News & Politics

Nearly 60 percent of Americans favor allowing late-term abortions for babies believed to be at strong risk for Zika-related conditions, and a leading pro-life activist is furious at the abortion lobby for advancing such an idea and urging expectant mothers not to go down that path.

The survey from Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health shows 59 percent of Americans “favor a woman being allowed to obtain a legal abortion” if her unborn child is like to have microcephaly or some other “severe” condition related to Zika.

That 59 percent is a huge jump from just 23 percent of Americans who favor allowing late-term abortions in healthy pregnancies.  The jump is remarkable among both Democrats and Republicans.  The poll shows 72 percent of Democrats favor late-term abortions for Zika-related pregnancies compared to just 34 in healthy patients.  In addition, 48 percent of Republicans are on board with late-term abortions in Zika cases as opposed to 12 percent in normal circumstances.

Susan B. Anthony National Campaign Chair Jill Stanek is appalled.

“It’s horrifying that people of both parties do not respect the rights of children with disabilities,” said Stanek.

“The real culprits here are the abortion lobby, who would rather kill babies than mosquitoes.  They are fomenting panic for their own personal benefit and gain, rather than promoting the best course of action, which would be to eliminate the mosquitoes carrying the virus and then, long-term, develop a vaccine,” said Stanek.

She is mystified as to why so many Americans suddenly believe some patients are not worthy of quality health care.

“We find the abortion lobby promoting abortion for disabilities across the spectrum, but the pro-life community believes that adult victims, child victims and pre-born children who are victims of the Zika virus deserve the same standard of care.  With what other illness do we end the lives of the afflicted, rather than try to heal them?” said Stanek.

Stanek says the unborn babies impacted by Zika not only have a right to life but could be very important in developing treatments or a cure for Zika.

“Killing the patient is not medical treatment.  Furthermore, how are we going to make advances in medicine if we destroy the patient before we find treatments and cures for them?” she asked.

Stanek is also livid with Senate Democrats for bogging down the effort to pass Zika response funding.

“Democrat senators are blocking approval of funding of their own bill.  They’ve blocked votes twice because they want Planned Parenthood to get funding in this, which is ridiculous,” said Stanek.

However, it’s not just Zika.  Abortion rates also skyrocket for pregnancies involving Down Syndrome, cystic fibrosis and other conditions.  While the estimates vary, anywhere from 67-85 percent of babies diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted.  Some studies in recent years put the number as high as 90 percent.

Stanek says there is a disconnect in America between the opinion people have on the right to life in general and their attitudes when challenging circumstances arise.

“There’s a schizophrenic breakdown in thinking because you would never think to recommend that a child be killed who has Down Syndrome or cystic fibrosis or any number of maladies.  Why would you automatically jump to killing a pre-born baby who might suffer maladies?” said Stanek.

This is not an abstract concept for Stanek, who was a delivery nurse for years before becoming a pro-life activist.  In fact, one episode in her life actually triggered her activism.

“I held a baby who had been aborted because he had Down Syndrome.  He survived his abortion for 45 minutes.  He was a 21 weeks.  I’ve also had a lot of dealings since then with mothers who aborted their pr-born babies, who had something wrong with their babies and also mothers who didn’t,” said Stanek.

“I have never met a mother who regretted carrying her baby to term if her baby had challenges or only if her baby was going to live for only a couple of minutes,” said Stanek.  “But I have met many mothers who have had to live a life of regret for knowing that they killed their baby rather than carry their baby to term and care for their baby as a mother should.”

Stanek has also seen the fulfillment and joy of welcoming such children into her own family.  Two of her ten grandsons are dealing with health challenges diagnosed in the womb, one with cystic fibrosis and another with cerebral palsy.  She says life is infinitely richer with those boys around her.

“Taking care of people who have challenges brings out the best in us,” said Stanek.  “Having those boys in my life has made me a better person and they are both certainly happy to be here as well.”

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Ian Tuttle of National Review applaud Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer for saying Olympic medalists should not have to pay taxes for their success – but wonder why he doesn’t extend that mentality to the rest of us.  They also slam Hillary Clinton for allowing emails referring to an Iranian defector to exist on her private, unsecured server: emails that possibly contributed to his execution.  And they discuss the noble but quixotic and possibly damaging independent presidential run of Evan McMullin.

Just two weeks after Secretary of State John Kerry claimed the coolants used in air conditioners and refrigerators were as great a threat to human life as ISIS, the nation and the world have moved on but the toll of human life exacted by the climate agenda rises without restraint.

Kerry made his comments in Vienna last month as he attended meetings to update the Montreal Protocol, an agreement from the 1980’s that was originally designed to combat the hole in the ozone layer but is now being re-purposed to achieve other priorities in the fight against climate change – including the targeting of products that replaced the products (chlorofluorocarbons) accused of depleting the ozone, specifically hydrofluorocarbons that are often often used as refrigerants.

To highlight the urgency of the alleged problem, Kerry used an analogy that raised many eyebrows.

“Yesterday, in Washington, I met with 45 nations, defense ministers and foreign ministers, as we were working together on the challenge of Daesh, ISIL, and terrorism.  It’s hard for some people to grasp it, but what you are doing here right now is of equal importance because it has the ability to literally save life on the planet itself,” said Kerry.

He then removed any doubt that he misspoke or wasn’t clear in what he meant.

“Measured against the global array of threats we face today, and there are many: terrorism, extremism, epidemics, poverty, nuclear proliferation, all challenges that respect no borders, climate change belongs on that very same list,” said Kerry.

Kerry’s comments drew derision from political critics in the U.S. and quite a bit of derision.

“This truly was, while consistent with Sec. Kerry particularly but also the global warming alarmist movement, an hysterical moment,” said Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Christopher C. Horner.

However, Horner says the real agenda behind Kerry’s remarks is not funny at all.

“It’s a scarcity agenda.  They’re not against everything.  They’re enthusiastically in favor of scarcity.  That is imposed by by making things like automobility, indoor climate control to make things more comfortable, and other modern conveniences much more expensive to purchase and to use,” said Horner.

“They want to make energy much more expensive so you use less of it because we have so much of it.  So now we’ve moved on to that it causes the seas to boil, the skies turn blood red, dogs and cats living together, etc.  Therefore, you must drastically change your lifestyle,” he said.

Another reason the agenda is no joke is because jacking up the cost of energy kills people when the weather gets very hot or very cold.  He says high energy prices indirectly led to thousands of deaths in a brutal heat wave in Paris last decade.

“So 20,000 of the most vulnerable died.  They’re living in a society where they could afford the $150 unit.  They just can’t afford to run it.  It’s seniors and the poor.  That’s who dies when weather happens,” said Horner.

The same horrors are true in cold weather, as England learned the hard way.

“In the winters now, energy poverty deaths  have skyrocketed from something like 12,000 to 17 to 31 to 40,000 excess a year, year over year coincidental with imposing these energy scarcity policies,” said Horner.

Horner says it’s ludicrous for Kerry to suggest climate change is as great a threat as terrorist groups like ISIS.  He won’t say climate change policies are a greater threat than ISIS, but he does say they kill more people every year.

“Thanks to energy poverty, you can now point to more deaths from these policies than terrorism.  That’s not to say that one is worse than the other, but please keep in mind the tremendous costs of an agenda that, by the way, nobody claims would actually impact the climate,” said Horner.

Instead, he says the left has resorted to distracting people from the ineffectiveness of their big government policies by linking every natural disaster to man-made climate change.

“Everything is being targeted for global warming.  Global warming is the reason for everything.  It’s the cause for everything, and addressing it is the cure for everything,” said Horner.

But he says a simple conversation with a climate activist shows just how insincere they really are.  Horner offered an example:

Activist: “Well. this is the greatest threat facing mankind.”

Horner: “Okay, so we should build lots of nuclear power then?”

Activist: “Oh, no!”

Horner: “So global warming is the greatest threat facing mankind, except for nuclear power.  How about dams?”

Activist: “No, those are mean to fish.  Can’t do that.”

Horner: “How about frack for more gas instead of coal?”

Activist: “No, no, no.  We can’t do that.”

Horner: “So global warming, the greatest threat facing mankind, is a lesser threat than nuclear power, hydropower, hydrofracking.”

Horner says the greatest threat to mankind also takes a backseat to climate control at town halls for President Obama and a comfortable climate at the Democratic National Convention.

He says the alarmism offered by Kerry is ridiculous and people who know better need to speak out forcefully when they happen.

“It is a great shame that we don’t take these moments to say, ‘You know what?  We’re living in dangerous times in a serious world and you have a position of responsibility and authority.  Cut it out.  Get serious.  Stop this.  Focus on what’s important,'” said Horner.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America enjoy seeing former Iranian hostage Saeed Abedini expose the Obama administration’s lie by saying the hostages could not leave until another plane arrived in Iran.  They also cringe as Donald Trump seems to be a drag on GOP Senate candidates.  And they brace for a disastrous Summer Olympics in Rio.

Critics of House Speaker Paul Ryan believe he may be vulnerable in next week’s Wisconsin congressional primary, but the man who pulled off one of the biggest political upsets in U.S. history says whoever wins better be ready to turn their campaign promises into action.

Ryan is seeking a tenth term in the U.S. House of Representatives.  He won re-election in 2014 with 63 percent of the vote.  However, GOP primary challenger Paul Nehlen is taking a Donald Trump-like approach to the campaign, calling Ryan out of touch with his district and weak on critical issues like border security and stemming the tide of illegal immigrants.

That’s pretty much the same approach that Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., used to score a stunning upset over then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a 2014 congressional primary, and with this election season in far more upheaval than the one two years ago, Ryan critics believe a replay of the Brat-Cantor race is possible.

For his part Brat is staying out of the Ryan-Nehlen battle, just as he stays out of every primary fight.

“I don’t get in the endorsement business.  I don’t endorse at the federal, state or local [level] because I don’t like elites picking winners.  I want to pick the winners on their own,” said Brat, who is also the author of “American Underdog: Proof that Principles Matter.”

But does he see Ryan as being in the same position as Cantor was in 2014?  Brat says Ryan is much better than Cantor about getting back home and being around the people in his community and he’s very approachable for other Republicans in the House.  He says Ryan is rock solid on his economic theory but has been underwhelming in putting those ideas into policy.

“On the principles, Paul and I are very similar.  He likes Hayek, and Von Mises and Milton Friedman and is a policy wonk,” said Brat.  “The challenge for our side is to do better and follow our rhetoric.”

Brat says the frustration of American voters of all political stripes is boiling over this year because both parties have failed at their most important jobs.

“The whole Trump phenomenon is related to about 20 years of Democrats and Republicans’ failure to solve fiscal matters.  We’ve racked up $19 trillion in debt and $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities,” said Brat.

The congressman says there is a similarity to Nehlen in that both of them made immigration major issues in their campaigns.  Only Brat says the issue is far worse now than it was just two years ago.

“I ran on just illegal immigration.  Now it’s morphed into the refugee crisis.  We’ve had terrible reports of infiltration into the Washington, D.C. (transit) police department.  We’re beyond the talking points.  The newspapers are full of hard data,” said Brat.

But when given a chance to address the immigration problem just last year, Brat says House Republican leaders not only failed to act but actually made things far worse.

“In the omnibus, they not only skipped all the immigration moves, instead they increased HB2 visas by 400 percent.  That’s a diametric move in the wrong direction, when Americans do have real concerns and they know we have big problems,” said Brat.

And he says immigration wasn’t the only maddening move by leadership against conservative efforts.

“We tried to save $30 billion out of a $535 billion deficit this year alone.  We couldn’t make any headway.  We’re called the right-wingers and the knuckle-draggers for trying to save $30 billion.  That’s a teaspoonful of fiscal savings,” said Brat.

In reflecting on Brat’s campaign, it appears he used a milder form of populism than Nehlen is employing to attack Speaker Ryan, whereas Brat spoke more to core conservative principles.  However, Brat says you don’t have to choose between those strategies.

“They don’t have to be divorced.  There’s a populist urge for us to execute on what we run on,” said Brat.

He says the reason populist messages are resonating on both sides of the political aisle is because politicians on both sides never seem to do what they promise.

“There’s a populist surge because people know that we’re not being honest, we’re not following through on these promises.  We’re going to get rid of Obamacare, we all say.  Then we really don’t fight.  I cam in two years ago and Obama did the unconstitutional amnesty.  (Former House Speaker John) Boehner said we’re going to fight tooth and nail and we didn’t fight,” said Brat.

He says voters are begging Republicans to fight for them in issues that are impacting their lives and crippling their livelihoods.

“I’ve got horror stories about the Department of Labor.  The overtime rule is putting people out of business.  The fiduciary rule of clobbering people.  These are major issues our leadership needs to fight on and the American people don’t think we’re fighting,” said Brat.

Most experts expect Ryan to win his primary on August 9, perhaps quite comfortably.  Brat says that may well be the case but he cautions that the experts are not exactly on a winning streak, including his own race and the result of the Republican presidential race.

“They had [Cantor] up 30 and I ended up winning by ten.  Same thing this year on the Trump phenomenon.  All the experts it turns out aren’t too much of experts on anything.  They own the microphones, I guess, but that’s about it.  They’ve been wrong on everything,” said Brat.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America react to Hillary Clinton telling a crowd she wants middle class tax hikes.  They also expose Pres. Obama’s hypocrisy on gun laws as he commutes the sentences of 214 criminals.  And they get a kick out of top Republicans only now realizing that Donald Trump at the top of the GOP ticket is a major problem.

The Obama administration is vigorously denying that the shipment if $400 million to Iran was a ransom payment for the release of American hostages earlier this year, but the former chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence says the timing and the secrecy make it clear the U.S. clearly bought off the Iranian captors.

The Wall Street Journal broke the story Tuesday, detailing what happened back in January while most Americans were focused on the release of the prisoners.

“The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward,” the story reads.

“Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland,” wrote reporters Jay Solomon and Carol E. Lee.

“The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi,” they wrote.

Early Tuesday morning, State Department spokesman, John Kirby denied any connection between the massive money transfer and the freeing of the hostages.

“We just don’t pay ransom.  It is our policy.  This was not ransom.  Any suggestion that it had anything to do with ransom is absolutely and utterly false.  These were two separate processes run by two separate teams.  Yes, they were done simultaneously, so I understand the coincidental nature of the timing.  But it had absolutely nothing to do with ransom.  We do not and will not pay ransom,” said Kirby on the Fox news Channel.

Former House Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., isn’t buying that explanation one bit.

“Absolutely it’s a ransom payment,” said Hoekstra.  “This is a president that has all along been willing to negotiate and make a deal, and if the deal included ransom he has been open to it.”

“If it walks like a duck, if it talks like a duck, it’s a duck.  This is a ransom payment,” said Hoekstra.

Hoekstra says the idea that the Obama administration is horrified by the suggestion it paid ransom for hostages doesn’t even square with U.S. policy on the issue, a policy Obama unilaterally changed.

“He made it very, very clear this summer that if families wanted to pursue paying ransom for family members or friends who were being held hostage, the U.S. government would assist them in that process and would never, ever prosecute them,” said Hoekstra.

Prior to the policy change, the U.S. government forbade families of hostages from negotiating financial terms for the release of their loved ones and did threaten federal prosecution.

As a result of the policy shift and this report, Hoekstra fears terrorists will declare open season on Americans abroad.

“This now clearly sets the precedent that if Iran, ISIS or other groups hold Americans hostage that they can now expect that the United States will negotiate with them and will pay them a ransom.  Not always, but that option now exists where previously it did not,” said Hoekstra.

Even more, Hoekstra says Obama undercut the efforts of Americans to claim some of that $1.7 billion from Iran due to damages caused by Iranian-backed terrorism.

“They were going after the Iranians in U.S. courts to collect damages that the Iranians had imposed on these individuals.  It’s not like they were only litigating whether this was Iranian money or not.  There were also U.S. citizens who were attempting to litigate and get settlements for the damages that they received from Iran,” said Hoekstra.

In addition to the convenient timing of the money transfer, Hoekstra says if there was no connection to the hostage release, why are we only learning about this now?

“If it’s purely a coincidence, then why all the secrecy?  Why pallets of money coming from the Hague on an unmarked plane flying out of Switzerland?  Why no transparency to Congress?  Why no transparency to the American people as this was being negotiated?” asked Hoekstra.

“If it’s all above board, then give us the transparency up front,” added Hoekstra.

Hoekstra is a fierce opponent of the Iranian nuclear deal but says at the very least the U.S. should have insisted upon the hostages being released as part of the deal.  But the former chairman says it’s just another example of Obama giving away the store to our adversaries and getting almost nothing in return.  While pleased the hostages are free, he says Obama has a record of making poor deals.

“They have fundamentally turned America’s foreign policy head over heels, now negotiating ransom payments for hostages, embracing the Muslim Brotherhood, embracing the regime in Iran, embracing Cuba.  The list goes on and on,” said Hoekstra.

“In almost all of those negotiations, America has gotten very little benefit from massive changes in our foreign policy,” said Hoekstra.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America groan as journalist Ron Fournier reveals Hillary’s staff is fully aware she lies and simply believes that “trust doesn’t matter.”  They also sigh as Trump spokeswoman Katria Pierson blames Pres. Obama for Capt. Khan’s death in Iraq in 2004 and weakening her legitimate criticisms of Obama and Hillary.  And they react to an already disastrous D.C. metro system being rocked by charges that one of their police officers was trying to aide ISIS.

Eight years of Barack Obama and the relentless tide of political correctness have weakened America, and Fox News host Eric Bolling says a return to nine core American virtues is critical for America before election day and in the years to come.

Bolling, who is best known as co-host of “The Five” And “Cashin In” on the Fox News Channel, is also the author of the New York Times bestseller “Wake Up America: The Nine Virtues that Made our Nation Great – And Why We Need Them More Than Ever.”

Bolling dedicates his book to Obama, but it’s not exactly a sincere tribute.

“The country has been pulled so far left for so many years.  Even before he was President Obama, Senator Obama said we needed to fundamentally change America and we elected him anyway.  He’s done that.  He’s tried to and he’s succeeded in pulling us very far left,” said Bolling, who says the book is a guide for leading America back to where it was meant to be.

“I needed to get some roadmap back to the center, back to the center-right where the country was founded and has done very well for 240 years,” said Bolling.

Bolling describes his book as a “push back against the PC culture” and says the reason it’s become a best-seller is the same reason Donald Trump is the Republican presidential nominee.

“I think that’s where Trump’s base is coming from.  In general, the people coming out to see Donald Trump are tired of being told they can’t say this.  They can’t say that.  It’s offensive to hold the door open for a woman.  They’re tired of it,” said Bolling.  “The book was written before Trump ever jumped into the race, but he’s tapping into the same thing I was tapping into.”

The nine virtues described in “Wake Up America,” include: grit, profit, manliness, thrift, individuality, dominion, merit, pride. and providence.  Bolling insists there is no particular order in which he addresses them, except for the first and last virtues.  He says grit is the story of America and our founding fathers.

“They weathered some massive, massive winters.  They were gritty and determined to carve out America in the landscape and they did that,” said Bolling.

He says grit also personified his own life – even in his mother’s final moments.

“Her final words on her deathbed – I was standing right next to her and she pulled me close.  Her last two words on earth were, ‘Never Quit,'” said Bolling.

It was a memory of his mother much earlier in Bolling’s life when which he realized the virtues he would need to pull himself and his family out of poverty.  It was a simple shopping trip to a discount retailer that made him realize just how dire his family’s finances were.

“My mom said, ‘Go grab a pair of sneakers over there.’  I brought back some Pro-Keds.  The look on her face when she had to tell me that we couldn’t afford the sneakers, I’ll never forget it.  That was my realization that there were haves and have nots in the world and we were the have nots.  I just wanted to get out of that situation and help my family,” said Bolling.

“I think it’s a lot of the reason I went from that life to being very blessed to sit in the middle seat on ‘The Five’ on Fox News every day and sitting in for Bill O-Reilly when he wants to take a vacation.  It’s a blessed life and it certainly wouldn’t have happened without these values,” said Bolling.

He specifically listed providence last on his list of virtues to express how much he thanks God for his accomplishments.

“I’m very fortunate to get where I am, but I don’t believe that’s from hard work alone.  It’s a lot of it, but I go to church every day and I thank the good Lord for the success I’ve had,” he said.

Bolling is especially concerned about the political correctness running wild on college campuses, especially as his son prepares to leave home this fall.

“I have an 18-year-old son going to college for the first time.  He’s off to this liberal academia.  I’m very concerned he’ll turn into a left-wing zealot,” said Bolling.

He says his son has a good head start but knows many sensible kids have been derailed at college.

“He’s leaving with at least a fair and balanced idea of what’s right and what’s wrong. what’s good government and what’s bad.  Hopefully, he comes back the same, but I’m concerned he won’t because of the complete liberal slant in academia,” said Bolling.

In the introduction to the book, Bolling describes the stage of Hillary Clinton’s inauguration, complete with prominent roles for Bernie Sanders, Al Gore and Al Sharpton, as a vision of what’s to come soon for America if the nation does not snap back to its moorings.  It’s a picture that has many of his readers terrified.

“As they’re waiting in line for the signing and they get through the introduction, they’ll be like, ‘I’m scared to death. How are we going to handle this?’  I said, ‘Don’t worry.  Just keep reading.  The book is a manual to fix it so this doesn’t have to be permanent.  It can be just a temporary phase we went through,” said Bolling.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud Mike Pence for his strong, compassionate response to a Gold Star mother critical of Donald Trump.  They also discuss Julian Assange’s revelation that Hillary Clinton’s own emails prove she lied to Congress and was sending weapons from Libya to Syrian rebels – including ISIS.  And they rip the media for savaging the mother of a Benghazi victim at the Republican convention while lauding the parents of the fallen Marine who blasted Donald Trump in Philadelphia.