Tuesday, April 30, 2013

FOXNews.com: Arming untrained teachers puts our kids at greater risk

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Arming untrained teachers puts our kids at greater risk
Apr 30th 2013, 21:56

In April, the U.S. Senate struck down gun control legislation that would have required universal background checks for gun purchases and imposed limits on gun magazine capacity, among other measures. 

Standing with family members of victims of the Newtown, Conn., tragedy, President Obama declared that this is only "round one" of the ongoing gun control debate, which has been at the center of the national discourse since the Dec. 14 attacks. 

While the debate rages on, most are agreed on one thing: the loss of 20 children and six teachers on that day awoke the nation to the need for heightened security, especially in our nation's schools.

In the wake of this tragedy, there is growing support among Second Amendment advocates for arming teachers with guns. 

Nothing could be more important than making sure the people who defend our children are adequately trained to do so.

The sentiment is understandable. 

Columbine, Virginia Tech and now Newtown are all stark reminders of the havoc that can be wreaked by evil people with guns. 

However, the overly simplistic proposal to arm all teachers is a knee-jerk reaction of monumental proportions that could ultimately hurt their cause. To say that it is not well thought out would be a gross understatement.

America's Constitution secures the right to bear arms. The right to self-defense is as American as apple pie, and gun control legislation like that proposed by the Obama administration runs directly against our character. 

Still, placing a third party in a position of defending our young people deserves vigorous debate and contemplation. 

Nothing could be more important than making sure the people who defend our children are adequately trained to do so.

Many assume that learning the skill of armed defense is simply a matter of taking a position on the firing line at the local range and shooting tight groups at a non-moving target. 

While range exercise is important to becoming proficient with a firearm, it does not adequately prepare one for real confrontation. 

Make no mistake about it: A teacher who is placed in a position of defending others will step into a foreign world of armed confrontation where unforgiving bullets fly. 

As Lt. Col. David Grossman, a world-renowned expert in the field of human aggression, has noted, interpersonal human aggression is the "universal human phobia." 

While we talk tough at the water cooler, a firefight is certainly not Monopoly or Bingo. This is where so many overlook a compelling and frightening reality.

Armed conflict causes an adrenaline effect, which influences a person's ability to mount a real and effective defense. When a person assumes a defensive posture, the natural physiological and mental reactions change the playing field in significant ways. These reactions include tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, heavy breathing, increased heart rate, profuse sweating, time dilation and the unexpected release of urine and defecation from the body.

Most people have not been trained to deal with these natural reactions. As a result, individuals who may be justified in using lethal force become incredibly dangerous to themselves and others. 

Only intense and consistent training can address this issue.

Let's be clear: There is nothing inherently wrong with putting guns in the hands of teachers. However, it would be wrong to saddle untrained teachers with the responsibility of protecting our children simply by placing a lethal weapon on their hip. 

They need adequate training. 

The eight or even 40 hours of training that's typically the standard for entry-level personal defense courses is simply not enough to expect a teacher to be prepared for what an armed situation would require. 

Military personnel and police officers immerse themselves in training with firearms defense, and even they get it wrong at times.

So, how should we go about protecting our children and keeping our schools safe? We must place adequately trained armed guards, such as police officers and military men and women, in schools. Such protection would create a deterrent effect for any would-be killer. 

The NRA's report, which outlines security needs and suggested training requirements for keeping our schools safe, is an important step in determining what we can do as a nation to protect our precious children. 

Experience demonstrates the way to stop violence is with countervailing force. However, an effective trained response takes serious time, money and resources to create. This responsibility must not be taken lightly.

Law enforcement agencies and the U.S. military allocate significant resources to train their people to defend their country, their communities, their teammates and themselves. In the heated debate over defense and gun laws in recent months, we have overlooked this important fact.

Unfortunately, sweeping gun control laws like those put forward in the Senate do not address the fundamental issues that compromise our safety. 

The problem is not guns or magazine capacities, but the evil people who manage to get their hands on guns, regardless of laws. 

Sadly, we often consider solutions without thinking beyond next week; in the process, we create a more dangerous society.

We have at our disposal common-sense solutions to the problem of gun violence in our schools. The blanket proposal to arm all teachers without intense training is not one of them. 

Let's move to address the problem with real, viable solutions. After all, this is America, and few things are more important than allocating money to protecting our children and our future.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Gang of Eight's plan would give illegal immigrants tax amnesty, too

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Gang of Eight's plan would give illegal immigrants tax amnesty, too
Apr 30th 2013, 18:00

Virtually every time one of the Senate Gang of Eight emerged from behind closed doors to update the American public on the progress of their negotiations on what is now an 844-page immigration bill, it included an impassioned denial that what was being cooked up was amnesty for illegal aliens. 

Invariably, the "Gang" member (or members) would insist that illegal aliens gaining legalization under the bill would be punished for having transgressed our immigration laws, including a requirement that they pay back taxes.

As recently as two days before the introduction of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, S. 744, two principal authors, Senators Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal (on Tax Day, April 15, ironically) declaring that their bill "would establish a tough but fair system for millions of people living in the shadows to come forward and settle their debt to society." 

Among their requirements for settling that debt included "paying a fine and back taxes," ignoring the fact that illegal aliens are already legally obligated to pay taxes, and therefore collection of those taxes could hardly be considered a penalty.

Few things about illegal immigration irritate Americans more than the reality that millions of illegal aliens evade paying income taxes by working off-the-books.

But a funny thing happened on the bill's way to the Senate print shop. The term "back taxes" mysteriously disappeared from the text of the legislation. 

Instead, before an illegal alien may apply for "registered provisional immigrant" (RPI) status – the first and most important step in the amnesty process – the alien would only be required to settle up with the IRS for all "Federal income taxes assessed." (Sec. 2101)

While this sounds good at first blush, "taxes assessed" is not the same as "taxes owed."  A tax assessment occurs when the IRS officially records that a person owes money because an individual files a tax return, or the IRS audits an individual – whether or not he has filed a return – and records how much the person owes.

The bill requires aliens to only pay taxes that the IRS has assessed at the time they apply for RPI status. 

If the IRS had no knowledge that the individual had been working here, there would obviously be no tax liability assessed and the alien has nothing to satisfy for the purpose of getting RPI status..

The bill, S. 744 does not require that an alien present himself to the IRS for a tax assessment before or during the application process for RPI status. Nor does it require an alien to submit relevant information to DHS, or that DHS to share such information with the IRS. Therefore the IRS would have no basis on which to conduct an audit or make an assessment, even if it wanted to.

So, what accounts for the hasty retreat on the collections of back taxes? 

As recently as January, McCain expressed confidence that collecting back taxes from illegal alien scofflaws would not present much of a challenge. "We can trace their employment back…It doesn't take a genius," he declared.

Explaining the omission of the back taxes requirement, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), another Gang of Eight member, confessed that it's just too complicated to bother. "Getting back taxes is incredibly difficult, particularly when someone has paid into a fraudulent Social Security number," Flake admitted.

Thus, in addition to amnesty that would allow millions of illegal aliens to gain legal U.S. residence ahead of millions of people around the world who continue to wait outside the country, S. 744 would give these illegal aliens a better deal than everyone who has worked legally in the U.S. 

Millions of illegal aliens who have worked at jobs that might otherwise have gone to Americans will gain complete immunity from paying taxes on past earnings, and from penalties for having failed to report income.

Convincing the American public that illegal aliens are not being given a free ride is critical to the Gang of Eight's sales strategy.  

Few things about illegal immigration irritate Americans more than the reality that millions of illegal aliens evade paying income taxes by working off-the-books, while actual taxpayers wind up footing enormous bills for their health care, the education of their children, and other social services.

It turns out the Gang of Eight has been less than forthright about making illegal aliens pay back taxes. Along with being a massive and unwarranted amnesty for people who violated our immigration laws, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act adds injury to insult by granting those same illegal aliens amnesty for tax evasion.

Dan Stein is president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, a national non-profit organization that supports stricter enforcement of immigration laws.

Follow us on twitter.com/foxnewslatino
Like us at
facebook.com/foxnewslatino

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: How to build a terrorist

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
How to build a terrorist
Apr 30th 2013, 19:23

Terrorism—homicidal violence of the kind that struck Boston on April 15—requires two things:  

1. Clinging to a set of overvalued ideas that may approach the level of a psychotic delusion

2. Being so completely severed from empathy that the suffering of ones' victims is either ignored or celebrated.

Sadly, cultural, religious and political differences will very likely be a source of conflict throughout the world, forever. But when a set of ideas, religious or not, leads a man to blow up innocent men and women and children, that set of ideas is best defined as psychosis.  

No rational adherent to a faith or movement would believe that blowing up people in a road race is likely to bring about any real goal.  Any of his hopes are outside our shared reality. They are psychotic.

The fact that more than one person, or even an entire movement of people, may be gripped by a delusion, does nothing to injure the theory.  

It could be argued that Jim Jones, who orchestrated the mass suicide of 909 followers of the People's Temple and the murder of 200 children in 1978, was delusional, as were the 909 followers.  

Nazism may best be understood not as rational group hatred, but as a delusion at epidemic levels.

The road to terrorism, like all of the recent mass murders we have witnessed, may also run directly through mental illness.   

The road to terrorism, then, like all of the recent mass murders we have witnessed, may also run directly through mental illness.   

In this regard, the most vulnerable people are those who suffer psychological disorders, prior to being exposed to powerful, core delusional ideas (radical, terrorist theology, in the case of the Boston Marathon bombers).  

The depressed man, wandering a dark emotional landscape, so bleak that it can obscure any idea that previously seemed meritorious to him, even making him as though a stranger from his wife or children, is an easier mark.  

Cults prey on those who are psychologically unstable, offering them a fixed and false (delusional) point of view on the world around them and offering them the false freedom of projecting all their suffering on others, rather than seeking to understand it and truly overcome it in themselves.

Understanding extreme religious doctrine that advocates killing innocent non-believers to be a delusional mental illness would explains the second condition necessary for terrorism: being completely severed from one's empathy. 

Delusions can do that because they sever the delusional individual or individuals from their capacity to feel the pain of others.  They transmute the "I-Thou relationship" that Martin Buber wrote about into "I-It."  

One could argue—and I do—that when a man is deprived of his empathy by a set of beliefs that casts entire groups as inhuman and worthy of death then that man is mentally ill.  

None of what I am writing about here excuses the behavior of a terrorist or necessarily suggests the way that a terrorist should be dealt with by the military or the judicial system. But, thinking about extremism as a form of mental illness would certainly suggest a new strategy to combat it.  

Would it not be interesting, for example, if aggressively treating depression (especially the kind linked to irritability) in a particular group turned out to significantly impact the likelihood that such a group would spawn extremist violence?

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at info@keithablow.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: New South Carolina scandal -- GOP wants to give big labor a big win

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
New South Carolina scandal -- GOP wants to give big labor a big win
Apr 30th 2013, 14:06

By

Published April 30, 2013

FoxNews.com

  • Sanford_Busch.jpg

    FILE: April 22, 2013: Elizabeth Colbert Busch and former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford.AP

  • Colbert Busch Sanford.jpg

    April 29, 2013: Democratic candidate Elizabeth Colbert Busch and Republican Mark Sanford debate in South Carolina.AP

It is an amazing testament to how bad the other candidates were that Mark Sanford ran away with the race in South Carolina's first congressional district.

A deeply flawed man, he was the one guy the primary voters knew wouldn't go wobbly in Washington. But they, and I, presumed he was over the issues with his ex-wife. Unfortunately, a couple of weeks ago we learned things were not settled.

The NRCC and GOP abandoned Mark Sanford as a result. In a race the GOP could still — even now — win, the GOP decided it would rather lose than win.

Right now, thanks to the NRCC pulling out of the race, the Democrats are outspending Mark Sanford three to one.

Unfortunately for the GOP, losing South Carolina's Republican first congressional district will give labor unions a massive win.

The unions, which passionately hate Boeing producing the 787 in Charleston, have poured money in to help Elizabeth Colbert Busch. Right now, thanks to the NRCC pulling out of the race, the Democrats are outspending Mark Sanford three to one.

Yesterday, the Sanford campaign discovered Colbert-Bush has gotten a massive pile of money from another ultra-liberal group. But Republicans are doing nothing.

At this time, even with all Sanford's flaws, it seems ridiculous that the GOP would give labor unions a massive win. The media will herald it as a rejection, even in South Carolina, of Republicans. The unions will herald it as a major win for big labor.

In the process. the first district would get a stooge for Nancy Pelosi and a puppet for labor unions against Boeing.

Mark Sanford can still win. But he's going to need a lot of help. The chickens at the NRCC ran as quickly as they could. They need to man up and fight like hell.

Erick Erickson is a Fox News contributor and editor of RedState.com.  Follow him on Twitter @EWErickson.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: The unholy alliance between Obama, Democrats and Planned Parenthood

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
The unholy alliance between Obama, Democrats and Planned Parenthood
Apr 30th 2013, 10:54

Addressing a meeting of Planned Parenthood last Friday, President Obama accused pro-lifers of wanting to "turn back the clock to policies more suited to the 1950s than the 21st century."

Like any decade, the '50s had its problems -- racism, discrimination, sexism -- but I'll defend the '50s on other grounds, if the president will defend the decade that followed. 

In the '50s, for much of mainstream America drugs were something you bought at a pharmacy with a prescription; living together meant getting married first, then having babies; abortion was not legal; our culture wasn't the enemy; metal detectors were instruments one took to the beach to find loose change and schools and the streets were mostly safe.

Planned Parenthood spends a lot on electing liberal Democrats to office. It can afford to.

It's "Ozzie and Harriet" vs. Woodstock.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell is on trial now in a Philadelphia courtroom indicted on charges that he performed late-term abortions and killed babies born alive during the procedures. 

Is this the 21 century the president prefers? 

It is actions like this -- not the policies of the '50s -- that have weakened America and harmed the women the president claims to be defending.

How many women has the president talked to who lament their abortions and say they would have made another choice, if they had been shown alternatives? 

Does the president champion the rights of these women? 

According to FactCheck.org, as an Illinois state senator, Obama twice voted against the so-called "born-alive" bills that would have "defined any aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a 'born alive infant' entitled to legal protection." 

He opposed the bills, he said, "as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion." He chose politics, not lives.

In his speech to Planned Parenthood, the president never mentioned the word "abortion," preferring to talk instead about "women's health." 

Could it be because 40 years after the historic Roe v. Wade decision, public opinion on abortion has changed very little? For the most part, those who favor it, favor it; those who do not, do not.

The president and Planned Parenthood's other defenders claim that if the organization were to be denied tax dollars, there would be fewer mammograms, cancer screenings and other services available, especially to poor women. Is this anything more than a distraction from Planned Parenthood's real purpose -- providing abortions?

According to analysis from the Chiaroscuro Foundation, a not-for-profit organization seeking to reduce the number of abortions in New York, Planned Parenthood "provides more abortions than any other organization in the United States, about one of every four U.S. abortions."

"Planned Parenthood's bottom line is numbers," according to a 2011 op-ed for The Hill newspaper written by former clinic director Abby Johnson, "And, with abortion as its primary money-maker, that means implementing a quota. ... I was directed to double the numbers of abortions our clinic performed in order to drive up revenue."

Planned Parenthood spends a lot on electing liberal Democrats to office. It can afford to.

According to its 2011-2012 annual report, the organization reported more than $1.2 billion in net assets and received a record $542 million in taxpayer funding. The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List has compiled the "Top 12 Reasons to Defund Planned Parenthood Now". Read it.

Planned Parenthood and the left are inextricably linked. The organization works to elect Democratic candidates who will defend their mission and those candidates, once elected, fuel Planned Parenthood's agenda by funneling tax dollars their way and trumpeting their "good works" in the name of women's health. And millions of American children are aborted. 

This is what the 21st century has to offer us? This is what we should prefer over the '50s?

A 1962 hit song looked back on the stability of the '50s and the values that shaped the decade. It was called "That's Old Fashioned." The Everly Brothers sang it. One of the verses goes:

"It's a modern changing world

Everything is moving fast

But when it comes to love I like

What they did in the past." 

That beats some of the lyrics from the psychedelic '60s. By comparison, the'50s look pretty good to me.

Cal Thomas is America's most widely syndicated newspaper columnist and a Fox News contributor. Follow him on Twitter@CalThomas. Readers may e-mail Cal Thomas at tmseditors@tribune.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Monday, April 29, 2013

FOXNews.com: Gosnell had an accomplice in murders -- the liberal media

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Gosnell had an accomplice in murders -- the liberal media
Apr 29th 2013, 17:28

  • gosnell_file_photo.jpg

    March 8, 2010: In this file photo, Dr. Kermit Gosnell is seen during an interview with the Philadelphia Daily News at his attorney's office in Philadelphia. Gosnell, an abortion provider charged with killing a patient and four babies, trial is scheduled to begin closing arguments Monday, April 29, 2013.AP/Philadelphia Daily News

  • Kermit.jpg

    Three murder charges against Philly abortion doctor Dr. Kermit Gosnell were tossedAP Photo/Philadelphia Police Department via Philadelphia District Attorney's Office

Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell did not act alone. He has an accomplice who is just as guilty as he is for willfully taking part in these heinous crimes: the media.

The Gosnell trial is possibly the most gruesome, most tragic human rights story of the 21st  century.  

The witness testimony coming out of the trial is worse than a horror movie script — babies left in shoe boxes, babies born alive and left to swim in a toilet to die, and worse.  Yet, instead of competing to cover Gosnell's capital murder trial for the serial killing of newborn babies and the murder of one female victim, the major broadcast networks actively worked to hide the evidence by censoring any and all coverage.  

The Gosnell trial is possibly the most gruesome, most tragic human rights story of the 21st century.  

Gosnell barely made headlines until Kirsten Powers, a columnist for USA Today and a left-leaning political analyst for Fox News, wrote a column shaming the media into finally acknowledging the grizzly case.   

The media's modus operandi is completely political.  Long ago, the press picked its side in the abortion debate.  

They bought into the abortion industry's "safe, rare, and legal" propaganda. So they ignored stories about unsafe abortion clinics, botched procedures, and subsequent fatalities. These topics were a protected from discussion in the press.

Since Powers spotlighted the case a few honest journalists have admitted that their political bias resulted in their failure to acknowledge the Gosnell trial.  The Washington Post's Melinda Henneberger wrote, "I say we didn't write more because the only abortion story most outlets ever cover in the news pages is every single threat or perceived threat to abortion rights."

On air, HuffPost Live host Marc Lamont Hill admitted, "For what it's worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it'll compromise abortion rights."

The fact that members of the media purposefully ignored this corruption not only makes them an accomplice to the Gosnell infanticides and murder, but it also makes then an accessory to every wrongful death in every abortion clinic with unsafe health and safety standards.  

This is why we have seen a need for states to adopt legislation that places greater health and safety standards on abortion clinics.  

During the height of the Gosnell trial, we witnessed Virginia's Board of Health pass a bill requiring all 20 state abortion clinics to uphold the same surgical standards that hospitals provide to their patients.  And in 2011 alone, we saw a record-high 92 state laws passed to protect women's safety in 24 states.  These included parental notification requirements for minors and partial-birth abortion bans, as well as sonogram and heart-beat bills.

Virginia got it right.  But so far, only four other states maintain health and safety standards similar to those just passed by Virginia: Indiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Oklahoma. (Tennessee has also passed similar abortion clinic regulations, but the constitutionality of that legislation is being challenged in Planned Parenthood vs. Sundquist.)

Few believe the liberal media's one-liner that Gosnell's practices justify decreasing regulations on abortion clinics to provide for more "safe, rare, and legal" abortions in a weak attempt to prevent mass murders at the hands of lunatics.  

But the communication moguls of America's broadcast networks have had free rein, with zero scrutiny, for so long that their audiences harass those pro-life advocates who sincerely want to protect women's health through legislation.

At the end of the day, we cannot hold the media liable for their complicity in abortion crimes.  And tragically, the media will likely continue to cover up the grotesque reality of abortion for purposes of socio-political gain.  

All the while, the Kermit Gosnells of the abortion industry's reality will be turning lights on in the office, grinning grimly at their trophy jars of babies feet, and preparing for another day's bloody profit.

Penny Young Nance is president and CEO of Concerned Women for America

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Distracted driving killed my wife, don't let it kill yours

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Distracted driving killed my wife, don't let it kill yours
Apr 29th 2013, 13:00

  • Texting and driving

One beautifully clear September morning a few years ago my wife and four-year-old son were parked in their Nissan on the side of highway heading into Canterbury, England, where she worked and where our boy was in day care.  

No one knows why she stopped, but her car was several feet on the correct side of the line, she was well within her legal rights to be there and, I'm sure she assumed, "safe."

At 10:21 that morning a tractor-trailer, an 18-wheeler, a really big truck was traveling at fifty-five miles per hour on that same stretch of road.  The trucker, a fifty-four-year-old father of two, had not taken his required driving breaks for three days prior.  

My son beat the odds: He survived when I was told to prepare for him dying. 

At 10:22 that truck hit that Nissan with enough force to send it flying, spinning into the air until it came to rest 230 feet away—that's about one-and-half lengths of an Olympic swimming pool.

The truck was outfitted with all the latest safety features.  Its breaks, applied only after the crash, were working as well that day as on the day they'd been installed.

The police report of the crash says that my wife was killed instantly—I'm thankful that she didn't suffer.  Our son, it says, was thrown fifty feet from the car but survived—for this I'm grateful beyond my ability to express. 

The police report describes every angle and position, every detail of visibility and the location of every piece of my wife's car in painstaking scientific detail. But these are just words and numbers, the photos of the crash tell another story.  

The one that will stay with me forever is the photo of my son's little wooden push-bike pulverized to splinters.  My son loved that bike.  But his new one was better—a big boy's bike.

The trucker never told the police exactly what happened. Some of the investigators thought he might have been messing with the radio or some papers on his dashboard. Most of the others guessed that he had fallen asleep at the wheel. 

He would have felt it when he hit them though, that would have certainly gotten his attention.  In the end, he was sentenced to two-and-half years in prison for causing death by dangerous driving.

My son beat the odds:  he survived when I was told to prepare for him dying.  He pulled himself out of a coma when I was told he'd likely never wake up.  

He walked on his own when this seemed unlikely.  And, only three months after the crash that killed his mother and should have killed him, he went to a normal, mainstream elementary school when I had been told this would never happen.

The crash also transformed me.  At my son's bedside, pulling him through his recovery, I found real meaning and a sense of genuine purpose for the first time in my life.  The fast-track career that had been so important to me before seemed irrelevant compared to my new vocation:  being the best father I could possibly be.  This was what I was meant to be doing.

My son is now 11-years-old. He plays soccer, has lots of friends, is great at math and amazingly good on the piano. Simply watching him grow up makes me happy every day.

While our story is ultimately a very positive one of recovery and redemption, the incalculable pain, grief and damage that precipitated it could have been so easily avoided if one person had not let their attention slip behind the wheel.

April is Distracted Driving Awareness Month and I'm sharing my story in an effort to reduce the number of needless deaths on the road. 

Our tragedy happened in England, but the statistics are virtually the same across the developed world:  roughly three deaths in every thousand are the fault of distracted drivers.  If you're driving, drive alert.

Martin Spinelli, is the author of the international bestseller "After the Crash." For more, visit his website: www.martinspinelli.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Consumer spending weakens, economy inches toward recession

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Consumer spending weakens, economy inches toward recession
Apr 29th 2013, 15:33

The Commerce Department reported Monday that the growth of consumer spending slowed in March, further indicating the United States may be swept into Europe's recession and the ranks of the U.S. unemployed are swelling.

Tax increases are tightening purse strings. In March, consumer spending advanced a tepid 0.2 percent—much weaker than the 0.3 and 0.7 percent registered in January and February. 

Such a slow pace is hardly enough to sustain a robust recovery and other pressures could push the economy over the edge into a recession.

Extraordinary year-end bonuses and dividends—intended to dodge higher taxes in January—boosted consumer activity in January and February but now households are hunkering down.

Much weaker consumer spending is expected for the second quarter as the $120 billion January hike in payroll taxes and $45 billion increase in income taxes borne by the wealthy weakens household finances.
 

In January, when a last minute tax deal raised social security taxes, working- and middle-class families could not adjust spending immediately—they have to keep driving to work and feeding their children—but in March retail sales fell precipitously. Now forecasters expect traffic at shopping malls to recover only slowly.  
 

Many upper income families pay taxes on a quarterly basis, and the actual impact of the quite complex changes to the tax code and rates implemented in January were not reckoned until their accountants computed their first quarter payments due April 15—now they are trimming purchases even further.

Also, the January tax changes greatly reduced mortgage interest deductions for high income families, and this will weaken demand for new and existing homes. The pace of sales may not be much affected but the price increases are likely to slow, especially outside of hot markets like Florida and New York, where speculators and foreign investors seeking refuge from uncertainty in Europe and China have been pouring money.  Overall real estate inflation will not support real asset growth and rising consumer spending the balance of 2013 as it did last year.

Along with sequestration, higher taxes are subtracting more than $200 billion from household purchasing power and government spending—that is slowing demand for what Americans make and makes jobs tougher to find.

More than 40 percent of the 2.5 percent growth in first quarter GDP was supported by growing inventories—not final sales of goods and services. Overall, final demand is advancing at a pace that will support subpar growth of about 2 percent—perhaps less—for the balance of the year.

U.S. corporations are reporting weak sales growth, even as profits advance, but the cost cutting necessary to accomplish that dichotomy will result in continued slow hiring and perhaps a wave of layoffs.  

Weakening conditions in Europe make layoffs more likely, and the danger that Southern Europe's severe recession could spread north to Germany and across the Atlantic to the United States and Canada is quite real.

Peter Morici is an economist and professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, and widely published columnist. Follow him on Twitter @PMorici1.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Here's how to dump UN official who smeared US after Boston attacks

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Here's how to dump UN official who smeared US after Boston attacks
Apr 29th 2013, 14:16

Calls have been pouring in for the resignation of the UN's Boston terror apologist, Richard Falk. The demands from members of Congress, multiple organizations, and the State Department, follow the UN expert's written assertion that Boston victims were like the "canaries" that "have to die" because of justifiable "resistance" to "the American global domination project."

Despite the anger at his contemptible words, however, in UN quarters it is assumed that the negative attention will soon blow over.  This isn't the first occasion that senior Obama officials have suggested Falk resign and the pattern appears to be predictable.

On July 7, 2011, U.S. Ambassador to the Human Rights Council, Eileen Donahoe, said Falk's comments at that time were "deeply offensive," "condemn[ed] them in the strongest terms" and complained his "continued status…is a blight on the UN system."

Withhold American taxpayer dollars from the UN Human Rights Council as long as Richard Falk remains in the job

On October 25, 2012, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, labeled Falk's statements then as "offensive," and said his "continued service…is deeply regrettable and only damages the credibility of the UN."  

On April 23, 2013, Rice called Falk's most recent comments "highly offensive" and said it was "Past time for him to go."  The State Department issued a formal statement describing his commentary as "offensive," reiterated the call "for Mr. Falk's resignation," and called his UN service an "absurdity."

After each round of offence and condemnation, the administration has continued to pay the usual 22% of all his expenses, and 22% of the production and dissemination of all his UN statements and reports.  Moreover, last November President Obama sought and won re-election to the Human Rights Council, thus legitimizing the very body that has repeatedly refused to fire Falk.

Falk himself says he's just misunderstood. He responded Friday, to what he calls "hate mail," by issuing a "clarification" of his remarks. In particular, he now says, "I had no intention whatsoever to connect any dots as to whether there was a causal linkage between what the U.S. or Israel have done in the world and what happened in Boston."  

Unfortunately for a man who is used to lying and getting away with it, his original statement tells a different story.  First he issued a description:

There are a few hopeful signs of awakening…Listening to a PBS program hours after the Boston event, I was struck by the critical attitudes of several callers…"We in this country should not be too surprised, given our drone attacks…in Afghanistan and Pakistan…" "Is this not a kind of retribution for torture inflicted by American security forces…?"

And then he reacted:  

Can we not expect one among our politicians…to have the courage to connect some of these dots?  Should we not all be meditating on W.H. Auden's haunting line: "Those to whom evil is done/do evil in return"?  

Yes, Mr. Falk did indeed intend to connect the dots.

So what will it take to move beyond mere hand-wringing this time? The answer lies with connecting a different set of facts that run through the UN human rights system, from seemingly arcane resolutions to the malevolent individuals that bring them to life.  

In 1993, the UN Commission on Human Rights – the predecessor to the Council – created a position "to investigate Israel's violations of the principles and bases of international law."  The outcome of any feigned investigation was, obviously, pre-determined.

A South African named John Dugard held the post prior to Falk.  At the height of the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign in Israel – which killed and maimed hundreds of children and parents engaged in everyday life – Dugard lectured UN members on the distinction between what he called "mindless terror" and Palestinian violence.  The latter, he claimed, was analogous to European resistance to the Nazis during the Second World War.

Prior to his appointment, Falk had already written a fawning preface for a 9/11 conspiracy book and opined that Israel was engaged in a "holocaust-in-the-making." For the Council, he was a perfect fit.

Immediately following his Boston remarks, Falk traveled to the home turf of the terrorist organization Hezbollah.  Speaking in Beirut on April 25, he advised his Lebanese audience against the promotion now of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Falk's own six-year term will be up in 2014, but the UN spot will remain. The only UN Human Rights Council investigative mandate without an end date is the one dedicated to the permanent demonization and defeat of Israel. And the only people who will ever be appointed to fill it, will share the twisted ideology that turns terrorists into victims, and connects American and Israeli victims of terrorism to crimes they didn't commit.

Want to get serious this time? Withhold American taxpayer dollars from the UN Human Rights Council as long as Richard Falk remains in the job and his UN post is not eliminated.  

Anne Bayefsky is director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust. Follow her on Twitter @AnneBayefsky.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Radical Islam and Obama's willful blindness

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Radical Islam and Obama's willful blindness
Apr 29th 2013, 13:19

By

Published April 29, 2013

New York Post

According to a relative of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the Chechen immigrant believed there is "oppression of the Muslim population around the world." The relative described Tsarnaev to The New York Times this way: "He was angry that the world pictures Islam as a violent religion."

Bombing the Boston Marathon was the Tsarnaev brothers' way of defending Islam. To say their argument boomeranged, however, isn't fully true. Not as long as the Obama administration puts religious blinders on the defenders of our homeland.

The moral of the story is that political correctness kills.

At its core, the Boston case reveals two fundamental truths. One, not all Muslims are terrorists. Two, in recent times, almost all terrorists are Muslims.

Willie Sutton robbed banks because that's where the money is. Police didn't catch him by staking out lemonade stands.

By the same logic, preventing terrorism requires close scrutiny of Muslim men leaning toward violent jihad. Had they followed that logic, the FBI could have prevented the bombing.

To continue reading Michael Goodwin's column in the New York Post, click here.

Michael Goodwin is a Fox News contributor and New York Post columnist.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Sunday, April 28, 2013

FOXNews.com: Be a mean mom -- protect your child from cyberbullying

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Be a mean mom -- protect your child from cyberbullying
Apr 28th 2013, 11:30

If you're the parent of a teean, you have witnessed this scenario at your own kitchen table, I'm sure. Less talking. More texting. Virtual conversations, whether via smart phones or social media, consume our kids' existence. 

Our children's social lives are no longer played out at home and at school, where adults are present, but now inhabit dark corners of the Internet. As parents, we want to believe these are harmless digital exchanges with their school friends — but what if they're not?

Over 85 percent of teenagers online have been "cyberbullied," according to Pew Internet. The most common form of cyberbullying is wide distribution of intimate information to the public.

Having private text messages forwarded without consent or having an embarrassing picture posted on Facebook without permission can lead to a tidal wave of emotional and verbal abuse. Now anyone and everyone can provoke a cyber attack without fear of consequences, or so it would seem.  

Go on. Be a mean mom or dad, and find out what your kids are doing online or on their phones. It just might save your child's life.

But the consequences are very real. According to the Cyberbulling Research Center, virtual attacks result in teenage depression, low self-esteem — and worse — suicide.  

Take the beautiful 15-year-old teenage girl from California, Audrie Pott, who police say was raped while unconscious at a party. 

Tragically, Audrie hanged herself eight days after her attackers posted humiliating photos of her on social media. Right before committing suicide, Audrie posted on Facebook, "My life is ruined. ... The whole school knows. ... My life is over. ..." Three 16-year-old boys have been arrested and are being prosecuted in a wrongful death suit, which basically aims to prove that the evil actions of these three teenage boys led to the death of Audrie Pott.

In the wake of Audrie's case, Canadian police have reopened the case of Rehtaeh Parsons, another teen girl who committed suicide after photos of her alleged sexual assault went viral

And, of course, we cannot forget about the brave rape victim in Stuebenville, Ohio, who is currently seeking justice not just against her convicted rapist but also against the high school football players who filmed the attack and bragged about it by spreading the footage throughout the Web. 

Hopefully, Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine's investigation of both kids and adults involved will culminate in other much-deserved convictions.

But here's my question: If social media is known as a tremendous problem among our teens, then what are adults going to do to protect them?

Twitter has done a good job providing a "Safety Tips for Parents" page that aims to educate parents on parental blocks.  Other researchers are working on apps and algorithms to detect and report bullying online. But these efforts cannot go far enough.  

Think about it. Parents are legally responsible for their children until they reach adulthood.  

Therefore, shouldn't they be expected to know what's going on with their own kids in cyberspace? While you cannot always read over your kids' shoulders, you can keep the lines of communication open. 

A wise teacher named Erin Kurt asked her students the same questions every year for over 16 years, and from these responses she learned, "The Top 10 Things Kids Want from Parents." At the top of the list, most kids just want their parents to sit and talk with them privately. When was the last time you sat down face to face with your child and asked them, "What is going on in your life, and are you all right?"

Beyond open discussions, watch for signs of changed behavior. A teenager's body language, words, changes in eating and sleep habits, and a drastic drop in grades can all be indications that your child is facing bullying. Silence often makes a powerful statement.

If your child is being cyberbullied, get the passwords and usernames of their social media and e-mail accounts. 

Block users who are harassing your child. If threats persist, screenshot hateful posts and pictures and reach out to other parents, schools, and eventually law enforcement. 

Above all, validate their feelings and respect their struggles, no matter how seemingly harmless.   

Take a moment to remember how hard it is to be a kid, and then multiply that by about a thousand. We have no idea what they are really up against in today's culture.

These tactics might seem extreme, but it is our duty as moms and dads to protect our children — sometimes even from themselves.  

I tell my 16-year-old daughter all the time that social media is not a right; it's a privilege.  After all, my husband and I pay the cell phone bill and own the laptops.  And as parents, we love our children unconditionally, and we want to save them from immense suffering.  

We are the first line of defense, not the school, not the government.

Finally, pray for your kids every day.  As much as we love them, God loves them more. I routinely pray for His protection and also, oddly, for me to catch them if they mess up, so we can correct them and set them immediately on the right path.

Go on. Be a mean mom or dad, and find out what your kids are doing online or on their phones. It just might save your child's life.

Penny Young Nance is president and CEO of Concerned Women for America.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

 
Great HTML Templates from easytemplates.com.