Levin: "Media have blood on their hands"...Venezuela torturadora continua...Why we love Trump!

Mark Levin: The Media 'Have Blood On Their Hands'

"Because they encourage this activity. Because Hamas watches them." 

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

ByJACOB AIREY

May 16, 2018 

 14.7k views

Conservative author and radio host Mark Levin blasted the mainstream media’s coverage surrounding Israel's response to the Palestinians' violent protests following the opening of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem. The media, Levin said, "have blood on their hands" for continuing to fall for the tactics of Hamas, who use human shields as props for the cameras so the press will unfairly blame the Israeli government for the violence.

"But they force children into these actions. Remember the last war with Gaza? Where do they put their headquarters? Under elementary schools. Remember? Where do they put their missile inventory? Under hospitals," he said. "You see, what our media do not understand or do not care to understand is that for Hamas every human being is expendable. Because it’s a war. Every one of their citizens, expendable. Children and women first!

"Why? I'm gonna tell you why," he continued. "And I don’t mean to be provocative, but I'm gonna tell you why.

"The media in our country — hell the worldwide media and the Democratic Party in our country, just like all the left European parties… You know what? They have blood on their hands! You know why they have blood on their hands? Because they encourage this activity. Because Hamas watches them. The more children that are killed, the more the media turn on the Israelis. The more women killed, the more the media turn on the Israelis. So they push the women to the front. They push the children to the front."

The host condemned Hamas for the violence the perpetrate on their own people. "You and I look at this and say holeeeee…these terrorists are unbelievable, what they do to their own people!" he said. "The media, they say the Israelis are unbelievable, look what they do to these people."

Link to Article

You can listen to the audio on The Right Scoop. 

Asi Torturan en Venezuela a quienes piensan diferente!

The Real Donald Trump

Want to understand why Trump keeps winning? Look at Democratic hysteria

If you want to understand why Donald Trump is president today (and why he could very well win a second term), look to the Democrats' hysterical response to two of Trump's major foreign policy achievements over the past week.

Last Thursday, the president traveled to Joint Base Andrews to greet three American hostages whose release he had secured from North Korea. Unlike his predecessor, Trump did it without sending the offending regime an unmarked plane loaded with hundreds of millions in hard currency. The return of these American captives should have been a moment of celebration and bipartisan unity.

A Message from My Snoring Solution

CPAP Makers Running Scared After New Snoring Cure Unveiled

End Your Nightly Snoring Nightmare With This Simple Solution

So how did Democrats respond? By blasting Trump for the way he welcomed the U.S. hostages home. The pretext for their outrage was Trump's comment thanking Kim Jong Un, who he said "really was excellent to these three incredible people" -- by which Trump obviously meant releasing them. No matter. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., took the Senate floor to attack Trump for his "troubling" remarks. "Kim Jong Un is a dictator" who "capriciously detained American citizens," Schumer declared, channeling Captain Obvious, and warned that, by praising Kim, Trump "weakens American foreign policy and puts American citizens at risk around the world."

Seriously? How do Democrats take a positive event such as the release of American hostages and turn it into an excuse to attack Trump? Apparently, Trump Derangement Syndrome is so debilitating that Democrats can't bring themselves to say "Good job, Mr. President," even when he brings our hostages home. Before, Democrats complained that Trump was too belligerent toward Kim; now, they're upset that he is too effusive. This is absurd. Trump is laying the groundwork for a high-stakes nuclear summit with Kim; of course the president is not going to publicly criticize him. People in Middle America listen to the Democrats' reactions and think: Can Trump do nothing right in these people's eyes? Keep reading :

Now movies have to cater to Trump era!!!...Y Nicaragua tambien saldra del poses socialcomunista!.....Trump's best wishes to All muslims!

copieBUSINESS

Making Movies in the Trump Era for the Audience Hollywood Ignored 

Producer Dallas Sonnier fled Los Angeles to create ‘populist entertainment’; Vince Vaughn as an unemployed mechanic who kills drug dealers to protect his wife from a forced abortion

By

Erich Schwartzel

May 15, 2018 12:06 p.m. ET

Before he casts actors in his movies, producer Dallas Sonnier puts them through what he calls “the Louisiana cousins test.”

These cousins of his are schoolteachers, HVAC installers, construction workers—just the kind of audience he thinks Hollywood has unwisely left behind. Continue to WSJ

ANTESALA DEL DIÁLOGO

Al menos 35 heridos en choques entre protestantes y policías en Nicaragua

Agence France Press 

 

Bogotá

 

Mayo 15, 2018 - 03:18 PM

  

Foto archivo AFP

Al menos 35 heridos y 10 detenidos dejaban este martes enfrentamientos entre manifestantes y policías antimotines en Matagalpa, en el norte de Nicaragua, en el marco de las protestas contra el gobierno que dejan al menos 53 muertos y sacuden al país previo a un diálogo nacional.

"Nos están disparando, no les da vergüenza, las calles son nuestras, atacan a la gente sin arma, cobardes. ¡Fuera!", gritaron los manifestantes a los antimotines en una calle de la ciudad, según un video colgado en las redes sociales.

"¡Nos dispararon con escopeta, vienen a agredirnos!", se quejó en otro video un joven que tenía el rostro semi cubierto con una camisa.

El dirigente de la Asociación Nicaragüense Pro Derechos Humanos (ANPDH) de la ciudad German Herrera dijo a una televisora local que "los muchachos están desarmados, no tienen con qué defenderse y los antimotines les caen de momentos".

"El cálculo que nosotros llevamos más o menos anda en 35 personas (heridas) y 10 detenidos que los vamos a ir a ver", dijo Herrera al canal privado 100% Noticias.

"Es doloroso lo que está pasando, no debería haber sucedido esto (...) nosotros estamos preocupados porque el hombre (el presidente Daniel Ortega) habla de diálogo, pero no existen las condiciones", comentó.

"Hay bastantes heridos en Matagalpa", dijo a la AFP Bayardo Siles, un activista que se encontraba en una parroquia apoyando el traslado de heridos al hospital de la ciudad. Sigue leyendo:

Donald Trump Sends ‘Best Wishes’ to Muslims on Ramadan

9

AWAD AWAD/AFP/Getty Images

by CHARLIE SPIERING15 May 2018126

President Donald Trump sent a greeting to all Muslims observing Ramadan around the world in a statement Tuesday.

“With the rising of tonight’s moon, I send my greetings and best wishes to all Muslims observing Ramadan in the United States and around the world,” the president said in a statement released by the White House.

Ramadan begins Tuesday evening, a Muslim season celebrating the revelation of the Quran to the prophet Muhammad.

The president noted that Ramadan was a period of fasting and spiritual reflection for Muslims, pointing out that many perform acts of charity, read the Quran, and recite prayers during the holy season.

“Ramadan reminds us of the richness Muslims add to the religious tapestry of American life,” Trump wrote, pointing out the Constitution’s enshrining the right to religious liberty.

“Our Constitution ensures Muslims can observe Ramadan in accordance with the dictates of conscience and unimpeded by government,” the statement read.

Trump also issued a statement honoring Ramadan in 2017, but condemned terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom and Egypt as “acts of depravity that are directly contrary to the spirit of Ramadan.”

Trump’s 2018 statement appeared to be more personal.

“As so many people unite to celebrate Ramadan, Melania and I join in the hope for a blessed month,” he wrote, concluding with the traditional phrase of greeting during the season, “Ramadan Mubarak.”

Is it "Liberty" to force 18 teenage Girls into a Single-Stall shower?... Derechos Humanos o Derechos Naturales..al fin que? ...Now cars are made in Mexico and clean water is gone in Flint?

SocietyCommentary

When ‘Liberty’ Forces 18 Girls Into a Single-Stall Shower Room

James Gottry / @JamesGottry / September 09, 2016 / comments

Separate locker rooms for men and women do not symbolize a sinister effort to force anyone's conformity with "gender stereotypes." (Photo: Eric Hernandez/Sheltered Images/Newscom)

Commentary By

James Gottry @JamesGottry

On Wednesday, Alliance Defending Freedom filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of high school students and parents, asking the court to strike down a Minnesota school district policy that empowers a male student to enter the girls’ locker room and disrobe.
Not surprisingly, many girls have been distressed by the actions of the male student, which include twerking, grinding, and other sexually explicit actions. The response of the district and other authorities to the concerns has been a collective yawn.
This, along with recent actions by President Barack Obama’s Department of Education and Justice Department, illustrates the evolution of the push to manufacture special privileges for a select few.
The pretense that such demands don’t affect the lives of others now has been abandoned, replaced by two options: (1) get over it and get in line; or (2) be pushed to the margins of society, losing your reputation—and possibly your career—in the process.
In version 2.0 of the New Regime, even if you can point to a direct, immediate, and significant intrusion on your life, your opinion is irrelevant (and perhaps bigoted) when compared to “social progress.”  Keep reading

Derechos naturales vs. Derechos humanos

Ojel Rodríguez

15 / 09 / 2016

Es importante destacar cómo durante años la retórica acerca de los “derechos” ha pasado de “derechos naturales” a “derechos humanos”. Esto se refleja en documentos de derechos como la Carta de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas o la Convención de Derechos Humanos europea, etc. Sin embargo, hace falta retomar el análisis de la tradición de los derechos naturales, no teorías utópicas o derechos abstractos. La tradición a seguir es la que el gran filósofo Edmund Burke delineó: Derechos naturales que provienen de la ley divina de Dios.

En la época de la Ilustración se utilizaba el término “derechos naturales” cuando se hablaba de los derechos de todo ser humano y que procedían de Dios o de la naturaleza. Sin embargo, a principios del siglo XX, el uso del término “derechos humanos” se hizo popular y se ha convertido en el estándar cuando hablamos de derechos. Pero estos términos son muy diferentes y estas diferencias hay que reseñarlas para poder entender por qué los conservadores rechazamos por completo el término “derechos humanos”.

Utilizar el término “derechos humanos” da pie a asumir sencillamente que son derechos otorgados por la humanidad. En el caso de “derechos naturales” se asume que son otorgados por una divinidad. Mientras que para nosotros el gobierno crea el orden político para gozar de nuestros derechos naturales, el concepto de “derechos humanos” implica que estos derechos los otorga el gobierno (humanidad).

Son enormes las implicaciones de esto último. Si los derechos humanos se derivan del gobierno entonces son subjetivos, es decir que la humanidad puede determinar en cualquier tiempo qué es un derecho o qué no lo es. En otras palabras, poder dar un derecho implica también poder quitarlo. Los derechos naturales son constantes y universales porque son derechos provistos por el Creador y nadie puede quitárnoslos. A eso hay que añadirle que el fanatismo democrático obliga a los propulsores de derechos humanos a crear y proponer una lista inacabable de derechos, como la salud, la educación, la vivienda, etc. que terminan siendo derechos basados en deseos de la humanidad.

Los derechos humanos se han convertido en la panacea que hace que cualquier deseo de la humanidad se transforme en un derecho. El problema de la subjetividad de lo que es un derecho humano hace imposible hacer una carta de derechos que contenga todos los derechos que proponen los creyentes de esta nueva religión.

En vez, los conservadores creemos en los derechos naturales y nos regimos bajo los siguientes criterios de los que surge nuestra visión de derechos: Igualdad ante los ojos de Dios, igualdad ante la ley, seguridad de nuestras posesiones y propiedades, participación en las actividades comunes y las consolaciones de la sociedad. Estados Unidos se fundó bajo estos criterios y ello se refleja en su magnífica Carta de Derechos, que no pretende ser un compendio de todos los supuestos derechos de la humanidad, sino de las cosas que el gobierno no puede hacer en su legitima búsqueda de organizar el orden en la sociedad. Los derechos contenidos en la carta americana de derechos se rigen bajos estos criterios.  Si un tirano alcanzara el poder, iría directamente contra esos derechos, por ejemplo, la posesión de armas, la propiedad, la libre expresión, etc…

Los derechos humanos son una creación atea para remover a Dios del debate sobre los derechos intrínsecos que cada uno tiene como humano. Es un intento de quitar la soberanía de la ley divina y transferirla a una humana basada en la razón. Es en esto que hemos visto cómo se ha utilizado el concepto de derechos humanos para llegar a conclusiones que favorecen a las campañas de la izquierda políticamente correcta. Esta concepción moderna de derechos se basa en principios débiles, con palabras deliberadamente diseñadas para estar abiertas a diferentes interpretaciones y para que sirvan a motivaciones políticas del momento.

© Libertad.org 

Ojel Rodríguez

Trump: ‘It Used to Be Cars Were Made in Flint, and You Couldn’t Drink the Water in Mexico’

By Melanie Hunter | September 15, 2016 | 2:49 PM EDT

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at luncheon for the Economic Club of New York in New York, Thursday, Sept. 15, 2016. (AP Photo)

(CNSNews.com) –

GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump told the Economic Club of New York on Thursday that the U.S. is a “silent nation of jobless Americans” as evidenced by the city of Flint, Mich., where jobs “have been stripped from the community and its infrastructure has totally collapsed.”

“It used to be cars were made in Flint and you couldn’t drink the water in Mexico. Now cars are made in Mexico, and you can’t drink the water in Flint, but we’re going to turn this around,” Trump said, referring to the Flint water crisis, where the water wastainted with lead after the city switched its water source from Lake Huron to the Flint River in 2014.

Furthermore, the Ford Motor Company announced Wednesday that it was moving all of its small car production to Mexico to boost company profits.

“Ford announced yesterday that they’re moving their small car production facilities to Mexico, and I’ve been talking about this a long while,” Trump said, adding that “to think that Ford is moving its small car division is a disgrace.”

“It’s disgraceful,” he said. “It’s disgraceful that our politicians allow them to get away with it.”

Trump’s unveiled his economy plan during the speech at the Economic Club of New York, saying it “will embrace the truth that people flourish under a minimum government burden and will tap into the incredible unrealized potential of our workers and their dreams.”

“My economic plan rejects the cynicism that says our labor force will keep declining, that our jobs will keep leaving, and that our economy can never grow as it did once before, and boy, oh boy, did it used to grow,” Trump said.

“We reject the pessimism that says our standard of living can no longer rise, and that’s all there is left to divide, because frankly, we’re looking at an economy now of no growth and redistribution of wealth, and that’s not going to work,” he said.

Trump’s economic plan establishes “a national goal of reaching four percent economic growth.”

“Over the next 10 years, our economic team estimates that under our plan the economy will average 3.5% growth and create a total of 25 million new jobs,” he said, adding that it will be deficit neutral.

“This growth means that our jobs plan, including our childcare reforms, will be completely paid for in combination with proposed budget savings,” Trump said.

“It will be deficit neutral. If we reach 4% growth, it will reduce the deficit. It will be accomplished through a complete overhaul of our tax, regulatory, energy and trade policies,” he said.

Ad Feedback

Follow

Melanie Hunter

Bio | Archive

More from Melanie Hunter

Democrats don't like Trump's voter...but they want their vote!!! Obama y el control de armas...Oil to provide for 80% of Energy pass 2040!

Why Are Democrats Concerned About White People All of a Sudden?

Democrats Look Down on Trump Supporters, but Want Their Vote

BY NAPP NAZWORTH , CP POLITICAL ANALYST

January 5, 2016|1:15 pm

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump greets supporters and signs autographs after a campaign stop in Spencer, Iowa December 5, 2015.

"These Trump supporters are horrible; how do we get their vote?" is the contradictory message heard from various Democratic corners these days.

While Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has gained support with appeals to some of the worst aspects of the American zeitgeist, some liberals now recognize that his supporters are a demographic group that the Democrats should listen to.

The most detailed study yet of Trump supporters was reported by Nate Cohn Thursday for The New York Times. Using a massive sample of 11,000 potential Republican primary voters, Civis Analytics, a Democratic firm, found that Trump's core supporters are likely registered Democrats who tend to vote Republican in presidential races.

In addition to being registered Democrats who self-identify as Republican, Trump's supporters are "less affluent, less educated and less likely to turn out to vote." These supporters tend to be concentrated along a broad swath of the country from Louisiana, through the Appalachians, to upstate New York. His three best states are West Virginia, New York and North Carolina, in that order. (The NYT report has a convenient heat map.)

The report also found that Trump's support tends to overlap with another report showing areas with the most racially charged Internet searches (an indicator of racism). Plus, those areas overlap well with where Hillary Clinton did best when she ran against Barack Obama for the Democratic Party nomination in 2008, Cohn pointed out.

Data aggregated at the congressional district level cannot determine causation at the individual level — you cannot say that Trump's supporters are racist based upon this information, in other words. But, it does indicate the possablity that Trump's support comes from those easily mobilized by bigotry.

One of the most important findings in political science since the early 1990s is that most voters views on most issues are characterized by ambivalence. They have many competing views in their heads when deciding where they stand on an issue. Which view surfaces, becomes their "top of the head" response, can be influenced by recent conversations or events in the news.

When Trump uses messaging with, for instance, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant or anti-Mexican overtones, he helps to surface those latent bigotries. As a communicator, Trump is one of the most skilled modern politicians at doing this.

A caveat: Trump's support does not only come from these voters. If that were the case he would not be leading by such a wide margin. The report points out that Trump is leading among all the major demographic groups, including registered Republicans. He even leads among Latino Republicans, though by a thin margin.

What the report found, however, is his strongest support comes from the blue collar, mostly white, mostly Democrat, families. For instance, his support among registered Republicans is 29 percent, but among registered Democrats likely to vote in the Republican primary, it's 43 percent.

On a measure of likelihood of voting in the primary, Trump does best among those least likely to vote (40 percent), and worst among those most likely to vote (29 percent).

Unlike the other candidates, the challenge for Trump's campaign is first, in the states that do not allow registered Democrats to vote in the Republican primary or only allow registered Republicans to vote in the Republican primary, to switch their party affiliation; and second, to get them to the polls on election day. (Some states require voters to register party affiliation when they register to vote while others do not.)

As the Trump campaign figures out the challenges of its core supporters, on the other side of the political divide some Democrats are wondering how they lost these voters, and how they might get them back.

Obama described his understanding of the Trump phenomenon a couple of weeks ago in an interview for NPR.

"[…] particularly blue-collar men have had a lot of trouble in this new economy, where they are no longer getting the same bargain that they got when they were going to a factory and able to support their families on a single paycheck," he said.

"You combine those things, and it means that there is going to be potential anger, frustration, fear — some of it justified, but just misdirected. I think somebody like Mr. Trump is taking advantage of that. That's what he's exploiting during the course of his campaign."

Obama's analysis is correct. Trump's main support comes from those who are angry and frustrated, and rightly so. They've seen others gain while their economic situation has remained stagnant or worsened.

David Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, described Trump supporters for The Atlantic's January cover story:

"The angriest and most pessimistic people in America are the people we used to call Middle Americans. Middle-class and middle-aged; not rich and not poor; people who are irked when asked to press 1 for English, and who wonder how white male became an accusation rather than a description.

"You can measure their pessimism in polls that ask about their expectations for their lives—and for those of their children. On both counts, whites without a college degree express the bleakest view. You can see the effects of their despair in the new statistics describing horrifying rates of suicide and substance-abuse fatality among this same group, in middle age.

"White Middle Americans express heavy mistrust of every institution in American society: not only government, but corporations, unions, even the political party they typically vote for — the Republican Party of Romney, Ryan, and McConnell, which they despise as a sad crew of weaklings and sellouts. They are pissed off. And when Donald Trump came along, they were the people who told the pollsters, 'That's my guy.'"

They aren't necessarily superconservative. They often don't think in ideological terms at all. But they do strongly feel that life in this country used to be better for people like them — and they want that older country back."

In addition to Obama's remarks, there have been several articles about working-class white people from liberal and left-of-center sources.

In a Nov. 29, 2015, op-ed for The Washington Post, Democrat E.J. Dionne recommends empathy for Trump supporters.

A couple of weeks later, political scientist William Galston, Dionne's colleague at Brookings Institution, authored a similar op-ed for The Wall Street Journal.

Don't turn away from Trump voters, Galston advized his fellow Democrats. (He once worked for the Bill Clinton administration.) Instead, consider how to win those voters.

image: http://graphic.christianpost.com/images/article/icn_veiwArticle.gif

 View article on single page

Next Page

Pages: 12

Contact: napp.nazworth@christianpost.com, @NappNazworth (Twitter)

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/democrats-white-people-trump-vote-154076/#RYWxqhETPULMcRIf.99

El decreto de Obama sobre el control de armas

John G. Malcolm

05 / 01 / 2016

0 Comments

Frustrado por su incapacidad para doblegar la voluntad del Congreso a la suya propia, el presidente Barack Obama ha vuelto a agarrar su lapicero y teléfono de confianza y emitió hoy una serie de “decretos presidenciales” sobre el control de armas.

Si bien puede haber un impacto presupuestario, varias de las propuestas del presidente, pero no todas, no son controvertidas desde un punto de vista legal, a pesar de que pueden ser objeto de controversia desde el punto de vista político o de normativa pública.

Lo que anunció el presidente

El presidente está pidiendo al Congreso que ponga fondos para, entre otras cosas, añadir 200 nuevos agentes e investigadores a la Oficina de Alcohol, Tabaco, Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (ATF) para hacer cumplir las leyes existentes de armas y para inyectar $500 millones y así aumentar el acceso a programas de salud mental.

Anunció que el FBI va a contratar a 230 examinadores y personal de apoyo para acelerar el proceso de verificación de antecedentes utilizando el Sistema Nacional Instantáneo de Antecedentes Penales (NICS) y ha ordenado al FBI para que colabore con el Servicio Digital de Estados Unidos para la modernización del sistema NICS.

Anunció que, bajo sus órdenes, la procuradora general Loretta Lynch había convocado una reunión con los procuradores de todo el país para instruirlos (como si no supieran ya eso) de que deberán seguir teniendo como objetivo los “peores de los peores” crímenes con armas y continuar con la lucha contra la violencia armada en sus comunidades.

Lynch también está preparando un memorando animándolos a renovar sus iniciativas contra la violencia doméstica. El presidente también ha dado instrucciones a Lynch para que escriba una carta a los estados subrayando la importancia de recibir registros completos de antecedentes penales, así como información sobre personas inhabilitadas a poseer armas de fuego por haber estado “en una institución mental” o “calificado con defecto mental” o haber sido condenado por un delito menor de violencia doméstica.

También ha ordenado a los departamentos de Defensa, Seguridad Interior y Justicia a que hagan o patrocinen investigaciones en tecnología de seguridad de armas y que promuevan el uso y adquisición de tecnología para armas inteligentes.

Ninguna de estas propuestas son jurídicamente problemáticas, ya que cualquier presidente es libre de dar orientación a las agencias federales y pedirle al Congreso el dinero apropiado para financiar sus prioridades. De hecho, los defensores de los derechos pro armas desde hace mucho han instado al presidente a que actualice y mejore el sistema NICS, que fue lo que estuvo detrás de la enmienda de la ley para mejorar el sistema NICS en 2008.

¿Qué es objeto de impugnación legal?

Algunas de las medidas anunciadas por el presidente podrán, sin embargo, ser objeto de impugnación jurídica a medida que los detalles vayan surgiendo en los próximos días. No es ningún secreto que el presidente desea cerrar el vacío legal de la venta en ferias de armas ampliando el número de vendedores a pequeña escala que deberán registrarse (y tener licencia) como distribuidores federales de armas de fuego, lo que luego les obligará a llevar a cabo verificaciones de antecedentes cada vez que vendan un arma.

La ley federal establece que alguien “involucrado en la industria” de la venta de armas de fuego cuando y cada vez “una persona dedique tiempo, atención y trabajo en la venta de armas de fuego como curso regular de actividad comercial o empresarial con el objetivo principal de obtener medios de vida o con fines de lucro a través de la compra repetitiva y reventa de armas de fuego, pero este término no incluirá a una persona que haga ocasionales ventas, intercambios o compras de armas de fuego para la mejora de una colección personal o pasatiempo, o que venda toda o parte de su colección personal de armas de fuego…”.

El papel de la ATF

El presidente anunció que la ATF ha “aclarado” que una persona “involucrada en la industria” de la venta de armas de fuego sin importar el lugar en el que las transacciones de armas de fuego se lleven a cabo e incluso unas pocas transacciones pueden desencadenar la exigencia de la licencia “cuando se combine con otras pruebas “suficientes para demostrar que alguien se dedica a ese negocio.

Aunque queda por ver qué acciones de cumplimiento buscará la ATF, esto no es realmente algo nuevo, ya que varios tribunales han sostenido que lo que importa es lo que uno está haciendo, no dónde lo está haciendo, y a los distribuidores de armas de fuego con licencia federal se les ha exigido desde hace mucho que lleven a cabo verificaciones de antecedentes penales si venden armas en sus tiendas o en ferias de armas.

Las cortes de justicia también han sostenido que otros factores, como considerarse comerciante de armas de fuego o participar en repetidas transacciones con fines de lucro, deben tenerse en cuenta a la hora de determinar la situación.

Muy significativo es que nada en esta “aclaración” cambia las definiciones contenidas en la legislación vigente y cualquier intento unilateral por parte de esta (o cualquier) administración de reescribir esas definiciones para reclasificar las personas que sólo se dedican a “ventas ocasionales” para que pasen a ser comerciantes de armas sujetos a requisitos de licencia serían impugnadas sin duda alguna en las cortes y probablemente la administración fracasará en su intento.

Si el presidente quiere reescribir la ley, tiene que trabajar con el Congreso para hacerlo.

¿Quién reúne los requisitos como enfermo mental?

Otro tema potencialmente preocupante es el anuncio del presidente de que la Administración del Seguro Social (SSA) comenzará el proceso de reglamentación para asegurar que los “registros apropiados” sean enviados al sistema NICS sobre  no sólo de personas calificadas por un juez como enfermos mentales o legalmente incompetentes, sino también a las personas “con un problema de salud mental documentado, que reciben beneficios por discapacidad y son incapaces de gestionar esos beneficios debido a su deterioro mental”.

Si un veterano está recibiendo tratamiento TEPT (Trastorno de estrés postraumático) o alguien tiene recetados antidepresivos o medicamentos contra la ansiedad por un psiquiatra, ¿será que esa persona ahora tiene “un problema de salud documentado”?

Si un jubilado recibe prestaciones de la seguridad social a través de un “representante del beneficiario”, ¿será que a esa persona ahora se le considerará como que “no puede gestionar esos beneficios” por alguna “deficiencia mental”?

¿Puede un burócrata del gobierno quitarle un derecho constitucional basado en estas bases sin una audiencia judicial?

¿Puede un burócrata del gobierno quitarle un derecho constitucional basado en estos fundamentos sin una audiencia judicial? Eso aún está por verse.

Los ciudadanos respetuosos de la ley

Mientras que la violencia armada es un legítimo asunto de preocupación pública, es importante recordar que, si bien la posesión de armas en este país ha aumentado de forma espectacular en los últimos años, las muertes relacionadas con armas de fuego (excepto el suicidio) han disminuido.

Muchos ciudadanos respetuosos de la ley optan por ejercer sus derechos de la Segunda Enmienda para protegerse a sí mismos y a sus familias, y reconocen que puede llegar un momento en el que se enfrenten a un asaltante armado y los segundos cuentan aunque la policía esté sólo a pocos minutos.

No se les debe impedir esa defensa debido a políticas mal concebidas y posiblemente ilegales aplicadas por decreto presidencial.

© DailySignal

John G. Malcolm

Despite Green Energy Push, API Chief Says Oil and Gas Will Provide 80% of U.S. Energy Needs Through 2040

By Penny Starr | January 5, 2016 | 9:40 PM EST

Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the trade association American Petroleum Institute, spoke about his organization's 2016 State of American Energy report in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 5, 2016. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)

(CNSNews.com) – American Petroleum Institute president and CEO Jack Gerard said Tuesday that federal government data show the United States will continue to rely on fossil fuels as its main source of energy for decades to come, despite efforts by environmentalists to work toward a goal of banning them.

CNSNews.com asked Gerard about the United Nations climate change conference in Paris last month at which scientists and environmentalists expressed the belief that addressing climate change would require an eventual ban on all fossil fuels.

“The experts will tell you that by 2040, 80 percent of the energy resource we’ll rely on in the United States will continue to be fossil fuels,” he said.

Gerard was speaking at a press conference  after addressing the oil and gas trade association’s annual State of American Energy event in Washington, D.C.

According to the federal Energy Information Administration, although renewable and nuclear are the fast-growing energy sources – each increasing by 2.5 percent a year – “fossil fuels continue to supply nearly 80% of world energy use through 2040.”

In his prepared remarks, Gerard said the U.S. was the world’s leader in gas and oil production while also leading the world in carbon reductions – thanks, in part, to increased production of fossil fuels, specifically liquefied natural gas (LNG).

“The science today shows us that natural gas is a key opportunity to further improve the environment,” he said. “I would suggest one of the things we should look at is how do we expedite and move LNG export opportunities in the United States.”

“Fortunately, we know how to bring about America’s brighter energy future, which means lower cost for American consumers, a cleaner environment and American energy leadership, because it is today’s reality,” Gerard said.

“We call it the U.S. model.”

“Simultaneously, the United States is leading the world in energy production, we have one of the strongest western economies, and are leading the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions – a trifecta of success unmatched by any other nation,” Gerard said.

Gerard told CNSNews.com at the press conference that the U.S. should “build on the success” in these areas.

“The reality is, we are leading the world and how did we get there?” Gerard said. “That’s the simple point we’re trying to make, as you look and you build on the success we have today, we believe we can deal with the challenge of carbon. But we can also do it in other ways, other than those driven purely by political ideology.”

AD FEEDBACK

 Follow

Penny Starr

Bio | Archive

More from Penny Starr