Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Friday, January 16, 2026
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 982)

obama announces sanctions

President announces sanctions targeting 7 Russian officials following the Sunday referendum in Crimea, when 97 percent voted in favor of annexation by Russia. The White House move comes as European Union foreign ministers slapped travel bans and asset freezes on 21 people from Russia and Crimea, who are linked to the push to secede from Ukraine.

The sanctions are individual-specific, targeting and freezing assets and restricting travel of those who the sanctions claim have “contributed to the situation in Ukraine.” The targeting of wealthy oligarchs who support Putin will, no doubt, give the Russian President a headache. However, whether or not they are a step in a much tougher direction, which will have the potential to stop Vladimir Putin, is unclear.

The White House Fact Sheet list the individuals, which are as follows:

In response to the Russian government’s actions contributing to the crisis in Ukraine, this new E.O. lists seven Russian government officials who are being designated for sanctions.  These individuals are Vladislav Surkov, Sergey Glazyev, Leonid Slutsky, Andrei Klishas, Valentina Matviyenko, Dmitry Rogozin, and Yelena Mizulina.

Meanwhile, Britain joined the U.S. in rejecting the Crimea referendum to breakaway from the Ukraine and join Russia, denouncing it as a “mockery of proper democratic practice.” Arriving in Brussels for talks tomorrow with EU foreign ministers, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Russia must now face “economic and political consequences” for its violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Sunday, the White House also warned Putin that he faces international isolation that will hurt Russia’s economy. “You can expect sanctions designations in the coming days,” White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer told NBC’s Meet the Press.

And now we have some of those promises being kept, plain and simple.

President announces sanctions targeting 7 Russian officials

The Empire State manufacturing index in New York state rose in the month of March, though at a slower rate than economists had forecast. New orders and inventories jumped, the New York Federal Reserve said in a report on Monday.

The New York Fed’s Empire State general business conditions index rose to 5.61 in March, up from 4.48 in the month of February.

The new orders index rose to 3.13 from a -0.21 prior, while inventories jumped to 7.06 from -5.0.

However, the employment gauges showed mixed signals. The index for the number of employees dropped to 5.88 from 11.25 and the average employee workweek index increased slightly to 4.71 from 3.75.

The index of business conditions six months ahead bottomed a bit to 33.21 from 38.99 in February.

The survey of manufacturing plants in the state is one of the earliest monthly guideposts to U.S. factory conditions, and precedes the Philadelphia and Midwest index.

The Empire State manufacturing index in New

Dinesh D'Souza movie America

Conservative filmmaker, Dinesh D’Souza, spoke Saturday with our buddy and conservative talk radio host, Don Smith of the Don Smith Show, about his new movie America. The documentary film explores the idea of what the world would be like without America.

(Listen To The Don Smith Interview w/ Dinesh D’Souza)

D’Souza says he wanted to answer the moral criticisms being hurled by the left, which aim to paint America and American history as evil, a thief, or unjust. As Don points out, the right has a messaging problem, or rather they do not seem to have one, at all. Dinesh D’Souza argues that the right cannot effectively rebut the left without making the moral case for capitalism and the constitutional principles that have traditionally guided American political philosophy.

The right has all of the facts on its side, but facts cannot rebut arguments of the heart. In order to win the argument with the American people, and expose the left for what it is, which is a failed ideology, the moral case against the left and socialism must be made.

Conservative filmmaker, Dinesh D’Souza, was recently indicted for supposedly violating campaign finance laws, which baffled experts considering the facts in the case. Many on the right believe D’Souza was unfairly singled-out for prosecution, just as the IRS unfairly singled out conservative groups, because of his ideology.

D’Souza, himself, says he knows for a fact that President Obama was furious over his first film, “2016: Obama’s America.”

Part 1: “America” Movie Trailer

Part 2: “America” Movie Trailer

Part 3: “America” Movie Trailer

Conservative filmmaker, Dinesh D'Souza, spoke Saturday with

crimean referendum

Voters overwhelmingly back the Crimean referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia in an election denounced by the United States, Europe and the Ukrainian government as illegal and destabilizing.

Crimean voters on Sunday overwhelming backed the Crimean referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia in an election denounced and unrecognized by the United States, the United Kingdom, other allies in West Europe and the Ukrainian government as illegal.

There were fireworks and Russian flags atop the celebrating crowd after election officials announced a 95 percent margin with half of the ballots counted.

Earlier, the RIA news agency said 93 percent voted in favor of annexation, citing an exit poll released just as voting ended at 8 p.m. (1800 GMT), while Reuters reported another Russian agency claimed turnout was over 80 percent. However, PeoplesPunditDaily.com reported earlier that many ethnic Ukrainians and Crimea’s large Tatar Muslim minority, were refusing to participate in the referendum.

The vote supposedly offered voters on the strategic Black Sea peninsula the choice of seeking annexation by Russia or remaining in Ukraine with greater autonomy.

Opponents of secession appeared to largely stay away Sunday, denouncing the vote as a power play and land grab by Putin and Russia. But turnout was reported to be well above the 50 percent that would make the referendum binding — and secession was expected to be approved overwhelmingly.

“Today is an important day for all of Crimea, Ukraine and Russia,” voter Manita Meshchina said in Sevastopol, the Crimean port where Russia now leases a major naval base from Ukraine for $98 million a year.

In a preemptive move in anticipation of success in the Crimean referendum, Russian-led forces seized control of Crimea. Locals say they fear the new Ukrainian government that took over when President Viktor Yanukovych fled to Russia last month will oppress them.

“Today is a holiday!” said 66-year-old Vera Sverkunova, breaking into a patriotic war song:  “I want to go home to Russia. It’s been so long since I’ve seen my mama.”

Kiev accused Moscow of pouring forces into the peninsula and warned separatist leaders “the ground will burn under their feet.”

Meanwhile, Britain has rejected the Crimea referendum to breakaway from the Ukraine and join Russia, denouncing it as a “mockery of proper democratic practice”.

Arriving in Brussels for talks tomorrow with EU foreign ministers, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Russia must now face “economic and political consequences” for its violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.

He stated, “Nothing in the way that the referendum has been conducted should convince anyone that it is a legitimate exercise. The UK does not recognize the referendum or its outcome, in common with the majority of the international community. Any attempt by the Russian Federation to use the referendum as an excuse to annex the Crimea, or to take further action on Ukrainian territory, would be unacceptable.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told Moscow that Washington would not accept the outcome of the vote, which is likely to favor union with Russia for a region which has a Russian-speaking majority.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov asked Kerry on Sunday to convince authorities in Kiev to stop what he called “massive lawlessness” against the Russian-speaking population. In their second phone conversation in two days, Lavrov and Kerry agreed to seek a solution to the crisis by pushing for constitutional reforms in Ukraine, Russia’s foreign ministry said in a statement.

However, a senior State Department official said Kerry told Lavrov that the United States would not accept the referendum result and said Russia must pull back its forces to their bases.

The White House also warned Putin that he faces international isolation that will hurt Russia’s economy. “You can expect sanctions designations in the coming days,” White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer told NBC’s Meet the Press.

Voters overwhelmingly back the Crimean referendum to

crimean vote results

Demonstrators take part in a pro-Russian rally in Odessa March 16, 2014. Ukraine accused “Kremlin agents” on Saturday of fomenting deadly violence in Russian-speaking cities and urged people not to rise to provocations its new leaders fear Moscow may use to justify a further invasion after its takeover of Crimea. REUTERS/Yevgeny Volokin (UKRAINE – Tags: POLITICS CIVIL UNREST)

The Russian state news agency, RIA, reported the Crimean vote results are overwhelmingly in favor of breaking with Ukraine and joining Russia on Sunday.

The RIA news agency said 93 percent voted in favor of annexation, citing an exit poll released just as voting ended at 8 p.m. (1800 GMT), while Reuters reported another Russian agency claimed turnout was over 80 percent. However, PeoplesPunditDaily.com reported earlier that many ethnic Ukrainians and Crimea’s large Tatar Muslim minority, were refusing to participate in the referendum.

Kiev accused Moscow of pouring forces into the peninsula and warned separatist leaders “the ground will burn under their feet.”

Meanwhile, Britain has rejected Crimea’s referendum vote to breakaway from the Ukraine and join Russia, denouncing it as a “mockery of proper democratic practice”.

Arriving in Brussels for talks tomorrow with EU foreign ministers, Foreign Secretary William Hague said Russia must now face “economic and political consequences” for its violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.

He stated, “Nothing in the way that the referendum has been conducted should convince anyone that it is a legitimate exercise. The UK does not recognise the referendum or its outcome, in common with the majority of the international community. Any attempt by the Russian Federation to use the referendum as an excuse to annex the Crimea, or to take further action on Ukrainian territory, would be unacceptable.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told Moscow that Washington would not accept the outcome of the vote, which is likely to favor union with Russia for a region which has a Russian-speaking majority.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov asked Kerry on Sunday to convince authorities in Kiev to stop what he called “massive lawlessness” against the Russian-speaking population. In their second phone conversation in two days, Lavrov and Kerry agreed to seek a solution to the crisis by pushing for constitutional reforms in Ukraine, Russia’s foreign ministry said in a statement.

However, a senior State Department official said Kerry told Lavrov that the United States would not accept the referendum result and said Russia must pull back its forces to their bases.

The White House also warned Putin that he faces international isolation that will hurt Russia’s economy. “You can expect sanctions designations in the coming days,” White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer told NBC’s Meet the Press.

The Russian state news agency, RIA, reported

paul ryan racist

Is Paul Ryan racist? For anyone who knows or has met the man, the answer is a flat-out no. This is a man who courageously took painstaking steps to propose a serious budget that would 1) set us on a trajectory that would avoid a debt crisis, and 2) assure that trajectory didn’t leave Americans who are dependent on the federal government without food and shelter. But the race mongers did what they do best following his comments about poverty, which is hide the truth by accusing someone of being a racist.

Here is what Paul Ryan said on Bill Bennett’s Morning in American radio show, in response to Bennett saying that the “fatherless problem is a big one.”

Absolutely — that’s the tailspin or spiral that we’re looking at in our communities — your buddy Charles Murray or Bob Putnam over at Harvard, those guys have written books on this, which is, we have got this tailspin of culture in our inner cities in particular of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work — so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with. Everybody’s got to get involved. So this is what we talk about when we talk about civil society. If you’re driving from the suburb to the sports arena downtown by these blighted neighborhoods, you can’t just say “I’m paying my taxes, government’s going to fix that.” You need to get involved. You need to get involved yourself, whether through a good mentor program or some religious charity, whatever it is to make a difference, and that’s how we help resuscitate our culture.

Ryan was talking about civic duty, a seemingly lost concept in modern America. Our founders made it clear that our Constitution relies upon citizenry practicing civic duty for its own preservation. Unfortunately, Paul Ryan didn’t have the courage to stand up to the predictable attack that followed, which enables the left to perpetuate the very status quo that has trapped millions of Americans in a life of poverty.

The status quo is, and has been, extremely profitable for just about everyone on the left, except of course, for their constituents. True to our promise, we are calling out one such leftist academic today. And, of course, if he doesn’t like it, then the opportunity to appear in a televised debate segment with yours truly is on the table, as always.

Meet Ian Haney López, a hack liberal law professor at UC Berkeley and a Senior Fellow at the liberal think-tank, Demos. López also happens to be the author of the race-mongering book, Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class.

This guy is a real piece of work, and a real piece of something else. He was all too happy use the liberal Politico Magazine to opine — using his expertise, of course — on Ryan’s comments, which just so happened to serve as a platform to sell his race-mongering book.

We’ll get to the fact that Obamanomics and other progressive “Great Society” policies, have truly “wrecked the middle class,” and not “coded racial appeals” in a moment. But, for now, let’s look at some of the outrageous claims made in his article.

“In our political culture, dog whistling all too often takes the form of warnings about a ‘tailspin of culture’ in the ‘inner cities’ and ‘generations of men not even thinking about working,’ López wrote. Notice how López disingenuously repeated a few words to give support to his “dog whistling” theory, while omitting the comments in their totality. And when we read them in their totality, there are no “coded racial appeals,” but rather quite the contrary. It was a clear call to civic duty, to help those trapped in inner-city poverty, not abandon or ostracize them to the progressive plantation.

It was a message that said to the audience that we are all in this together, and we all need to do our part. Let’s look at another doozy comment in his floppy argument.

“We cannot be certain what Ryan intended. Nevertheless, there’s no doubt that Ryan employed rhetoric closely connected to a dismal history of Republican racial demagoguery,” he writes, only after trashing Ryan and those who defended him, including Republican political strategist Ron Christie, whom López dismisses due to the fact he is black and Republican.

As usual, black opinions only matter if they are liberal, otherwise they are to be discounted along with the rewritten racist history of the left.

The “dismal history of Republican racial demagoguery” is a myth, and so are the examples used to support his claim. In fact, these examples do not at all jive with his entire thesis, which is that “dog whistling” is “not rooted in fiery hatred but rather in cool calculation — it’s the strategic, carefully considered decision to win votes by stirring racial fears in society.”

First of all, aside from President Truman desegregating the military, it is the left and the Democratic Party who has a dark, racist history in American politics. For his efforts, Southern Democrats led by fellow-Democrat and KKK member Strom Thurmond, left the Democratic Convention due to Truman’s civil rights stance.

Ironically, López cites “Barry Goldwater’s endorsement of ‘states’ rights'” as an example of dog whistling. But unlike the Republican-led Southern realignment that began under Goldwater, which was not fueled by an opposition to civil rights but rather traditional American values and a deep concern over the power of the federal government, the Democrat-led “States’ Rights” movement, or the “Dixiecrats” who challenged Truman in 1948, were racists. Consequently, it was Strom Thurman (before he repented, left the KKK and switched to the Republican Party) who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and, along with the help of Al Gore’s father, another card-carrying member of the KKK, set the record for the longest filibuster in Senate history.

Johnson relied upon Republican support to pass the legislation, because Democrats had the “dismal history” of racism, not Republicans. Even before the Dixiecrat mutiny, it was the leftist President Woodrow Wilson who boasted the first cinema showing ever in the White House. Of course, the film “Birth Of Nations” was a KKK propaganda movie depicting hooded men hanging black people from trees, to which the finest progressives minds showed their approval by giving a thunderous applause.

Wilson wasn’t from conservative Birmingham, Alabama, he was a progressive governor of New Jersey, who hated the idea of federalism and self-governance. He did, however, love the idea of eugenics, championed by another progressive hero, Margaret Sanger, who dreamed of weeding out the “negro race” through abortion.

López also wants us to “recall New Gingrich’s 2012 tarring of Barack Obama as ‘the best food-stamp president in American history.’ Or consider another Gingrich jibe from the last election: ‘Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works.'”

These comments are “not rooted in fiery hatred” nor “in cool calculation,” they are just the truth, which sadly Paul Ryan didn’t have the courage to say.

The truth is that the left must use these hack theories, revisionist histories and alternate realities to distract black Americans, because they cannot reconcile how black families and communities survived slavery and Jim Crow, yet have been decimated by the progressive “Great Society,” and the more recent failures of Obamanomics. They cannot reconcile how black Americans have had far more economic opportunity under Republican presidents, such as Ronald Reagan, who he blasted for using the term “welfare queens,” and George W. Bush, who threatened the Democratic monopoly of the black vote when he earned an unprecedented percentage in 2004.

But most of all, the truth is that there is a ton of money, and even more power, to be had by keeping racism in American politics, even though Gallup measures racism at the bottom of the national issue list. We have to look no further than the latest Democratic Party fundraising email to see how much they believe in race mongering as a money-making tool.

“This week, Ryan told ultra-conservative radio host Bill Bennett that poverty in America is caused by a ‘culture problem’ of ‘inner city’ men too lazy to work. Ryan’s comments are plainly a dog-whistle to ugly racial politics,” the email read.

Ian Haney López has given the left a few fictitious terms for them to use as ammunition against the Republican Party, and they give him a platform and a purpose to sell books. It is an unholy arrangement that not only hurts black Americans more than it helps them, but is wholly invested in keeping black Americans angry and in big government bondage.

Was that plain enough, or too “coded” of a “dog whistle” for you, Ian?

(Note: For your viewing pleasure, here is Ian Haney López with the insufferable Bill Moyers, hat-tip @SandyEgoCali. Ironically, you’d think he was referring to Democrats in his thesis, considering data show it is clearly in voters’ economic interests to vote Republican. This is particularly when you consider bankruptcy would hurt the most vulnerable Americans the most.)

Ian Haney López on the Dog Whistle Politics of Race from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.

Opinion: Is Paul Ryan racist? For anyone

climate change

Gallup recently wrapped up a series of articles reporting the findings from their March 6 – 9 Environment poll. Overall, Americans are well-aware of the unusually cold weather in 2014, just as they were aware of warmer weather in 2013 and 2012. However, they do not attribute temperatures to climate change or global warming, or whichever term Democrats are using these days.

Ironically, a substantial amount of Democrats are members of the so-called “flat earth society,” as Sec. John Kerry dubbed those who do not buy in to the theory, with 47 percent saying 2014 temperatures are due to manmade climate change. And a whopping 11 percent of Republicans are not “flat-earthers.”

When Gallup isolated the 25 percent of Americans who are experiencing drought, just 9 percent said it was due to “global warming,” while 15 percent said it was due to “normal variation in rainfall.” When broken down on party lines, still just 51 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaners experiencing drought attribute it to global warming, which is compared with 14 percent of Republicans, only slightly higher than the nationwide totals for each.

This is significant, because Gallup, as Frank Newport said, found no more tendency to attribute drought conditions to climate change even when they use the term “warming” in their questioning. It would appear from these numbers and the data to be shown below, Democrats have a dire disconnect with the American people. Let’s take a look at a few more findings from Gallup.

Though 28 Democratic senators staged an all-night “talkathon” last Monday, during which they filibustered themselves to call attention to climate change, only 24 percent of Americans say they worry about the issue a “great deal.” In general, only 31 percent of Americans indicate that they worry “a great deal” about the quality of the environment this year, which is the lowest level of worry about the environment since Gallup began measuring the issue in 2001.

climate change or global warming vs. national issues

Apparently the trend is heading in the wrong direction, because Americans were most concerned about the environment in 2007, when 43 percent were worried a great deal. Climate change beats-out just one issue — race relations — when Americans are asked to prioritize. The economy, after a short stint of measuring government at the top of the list, is far and away more important than climate change, which the Democrats are constantly sacrificing on the global warming altar through costly and burdensome EPA regulations.

Looking at the list of national issues, in totality, the top issues pose a serious problem to the party of big government, particularly in a “six-year itch” midterm election year when Democrats are likely to lose control of the U.S. Senate. Considering the number 2 and 3 issues coming in just behind of the economy at 59 percent — concern over the federal budget and spending (58 percent), as well as the availability and affordability of healthcare (57 percent) — it puzzles the mind Democrats would focus so much effort on climate change.

Of course, we would expect the party of big government to focus on an issue that ranks so low on Americans’ priority list if it would result in more power being delegated to the federal government. After all, the Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare, never enjoyed majority support in either individual public polling or the PPD average of polls, yet that didn’t stop Democrats from forcing it down the throats of the American people.

Perhaps, the oft-repeated charge from those who oppose the climate change agenda — which states climate change is a “red” agenda, not a “green” one — may just have some weight. That shouldn’t surprise Americans too much, because the number five issue is the size and power of the federal government (48 percent), a concern fifth only to unemployment. Republicans would do themselves justice to hear out Sen. Rand Paul on the importance of adopting a “liberty message” when the number of Americans concerned about government is so high.

Nevertheless, the data clearly show that on the issue of climate change, or global warming or whatever they choose to call it, Democrats are displaying a dire disconnect with the American people.

Based on the findings of the Gallup

Crimea vote

Ethnic Ukrainians and many in the large minorty Muslim population are refusing to participate in the Crimean vote, calling it a “clown” show.

The Crimea vote to ratify the regional parliament’s decision to break away from Ukraine and seek annexation by Russia, is now underway.

Residents of the Crimea region flocked to the polls that opened at 8 a.m. local time Sunday (2 a.m. ET), and voting will continue until 8 p.m., with results expected to be announced at around 10 p.m. local time (4 p.m. ET).

The referendum has been condemned as illegal by the United States and European countries, who are now mulling over sanctions to impose on Russia.

The vote took place several weeks after Russian-led forces took control of Crimea, a predominantly ethnic Russian region. Many residents say they fear the new Ukrainian government that took over when pro-Russia President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted last month will oppress them.

Russia raised the stakes Saturday when its military, including helicopter gunships and armored vehicles, seized control of a village near the border with Crimea, in the first military move outside the peninsula.  The forces also took control of a nearby natural gas distribution station, citing the need to prevent an act of terrorism on the complex.

Serhiy Astakhov, a spokesman for Ukraine’s Border Guard, told The Associated Press on Sunday that Ukrainian forces retook control of the village Saturday evening after negotiations with the Russian forces. However, they still control the distribution center.

If the referendum passes, Russia faces the prospect of sanctions from Western nations, but Moscow has deemed the region in Crimea worth whatever sanctions the West even imposes in the end.

At Sevastopol, Crimea’s key strategic port and the site of the new Russian naval base, more than 70 people poured into a polling station during the first 15 minutes of voting on Sunday.

“Today is a holiday,” said one of them, 66-year-old Vera Sverkunova. Asked how she voted, she broke into a patriotic war song:  “I want to go home to Russia. It’s been so long since I’ve seen my mama.”

Speakers blared the city anthem up and down the streets, giving Sevastopol a feeling of a block party. A Russian naval warship stood blocking the outlet leading from the port to the open Black Sea.

Since Yanukovych fled to Russia, Crimea has come under control of local militia forces, as well as heavily armed troops under apparent command from Moscow.

Crimea’s pro-Russia authorities say that if Ukrainian soldiers — who are still occupying their garrisons — don’t surrender after Sunday’s vote, they will be considered “illegal.”

Yet Ukraine’s acting defense minister, Igor Tenyuk, said in an interview published Sunday by the Interfax news agency that “this is our land and we’re not going anywhere from this land.”

In Sevastopol, where the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based under a legal lease agreement with Ukraine, enthusiasm for the Crimea referendum was high, with voters lining up outside polling stations before they opened.

“Today is an important day for all Crimea, Ukraine and Russia,” said voter Manita Meshchina. “I think that people are expecting the majority of people will vote `yes.’ What it means is that people believe and think they need to be with Russia.”

At a polling station 850097 set up inside a historic school building in downtown Sevastopol, Vladimir Lozovoy, a 75-year-old retired Soviet naval officer, began tearing up as he talked about his vote today.

“I want to cry. I have finally returned to my motherland. It is an incredible feeling. This is the thing I have been waiting for for 23 years and finally it has happened,” he said.

As far as the anti-Russian coalition, much of it includes Crimea’s large Tatar Muslim minority, who vehemently opposes annexation to Russia.

The Crimea vote “is a clown show, a circus,” a leader in the Crimean minority community, Refat Chubarov, said on Crimea’s Tatar television station Sunday. “This is a tragedy, an illegitimate government, with armed forces from another country.”

No where could the blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flags be seen in the regional capital of Simferopol, but the red, white and blue Russian and Crimean flags flooded the sidewalks, city buildings and were visible on many cars.

Ethnic Ukrainians interviewed outside the Ukrainian Orthodox cathedral of Vladimir and Olga said they refused to take part in the referendum, calling it an illegal charade that they believe was staged by Moscow. Some even said they were scared of the potential for ethnic cleansing in the coming weeks.

And they would have good reason, because  that is what happened in parts of the former Soviet republic of Georgia.

“We’re just not going to play these separatist games,” said Yevgen Sukhodolsky, a 41-year-old prosecutor from Saki, a town outside of Simferopol. “Putin is the fascist. The Russian government is fascist.”

Vasyl Ovcharuk, a retired gas pipe layer who also worked on the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986, predicted terrible days ahead for Crimea.

“This will end up in military action, in which peaceful people will suffer. And that means everybody. Shells and bullets are blind,” he said.

At the United Nations, Russia vetoed a Security Council resolution declaring the referendum illegal. Yet China, a Russian ally, curiously abstained in a sign of Moscow’s isolation on the issue.

Supporters of the U.S.-sponsored resolution knew ahead of time that Russia would use its veto on Saturday.

But they put the resolution to a vote to show the strength of opposition in the 15-member U.N. Security Council to Moscow’s takeover of Crimea. The final vote was 13 members in favor, China’s abstention, and Russia as a permanent council member casting a veto.

The Crimea vote to ratify the regional

support for gay marriage

If Americans have increased their support for gay marriage, then why does the map still look like this, with federal courts — not legislatures — being asked to change the law?

After a slew of public polling being released along-side the legal push to legalize gay marriage and trump the Tenth Amendment, support for gay marriage has taken a significant hit.

PeoplesPunditDaily.com reported in December on what was textbook blowback following national debates over abortion and gay marriage developments. Now, a new survey finds support for gay marriage following the same, yet even quicker trend observable on another social issue — abortion.

American voters continue to see marriage more as a religious institution than a civil one and though they remain closely divided on the subject of gay marriage, the number of voters favoring the union fell. According to a new Rasmussen Reports, 50 percent of likely voters view marriage as a religious institution, while just 39 percent consider it a civil institution. Overall, just 43 percent support gay marriage, down from 48 percent, while the same number is now opposed.

The danger of having the Supreme Court dictate what is socially acceptable “settled” law is underscored best by the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision to proclaim a constitutional right to abortion. Prior to the Roe vs. Wade decision, so-called nonpartisan public polling found a move toward abortion among the public, but now public opinion has firmly reversed, with the Pro-Life designation being in the majority ironically fueled by younger Americans.

Every January the fact that decision didn’t “settle” anything is on full display, when the annual “March for Life” is held on the Roe v. Wade anniversary. Last year, nearly a half of million Americans attended that rally in protest of the 55 million babies who have been terminated since 1973.

Proponents of gay marriage may not agree with such a comparison, but it is pretty self-evident. The two social issues also share another fact, which is that neither was ever about the issue per se, but rather is aimed at expanding the already-overreaching power of the federal government to dominate and dismantle the Tenth Amendment.

Nevertheless, public opinion changes considerably, if it ever did on this topic at all. If it truly is the case that Americans are increasing in their support for gay marriage, then why is the court being asked to strike down laws in all of the states shown above in the map of states with bans on gay marriage? Rather than overturning what is a clear majority position in middle America utilizing a court that can only cause social unrest, the proponents of gay marriage should instead work to change the laws through the legislatures in the individual states.

If public opinion is moving increasing in support for gay marriage, then that really shouldn’t be a problem. Or, perhaps the opinion isn’t that favorable, after all?

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on March 10-11, 2014 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

After a swamping of public polling being

missing Malaysian airliner

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak at a press conference over the missing Malaysian airliner.

The investigation into the missing Malaysian airliner has taken a dramatic turn for the worse, with officials now saying evidence suggests the event was a “deliberate action.”

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said at a press conference investigators now are aware that the airliner’s communications devices were deliberately disabled and that its last signal came about 7 1/2 hours after takeoff, suggesting an act of terror.

Investigator must now redirect their focus on the crew members and passengers to learn who was responsible for disabling the Boeing 777 communications.

“In view of this latest development, the Malaysian authorities have refocused their investigation into the crew and passengers on board,” Najib said.

He said the jetliner’s “movements are consistent with the deliberate action of someone on the plane,” BBC News reported.

The last signal was 7.5 hours after departure which vastly broadens the search for the M.I.A airliner — from as far as Kazakhstan or deep in the southern Indian Ocean. Prime Minister Najib Razak did make it clear that they were still investigating all possibilities as to why the plane deviated so drastically from its original flight path.

Unfortunately, the missing Malaysian airliner was carrying 239 people when it took off  March 8, 2014 at 12:40a.m. for an overnight flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

The critical piece of evidence supporting “human intervention” in the plane’s disappearance is that contact with its transponder ceased about 12 minutes before the messaging system did. The evidence also suggests it is possible that the plane could have landed somewhere, a frightening possibility considering the long-plotted terrorist hope to use hijacked aircraft as a weapon of mass destruction.

A Malaysian government official directly involved with the investigation spoke on the condition of anonymity. The official said that — although no motive has been established — they believe the hijacking theory was no longer a theory, but instead is now conclusive.

There are other thoeries floating around aside from an act of terror accounting for the missing Malaysian airliner.

Mike Glynn, a committee member of the Australian and International Pilots Association, said he considers pilot suicide to be the most likely explanation for the disappearance, as was suspected in a SilkAir crash during a flight from Singapore to Jakarta in 1997 and an EgyptAir flight from Los Angeles to Cairo in 1999.

“A pilot rather than a hijacker is more likely to be able to switch off the communications equipment,” Glynn said. “The last thing that I, as a pilot, want is suspicion to fall on the crew, but it’s happened twice before.”

“What we can say is we are looking at sabotage, with hijack still on the cards,” said that source, a senior Malaysian police official.

The current search involves 14 countries, 43 ships and 58 aircraft.

The investigation into the missing Malaysian airliner

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