Last week’s story here that Britain’s National Health Service euthanizes 130,000 elderly folks a year is no surprise. Last year, a major report cited the socialist health-care agency for neglecting the elderly under its care. The neglect was so severe that doctors began prescribing drinking water to patients because they would otherwise die of thirst.
As the sprawling surveillance site being constructed by the National Security Agency (NSA) in Utah grows larger and nearer completion every day, the domestic spy service remains tightlipped about just how much and what kind of personal electronic data they have already collected and collated. Not only does the NSA refuse to provide such information, it insists that it cannot be forced to. In July of 2011 and again in May 2012, Senators Mark Udall (D-Colo.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) wrote a letter to James R. Clapper, Jr., the Director of National Intelligence, asking him a series of four questions regarding the activities of the NSA and other intelligence agencies regarding domestic surveillance.
The remarkable coincidence of increased private ownership of guns as reflected by the explosive growth of firearms manufacturers, coupled with the increased interest in self-defense and relaxed state rules regarding carrying a weapon with or without a concealed weapons permit, along with the steady decline in violent crime as reported by the FBI, all seem to point to a supreme irony: The most anti-gun president in recent memory, who is trying to stimulate the economy by growing jobs, is in fact increasingly responsible for the growth of the gun industry itself.
Now that Attorney General Eric Holder has appointed two U.S. Attorneys to investigate the alleged “leaks” of classified information many suspect originated in the White House, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence is piling on by announcing that all intelligence agents and officials may be subjected to polygraph testing if they are suspected of leaking information to the media.
“The United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights,” former President Jimmy Carter charged in a June 24 op-ed in the New York Times, charging the United States government with assassination attempts through the use of drones and massive domestic surveillance against the privacy rights of American citizens. But Carter cited the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights rather than the U.S. Bill of Rights as the inspiration to follow and restore a respect for the inalienable rights of others.
American taxpayers dole out $80 billion every year to subsidize food stamps for the poor, but are unsure of where and how their hard-earned dollars are being spent. Ranging from candy to potato chips to steak dinners, food stamps can be used to purchase a variety of foods, and are accepted at gas stations, fast-food restaurants, retail stores, and in some areas, even high-scale restaurants.
Found guilty and sentenced to 25 years in prison, communist Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout may be headed back home to Russia not even a year into his prison sentence. The plan to repatriate Bout and Russian pilot Konstantin Yaroshenko comes from Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov.
Conditions in Mexico continue to demonstrate that almost no form of violent criminal activity is impossible in that failed state. Although the violent conflict between the Mexican government and the drug cartels has continued unabated, it has become increasingly rare for the American media to report on the conflict. The Mexican "drug war" began with President Felipe Calderon’s declaration of war in December 2006. But as that so-called war continues to drag on, the hopes which were expressed nearly six years ago for a quick victory have proven to be ephemeral.
Fifteen trillion dollars: That’s how much American taxpayers have forked over in the name of helping the poor since 1964. And what do we have to show for it? A poverty rate that has barely budged, an entrenched bureaucracy, and a population — like that of Greece and Portugal, two welfare-state basket cases — increasingly dependent on government handouts.