Now this girl has some moxie.
****************************
Miss California Sparks Furor With Gay Marriage Comments on Miss USA Telecast
Monday, April 20, 2009
Print ShareThis
AP
Miss California Carrie Prejean made her controversial comments on Sunday night's show.
Miss California Carrie Prejean made her controversial comments on Sunday night's show.
Miss North Carolina Kristen Dalton was crowned Miss USA on Sunday, but the big story to come out of the normally politics-free telecast was Miss California's comments regarding gay marriage.
When asked by judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, whether she believed in gay marriage, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, said "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."
Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, tells FOXNews.com that he was "saddened" by Prejean's statement.
"As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman," said Lewis in a statement. "I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit. I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone and religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family."
PHOTOS: Pics from last night's controversial show.
Co-director Shanna Moakler said that she fully supported Lewis' statement.
But Prejean told FOXNews.com that she has "no regrets" and is happy with the answer she gave.
PHOTOS: 10 beauty pageant scandals from years past.
Miss California's answer sparked a shouting match in the lobby after the show. "It's ugly," said Scott Ihrig, a gay man, who attended the pageant with his partner. "I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are."
Charmaine Koonce, the mother of Miss New Mexico USA Bianca Matamoros-Koonce, argued back.
YOU DECIDE: Did Miss California's answer cost her the crown?
"In the Bible it says marriage is between Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!"
The pageant had enjoyed a scandal-free year until earlier this month, when Miss Universe 2008 Dayana Mendoza was skewered for a blog posting from a trip to Guantanamo Bay. The entry described having "aloooot of fun" at a base that houses the notorious military prison; it was later deleted from the pageant's Web site.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
DHS says anti-abortion people are terrorists
Wow.
DHS issued report on extremism despite concerns
FOX News By EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer Eileen Sullivan, Associated Press Writer – Thu Apr 16, 6:48 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department flagged language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway.
The intelligence assessment issued to law enforcement last week said some military veterans could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or commit lone acts of violence. That prompted angry reactions from some lawmakers and veterans' groups.
Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said the report was issued before officials resolved problems raised by the agency's civil rights division about analysts' definition of right-wing extremism.
In a footnote in the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. It went on to say, "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report Thursday but acknowledged that the definition needs to be changed.
"If there's one part of that report I would rewrite, in the word-smithing, Washington-ese that goes on after the fact, it would be that footnote," Napolitano said Thursday on Fox News.
The same definition was included in the agency's March 26 report on domestic extremism. Both reports were marked "For Official Use Only."
The report cites the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh as one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.
Several lawmakers, the American Legion and Vets for Freedom took offense to the intelligence review. The Veterans of Foreign Wars defended it as an assessment, not an accusation.
Napolitano said, "We do not mean to suggest that veterans as a whole are at risk of becoming violent extremists."
She also said: "I apologize for that offense. It was certainly not intended."
The top Republican on the House intelligence committee, Michigan's Pete Hoekstra, has asked the director of national intelligence's ombudsman to investigate the Homeland Security report for "unsubstantiated conclusions and political bias."
The senior Democrat of the House committee with oversight of the department said the report raises privacy and civil liberty issues. "This report appears to have blurred the line between violent belief, which is constitutionally protected, and violent action, which is not," Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., wrote in a letter to Napolitano.
The department's definition of left-wing extremism in the March 26 report includes a reference to violence, stating these groups that embrace anticapitalist, communist or socialist beliefs seek "to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes."
These reports are part of the department's routine analysis of intelligence information to give to law enforcement agencies guidance on possible security threats.
In February, the department issued a similar warning about possible cyber attacks from left wing extremists. In September, the agency reported that right-wing extremists over the past five years had used the immigration debate as a recruiting tool.
Since September, the agency issued reports on individual foreign and domestic extremist groups such as al-Qaida and Hammerskin Nation, a skinhead organization. The Hammerskin assessment said many of the group's members received military training and fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In an Aug. 21, 2007, report, the department put law enforcement on notice that U.S. minorities could be susceptible to al-Qaida propaganda, as the terror group links "jihadist rhetoric to the struggles and grievances of disaffected minority groups."
The latest report has turned into a "political football," said Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif. Harman, who chairs a House subcommittee on intelligence and information sharing, said the report could have been written more artfully, but added that "it was a well-intended effort to describe to law enforcement what things to look for."
"If the result is to dumb down intelligence products that could prevent the next attack to the homeland, we will all lose," she said.
DHS issued report on extremism despite concerns
FOX News By EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer Eileen Sullivan, Associated Press Writer – Thu Apr 16, 6:48 pm ET
WASHINGTON – Civil liberties officials at the Homeland Security Department flagged language in a controversial report on right-wing extremists, but the agency issued the report anyway.
The intelligence assessment issued to law enforcement last week said some military veterans could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or commit lone acts of violence. That prompted angry reactions from some lawmakers and veterans' groups.
Homeland Security spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said the report was issued before officials resolved problems raised by the agency's civil rights division about analysts' definition of right-wing extremism.
In a footnote in the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. It went on to say, "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report Thursday but acknowledged that the definition needs to be changed.
"If there's one part of that report I would rewrite, in the word-smithing, Washington-ese that goes on after the fact, it would be that footnote," Napolitano said Thursday on Fox News.
The same definition was included in the agency's March 26 report on domestic extremism. Both reports were marked "For Official Use Only."
The report cites the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh as one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.
Several lawmakers, the American Legion and Vets for Freedom took offense to the intelligence review. The Veterans of Foreign Wars defended it as an assessment, not an accusation.
Napolitano said, "We do not mean to suggest that veterans as a whole are at risk of becoming violent extremists."
She also said: "I apologize for that offense. It was certainly not intended."
The top Republican on the House intelligence committee, Michigan's Pete Hoekstra, has asked the director of national intelligence's ombudsman to investigate the Homeland Security report for "unsubstantiated conclusions and political bias."
The senior Democrat of the House committee with oversight of the department said the report raises privacy and civil liberty issues. "This report appears to have blurred the line between violent belief, which is constitutionally protected, and violent action, which is not," Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., wrote in a letter to Napolitano.
The department's definition of left-wing extremism in the March 26 report includes a reference to violence, stating these groups that embrace anticapitalist, communist or socialist beliefs seek "to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes."
These reports are part of the department's routine analysis of intelligence information to give to law enforcement agencies guidance on possible security threats.
In February, the department issued a similar warning about possible cyber attacks from left wing extremists. In September, the agency reported that right-wing extremists over the past five years had used the immigration debate as a recruiting tool.
Since September, the agency issued reports on individual foreign and domestic extremist groups such as al-Qaida and Hammerskin Nation, a skinhead organization. The Hammerskin assessment said many of the group's members received military training and fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In an Aug. 21, 2007, report, the department put law enforcement on notice that U.S. minorities could be susceptible to al-Qaida propaganda, as the terror group links "jihadist rhetoric to the struggles and grievances of disaffected minority groups."
The latest report has turned into a "political football," said Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif. Harman, who chairs a House subcommittee on intelligence and information sharing, said the report could have been written more artfully, but added that "it was a well-intended effort to describe to law enforcement what things to look for."
"If the result is to dumb down intelligence products that could prevent the next attack to the homeland, we will all lose," she said.
Jesus too contoversial for Georgetown
What would a Jewish university had done were it asked to cover the star of David?
***************************
Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
By Edwin Mora
Photo of Gaston Hall stage that shows symbol "IHS" that was covered up during President Obama's speech to accommodate a White House request. (Wikimedia photo)(CNSNews.com) - Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”--symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.
President Obama is greeted by Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia as he arrives to deliver remarks on the economy, April 14, 2009, at Georgetown University. Georgetown had covered the symbol "IHS" on the pediment above and behind the two men. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) “In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.
“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”
Pediment in Gaston Hall with "IHS" covered as photographed by CNSNews.com, April 15, 2009. (Photo by Penny Starr,CNSNews.com)On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood.
Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS" in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.
The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.
President Obama speaking at Gaston Hall at Georgetown on April 14 with the "IHS" covered up on the pediment behind him. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.
Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits.
Gaston Hall stage as it looked on the afternoon of April 15 with "IHS" still shrouded. (Photo by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com)Although the monogram was covered over on the wooden pediment at the back of the Gaston Hall stage where it would have been directly above and behind President Obama as he spoke, the letters “IHS” are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times on shields representing different parts of the United States and the world.
Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.
“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.
“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.”
***************************
Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
By Edwin Mora
Photo of Gaston Hall stage that shows symbol "IHS" that was covered up during President Obama's speech to accommodate a White House request. (Wikimedia photo)(CNSNews.com) - Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”--symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up--when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.
President Obama is greeted by Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia as he arrives to deliver remarks on the economy, April 14, 2009, at Georgetown University. Georgetown had covered the symbol "IHS" on the pediment above and behind the two men. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) “In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.
“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”
Pediment in Gaston Hall with "IHS" covered as photographed by CNSNews.com, April 15, 2009. (Photo by Penny Starr,CNSNews.com)On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood.
Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS" in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.
The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.
President Obama speaking at Gaston Hall at Georgetown on April 14 with the "IHS" covered up on the pediment behind him. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.
Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits.
Gaston Hall stage as it looked on the afternoon of April 15 with "IHS" still shrouded. (Photo by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com)Although the monogram was covered over on the wooden pediment at the back of the Gaston Hall stage where it would have been directly above and behind President Obama as he spoke, the letters “IHS” are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times on shields representing different parts of the United States and the world.
Obama did not mention the name of Jesus during his address. However, he did mention Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.
“There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells a story of two men…‘the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house…it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock,’” Obama said.
“We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand,” he added. “We must build our house upon a rock.”
Friday, April 10, 2009
Desert of godlessness
I love this man.
*********************
'We are shocked to see to what levels of brutality human beings can sink,' he will tell the congregation as he meditates on the stations of the cross at an evening ceremony at the Coliseum, Rome.
'Jesus is humiliated in new ways even today – when things that are most holy and profound in the faith are being trivialised, the sense of the sacred is allowed to erode,' he will say.
'Everything in public life risks being desacralised – persons, places, pledges, prayers, practices, words, sacred writings, religious formulae, symbols, ceremonies. Our life together is being increasingly secularised.
'Religious life grows diffident. Thus we see the most momentous matters placed among trifles, and trivialities glorified.
'Values and norms that held societies together and drew people to higher ideals are laughed at and thrown overboard. Jesus continues to be ridiculed.'
The Pope, who turns 82 later this month, will pray that Christians would respond to the problem by growing in faith.
'May we never question or mock serious things in life like a cynic,' he will say.
'Allow us not to drift into the desert of godlessness. Enable us to perceive you in the gentle breeze, see you in street corners, love you in the unborn child.'
*********************
'We are shocked to see to what levels of brutality human beings can sink,' he will tell the congregation as he meditates on the stations of the cross at an evening ceremony at the Coliseum, Rome.
'Jesus is humiliated in new ways even today – when things that are most holy and profound in the faith are being trivialised, the sense of the sacred is allowed to erode,' he will say.
'Everything in public life risks being desacralised – persons, places, pledges, prayers, practices, words, sacred writings, religious formulae, symbols, ceremonies. Our life together is being increasingly secularised.
'Religious life grows diffident. Thus we see the most momentous matters placed among trifles, and trivialities glorified.
'Values and norms that held societies together and drew people to higher ideals are laughed at and thrown overboard. Jesus continues to be ridiculed.'
The Pope, who turns 82 later this month, will pray that Christians would respond to the problem by growing in faith.
'May we never question or mock serious things in life like a cynic,' he will say.
'Allow us not to drift into the desert of godlessness. Enable us to perceive you in the gentle breeze, see you in street corners, love you in the unborn child.'
Thursday, April 9, 2009
"Stronger global regime"
Said our king last weekend in Prague:
"All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime."
Was this envisioned by our founders?
"All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime."
Was this envisioned by our founders?
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Obama most partisan ratings in modern era
More polarizing than Bush. This is not the progressive way.
Partisan Gap in Obama Job Approval Widest in Modern Era
April 2, 2009
From: To:
For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades. The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama's job performance is the result of a combination of high Democratic ratings for the president -- 88% job approval among Democrats -- and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans (27%).
By comparison, there was a somewhat smaller 51-point partisan gap in views of George W. Bush's job performance in April 2001, a few months into his first term. At that time, Republican enthusiasm for Bush was comparable to how Democrats feel about Obama today, but there was substantially less criticism from members of the opposition party. Among Democrats, 36% approved of Bush's job performance in April 2001; that compares with a 27% job approval rating for Obama among Republicans today.
The partisan gap in Bill Clinton's early days was also substantially smaller than what Obama faces, largely because Democrats were less enthusiastic about Clinton. In early April 1993, 71% of Democrats approved of Clinton's job performance, which is 17 points lower than Obama's current job approval among Democrats. Republican ratings of Clinton at that point (26%) are comparable to their current ratings of Obama today (27%).
The growing partisan divide in presidential approval ratings is part of a long-term trend. Going back in time, partisanship was far less evident in the early job approval ratings for both Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon. In fact, a majority of Republicans (56%) approved of Carter's job performance in late March 1977, and a majority of Democrats (55%) approved of Nixon's performance at a comparable point in his first term.
Partisan Gap in Obama Job Approval Widest in Modern Era
April 2, 2009
From: To:
For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades. The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama's job performance is the result of a combination of high Democratic ratings for the president -- 88% job approval among Democrats -- and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans (27%).
By comparison, there was a somewhat smaller 51-point partisan gap in views of George W. Bush's job performance in April 2001, a few months into his first term. At that time, Republican enthusiasm for Bush was comparable to how Democrats feel about Obama today, but there was substantially less criticism from members of the opposition party. Among Democrats, 36% approved of Bush's job performance in April 2001; that compares with a 27% job approval rating for Obama among Republicans today.
The partisan gap in Bill Clinton's early days was also substantially smaller than what Obama faces, largely because Democrats were less enthusiastic about Clinton. In early April 1993, 71% of Democrats approved of Clinton's job performance, which is 17 points lower than Obama's current job approval among Democrats. Republican ratings of Clinton at that point (26%) are comparable to their current ratings of Obama today (27%).
The growing partisan divide in presidential approval ratings is part of a long-term trend. Going back in time, partisanship was far less evident in the early job approval ratings for both Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon. In fact, a majority of Republicans (56%) approved of Carter's job performance in late March 1977, and a majority of Democrats (55%) approved of Nixon's performance at a comparable point in his first term.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Not a progressive tax
But for a progressive cause?
*******************
PROMISES, PROMISES: Obama tax pledge up in smoke
Apr 1 11:55 AM US/Eastern
By CALVIN WOODWARD
Associated Press Writer Share on Facebook
WASHINGTON (AP) - One of President Barack Obama's campaign pledges on taxes went up in puffs of smoke Wednesday.
The largest increase in tobacco taxes took effect despite Obama's promise not to raise taxes of any kind on families earning under $250,000 or individuals under $200,000.
This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich.
To be sure, Obama's tax promises in last year's campaign were most often made in the context of income taxes. Not always.
"I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
He repeatedly vowed "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime."
Now in office, Obama, who stopped smoking but has admitted he slips now and then, signed a law raising the tobacco tax nearly 62 cents on a pack of cigarettes, to $1.01. Other tobacco products saw similarly steep increases.
The extra money will be used to finance a major expansion of health insurance for children. That represents a step toward achieving another promise, to make sure all kids are covered.
Obama said in the campaign that Americans could have both—a broad boost in affordable health insurance for the nation without raising taxes on anyone but the rich.
His detailed campaign plan stated that his proposed improvement in health insurance and health technology "is more than covered" by raising taxes on the wealthy alone. It was not based on raising the tobacco tax.
The White House contends Obama's campaign pledge left room for measures such as the one financing children's health insurance.
"The president's position throughout the campaign was that he would not raise income or payroll taxes on families making less than $250,000, and that's a promise he has kept," said White House spokesman Reid H. Cherlin. "In this case, he supported a public health measure that will extend health coverage to 4 million children who are currently uninsured."
*******************
PROMISES, PROMISES: Obama tax pledge up in smoke
Apr 1 11:55 AM US/Eastern
By CALVIN WOODWARD
Associated Press Writer Share on Facebook
WASHINGTON (AP) - One of President Barack Obama's campaign pledges on taxes went up in puffs of smoke Wednesday.
The largest increase in tobacco taxes took effect despite Obama's promise not to raise taxes of any kind on families earning under $250,000 or individuals under $200,000.
This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich.
To be sure, Obama's tax promises in last year's campaign were most often made in the context of income taxes. Not always.
"I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
He repeatedly vowed "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime."
Now in office, Obama, who stopped smoking but has admitted he slips now and then, signed a law raising the tobacco tax nearly 62 cents on a pack of cigarettes, to $1.01. Other tobacco products saw similarly steep increases.
The extra money will be used to finance a major expansion of health insurance for children. That represents a step toward achieving another promise, to make sure all kids are covered.
Obama said in the campaign that Americans could have both—a broad boost in affordable health insurance for the nation without raising taxes on anyone but the rich.
His detailed campaign plan stated that his proposed improvement in health insurance and health technology "is more than covered" by raising taxes on the wealthy alone. It was not based on raising the tobacco tax.
The White House contends Obama's campaign pledge left room for measures such as the one financing children's health insurance.
"The president's position throughout the campaign was that he would not raise income or payroll taxes on families making less than $250,000, and that's a promise he has kept," said White House spokesman Reid H. Cherlin. "In this case, he supported a public health measure that will extend health coverage to 4 million children who are currently uninsured."
Nina Fedoroff - neoMalthusian with Rice, now Clinton
Where have we heard this before? I'm only surprised that Condi Rice would have had this ideologue on staff.
*******************
Earth population 'exceeds limits'
By Steven Duke
Editor, One Planet, BBC World Service
LIVING ON A CROWDED EARTH
Current world population - 6.8bn
Net growth per day - 218,030
Forecast made for 2040 - 9bn
Source: US Census Bureau
There are already too many people living on Planet Earth, according to one of most influential science advisors in the US government.
Nina Fedoroff told the BBC One Planet programme that humans had exceeded the Earth's "limits of sustainability".
Dr Fedoroff has been the science and technology advisor to the US secretary of state since 2007, initially working with Condoleezza Rice.
Under the new Obama administration, she now advises Hillary Clinton.
"We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can't support many more people," Dr Fedoroff said, stressing the need for humans to become much better at managing "wild lands", and in particular water supplies.
Pressed on whether she thought the world population was simply too high, Dr Fedoroff replied: "There are probably already too many people on the planet."
GM Foods 'needed'
A National Medal of Science laureate (America's highest science award), the professor of molecular biology believes part of that better land management must include the use of genetically modified foods.
"We have six-and-a-half-billion people on the planet, going rapidly towards seven.
"We're going to need a lot of inventiveness about how we use water and grow crops," she told the BBC.
THE MOST POPULOUS NATIONS
China - 1.33bn
India - 1.16bn
USA - 306m
Indonesia - 230m
Brazil - 191m
"We accept exactly the same technology (as GM food) in medicine, and yet in producing food we want to go back to the 19th Century."
Dr Fedoroff, who wrote a book about GM Foods in 2004, believes critics of genetically modified maize, corn and rice are living in bygone times.
"We wouldn't think of going to our doctor and saying 'Treat me the way doctors treated people in the 19th Century', and yet that's what we're demanding in food production."
In a wide ranging interview, Dr Fedoroff was asked if the US accepted its responsibility to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be driving human-induced climate change. "Yes, and going forward, we just have to be more realistic about our contribution and decrease it - and I think you'll see that happening."
And asked if America would sign up to legally binding targets on carbon emissions - something the world's biggest economy has been reluctant to do in the past - the professor was equally clear. "I think we'll have to do that eventually - and the sooner the better."
The full interview with Dr Nina Federoff can be heard on this week's edition of the new One Planet programme on the BBC World Service
*******************
Earth population 'exceeds limits'
By Steven Duke
Editor, One Planet, BBC World Service
LIVING ON A CROWDED EARTH
Current world population - 6.8bn
Net growth per day - 218,030
Forecast made for 2040 - 9bn
Source: US Census Bureau
There are already too many people living on Planet Earth, according to one of most influential science advisors in the US government.
Nina Fedoroff told the BBC One Planet programme that humans had exceeded the Earth's "limits of sustainability".
Dr Fedoroff has been the science and technology advisor to the US secretary of state since 2007, initially working with Condoleezza Rice.
Under the new Obama administration, she now advises Hillary Clinton.
"We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can't support many more people," Dr Fedoroff said, stressing the need for humans to become much better at managing "wild lands", and in particular water supplies.
Pressed on whether she thought the world population was simply too high, Dr Fedoroff replied: "There are probably already too many people on the planet."
GM Foods 'needed'
A National Medal of Science laureate (America's highest science award), the professor of molecular biology believes part of that better land management must include the use of genetically modified foods.
"We have six-and-a-half-billion people on the planet, going rapidly towards seven.
"We're going to need a lot of inventiveness about how we use water and grow crops," she told the BBC.
THE MOST POPULOUS NATIONS
China - 1.33bn
India - 1.16bn
USA - 306m
Indonesia - 230m
Brazil - 191m
"We accept exactly the same technology (as GM food) in medicine, and yet in producing food we want to go back to the 19th Century."
Dr Fedoroff, who wrote a book about GM Foods in 2004, believes critics of genetically modified maize, corn and rice are living in bygone times.
"We wouldn't think of going to our doctor and saying 'Treat me the way doctors treated people in the 19th Century', and yet that's what we're demanding in food production."
In a wide ranging interview, Dr Fedoroff was asked if the US accepted its responsibility to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be driving human-induced climate change. "Yes, and going forward, we just have to be more realistic about our contribution and decrease it - and I think you'll see that happening."
And asked if America would sign up to legally binding targets on carbon emissions - something the world's biggest economy has been reluctant to do in the past - the professor was equally clear. "I think we'll have to do that eventually - and the sooner the better."
The full interview with Dr Nina Federoff can be heard on this week's edition of the new One Planet programme on the BBC World Service
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
