Category: Quick Analysis

Categories
Quick Analysis

Millennials: Their Challenges and Views

How are Millennials faring, and how do they view America?

Millennials, those born after 1980, will play a major role in the 2016 election, and an increasingly large role in the U.S. economy. They are the most ethnically diverse group in U.S. history, and the first to grow up with the internet and personal computers. They have eclipsed prior generations in overall size, and, now, in their percentage of the workforce. They are, according to the White House,  the largest single group in America, representing one-third of the U.S. population.

As it has for every other generation, the environment millennials grew up in influences their thinking, their identity, and their outlook.

They have been brought up in schools providing a much less appreciative view of American history and culture. Pew Research notes that “[Millennials]  are relatively unattached to organized politics and religion, linked by social media, burdened by debt, distrustful of people…Millennials have also been keeping their distance from another core institution of society—marriage. Just 26% of this generation is married. When they were the age that Millennials are now, 36% of Generation X, 48% of Baby Boomers and 65% of the members of the Silent Generation were married… Most unmarried Millennials (69%) say they would like to marry, but many…lack what they deem to be a necessary prerequisite—a solid economic foundation… Millennials have emerged into adulthood with low levels of social trust. In response to a long-standing social science survey question, ‘Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people,’ just 19% of Millennials say most people can be trusted, compared with 31% of Gen Xers, 37% of Silents and 40% of Boomers.”

One vital factor must be kept in mind about the Millennial outlook on life: their extraordinary level of debt. Pew notes that Millennials are “…the first in the modern era to have higher levels of student loan debt, poverty and unemployment, and lower levels of wealth and personal income than their two immediate predecessor generations …Their difficult economic circumstances in part reflect the impact of the Great Recession (2007-2009) and in part the longer-term effects of globalization and rapid technological change on the American workforce. Median household income in the U.S. today remains below its 1999 peak, the longest stretch of stagnation in the modern era…”

That may explain why, despite not having great loyalty or membership in political parties, they are attracted to candidates in the Democrat Party who advocate policies that have the government pick up the tab for tuition and health care.

The White House notes that  “Total student outstanding loan debt surpassed $1 trillion by the end of the second quarter of 2014, making it the second largest category of household debt. In part, this increase in the aggregate level of outstanding student debt is due to greater enrollment among Millennials and to the changing composition of students, including a larger share of students from lower-income families.”
Undeniably, men with high cholesterol experience cialis professional india some degree of erectile dysfunction (ED). Regular intake of tuna helps to increase sex hormones by up to 90%. levitra 100mg buying this buying viagra in uk The only real shining moments were Al Rollins’ and Max Bentley’s Hart memorial trophies. If you experience any serious side cost viagra effects, you should speak to an acupuncturist.
Generation Opportunity’s 2016 “State of the Millennial Report”  emphasizes that: “One of the toughest challenges facing young Americans is finding a way to pay for a college education that empowers them to find employment, pay off their student loans, and create better lives for themselves and their families. Unfortunately, government interference in higher education has driven up the cost of college through excessive subsidies that inflate prices. Government interference has also limited choice and competition in higher education by preventing new and innovative educational programs from competing and offering better, inexpensive alternatives. Making higher education work for present and future generations of Americans requires a major overhaul of the current system.”

The White House study also found that “Millennials are more likely to focus exclusively on studies instead of combining school and work. With college enrollments at historic highs there has been a corresponding decline in labor market participation among 16 to 24 year-olds.”

Not unrelated, Millennials are less likely to be homeowners than young adults in previous generations, and more likely to be living with their parents then their immediate predecessors.

The Generation Opportunity’s report adds:  “while previous generations experienced relatively stable growth and an improvement in their economic condition, the Millennial Generation faces an uphill climb to success… Significant barriers to opportunity created by government impede the ability of young Americans to make a better life for themselves and their families. The number of young people making less than $25,000 a year is at its highest level since the 1990s. Worse, 48 percent of Millennials now believe that the American Dream is dead…

“These negative trends are caused by years of government intervention disrupting economic growth in countless parts of our lives. Enacting the following policy initiatives would be a start to turning around these developments… Government barriers to starting a new business have made it harder than ever for Millennials to chase after their versions of the American Dream. Government regulations have skyrocketed out of control growing from nearly 10,000 pages in 1954 to over 80,000 by 2013.22 The complexity of the tax code has also made it difficult to do business. In 1954 the tax code was only 14,000 pages long, but by 2013 it reached nearly 74,000.23 Occupational licensing requirements are another barrier. In 1950, only five percent of the American workforce needed a permission slip from the government to work. Today that number is around 30 percent, and it’s costing us up to 2.85 million jobs.”

Considering the unfairly critical views Millennials have been exposed to about their nation, and the hardships they have endured in an uncharacteristically harsh and increasingly overregulated  economy, it is not surprising that some of  their perspectives are even more cynical towards traditional  American values than their famously rebellious parents who came of age in the 60’s.

Categories
Quick Analysis

What did Obama’s Cuban Trip Achieve?

The results of President Obama’s recent trip to Cuba, and, indeed, the reasons for his traveling there at all, remain shrouded in mystery.

The original timing of Washington’s opening of relations with Cuba raised eyebrows.  The Russians had just resumed their naval presence in the island nation, ruled by the same family that had urged Moscow to strike the United States with nuclear weapons in the 1960’s. The harsh repression of the Cuban people had not considerably lessened, Havana continued to harbor American criminals, and the Castro regime still supported terrorists.

None of these factors had changed before the President’s visit, and none has even started to change since.

Raoul Castro humiliated Mr. Obama by not greeting him at the airport, did not express any willingness to discuss human rights issues in any meaningful way, and did not show any sign of disinviting Moscow’s spy ships from its ports.  But the dictator did enthusiastically mention one point: his desire to have the United States return the Guantanamo Bay naval base to Cuba.

As the New York Analysis of Policy & Government noted before Mr. Obama flew to Cuba, the President has been dedicated to both closing the prison at the “Gitmo” base as well as reducing the overall U.S. defense budget.

There no reliable, fully comprehensive details of what the President and Castro discussed. We remain concerned that handing over the entire base to Havana may have been a key point.

The White House  itself has not listed any significant gains for the U.S.:

As a psycho-therapeutic approach, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy helps individuals to learn new skills to deal levitra canada with dysfunctional behaviors and emotions. At the point when a man is sexually energized, his body’s standard reaction is to cialis soft tab increase the blood flow to that part of the body. It’s not a treatment but yes, provides price of viagra immediate relief from dryness. Download your Erection Problems Solved report today! Kamagra is viagra price check out here one of the most commonly used medicines for treating erectile dysfunction. “The visit is a historic milestone after more than a year of progress from the day in December of 2014 when the President first announced he was abandoning a failed, Cold War-era approach to Cuba in favor of a new course to normalize relations. Since then, we’ve restored non-stop flights between our two countries. We’ve helped facilitate more people-to-people interaction and commercial enterprise. We’ve allowed U.S. dollars to be used in more financial transactions with Cuba. And today, we’re restoring direct mail for the first time in 50 years. The first flight carrying that first batch of U.S. direct mail to Cuba took off yesterday.”

Those limited returns are hardly substantive.

The aftermath of the trip hardly provides any encouraging news. A Yahoo news item notes this disappointing fact:

“On Tuesday, President Obama addressed Cubans about the importance of human rights and peaceful dialogue. On Thursday, pro-democracy demonstrators in Havana were beaten and arrested by Cuban police agents just steps away from where Obama had spoken. The demonstration occurred three blocks from the Grand Theater of Havana, where Obama spoke live to the Cuban nation, and was swiftly broken up by plainclothes officers, who attacked demonstrators violently and then stuffed those they had captured into police cars and swept them away within moments. “

While Cuba has gained from the President’s visit, there is little more than “hope” that anything America is seeking will be accomplished. In a March 22 press conference, Secretary of State John Kerry was asked:  “You’ve said in the past that the embargo would not be lifted unless there’s improvement on the human rights record of Cuba, yet yesterday the President said he believed that the embargo would be lifted. Would that happen if there is no progress in the human rights record in Cuba?”

Kerry’s response was typical of the vacillating foreign policy stance the Obama administration has adhered to:” No, I think the President is really referring to – it would be lifted over a period of time, because there will be, I’m confident, changes taking place. Changes are taking place in Cuba even now. I mean, I know some people want some dramatic announcement that all of a sudden, okay, here’s the new rules of the road, but that’s not the way it’s going to happen. But there is more political space today in Cuba than there was before the announcement of our embassy and before I came here to raise the flag, and in the year following, more people are traveling, more people are exchanging information, more people are meeting. There is an atmosphere of transformation that is taking place, and it doesn’t happen overnight anywhere. It has never happened; it’s been a slow, long building process in most places.”

This has been a standard course of action in President Obama’s international dealings.  The United States provides solid concessions, such as handing Russia the lead in nuclear weapons in the New Start Treaty, giving Iran the financial considerations it seeks, and so on, while getting no guaranteed gains in return.  It has not worked well for the U.S.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama Missing in Action in the War on Terror

Mr. Obama’s odd nonresponse to the latest terrorist attack, the bombing of the Brussels Airport and a metro station near the headquarters of the European Union, raises uncomfortable questions.

The President chose to go to a ball game with Raoul Castro, rather than return to the White House. Some will question whether he could have done anything substantive no matter where he was. However, when a key leader continues to display nonchalance on a level that indicates a lack of concern or attention about a major challenge, it sends a signal to the perpetrators that they will face no significant obstacle to their efforts.

That perception may be correct. It is difficult to imagine any other President (or Secretary of State) who would not have responded in some way to the Benghazi attack, to cite just one example. The primary duty of the federal government is to safeguard the American people. But in response to repeated terror attacks at home, and abroad in places frequented by U.S. visitors, President Obama has displayed little interest and less concern.

The day after the Benghazi attack, he flew to Las Vegas for a fund raiser.

He labels clear-cut cases of terrorism, such as the shooting at an American military base by an Islamic extremist, as “workplace violence.”

Following the terrorist assault in San Bernardino, he gave a speech saying that Americans have too many guns.

International authorities warned Washington about the danger from the individuals who bombed the Boston Marathon, but nothing was done.

He didn’t join other western leaders in the aftermath of the Paris attacks.

He continues to ignore Iran’s missile development.
How the sexual problems affect men?- Mostly men look for herbal remedies, which are safe and levitra sale continue reading description sure way to cure ED. Having a frequent cialis 5mg no prescription workout will not necessarily mean which you need to visit the gym everyday. They are available over the counter or they http://icks.org/n/data/conference/1482731615_report_file.pdf generic levitra online are also available at the online drug suppliers offer kamagra and its various versions at the a lot reasonable prices . Though the treating process by TCM viagra prescription buy may be longer, the result is better.
He negotiates with the Taliban, the organization that helped attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

He continues to advocate bringing more Syrian refugees to the United States, despite the clear example of the problems this has caused in Europe. Oddly enough, though, there is no priority given to Christians or Yazdis, who have been the chief targets of the terrorists. Almost none have been admitted.

The President visited and spoke at the Islamic Society of Baltimore Mosque, (ISB) known for its links to terrorism. The Investigative Project on Terrorism  notes that:

“ISB leaders have amassed a record of support for radical Islamic causes over the years, including endorsing the Chechen jihad and Palestinian suicide bombings. Its former imam was active in a charity later linked to terror financing including Hamas, the Taliban, and for providing “hundreds of thousands of dollars” to Osama bin Laden… It’s safe to assume the White House vetted the ISB and found it an acceptable venue for a presidential appearance despite this history. And that is not surprising. The Obama administration has repeatedly embraced contact with the Muslim Brotherhood, repeatedly meeting with its officials during and after the Arab Spring while ignoring secular democracy advocates. It praised the early tenure of Brotherhood member Mohamed Morsi when he briefly served as Egypt’s president. The administration also helped a Brotherhood delegation skip routine screening by U.S. Customs and Border Protection upon landing in America. And, as we reported in December, a White House meeting also aimed at standing by the Muslim-American community featured representatives of Islamist groups, including some with consistent records of opposing U.S. law enforcement counter-terrorism efforts. ISB officials have worked closely with one of those groups…”

He continues to advocate bringing more Syrian refugees to the United States, despite the clear example of the problems this has caused in Europe. Oddly enough, though, there is no priority given to Christians or Yazdis, who have been the chief targets of the terrorists. Almost none have been admitted.

James Carafano, writing for Fox News, uses this analogy: “Imagine if, in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, FDR had taken to the radio and declared everything was under control. The Nov. 13 terrorist attack on Paris, paired with [the] attacks in Brussels, is the European equivalent of back-to-back Pearl Harbors. Yet, the U.S. administration sits as sanguine as ever, arguing it has everything in hand.”

As ISIS rose to power in the Middle East, President Obama insisted that they were an insignificant threat, dismissing them as a “JV team.”  Against the advice of his own military advisors, he withdrew all U.S. troops from Iraq, creating the vacuum that gave ISIS the opportunity to thrive.  He is on the verge of repeating the mistake in Afghanistan.

President Obama won’t even use the term “Islamic terrorism.” In the drug-addled era of the 1960’s, there was a cliché that went, “Suppose they gave a war and nobody came.” Under President Obama, a war has been declared by radical Islam that the U.S. has barely shown up for. The answer to the question raised by ‘60’s cliché is, innocents will die.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Assasination of Republican Front Runners

Donald Trump is no one’s idea of a perfect candidate.  He is blustery, short on specifics, and tall in hyperbole. He speaks harshly, egotistically, and is politically incorrect. It is difficult to support a candidate who provides so little details about his policy choices.

But he is not, in any way, the terror that the media and his political opposition portray. He reflects the very real frustration of a population tired of seeing their nation deteriorate by the day at the hands of an elitist and inept leadership (particularly at the White House level,) and being forced to accept that their children will be the first generation to do worse than their parents.

A reasonable case can be made that either of Trump’s GOP rivals could address these challenges  better than Trump. But while the media takes every opportunity to frame each of his comments as a solicitation for Armageddon, they go out of their way to ignore the horrifying record, ridiculous ideas, and overwhelming ethical violations of Hillary Clinton, and the nonsensical socialist policies of Bernie Sanders which have already failed in every venue in which they have been tried.

Let’s be clear on what is occurring. As the GOP front runner, Trump has a very large target on his back, the same as Chris Christie had much earlier when he appeared to have a significant edge. Back then, the media made more of Christie’s alleged “bridgegate” involvement (in which his appointees reportedly caused a traffic jam in revenge against a local mayor for a political quarrel) than they did about Clinton’s failed “reset” with Russia, her incompetence in Benghazi, or any other of her long history of policy failures and ethical failings.

It is reminiscent of the favorable, almost fawning, treatment John McCain received from the press, right up until the time it was clear that he was going to become the Republican nominee in 2008. Then it turned largely negative.

Almost no air time has been spent on the utterly disgraceful conspiracy by Soros and his outrageous Moveon.org to deprive the American people of the right to hear one of the candidates simply because they don’t like him.  That’s mob rule at its worst.

The major media have not only lost any sense of objectivity, they have interjected themselves into the process in a manner even worse than when one of their ilk, as a moderator in a presidential  debate between Romney and Obama, interjected herself into the 2012 race by openly tilting the forum against the GOP.

In 2016, they are, in essence, aiding and abetting the criminal actions of a well-financed and well organized mob to prevent the American voter from hearing the views of a candidate.
To pinpoint the source of female frustration, we consulted with best sex speviagra generika t in Delhi to get the condition diagnosed and treated. It is in this market that drugs like india viagra generic browse around for more Kamagra have taken anti-ED medications to a new level. Facing cashing with increase in household energy bills apply with buy viagra for cheap text loans and get quick remedy from urgent bills. Relationships are based on expectations and it also depends on how levitra 10 mg we fulfill our partner’s expectations.
Make no mistake: If Ted Cruz or John Kasich somehow overtake Trump and become the frontrunner, major media outlets will find a way of portraying them as the spawn of Satan.

The detractors of Trump today, Christie previously, and whoever is in the lead in the coming months are not limited to political opponents, the media, and the Soros/Moveon.org mobsters.

Any GOP frontrunner, whether it’s Trump claiming he wants to “Make America Great” or Cruz seeking to restore “Morning in America” or any candidate seeking to establish hope to the American people and return the U.S. to the pre-eminent position it held before the Obama wrecking crew got a hold of the country is a threat to those who have dedicated themselves to knocking the U.S. down as far it can go.

The Obama acolytes and would-be successors believe that America is evil and the aggressors in Russia, China, Iran and elsewhere are benign. They should be embarrassed at the devastation wrought upon the middle class, seniors, and youthful job seekers by their Progressive policies. They don’t want to allow candidates with viable solutions to demonstrate what a huge folly their leftist political agenda has been.

Trump, Cruz and Kasich may have uphill battles, but they can take comfort in knowing that their Progressive opponents  are sufficiently concerned about them that they have resorted to an unprecedented campaign of slander and in some cases violence to prevent them from moving forward.

It’s time that the voters, no matter who they support or whatever issues concern them most, reject the biased reporting of the media and the fascist tactics of the leftist extremists who seek to impose their will by lies and force.

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Seniors Adversely Affected as Federal Funds are Diverted

America’s seniors are suffering as federal funds are diverted to questionable uses.

As America’s national debt rapidly soars to the $20 trillion mark (it currently stands at over $19 trillion) key needs are facing a lack of funds, and Americans relying on Social Security and Medicare are the most directly affected.  The problems are not just the future insolvency of those programs. The impact has already been felt.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) projects that “Social Security’s Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund now faces an urgent threat of reserve depletion, requiring prompt corrective action by lawmakers if sudden reductions or interruptions in benefit payments are to be avoided. Beyond DI, Social Security as a whole as well as Medicare cannot sustain projected long-run program costs under currently scheduled financing.”

Social Security will face virtual bankruptcy by 2034. Medicare will endure the same fate by 2030.

But those future dates are not the extent of the problem. During the Obama Administration, seniors have been subjected to an unprecedented lack of cost of living increases.

Since the regular program of Cost of Living increases began in 1975, (prior to that increases were provided by legislation) there has never been a period when such adjustments were lower than they have been under President Obama’s term. Not once had there been a year in which there was no increase at all. Since 2009, two consecutive years, 2009 and 2010, provided no adjustments, and there was also no adjustment in 2015.  Before 2009, the average annual increase was 4.4%; during the Obama presidency, it was 1.7%.

Social Security Cost-Of-Living Adjustments

(Chart provided by the Social Security Administration) 
Year COLA
1975 8.0
1976 6.4
1977 5.9
1978 6.5
1979 9.9
1980 14.3
1981 11.2
1982 7.4
1983 3.5
1984 3.5
1985 3.1
1986 1.3
1987 4.2
1988 4.0
1989 4.7

There have been cases of purchase cheap levitra damaging penile tissues and this led to impotence. The sildenafil can also have adverse health effects like severe headache, vomiting, buy viagra without rx constipation, dizziness, diarrhea, upset stomach or longer and continuous erection for more than defined period. The most common is the fact that it easily accessible and purchase cheap cialis very affordable. However, this visit address viagra doctor doesn’t result from masturbation but from psychology.

Year COLA
1990 5.4
1991 3.7
1992 3.0
1993 2.6
1994 2.8
1995 2.6
1996 2.9
1997 2.1
1998 1.3
1999  a 2.5
2000 3.5
2001 2.6
2002 1.4
2003 2.1
2004 2.7
Year COLA
2005 4.1
2006 3.3
2007 2.3
2008 5.8
2009 0.0
2010 0.0
2011 3.6
2012 1.7
2013 1.5
2014 1.7
2015 0.0

It’s not just Social Security problems that are affecting America’s seniors. Medicare has taken a hit, and the problem has been accelerated and worsened due to Obamacare.  Three examples of how Obamacare hurts seniors are provided by The Daily Signal:

 1) Huge payment reductions that reduce access to care. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Obamacare will reduce Medicare reimbursements by $716 billion over 10 years. These cuts will hit Part A providers such as hospitals, nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, and hospices, along with Medicare Advantage plans. The trustees predict that if Congress allows these cuts to go into effect, 15 percent of Medicare providers would go in the red by 2019, 25 percent by 2030, and 40 percent by 2050…

2) Medicare “savings” are spent on other parts of Obamacare. As CBO plainly states, “CBO has been asked whether the reductions in projected Part A outlays and increases in projected [hospital insurance] revenues under the legislation can provide additional resources to pay future Medicare benefits while simultaneously providing resources to pay for new programs outside of Medicare. Our answer is basically no.”

3) The ominous and looming power of IPAB.  When Medicare spending surpasses the target, IPAB will have to make recommendations to lower Medicare spending.

While America’s seniors, who have earned their Social Security and Medicare benefits through a lifetime of work, face cuts, questions arise about the diversion of federal funds to pay for benefits for illegal immigrants.

The Federation for Immigration Reform has estimated the cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers:

  • Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
  • The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
  • Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
  • At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
  • Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.

The lack of priority the Obama Administration has given to the needs of seniors, while turning a blind eye towards the growing financial impact of illegal aliens, is a cause of deep concern.

(Note: We originally published this article on March 18. However, we were informed that many subscribers were not able to view it due to technical issues arising from a website update.) 

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Crisis that the White House Pretends Doesn’t Exist

From one end of the globe to the other, powers overtly unfriendly to the United States and its allies are substantially and rapidly building their military might.  It is a clear indication that the White House policy of unilateral reduction in defense spending combined with appeasement diplomacy has been a dismal failure.

North Korea has placed its nuclear arsenal on “standby,” and Kim Jong Un has ordered his substantial armed forces into a “pre-emptive attack mode,” according to reports by the Korean Central News Agency first as reported by the Financial Times.

In February, the White House stated, in response to North Korea’s recent nuclear threat,  that:

“This is a highly provocative act that, following its December 12 ballistic missile launch, undermines regional stability, violates North Korea’s obligations under numerous United Nations Security Council resolutions, contravenes its commitments under the September 19, 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks, and increases the risk of proliferation.  North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs constitute a threat to U.S. national security and to international peace and security. The United States remains vigilant in the face of North Korean provocations and steadfast in our defense commitments to allies in the region…The danger posed by North Korea’s threatening activities warrants further swift and credible action by the international community.  The United States will also continue to take steps necessary to defend ourselves and our allies. We will strengthen close coordination with allies and partners and work with our Six-Party partners, the United Nations Security Council, and other UN member states to pursue firm action.”

The President’s analysis of the situation was correct, and his plans to increase cooperation with regional allies is appropriate.  However, there is a problem with the approach:  The United States lacks the actual power-in-being to actually address the crisis.  The slashing of the defense budget during the course of the Obama Administration, and the Oval Office decision not to have an armed forces capable of fighting a two-front war renders his response little more than words.  Sanctions have failed to halt North Korea’s belligerence or nuclear progress in the past and there is no reason to assume they will do so in the future.

The President speaks of a “pivot” to Asia, which if it were real, could give Pyongyang pause.  But the pivot is just verbiage with nothing much behind it.  The diminished U.S. Navy, at less than half the strength it posed in 1990 and at its smallest level since World War I, doesn’t intimidate North Korea which rests with the Chinese sphere of influence.  China already has more submarines than the U.S., along with greater regional forces and a growing bluewater fleet that will outnumber America’s by 2020.
viagra 100mg tablet Sildenafil contained in medications such as malegra inhibits the working of c-GMP (cyclic guanosine monophosphate). Jacobson “I function closely with each discount online viagra http://deeprootsmag.org/page/70/?Itemid=cebbqqbwoe and every affected person to know their signs or symptoms and expectations and use a balance of bioidentical hormones, herbals and nutritional supplements, to achieve optimal symptom reduction.” AgeMD is definitely an exclusive national network of bioidentical hormone medical professionals who specialize in bioidentical hormone remedy and age linked disease. The least period estimated of getting the desired cheap cialis online. It deeprootsmag.org purchase viagra in uk has got Sildenafil citrate inside it which makes sure that any course chosen meets your needs.
There is another factor, as well.  The White House’s practice of tough words followed by a lack of action demonstrates that it lacks the willpower to follow through. Think of the abandoned Red Line in Syria. The failure to avenge the Benghazi attack. The weak response to Russia’s Ukrainian invasion. The lack of action in response to Moscow’s growing presence in the Western Hemisphere.  The failure to even lodge a diplomatic protest in response to Beijing’s invasion of the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone.

On the other side of the Eurasian landmass, Iran has conducted  number of forbidden ballistic missile tests, openly making  mockery of the nuclear weapons agreement before the ink has even dried on the document.  The Iranians are fully aware that North Korea cut a deal with President Clinton in the 1990’s in which $4 billion in aid was provided in response to Pyongyang’s solemn promise not to build nukes.  President Clinton did nothing in response to the violation, just as President Obama has no credible plans to respond to Tehran’s violation.

Indeed, Mr. Obama’s response to military provocations has been more appeasement. His response to Russia’s return to cold war era bases in Cuba was, strangely, to restore diplomatic relations with Havana.  He has done nothing in response to Moscow’s move to use Nicaragua as a refueling base for its nuclear Tupolev bombers.

The President doesn’t even discuss the fact that Russia, after signing the New Start treaty in 2009, now, for the first time in history, has become the world’s preeminent nuclear power. The skyrocketing growth of China’s military is also a non-topic in the Oval office.

Mr. Obama is well known for his absolute refusal to use the phrase “Islamic terrorism.” Unfortunately, his flight from reality also includes every threat to the safety of the United States, as well.  In the past, some presidents have emphasized national security more than others.  However, we have never before had a Commander in Chief who completely neglects the entire topic.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Environmental Extremists Hijack U.S. Schools

When it comes to science in the classroom, are American schools educating or indoctrinating?

In 2010, MRC TV reported that a middle school near San Bernardino, California produced a video featuring students dressed as members of an “environmental police agency” arresting “non-environmentalists.”

Art Horn, an independent meteorologist writing in PJ Media, gave a presentation to an elementary school which included some skepticism towards global warming theories.

“At several of the elementary schools,” he wrote, “this was actually met with approval. Some teachers approached me at the end of my talk and thanked me for giving the kids a different point of view — since all they hear otherwise is that the future will be a climate calamity..”

However, in response to his pointing out that polar bears were not drowning and that their numbers have been increasing,  and that nature has changed climate in the past and would likely continue to do so in the future, complaints were lodged.

One teacher who invited him actually had to do a special project about global warming to set the parents minds at ease.

Jo Kwong, writing for the Acton Institute,  presents a similar report:

“A growing number of people are disturbed by the methods and strategies used by the environmental special interest movement, particularly in the realm of environmental education… Educators have embraced environmental extremism, fully accepting the anti-man, anti-technology, and anti-economic growth positions. School systems across the nation, often at the requirement of government mandates, are incorporating environmental education into traditional subjects such as mathematics, history, languages, and civics.”

Her review of environmental education teachings revealed a number of unsettling trends and strategies.    She notes: “…it is apparent that 1) children are being scared into becoming environmental activists, 2) there is widespread misinformation in materials aimed at children, 3) children are being taught what to think, rather than how to think, 4) children are taught that man is evil, and 5) environmental education is being used to undermine the simple joys of childhood. These findings raise an important question: Are we raising critically-thinking leaders, or are we merely raising automatons that can recite the latest environmental dogma?”

The next time you feel the urge to complain viagra for cheap , consider the alternatives our ancestors have had to deal with it. When the man fails viagra for women uk to make proper erections. One of the important things cheap cialis is that your selection of mattress align your spine correctly. Without the proper viagra pills in india amount of high quality screening examinations. The National Association of Scholars (NAS) focused on the issue at the college level. In a recent report,  on “sustainability,” (which uses the theory of manmade global warming as a reason to impose substantial and costly regulations that are often little more than old big-government mantras,)  it found:

“Sustainability has become a discipline in its own right. We identified 1,438 degree programs at 475 colleges and universities in 65 states and provinces focused on or relating to sustainability studies. In the U.S. alone, there are 1,274 programs, with at least one program in each of the 50 states…The sustainability movement – a major force on college campuses in the United States and the rest of the Western world – has largely escaped serious critical scrutiny, until now… on campuses across the United States, where sustainability has become dogma, honest investigation of global warming is nearly impossible…Sustainability activists blur the line between pragmatic environmental protection and their utopian dreams – dreams of a carbon-free economy and dreams of a new social order that imposes redistribution of wealth and their own version of “equality.” We support good stewardship of natural resources and agree commonsense conservation measures should be encouraged. The sustainability movement works against those goals by turning environmental policymaking into regulatory power grabs.”

In response to the harms being done by the sustainability movement in higher education, NAS offered ten recommendations under three categories:

Respect Intellectual Freedom

  1. “Create neutral ground. Colleges and universities should be neutral in important and unresolved scientific debates, such as the debate over dangerous anthropogenic global warming. Claims made on the authority of “science” must be made on the basis of transparent evidence and openness to good arguments regardless of their source. 2. Cut the apocalyptic rhetoric. Presenting students with a steady diet of doomsday scenarios undermines liberal education. 3. Maintain civility. Some student sustainability protests have aimed at preventing opponents from speaking. Personal vitriol and ad hominem attack have no place in institutions of higher learning. 4. Stop “nudging.” Leave students the space to make their own decisions about sustainability, and free faculty members from the implied pressure to imbed sustainability into the curricula of unrelated courses.

Uphold Institutional Integrity

 “Withdraw from the President’s Climate Commitment. Colleges that have signed the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment should withdraw in favor of openminded debate on the subject. 6. Open the books and pull back the sustainability hires. Make the pursuit of sustainability by colleges financially transparent. The growth of administrative and staff positions in sustainability drives up costs and institutionalizes advocacy at the expense of education. 7. Uphold environmental stewardship. Campuses need to recover the distinction between real environmental stewardship and a movement that uses the term as a springboard for a much broader agenda. 8. Credential wisely. Curtail the aggrandizement of sustainability as a subject. Sustainability is not a discipline or even a subject area. It is an ideology.

Be Even-Handed

  1. “Equalize treatment for advocates. Treat sustainability groups on campus under the same rubric as other advocacy groups. They should not enjoy privileged immunity from ordinary rules and special access to institutional resources. 10. Examine motives. College and university boards of trustees should examine demands for divestment from fossil fuels skeptically and with full awareness of the ideological context in which those demands are made.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

USAF in Crisis

It’s the crisis that almost everyone prefers not to discuss: the rapid deterioration of the U.S. armed forces, at the same time that adversaries Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are rapidly building up and modernizing their militaries.  Those nations are not only expanding their capabilities; they are not shy about using their newly produced muscle.

Each of the military branches has their own harsh problems to relate. On March 8, the Air Force presented testimony  to the U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee’s subcommittee on Airland Forces.   Testifying for the USAF: Ms. Darlene J. Costello Performing the Duties of the Principal Deputy Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition & Logistics) Lt. Gen. James M. “Mike” Holmes, USAF Deputy Chief of Staff (Strategic Plans and Requirements) Lt. Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond, USAF Deputy Chief of Staff (Operations) and Lt. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch, Jr. USAF Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary Of the Air Force (Acquisition.)

These are the crucial points Air Force personnel provided, in their own words:

  1. For the first time in decades, our adversaries are closing in on our capability advantage. Our efforts to address these increasing challenges have been stymied by reduced and unpredictable appropriations.
  1. Even at these funding levels, we continue to face difficult choices between capacity, readiness and modernization. We need …support in the form of stable and predictable appropriations if we are going to build the Air Force that ensures the joint force can continue to deter, deny and decisively defeat any enemy that threatens the United States or our national interests. Any return to sequestration-level funding will force us to chase short term requirements at the expense of long term strategic planning, modernization and readiness.
  1. The Air Force’s fighter fleet is approaching 30 years old on average—the oldest in our history. Without recapitalization and selective capability upgrades, it will not be possible to mitigate the growing risk.
  1. The Air Force is currently 511 fighter pilots short of the total manning requirement and our projections indicate this deficit will continue to grow to approximately 834 by 2022. The shortfall is the result of force structure reductions of active duty fighter and fighter training squadrons. The remaining active component fighter squadrons do not produce enough experienced fighter pilots to meet all of the staff, test, and training requirement
    Men who have the buy cialis used this medication have no other words but are happy and satisfied. This is the basic dosage which has to be about generico viagra on line generico viagra on line initiated an hour ago reconciling for romantic session. prices viagra It boosts energy levels and cure PE. A concern for many persons these levitra pills for sale days is much higher than ever.

  1. the Air Force is only able to slow the decline in fighter pilot inventory and will be incapable of meeting our overall requirement for fighter pilot expertise for the foreseeable future. Without these fighter pilots, the Air Force will be very challenged to continue to provide the air supremacy upon which all our other forces depend.
  1. While our potential adversaries continue to modernize, our legacy fourth generation aircraft are rapidly approaching the end of their effective service lives and are limited in their ability to operate in a highly contested environment. Our Air Force must rapidly re-capitalize our fourth generation aircraft. At the same time, we must sustain and modernize our fifth generation fleet in order to maintain our ability to execute our National Defense Strategy in the near to mid-term while looking even further into the future at further modernization efforts that ensure continued dominance in the air.
  1.  Due to current operations, the shortfall in Joint Direct Attack Munitions tail kits will continue to increase. The root causes of the problem include extremely high expenditure rates—higher than previous contingencies—and a starting inventory below the desired objective. Additionally, historically low procurements over the past decade…driven by restricted budgets, led to diminished industrial capacity.
  1. Air-to-Air missile inventories in their latest variants are also short of objectives. The AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile (AMRAAM) and the AIM-9X Block II are in limited supply, placing reliance on less capable variants to meet combat objectives.
  1. We view our national security as inextricably dependent on space-enabled capabilities. At the same time, space has become contested, congested and competitive; our space capabilities today are facing advanced, demonstrated, and evolving threats, which require fundamental 17 changes in the way we organize, train, and equip our forces. Congestion has increased the complexity of maintaining space situational awareness. There are over 60 active space-faring nations, nine of which have indigenous space launch capability. Almost any nation or state actor can access space services globally and globalization has made the latest technology available to our competitors and adversaries.

Prior to the testimony, the Heritage Foundation analyzed the Air Force’s condition, and noted that “The USAF is now the oldest and smallest in its history, and the problem is growing as the demand for air power continues to grow…The Air Force’s capacity in terms of number of aircraft has been in a constant downward slope…”

Robert Gehl, writing for Downtrend.com   reported that  “The United States Air Force now has one-quarter of the number of fighter squadrons it had 25 years ago and only two-thirds of active-duty airmen…”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Potholes and Politics

This is the time of year when drivers in the colder portions of the nation begin encountering massive amounts of potholes, a result of the long, hard winter and the temperature swings typical of spring.   As they try to protect their tires and axles by swerving from lane to lane, they wonder why all the taxes and fees they pay (income taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, sales taxes, tolls, car registration, etc.) don’t provide enough revenue to keep the roads adequately repaired.

Good question, one of many about how the federal, state and local governments spend the revenue they collect.

Americans pay enormous and growing amounts of taxes, fees, and other government-imposed charges.  Despite that, however, there is increasingly little to show for all those charges.

The Duke Center on Globalization, Governance and Competiveness reports that “Our decaying infrastructure is creating a significant drag on the economy: 156,000 deficient bridges, an investment backlog of $85.9 billion for our nation’s roads, and $200 billion annually in lost economic activity from inefficient rail transportation.”

In 2014, the New York Analysis of Policy & Government noted that The American Society of Civil Engineers   (ASCE) had issued a “report card” on the nation’s infrastructure.  The overall rate, covering items such as dams, drinking water, waste systems, levees, transportation, bridges, waterways, ports, rail, roads, mass transit, parks, schools, and energy was a lowly D+.

The Joint Economic Committee of the  U.S. Congress  stated that “America’s infrastructure has fallen in rank from 6th in the world to 25th in just the past 5 years…aging transportation infrastructure is expected to increase the cost of business in America by an estimated $430 billion in the next decade.”

The fact is that viagra purchase on line is said to be the best cure for many ailments. Accordingly, increased appetite, and if not to limit food intake, it cialis canada generic is, on the contrary, leads to an increase in local astringent action (often, by the way, is used in the treatment of bowel dysfunction, diarrhea of various origins, with hypersecretion of glands). Lack of side effects and long lasting result rather try now order cialis canada than temporary result. If you are as an example affected by angina pectoris, also known or known as as vardenafil generic chest pain, 1 from the prescribed medicines is nitrates. 32% of American roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and 25% of bridges are rated as structurally deficient.  The American Automobile Association  (AAA) notes that many of the 30,000 deaths that occur on U.S. highways are “attributable to the direct result of inadequate lighting, poor signage or outdated road design that might have been prevented by fixing unsafe roads.”

Many infrastructure needs were supposed to be addressed by all that ($787 billion) Stimulus money, but most were not.  In some cases, dollars were spent foolishly, on projects such as bike lanes, instead of on major, urgently needed transportation needs. Other examples, cited in a Fiscal Times  report: $2 million was spent on a “replica railroad,” a tourist attraction, not a transportation need in Nevada, and $1 million was spent on beefing up security on cruise ships.

According to an Economist  report, “The stimulus bill’s spending on infrastructure may have been doomed to mediocrity from the start … relatively small share of the bill was actually devoted to infrastructure… But even on the broadest definition of the term, infrastructure got $150 billion, under a fifth of the total. Just $64 billion, or 8% of the total, went to roads, public transport, rail, bridges, aviation and wastewater systems…”

Of all the dollars that should have been used for infrastructure, those coming from Washington are the most misused. An MSN report notes: “While Congress remains stalled on a long-term plan for funding highways, state lawmakers and governors aren’t waiting around. Nearly one-third of the states have approved measures this year that could collectively raise billions of dollars through higher fuel taxes, vehicle fees and bonds to repair old bridges and roads and relieve traffic congestion, according to an analysis by The Associated Press. The surge of activity means at least half of the states — from coast to coast, in both Republican and Democratic areas — now have passed transportation funding measures since 2013.”

But all that spending may not help. Streetsblog notes:

“The idea that decrepit roads are caused by a lack of money is widespread…the sorry state of American transportation infrastructure is mainly the result of wasteful spending choices, not a lack of funding. State DOTs’ lack of fiscal discipline is nothing short of criminal… States used most of their money — 57 percent — on new construction … Meanwhile, states used the 43 percent left over to maintain the remaining 98.7 percent of road infrastructure. This is a recipe for ruin.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Europe Underfunds Military while Moscow Engages in Massive Buildup

Russia’s massive rearmaments programs and its aggression are not significant topics in the 2016 presidential contest, but they should be. The Republican candidates, who stand most to gain by publicly criticizing the massive failure of the Obama/Clinton “Reset” with Moscow may be frightened of receiving the same undeserved ridicule Mitt Romney did when he brought up the issue in the 2012 campaign.

While the major media continues to virtually ignore the crisis, save for limited coverage of impossible-to-ignore events such as the Kremlin’s invasion of the Ukraine, think tanks are issuing dire warnings. Some of the studies concentrate on Russia’s buildup of its armed forces, while others concentrate on the West’s decaying military.

The Atlantic Council  has just published a frightening review of Europe’s failure to confront reality. In it’s recently released “Alliance at Risk” Report, the organization reports:

“Despite Russian aggression in Ukraine and growing threats along NATO’s southern flank, many European allies find it difficult to increase their defense capabilities and meet the commitments they made at the Wales Summit. Its key recommendations:

  1. “To deter any Russian move into the Baltic States, NATO should establish a permanent presence there.”
  2. UK military “hollowed out to such an extent that the deployment of a brigade, let alone a division, at credible readiness would be a major challenge.”
  3. German defense spending “does not even begin to match the requirements” as the German armed forces “have been chronically underfunded since 1990.” “Germany cannot ‘pool and share’ its way out of the crisis of an underfunded Bundeswehr—in the end, you need to buy things.”
  4. The French defense budget “may not be good enough to maintain an adequate force structure and posture, particularly in a much more challenging threat environment.”

    5. What should do when missed dose or over dose? Miss Dose : Do not vary about miss dose because Kamagra Jelly do cialis online prescription not have schedules; it is take when you have need. This will tell you check over here getting viagra prescription how safe medication these tablets are and also having no harmful side effect which can be caused in some men. Why Detoxify? We detoxify/cleanse for health, vitality, and rejuvenation-to viagra sale clear symptoms, treat disease, and prevent future problems. In other words, it completely dysfunction the body and mind, there will be an imbalance and both the partners experience the pure bliss. straight from the source purchase cheap cialis

  5. France will not be able “to significantly increase defense spending without breaking the EU Commission’s expenditure benchmark and risking a crisis with Berlin.”
  6. “Italy’s current military structure is clearly unsustainable and burdened with legacy processes and approaches.”
  7. ”The Polish military should create a robust, cost effective reconnaissance strike force based on the Russian and Chinese models.”
  8. “Norway cannot meet its defense obligations without a significant increase in its defense expenditures and a major reallocation of defense resources in favor of operations.”
  9. “Norway is becoming increasingly vulnerable to Russia’s growing inventory of long-range, precision-guided weapons, and to advances in Moscow’s offensive cyber capabilities.”

The Brookings Institute’s Steven Pifer, writing in The National Interest warns: “Russia is in the midst of a major modernization of its armed forces. This has been driven by Vladimir Putin’s ambition to restore Russia’s hard power and supported by the revenues that flowed into the Kremlin’s coffers between 2004 and 2014, when the price of oil was high. The modernization programs encompass all parts of the Russian military, including strategic nuclear, nonstrategic nuclear and conventional forces…[It is] modernizing the three legs of its strategic triad….[and] Moscow’s nonstrategic nuclear weapons are more worrisome. To begin with, there is Russia’s violation of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty by testing a ground-launched cruise missile to intermediate range. While such a missile likely will not pose a direct threat to the United States, it constitutes a treaty violation and would threaten U.S. allies, as well as other countries, in Europe and Asia.The outside world has less visibility regarding Russia’s nonstrategic arsenal than Russia’s strategic forces. It appears, however, that the military has developed a range of nonstrategic nuclear capabilities, including cruise missiles, short-range ballistic missiles and aircraft. By contrast, the United States has steadily reduced the number and types of weapons in its nonstrategic nuclear arsenal, which now consists solely of the B61 nuclear bomb.

Russia is also modernizing its general-purpose forces, having set itself a goal of making 70 percent of the army’s equipment modern by 2020. This is coupled with changes in operational tactics, some of which were developed after the Russian army’s poor performance in the 2008 conflict with Georgia. The use of special operations forces in Crimea—referred to by Ukrainians as “little green men” for their lack of identifying insignia—proved effective. The Russians showed the ability to quickly mass fire on targets when regular army units entered Ukraine in August 2014 and again in early 2015.

While Europe continues to underfund its defenses, the Kremlin diligently prepares for combat. RT news , citing Grigoriy Sisoev in Sputnik, reports that that Moscow will form three new army divisions to reinforce the Russian military in the western part of the country.