Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Saturday, January 17, 2026
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 1004)
Entertainment, News, Opinion, US

harvey-weinstein

So, the Hollywood hypocrite Harvey Weinstein says his upcoming secret “big movie” starring Meryl Streep will make the NRA “wish they weren’t alive.”

Sen. Ted Cruz responded to Weinstein in an interview with Greta Van Susteren (see below), stating Weinstein would want the “single mom who lives in the inner city” to be defenseless against armed attackers. He also went on point to the utter hypocrisy of the man who was behind “Kill Bill” and other violent productions.

“That’s not a message the American people agree with. We have a right to protect ourselves, it’s protected in the Constitution. And even if liberal Hollywood types want to take it away, it isn’t going anywhere,” Cruz said, referring to the Second Amendment.

While Sen. Ted Cruz made the constitutional and practical argument, from a psychological and physiological perspective there is a deeply disturbing aspect to the statements made by hypocrite Harvey Weinstein regarding his little secret film, which will now mostly likely be a flop.

Whether it is out of ignorance or greed, liberal elites like Harvey Weinstein refuse to admit that they — unequivocally — are a large part of the problem. I underscore unequivocally, because unlike guns, it is actual established science that media and entertainment with a caliber of violence seen from Harvey Weinstein and other “useful idiots” in Hollywood, unequivocally create and reinforce the culture of violence in America.

When I was conducting research for Our Virtuous Republic, which covers this issue in the section “Targeting Empowerment & The Right Of Protection,” I was surprised to find the amount unanimous condemnation of the entertainment industry by medical professionals. According to the Council on Communications and Media from the American Academy of Pediatrics, specifically Media Violence published on Nov. 1, 2009:

Research has associated exposure to media violence with a variety of physical and mental health problems for children and adolescents, including aggressive and violent behavior, bullying, desensitization to violence, fear, depression, nightmares, and sleep disturbances… Several different psychological and physiologic processes underlie media violence on aggressive attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and emotions, and these are well understood.

In other words, not only are Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner, and other already-troubled individuals emboldened by and act upon behaviors depicted in films — such as, oh say, Weinstein’s “Pulp Fiction” — but the minds of growing, otherwise normal children are polluted by them, as well. And it is established medical science.

It is true, admittedly, the job of parental guidance plays a great role in sheltering children and developing adolescents from the mentally warping entertainment industry Harvey Weinstein has made a fortune in furthering, but there is a bigger challenge to parents in this area than in the so-called “gun culture.”

Again, perhaps it is ignorance or selfish greed that prevents them from seeing this certain reality, I really don’t know. But the difference between the gun culture and the culture of violence is one of parental empowerment environmental control. That is to say, parents who raise their children around guns and teach them their proper use and reverence, control the exposure environment and observe the learning process.

With media violence, on the other hand, or rather the culture of violence produced by Harvey Weinstein for money, parental control is limited to what their children do or don’t see only within the confines of their own home.

Hollywood hypocrite Harvey Weinstein says his upcoming

News, Politics

senator tom colburn

Senator Tom Coburn, a champion in the battle against government waste, fraud and abuse in Washington, announced Thursday he would be stepping down at the end of 2014.

The Oklahoma senator previously announced he would not seek reelection, however, his new comments reveal that he will be leaving Congress a full 2 years earlier than planned.

It is well-known Coburn has been battling a recurrent case of prostate cancer, and was suggesting early retirement during an interview with reporters last week.

“Serving as Oklahoma’s senator has been, and continues to be, one of the great privileges and blessings of my life,” said Coburn, who is now 65. “But after much prayer and consideration, I have decided that I will leave my Senate seat at the end of this Congress.”

Senator Tom Coburn rode in to Washington on the 1994 “Republican Revolution” wave, where he served in the House, as he previously promised he would, for just 3 terms. In other words, Colburn term-limited himself and actually stuck to it, unlike many others who have reneged on their campaign promises over the years.

Coburn didn’t return to politics until he was elected to the Senate in 2004. Since then, he has been a fierce critic of what he described as excessive government spending, and was a pioneer in opposing the earmarking of special projects, known as pork, which was brought to the public’s attention every year in his annual “Wastebook” report.

Coburn, who is a licensed physician specializing in family medicine, obstetrics and allergy treatment, has long been battling prostate cancer. In the past, he also suffered from colon cancer and melanoma. However, he said he was retiring to honor his pledge to serve no more than 2 terms in the Senate, even though he will be stepping down two years before his term expires.

“This is the worst news I have heard in a very long time. He’s irreplaceable.” – a senior Senate Republican aide talking to Fox News First. “He’s irreplaceable.”

Indeed, there have been few to no lawmakers who have courageously and repeatedly proposed a quarter-trillion dollars in cuts, a result of his tedious combing through of GAO reports outlining fraud, waste and abuse.

“As a citizen, I am now convinced that I can best serve my own children and grandchildren by shifting my focus elsewhere,” Coburn said in his announcement. “In the meantime, I look forward to finishing this year strong. I intend to continue our fight for Oklahoma, and will do everything in my power to force the Senate to re-embrace its heritage of debate, deliberation and consensus as we face our many challenges ahead.”

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell reacted to the news by describing Coburn as “one of the most intelligent, principled, and decent men in modern Senate history” in a statement.

“Tom is a legend in his own time, an extraordinary man and a deeply serious lawmaker who has made an immense difference to his country and to this body. We will miss him terribly when he leaves the Senate, and we will stand with him every step of the way as he wages this latest of many tough battles that he has fought, and won,” the statement read.

Senator Tom Coburn, a champion in the

Opinion

WASHINGTON — By early 2011, writes former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, he had concluded that President Obama “doesn’t believe in his own [Afghanistan] strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his.”

Not his? America is at war and he’s America’s commander-in-chief. For the soldier being shot at in the field, it makes no difference under whose administration the fighting began. In fact, three out of four Americans killed in Afghanistan have died under Barack Obama’s command. That’s ownership enough.

Moreover, Gates’ doubts about Obama had begun long before. A year earlier, trying to understand how two senior officials could be openly working against expressed policy, Gates concluded that “the most likely explanation was that the president himself did not really believe the strategy he had approved would work.” This, just four months after Obama ordered his 30,000 troop “surge” into Afghanistan, warning the nation that “our security is at stake … the security of our allies, and the common security of the world.”

The odd thing about Gates’ insider revelation of Obama’s lack of faith in his own policy is that we knew it all along. Obama was emitting discordant notes from the very beginning. In the West Point “surge” speech itself, the very sentence after that announcement consisted of the further announcement that the additional troops would be withdrawn in 18 months.

How can any commander be so precise so far in advance about an enterprise as inherently contingent and unpredictable? It was a signal to friend and foe that he wasn’t serious. And as if to amplify that signal, Obama added that “the nation that I’m most interested in building is our own,” thus immediately undermining the very importance of the war to which he was committing new troops.

Such stunning ambivalence, I wrote at the time, had produced the most uncertain trumpet ever sounded by a president. One could sense that Obama’s heart was never in it.

And now we know. Indeed, this became hauntingly clear to Obama’s own defense secretary within just a few months — before the majority of the troops had arrived in the field, before the new strategy had even been tested.

How can a commander in good conscience send troops on a mission he doesn’t believe in, a mission from which he knows some will never return? Even worse, Obama ordered a major escalation, expending much blood but not an ounce of his own political capital. Over the next four years, notes Gates with chagrin, Obama ignored the obligation of any commander to explain, support and try to rally the nation to the cause.

And when he finally terminated the surge, he did so in the middle of the 2012 fighting season. Militarily incoherent — but politically convenient. It allowed Obama to campaign for re-election proclaiming that “the tide of war is receding.”

One question remains, however. If he wasn’t committed to the mission, if he didn’t care about winning, why did Obama throw these soldiers into battle in the first place?

Because for years the Democrats had used Afghanistan as a talking point to rail against the Iraq War — while avoiding the politically suicidal appearance of McGovernite pacifism. As consultant Bob Shrum later admitted, “I was part of the 2004 Kerry campaign, which elevated the idea of Afghanistan as ‘the right war’ to conventional Democratic wisdom. This was accurate as criticism of the Bush administration, but it was also reflexive and perhaps by now even misleading as policy.”

Translation: They were never really serious about Afghanistan. (Nor apparently about Iraq either. Gates recounts with some shock that Hillary Clinton admitted she opposed the Iraq surge for political reasons, and Obama conceded that much of the opposition had indeed been political.) The Democratic mantra — Iraq War, bad; Afghan War, good — was simply a partisan device to ride anti-Bush, anti-Iraq War feeling without appearing squishy.

Look, they could say: We’re just being tough and discriminating.

Iraq is a dumb war, said Obama repeatedly. It’s a war of choice. Afghanistan is a war of necessity, the central front in the war on terror. Having run on that, Obama had a need to at least make a show of trying to win the good war, the smart war.

“If I had ever come to believe the military part of the strategy would not lead to success as I defined it,” writes Gates. “I could not have continued signing the deployment orders.” The commander-in-chief, Gates’ book makes clear, had no such scruples.

Charles Krauthammer’s email address is [email protected].

Krauthammer: "If he [Obama] wasn't committed to

News, Policy

nsa reform

In a long-awaited action to begin much needed NSA reform, President Obama will punt on the more controversial aspects to the NSA spying programs and keep much of the data under executive branch authority.

Obama on Friday will call for ending the National Security Agency’s ability to store phone data from millions of Americans, but don’t get too comfortable yet. Instead, he will propose for Congress and the Justice Department — which is still under executive authority — to hold these records.

In essence, the NSA reform proposal will take power and authority over phone data from one man who lied to Congress under oath, James Clapper, and give it to another man who lied under oath to Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder.

After months of silence from the president on the issue, Obama will finally attempt to argue the need to store metadata, one of many programs exposed by leaker Edward Snowden. The announcement comes after a months-long review of the controversial spying practices by the White House.

However, Obama will punt on NSA reforms surrounding the most controversial aspects of the U.S. government’s data-collection programs, including those attacked by phone and Internet companies, whom of which complain American customers have lost faith in their ability to ensure their privacy is protected.

“They’re going to punt,”said James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “For many of the big issues, they’ll express an opinion but leave it up to congressional action,” he added.

And they did. But as far as monitoring world entities, Obama order changes to the current system, which may result in intelligence breakdowns. “Unless there is a compelling interest, we will not monitor heads of states” in friendly countries, Obama said.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Thursday that the president believes the government can make surveillance activities “more transparent in order to give the public more confidence about the problems and the oversight of the programs.”

Yet, despite the White House promises, none of these reforms will address the storing of information through any other method outside of phone surveillance.

Proponents of the Fourth Amendment have been pressing for guidelines that significantly narrow the amount of data collected from Americans. As previously reported, libertarian-leaning Republican Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), is suing the Obama administration for the NSA spying on Americans in an effort to “protect the Fourth Amendment.”

In December, Obama’s own panel proposed moving the records to the phone companies or another third party, and requiring the NSA to get separate authority from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court each time it wants to access the data. But in Obama’s NSA reform proposal, the likelihood that information will still be stored separate of transparent, open authorities independent of the executive branch is very high.

The White House official did say Obama will not actually decide who should ultimately hold the data. He will call on the intelligence community and Congress Friday to consult on where it should be maintained, or another punt.

The NSA reform guidelines, however, will be effective immediately “so that a judicial finding is required before we query the database.”

The leaks from Snowden showed an ever-increasing polio state, with the practice of pushing privacy beneath “security” being institutionalized in unaccountable government agencies.

On Thursday, The Guardian reported that the NSA collects nearly 200 million text messages a day from people around the world as part of a program code-named “Dishfire.” The program allows the agency to collect data on people’s travel plans, phone contacts and financial transactions.

The latest disclosure came on the heels of a New York Times report claiming the NSA has implanted software on nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the U.S. to conduct surveillance on those machines using radio frequency technology.

The NSA explained by claiming the effort an “active defense,” claiming they have used the technology to monitor units of China’s Army, the Russian military, drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and sometime U.S. partners against terrorism like Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan, the Times reported.

In a long-awaited action to begin much

US

Ladies and gentlemen, there is unethical and ideological, and then there is Lawrence O’Donnell unethical and ideological. Even the 12 or so viewers who actually watch his show can acknowledge his bought-and-paid for inconsistency.

No matter which party each of us belongs to, our freedom is at risk whenever hyper-partisanship causes us to allow condemnable behavior to continue within our own ranks. It is a threat to the very fabric of representative government when those on TV get this far off the reservation.

We can see this ultra-bias little twerp must think he is pretty funny, but the only one laughing is Hillary Clinton, who knows she has a ton of “useful idiots” like Lawrence O’Donnell in her Rolodex, ready and willing to throw their own integrity out of the window whenever they feel blessed enough to receive her phone call.

“How may I serve you your majesty? I am but an unworthy, lowly little servant with no wealth of character, but whatever I do have I shall eagerly surrender to you, my grace.”

When news first hit of the IRS scandal, O’Donnell exposed his utter contempt for good character and blind ideological tendencies when he had the nerve to say the agency was within their right to target Tea Party groups.

His reasoning? Because they are political organizations, nothing at all like ACORN, the NAACP, the ACLU, Hillary 2016, and the like.

lawrence o'donnell

Forget being outraged over the fact nobody will be fired for the worst government abuse of power in the last 100 years, or the fact Obama appointed a donor to make that decision, it wasn’t even a real scandal.

A traffic jam for political retribution, however, prompts Lawrence O’Donnell to use his painfully lacking intellect to conjure up a political ad.

In his cornball video, he pieced together the very unoriginal, old before and after ad, which shows Chris Christie stating he trusts his cabinet with an enormous amount of power. The “after,” then shows the New Jersey governor’s apology during his press conference following the “Bridgegate” scandal.

This guy is cheese at its stinky cheesiest. Unlike Obama, who used the single-most feared and intrusive wing of the federal government to punish his political enemies, obviously to ensure a 2010 repeat scenario didn’t off-set his voter fraud machine in 2012, Christie actually took responsibility and held people to account for injuring citizens with the levers of government.

Obama? Not so much.

In all seriousness, Obama’s entire cabinet has been involved in one scandal or another, and have egregiously managed to escape any form of punishment, whatsoever.

The Justice Department engineered the gun-running scheme “Fast and Furious,” hoping to increase gun violence so the administration could make an argument for further degrading Americans’ Second Amendment rights. I know it doesn’t bother liberals like O’Donnell, because you actually need decency to care about Brian Terry’s death, but that fake scandal did result in the death of several innocent people. Yet Eric Holder not only lived to wiretap another day, but was later flat-out caught lying to Congress about tapping journalists’ phones.

Also in the news this week, outside of the “end of days” traffic jam, the Senate released a report damning Hillary Clinton for creating the conditions ripe for disaster in Benghazi, which resulted in the death of 4 Americans. Yet Killary not only lived to lie to the victims’ parents another day, but O’Donnell is already auditioning to be her lap-dog in 2016.

It really shouldn’t be that hard for him, since he had so much practice with the Obama presidency, whom he and other liberal media dunces helped to create.

You might think a care-for-all redistributionist liberal would think there are bigger stories this month — oh say, the disgraceful 74,000 jobs created in the month of December, and the nearly 92 million Americans who gave up on the American Dream because liberals got their communist dream in the White House — O’Donnell opts instead to show everyone he knows how to use YouTube.

This guy is a dunce and a disgrace. Judging by his pathetic ratings, pathetic even for MSNBC, most news-watching Americans wish they really were about to hear “the last word,” that is, the last word out Lawrence O’Donnell. Unfortunately, just as the Tea Party groups have a right to free speech without being targeted by the IRS, he has the right to sound like an oxygen thief.

Most Americans wish they heard "The Last

Economy, Policy

2014-index-of-economic-freedom

In the 2014 Index of Economic Freedom report, the United States has dropped off the map, a trend under Obama that moved the U.S. from 6 in 2009 to just 12.

The index, which was conducted by Heritage, found the United States to have an overall economic freedom score of 75.5.

“Over the 20-year history of the Index, the U.S.’s economic freedom has fluctuated significantly,” according to Heritage. “During the first 10 years, its score rose gradually, and it joined the ranks of the economically ‘free’ in 2006.”

But it has been all down hill from there, with a dramatic decline of almost 6 points since then, underscoring significant losses in property rights, freedom from corruption, and control of government spending.

According to Heritage, the United States is the only country to have seven consecutive years of losses in economic freedom. A table summarizing the entire study by country, is below.

name index year overall score property rights freedom from corruption fiscal freedom government spending business freedom labor freedom monetary freedom trade freedom investment freedom financial freedom
Afghanistan 2014 N/A N/A 10.0 91.2 84.2 63.1 75.0 74.3 N/A 65.0 N/A
Albania 2014 66.9 30.0 30.4 92.7 75.6 78.1 49.7 80.0 87.5 75.0 70.0
Algeria 2014 50.8 30.0 28.7 80.5 51.0 66.3 48.3 67.8 60.8 45.0 30.0
Angola 2014 47.7 15.0 17.7 87.7 55.3 47.5 40.1 63.6 70.1 40.0 40.0
Argentina 2014 44.6 15.0 29.5 63.5 49.9 53.9 44.9 60.0 68.9 30.0 30.0
Armenia 2014 68.9 30.0 26.7 86.5 81.3 83.1 78.5 77.0 85.5 70.0 70.0
Australia 2014 82.0 90.0 87.7 64.2 62.6 94.6 79.2 80.5 86.4 85.0 90.0
Austria 2014 72.4 90.0 75.5 51.0 23.5 76.3 80.5 79.5 87.8 90.0 70.0
Azerbaijan 2014 61.3 20.0 22.7 88.1 64.8 73.5 77.9 78.8 77.2 60.0 50.0
Bahrain 2014 75.1 60.0 49.4 99.9 71.4 76.3 82.0 78.4 78.6 75.0 80.0
Bangladesh 2014 54.1 20.0 23.3 72.5 92.3 70.8 51.9 65.9 59.0 55.0 30.0
Barbados 2014 68.3 80.0 77.9 74.0 49.8 72.8 78.4 74.6 60.6 55.0 60.0
Belarus 2014 50.1 20.0 24.6 89.2 61.2 73.4 77.7 33.9 81.4 30.0 10.0
Belgium 2014 69.9 80.0 74.2 44.8 14.8 89.9 72.7 79.5 87.8 85.0 70.0
Belize 2014 56.7 30.0 6.7 82.1 74.2 71.6 67.2 77.6 67.8 40.0 50.0
Benin 2014 57.1 30.0 29.5 68.3 86.1 51.0 50.5 75.4 60.0 70.0 50.0
Bhutan 2014 56.7 60.0 58.8 82.9 57.2 59.4 83.6 65.8 49.4 20.0 30.0
Bolivia 2014 48.4 10.0 28.1 87.1 62.5 53.4 29.9 70.0 77.6 15.0 50.0
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2014 58.4 20.0 33.9 82.9 27.4 55.5 62.4 80.1 86.9 75.0 60.0
Botswana 2014 72.0 70.0 61.2 81.0 69.8 68.5 69.7 72.4 82.7 75.0 70.0
Brazil 2014 56.9 50.0 37.9 68.8 54.1 53.8 49.8 69.9 69.3 55.0 60.0
Brunei Darussalam 2014 69.0 40.0 53.3 90.2 66.1 68.2 96.5 74.2 81.8 70.0 50.0
Bulgaria 2014 65.7 30.0 35.2 91.2 64.5 73.5 80.2 79.6 87.8 55.0 60.0
Burkina Faso 2014 58.9 30.0 31.3 83.0 82.3 60.7 55.0 78.8 67.8 60.0 40.0
Burma 2014 46.5 10.0 11.6 86.9 89.2 28.3 75.7 64.8 73.6 15.0 10.0
Burundi 2014 51.4 20.0 15.9 73.5 51.9 59.8 63.1 68.2 71.8 60.0 30.0
Cambodia 2014 57.4 30.0 18.7 90.8 88.4 36.6 50.2 77.9 71.0 60.0 50.0
Cameroon 2014 52.6 30.0 21.9 71.7 86.0 45.0 56.1 69.4 61.2 35.0 50.0
Canada 2014 80.2 90.0 87.7 79.7 47.3 89.3 83.1 76.3 88.3 80.0 80.0
Cape Verde 2014 66.1 70.0 54.9 77.4 68.6 63.8 48.0 79.1 69.6 70.0 60.0
Central African Republic 2014 46.7 10.0 20.6 65.1 92.6 33.9 40.4 72.5 51.8 50.0 30.0
Chad 2014 44.5 20.0 15.9 46.2 80.0 24.9 43.3 69.8 55.2 50.0 40.0
Chile 2014 78.7 90.0 72.3 76.5 83.8 69.3 69.3 84.1 82.0 90.0 70.0
China 2014 52.5 20.0 35.0 69.9 82.9 49.7 61.9 73.3 71.8 30.0 30.0
Colombia 2014 70.7 50.0 33.2 80.6 74.9 85.2 80.5 78.8 78.8 75.0 70.0
Comoros 2014 51.4 30.0 22.1 64.5 85.3 49.4 50.1 74.5 72.7 35.0 30.0
Costa Rica 2014 66.9 50.0 50.9 80.0 90.0 64.9 53.3 76.3 83.8 70.0 50.0
Côte d’Ivoire 2014 57.7 30.0 22.1 79.1 79.8 55.1 59.0 80.6 71.4 50.0 50.0
Croatia 2014 60.4 40.0 41.1 69.4 45.8 61.4 39.4 79.2 87.4 80.0 60.0
Cuba 2014 28.7 10.0 41.2 60.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 65.8 60.0 0.0 10.0
Cyprus 2014 67.6 70.0 64.0 79.7 36.2 79.7 70.2 78.8 82.8 65.0 50.0
Czech Republic 2014 72.2 70.0 45.3 81.7 43.8 70.1 84.0 79.4 87.8 80.0 80.0
Democratic Republic of Congo 2014 40.6 10.0 17.6 69.4 74.6 30.0 38.5 63.0 63.0 20.0 20.0
Denmark 2014 76.1 90.0 93.7 39.3 0.5 98.1 91.2 80.0 87.8 90.0 90.0
Djibouti 2014 55.9 30.0 30.9 80.6 62.8 42.7 65.1 77.2 54.8 65.0 50.0
Dominica 2014 65.2 60.0 53.5 72.9 61.7 75.0 70.7 85.8 72.7 70.0 30.0
Dominican Republic 2014 61.3 30.0 27.3 83.7 92.3 56.1 55.2 75.7 77.8 75.0 40.0
Ecuador 2014 48.0 20.0 26.0 79.8 41.8 52.8 52.0 66.1 71.8 30.0 40.0
Egypt 2014 52.9 20.0 28.6 85.6 69.6 62.7 45.7 60.5 71.4 45.0 40.0
El Salvador 2014 66.2 40.0 34.3 79.6 85.8 59.6 63.3 80.0 79.0 70.0 70.0
Equatorial Guinea 2014 44.4 10.0 16.6 75.5 62.6 43.4 41.5 75.4 53.8 35.0 30.0
Eritrea 2014 38.5 10.0 22.9 57.0 66.1 18.6 63.6 57.6 69.1 0.0 20.0
Estonia 2014 75.9 90.0 64.2 80.4 56.0 77.6 55.9 76.9 87.8 90.0 80.0
Ethiopia 2014 50.0 30.0 27.0 77.5 89.9 57.8 54.7 59.0 64.2 20.0 20.0
Fiji 2014 58.7 25.0 20.0 82.3 76.2 64.9 73.1 75.2 70.2 50.0 50.0
Finland 2014 73.4 90.0 93.4 65.1 8.9 93.6 46.5 78.9 87.8 90.0 80.0
France 2014 63.5 80.0 69.9 48.4 5.6 79.9 51.8 76.1 82.8 70.0 70.0
Gabon 2014 57.8 40.0 29.1 74.5 81.7 58.9 63.0 75.1 61.0 55.0 40.0
Georgia 2014 72.6 40.0 42.8 87.3 69.7 87.8 91.2 78.4 88.6 80.0 60.0
Germany 2014 73.4 90.0 80.1 61.2 38.2 89.9 46.4 80.8 87.8 90.0 70.0
Ghana 2014 64.2 50.0 40.4 85.4 83.3 62.6 60.2 65.8 64.8 70.0 60.0
Greece 2014 55.7 40.0 33.2 65.9 19.2 75.8 53.9 76.3 82.8 60.0 50.0
Guatemala 2014 61.2 25.0 28.7 79.6 93.6 58.4 49.3 76.7 85.4 65.0 50.0
Guinea 2014 53.5 20.0 19.2 69.3 86.2 51.8 73.4 64.1 61.2 50.0 40.0
Guinea-Bissau 2014 51.3 20.0 20.2 89.0 86.6 40.5 61.4 74.4 61.4 30.0 30.0
Guyana 2014 55.7 30.0 24.4 68.4 71.8 64.3 72.6 78.1 72.0 45.0 30.0
Haiti 2014 48.9 10.0 16.9 80.3 66.3 33.3 68.5 73.6 70.4 40.0 30.0
Honduras 2014 57.1 30.0 23.7 84.9 79.8 55.4 26.5 75.1 75.4 60.0 60.0
Hong Kong 2014 90.1 90.0 82.3 93.0 89.7 98.9 95.5 82.0 90.0 90.0 90.0
Hungary 2014 67.0 60.0 48.6 81.1 26.8 79.3 65.7 75.6 87.8 75.0 70.0
Iceland 2014 72.4 90.0 84.2 72.9 32.9 91.2 59.1 76.0 87.9 70.0 60.0
India 2014 55.7 50.0 31.5 79.4 77.8 37.7 74.0 65.5 65.6 35.0 40.0
Indonesia 2014 58.5 30.0 28.0 83.4 89.8 54.8 47.8 76.4 74.8 40.0 60.0
Iran 2014 40.3 10.0 23.4 80.6 85.9 62.3 41.7 47.3 41.4 0.0 10.0
Iraq 2014 N/A N/A 13.7 95.5 40.3 56.9 73.4 70.0 N/A N/A N/A
Ireland 2014 76.2 90.0 74.8 74.0 30.6 83.4 79.5 81.7 87.8 90.0 70.0
Israel 2014 68.4 75.0 59.3 60.1 40.3 73.2 63.0 80.6 82.9 80.0 70.0
Italy 2014 60.9 50.0 38.5 55.5 25.6 75.5 52.5 78.9 87.8 85.0 60.0
Jamaica 2014 66.7 40.0 33.0 77.2 69.4 84.6 75.6 77.3 75.1 85.0 50.0
Japan 2014 72.4 80.0 77.8 69.2 47.1 80.0 79.8 87.5 82.4 70.0 50.0
Jordan 2014 69.2 60.0 45.6 94.0 66.9 62.0 72.9 81.3 79.6 70.0 60.0
Kazakhstan 2014 63.7 30.0 25.7 92.9 85.0 74.4 86.7 74.4 78.2 40.0 50.0
Kenya 2014 57.1 30.0 21.0 78.0 74.6 55.8 64.0 74.9 72.8 50.0 50.0
Kiribati 2014 46.3 30.0 29.2 71.4 0.0 57.0 83.6 81.3 55.4 25.0 30.0
Kosovo 2014 N/A 30.0 28.6 92.7 73.0 58.1 71.3 72.7 N/A 65.0 N/A
Kuwait 2014 62.3 50.0 43.7 97.7 55.6 57.7 63.6 73.2 76.7 55.0 50.0
Kyrgyz Republic 2014 61.1 20.0 19.2 94.6 60.2 74.2 83.8 73.7 75.2 60.0 50.0
Laos 2014 51.2 15.0 18.6 86.6 86.7 60.7 54.9 75.5 58.6 35.0 20.0
Latvia 2014 68.7 50.0 43.6 84.6 54.9 82.5 68.5 79.7 87.8 85.0 50.0
Lebanon 2014 59.4 20.0 24.5 90.9 73.7 55.6 58.7 74.5 75.8 60.0 60.0
Lesotho 2014 49.5 40.0 37.1 67.4 0.0 54.0 62.4 75.5 68.6 50.0 40.0
Liberia 2014 52.4 30.0 33.8 83.6 70.5 62.3 47.0 72.9 64.1 40.0 20.0
Libya 2014 N/A 10.0 18.3 95.0 0.0 50.1 77.9 66.9 N/A 5.0 20.0
Liechtenstein 2014 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 90.0 85.0 80.0
Lithuania 2014 73.0 60.0 49.9 92.9 55.9 85.7 59.0 78.6 87.8 80.0 80.0
Luxembourg 2014 74.2 90.0 84.1 62.8 47.6 72.6 43.1 78.9 87.8 95.0 80.0
Macau 2014 71.3 60.0 49.7 71.4 91.7 60.0 55.0 79.8 90.0 85.0 70.0
Macedonia 2014 68.6 35.0 39.6 91.4 70.7 81.0 78.8 83.5 85.9 60.0 60.0
Madagascar 2014 61.7 40.0 27.3 90.8 92.3 62.8 43.9 77.6 77.8 55.0 50.0
Malawi 2014 55.4 45.0 31.9 78.0 63.0 38.9 60.3 64.1 72.7 50.0 50.0
Malaysia 2014 69.6 55.0 44.3 84.6 75.6 85.6 78.5 81.0 76.4 55.0 60.0
Maldives 2014 51.0 20.0 21.9 97.4 43.8 87.4 71.7 69.4 43.8 25.0 30.0
Mali 2014 55.5 20.0 27.7 69.8 81.7 48.0 63.2 76.7 73.2 55.0 40.0
Malta 2014 66.4 75.0 55.8 63.7 47.2 62.4 53.2 79.1 87.8 80.0 60.0
Mauritania 2014 53.2 25.0 23.9 81.7 75.8 38.0 53.1 75.5 69.0 50.0 40.0
Mauritius 2014 76.5 65.0 53.4 92.2 81.8 74.4 78.0 76.7 88.6 85.0 70.0
Mexico 2014 66.8 50.0 29.7 80.9 78.9 76.8 58.3 77.4 85.6 70.0 60.0
Micronesia 2014 49.8 30.0 30.0 97.5 0.0 51.7 77.9 75.2 81.0 25.0 30.0
Moldova 2014 57.3 40.0 29.5 85.8 54.4 70.1 37.9 75.0 80.1 50.0 50.0
Mongolia 2014 58.9 30.0 28.2 81.8 39.1 71.8 81.1 72.4 74.7 50.0 60.0
Montenegro 2014 63.6 40.0 37.8 92.5 42.6 77.6 68.6 78.6 83.1 65.0 50.0
Morocco 2014 58.3 40.0 33.3 71.3 64.1 76.2 31.5 78.1 58.8 70.0 60.0
Mozambique 2014 55.0 30.0 26.2 75.7 64.6 65.2 36.7 80.8 75.5 45.0 50.0
Namibia 2014 59.4 30.0 44.2 66.9 58.8 64.4 81.9 75.0 82.9 50.0 40.0
Nepal 2014 50.1 30.0 21.3 85.9 89.6 58.5 43.8 76.3 61.0 5.0 30.0
New Zealand 2014 81.2 95.0 94.0 71.2 32.3 96.1 90.2 86.3 86.8 80.0 80.0
Nicaragua 2014 58.4 15.0 24.1 78.6 80.0 52.6 60.3 72.8 85.4 65.0 50.0
Niger 2014 55.1 30.0 26.0 76.8 88.4 35.2 45.4 88.3 65.6 55.0 40.0
Nigeria 2014 54.3 30.0 22.7 85.0 74.5 48.0 66.4 73.1 63.8 40.0 40.0
North Korea 2014 1.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Norway 2014 70.9 90.0 88.1 50.6 42.2 90.9 44.6 78.7 89.1 75.0 60.0
Oman 2014 67.4 50.0 48.2 98.5 56.0 68.3 75.5 73.6 78.7 65.0 60.0
Pakistan 2014 55.2 30.0 22.7 80.6 88.3 69.4 47.3 68.5 64.8 40.0 40.0
Panama 2014 63.4 30.0 34.0 84.3 78.7 73.0 39.4 75.1 74.2 75.0 70.0
Papua New Guinea 2014 53.9 20.0 20.2 66.7 75.4 57.0 73.7 75.5 85.1 35.0 30.0
Paraguay 2014 62.0 30.0 20.5 96.2 89.0 58.0 28.9 80.9 81.1 75.0 60.0
Peru 2014 67.4 40.0 34.0 79.1 89.1 70.6 61.4 83.3 87.0 70.0 60.0
Poland 2014 67.0 60.0 54.8 76.1 43.2 70.1 60.4 77.8 87.8 70.0 70.0
Portugal 2014 63.5 70.0 61.1 60.1 26.8 84.9 34.6 79.3 87.8 70.0 60.0
Qatar 2014 71.2 70.0 72.4 99.9 72.1 71.7 70.0 81.2 79.8 45.0 50.0
Republic of Congo 2014 43.7 10.0 20.6 67.5 79.6 35.1 47.0 72.0 55.6 20.0 30.0
Romania 2014 65.5 40.0 37.7 87.0 59.2 71.0 65.2 77.1 87.8 80.0 50.0
Russia 2014 51.9 25.0 22.1 85.6 61.5 70.0 55.8 69.4 74.6 25.0 30.0
Rwanda 2014 64.7 30.0 46.9 80.3 78.2 69.6 84.1 74.8 77.7 65.0 40.0
Saint Lucia 2014 70.7 70.0 70.6 75.7 63.6 83.1 84.5 82.7 71.9 65.0 40.0
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 2014 67.0 70.0 61.1 73.7 72.4 76.3 78.7 79.8 67.6 50.0 40.0
Samoa 2014 61.1 60.0 38.0 79.9 42.2 73.7 80.3 76.1 75.8 55.0 30.0
São Tomé and Príncipe 2014 48.8 20.0 32.5 86.9 27.9 52.6 44.7 68.3 75.3 50.0 30.0
Saudi Arabia 2014 62.2 40.0 43.7 99.7 63.1 67.3 75.8 68.7 74.0 40.0 50.0
Senegal 2014 55.4 40.0 29.5 65.1 75.4 47.5 41.5 81.8 73.2 60.0 40.0
Serbia 2014 59.4 40.0 34.0 83.1 38.6 59.3 70.1 66.9 77.0 75.0 50.0
Seychelles 2014 56.2 50.0 48.5 76.8 61.8 67.6 68.5 75.1 33.4 50.0 30.0
Sierra Leone 2014 50.5 15.0 24.6 80.7 85.7 55.3 28.7 70.2 70.2 55.0 20.0
Singapore 2014 89.4 90.0 91.9 91.2 91.2 96.8 96.5 81.5 90.0 85.0 80.0
Slovakia 2014 66.4 50.0 41.8 80.2 56.0 67.0 53.6 78.1 87.8 80.0 70.0
Slovenia 2014 62.7 60.0 61.0 58.9 22.6 85.4 51.0 80.3 87.8 70.0 50.0
Solomon Islands 2014 46.2 30.0 25.0 61.4 21.3 65.2 65.2 75.4 73.0 15.0 30.0
Somalia 2014 N/A N/A 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
South Africa 2014 62.5 50.0 41.6 68.7 69.1 74.5 54.4 75.3 76.1 55.0 60.0
South Korea 2014 71.2 70.0 54.0 72.6 72.6 92.8 47.8 79.6 72.6 70.0 80.0
Spain 2014 67.2 70.0 62.6 54.0 38.7 77.3 52.2 79.9 87.8 80.0 70.0
Sri Lanka 2014 60.0 40.0 33.4 84.9 86.3 74.4 59.2 68.0 73.6 40.0 40.0
Sudan 2014 N/A N/A 9.8 85.1 90.3 54.5 49.1 55.8 55.6 15.0 N/A
Suriname 2014 54.2 40.0 32.9 69.0 78.3 41.8 81.8 71.8 66.2 30.0 30.0
Swaziland 2014 61.2 40.0 31.6 74.7 70.9 64.2 71.7 72.3 81.5 65.0 40.0
Sweden 2014 73.1 90.0 92.3 42.9 21.4 91.1 52.9 82.5 87.8 90.0 80.0
Switzerland 2014 81.6 90.0 88.1 68.9 65.7 75.4 87.4 85.2 90.0 85.0 80.0
Syria 2014 N/A 10.0 23.3 N/A N/A 60.4 55.1 N/A N/A 0.0 20.0
Taiwan 2014 73.9 70.0 59.7 80.3 84.7 93.9 53.1 81.7 85.8 70.0 60.0
Tajikistan 2014 52.0 20.0 19.4 92.3 78.1 58.4 45.5 67.7 73.2 25.0 40.0
Tanzania 2014 57.8 30.0 28.8 79.7 78.3 47.0 61.1 66.0 76.8 60.0 50.0
Thailand 2014 63.3 45.0 33.6 79.7 83.6 71.4 61.6 68.6 75.0 45.0 70.0
The Bahamas 2014 69.8 70.0 66.6 97.3 84.1 70.7 81.5 75.1 52.2 30.0 70.0
The Gambia 2014 59.5 30.0 31.7 79.0 79.8 57.4 65.8 71.3 65.0 65.0 50.0
The Netherlands 2014 74.2 90.0 88.0 51.7 25.6 89.7 59.6 79.9 87.8 90.0 80.0
The Philippines 2014 60.1 30.0 26.1 79.2 92.3 59.9 49.7 78.0 75.5 60.0 50.0
Timor-Leste 2014 43.2 20.0 25.4 64.7 0.0 45.4 79.2 68.3 64.4 45.0 20.0
Togo 2014 49.9 30.0 23.8 69.7 82.4 43.3 42.8 79.3 62.8 35.0 30.0
Tonga 2014 58.2 20.0 28.6 86.7 74.8 74.6 91.2 71.3 79.5 35.0 20.0
Trinidad and Tobago 2014 62.7 50.0 34.0 84.8 62.5 59.4 76.4 71.7 78.6 60.0 50.0
Tunisia 2014 57.3 40.0 39.2 74.3 63.8 80.7 72.6 75.9 61.8 35.0 30.0
Turkey 2014 64.9 50.0 44.0 77.5 63.5 67.6 59.7 71.8 84.5 70.0 60.0
Turkmenistan 2014 42.2 5.0 13.4 95.2 93.0 30.0 30.0 65.9 79.2 0.0 10.0
Uganda 2014 59.9 30.0 23.8 79.1 87.3 45.1 87.4 71.0 75.4 60.0 40.0
Ukraine 2014 49.3 30.0 21.9 79.1 37.5 59.8 49.8 78.7 86.2 20.0 30.0
United Arab Emirates 2014 71.4 55.0 66.4 99.6 83.1 74.4 82.9 84.6 82.5 35.0 50.0
United Kingdom 2014 74.9 90.0 76.4 56.6 29.5 92.0 73.1 73.5 87.8 90.0 80.0
United States 2014 75.5 80.0 72.0 65.8 48.1 89.2 97.2 75.4 86.8 70.0 70.0
Uruguay 2014 69.3 70.0 70.6 77.4 68.0 74.5 68.1 72.1 82.5 80.0 30.0
Uzbekistan 2014 46.5 15.0 13.4 90.3 70.4 75.7 60.8 63.1 66.1 0.0 10.0
Vanuatu 2014 59.5 40.0 33.5 97.3 81.7 54.8 56.8 82.7 48.0 60.0 40.0
Venezuela 2014 36.3 5.0 16.5 75.3 51.8 43.4 33.7 49.7 62.7 5.0 20.0
Vietnam 2014 50.8 15.0 26.9 77.0 71.4 62.0 68.3 63.6 78.7 15.0 30.0
Yemen 2014 55.5 30.0 19.4 91.7 74.9 59.2 54.9 62.1 82.4 50.0 30.0
Zambia 2014 60.4 30.0 31.3 71.8 82.9 74.9 50.1 68.0 84.6 60.0 50.0
Zimbabwe 2014 35.5 10.0 19.3 63.3 64.0 34.5 22.2 73.0 54.2 5.0 10.0

In the latest 2014 Index of Economic

News, Politics

cpac 2014

Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida are the early CPAC 2014 headliners, suggesting conservative activists will focus on new, fresh faces this year, according to Conservative Political Action Conference.

The conservative activists’ annual gathering is a popularity contest for the Republican Party’s likely presidential candidates, and with Christie in doubt, conservatives are looking for an opportunity to make their move.

The Iowa caucus is 2 years away, and candidates who decide to run with start to launch campaigns 6 months prior.

“This presidential cycle for Republicans starts earlier than ever, in part because it’s the first time in a while we have an open seat without a leading candidate who has run before,” said Al Cardenas, chairman of the American Conservative Union. “We’re almost off and running, and CPAC is the beginning of that journey.”

This year is set to be a forced passing of the torch, with new up-and-coming GOP stars seeing their chance to break the stranglehold on the party, and begin to build a larger constituency. Last year, Sen. Rand Paul won the CPAC 2013 straw poll, while Rubio came in a close second.

Notably, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio were the only speakers CPAC announced Thursday, but many more are sure to come, particularly Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Santorum.

To be sure, Chris Christie was shunned by CPAC last year for cozying up to President Obama after superstore Sandy, and it is unclear whether Wisconsin Rep. and former VP candidate Paul Ryan will receive similar treatment during CPAC 2014 because of his stance on the budget deal and immigration.

CPAC 2013 attracted more than 10,000 activists, and Cardenas said registration is running ahead for the March 6-8 convention at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center in Maryland.

Both Rand Paul and Marco Rubio have argued the need to stay principled, while working harder to expand voter attraction to the party, notably Paul who has been visiting black communities with proposals to increase economic opportunity, decrease drug offense sentences and inner-city school reform.

Sen. Marco Rubio has made similar efforts to reach out to Hispanic voters, whom of which supported his senatorial campaign in 2010 by a wide margin.

Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco

Opinion

WASHINGTON — Viewed from Washington, which often is the last to learn about important developments, opposition to the Common Core State Standards Initiative still seems as small as the biblical cloud that ariseth out of the sea, no larger than a man’s hand. Soon, however, this education policy will fill a significant portion of the political sky.

The Common Core represents the ideas of several national organizations (of governors and school officials) about what and how children should learn. It is the thin end of an enormous wedge. It is designed to advance in primary and secondary education the general progressive agenda of centralization and uniformity.

Understandably, proponents of the Common Core want its nature and purpose to remain as cloudy as possible for as long as possible. Hence they say it is a “state-led,” “voluntary” initiative to merely guide education with “standards” that are neither written nor approved nor mandated by Washington, which would never, ever “prescribe” a national curriculum. Proponents talk warily when describing it because a candid characterization would reveal yet another Obama administration indifference to legality.

The 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the original federal intrusion into this state and local responsibility, said “nothing in this act” shall authorize any federal official to “mandate, direct, or control” schools’ curriculums. The 1970 General Education Provisions Act stipulates that “no provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any” federal agency or official “to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction” or selection of “instructional materials by any” school system. The 1979 law creating the Department of Education forbids it from exercising “any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum” or “program of instruction” of any school system. The ESEA as amended says no Education Department funds “may be used … to endorse, approve, or sanction any curriculum designed to be used in” grades K-12.

Nevertheless, what begins with mere national standards must breed ineluctable pressure to standardize educational content. Targets, metrics, guidelines and curriculum models all induce conformity in instructional materials. Washington already is encouraging the alignment of the GED, SAT and ACT tests with the Common Core. By a feedback loop, these tests will beget more curriculum conformity. All of this will take a toll on parental empowerment, and none of this will escape the politicization of learning like that already rampant in higher education.

Leave aside the abundant, fierce, often learned and frequently convincing criticisms of the writing, literature and mathematics standards. Even satisfactory national standards must extinguish federalism’s creativity: At any time, it is more likely there will be half a dozen innovative governors than one creative federal education bureaucracy. And the mistakes made by top-down federal reforms are (BEG ITAL)continental(END ITAL) mistakes.

The Obama administration has purchased states’ obedience by partially conditioning waivers from onerous federal regulations (from No Child Left Behind) and receipt of federal largess ($4.35 billion in Race to the Top money from the 2009 stimulus) on the states’ embrace of the Common Core. Although 45 states and the District of Columbia have struck this bargain, most with little debate, some are reconsidering and more will do so as opposition mounts.

Many proponents seem to deem it beneath their dignity to engage opponents’ arguments, preferring to caricature opponents as political primitives and to dismiss them with flippancies such as this from Bill Gates: “It’s ludicrous to think that multiplication in Alabama and multiplication in New York are really different.” What is ludicrous is Common Core proponents disdaining concerns related to this fact: Fifty years of increasing Washington inputs into K-12 education has coincided with disappointing cognitive outputs from schools. Is it eccentric that it is imprudent to apply to K-12 education the federal touch that has given us HealthCare.gov?

The rise of opposition to the Common Core illustrates three healthy aspects of today’s politics. First, new communication skills and technologies enable energized minorities to force new topics onto the political agenda. Second, this uprising of local communities against state capitals, the nation’s capital and various muscular organizations (e.g., the Business Roundtable, the Chamber of Commerce, teachers unions, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) demonstrates that although the public agenda is malleable, a sturdy portion of the public is not.

Third, political dishonesty has swift, radiating and condign consequences. Opposition to the Common Core is surging because Washington, hoping to mollify opponents, is saying, in effect: “If you like your local control of education, you can keep it. Period.” To which a burgeoning movement is responding: “No. Period.”

George Will’s email address is [email protected].

Viewed from Washington, which often is the

News, Policy

obamacare-website-security

The reformed bad-guy-turned good Internet security expert Kevin Mitnick, renowned for his cyber criminal activities, called the ObamaCare website security “shameful” and “minimal.”

House Science, Space and Technology Committee received Mitnick’s written testimony, which read: “It’s shameful the team that built the Healthcare.gov site implemented minimal, if any, security best practices to mitigate the significant risk of a system compromise.”

On the House floor, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) read from the draft memo by chief information security officer at the CMS, Teresa Fryer, who wrote in September to her boss conveying Healthcare.gov “does not reasonably meet the CMS security requirements” intended to minimize risks. “There is also no confidence that the Personal Identifiable Information (PII) will be protected.”

Meanwhile, CMS administrator Marilyn Tavenner, and the now-retired agency’s chief information officer, Tony Trenkle, made the decision to launch HealthCare.gov as scheduled despite the security risks.

The House Democrats argued that the Republicans overstate the site’s vulnerability, with Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) stating, “Republicans are still obsessed with killing this law. Since they cannot do so legislatively, they have shifted to a different tactic: scaring people away from the Web site.”

However, Mitnick’s written testimony that was submitted to the panel concluded: “After reading the documents provided by David Kennedy that detailed numerous security vulnerabilities associated with the Healthcare.gov Website, it’s clear that the management team did not consider security as a priority.”

CMS conveyed that there has been no successful security attacks on the site and that “no person or group has maliciously accessed personally identifiable information from the site.”

Mitnick’s analysis was supported by CEO and founder of TrustedSec LLC David Kennedy, the white hat hacker who compromises websites in order to identify and fix security flaws, testified that several of the issues they first discovered still exist on the site.

Kennedy told the panel that both himself and other experts have not seen any significant developments within the past two month — “it’s getting worse. Nothing has really changed since our November 19th testimony,” he stated.

The co-founder and CEO of Lunarline Waylon Krush claimed that the flaws that have been found are mere speculation.

Who are we to believe Krush who gets paid by the government practically on a daily basis or two entrepreneurs such as Mitnick and Kennedy that do not have to answer to the government. 

The reformed bad-guy-turned good Internet security expert

News, Policy

reverend-wright-speech

President Barrack Obama’s former pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright was invited to the Chicago Teachers Union to speak at their event.

Though still a supporter, according to a close associate, Wright took this as an opportunity to voice his disdain for the president. In the latest controversial Reverend Wright speech, the radical pastor said, “We need to teach the truth about our politicians, from Bush to Barack, because very clearly it is not about the person. It is about the policies of this government. King said, ‘I have a dream.’ Barack said, ‘I have a drone.”

The Chicago Teachers Union desires a more prominent voice amongst the political world, hence their decision in the controversial Reverend Jeremiah Wright in hope that he will rally up the clergy for the cause.

Wright disappeared off the radar after his daughter was charged with fraud and money laundering in April of 2013.

Although, the so-called pastor is known best for several videos that surfaced of him blaming the government for the creation of AIDS in order to kill African-Americans, yelling that the United States brought September 11 upon themselves, and the infamous “God damn America.”

CTU President Karen Lewis stated, “We just cannot have governance by the rich. We have to have people who understand working folk.”

Lewis expressed, “Martin Luther King was an extraordinarily controversial figure and Rev. Wright has been a huge acolyte of Dr. King’s vision, spreading the gospel of freedom and justice.”

Now the infamous reverend is back, union officials are reaching out for allies to advance their political activism and fight the shutting down of some neighborhood schools.

They are also determined to prevent the opening of charter schools that are publicly funded, privately managed, and non-union.

Ironically, sixteen academic studies have been published on charter school performance since 2010, four national studies and 12 regional studies from throughout the country.

Fifteen of the sixteen found that students in charter schools do better in school than their traditional school peers.

CTU apparently care more for themselves than the actual students that would benefit from charter schools.

The media was invited to CTU’s event, however when Fox News producer Griff Jenkins followed the reverend to ask questions he was held a bay by security.

Jenkins reported that Wright stated President Obama has a “kill” list he reviews every Tuesday and chooses who he is going to kill. 

Wright was invited in hopes that he would vocalize social justice themes as they prepare for a fight against Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

Former Congressman Allen West expressed that Wright  is simply trying to make himself relevant by making outrageous comments. West added, “You’re dealing with a person who is completely irrational and he is a scorned woman.”

The Chicago Teachers Union are inconsistent, it is conveniently okay to have a “religious” man part of their cause — yet it is tabu to require the children of the school system pledge their allegiance to God.

 

 

 

President Barrack Obama's former pastor Reverend Jeremiah

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe