Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2012 and an abortion opponent, said Thursday that anti-abortion activists should try to build a broad coalition and find common ground with supporters of abortion rights as a way to advance their agenda.
Ryan, R-Wis., said in a speech to the Susan B. Anthony List that those who oppose abortion “need to work with people who consider themselves pro-choice — because our task isn’t to purge our ranks. It’s to grow them.”
“We don’t want a country where abortion is simply outlawed. We want a country where it isn’t even considered,” he said.
Ryan told the organization that seeks to elect women who oppose abortion rights that “labels can be misleading.” He pointed to former GOP Sen. Scott Brown, whose 2010 election in Massachusetts nearly derailed President Barack Obama’s health care law. Brown supports abortion rights. In contrast, Ryan told the group that former Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who opposed abortion, “delivered the votes that passed it into law.”
Many opponents of abortion disagreed with the health care overhaul because it requires most employers to cover birth control free of charge to female workers as a preventative service. The law exempted churches and other houses of worship.
Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2012 and an abortion opponent, said Thursday that anti-abortion activists should try to build a broad coalition and find common ground with supporters of abortion rights as a way to advance their agenda.
WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2012 and an abortion opponent, said Thursday that anti-abortion activists should try to build a broad coalition and find common ground with supporters of abortion rights as a way to advance their agenda.
Ryan, R-Wis., said in a speech to the Susan B. Anthony List that those who oppose abortion “need to work with people who consider themselves pro-choice – because our task isn’t to purge our ranks. It’s to grow them.”
WASHINGTON — Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said Wednesday that Republicans face long odds in connecting with black voters and are often cast as unsympathetic to the needs of blacks and minorities — something he says the party needs to change.
Paul, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said in a speech at Howard University that the Republican party was rooted in the presidency of Abraham Lincoln and efforts to rid the South of oppressive Jim Crow laws. He expressed hope that black voters would be more open to Republicans, pointing to policies promoting school choice, economic opportunity and the decriminalization of drug laws.
“Republicans face a daunting task. Several generations of black voters have never voted Republican and are not very open to considering the option,” Paul said. By speaking at Howard, Paul said he hoped students would “hear me out — that you will see me for who I am, not the caricature sometimes presented by political opponents.”
Paul’s speech to black students and faculty members at the historically black university was emblematic of Republicans’ efforts to attract a broader swath of voters following President Barack Obama’s re-election. Obama, the nation’s first black president, received more than 9 in 10 votes from blacks in 2008 and 2012 and strong support among Latinos, prompting Republicans to discuss ways of broadening their outreach to minorities.
The Kentucky senator, an eye doctor and son of libertarian-leaning former Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, was briefly interrupted during his speech by a young man who unfurled a banner that said the university does not support “white supremacy.” The man was removed from the auditorium.
Acacia Subsidiary Partners with Major Technology Company for Patent Portfolio Covering Microprocessor and Memory Technology
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Acacia Research Corporation (NAS: ACTG) announced today that a subsidiary has acquired over 40 issued patents relating to microprocessor and memory technology and will share licensing revenue with the patent owner.
“As our licensing success grows, an increasing number of major technology companies are selecting us as their partner for the licensing of their patented technologies,” commented Paul Ryan, Acacia CEO. “Acacia is rapidly becoming the leader in technology licensing and we continue to grow our base of future revenues by adding new patent portfolios,” concluded Mr. Ryan.
ACACIA RESEARCH CORPORATION
Acacia Research Corporation‘s subsidiaries partner with inventors and patent owners, license the patents to corporate users, and share the revenue. Acacia Research Corporation‘s subsidiaries control 250 patent portfolios, covering technologies used in a wide variety of industries.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.These statements including those of Paul Ryan relating to our licensing success, the number of major technology companies selecting us as their partner, and the growth of our base of future revenues are based upon our current expectations and speak only as of the date hereof.Our ability to become the licensing partner for companies, and our ability to grow our base of future revenues by adding new patent portfolios may differ materially and adversely from that expressed in any forward-looking statements as a result of various factors and uncertainties, including the economic slowdown affecting technology companies, theability to successfully develop licensing programs and attract new business, rapid technological change in relevantmarkets, changes in demand for current and future intellectual property rights, legislative, regulatory and competitive developments addressing licensing and enforcement of patents and/or intellectual property in general, and general economic conditions.Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, recent and forthcoming Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, …read more
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan earned the dubious distinction of garnering just 27 percent of the Latino vote in 2012. This dismal showing not only assured their defeat, but implied GOP difficulties for years to come: Hispanics are the nation’s fastest-growing minority.
After I watched what might have been the last hope for a gasping America collapse last election eve, I knew that my worst fears for this nation had been realized: Mob rule had ultimately been established via the voting booth. A league of mindless dummies, who feed on media pablum the way cattle do at a trough, had been taken out of storage and mobilized long enough to reinstall the media’s chosen candidate. Obama floated back into office resting on a sea of false laurels, empty promises and promotion generated from amongst the highest priests of Hollywood’s most popular puppets. That and shamelessly obvious ballot rigging put the serious hurt on any opportunity for conservatism and reason to find an equal voice outside the ranks of its own.
But what followed the next morning was even more appalling. I began to hear ‘Republicans’ actually ridiculing Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for what they had represented. Since the two had lost, people who had just the day before been ardent supporters were now distancing themselves from the two lepers who stood to infect them politically. I was amazed at the shallowness of such fair-weather ‘team members.’ But I was even more amazed when the GOP began issuing apologies to liberal America for having so excluded the ‘valuable and noteworthy’ priorities of so many progressive thinkers who want socialized pampering, gay marriage and drive-through abortions. Incredibly, with hat in hand, the Republican Party genuflected before a pack of dogs in trying to secure some future opportunity to garner their affection (votes). It was shameful and downright weird. It was the beginning of the manifestation of the crowd of impostors we now call ‘RINOs’ (Republicans in Name Only).
But their actions had nothing to do with the real ‘Grand Old Party.’ No, it is becoming nauseatingly clear that their compromise is wholly unrelated to a regard for the welfare of our nation or any preservation of its sanity. It is entirely about a group of selfish men and women who are looking to make the world safe for themselves with job security in a climate of trendy electability. To call these people ‘politicians’ insults even the legacies of ‘Boss Tweed,’ Huey Long, Rahm Emanuel and PT Barnum. But they have done us a favor by showing us their true colors. “When a man shows you what he is, believe him.”
Of course I voted for Romney and Ryan – but, for the life of me, I could not understand how in the world we expected to win with those two AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME IN HISTORY. Make no mistake about it, I totally admire the qualities of both men and believe that their clear vision for the needs of our dying country would have been the healing elixir that we absolutely needed. Nevertheless, my most rudimentary marketing sense made me wonder why we would run the 1967 version of Batman and Robin against Obama. The ‘cool’ Barach was already expertly dialed in to the throngs of …read more Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism
The New York Times told its readers on March 12 that Paul Ryan’s proposed 2014 budget involves “eliminating Medicare’s guarantee to retirees” and “dispensing with Medicaid and food stamps….” But Joe Farah, CEO of WND News, told his readers on March 15 that Ryan’s budget “fails to address unsustainable ‘entitlement’ programs.” They cannot both be right. But they can both be grievously wrong. …read more Source: FULL ARTICLE at Forbes Latest
J. Scott Applewhite/AP The budget passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday, crafted by Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., differs significantly from the one being debated in the Senate.
WASHINGTON — The Republican-controlled House passed a tea party-flavored budget plan Thursday that promises sharp cuts in safety-net programs for the poor and a clampdown on domestic agencies, in sharp contrast to less austere plans favored by President Barack Obama and his Democratic allies.
The measure, similar to previous plans offered by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., demonstrates that it’s possible, at least mathematically, to balance the budget within a decade without raising taxes.
But its deep cuts to programs for the poor like Medicaid and food stamps and its promise to abolish so-called “Obamacare” are nonstarters with the president, who won re-election while campaigning against Ryan’s prior budgets. It passed on a mostly party-line 221-207 vote.
The House measure advanced as the Democratic Senate debated its first budget since the 2009 plan that helped Obama pass his health care law.
The dueling House and Senate budget plans are anchored on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum in Washington, appealing to core partisans in the warring parties that are gridlocked over persistent budget deficits. Obama is exploring the chances of forging a middle path that blends new taxes and modest curbs to government benefit programs.
“The president has an opportunity during this critical debate to come forward and to help make this part of his legacy, like it has become part of the Clinton legacy: working together on behalf of the American people to solve what we know is a crisis in our country,” said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. He was referring to President Bill Clinton‘s success in working with a GOP Congress to generate budget surpluses over 1998-2001. “We can’t continue to spend money that we don’t have,” Boehner said.
The sharp contrast over the 2014 budget and beyond came as the House cleared away last year’s unfinished budget business — a sweeping, government-wide funding bill to keep Cabinet agencies running through the 2013 budget year, which ends Sept. 30.
The House passed the bipartisan 2013 measure by a sweeping 318-109 vote. The Senate had approved the measure on Wednesday after easing cuts that threatened intermittent closures of meat packing plants starting this summer and reviving college tuition grants for active-duty members of the military. The cuts were mandated by automatic spending cuts that took effect at the beginning of the month.
Looking to the future, Democrats and Republicans staked out divergent positions over what to do about spiraling federal health care costs and whether to raise taxes to rein in still-steep government deficits.
Carolyn Kaster/APThe long-term plan GOP budget plan, put forth by Paul Ryan, R-Wis., offers slashing cuts to domestic agencies, Medicaid and health-care plan subsidies while exempting the Pentagon and Social Security beneficiaries.
By ANDREW TAYLOR
WASHINGTON — A familiar budget plan to sharply cut safety-net programs for the poor and clamp down on domestic agencies performing the nuts-and-bolts programs of the government is cruising to passage in the tea party-flavored House.
The Republican measure is advancing to the finish line in the House as the Senate starts a lengthy slog toward passage of a rival budget measure. It takes a sharply different view, restoring automatic cuts to agency budgets and increasing taxes by $1 trillion over the coming decade.
The dueling budget plans are anchored on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum in Washington, appealing to core partisans in the warring parties gridlocked over persistent budget deficits. President Barack Obama is exploring the chances of forging a middle path that blends new taxes and modest curbs to governmentbenefits programs.
The sharp contrast over the 2014 budget and beyond came as the House is positioned to clear unfinished budget business — a sweeping, government-wide funding bill to keep Cabinet agencies running through the 2013 budget year, which ends Sept. 30.
The Senate passed the bipartisan 2013 measure by a sweeping 73-26 vote Wednesday after easing cuts that threatened intermittent closures of meat packing plants starting this summer and reviving college tuition grants for active-duty members of the military. The cuts were mandated by automatic spending cuts that took effect at the beginning of the month.
Looking to the future, Democrats and Republicans staked out divergent positions over what to do about spiraling federal health care costs and whether to raise taxes to rein in still-steep government deficits.
The long-term GOP budget plan, authored by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., offers slashing cuts to domestic agencies, the Medicaid health care plan for the poor and “Obamacare” subsidies while exempting the Pentagon and Social Security beneficiaries. The measure proposes shifting programs like Medicaid to the states but is sometimes scant on details about the very cuts it promises.
The Ryan measure revives a controversial plan to turn the Medicare programs for the elderly into a voucher-like system — for future beneficiaries born in 1959 or later — into a program in which the government subsidizes the purchase of health insurance instead of directly paying hospital and doctor bills. Critics say the idea would mean ever-spiraling out-of-pocket costs for care, but Ryan insists the plan would inject competition into a broken system.
The cuts to domestic agencies like the FBI, Border Patrol and National Institutes of Health could approach 20 percent when compared with levels agreed to as part of a hard-fought budget deal from the summer …read more Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance
Alex Wagner and guest Douglas Holtz-Eakin had a testy conversation about the budget on Wagner’s show on Tuesday.
Holtz-Eakin, the former director of the Congressional Budget Office and economist on President George H.W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers, defended the Paul Ryan budget while criticizing the Murray budget supported by the Democrats. He clashed with Wagner several times during the panel’s discussion.
He said he disagreed with Wagner’s assertion that the Democrats’ proposal provided both spending cuts and revenue. “My disagreement with folks like you, who are desperately wrong on the issue, is that — did I say that right?” he asked.
During the 2012 Presidential Campaign, Paul Ryan seemed to be a bright light at the end of the black fiscal tunnel. I rejoiced in his in-your-face attitude regarding unbridled government spending due to the lack of a balanced budget. However, since the campaign, I’ve studied the government’s budgeting process and am now concerned that Representative Ryan may not be as righteous as I first believed him to be.
My studies revealed that in 1974, the US Congress enacted the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Following the implementation of the Act, federal budget deficits and the national debt began to rapidly increase. I researched the Act and analyzed the subsequent historical budgets, deficits, and increases in debt – and I discovered an unbelievable fact. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 established a federal budget process designed to automatically increase spending without any consideration of the available revenue (income).
For clarification, I discovered that the federal budget process as established by The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is based on setting this year’s federal spending level equal to what was actually spent last year after adding suitable increases for inflation and population growth. Therefore, because revenue has no part in the budgeting process, the spending will always be higher than last year (even if the budget is balanced). So it appears that the expectation that balancing the federal budget will eliminate the deficit and stop the rise in national debt is false – and that Representative Ryan’s current “balanced budget” proposal may in truth be a diversion from the real objective – a zero deficit.
Therefore, I challenge Representative Ryan to clarify his budget. Does it balance against revenue (in other words, does it immediately stop government growth and money borrowing/printing?) If the answer is no, Representative Ryan’s balanced budget is a fiscal red herring that the conservative base will view as an act of fiscal infidelity.
Rep. Paul Ryan issued an urgent call to conservatives Friday to bridle the debt and head off a crisis he described as a looming “moral failure,” defending the budget he introduced earlier this week from a barrage of Democratic attacks.
How was it possible that Scott Walker was able to beat back so many challenges and build his reputation as a “union killer” in a state like Wisconsin, yet Mitt Romney still lost there, even with a popular Paul Ryan as his running mate? It happened because while the Democrats in Wisconsin and other states are turning on each other, they will stop fighting long enough to re-elect Democrat Barack Obama. This political reality has developed because the rank and file Democrats, who are being forced to work harder to fund the pensions of their “union brothers and sisters” have said “Enough!” They don’t care about Democrat union members now that THEY have learned THEY are funding the pay and benefits packages they THOUGHT were paid for with money picked off a tree (some Democrats are THAT dumb).
This phenomenon is now taking shape in California. The current epicenter of the showdown between the makers and the takers is in San Diego, where voters last year supported reforms (read: reductions) of civil servants’ pension benefits. This, of course, has angered union members.
The cost of paying for the cushy retirements of these people has quintupled over the last dozen years; and at long last, the suckers don’t want to fund them anymore.
Naturally, the unions are fighting back. They’re claiming a lack of “go faith” on the part of the suckers in San Diego. The union thugs actually believe THEY have the power of “yes or no” in this matter. Why shouldn’t they feel this way? After all, the unions own California, and the suckers work FOR them.
The San Diego City Attorney Jan Goldsmith, who can count voters, has come out fighting on this issue saying “We’re not gonna back down one iota, I can tell you that; Because the people do have a right under direct democracy to bypass the city council, to bypass the state legislature, to bypass the labor unions, and to bypass PERB. This is a constitutional right, no different than the first amendment.”
Based on what has happened around the state when other suckers have revolted, Goldsmith looks to be on the winning side. Other local governments are fighting their unions and winning. Surprisingly, even Governor Jerry Brown has joined the fight against the unions in spite of his having been a prime mover in creating this pension mess when he was governor the first time between 1975 and 1983.
What will come of this? Who knows? But any trouble in our enemy’s tent is a good thing.
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio managed to overcome pontifical opposition and was elected pope with a filibuster-proof supermajority. Vice President Biden will lead the U.S.’s delegation to Pope Francis’ first mass and will, presumably, be the first person on Earth to call the holy father “Pope Frank” to his face. And back in the States, the American economy finally recovered after one House Republican used a meeting with President Obama to ask why he canceled White House tours. This is HUFFPOST HILL for Wednesday, March 13th, 2013:
OBAMA MEETS WITH GOP HOUSE CONFERENCE, SOLVES ALL OUR PROBLEMS – Politico: “President Barack Obama tangled with House Republicans for more than an hour Wednesday, answering questions on topics ranging from whether the White House spends too much time campaigning to how serious the administration is about slashing the nation’s deficit. Republicans focused on political issues — quizzing Obama on why his White House stopped giving tours after the sequester took effect. But the House GOP also delved into policy, where Republicans heard Obama say he doesn’t want to balance the budget in 10 years. That’s the challenge issued by Rep. Paul Ryan in the GOP budget unveiled on Tuesday… [Rep. Candice Miller] also asked why the the White House decided to suspend White House tours, citing the sequester. Why not cancel the White House-Congressional picnic, as well? Obama, according to a source in the room, said the decision to suspend the tours was made by the Secret Service. The president said that the Secret Service would have had to furlough more people in order to keep the tours going…Obama said he would not tweak entitlements without more taxes. Ways and Means chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) praised Obama for supporting ‘Medicare capping for high net worth people’ and ‘chain CPI on Social Security.'” [Politico]
Obama when he walked out of the meeting: “It was good. It was useful. I enjoyed it.” Sure you did.
Even before the most recent election, TransCanada‘s Keystone XL pipeline was a contentious issue. On one side, environmentalists fear that a pipeline running through the heart of our country could lead to a disastrous incident of spilled crude from Canadian oil sands. Countering that argument are those that say it would tremendously benefit the entire nation. Rep. Paul Ryan clearly falls on the latter side of this debate.
In addition, he supports an open season on federally owned land. In his plan, this will add trillions of dollars to U.S. GDP over the next 30 years. The Department of the Interior will be getting a head start on this soon in the Gulf of Mexico. Look for the likes of Hercules Offshore , Seadrill and Transocean to benefit.
The following video offers key data points which Rep. Ryan uses to support his budget plans. This discussion is far from over, so understanding both sides is critical for informed debate.
If you’re an energy investor looking for exciting opportunities, then you should look into one of the more intriguing plays in the space: Seadrill. To learn more about the strengths and weaknesses of this company, as well as what to expect from Seadrill going forward, be sure to check out this brand-new premium report put together by one of our top Stock Advisor analysts. Click here to get started.
var FoolAnalyticsData = FoolAnalyticsData || []; FoolAnalyticsData.push({ eventType: “TickerReportPitch”, contentByline: “Taylor Muckerman and Joel South“, contentId: “cms.23661”, contentTickers: “NYSE:RIG, NYSE:TRP, NASDAQ:HERO, NYSE:SDRL”, contentTitle: “Rep. Paul Ryan‘s Plan for Keystone XL and Federal Land“, …read more Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance
Sen. 
