High-Tailing It Out of Blue States

Posted on September 29th, 2015

Illinois leaving a sinking ship from www.caglecartoons.com # 168180By Stephen Moore

The so-called “progressives” love to talk about how their policies will create a worker’s paradise, but then why is it that day after day, month after month, year after year, people are fleeing liberal blue states for conservative red states?

The new Census data on where we live and where we moved to in 2014 shows that the top seven states with the biggest percentage increase in in-migration from other states are in order: North Dakota, Nevada, South Carolina, Colorado, Florida, Arizona, and Texas. All of these states are red, except Colorado, which is purple.

Meanwhile the leading exodus states of the continental states in percentage terms were: Alaska, New York, Illinois, Connecticut, New Mexico, New Jersey, and Kansas. All of these states are blue, except Alaska and Kansas.

The latest Rich States, Poor States document (which I co-author) published by ALEC, the state legislative organization, finds that nearly 1,000 people each day on net are leaving blue states and entering red states. This migration is changing the economic center of gravity in America — moving it relentlessly to the South and West.

In 2013, Florida gained $8.2 billion in adjusted gross income from out of staters. Texas gained $5.9 billion — in one year. Five of the seven states with the biggest gains in income have no income tax at all: Florida, Texas, Arizona, Washington, and Nevada. New York was again the big loser with another 112,236 tax filers leaving and taking $5.2 billion with them. Read More..

Why Democrats Didn’t Want to Vote on the Iran Deal

Posted on September 29th, 2015

A pitiful deal Iran death to AmericaBy New York Post

To hear the Democrats in Congress who supported President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal — and then successfully filibustered it in the Senate, refusing even to allow an actual vote — you’d think someone was literally holding a gun to their heads.

Because it’s hard to find a single one who argues that Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry negotiated anything close to a good deal.

Which is pretty significant — given that the president himself long insisted, “No deal is better than a bad deal.”

But that was then. Now, his foreign-policy legacy — as he sees it — is on the line.

Still, the list of Democratic supporters’ objections is astonishing. (Imagine what they’d be saying if they were voting “no.”)

Like House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer: “This agreement is not one I would have negotiated, nor one I think should have been agreed to ... I believe this agreement gives too much to Iran and demands too little in return.” Read More..

Other Informative Stories That We are Following on September 29, 2015

Posted on September 29th, 2015

Putin Moves In as Obama’s Syrian Strategy Against ISIS Collapses

Posted on September 28th, 2015

Confronting Putin, Obama from www.caglecartoons.com # 153175EDITOR’S COMMENT: As we discussed over a year ago, it was obvious to everyone who wasn’t an Obama fanatic that Obama’s supposed ‘strategy’ was actually ‘no strategy’ at all or a delaying strategy, that had no intention whatsoever of trying to defeat ISIS, as confirmed by the recent resignation of John Allen, Obama’s “war czar,” who quit in disgust because of micromanaging from his national security aides. Of course, these unqualified aides and political hacks were not acting independently, but were following Obama’s and Susan Rice’s directions.

By Rick Moran

When you pretend to fight a war, the results are predictable; failure.

A very sharp analysis of the Syrian situation from the New York Observer’s John Schindler who lays out a case that Russian influence in the Middle East is on the rise while America’s is being frittered away by the incompetents at the White House.

How incompetent?

The forces Mr. Putin has just deployed to Syria are impressive, veteran special operators backed by a wing of fighters and ground attack jets that are expected to commence air strikes on Assad’s foes soon. They are backed by air defense units, which is puzzling since the Islamic State has no air force, indicating that the Kremlin’s true intent in Syria has little to do with the stated aim of fighting terrorism and is really about propping up Russia’s longtime client in Damascus.

The White House is left planning “deconfliction” with Moscow—which is diplomatic language for entreating Russians, who now dominate Syrian airspace, not to shoot down American drones, which provide the lion’s share of our intelligence on the Islamic State. The recent meeting on Syrian developments between Mr. Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who clearly finds dealing with the Russian strongman preferable to parleying with President Obama, indicates where power is flowing in today’s Middle East. Read More..

Immigration: A Political and Economic Issue

Posted on September 28th, 2015

Europe’s refugee crisis immigration from www.caglecartoons.com # 168645By John Browne, Senior Market Strategist, Euro Pacific Capital, Inc.

Donald Trump has successfully placed immigration at the center of the U.S. Presidential election. But while the issue is still largely a debating point in the United States, it has quickly and violently become a life and death issue for the European Union, which is in the midst of the most significant immigration and refugee crisis since the Second World War.

The BBC reports, “More than 300,000 migrants have risked their lives trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe so far this year, according to the UN. This compares with 219,000 for the whole of 2014.” (8/28/15) By including refugees, AFP News Agency puts the figure even higher, stating “Nearly 340,000 refugees and migrants illegally crossed the border into Europe from January to July 2015, according to the EU’s border agency Frontex. The figure compares to 280,000 for the whole of 2014.” (8/31/15) This promises a drastic increase for all of 2015.

The spike in immigration in Europe has its roots in general disintegration in the Middle East and North Africa, which in itself is a function of flawed Western interventionism and botched foreign policy. With war tensions in the Middle East and the rise of ISIS, the suffering of the local civilians has been appalling. With the political and social institutions collapsing in failed states such as Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Libya, those leaving likely see no possibility of returning. So, unlike in years past, they are not willing to stop in refugee camps to await developments in their home countries. They have made the decision to go all the way to Europe, and they are willing to risk all to get there.

The waves of immigrants, both refugees and migrants, tend to enter the southern periphery countries including Greece, Italy and Spain in addition to new eastern EU member countries like Hungary. Immigrants perceive these EU countries as close with porous borders. Furthermore, these periphery countries condone lax border controls because they understand that these immigrants have no wish to settle in their countries. Rather, the migrants are intent on moving out fast, under the EU’s Schengen Plan, into the richer northern countries, like Germany and the UK, which also offer more generous social benefits to newly arrived immigrants.

Notably, excluding the UK and Ireland, which were granted an opt out, the 26 remaining nations of the EU have accepted membership of the Schengen Area. Membership requires each nation to abolish all passport and other types of control at their common intra-EU borders. Thus, once  migrants have entered the EU through the relatively porous southern borders, they can move at will, like any EU citizen, to any member country, with the exception of the UK and Ireland. Naturally, migrants head to those relatively rich countries. This strains the availability of housing, health, education, social security and jobs greatly to the cost and disadvantage of legitimate local citizens. Read More..

Obama’s Victory Is Iran’s Victory

Posted on September 28th, 2015

Spiked Iran deal Obama from www.caglecartoons.com # 168430By Lee Smith

Recently the White House puffed its feathers when Barbara Mikulski became the 34th Democratic senator to come out in favor of the nuclear deal with Iran. Mikulski’s support ensures enough votes in Obama’s pocket to sustain a presidential veto on a resolution of disapproval, but it’s still not clear why the administration is celebrating. A majority of senators and congressmen oppose Obama’s signature foreign policy initiative. So does most of the American public, by a two-to-one ratio according to a new poll released last week. In other words, the administration may have won this round, but the fight over the Iran deal isn’t over.

The other critical actor is the White House’s negotiating partner in Tehran. The clerical regime looks at the American political landscape and sees that it is operating in a protected environment that may change very quickly when a new administration comes to the White House in 16 months. Unlike the Obama White House, the Islamic Republic understands that the fight over its nuclear weapons program will continue.

In the negotiations, the White House played the role of Iran’s lawyer, defending and supporting Tehran’s demands when France and other EU partners demurred. In Washington, the White House attacked recalcitrant members of the president’s own party, like Senators Robert Menendez and Charles Schumer, who opposed the Iran deal. They were beholden to donors and moneyed interests, said the administration. Read More..

Other Informative Stories That We are Following on September 28, 2015

Posted on September 28th, 2015

Cleaning Up After the Obama Team’s Iran Deal

Posted on September 25th, 2015

Iran Boxed in Obama Iran deal from www.caglecartoons.com # 167821By Michael B. Mukasey

‘We couldn’t have negotiated a better deal.” That is one of the two pillars of the Obama administration’s argument in favor of its nuclear arrangement with Iran, the other being, “there’s no alternative but war.” Those two propositions appear to have won the day—at least with enough Democrats in Congress to prevent a vote disapproving of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The Iran deal remains deeply unpopular with the American public and with the Republican majority in Congress.

Over the past few months, the two propositions regarding the deal left opponents sputtering a catalog of its numerous defects. But it must be admitted that the first proposition—“we couldn’t have negotiated a better deal”—is plainly true.

Consider who the “we” are. President Obama, the deal’s principal proponent, has repeatedly refused to recognize the existence of Islamist radicalism and failed to enforce even his own red line against Bashar Assad’s use of poison gas in Syria.

The leader of the U.S. delegation, Secretary of State John Kerry, airily endorsed an inspections regimen agreed to between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency—an agreement whose wording he concedes the U.S. doesn’t have, although he thinks one member of the U.S. delegation may have seen it. Not providing the text of this side deal to Congress violates directly the statutory requirement that the administration supply “annexes, appendices, side agreements” and “any related agreements.”

Mr. Kerry also concedes that Iran will prevent access to what it calls defense sites. These include the Parchin facility, where Iran carries out weaponization experiments, and at which Iran will be permitted to take its own soil samples for presentation to the IAEA.

Finally, there is Wendy Sherman, the lead U.S. negotiator. What was her response to the suggestion that Congress should have had a chance to review the deal—as the president promised and U.S. law requires—before it was submitted to the U.N. Security Council? “It would have been a little difficult when all of the members of the P5+1 wanted to go to the United Nations to get an endorsement . . . for us to say, ‘Well excuse me, the world, you should wait for the United States Congress.’ ” Read More..

FOLLOW UP: Report: Obama Will Endorse Biden if….

Posted on September 25th, 2015

Democratic candidates from www.caglecartoons.com # 167728By Thomas Lifson

While this report from the author Ed Klein, via the Boston Herald, may or may not be true, it makes an awful lot of sense from Barack Obama’s perspective.

Former Gov. Deval Patrick — long touted as a potential 2020 White House contender — is now being floated as a possible running mate for Joe Biden if the vice president enters the Democratic primary.

Former New York Times Magazine editor Ed Klein reported on his website this week on a scenario that purportedly could pave the way for Patrick to actually become president by 2020.

Under Klein’s scenario, which cites “the talk in Democratic circles” and other unnamed sources, President Obama would endorse Biden’s White House bid — but only if the vice president lets Obama have “a final say” on Biden’s running mate.

In return for the president’s endorsement, the Klein scenario goes, Biden would pick an African-American running mate — specifically Patrick.

In the arrangement, Biden, who would be 78 years old at the end of his first term, also would agree not to run for re-election in 2020 but instead back Patrick as his successor, according to Klein.

That would make Patrick the Democratic presidential nominee in a matter of just five years.

Patrick is close to Obama, and the two have known each other for many years.  Biden owes his standing completely to Obama, and if he were to be succeeded by Patrick, then Obama might well have two sock puppets as president for the next twelve years, enabling him to carry out the rest of his fundamental transformation of America. Read More..

Kerry: Assad Has to Go, But Timing Can Be Negotiated

Posted on September 25th, 2015

Secretary Kerry greets Iranian Foreign Minister ZarifBy Times of Israel

Secretary of State calls on Russia and Iran to convince Syrian president he must step down, says ending conflict is of utmost urgency.

Syrian President Bashar Assad must leave office although the timing of such a move can be negotiated, US Secretary of State John Kerry said in London recently, following talks with British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond.

Kerry urged Russia and Iran, two key allies, to persuade Assad to negotiate his departure, Reuters said. The top US diplomat also expressed the urgency in finding a political solution to the four-year civil war in Syria, which has left hundreds of thousands dead and millions more displaced.

“We need to get to the negotiation. That is what we’re looking for and we hope Russia and Iran, and any other countries with influence, will help to bring about that, because that’s what is preventing this crisis from ending,” Kerry said. “We’re prepared to negotiate. Is Assad prepared to negotiate, really negotiate? Is Russia prepared to bring him to the table?” Read More..

Do you have an interesting news story that just doesn't "add up," or is not receiving the appropriate coverage in the news, just let us know. We'd love to hear it! And, we'll investigate. CLICK HERE.
Get What Am I Missing Here delivered to your inbox for FREE!