Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Ted Cruz and the shutdown caucus

are you ready for this young gun Cruz is re writing the dictionary to lessen the impact of his rhetoric.

Who’s afraid of a government shutdown? Not Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.
“There are some Democrats, some in the media and some Republicans who portray a shutdown as a horrible calamity. I think the term ‘shutdown’ is a misnomer,” Cruz said Tuesday during a luncheon with conservative activists and bloggers at the Heritage Foundation. “It’s actually a partial, temporary shutdown. We have seen them before.”
These “partial, temporary” shutdowns, Cruz argued, happen “every single week on the weekend. Saturdays and Sundays we see temporary partial government shutdowns, and the world doesn’t end.”
he equating what he wants to do to DMV closed on Sunday who's zoomin' who?  he call it 40 hr. work week here in America.
A shutdown could even help conservative causes, Cruz added, pointing to balanced federal budgets that occurred after two shutdowns under former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
So, no big deal, right? Three cheers for shutdowns! Well, not everyone would agree, and that includes plenty of Republicans.
“We’ve been down that road,” Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Friday. “We got our butts kicked over shutting down the government.”
he's n that corner with the headlight in his eyes, and is now forced to try and lie his way out in his head.  it is a big deal and he just dropped the elephant dung in the front room.  i've said before he is going to flame out leaving a chard corpse of right wing arrogance, he's making more enemies than the entire party, T-Per's like their darlings to follow the yellow brick road and not go farther than they have already alienating everybody, is he in line for a primary outing?

George Zimmerman Speeding, Pulled Over With Gun In Car

all the syrupy testimony praising Georgie boy, wonder what they are thinking now that they have testafied to his boy next door personality?
Article PhotoLess than a month after being acquitted of second-degree murder charges related to his killing of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman was reportedly caught speeding Wednesday, with a gun in the glove compartment of his vehicle.The incident took place in the town of Forney, Tex., TMZ reports.
Zimmerman, who informed police that the weapon was in the car shortly after being pulled over, was asked where he was going, to which he responded, "nowhere in particular," according to the site.
CBS News reports that, during the traffic stop, which occurred at 12:54 p.m., Zimmerman also asked the officer if he recognized him from television.
Texas was he looking for Perry's N----RHEAD RANCH in order to do more hunting?
is he trying to provoke something, in court he was afraid all during trial he feared retribution, now he's out crusin like he's on the Vegas strip, or LA's sunset strip, he is highly recognizable so what is he really after another notch, he could get that in Sandford with impunity.  but it sure looks like he's got a death wish one way or another.

Victory: Federal Courts Strike Down Three Anti-Immigrant Laws In One Week

Article PhotoImmigrants living in Farmers Branch, TXSouth Carolina, andHazleton, PA can breathe a sigh of relief now that states and localities were mandated to scale back on immigration enforcement last week. In three separate decisions, federal appeals courts struck down ordinances that effectively criminalize mere presence in the United States by prohibiting landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants.
The rulings across three states that invalidate intolerant provisions are a warning signal to other localities hoping to take federal immigration enforcement into their own hands. 
In the last of the three decisions last week, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled, “We again conclude that both the employment and housing provisions of the Hazleton ordinances are pre-empted by federal immigration law.” All three decisions cite to the federal court 2012 ruling striking down Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, and suggest that the Supreme Court’s reasoning would apply equally to rental bans. But earlier this month, one other federal appeals court upheld a similar Nebraska provision, setting up the question for possible Supreme Court review.
the courts are driving me crazy one day good law the next day the racist win then back again are they trying to please everybody? those who lose threaten to disobey the law i think posturing and then submitting like they've done with everyone of Pres.s bills they buck then run find a camera and parade what "THEY" got from government, those states must live on a giant egg shell never knowing what?
Hazleton was the site of the controversial 2006 Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which would have penalized businesses that hire undocumented immigrants and fine landlords for renting to them. The anti-immigrant ordinances ushered through by one-time Hazleton mayor Lou Barletta (R) was reviewed, upheld, and sent back for reconsideration by a series of court decisions in 2007, 2010, and 2012.
Notably, Barletta, now a Congressman, remained steadfastly unapologetic about Hazleton’s ordinances in an op-ed in the Washington Times on Monday.
they really are unapologetic unless they are caught lying about their pants being around their ankles, or soe totally anal utterance that puts another nail in the 2016 coffin, and they are now spreading this one good chance to take senate and hold congress.
do they really not know all they have done is wrong and UnAmerican?

VIDEO: Paul Ryan Wants Boehner To Bring Immigration Reform To A Vote Even If Most GOPers Don't Support It

remember smilin' faces,

Article PhotoRACINE, Wisconsin — Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) made a little-noticed pronouncement at a town hall Friday that could have major implications for the prospects of immigration reform passing the House of Representatives.
Comprehensive immigration reform passed the Senate in June, but its prospects have remained uncertain in the Republican-controlled House. 
That’s because reform opponents like Rep. Steve King (R-IA) are pressuring GOP leadership only to bring forth an immigration package that is supported by a majority of Republicans, a move known as the Hastert Rule. Doing so, however, would likely preclude a pathway to citizenship from becoming law because, although a pathway almost certainly has majority support in the House at large, most Republicans oppose it. 
Bringing it to a floor vote, therefore, would violate the Hastert Rule.
this tells us the real deal you would think that if they were interested in gathering Hispanic vote they would do thinks conducive to attaining that goal, but we are not dealing with logic here.  
they will not vote on it unless it's supported by the majority of republicans which would surly kill it, so they are using that as an excuse not to bring it to vote to hide the fact they don't want to fatten up any more progressive voters.
QUESTIONER: One of the biggest frustrations we're seeing right now is hearing Speaker Boehner, that he's going to follow the Hastert Rule. That he's not going to bring any of these bills forward unless they have a majority support of the majority party. What's your position, should you maintain that?
RYAN: [...] Bringing these bills to the floor, we'll find out. It is not, "they don't come to the floor unless we have a majority of the majority," because we don't know if we have a majority until we vote on it. So here's where I see things going. I've spoken to John Boehner as recently as three days ago about this, which is, we all agree it is better to legislate in stages instead of one big thousand plus page bill that no one has read. [...] I'm trying to get to a consensus so a majority of us do support those component parts. I believe that's achievable because when people really look at the details and they focus on what's right, I believe what I've just laid out is something that a consensus of Republicans and Democrats can agree to.
does this sound like anything remotely favoring governing and passing bill, only if you know you can defeat it if it's progressive or pass it if i belongs to them, c'mon this is one of many reasons not to vote them back in it's clear they are engaged in a game of chess and they are playing Chinese checkers, you get held back until they get their way, nothing changed still them not you, remedy Nov. 3rd, 2014,  it also shows dissension within their ranks  and no plan, 
what do you really want, take a stroll through your mind, mark Nov. 3rd on your calender or earlier if you vote like that but vote.

MSNBC's Chris Hayes DESTROYS Bill O'Reilly's Racist Portrayal Of 'Black Violence'

Article PhotoIt is ironic that just after Bill O’Reilly and Don Lemon generalized and castigated the black community for violence and bad behavior without the proper socioeconomic narrative that a riot erupted in Huntington Beach California. What is more ironic is that THE Taiwanese Animators behind the infamous Tiger Woods animation, caricatured the riot as a ‘white riot’.  Within the animation they had the statement “A wave of violence hit Huntington Beach Sunday night at the end of the Vans U.S. Open Surfing reminding us that whites can riot too.” The not too subtle message from foreigner’s looking in is evident.
Don Bon, a commenter on the YouTube video had an interesting tidbit. He said, “I like how there’s no racial slurs when it’s whites rioting. If it was black rioters, the comments would be full of them.” Many believe a double standard in coverage and in persecution of bad acts skews both perception and statistics that have provided cover for Bill O’Reilly and Don Lemon to provide a certain level of skewed truths with a flawed narrative.
Tonight Chris Hayes had a segment intended to be a joke that castigated white violence and behavior as is similarly done when minority youth are involved. It was based on a piece written by Cord Jefferson at titled “Video of Violent, Rioting Surfers Shows White Culture of Lawlessness” . In the article Cord writes,
Many people don’t want to hear this kind of tough love, of course. They’d like to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that all white children are as sweet and harmless as Taylor Swift. But the reality is that the statistics tell a different story. For instance, according to research from the Department of Justice, 84 percent of white murder victims are killed by other white people [PDF]. Similarly, white rape victims tend to beraped by other whites [PDF]. White-on-white violence is a menace to white communities across the country, and yet you never hear white leaders like Pastor Joel Osteen, Bill O’Reilly, or Hillary Clinton take a firm stance against the scourge.[source]
O'Reilly needs to wrap is neck, it's still drippin', sounds a lot like he's telling the young Whites that they are doing no evil they are entitled, that's the difference between the young White and Black kids one do what they do for several reasons none which i would say are because they feel entitled. 
Chris Hayes commentary immediately after the segment said the following.
If you watched that segment and thought that’s an absolutely ridiculous premise and an absolutely terrible way to talk about millions of people who share nothing, nothing except their general broad pigmentation, you are correct. And remember that the next time you hear those same arguments but with a different word in the place of the word white.
Chris appeal for empathy is commendable. Cord Jefferson congruent language comparison is also commendable. They are both, just like O’Reilly and Lemon, not expanding on a narrative that is necessary to solve the problem. There is a problem with violence.
There is a systemic class and race problem. An economic system is marginalizing many leaving them without hope and outlet. Violence is generally an outcome of that irrespective of race. Minorities are disproportionately jailed or given harsher sentencing by the justice system, which has a direct effect on that family’s economy. Minorities still face discrimination in hiring whether for the job proper or wages. This furthers the generational down spiral.
only when we can get the words out of our mouths then go into a listening mode respectively will we begin to enter into that which has been made the bogeyman of discourse, i think those who are afraid to and deny it are more less inclined to face up and take a stroll through their minds, you might be surprised aywhat you might find or you can keep the status qou and dance and hum along, reality one gets you started the other stalls.

Pa. Governor Tom Corbett Swears the Bribes He Took Were Legal

Article PhotoIn 2010, Pennsylvania's Tom Corbett (R) won the race for governor by running on a platform that promised to restore public trust in the state government. Corbett championed "honesty, accountability, and transparency," and he has released statements stating that he follows both"the letter and the spirit" of the law.
So why is he accepting thousands of dollars of gifts from lobbyists and big business? 
To cite just a few examples, Corbett has accepted tickets to the hottest hockey games from lobbyist Robert Kennedy, NFL playoff tickets from the CEO of the largest lobbying firm in Pennsylvania, private jet flights from the CEO of a chain of beauty schools, and a yachting trip from the CEO of an oil and gas transportation company.
Here's the kicker: In all of these cases, Corbett not only accepted the gifts, totaling upwards of $11,000, but later reciprocated by sketchily helping the companies in dealing with government. He repaid the yachting trip by taking the CEO on weeklong trips discussing trade and energy in Europe and South America. He repaid sports tickets with state backing in legal disputes or appointments to his committees. 
Sure sounds like bribery to me.
don't get upset it's ok he's a republican, his cohorts are worse Beohner passed out bribe checks to republicans on the floor of the congress that is the epitome of arrogance, to take the bribe then get paid on the floor of congress, priceless.
In Pennsylvania, the accepting of gifts by public officials is not, strictly speaking, illegal. The Code of Conduct only states that gifts over $250 (for items) or $600 (for trips, travel, etc.) must be declared. However, the Governor's Code of Conduct, a stricter set of moral guidelines for the executive branch, states that the governor cannot take gifts from anyone engaged in business relating to or with the state, which Corbett has done several times.
In March, after multiple ethics complaints were filed against him, Corbett responded by stating that because he was friends with the lobbyists, the gifts he was given fell under an exception. I imagine I would also quickly become friends with someone who offered to let me use his yacht for a week. In addition, Corbett insisted that the Code of Conduct was not strictly law and therefore, he was not doing anything illegal.
For someone who claimed to want to follow the "spirit" of the law, that response is laughable.
this can't be new this is one of the perks of being a congressperson you get to sit there vote against the peoples interest and wait for the bribe money to be delivered, then they all gather round like day workers hands stuck out for their pay, are you mad or embarrassed?

Simpson wins small parole victory on some charges
Article PhotoCARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — O.J. Simpson won a small victory Wednesday in his bid for freedom as Nevada granted him parole on some of his convictions in a 2008 kidnapping and armed robbery involving the holdup of two sports memorabilia dealers at a Las Vegas hotel room.
But the decision doesn't mean Simpson will be leaving prison anytime soon. Because he was convicted on multiple charges, Simpson still faces at least four more years in prison on sentences that were ordered to run consecutively
i was not there don't feel proven guilty neither did the jury, i think there was a lesson they were trying to teach.  nobody but him and God know so before the hang 'em high crowd comes in just wanted to get that straight.
seems civil courts have become where the "dissappointed with their verdict" go to get what they prceive to be justice. should not be used as a vendetta like i think that case was.
those who want to bring Trayvon in his parents aren't looking for revenge, just justice.

Obama Can Best Weaken the GOP by Courting Its Traditional Business Backers

Article PhotoSo the president came out yesterday with another economic proposal that isn’t going anywhere. I don’t mean to sound snarky. Some people are snarking about it, orlamenting it anyway
But I see it differently. At this point it goes without saying that anything Obama proposes is DOA. So he can’t get that done. But he can get something else done: Pry the nutso GOP away from its traditional constituencies one by one, so that all they’re left with is the Tea Party lunatic fringe.
It’s the only play Obama really has at this point, and while it might not pay dividends for him, it will help the Democrats running in the midterm elections, the next president, and the country over the long term.
Yesterday’s proposal was as follows: Obama offered to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent (from the current 35 percent) in exchange for some infrastructure investments. Republicans have been clamoring for a lower corporate rate since forever. 
Even many Democrats support this—the U.S. corporate rate is among the developed world’s highest, and the idea that the rate should be lowered in exchange for closing some capacious corporate loopholes has long been an idea that a lot of Democrats are fine with. But fundamentally, it should be something that gets Republicans’ juices flowing. They’re the party of corporate America, right?
And not only is this GOP-friendly. Even on the investment side, the proposal is geared toward projects that the Republican Party hasn’t shown utter contempt for in the past. 
that didn't seem to make a difference before they like fine, he like oh hell no, refusal to advance the America you swore to protect and serve in my book is treason, they only get away with it because others vote for them, seems like the solution would be don't vote for them.
As Jared Bernstein noted yesterday, the investment is directed almost wholly away from the public sector—no money for teachers, who to Republicans are just another group of bought-off Democratic voters. As Bernstein summarizes the package: “We’ve got a big drop in the corporate rate that doesn’t add to the deficit, for which the Republicans have only to swallow a paid-for jobs program in areas they’ve historically supported.”
Sounds pretty damn reasonable. But none of this is likely to matter. It’s the same old story: If Obama’s for it, they’re agin’ it. Especially if it’s tied to the kinds of socialistic demands for infrastructure investment that have long been backed by the United States Chamber of Commerce, among other socialist organizations. So the chances of a deal are slim to none. Or none to negative.
whenever the other side gets tired of not having any more to show for their vote and things go back to worse maybe the country will go back to all of us instead of them.  that too is unlikely some would rather die on a stick than let everyone live the dream.

Obama's Economic Policies Are Hurting the Middle Class More Than Anyone Else

Article Photo
According to a new survey from the Associated Press (AP), fully 80% of Americans are near poverty, rely on welfare, or are unemployed amid signs of deteriorating economic security and an elusive American dream. More than 19 million whites fall below the poverty line of $23,021 for a family of four – accounting for more than 40% of America’s poor – nearly double the number of poor blacks.
This data underlines one very scary point: As President Barack Obama pivots toward economic recovery for a 19th time, the result will be the same. How can he fix things? Drop his extremist ideological devotion to Keynesian economic theory and tries something different.
What amazes me though is that the very economic policies that the Obama administration has advocated “to grow the middle class” have never been stronger. The federal government is spending more money (in both hard dollars and as a percentage of GDP) than ever before. Rules and regulations from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have never been more aggressive. The Federal Reserve’s monetary intervention is so entrenched with the economy it is now fully in sync with the stock markets’ action on a daily basis.
is this a fair assumption, why when something positive is done there is a reluctance to credit Pres. alone it's the Democrats but let something negative get in there and it's Obama's fault he failed to do this or that.  if not for total obstruction would this article have ever seen the light of day
when actually he has to have cooperation of others to do anything even executive orders.  we all know that the republican promise made to us in '08 that their first job would be to make him a one term Pres., that having failed they now are trying to ruin his legacy.
the debt limit republicans are fighting against paying bills they already approved and trying to lay it off on the Pres., they are sinking the country Pres. is trying to build it back up, and he's the bad guy, this is where common sense is suppose to kick in, did it?
which still involves ruining our economy and us, what amazes me is who many actually saw that treasonous agenda as ok and still don't seem to realize this is hurting them to and those that do realize seem not to care if they lose those things that kept the family going, is that because of radical ideals or just hate is stronger then survival if so that is the real Kamikaze's
Yet the labor force participation rate – which measures the number of working age Americans (16-64) actively working or looking for work – is the lowest it’s been in more than 30 years. Barely half the U.S. population is paying any taxes on income. For the first time in history, there are more Americans collecting welfare (101 million, or about a third of the country) than there are adults working full-time in the private sector (97 million, or less than half of adults).
once more for clarity would this be an issue if not for all the obstruction on the right wing?  recognize

Boycotting the Sochi Olympics and Vodka Won't Save Russian Gays

Russia's horrendous treatment of their LGBT citizens has garnered attention recently, with horrific news emerging from the country of anti-gay legislation passed on Tuesday banning information on homosexuality, hate crimes by neo-Nazi groups, and police brutality on a peaceful gay pride march
Article PhotoObvious outrage has been sparked in the global community — and gay bay bars everywhere are dumping out their Russian vodka. Dan Savage, a U.S. gay rights activist and founder of the It Gets Better Project, recently called for a boycott of Stolichnaya and other Russian products on his blog. Soon an avalanche of boycott support came down, going so far as to encourage the boycott of the 2014 Olympics in Sochi.
In theory, the boycott sounds great. Boycotts have a long and illustrious history of engendering social change, so hit them where it hurts, right? Unfortunately, the proposed ideas may not hurt all that much.
Stolichnaya released an open letter defaming the Russian government for its actions, emphasizing that it "stands strong & proud with the global LGBT community." The reality that Stolichnaya is not representative of the Russian government, in no way condones the government's actions, and has no social impact over it becomes clear. Since an unjustified decline in Western sales won't even bruise the vodka brand, it will hardly crumble the Russian economy.
we really don't know the affect boycotting will have especially in another country trading on the world market, they said sanctions against Iran were not going to do anything, although not really measurable it has it's teeth and it does bite and like something as small as a little bug bite it still annoys the hell out of you, is that not the point?
Well, what about the Olympics? RUS LGBT, a Russian gay rights group, called for its boycott.However, the Russian LGBT Network urged against it. This is not the first time the Olympic games have been embroiled in political controversy and boycotts, and likely not the last. The games are meant to be apolitical, often achieving their social ends through avid participation when it is least expected. This article by the founder of the You Can Play Project to combat homophobia in sports made the point that the attendance of LGBT athletes could be the biggest symbol.
"In 1968, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar refused to play in the Olympics as a protest against the treatment of blacks in America. The same year, Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood on a medal stand, gloved fists in the air, as a protest against the treatment of blacks in America. History remembers the athletes who showed up."
The real question in this boycott is who it will matter to — since it doesn't to our favorite cuddly villain, Russian President Vladimir Putin. "I don’t think it will matter to Putin because the boycott will just mean there won't be any gays at the Olympics and that makes them happy, but the international noise will matter," said Kargaltsev
these incidents are in the history books they serve to inspire future efforts.  there is something to be said about peaceful unrest the violence gets more press because of the sensationalism, the peaceful only when those who oppose create violence but does that bring the protesting to the front or the violence against them?
they say "be careful what you wish for", is that because most of the time we don't know what we want until we see it,  that's like hunting, i always wanted to go and i'm good with a rifle, but i saw a documentary about hunting and these two guys tree'd a bear and proceeded to shoot him 6 times with a revolver that was the most inhumane thing i had seen to that date i was 14 and that was the end of that dream for me.
we are a fickled people, we cheer the worse of us and boo the best and potentially best, then tomorrow vice versa, shouldn't we find out what really drives us before we impose our wants on those who don't want it?  that's a two way street. America's Imaginary Lavish Social Welfare Safety Net That Exists Only in GOP's Mind

Article Photo
In America, we hate the poor. We really, really hate the poor. We are indoctrinated from birth to hate the poor. Jesus may have said, "Blessed are you who are poor." But America has no time for that Jesus. Our motto is "Screw the poor."
As a result, America has never been big on social welfare programs for the poor. Even during the peak years of U.S. social program spending (during LBJ's "Great Society" years), America had a skimpy social safety net, compared to other industrialized nations.
Compared to generous European social safety nets, America these days more closely resembles the likes of Mexico than a modern First World industrialized nation. Jobless benefits, for example, are far more meager and stingy in the U.S. than they are in Europe. In fact, for one reason or another, millions of Americans don't even ever qualify for jobless benefits. (I know: I was one of them. Years ago, I applied for jobless benefits and was turned down).
do we have such an inflated opinion of ourselves we can't see the small print? in my 64 years i've grown to know that the mantel of America is and has only been for the select few, sure there are strides being made but are they strides of real change or that select group is being crowded out by the number of us not on the A list, which creates open arms of necessity not because they feel the love. 
that creates even more resentment than having to tolerate but on their own terms now it's do or die and the level of vitriol rises as we have seen since Nov. '08.
The other pillar of the U.S. social safety net, food stamps, is also very meager. I recall recently playing around with the food stamp eligibility program on a Texas state government Web site. I was curious as to exactly how low one's income had to be in order to qualify. I kept plugging in lower and lower income numbers and kept getting a response page that said, "You earn too much to qualify for food stamps." Eventually, I concluded the Web site must be broken. It was only later that I discovered, much to my amazement, that the Web site was in fact working just fine and the Third World-like wages I'd plugged into the search form were indeed considered too high to qualify for aid.
In short, in America these days, if you're poor, you are screwed. The fact is, many low-income and poor people never even qualify for any type of aid. And the shocking numbers of homeless in the U.S. demonstrates that our social safety net is grotesquely inadequate to meet the needs of the needy. The fact that one in five children lives in poverty is a good indicator of that.
In fact, what meager social safety net programs that are around only exist because corporate America wants them to exist (a good indicator of just how corrupt our government is these days).
too many here in America refuse to see the small print even when they know what it says, IMO that indicates alls not lost they are conscious of what is happenning and feel as "we the poor and low income people" do they maybe part of our ranks but to proud to admit their party is doing them like rented mule also.
they say the truth will set you free, thats a hard pill to swallow when it's your truth.

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Top Conservatives Concede Defeat In Obamacare Shutdown Battle
Multiple conservatives leading the charge to shut down the government if Obamacare isn’t defunded have begun to admit it’s a lost cause as senior Republicans put the kibosh on the plan.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) lamented Monday afternoon that Republicans are too “scared” to follow through with the plan to withhold support for funding the government after the Sept. 30 deadline unless Obamacare is defunded.
“The problem right now is we don’t have Republicans willing to stand up and do this,” he said on The Andrea Tantaros Show, a conservative talk radio program. “We need 41 Republicans in the Senate or 218 Republicans in the House, to stand together, to join me, to join Mike Lee, to join Marco Rubio, all of whom have said, we will not vote for a single continuing resolution that funds even a penny of Obamacare.”
Late last week, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) laughed out loud when Sean Hannity of Fox News asked if Republicans have the “courage” to stand tough against legislation that funds Obamacare.
“Frankly, probably not,” the senator said.
is this going to make them look less stupid after 40 attempts that failed and now after millions wasted paying them to do this, will backing down just show it was a planned effort not a desire to kill it for any of the reasons they said,but just plain old everyday republican obstruction denying you to get at the Pres. and turn you against him, no logic there. my favorite "it's an abomination", to give Americans health care.