant and pursuing the family abroad after his parents removed him from a British hospital against medical advice.
Hours later, a Spanish judge ordered the parents’ detention for 72 hours while a court in Madrid considers whether to grant Britain an extradition request.
Grandmother Patricia King told the BBC it was an “absolute disgrace” that her son and daughter-in-law were accused of child neglect after they took Ashya from Southampton General Hospital last week. The family says U.K. authorities had refused to give Ashya the kind of treatment he needed.
The family has criticized Britain’s health care system, saying he needs an advanced treatment option called proton beam therapy and that it wasn’t being made available to him.
King’s parents were arrested Sunday in southeastern Spain after a European arrest warrant was issued by Interpol at the request of British police. Their son is receiving medical treatment for a brain tumor. After his parents’ arrest, he was admitted to a Spanish hospital.
King says the authorities are “the ones who are cruel, because they have taken poor little Ashya, who is dying of a brain tumor, and they won’t let the parents, my son and daughter-in-law, they won’t let them see him at all.”
If you think this can’t happen in the United States, think again. Just take a look at the story of Justina Pelletier.
This is what happens when patient decisions are taken out of the parents’ hands and put into the hands of the government.