Adam Levine ‘I hate this country’ comment after ‘The Voice’ eliminations draws outrage 

A hot microphone blunder after a night of upsets has Adam Levine eating his seemingly unpatriotic words.

Comments (163)

BY CHIDERAH MONDE / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

WEDNESDAY, MAY 29, 2013, 10:31 AM

789

146

0

Print

NBC

The Maroon 5 frontman has come under fire for stating ‘I hate this country’ under his breath, but it was picked up and broadcast live thanks to a hot microphone.

Adam Levine had a few un-patriotic words after America voted off his contestants, Judith Hill and Sarah Simmons, from "The Voice" on Tuesday night.

The Maroon 5 musician muttered "I hate this country" after two of his strong singers got the boot, but America opted to save his third — country singer Amber Carrington.

NBC

Levine, 34, received a lot of backlash for the unpatriotic words.

PHOTOS: THEY SAID WHAT?!

Though Levine, 34, was probably just fuming from his loss on the show, his statement was picked up under the hot microphone … on live television.

NBC/TYLER GOLDEN/NBC

Levine clearly had a bad night. The judge saw two of his contestants eliminated.

Almost immediately, the singer felt the wrath of angry Americans on his Twitter page.

RELATED: ADAM LEVINE SPLITS WITH MODEL GAL PAL TO DATE ANOTHER

NBC/TYLER GOLDEN/NBC

America opted to save his third contestant — country singer Amber Carrington.

Some called for the singer to be fired from his position as judge on the NBC show. Others suggested he should be deported.

A few people came to his defense — saying Levine is right because America tends to favor Blake Shelton, the country musician and judge who has enjoyed a winning streak throughout the show.

NBC

Levine took to Twitter defining a series of words like ‘joke’ and ‘misunderstand,’ perhaps in efforts to clarify he didn’t mean what he said.

RELATED: CHRISTINA AGUILERA, CEE LO GREEN TO RETURN TO ‘THE VOICE'

Instead of tweeting an apology, on Wednesday Levine posted a series of definitions of words like "joke," "humorless," and "misunderstand" — in a lighthearted attempt to clarify that his allegiance is still to the flag.

RELATED: SEE IT: ADAM LEVINE STRIPS DOWN FOR MAGAZINE SHOOT

 MOBILE USERS CLICK HERE TO WATCH

POST A COMMENT »

OTHER STORIES

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/adam-levine-hate-country-comment-fire-article-1.1357367#ixzz2Uhv3UmxX

Deadliest US tornadoes since 1900

Dozens of people are dead after a tornado hit the suburb of Moore in Oklahoma City. Here is a list of the deadliest US tornadoes since 1900:

By AP

2:23AM BST 21 May 2013

- 695 deaths. March 18, 1925, in Missouri, Illinois and Indiana.

- 216 deaths. April 5, 1936, in Tupelo, Mississippi.

- 203 deaths. April 6, 1936, in Gainesville, Georgia.

- 181 deaths. April 9, 1947, in Woodward, Oklahoma.

- 158 deaths. May 22, 2011, in Joplin, Missouri.

- 143 deaths. April 24, 1908, in Amite, Louisiana, and Purvis, Mississippi.

- 116 deaths. June 8, 1953, in Flint, Michigan.

- 114 deaths. May 11, 1953 in Waco, Texas.

- 114 deaths. May 18, 1902 in Goliad, Texas.

- 103 deaths. March 23, 1913, in Omaha, Nebraska.

Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Gallup poll confirms strong abortion opposition

58 percent said abortion should be illegal in all or most cases

By Adelaide Mena

Washington D.C., May 15, 2013 / 01:04 am (EWTN News)

More Sharing ServicesShare|Share on facebookShare on myspaceShare on googleShare on twitter

 

Protestors in front of the US Supreme Court.

Related news:

• Abortionist Gosnell sentenced to life in prison
• Gosnell conviction prompts call for abortion business scrutiny
• Abortionist Gosnell convicted of three baby murders
• Undecided on two charges, Gosnell jurors continue deliberations

A new Gallup poll released on May 10 shows that the majority of Americans oppose legal abortion in all or most circumstances, in keeping with trends over recent years.

Of those polled, 58 percent said abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. Only 26 percent supported legalized abortion under “any circumstances,” while 13 percent said it should be legal in “most circumstances.”

According to Gallup, these results “are similar to what Gallup has found for most of the past decade,” and are in line with “nearly every Gallup measure of this question since 1975.”

Conducted May 2-7, the survey also indicated that the trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell “has not swayed public opinion” on the legality of abortion. Gosnell was recently charged with the deaths of a woman and several live babies who were killed after surviving abortions in his clinic.

Part of the reason for the trial’s lack of impact, Gallup speculated, “could be that relatively few Americans are paying attention to it.” 

Only one-quarter of those surveyed had followed the story very closely or somewhat closely, “well below the 61 percent average level of attention Americans have paid to the more than 200 news stories Gallup has measured since 1991.”

More than 50 percent of respondents said that they have not followed the story at all, and an additional 20 percent said that they had followed it “not too closely,” making “the Gosnell case one of the least followed news stories Gallup has measured.”

Gallup stated that it “is not clear from the data whether Americans' relatively low attention to the Gosnell case reflects a lack of interest in it, or a lack of coverage by the mainstream media.” Recent weeks have seen an outpouring of criticism over a media “blackout” of the trial.

Of those who are following the case, 46 percent said that the media had not devoted enough coverage to the story, while just 27 percent said the media had given the proper amount of attention to it.

Gallup stated that this imbalance may be partly due to the “heavy representation of pro-life respondents among those who were asked the question.” Individuals who identified themselves as “pro-life” were more likely to have followed the case than other Americans.

The research organization also remarked that it is not clear from the data whether or not “views would shift if more Americans become familiar with the case,” though it “will be evident if the eventual verdict sparks a major expansion of news coverage.”

On May 13, three days after the results of the Gallup survey were released, Gosnell was found guilty on three charges of first-degree murder, as well as involuntary manslaughter for the death of a woman who underwent an abortion at his clinic and a host of other charges.

The following day, he accepted a sentence of life in prison, reaching a deal with the district attorney’s office to avoid the death penalty by choosing to forego an appeal.

Read more: http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=7663#ixzz2TMcCah7E

The crucifixion of Jason Richwine

By Michelle Malkin  •  May 9, 2013 05:54 PM

The crucifixion of Jason Richwine
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2013

How low will supporters of the Gang of Eight immigration bill go to get their way? This low: They’ve shamelessly branded an accomplished, Ivy League-trained quantitative analyst a “racist” and will stop at nothing to destroy his career as they pave their legislative path to another massive illegal alien benefits bonanza.

Jason Richwine works for the conservative Heritage Foundation. He’s a Harvard University Ph.D. who co-authored a study that pegs the cost of the Ted Kennedy Memorial Open Borders Act 2.0 legislation at $6.3 trillion. Lead author Robert Rector is senior research fellow at Heritage, a former Office of Personnel Management analyst, and the intellectual godfather of welfare reform. He holds a master’s degree in political science from Johns Hopkins University.

Both Democrats and Republicans leaped to discredit the 102-page report without bothering to read it. The Washington Post falsely claimed the study did not take into account increased revenues from amnestied illegal alien workers. It did. Haley Barbour immediately proclaimed that the Heritage assessment of government costs incurred by amnestied illegal aliens was “not serious.”

They want to talk gravitas? Let’s talk gravitas. Blowhard Barbour is a career politician and paid lobbyist for the government of Mexico who has carried water for open borders since the Bush years. Richwine received his doctorate in public policy in 2009 from Harvard University’s prestigious Kennedy School of Government. He holds bachelor’s degrees in mathematics and political science from American University. Before joining Heritage in 2010, he worked at the American Enterprise Institute on a dissertation fellowship.

Richwine’s 166-page dissertation, “IQ and Immigration Policy,” is now being used to smear him – and by extension, all of Heritage’s scholarship – as “racist.” While the punditocracy and political establishment sanctimoniously call for “honest discussions” on race, they rush to crush bona fide, dispassionate academic inquiries into the controversial subjects of intelligence, racial and ethnic differences, and domestic policy.

Richwine’s entire thesis, “IQ and Immigration Policy,” is now online here. Part One reviews the science of IQ. Part Two delves into empirical research comparing IQs of the native-born American population with that of immigrant groups, with the Hispanic population broken out. Richwine explores the causes of an immigrant IQ deficit that appears to persist among Hispanic immigrants to the U.S. through several generations.

The thesis analyzes social policy consequences of these findings and uses a model of the labor market “to show how immigrant IQ affects the economic surplus accruing to natives and the wage impact on low-skill natives.”

The smug dismissal of Richwine’s credentials and scholarship is to be expected by liberal hacks and clown operatives. But a reckless and cowardly pile-up of knee-jerk dilettantes on the Right — including former McCain campaign co-chair Ana Navarro and conservative Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin – have joined the character assassins of the Soros-sphere, MSNBC, and Mother Jones in deeming Richwine a “racist.” The drooling attack dogs of far Left blog Daily Kos have now launched a pressure campaign against the JFK School demanding to know“why the school awarded Richwine a PhD and what they plan to do in the future to prevent it from happening again.”

No researcher or academic institution is safe if this smear campaign succeeds. Richwine’s dissertation committee at Harvard included George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy. The Cuban-born scholar received his PhD in economics from Columbia. He is an award-winning labor economist, National Bureau of Economic Research research associate, and author of countless books, including a widely used labor economics textbook now in its sixth edition.

Richard J. Zeckhauser, the Frank P. Ramsey Professor of Political Economy at JFK, also signed off on Richwine’s dissertation. Zeckhauser earned a PhD in economics from Harvard. He belongs to the Econometric Society, the American Academy of Sciences, and the Institute of Medicine (National Academy of Sciences).

The final member of the committee that approved Richwine’s “racist” thesis isChristopher Jencks, the Malcolm Wiener Professor of Social Policy at Harvard’s JFK School. He is a renowned left-wing academic who has taught at Harvard, Northwestern, the University of Chicago, and the University of California, Santa Barbara. He edited the liberal New Republic magazine in the 1960s and has written several scholarly books tackling poverty, economic inequality, affirmative action, welfare reform, and yes, racial differences (The Black White Test Score Gap).

The willingness of Republican Gang of 8’ers to allow a young conservative researcher and married father of two to be strung up by the p.c. lynch mob for the crime of unflinching social science research is chilling, sickening, and suicidal.

These are serious people doing serious work. The crucifiers of Jason Richwine pretend to defend sound science. But if it is now inherently racist to study racial and ethnic differences among demographic groups, then it’s time to shut down every social sciences department in the country.

REVEALING NEW STATISTICS SEEM TO DEBUNK KEY CLAIM MADE BY GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES

May. 7, 2013 4:29pm Jason Howerton

• 112
• 383
• 1
• 0
• 29

Credit: AFP/Getty Images

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Gun homicides have dropped steeply in the United States since their peak in 1993, a pair of reports released Tuesday showed, adding fuel to Congress’ battle over whether to tighten restrictions on firearms. The findings throw cold water on one of the main arguments made by gun control advocates, that more firearms regulations are needed because gun violence is spiraling out of control.

A study released Tuesday by the government’s Bureau of Justice Statistics found that gun-related homicides dropped from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011. That’s a 39 percent reduction.

Another report by the private Pew Research Center found a similar decline by looking at the rate of gun homicides, which compares the number of killings to the size of the country’s population. It found that the number of gun homicides per 100,000 people fell from 7 in 1993 to 3.6 in 2010, a drop of 49 percent.

Both reports also found the rate of non-fatal crimes involving guns was also down by around 70 percent over that period.

But perhaps because of the intense publicity generated by recent mass shootings such as the December massacre of 20 school children and six educators in Newtown, Conn., the public seems to have largely not noticed the reductions in gun violence, the Pew study shows.

The non-partisan group said a poll it conducted in March showed that 56 percent of people believe the number of gun crimes is higher than it was two decades ago. Only 12 percent said they think the number of gun crimes is lower, while the rest said they think it remained the same or didn’t know.

First Lady Michelle Obama. Credit: AFP/Getty Images

That may have something to do with the dramatic anti-gun rhetoric coming from anti-gun advocates. First Lady Michelle Obama last week told students at a Chicago high school that kids across the nation “wake up and wonder whether they’re going to make it out of school alive” because of guns.

In March, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC that so-called “assault weapons” wereclaiming the lives of “millions of kids.” Of course the statement is incorrect, but it was such an inaccurate statement it boggles the mind how he came up with that figure.

In 2011, the total number of gun homicides in the U.S. was 8,583. Using the 2011 total gun-related murder rate, it would take more than 116 years for one million people to be killed by a firearm.

These are just a few of the many example when gun control advocates have resorted to baseless emotional arguments to demonize guns and exaggerate the effect of gun violence. Now, 8,583 gun murders every year is 8,583 too many. However, we can’t have an honest debate about gun violence if we aren’t holding to the truth.

The trend in firearm-related homicides is part of a broad nationwide decline in violent crime over past two decades, including incidents not involving firearms.

But handguns play a major role in violent crime. The Justice study said that in 2011, about 70 percent of all homicides were committed with a firearm, mainly a handgun.

The data was released three weeks after the Senate rejected an effort by gun control supporters to broaden the requirement for federal background checks for more firearms purchases. Senate Democratic leaders have pledged to hold that vote again, and gun control advocates have been raising public pressure on senators who voted “no” in hopes they will change their minds.

Gun rights advocates have argued that people are safer when they are allowed to own and carry guns. Those supporting gun control say that with more background checks, gun violence would drop because more criminals and mentally unstable people would be prevented from getting weapons.

TheBlaze on Tuesday reported on some interesting FBI statistics that revealed California had the most gun murders in 2011 and a high gun murder rate, despite being named the state with the strongest gun control laws by the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence that same year.

Additionally, Washington, D.C., another state with strong gun regulations, topped the 201 list for total gun murder rate with 12 homicides per 100,000 people.