September 21, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-decision-on-2016-may-not-come-in-time/

Biden: Decision on 2016 may not come in time
By REBECCA KAPLAN CBS NEWS
September 21, 2015

Play VIDEO -- Is Vice President Joe Biden ready to run?


Vice President Joe Biden said that he may not decide whether or not to run for president until it's too late to jump into the 2016 race.

"I just have to be comfortable that this will be good for the family," he said in an interview with America magazine ahead of Pope Francis' visit. "It's not quite there yet, and it might not get there in time to make it feasible to be able to run and succeed, because there are certain windows that will close. But if that's it, that's it. But it's not like I can rush it."

"It's not like it either happens or it doesn't happen. I know that's not satisfying to anybody. But people who've been there - I know they understand," he added.

He told America Magazine that he must be certain that he can give the presidency "all my passion, all my energy, and ... not be distracted" if he decides to run, a sentiment Biden has expressed before.

Biden also reflected on his Catholic faith and looked forward to experiencing the pope's joint address to Congress Thursday with fellow Catholic politican, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

The two normally sit side by side during President Obama's joint addresses, when they find few areas of agreement.

"We've now done seven State of the Union addresses and we joke with one another, and John will say 'don't stand on everything," Biden said. "But John's a good guy and I think we'll both be sitting there with a great deal of pride." The pope's speech to the Senate and the House will mark the first time any pope has addressed a joint session of Congress.

Biden talked about his views on abortion, an issue where his party is at odds with the Catholic Church.

"It has been hard in one sense, because I'm prepared to accept de fide doctrine on a whole range of issues as a Catholic," he said. "I'm prepared to accept as a matter of faith, my wife and I, my family, [the Church's position on] the issue of abortion."

But, he added, "What I'm not prepared to do is impose a...precise view that is born out of my faith on other people who are equally God-fearing, equally as committed to life, equally as committed to the sanctity of life."

And this was a point he brought up in a meeting with the last pope, Benedict, in what he called a "wonderful meeting." "He wasn't judgmental...I came away enlivened from the discussion," Biden said.

Asked whether there is a place for pro-life Democrats within the party, the vice president said, "Absolutely. Absolutely, positively. And that's been my position as long as I've been engaged."




“He told America Magazine that he must be certain that he can give the presidency "all my passion, all my energy, and ... not be distracted" if he decides to run, a sentiment Biden has expressed before. …. Biden talked about his views on abortion, an issue where his party is at odds with the Catholic Church. "It has been hard in one sense, because I'm prepared to accept de fide doctrine on a whole range of issues as a Catholic," he said. "I'm prepared to accept as a matter of faith, my wife and I, my family, [the Church's position on] the issue of abortion." But, he added, "What I'm not prepared to do is impose a...precise view that is born out of my faith on other people who are equally God-fearing, equally as committed to life, equally as committed to the sanctity of life." …. Asked whether there is a place for pro-life Democrats within the party, the vice president said, "Absolutely. Absolutely, positively. And that's been my position as long as I've been engaged."

I do like V. Pres. Biden very much. He’s a handsome dude and a very intelligent leader. If he does get the Democratic nomination I will certainly vote for him. Unlike some who criticize his “gaffs” as being unacceptable, I am actually attracted to people who say what they think without white washing it. If Mr. Trump weren't so extremely offensive in the things he says, I would forgive him for it and just judge him as a Robber Baron. A friend of mine some years ago was an employee of the World Bank and had many well educated and well-heeled Hispanic friends. She said once, however, that she finds some of them “so polite that I don’t trust them.” I am of much the same turn of mind. Someone who speaks his or her mind draws me forward rather than making me move away. I always study faces, tone of voice, and body language in dealing with people, so I WANT to know what they think. If they don’t try to indoctrinate me in their way of thinking or do some kind of harm to me, I give them the right to their views. Donald Trump and others who are natural enemies will, however, not receive any of my political support. I give Trump the human right to be a jackass, but I take the right to laugh at him for it as my own; and I will fight him tooth and nail in his run for the highest political office in this country, along with all the other Dominionists, militiamen, racists, robber barons, etc. who are his friends. I am what you could call a “committed” Democrat and liberal. I include Bernie Sanders in that benign umbrella. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist, but he is merely a liberal in the things he is proposing for the country. He’s not suggesting that we should teach Karl Marx in the public schools – though I think any prep school that doesn’t get into his views is not worth the money it charges for tuition. Schools and teachers can teach a subject without either advocating its views or denigrating them.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-marks-10th-papal-visit-to-u-s-after-cuba-trip/

Popes in the U.S., then and now
CBS NEWS
September 21, 2015

After his trip to Cuba, Pope Francis will begin his visit to the U.S. Tuesday afternoon in Washington, where he will address thousands of worshipers gathered at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. This will mark the 10th time a pope has set foot on U.S. soil, and the first for Pope Francis.

Ahead of the highly-anticipated visit, CBS News correspondent Chip Reid had a look back over some highlights of previous papal visits.

In 1965 Pope Paul VI was cheered on by millions as he made a historic landing in New York and made his way through Manhattan. He also addressed the United Nations and met with President Lyndon Johnson, and the pope's enthusiastic reception was a sign of the changing times.

For many years anti-Catholic sentiment had been widespread in the U.S., fueled in part by fears that a Catholic-American president would naturally take orders from the Vatican.

That began to change when John F. Kennedy affirmed his belief in the separation of church and state in a historic campaign speech in 1960, in which he famously said, "I do not speak for the church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me."

"Anti-Catholicism in a sense died with John F. Kennedy," said Father Thomas Reese of The National Catholic Reporter. "John Kennedy became an American hero... so his assassination kind of put anti-Catholicism to rest.

More than a decade later in 1979 Pope John Paul II traveled to six cities and delivered over 50 speeches and sermons. His final stop was in Washington, where he visited the White House by invitation of President Jimmy Carter, a devout Baptist.

"The church was changing by that time," said Father Reese. "Americans in general, who were very anti-communist, saw the papacy, saw the pope, saw John Paul as an ally of the U.S. against Communism."

In a 1987 tour of America, Pope John Paul made strong speeches on human rights. In San Francisco he blessed Catholic AIDS patients and in Detroit he preached against abortion -- a message he continued to deliver in a 1993 address in Denver, then again in his final address in St. Louis in 1999 where he visited with President Bill Clinton.

In 2008 Pope Benedict XVI made a six-day tour of America, during which he highlighted the sexual abuse scandal involving Catholic priests in the United States. Then, during a visit to the White House, President George W. Bush hit a lighter note as he and the first lady celebrated Pope Benedict's 81st birthday.

But as Pope Francis makes his way to Washington, he will be making history as the first pope to address the U.S. Congress. Father Reese warned the pope could ruffle some feathers.

"This pope is concerned about the poor and the environment and he's critical of libertarian capitalism. He's not afraid of challenging people and sometimes when he challenges people they get mad," said Father Reese.

Pope Francis arrives at a time when the number of Catholics in America is at an all-time low, but supporters of Pope Francis hope his different perspective on the papacy could help change that.




“For many years anti-Catholic sentiment had been widespread in the U.S., fueled in part by fears that a Catholic-American president would naturally take orders from the Vatican. That began to change when John F. Kennedy affirmed his belief in the separation of church and state in a historic campaign speech in 1960, in which he famously said, "I do not speak for the church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me." …. More than a decade later in 1979 Pope John Paul II traveled to six cities and delivered over 50 speeches and sermons. His final stop was in Washington, where he visited the White House by invitation of President Jimmy Carter, a devout Baptist. "The church was changing by that time," said Father Reese. "Americans in general, who were very anti-communist, saw the papacy, saw the pope, saw John Paul as an ally of the U.S. against Communism." …. In 2008 Pope Benedict XVI made a six-day tour of America, during which he highlighted the sexual abuse scandal involving Catholic priests in the United States. …. But as Pope Francis makes his way to Washington, he will be making history as the first pope to address the U.S. Congress. Father Reese warned the pope could ruffle some feathers. "This pope is concerned about the poor and the environment and he's critical of libertarian capitalism. He's not afraid of challenging people and sometimes when he challenges people they get mad," said Father Reese.”

One reason that I never vote for a Republican is because the party as a whole is most deeply committed to acquiring more and more wealth by those who are already wealthy enough. Nobody needs three or four five million dollar homes and a couple of yachts, especially while poor people literally don’t have enough money to eat fresh fruit and vegetables every day and at least a few ounces of meat or cheese. There are children in American cities who scrounge in the dumpsters to find something edible. President Obama’s wife was strongly criticized by some for saying that “for the first time” she was proud of our country. That was when Obama was actually elected president, and it was an electrifying time for everyone. Unfortunately it was not equally welcome to all. I have to join her in the opinion that when I think of such poverty continuing here I am not proud of that.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vw-sees-billions-wiped-off-market-value-after-rigging-claims/

VW sees billions wiped off market value after rigging claims
AP September 21, 2015

Play VIDEO -- Volkswagen to halt U.S. sales of certain diesel models


BERLIN - Around 15 billion euros ($16.9 billion) was wiped off the market value of Volkswagen AG on Monday following revelations that the German carmaker rigged U.S. emissions tests for about 500,000 diesel cars.

By midday trading in Frankfurt, Volkswagen's share price was 19.3 percent lower at a three-year low of 130.20 euros. Its dramatic fall weighed heavily on Germany's main stock index, the DAX, which underperformed its peers in Europe with a 0.6 percent decline.

Volkswagen's market woes Monday follow a weekend that saw the company's reputation for probity seriously damaged by revelations from the Environmental Protection Agency in the U.S. that it had skirted clean air rules. All told, the EPA indicated that VW faces fines that could run up to more than $18 billion.

The EPA said VW used a device programmed to detect when the cars are undergoing official emissions testing. The software device then turns off the emissions controls during normal driving situations, allowing the cars to emit more than the legal limit of pollutants.

Volkswagen marketed the diesel-powered cars, which account for about 25 percent of sales, as being better for the environment. The cars, built in the last seven years, include the Audi A3, VW Jetta, Beetle, Golf and Passat models.

"The company will have to recall nearly 500,000 affected cars, which will cost it millions of dollars, and that's even before the damage to its brand and potential fines," said Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets.

The agency has ordered VW to fix the cars at its own expense but said car owners do not need to take any immediate action. The EPA insisted that the violations do not pose any safety hazard and said the cars remain legal to drive and sell while Volkswagen comes up with a plan to recall and repair them. However, it said the cars posed a threat to public health.

The EPA also indicated the scale of the fines that could be imposed on VW. It said the carmaker could be hit up to $37,500 per vehicle for the violations -- a total of more than $18 billion. The California Air Resources Board is also investigating.

Volkswagen has had a difficult year, its share price having fallen from over 250 euros amid signs of faltering sales in the U.S. and China.

VW edged out Toyota to become the world's top-selling automaker the first half of 2015. But a hit to its reputation from the emissions revelations could hamper its efforts at a sales rebound in the U.S.

If other regulatory authorities decide VW has a case to answer, then the carmaker faces the potential for even bigger fines.

"The news so far revolves around the U.S. impact, but if European investigators become interested the potential penalties could multiply very quickly," said Chris Beauchamp, senior market analyst at IG.




“Around 15 billion euros ($16.9 billion) was wiped off the market value of Volkswagen AG on Monday following revelations that the German carmaker rigged U.S. emissions tests for about 500,000 diesel cars. …. Volkswagen's market woes Monday follow a weekend that saw the company's reputation for probity seriously damaged by revelations from the Environmental Protection Agency in the U.S. that it had skirted clean air rules. All told, the EPA indicated that VW faces fines that could run up to more than $18 billion.

$18 billion is a lot of money even for VW. Besides, their product most likely won’t sell as well now either. If this disaster follows that of Honda over the faulty air bags, which also were ignored by Honda until it became widely known, they are going to be in trouble. Honda is still in the news occasionally. I don’t like to say it because it sounds “un-American,” but big business is even dirtier than politics. All these mainly Protestant Christians in the Republican Party are miles away from the message that Jesus preached when he was on earth. Their true values show in their business and political party dealings – no honor or “gentleness” in so many cases. In the words of Jesus himself, “ye shall know them by their fruits.”





http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/21/441510600/despite-constant-debate-americans-abortion-opinions-rarely-change

Despite Constant Debate, Americans' Abortion Opinions Rarely Change
Danielle Kurtzleben
Political Reporter
SEPTEMBER 21, 2015

Photograph -- Ted Cruz has strong views on abortion. Americans tend to be more ambivalent.
Olivier Douliery/Getty Images


It's been a big week for abortion news.

Carly Fiorina's passionate (if inaccurate) depiction of a Planned Parenthood sting video was one of the most memorable moments of last week's GOP debate. And the House of Representatives on Friday passed two abortion-related bills — one aimed at cutting federal funds to Planned Parenthood, the other at punishing doctors who fail to provide medical care to infants that survive abortion attempts.

Given all this, you could be forgiven for thinking there's been a public-opinion shift against abortion rights in the U.S.

But you'd be wrong.

Abortion is one of those rare issues in which public opinion never seems to budge all that much. Americans are still more or less where they were on whether they think it should be legal as in 1975, just after the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. That is, with the largest share of Americans somewhere in the murky middle.

According to Gallup data, by a 29 to 19 percent margin, Americans think it should be legal in all circumstances. But a majority — 51 percent — say it should be legal in only certain circumstances — in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life is threatened, for example. That number has barely changed in 40 years.

That kind of data stands in stark contrast to what's available about other social issues. Consider same-sex marriage, for example, where public opinion has swung dramatically toward legalization in the past decade.

Or take the death penalty — upticks in crime and opposition to government spending are two factors that have driven Americans' opinions on this topic back and forth over the years.

Abortion isn't like that. Strong majorities have consistently opposed overturning Roe v. Wade since 1989, today by a nearly 2-to-1 margin.

That's perhaps even more surprising when considering what's happened over the last 40 years. There has been a patchwork of state laws passed to define very specific restrictions on abortion, a decline in teen pregnancy, and increasing political polarization. All of that has apparently neither caused nor been the result of big shifts in national public opinion on abortion.

So what's going on?

It might have to do with another fact about public opinion on abortion — it's a topic on which the realities are anything but black-and-white, which is exactly how the arguments are all-too-often framed in the political arena.

A majority of Americans support legal abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. But a majority also opposes it in the second and third trimesters. Most support it in cases of rape or incest, but most oppose it if the mother simply can't afford another child.

Those opinions get much messier when you dive deeper into the research.

"Not only is opinion remarkably stable ... it is deeply contradictory," said Karlyn Bowman, who studies public opinion at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute. When people are asked, "'Is it murder?' people say yes," Bowman said. But "'should it be a personal choice between a woman and her doctor?' a large majority say yes."

In one poll from the Public Religion Research Institute, 43 percent of Americans identified as both "pro-life" and "pro-choice." Those labels are their own source of uncertainty.

Since the mid-1990s, the share of people who consider themselves "pro-choice" (by Gallup's count) has fallen moderately — even while opinions on abortion circumstances have held steady. (Still, a majority — 50 percent — consider themselves "pro-choice," while 44 percent say they are "pro-life.")

These contradictions may be why public opinion holds so steady.

"When that [contradiction] happens on a public policy issue, when there are deep contradictions, most people pull away from an issue," Bowman said. "They don't see any reason to resolve the tensions in their opinions. So that leaves the topic up to the pro-life and the pro-choice activists. And those groups don't really represent most people."

Why Planned Parenthood is the focus

So, if most Americans don't firmly oppose abortion, one might say, it's foolhardy for Republicans, like this week's GOP debate participants, to stake such firm anti-abortion stances.

But abortion is an issue that fires up the bases of both parties. It's one of the top issues used by Republicans and Democrats to motivate, fundraise and organize.

What's more, though, the latest abortion fight isn't focused on the larger issue of abortion itself. It's been about Planned Parenthood. And recent surveys suggest that public opinion on the organization is more malleable than opinion on the topic of abortion.

Today, a plurality of Americans — 37 percent — view Planned Parenthood favorably, according to a recent Monmouth poll (with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points). But just three years ago, the same poll found that far more people — 55 percent — viewed the organization favorably.

It's just one survey, but it suggests that making the abortion debate about Planned Parenthood (and taxpayer money) may be a more successful tactic for the GOP than trying to pass laws restricting abortion itself.

Of course, that doesn't mean a shutdown over the issue would be a good idea for the GOP. The Republican Party's favorability rating fell sharply during the October 2013 partial government shutdown — making it one area where public opinion does tell a clear story.




“And the House of Representatives on Friday passed two abortion-related bills — one aimed at cutting federal funds to Planned Parenthood, the other at punishing doctors who fail to provide medical care to infants that survive abortion attempts. …. Americans are still more or less where they were on whether they think it should be legal as in 1975, just after the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. That is, with the largest share of Americans somewhere in the murky middle. According to Gallup data, by a 29 to 19 percent margin, Americans think it should be legal in all circumstances. But a majority — 51 percent — say it should be legal in only certain circumstances — in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother's life is threatened, for example. …. Strong majorities have consistently opposed overturning Roe v. Wade since 1989, today by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. That's perhaps even more surprising when considering what's happened over the last 40 years. There has been a patchwork of state laws passed to define very specific restrictions on abortion, a decline in teen pregnancy, and increasing political polarization. …. it's a topic on which the realities are anything but black-and-white, which is exactly how the arguments are all-too-often framed in the political arena. A majority of Americans support legal abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. But a majority also opposes it in the second and third trimesters. Most support it in cases of rape or incest, but most oppose it if the mother simply can't afford another child.”

The fact that some “conservatives” are making changes in state laws in an effort to get around Roe v Wade -- including by removing the issues of incest, rape and the fact that a mother’s life may be threatened by her giving birth as a proper consideration -- is not only alarming legally. It is infuriating in its lack of human sensitivity. These “Christian” laws are not kinder nor gentler. They are unfair and obscene. That carries the legal position in this country back to the days when not even the life of the mother was considered, an old-guard Catholic position. Several young women in Republican states during the last few years have been arrested under newly written laws that define simple natural abortion as evidence that some teenager purposely or carelessly caused her baby to abort. The police have, amazingly, been called several times into schools where a girl aborted and it was discovered by the school authorities. School authorities should instead be calling an ambulance and taking the girl to the hospital without blame.

Those cases are scattered, but they are the result of new laws criminalizing such early term events. Any of you who have ever experienced a spontaneous abortion knows that they can happen without the mother failing to take enough vitamins or doing some sort of heavy work, etc. It’s an old sad story which in my day used to be called “losing the baby.” Everybody was sympathetic about it in those days and not angry or punitive.

I personally don’t think a woman should go around carelessly failing to use birth control – which the Catholic Church also forbids, of course – and then solving the problem by having an abortion. Of course that is an easy mistake to make, especially at certain times when there’s a full moon, but it shouldn’t happen more than once. Women can buy a pack of condoms to carry with her wherever she goes, and that would prevent most of these cases.

As for the more traumatic cases – rape and incest – the issues are more disturbing still. If you haven’t read this book, I suggest you get it from the public library and read it. It’s a little outdated, but very impressive still. I reread it just a few years ago. See Wikipedia, below.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peyton_Place_(novel)

Peyton Place (novel)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peyton Place is a 1956 novel by Grace Metalious. It sold 60,000 copies within the first ten days of its release and remained on the New York Times best seller list for 59 weeks. It was adapted as both a 1957 film and a 1964–69 television series.

The fictional Peyton Place is a composite of several real New Hampshire towns: Gilmanton, Gilford, Laconia, Manchester and Plymouth where at least some of the work was written in the Plymouth Inn on Main Street. The inn has since been torn down. Grace Metalious and her husband George first considered Potter Place (the name of a real community near Andover, New Hampshire). Realizing their town should have a fictional name, they looked through an atlas and found Payton (the name of a real town in Texas). They combined that with Place and changed the "a" to an "e". Thus, Peyton Place was created, prompting her comment, "Wonderful—that's it, George. Peyton Place. Peyton Place, New Hampshire. Peyton Place, New England. Peyton Place, USA. Truly a composite of all small towns where ugliness rears its head, and where the people try to hide all the skeletons in their closets."[1]

The main plot follows the lives of three women—lonely and repressed Constance MacKenzie; her illegitimate daughter Allison; and her employee Selena Cross, a girl from across the tracks, or "from the shacks." The novel describes how they come to terms with their identity as women and sexual beings in a small New England town. Hypocrisy, social inequities and class privilege are recurring themes in a tale that includes incest, abortion, adultery, lust and murder. The term "Peyton Place" became a generic label for any community whose inhabitants have sordid secrets.

Several characters and events were drawn from events in nearby towns and people Metalious actually knew. Selena Cross was based on Barbara Roberts, a 16-year-old girl from the village of Gilmanton Ironworks, who murdered her father Sylvester after years of sexual abuse and buried his body under a sheep pen. In the novel, Selena kills her stepfather, since incest was considered too taboo for readers at the time. Metalious' editor Kitty Messner made the change, much to the author's dismay and disapproval.[2]





http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/19/440925347/generation-disappointed-millennials-want-more-from-politics

Generation Disappointed: Millennials Want More From Politics
ASMA KHALID
SEPTEMBER 19, 2015

Photograph -- Benjamin Purdy, 20, wants the next president to focus on prison reform. He says jailing non-violent drug offenders is "sucking so much money out of our budget."
Asma Khalid/NPR
Photograph -- Cassie Harrison, 25, says she's worried about economic justice and racial justice. She says her generation feels more liberal than older generations.
Asma Khalid/NPR
Alex Dreschel, a business student from a military family, came to this Derry, N.H. Trump rally with his dad out of curiosity. "The Republican party needs to evolve a little bit, so I'm more relaxed on some social issues that other Republicans wouldn't be," he said.
Mary Schwalm/AP


Millennials do not like to be categorized.

The Pew Research Center finds they don't even like the label "millennial." But for our journalistic purposes, we'll use it like the Census Bureau — to refer to people born between 1982 and 2000. (And full disclosure: your author fits into this so-called millennial generation.)

This summer, millennials officially became the largest population in the country, according to data from the Census Bureau.

The sheer size and diversity of this group make it unlike any other.

Sure, they don't always vote in huge numbers, but, when they do, they make a difference.

Worried about equality

At a Bernie Sanders rally in Manassas, Va. recently, 20-year-old Benjamin Purdy was waving selfie stick in the air while carrying a friend on his shoulders.

And, as he waited for the Vermont independent running for the Democratic nomination for president to take the stage, he explained that he's deeply concerned about economic issues.

"One of the main issues for me is prison reform," said Purdy, a junior at the University of Mary Washington, "and, it's just sucking so much money out of our budget to put people, especially non-violent, drug-offending criminals in jail for such long periods of time. We could be spending that money maybe lowering tuition costs for college students like me, so it's a little bit more affordable for us to go to college."

Cassie Harrison, 25, says she's worried about economic justice and racial justice. She says her generation feels more liberal than older generations. The economy was a common theme among this college-educated crowd that's come of age in the Great Recession.

They're also worried about equality in general — whether that's economic or racial.

"Civil rights isn't where it should be for everybody," said Kelly Beale, a 29-year-old financial analyst. "It's better, but with the whole Black Lives Matter movement, it's obvious, that it's not there yet. And, I feel like we're not addressing it properly."

Racial justice is also a top priority for 25-year-old Cassie Harrison, who was sitting across the lawn. But, she thinks racial attitudes are changing. She said her generation is more flexible about social norms.

"I think we like to question things a little bit more," Harrison said, "and, so I do think we are a little bit more liberal."

A 'rather non-judgmental' generation

A Pew study backs that up. It found that millennials of all political stripes are far more liberal than the country as a whole.

"I'm a registered Republican, but I'm definitely more of a progressive Republican," said Alex Drechsel at a Donald Trump rally in New Hampshire. "I consider [myself] a millennial Republican."

Dreschel, a business student from a military family, wasn't supporting Trump; he's more a fan of Ohio Gov. John Kasich, but he came to see the show with his dad out of curiosity.

"My opinion — the Republican Party needs to evolve a little bit," Dreschel said, "so I'm more relaxed on some social issues than other Republicans wouldn't be."

Pew's research suggests that millennials, like Drechsel, who identify with the GOP are actually far more liberal than Republicans of other generations, especially when it comes to immigration and sexual preference.

"This is a rather non-judgmental generation," said Kristen Soltis Anderson, a GOP pollster and author of The Selfie Vote: Where Millennials Are Leading America (And How Republicans Can Keep Up). "They're not interested in judging others or imposing values on others, and I think, as a result, they sometimes view the Republican Party as espousing a more old-fashioned attitude toward culture."

For example, she says her generation does not see immigration as a cultural threat.

"For a lot of older voters, they don't understand why they have to press "1" for English," Soltis-Anderson said. "They're remembering a time before that they wish we could go back to."

She added that where older voters might be angry about immigration, most millennials grew up having a closer association with immigrants.

"You'll see young voters of all stripes saying the system is broken, and it needs to be fixed, but I think it doesn't come from the same kind of cultural anxiety place, but rather more from a the system seems so broken, why can't we enforce laws point of view," Soltis-Anderson said.

Despite a campaign season that so far has been dominated by some of that anger, that's not the dominant feeling among millennials. They're more disappointed.

"Young people tend to be the most optimistic, the least angry and openly hostile toward the political system or either of the political parties," said Michelle Diggles, an analyst with the center-left think thank [sic] Third Way. "I think mainly they're just shaking their head being turned off by some of the antics."

Analysts said it's unclear exactly how that disappointment will play in the long run. But given how key young people have been to Democratic success — and how motivated the GOP base is — Democrats will need to figure out ways of keeping them engaged in the post-Obama era.


THIRD WAY, mentioned above, is very interesting. I suggest you read more at their website -- www.thirdway.org

http://perspectives.thirdway.org/?p=3647

Elites focus on inequality; real people just want growth
by Bill Schneider
May 6th, 2014

The economic debate is now sharply focused on the issue of income inequality. That may not be the debate Democrats want to have, however. It’s negative and divisive. Democrats would be better off talking about growth — a hopeful and unifying agenda.

Democrats believe income inequality is a populist cause. But it may be less of a populist issue than an issue promoted by the cultural elite: well-educated professionals who are economically comfortable but not rich. There’s new evidence that ordinary voters care more about growth.

Growth and inequality are not separate issues. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote, “Politicians typically talk about rising inequality and the sluggish recovery as separate phenomena when they are in fact intertwined. Inequality restrains and holds back our economic growth.

The question is whether Democrats want to talk about punitive and confiscatory policies aimed at curbing the power of the wealthy and special interests or an agenda aimed at growing the economy for everyone.

Policies aimed at reducing inequality gain more traction with voters when they are pitched as pro-growth policies. Issues like raising the minimum wage, extending unemployment benefits, pay equity for women, student-loan debt relief, increasing the earned income tax credit and closing tax loopholes for the rich.

The argument is straightforward: More fairness means more growth. When the incomes of the poor and the middle class are growing, consumption — the principal driver of economic growth — goes up. So do tax revenues and investment in business and education.

Former President Bill Clinton, in a speech at Georgetown University last week, called inequality “a severe constraint on growth.” He defended his administration’s pro-growth agenda. “My commitment was to restore broad-based prosperity to the economy,” Clinton declared, “and to give Americans a chance.” He noted that 7.7 million Americans were lifted out of poverty during his eight years in office.

During the last four years of Clinton’s presidency, the nation’s economic growth rate averaged 4.5 percent a year — three times as high as last year. Plus we had a budget surplus. Yes, incomes grew for the richest 20 percent of Americans during the 1990s. But, as Clinton noted, they grew faster for the poorest 20 percent. “It worked out pretty well,” he said. Even though the left criticized his policies of financial deregulation, welfare reform, free trade and balancing the budget. We now have evidence from the GlobalStrategyGroup, a Democratic consulting firm, that the growth agenda is more popular than the inequality agenda. Asked how much of a priority it should be for Congress to “promote an agenda of economic growth that will benefit all Americans,” 78 percent called it extremely or very important. Growth topped the list. At the bottom: addressing income inequality (50 percent) and spreading wealth more evenly (43 percent).

Would voters prefer a candidate focused on “more economic growth” or “less income inequality”? No contest. Growth beat inequality, 80 percent to 16 percent. Growth also came out ahead of “increasing wages,” “expanding the middle class,” “economic justice to level the playing field for middle- and low-income Americans” and even “more economic fairness.”

That doesn’t mean Democrats have to choose between growth and inequality. The GSG poll showed that Democratic policies aimed at reducing inequality are seen as promoting growth. Solid majorities (ranging from 54 percent to 74 percent) said that providing more income opportunity for all, increasing spending on education and infrastructure, making seniors’ retirement more secure, increasing the minimum wage and asking the wealthy to pay more taxes would lead to more economic growth rather than less.

Democrats already have credibility on the inequality issue. Asked which party can be trusted “to enact policies that will lead to more income opportunity for all,” Democrats lead Republicans 46 percent to 34 percent.

What Democrats lack, however, is credibility on the growth issue. Asked which party can be trusted “to enact policies that will lead to more economic growth,” it’s a dead heat: Democrats 39 percent, Republicans 39 percent. After George W. Bush and Barack Obama, voters aren’t sure which party can deliver prosperity.

What’s driving the inequality frenzy? New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote, “If you are a young professional in a major city, you experience inequality firsthand. But the inequality you experience most acutely is not inequality down, toward the poor; it’s inequality up, toward the rich.” They’re the people who are buying Thomas Piketty’s bookadvocating redistribution of wealth.

These days, a lot of American politics is a war between two elites. For years, polls have revealed that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to vote Republican. But the better educated you are, the more likely you are to vote Democratic. So in 2012, we got a race between Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who represented the elite of wealth, and Obama, who represented the elite of education.

The debate over inequality is a debate between these two bitterly antagonistic elites. An army of country-club conservatives doing battle with an army of NPR liberals. The fabulously wealthy Koch brothers, for example, versus the fabulously well-educated Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a former Harvard professor.

What do ordinary voters want? They want an economic boom.

Ronald Reagan got elected in a recession and delivered a boom in his second term. Clinton got elected in a recession and delivered a boom in his second term. Voters’ deep dissatisfaction with Obama right now is due mostly to his failure to deliver on the economy. That’s why the most popular political figures in the country today are the Clintons.

Bring them back, people hope, and maybe we can bring back the “good times.’’

This piece was originally published via Reuters.
- See more at: http://perspectives.thirdway.org/?p=3647#sthash.TP7YIz3W.dpuf




NPR -- This summer, millennials officially became the largest population in the country, according to data from the Census Bureau. The sheer size and diversity of this group make it unlike any other. Sure, they don't always vote in huge numbers, but, when they do, they make a difference. …. And, as he waited for the Vermont independent running for the Democratic nomination for president to take the stage, he explained that he's deeply concerned about economic issues. "One of the main issues for me is prison reform," said Purdy, a junior at the University of Mary Washington, "and, it's just sucking so much money out of our budget to put people, especially non-violent, drug-offending criminals in jail for such long periods of time. We could be spending that money maybe lowering tuition costs for college students like me, so it's a little bit more affordable for us to go to college." …. They're also worried about equality in general — whether that's economic or racial. "Civil rights isn't where it should be for everybody," said Kelly Beale, a 29-year-old financial analyst. "It's better, but with the whole Black Lives Matter movement, it's obvious, that it's not there yet. And, I feel like we're not addressing it properly." Racial justice is also a top priority for 25-year-old Cassie Harrison, who was sitting across the lawn. But, she thinks racial attitudes are changing. She said her generation is more flexible about social norms. "I think we like to question things a little bit more," Harrison said, "and, so I do think we are a little bit more liberal." …. "My opinion — the Republican Party needs to evolve a little bit," Dreschel said, "so I'm more relaxed on some social issues than other Republicans wouldn't be." Pew's research suggests that millennials, like Drechsel, who identify with the GOP are actually far more liberal than Republicans of other generations, especially when it comes to immigration and sexual preference. …. ). "They're not interested in judging others or imposing values on others, and I think, as a result, they sometimes view the Republican Party as espousing a more old-fashioned attitude toward culture." For example, she says her generation does not see immigration as a cultural threat. "For a lot of older voters, they don't understand why they have to press "1" for English," Soltis-Anderson said. "They're remembering a time before that they wish we could go back to." She added that where older voters might be angry about immigration, most millennials grew up having a closer association with immigrants. "You'll see young voters of all stripes saying the system is broken, and it needs to be fixed, but I think it doesn't come from the same kind of cultural anxiety place, but rather more from a the system seems so broken, why can't we enforce laws point of view," Soltis-Anderson said.”


THIRD WAY -- "Policies aimed at reducing inequality gain more traction with voters when they are pitched as pro-growth policies. Issues like raising the minimum wage, extending unemployment benefits, pay equity for women, student-loan debt relief, increasing the earned income tax credit and closing tax loopholes for the rich. The argument is straightforward: More fairness means more growth. When the incomes of the poor and the middle class are growing, consumption — the principal driver of economic growth — goes up. So do tax revenues and investment in business and education." Interestingly, these are the very things that our Socialist Bernie Sanders is proposing lately, so maybe he will get the Millennial votes. I really would like to see him win, because he isn't of the old Clinton-related political bent. I will vote for Hillary, of course, if she gets the nomination.

“Voters’ deep dissatisfaction with Obama right now is due mostly to his failure to deliver on the economy. That’s why the most popular political figures in the country today are the Clintons. Bring them back, people hope, and maybe we can bring back the “good times." Since there is a chance that the Republicans might win the presidency this coming year, I hope lots of these Millennials will vote for the more intelligent and honest Republicans like John Kasich, Ben Carson, Lindsey Graham, and the feisty lady Carly Fiorina. I am tempted to add Chris Christy to the list, but not after Bridgegate!




http://www.military-money-matters.com/foundation-for-american-veterans.html#axzz3mPl4yBAF

SCAM ROBO CALL ALERT – AND VERY PERSISTENT, TOO. SEE BELOW.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT:

Sep 15, 2015
How to deal with this obnoxious group
by: Anonymous

Write down the name of the caller, the time and date they called, and their phone number off your caller ID.

You now have all the information you need to file a complaint with your State's Attorney General's office, directed to the consumer affairs department. (They many even have a form you can complete online.)

You will notified by the AG's office that they received your complaint and they will make the contacts to correct this.




Foundation for American Veterans
(West Allis, WI)

A reader asks:

I didn't see a rating for 'Foundation for American Veterans' in Michigan. Are they a good organization or another bad money handling outfit?

Thank you for your question.

The Foundation for American Veterans does not publish financial information on its web site.

The Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance reports that the organization failed to provide the requested information, so BBB cannot determine whether it meets their 20 standards for charity accountability.

According to a Charity Navigator report in 2005, the Foundation for American Veterans used just 6 cents of every dollar raised for services for veterans.

Despite this lack of transparency with regard to their financial information, we were able to locate a form filed by the Foundation for American Veterans, Inc. with the Secretary of State for the State of Washington (charities must register in each state in which they intend to solicit donations). According to the information filed with Washington State, for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007, the organization had revenue of $5,263,927, and spent $528,196 on program services out of total expenses of $5,118,508.

In other words, for FY 2007, the Foundation for American Veterans devoted 11% of its total expenses to program services for veterans.

The form did not break down those expenses, but we think it would be safe to say that a large percentage went to professional fund raisers. It did list Associated Community Services as a paid fundraiser organization.

When we checked that organization's Commercial Fundraiser Profile Report with the Washington Secretary of State, we learned that in the fiscal year ending December 31, 2008, Associated Community Services (ACS)

reported that it raised $1,264,583 in contributions, and of that amount, only $480,465 went to the charity client for whom the funds were raised. In other words, the charity got 38% of the money raised, and the fundraising organization kept the other 62% as its fee.

The Fundraiser Profile indicates that ACS also solicited contributions on behalf of Disabled Veterans Services, Inc. and the Washington chapter of the United States Navy Veterans Association.

An article in the Portland Observer in December, 2009, indicated that FAV used 8.67 percent of funds raised for its cause, landing Foundation for American Veterans on the Oregon Attorney General's list of the 20 worst charities soliciting in the state, based on how much of its contributions actually go to the stated cause.

Wikipedia reports that the Foundation for American Veterans "makes far too many calls to people who are not veterans. The reps hang up before one can get to the telephone and they call up to 8 times in a single day. This practice is not only excessive, but counterproductive in obtaining donations because they are such a nuisance. When calling back their number, there is no option for removing one's phone number from their database."

If you would like to contact FAV to ask more specific questions, you may e-mail them at fav (at) fav (dot) org. Charitable organizations that are exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c) are required to allow public inspection of or provide copies of their annual returns (From 990). If you would like to review FAV's most recent Form 990, request a copy directly from them at the above e-mail address.


Comments for Foundation for American Veterans
Click here to add your own comments


Sep 15, 2015
How to deal with this obnoxious group
by: Anonymous

Write down the name of the caller, the time and date they called, and their phone number off your caller ID.

You now have all the information you need to file a complaint with your State's Attorney General's office, directed to the consumer affairs department. (They many even have a form you can complete online.)

You will notified by the AG's office that they received your complaint and they will make the contacts to correct this.


Sep 10, 2015
Too Happy - Got Rid of Them
by: VMWH

I got this call from a clown wanting to know if I was (my husband's name). Did the pitch about how he was not asking for pledges before wanting to send me an envelope for a contribution.

I told him our house was sold and we would not be here to get the envelope and he tried to tell me it would find me somehow.

I told him truthfully that my husband does his veterans' giving via American Legion at which point he thanked me and said goodbye.


Sep 08, 2015
Pledged $20, billed for $220
by: Anonymous

After being annoyed with their constant calls I answered and they convinced me to donate $20 after I refused higher donation requests.

I was uncomfortable giving them my credit card # over the phone so told them to send me an invoice. They did, for $220!

That made me suspicious so I decided to check them out on line and glad I did. They will get nothing!


Aug 26, 2015
What a scam!
by: Anonymous

17 calls in the last 3 days. When I start to ask to be removed from their calling list, the caller hangs up...then calls back 30 minutes later (like I am going to change my mind about giving money to a scam organization that donates only 8 percent of the money it receives).


Aug 23, 2015
Same Experience as Others Here
by: Anonymous

I also received a phone call from what I can only describe as a fast-talking hustler. His requests for money dropped to $20 after I said no a few times.

I was then transferred to a woman who asked for my credit card info over the phone, to which I replied "no way." Of course, they already had my address and phone number.

Since the call, I've checked them out online and find nothing but negative comments and stats showing they use less than 10% of the funds they raise for veterans. I've received 2 "Pledge Reminders" so far, but have no intention of sending these scammers a dime.



Thank you for your desire to help our vets, and for your diligence in checking before you donate.

Your comments provide a reminder for others - you have no legal obligation to send money for one of these "pledges."


Aug 21, 2015
Pledge Reply
by: Anonymous

I received an unsolicited mailing from fav thanking me for my $20 donation and asking me to fulfill my pledge.

This is the first and only correspondence. I never made a pledge!

Didn't answer them--scam!


Aug 21, 2015
Heart Breaking
by: Saddened in Georgia

I have started helping my mom with her finances recently and since I can see her banking information I happened to look this morning and found where a check had cleared her bank that was made out to FAV.

I called my mom and asked her about it and she said that she wanted to help our veterans b/c my papa (her stepdad) and our grandfather (my papa's dad) were veterans.

I told her to let me do some research concerning this organization and I would let her know what I find out. I am so grateful that I found your website.

I have since called her and told her not to ever give to them again and that we can find better organizations for her money to go to.

I will suggest the Fisher House when I see her this afternoon. Thank you for your diligence in informing the public of this outrageous and disgraceful attempt to scam hard working men and women of their money in the guise of helping our vets.

Fisher House is an excellent choice.


Aug 07, 2015
Scammers
by: Anonymous

These people kept calling here asking for my husband. I told them he was not available and not to call here.

They kept calling but I would not answer the phone. The calls stopped for awhile but have since started again.

They use a local number to make it look like it is from my area.

It is terrible that they prey on our veterans and their families. My husband was a World War 2 veteran.


Jul 26, 2015
SCAM
by: Mary Ann

They have called me many, many times so I finally answered the phone. Big mistake. Was given the same line " We will send a tank over to thank you".

After reading the comments here, I sent their pledge card back stating I will not donate to a SCAM organization.

It would be great if these people actually used most of the money for the vets.


Jul 15, 2015
Repeated Unwanted Calls
by: Anonymous

This organization calls my home even though they have been asked repeatedly not to call.

They ask for my husband by his first name. He has been deceased for several years. I have informed them of this several times.

Sometimes when I answer the phone the caller hangs up on me.

This needs to be resolved immediately.

I'm so sorry you have to deal with the insensitivity of this group!




There are many more pages of these outraged comments. Go to the website above if you want to read more.