Gary Johnson on The Greg Gutfeld Show: "I want to shrink the size of government."

Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson was on last night's episode of Fox News's The Greg Gutfeld Show, talking about his chances to make it into the debates. "Better than 50 percent," says the two-term former governor of New Mexico, who adds that, as president, "I want to shrink the size of government...stand up for civil liberties...and stop with the military interventions."
Take a look:

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/14/gary-johnson-on-the-greg-gutfeld-show-i

Hacked Docs Expose Soros-Obama-UN Refugee Invasion Network

Secret internal reports and memos by one of George Soros’s left-wing front groups reveals the socialist billionaire’s subversive reach within the Obama administration, the United Nations, and the governing structures European Union, especially as it relates to the manufactured refugee/migration crisis.

Among the many noteworthy points made by Soros activists in one report is the assertion that the migrant/refugee tsunami that has already swamped Europe with 1-2 million Muslim migrants should be accepted as “the new normal.” This is not surprising, but it is alarming. It is not surprising because for many years Soros and his minions have been in the vanguard of the Open Borders/Migration Lobby. It is alarming because the radical “migration rights” agenda of the Soros network is being translated into official policy, nationally and globally.

A May 12, 2016 report of the International Migration Institute (IMI), an official project of Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF), provides an important window to view the working relationships among the IMI refugee activists and their allies inside the Obama administration and the United Nations. The nine-page report, by top IMI staffers Anna Crowley and Kate Rosin, entitled “Migration Governance and Enforcement Portfolio Review,” is one of many Soros/OSF documents released this week by DCLeaks.com, which describes itself as a project “launched by the American hacktivists” who “believe U.S. citizens have the right to know how domestic and foreign policies of the United States are shaped and who the real policy maker is.”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/23893-hacked-docs-expose-soros-obama-un-refugee-invasion-network

Hacked Documents: Soros Funded Black Lives Matter

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/23896-hacked-documents-soros-funded-black-lives-matter

The Link Between Health Spending and Life Expectancy: The US is an Outlier

 It should come as no surprise that, with the most fabulously overpriced health care system in the world, it delivers notably poor outcomes in terms of measurable results, such as life expectancy. This post seeks to get a better understanding as to why. Note that the analysis omits certain issues, for instance, that there is solid evidence that suggests that more unequal societies are more unhealthy. But that would mean US results should be compared to the subset of pretty to very unequal counties, and you’d still find the same result, that high US expenditures do not translate into better results.

This short study identifies that spending on healthcare is very unequal, and intuitively seems not explainable by differences in the health of the population (and Medicaid data suggests that this intuition has merit).

So the question for reader is: what might explain this pattern? One issue, which is not discussed as often in the press as it needs to be, is that the driver of the high cost of end of life care often amounts to what Lambert calls, “Insert tube, extract rents” of sheer looting. The press will occasionally feature stories about how an aged parent goes into a hospital or other institutional setting, and despite the relatives having a medical power of attorney plus clear, legally well documented instructions that the patient does not want high cost interventions with limited life extension potential, that the medical professionals come close to or actually do threaten the family with litigation if they attempt to remove the patient or restrict care.

Another issue for patients is the way that they’ve been conditioned to believe that Something Can Be Done when they have a condition that is pretty much a permanent impairment. This is particularly common with orthopedic procedures. I see individuals in my gym that I can tell from how they discuss their surgeries that they’ve been overtreated for no or negative benefit.

Other thoughts?

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/08/the-link-between-health-spending-and-life-expectancy-the-us-is-an-outlier.html

Gary Johnson and the Rise of Libertarian Centrism

On CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine became the latest well-known Republican to flirt with the unthinkable. “I’m taking a look at the Libertarian ticket,” said the lawmaker, a veteran centrist.

That puts her in company with Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush, who earlier this summer said they were considering a vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, the former New Mexico governor. After expressing dismay at the choice of Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, Collins joined Romney in effusively praising Johnson’s running mate, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, with whom she had worked on various projects.

As with so much in 2016 politics, a pattern is beginning to emerge that might have been hard even to imagine a year ago. When libertarian candidates have made inroads in the GOP in the past, it has often been in some of the party’s rightmost precincts. But Johnson and Weld thus far have enjoyed little success (and, to be fair, shown little interest) at wooing the most conservative elected officials and pundits. While the Libertarian ticket has been drawing an entirely unprecedented 8-10 percent in national polls, little of its energy comes from the Republican base. Instead, it is making noticeable gains in the center.

In one communication after another, the Johnson-Weld campaign strikes a theme seldom associated with past libertarian campaigns in the US: moderation. It is the “sane” choice, the “responsible” and “adult” ticket, the ones happy to work with the best people and ideas from both parties, campaigning not on fear and anger but on a positive message of problem-solving. A recent Johnson video contrasts a bickering, shouty Trump and Clinton with the cool-and-collected libertarian alternative.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gary-johnson-rise-libertarian-centrism

How Safe Is Our Food Supply?

A recent survey published by the International Food Information Council found that Americans are concerned about food safety. Foodborne illness resides as the top concern of survey respondents.

These facts may sound worrying. Thankfully, they don't tell the whole story. The survey also reveals that fully two-thirds of Americans are confident in the safety of the nation's food supply.

Data support that confidence. For example, the number and severity of foodborne illnesses appears to be trending downwards in many places, including California.

Part of our confidence in our food supply no doubt stems from regulations. But rules can (and often are) imperfect, something I detail at length in my forthcoming book, Biting the Hands that Feed Us: How Fewer, Smarter Laws Would Make Our Food System More Sustainable. And, as I wrote about in a 2012 law-review article, regulations intended to make our food safer often impose new costs but fail to improve safety.

Earlier this week—keeping the above facts in mind—the FDA published final rules to clarify and update its "GRAS" classification system. The acronym "GRAS," which stands for "generally recognized as safe," refers to the status of permissible food additives.

GRAS rules have been controversial for some time. On the one hand, critics have viewed the self-policing approach favored by the rules as too heavily weighed in favor of food producers and, ergo, bad both for consumers and food safety.

http://reason.com/archives/2016/08/20/how-safe-is-our-food-supply

Judge orders Clinton to answer questions about email server

For months, Hillary Clinton had been stonewalling Judicial Watch, who wanted to depose her in their FOIA lawsuit seeking information on her emails and private server.  J.W. wanted to interview her in person and under oath.

Now a federal judge has ruled that Clinton must answer questions under oath posed by J.W., but she can do it in writing.

Fox News:

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued the order as part of a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch. The group had sought to question Clinton under oath and in person, but the judge ruled she would only have to answer questions in writing.

FBI Director James Comey announced last month that  the agency would not seek criminal charges against Clinton after an investigation into her email use, although he concluded she been "extremely careless" in her handling of sensitive material.

Judicial Watch's Director of Investigations Chris Farrell said that while they would have preferred to have Clinton answer questions in person, the decision represented a victory for the organization.

“Judicial Watch will get Clinton under oath regarding the set-up of her outlaw server – something no other person, organization or agency has been ableto do, to date," he said.

“We believe it is a victory for law and order to get Hillary Clinton under oath answering questions about the server setup and why she did it,” he said.

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said the campaign was glad that the judge had allowed Clinton to answer questions in writing.

"Judicial Watch is a right-wing organization that has been attacking the Clintons since the 1990s," Fallon said. "This is just another lawsuit intended to try to hurt Hillary Clinton's campaign, and so we are glad that the judge has accepted our offer to answer these questions in writing rather than grant Judicial Watch's request."

Judge Sullivan said Judicial Watch must submit its questions to Clinton by Oct. 14 and gave Clinton 30 days to respond -- a timetable that could push Clinton's answers past the November election unless Judicial Watch sends its questions earlier than mid-October.



http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/judge_orders_clinton_to_answer_questions_about_email_server.html

Smoke and Mirrors, the Federal Reserve and America’s Economic Recovery Myth

Federal Reserve officials have been debating another interest rate hike and its possible timing. The minutes of the latest meeting in July indicate some policymakers insist they first need more evidence on the durability of the economy’s rebound before approving an increase.
I must admit that I’m a little confused about what additional evidence they could possibly need. Do you remember former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke indicating in 2012 that interest rates would start rising when unemployment dropped below 6.5 percent? Well, according to the government, that rate now stands at 4.9 percent.
How can the economy possibly get any better when we supposedly have full employment? After all, if the economy were to improve any more, we wouldn’t have any workers to sustain growth. It looks to me like the Federal Reserve had better quickly raise interest rates just to slow down the incredible growth that we’re experiencing.
Pathetic Economic Picture
Every time I hear and read the Fed minutes, I can’t help thinking how they confirm that the economy is every bit as pathetic today as it has been for the past decade.

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/dan-celia/smoke-and-mirrors-fedearl-reserve-and-americas-economic-recovery-myth