Apr 16, 2014 11:27 AMA Westhampton woman said she plans to file a complaint with the Riverhead Town Police Department after an officer on Monday ordered her to stop breastfeeding her child in a car on a private street—an activity state law specifically allows.
According to Andrea Zeledon, the incident in question happened on Monday night in Wading River, and she is hoping that, in the future, police officers in general will be better trained to deal with nursing mothers. She said she intends to file an official complaint with Riverhead Town Police to try to help other women who might feel threatened while feeding their babies.
“My reason for wanting this to get out there is, one, I think that this officer, and every officer, should be trained not to say anything,” Ms. Zeledon said. “And, two, I don’t understand how someone can actually do something like this to someone who is doing something so natural as breastfeeding a baby.”
Ms. Zeledon said she had called the Riverhead Town Police to a Wading River residence to file a report against an acquaintance who she said was violating a court order. The officer arrived on scene, and Ms. Zeledon remained outside in her car with her children, 12-year-old Richard and her 9-week-old daughter, Sophia, while a report was written.
While she was waiting in the car, her daughter became fussy, so Ms. Zeledon said she remained in the car and started to breastfeed. When the officer—who she said had been very polite and helpful until then—returned to the car and observed her breastfeeding the baby, she said he told her to “put that away.”
Taken aback, she said she reminded the officer that it is illegal, under New York State law, to ask a woman who is breastfeeding a child to stop. Out of courtesy, she said she would cover up—to which the officer allegedly responded, “I’m not going to ask you again.” She complied.
“I was in my car,” Ms. Zeledon said. “If I was in a park or at a baseball game, I could understand a little better—I’ve been to sporting events, and I won’t breastfeed there—but for a grown man of a legal caliber of authority to come and intimidate you in that way, and to tell you, ‘I don’t want to have to tell you again,’ that is inappropriate,” she said. “I honestly thought at the time that if I didn’t cover up, he was going to arrest me.”
According to New York State Penal Code 79-e, women have the right to nurse babies in public and should not be told to cover up or leave: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a mother may breast feed her baby in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether or not the nipple of the mother’s breast is covered during or incidental to the breast feeding.”
Riverhead Police Chief David J. Hegermiller said this week he was not aware of the situation but he has reached out to Ms. Zeledon.
Ms. Zeledon said she is consulting with a lawyer about the incident and plans to file a complaint this week. She noted that she called the chief’s office on Tuesday, and although someone from the office called her back, she was not home at the time and had not yet spoken to the chief.
“I wanted to bring attention to this, and I want the police department to take some kind of measure to educate these men and women about sensitivities surrounding breastfeeding,” Ms. Zeledon said. “I want to talk to the chief, because although his officer was otherwise completely courteous and helpful, someone in a position of authority like that should have a little bit of education on the matter.”
You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.
Already a subscriber? Sign in
Then we move on to the horrible act of a woman breastfeeding a child. hmmm, when did THAT kind of behavior star? (Must have been them dang hippies with all that back to nature boloney.)
Thanks for reminding us of the abomination of two people who love each other living together and getting the ...more legislated benefits previously only available to heterosexual Christian God-fearing folk.
Here's one that still keeps me up at night as well. Did you know that 65 years ago they let Jackie Robinson try a shot at the Majors? Glad that didn't take off, could you imagine what society would be like today if it had panned out?
Good thing we all take moral authority from elected officials, because that's what this country was founded on!!
Please Chief, when are you running for office? I want to help get signatures for you.
Yep 2 mil in jail, how many for ridiculous drug laws?
And yes, homosexuals, a part of our community since day 1, are permitted to marry.
And that has what to do with your puritanical response on a woman breast feeding?
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty
The original quote was "Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore." But it is sometimes misquoted as "I don't think we're in Kansas anymore, Toto." Many other variations exist. Hope that helps.
We come here today to commemorate one of the epoch-making events of the long struggle for the rights of man--the long struggle for the uplift of humanity. Our country--this great Republic-means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy, the triumph of popular government, and, in the long run, of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him. That is why ...more the history of America is now the central feature of the history of the world; for the world has set its face hopefully toward our democracy; and, O my fellow citizens, each one of you carries on your shoulders not only the burden of doing well for the sake of your country, but the burden of doing well and of seeing that this nation does well for the sake of mankind.
There have been two great crises in our country’s history: first, when it was formed, and then, again, when it was perpetuated; and, in the second of these great crises--in the time of stress and strain which culminated in the Civil War, on the outcome of which depended the justification of what had been done earlier, you men of the Grand Army, you men who fought through the Civil War, not only did you justify your generation, but you justified the wisdom of Washington and Washington’s colleagues. If this Republic had been founded by them only to be split asunder into fragments when the strain came, then the judgment of the world would have been that Washington’s work was not worth doing. It was you who crowned Washington’s work, as you carried to achievement the high purpose of Abraham Lincoln.
Now, with this second period of our history the name of John Brown will forever be associated; and Kansas was the theatre upon which the first act of the second of our great national life dramas was played. It was the result of the struggle in Kansas which determined that our country should be in deed as well as in name devoted to both union and freedom; that the great experiment of democratic government on a national scale should succeed and not fail. In name we had the Declaration of Independence in 1776; but we gave the lie by our acts to the words of the Declaration of Independence until 1865; and words count for nothing except in so far as they represent acts. This is true everywhere; but, O my friends, it should be truest of all in political life. A broken promise is bad enough in private life. It is worse in the field of politics. No man is worth his salt in public life who makes on the stump a pledge which he does not keep after election; and, if he makes such a pledge and does not keep it, hunt him out of public life. I care for the great deeds of the past chiefly as spurs to drive us onward in the present. I speak of the men of the past partly that they may be honored by our praise of them, but more that they may serve as examples for the future.
It was a heroic struggle; and, as is inevitable with all such struggles, it had also a dark and terrible side. Very much was done of good, and much also of evil; and, as was inevitable in such a period of revolution, often the same man did both good and evil. For our great good fortune as a nation, we, the people of the United States as a whole, can now afford to forget the evil, or, at least, to remember it without bitterness, and to fix our eyes with pride only on the good that was accomplished. Even in ordinary times there are very few of us who do not see the problems of life as through a glass, darkly; and when the glass is clouded by the murk of furious popular passion, the vision of the best and the bravest is dimmed. Looking back, we are all of us now able to do justice to the valor and the disinterestedness and the love of the right, as to each it was given to see the right, shown both by the men of the North and the men of the South in that contest which was finally decided by the attitude of the West. We can admire the heroic valor, the sincerity, the self-devotion shown alike by the men who wore the blue and the men who wore the gray; and our sadness that such men should have to fight one another is tempered by the glad knowledge that ever hereafter their descendants shall be fighting side by side, struggling in peace as well as in war for the uplift of their common country, all alike resolute to raise to the highest pitch of honor and usefulness the nation to which they all belong. As for the veterans of the Grand Army of the Republic, they deserve honor and recognition such as is paid to no other citizens of the Republic; for to them the republic owes it all; for to them it owes its very existence. It is because of what you and your comrades did in the dark years that we of to-day walk, each of us, head erect, and proud that we belong, not to one of a dozen little squabbling contemptible commonwealths, but to the mightiest nation upon which the sun shines.
I do not speak of this struggle of the past merely from the historic standpoint. Our interest is primarily in the application to-day of the lessons taught by the contest a half a century ago. It is of little use for us to pay lip-loyalty to the mighty men of the past unless we sincerely endeavor to apply to the problems of the present precisely the qualities which in other crises enabled the men of that day to meet those crises. It is half melancholy and half amusing to see the way in which well-meaning people gather to do honor to the men who, in company with John Brown, and under the lead of Abraham Lincoln, faced and solved the great problems of the nineteenth century, while, at the same time, these same good people nervously shrink from, or frantically denounce, those who are trying to meet the problems of the twentieth century in the spirit which was accountable for the successful solution of the problems of Lincoln’s time.
Of that generation of men to whom we owe so much, the man to whom we owe most is, of course, Lincoln. Part of our debt to him is because he forecast our present struggle and saw the way out. He said:
"I hold that while man exists it is his duty to improve not only his own condition, but to assist in ameliorating mankind."
And again:
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."
If that remark was original with me, I should be even more strongly denounced as a Communist agitator than I shall be anyhow. It is Lincoln’s. I am only quoting it; and that is one side; that is the side the capitalist should hear. Now, let the working man hear his side.
"Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights. . . . Nor should this lead to a war upon the owners of property. Property is the fruit of labor; . . . property is desirable; is a positive good in the world."
And then comes a thoroughly Lincoln-like sentence:
"Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built."
It seems to me that, in these words, Lincoln took substantially the attitude that we ought to take; he showed the proper sense of proportion in his relative estimates of capital and labor, of human rights and property rights. Above all, in this speech, as in many others, he taught a lesson in wise kindliness and charity; an indispensable lesson to us of today. But this wise kindliness and charity never weakened his arm or numbed his heart. We cannot afford weakly to blind ourselves to the actual conflict which faces us today. The issue is joined, and we must fight or fail.
In every wise struggle for human betterment one of the main objects, and often the only object, has been to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity. In the struggle for this great end, nations rise from barbarism to civilization, and through it people press forward from one stage of enlightenment to the next. One of the chief factors in progress is the destruction of special privilege. The essence of any struggle for healthy liberty has always been, and must always be, to take from some one man or class of men the right to enjoy power, or wealth, or position, or immunity, which has not been earned by service to his or their fellows. That is what you fought for in the Civil War, and that is what we strive for now.
At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress. In our day it appears as the struggle of freemen to gain and hold the right of self-government as against the special interests, who twist the methods of free government into machinery for defeating the popular will. At every stage, and under all circumstances, the essence of the struggle is to equalize opportunity, destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth. That is nothing new. All I ask in civil life is what you fought for in the Civil War. I ask that civil life be carried on according to the spirit in which the army was carried on. You never get perfect justice, but the effort in handling the army was to bring to the front the men who could do the job. Nobody grudged promotion to Grant, or Sherman, or Thomas, or Sheridan, because they earned it. The only complaint was when a man got promotion which he did not earn.
Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, every man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities, unassisted by special privilege of his own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry him, and to get for himself and his family substantially what he has earned. Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable. No man who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.
I stand for the square deal. But when I say that I am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service. One word of warning, which, I think, is hardly necessary in Kansas. When I say I want a square deal for the poor man, I do not mean that I want a square deal for the man who remains poor because he has not got the energy to work for himself. If a man who has had a chance will not make good, then he has got to quit. And you men of the Grand Army, you want justice for the brave man who fought, and punishment for the coward who shirked his work. Is that not so?
Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics. That is one of our tasks to-day. Every special interest is entitled to justice--full, fair, and complete--and, now, mind you, if there were any attempt by mob-violence to plunder and work harm to the special interest, whatever it may be, that I most dislike, and the wealthy man, whomsoever he may be, for whom I have the greatest contempt, I would fight for him, and you would if you were worth your salt. He should have justice. For every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office. The Constitution guarantees protection to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation.
The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being.
There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.
We must have complete and effective publicity of corporate affairs, so that the people may know beyond peradventure whether the corporations obey the law and whether their management entitles them to the confidence of the public. It is necessary that laws should be passed to prohibit the use of corporate funds directly or indirectly for political purposes; it is still more necessary that such laws should be thoroughly enforced. Corporate expenditures for political purposes, and especially such expenditures by public-service corporations, have supplied one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs.
It has become entirely clear that we must have government supervision of the capitalization, not only of public-service corporations, including, particularly, railways, but of all corporations doing an interstate business. I do not wish to see the nation forced into the ownership of the railways if it can possibly be avoided, and the only alternative is thoroughgoing and effective legislation, which shall be based on a full knowledge of all the facts, including a physical valuation of property. This physical valuation is not needed, or, at least, is very rarely needed, for fixing rates; but it is needed as the basis of honest capitalization.
We have come to recognize that franchises should never be granted except for a limited time, and never without proper provision for compensation to the public. It is my personal belief that the same kind and degree of control and supervision which should be exercised over public-service corporations should be extended also to combinations which control necessaries of life, such as meat, oil, or coal, or which deal in them on an important scale. I have no doubt that the ordinary man who has control of them is much like ourselves. I have no doubt he would like to do well, but I want to have enough supervision to help him realize that desire to do well.
I believe that the officers, and, especially, the directors, of corporations should be held personally responsible when any corporation breaks the law.
Combinations in industry are the result of an imperative economic law which cannot be repealed by political legislation. The effort at prohibiting all combination has substantially failed. The way out lies, not in attempting to prevent such combinations, but in completely controlling them in the interest of the public welfare. For that purpose the Federal Bureau of Corporations is an agency of first importance. Its powers, and, therefore, its efficiency, as well as that of the Interstate Commerce Commission, should be largely increased. We have a right to expect from the Bureau of Corporations and from the Interstate Commerce Commission a very high grade of public service. We should be as sure of the proper conduct of the interstate railways and the proper management of interstate business as we are now sure of the conduct and management of the national banks, and we should have as effective supervision in one case as in the other. The Hepburn Act, and the amendment to the act in the shape in which it finally passed Congress at the last session, represent a long step in advance, and we must go yet further.
There is a wide-spread belief among our people that, under the methods of making tariffs which have hitherto obtained, the special interests are too influential. Probably this is true of both the big special interests and the little special interests. These methods have put a premium on selfishness, and, naturally, the selfish big interests have gotten more than their smaller, though equally selfish, brothers. The duty of Congress is to provide a method by which the interest of the whole people shall be all that receives consideration. To this end there must be an expert tariff commission, wholly removed from the possibility of political pressure or of improper business influence. Such a commission can find the real difference between cost of production, which is mainly the difference of labor cost here and abroad. As fast as its recommendations are made, I believe in revising one schedule at a time. A general revision of the tariff almost inevitably leads to logrolling and the subordination of the general public interest to local and special interests.
The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need to is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows. Again, comrades over there, take the lesson from your own experience. Not only did you not grudge, but you gloried in the promotion of the great generals who gained their promotion by leading their army to victory. So it is with us. We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community. This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.
No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective-a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.
The people of the United States suffer from periodical financial panics to a degree substantially unknown to the other nations, which approach us in financial strength. There is no reason why we should suffer what they escape. It is of profound importance that our financial system should be promptly investigated, and so thoroughly and effectively revised as to make it certain that hereafter our currency will no longer fail at critical times to meet our needs.
It is hardly necessary to me to repeat that I believe in an efficient army and a navy large enough to secure for us abroad that respect which is the surest guaranty of peace. A word of special warning to my fellow citizens who are as progressive as I hope I am. I want them to keep up their interest in our international affairs; and I want them also continually to remember Uncle Sam’s interests abroad. Justice and fair dealings among nations rest upon principles identical with those which control justice and fair dealing among the individuals of which nations are composed, with the vital exception that each nation must do its own part in international police work. If you get into trouble here, you can call for the police; but if Uncle Sam gets into trouble, he has got to be his own policeman, and I want to see him strong enough to encourage the peaceful aspirations of other people’s in connection with us. I believe in national friendships and heartiest good-will to all nations; but national friendships, like those between men, must be founded on respect as well as on liking, on forbearance as well as upon trust. I should be heartily ashamed of any American who did not try to make the American government act as justly toward the other nations in international relations as he himself would act toward any individual in private relations. I should be heartily ashamed to see us wrong a weaker power, and I should hang my head forever if we tamely suffered wrong from a stronger power.
Of conservation I shall speak more at length elsewhere. Conservation means development as much as it does protection. I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us. I ask nothing of the nation except that it so behave as each farmer here behaves with reference to his own children. That farmer is a poor creature who skins the land and leaves it worthless to his children. The farmer is a good farmer who, having enabled the land to support himself and to provide for the education of his children, leaves it to them a little better than he found it himself. I believe the same thing of a nation.
Moreover, I believe that the natural resources must be used for the benefit of all our people, and not monopolized for the benefit of the few, and here again is another case in which I am accused of taking a revolutionary attitude. People forget now that one hundred years ago there were public men of good character who advocated the nation selling its public lands in great quantities, so that the nation could get the most money out of it, and giving it to the men who could cultivate it for their own uses. We took the proper democratic ground that the land should be granted in small sections to the men who were actually to till it and live on it. Now, with the water-power, with the forests, with the mines, we are brought face to face with the fact that there are many people who will go with us in conserving the resources only if they are to be allowed to exploit them for their benefit. That is one of the fundamental reasons why the special interests should be driven out of politics. Of all the questions which can come before this nation, short of the actual preservation of its existence in a great war, there is none which compares in importance with the great central task of leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us, and training them into a better race to inhabit the land and pass it on. Conservation is a great moral issue, for it involves the patriotic duty of insuring the safety and continuance of the nation. Let me add that the health and vitality of our people are at least as well worth conserving as their forests, waters, lands, and minerals, and in this great work the national government must bear a most important part.
I have spoken elsewhere also of the great task which lies before the farmers of the country to get for themselves and their wives and children not only the benefits of better farming, but also those of better business methods and better conditions of life on the farm. The burden of this great task will fall, as it should, mainly upon the great organizations of the farmers themselves. I am glad it will, for I believe they are all well able to handle it. In particular, there are strong reasons why the Departments of Agriculture of the various states, the United States Department of Agriculture, and the agricultural colleges and experiment stations should extend their work to cover all phases of farm life, instead of limiting themselves, as they have far too often limited themselves in the past, solely to the question of the production of crops. And now a special word to the farmer. I want to see him make the farm as fine a farm as it can be made; and let him remember to see that the improvement goes on indoors as well as out; let him remember that the farmer’s wife should have her share of thought and attention just as much as the farmer himself.
Nothing is more true than that excess of every kind is followed by reaction; a fact which should be pondered by reformer and reactionary alike. We are face to face with new conceptions of the relations of property to human welfare, chiefly because certain advocates of the rights of property as against the rights of men have been pushing their claims too far. The man who wrongly holds that every human right is secondary to his profit must now give way to the advocate of human welfare, who rightly maintains that every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it.
But I think we may go still further. The right to regulate the use of wealth in the public interest is universally admitted. Let us admit also the right to regulate the terms and conditions of labor, which is the chief element of wealth, directly in the interest of the common good. The fundamental thing to do for every man is to give him a chance to reach a place in which he will make the greatest possible contribution to the public welfare. Understand what I say there. Give him a chance, not push him up if he will not be pushed. Help any man who stumbles; if he lies down, it is a poor job to try to carry him; but if he is a worthy man, try your best to see that he gets a chance to show the worth that is in him. No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living, and hours of labor short enough so after his day’s work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load. We keep countless men from being good citizens by the conditions of life by which we surround them. We need comprehensive workman’s compensation acts, both State and national laws to regulate child labor and work for women, and, especially, we need in our common schools not merely education in book-learning, but also practical training for daily life and work. We need to enforce better sanitary conditions for our workers and to extend the use of safety appliances for workers in industry and commerce, both within and between the States. Also, friends, in the interest of the working man himself, we need to set our faces like flint against mob-violence just as against corporate greed; against violence and injustice and lawlessness by wage-workers just as much as against lawless cunning and greed and selfish arrogance of employers. If I could ask but one thing of my fellow countrymen, my request would be that, whenever they go in for reform, they remember the two sides, and that they always exact justice from one side as much as from the other. I have small use for the public servant who can always see and denounce the corruption of the capitalist, but who cannot persuade himself, especially before election, to say a word about lawless mob-violence. And I have equally small use for the man, be he a judge on the bench or editor of a great paper, or wealthy and influential private citizen, who can see clearly enough and denounce the lawlessness of mob-violence, but whose eyes are closed so that he is blind when the question is one of corruption of business on a gigantic scale. Also, remember what I said about excess in reformer and reactionary alike. If the reactionary man, who thinks of nothing but the rights of property, could have his way, he would bring about a revolution; and one of my chief fears in connection with progress comes because I do not want to see our people, for lack of proper leadership, compelled to follow men whose intentions are excellent, but whose eyes are a little too wild to make it really safe to trust them. Here in Kansas there is one paper which habitually denounces me as the tool of Wall Street, and at the same time frantically repudiates the statement that I am a Socialist on the ground that that is an unwarranted slander of the Socialists.
National efficiency has many factors. It is a necessary result of the principle of conservation widely applied. In the end, it will determine our failure or success as a nation. National efficiency has to do, not only with natural resources and with men, but it is equally concerned with institutions. The State must be made efficient for the work which concerns only the people of the State; and the nation for that which concerns all the people. There must remain no neutral ground to serve as a refuge for lawbreakers, and especially for lawbreakers of great wealth, who can hire the vulpine legal cunning which will teach them how to avoid both jurisdictions. It is a misfortune when the national legislature fails to do its duty in providing a national remedy, so that the only national activity is the purely negative activity of the judiciary in forbidding the State to exercise power in the premises.
I do not ask for the over centralization; but I do ask that we work in a spirit of broad and far-reaching nationalism where we work for what concerns our people as a whole. We are all Americans. Our common interests are as broad as the continent. I speak to you here in Kansas exactly as I would speak in New York or Georgia, for the most vital problems are those which affect us all alike. The National Government belongs to the whole American people, and where the whole American people are interested, that interest can be guarded effectively only by the National Government. The betterment which we seek must be accomplished, I believe, mainly through the National Government.
The American people are right in demanding that New Nationalism, without which we cannot hope to deal with new problems. The New Nationalism puts the national need before sectional or personal advantage. It is impatient of the utter confusion that results from local legislatures attempting to treat national issues as local issues. It is still more impatient of the impotence which springs from over division of governmental powers, the impotence which makes it possible for local selfishness or for legal cunning, hired by wealthy special interests, to bring national activities to a deadlock. This New Nationalism regards the executive power as the steward of the public welfare. It demands of the judiciary that it shall be interested primarily in human welfare rather than in property, just as it demands that the representative body shall represent all the people rather than any one class or section of the people.
I believe in shaping the ends of government to protect property as well as human welfare. Normally, and in the long run, the ends are the same; but whenever the alternative must be faced, I am for men and not for property, as you were in the Civil War. I am far from underestimating the importance of dividends; but I rank dividends below human character. Again, I do not have any sympathy with the reformer who says he does not care for dividends. Of course, economic welfare is necessary, for a man must pull his own weight and be able to support his family. I know well that the reformers must not bring upon the people economic ruin, or the reforms themselves will go down in the ruin. But we must be ready to face temporary disaster, whether or not brought on by those who will war against us to the knife. Those who oppose reform will do well to remember that ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our national life brings us nothing better than swollen fortunes for the few and the triumph in both politics and business of a sordid and selfish materialism.
If our political institutions were perfect, they would absolutely prevent the political domination of money in any part of our affairs. We need to make our political representatives more quickly and sensitively responsive to the people whose servants they are. More direct action by the people in their own affairs under proper safeguards is vitally necessary. The direct primary is a step in this direction, if it is associated with a corrupt-services act effective to prevent the advantage of the man willing recklessly and unscrupulously to spend money over his more honest competitor. It is particularly important that all moneys received or expended for campaign purposes should be publicly accounted for, not only after election, but before election as well. Political action must be made simpler, easier, and freer from confusion for every citizen. I believe that the prompt removal of unfaithful or incompetent public servants should be made easy and sure in whatever way experience shall show to be most expedient in any given class of cases.
One of the fundamental necessities in a representative government such as ours is to make certain that the men to whom the people delegate their power shall serve the people by whom they are elected, and not the special interests. I believe that every national officer, elected or appointed, should be forbidden to perform any service or receive any compensation, directly or indirectly, from interstate corporations; and a similar provision could not fail to be useful within the States.
The object of government is the welfare of the people. The material progress and prosperity of a nation are desirable chiefly so long as they lead to the moral and material welfare of all good citizens. Just in proportion as the average man and woman are honest, capable of sound judgment and high ideals, active in public affairs,-but, first of all, sound in their home, and the father and mother of healthy children whom they bring up well,-just so far, and no farther, we may count our civilization a success. We must have-I believe we have already-a genuine and permanent moral awakening, without which no wisdom of legislation or administration really means anything; and, on the other hand, we must try to secure the social and economic legislation without which any improvement due to purely moral agitation is necessarily evanescent. Let me again illustrate by a reference to the Grand Army. You could not have won simply as a disorderly and disorganized mob. You needed generals; you needed careful administration of the most advanced type; and a good commissary-the cracker line. You well remember that success was necessary in many different lines in order to bring about general success. You had to have the administration at Washington good, just as you had to have the administration in the field; and you had to have the work of the generals good. You could not have triumphed without the administration and leadership; but it would all have been worthless if the average soldier had not had the right stuff in him. He had to have the right stuff in him, or you could not get it out of him. In the last analysis, therefore, vitally necessary though it was to have the right kind of organization and the right kind of generalship, it was even more vitally necessary that the average soldier should have the fighting edge, the right character. So it is in our civil life. No matter how honest and decent we are in our private lives, if we do not have the right kind of law and the right kind of administration of the law, we cannot go forward as a nation. That is imperative; but it must be an addition to, and not a substitute for, the qualities that make us good citizens. In the last analysis, the most important elements in any man’s career must be the sum of those qualities which, in the aggregate, we speak of as character. If he has not got it, then no law that the wit of man can devise, no administration of the law by the boldest and strongest executive, will avail to help him. We must have the right kind of character-character that makes a man, first of all, a good man in the home, a good father, and a good husband-that makes a man a good neighbor. You must have that, and, then, in addition, you must have the kind of law and the kind of administration of the law which will give to those qualities in the private citizen the best possible chance for development. The prime problem of our nation is to get the right type of good citizenship, and, to get it, we must have progress, and our public men must be genuinely progressive.
We all can determine the point of your comment on our own. In fact, I'll post it again for everyone to see, so they can formulate their own opinion about what you were saying.
"This country is really becoming crazy with things they think are ok. Legalize pot, have your breasts hang out, two men and two women can be married. The morals of this country are virtually non existent!"
you went on ...more to state this:
"This country has a 65 % divorce rate, largest prison population, most murders of any civil society, and you think society is ok in this country? Not to mention we are trillions in debt that we can never repay, and are taxing the hell out of everyone. Sure we are on the right path. Lol"
I think it's pretty obvious where you stand.
No one is jamming anything down "our" throats. Change is inevitable, And no one is pushing their ideas of correct behavior on you. You just live in your own special world, don't you?
A lot of guys are just not used to seeing it, and does cause a bit of embarrassment. Its no biggie, just something to deal with.
Thanks for playing...
I don't know what a web stalker is, but I do know that every time you post, your inane statements just beg for a response from a voice of reason. Of course you have the right to your opinion. No one has said otherwise. But when that opinion indicates that you yearn for a simplistic time when social issues were ignored by the mainstream at the expense of the minority, you label yourself as simple and uninformed.
More than half, eh? So how did that work out for Sen. McCain and Gov Romney?
Smart thinkin'
"do" should be "due" I've pointed this out to you before. Now pay attention!
What "results of liberalism" did we see during the Carter years?
-Alonzo L. Hamby
I think the guy had more than Alzheimer's...
Carter, like Obama was left one h*** of a ****** mess.
How so? What policies of the Carter years required that President Reagan put this country back on track? details!!
" You're still being a bully Blank and you are the type that likes ramming flawed ideas down our throats." I'm not. I just ask you for qualifiers on your statements and I get more babble. What ideas am I ramming down anyones throat?
Have a pleasant day.
Mr. Holder was expected to deliver remarks at the afternoon graduation ceremony, according to his official itinerary sent out by the Justice Department Thursday morning.
A Justice Department spokesman denied that the trip was canceled because of the possibility of a hostile reception.
Worst president EVER: Franklin Pierce. And for "spiraling inflation" that would be the policies of Alan Greenspan, appointed by none other than Mr. Bechtel/HUD rigging scandal/Iran-Contra himself, Ronald Reagan. Reagan also appointed Wendy Gramm to head the CFTC via nepotism by proxy. Her policies have allowed speculation to run rampant, and commodities prices to go through the roof.
Despite the Reagan myth, we have not had a decent POTUS since Eisenhower.
Quote:
"So you want to lay personal blame on Reagan, for decisions of someone (corrupt or not) appointed to the CFTC in 1988? ... Hold the person accountable who did the crime. Not the person several degrees of separation away."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So we shouldn't hold Ronald Reagan accountable for the commodities bubble disaster and the CMO apocalypse because he ONLY appointed the chairmen (Wendy ...more Gramm and Alan Greenspan) who CAUSED the catastrophes?! You see "several degrees of separation" between cause and effect here? Where, pray tell?
Donald Regan had The Gipper eating out of his hand.
If the buck stops with Obama like it is alleged so often it should, then even Saint Ronnie is not immune for granting Wall Street a free license to steal and pillage.
You don't get it and likely never will.
More than half, eh? So how did that work out for Sen. McCain and Gov Romney?
By But I'm a blank! (640), Hampton Bays on Apr 22, 14 11:43 AM
Like Reply Report as inappropriate
then Ronald Regan, Donald Regan,Carter, Roosevelt.....you're ...more addicted.
To debate, knowledge, and truth; absolutely 100%.
“If I were to remain silent, I'd be guilty of complicity.”
~ Albert Einstein
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence."
~ Leonardo da Vinci
~anon
"It's good to shut up sometimes"
~Marcel Marceau
"Much talking is the cause of danger. Silence is the means of avoiding misfortune. The talkative parrot is shut up in a cage. Other birds, without speech, fly freely about."
~Saskya Pandita
Quote:
" [T]he standard to which we hold our elected leaders accountable has most certainly been degraded by the cultish, rock star God-like persona placed upon him by the corrupt media and His followers."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specious Right-Wing extremist cant. We supporters of President Obama recognize his fallibility even as we laud his successes. It in only the Tea Party drones ...more who blame him for everything, bad weather included, and then become irate when their obsessive mendacity is (again) revealed.
Quote:
"this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ..." *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from the noble aspirations (as befits a presidential candidate) expressed by President Obama that exemplify his concern with the legacy that we leave our children. To be contrasted with the solipsistic, mean-spirited and myopic ...more Right-Wing obsession to avoid all expenditures that don't benefit them personally. (Their progeny can look out for themselves.)
* "America, this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past. Our time to bring new energy and new ideas to the challenges we face. Our time to offer a new direction for the country we love.
The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment - this was the time - when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America."
Complete with Greek columns,
I have never seen such a narcissistic empty suit.
Thanks for reminding us Cap/Dan
The "epiphany" quote (which you misquoted, by the way) is from a speech that the President made to a group of Dartmouth College students who have the intelligence and the sense of humor to appreciate a JOKE. It is no wonder that it was lost on you.
Moreover, you mendaciously accuse the president of "14 lies" without identifying them for fear of yet another damning rebuttal. Grow a pair.
to 27dan:
Thank you for reiterating, lest we forget, your ...more stereotypical extreme Right-Winger obsession to keep all your money. Posterity be damned.
Your perception of reality has passed beyond the pall. Now, all opinions that contradict your own naked assertions are "lies". Take care. While redefining reality may seem a plausible alternative when one cannot find objective fact or is unable to construct a reasoned argument in support of one's claim, your eccentricity is rendering you incomprehensible. If you start having conversations in public that only you can understand (as you are on this forum), people will ...more start to avoid you.
Right in front of the voters.
As for the rest, nothing is sticking to the President.
It's all political theatre by the right.
They haven't done a thing to improve this country in the last four years- all they've done is what we see here.
Obstruct, lie, fabricate and not back up what they post.
I'm still waiting for answers to several questions; I guess that means that they'll start harping about abortion again. Every time they ...more ...more can't answer with the truth, they pull out their little black dress and put it on.
Talk about shiny objects.
By philathome (7772), Southampton on May 15, 13 7:08 PM
"None of it is proven. Just the continuation of the right wing smear machine.
Nothing has ever been proven."
By philathome (7775), Southampton on May 20, 13 2:08 PM
There are no scandals just manufactured outrage The facts are that there has been no connection made to ...more the president.
it's all manufactured outrage designed to distract from the republican lack of participation in governing.
Thanks for playing grasping at straws.
By philathome (7775), Southampton on May 22, 13 6:14 PM
ORIGINAL RECIPE!
92,594,000: AMERICANS NOT WORKING HITS RECORD...
Women Not in Labor Force Hits Record High...
Unemployment plummets to 6.3%...
Eric Holder still refusing to take action against Lois Lerner for abuse of power Even with Congress holding her in contempt ! Citizens demand impeachment of Holder now!
Thanks phil for providing a link that shows us how the cover up even reaches into CBS as well
The briefing, the appearances, it was all about Benghazi. Of course everything in the memo is about Benghazi. And when Phil denies it, he simply looks foolish.
By PGC
A land of no laws and no taxes. If you ask anyone who calls themselves either a “libertarian” or an “anarchist” these days, that’s how they’d usually wind-up describing their ideal society. So why not give these Anarcho-Libertarians their cream dream wish and rip down the societal constructs that have heretofore at least done a decent enough job of keeping things humming ...more along, albeit imperfectly?
Well, for these five reasons, actually.
#5. “Then Let Them Die and Decrease the Surplus Population!”
Listening to anarchists and libertarians, you’d get the idea that if we just do away with all burdensome laws, regulations and government, the poor and working poor would magically vanish, but have you ever asked them how? They may tell you that religious charities will pick up the slack. But how could they possibly afford to spend as much as they’d need to take care of the country’s poor, and doesn’t that completely violate the idea of church and state being separated? Why would we force someone to swallow and follow a religion just to get some help in not starving?
Well, the answer is that to anarchists and libertarians, poor people are poor because they just haven’t been motivated to work yet. You know, cultural laziness and shit, right? So what better way to motivate people to work than the possibility of them joining the pile of dead bodies out in the street that are still there because there’s no government agency to come and clean up the bodies of the poor people who had nowhere to turn so they got sick or starved to death? The social safety net exists for a reason, and libertarians just prefer to ignore those reasons as if they don’t exist. However, the simple fact is that inescapable poverty is what leads to crime, drug abuse and societal decline, not helping people out of it.
#4. “Idiocracy” Will Go From Prophecy to Reality
In the land of no laws and taxes, where does the responsibility for educating the masses fall? Once again, you’re left with two choices: the unregulated free market or religion. I suppose you also have the option of homeschooling, too don’t you? So in Libertarian Utopia you’re going to have to either pay a corporation, subject your kid to creationism in the classroom, or stay at home and stop working so that you can teach your kid stuff like math, reading and science.
Let’s start with the homeschooling and religious options. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in libertarian social media circles and read comments about how the standards of education have fallen so hard it’s stupid to pay for other kids’ education. Of course, at least 85% of the libertarians discussing these things are 19-22 year old college students, and even though the vast majority of them wouldn’t be in college were it not for the rest of us paying for their public education, they’re just stuck in their selfish “me me me” bubbles and so they aren’t thinking clearly about what happens when we stop trying to make people as smart and educated as they can be.
But this notion that it’s somehow better to pay a private company so that they can profit by educating our children is just ludicrous to me. Where is the accountability for the curriculum? The private company will just tell you to go find another service provider, but do we really want our schools run like cell phone contracts?
Of course in this society you should have that option, but bang-for-buck wise, it’s always going to be a better investment to pool your resources and reduce the risk of investment. Public education is a point of pride in any society, and the jackasses that are trying to “get government out” of education should take a look at developed and developing nations. The ones that are surpassing us in education aren’t doing so by paying Education, Inc. They’re doing so by investing more in their future. It’s not rocket science, but if you give the libertarians what they want, no one will be smart and trained enough to be a rocket scientist anyway, so maybe that’s a win-win in their book?
#3. Why Take Them To Court When You Can Just Shoot Them?!
What happens in a society when two parties have a disagreement?
Let’s say you get in a car accident going to work one day. In our current societal structure with laws and police officers and courts, you’ll get out of your car, and assuming it’s not a horrendous accident with lives in danger you’ll exchange insurance information. If the other driver doesn’t have insurance, you’ll hand the case off to your insurance company or if you don’t have uninsured motorist coverage, you’ll take the other driver to small claims court, present your case to a judge and hopefully be awarded damages so you can repay yourself for the damage you had to fix on your car.
Now, what happens in Anarcho-Libertarian Cream Dream Land?
Dude hits your car, you get out, and since he doesn’t have to answer to any laws about insurance or wait for a cop to come to the scene, he beats the shit out of you and drives off. You find him later, and you assault him right back, this time with two of your buddies. Two weeks later, his friends in the Backyard Militia of Podunk, Idaho come and lay siege to your house, filling it with round after round of fully-automatic gun fire (because remember there are now no laws against possessing automatic weapons because “Amurika”).
Sounds awesome, doesn’t it?
#2. Yay For Plagues!
If you think education and the social safety net would suffer under Libertarian Rule, imagine what health care would like when you truly have no other option than to pay for it out of your pocket with no subsidies whatsoever. Essentially, just imagine life before the Affordable Care Act. I’m not here to blow sunshine up Obamacare’s ass; there are definitely glaring holes in the law. Under Libertarian rules, there’s no ACA so we couldn’t force the insurance companies to provide us with at least an 85% return on our premiums. We couldn’t mandate that nobody be denied coverage for a preexisting condition, and we couldn’t make sure the elderly and children were covered via Medicare and Medicaid.
So if it’s scads of sickly people roaming the streets, tripping over the dead bodies that still haven’t been cleaned up, then by all means, let’s rip up our social fabric and just let shit fall where it falls.
#1. It Sucked So Much We Scrapped It Over 200 Years Ago
The thing is that for the most part we already tried to live in a Libertarian Utopia. The very first time we established The United States of America, it was under the Articles of Confederation. Apparently while studying political science at their universities, libertarians have forgotten some of the most basic American history — stuff we learned in 8th grade and then again in high school. The Articles of Confederation essentially created a useless and completely weak Federal government in favor of the supremacy of the states.
It failed so hard we had to rip it all up and start again. If you weaken the Federal government, you could have 50 different state currencies. You could have states not recognizing each other’s laws. You’d have 50 separate state militias with the potential for invasion by one state into another. I mean, do we really need all those little tiny New England area states? Why can’t Maine’s militia just start systematically annexing its neighbors to make one, larger state?
The bottom line is a simple one: If libertarians or classical liberals — whatever the hell they’re calling themselves to sound more intelligent than they are — want to live in a society where there’s no strong central government or any of the many benefits the founders themselves realized they needed to provide via a strong central government, they should contact Dr. Emmett Brown, borrow his DeLorean and set the time circuits to 1777 because in the words of the great Canadian poets and scholars of The Barenaked Ladies, it’s all been done before.
And it sucked back then just as much as it would suck right now.
By Jerry Della Femina
From time to time I receive emails that I like to share with the readers of this column. This first one, which is called "A Conundrum," is so so true.
The definition of "conundrum" is something that is puzzling or confusing.
Here are six conundrums of socialism in the United States of America:
1. America is capitalist and greedy – yet half of the population is subsidized.
2. Half ...more of the population is subsidized – yet they think they are victims.
3. They think they are victims – yet their representatives run the government.
4. Their representatives run the government – yet the poor keep getting poorer.
5. The poor keep getting poorer – yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.
6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about – yet they want America to be more like those other countries.
That pretty much sums up the USA and what the liberal leaders want the 47 percent who pay no taxes to believe.
It's more complex than this sad, paltry, tripe ridden waste of text by the author who should probably stick to advertising and restaurants.
There's more than one definition of wealth. And the etymology of what it has meant, and come to mean over the centuries is an interesting query. As it turns out, "happiness" is now listed as an obsolete definition of the word.
Might be a big part of "Our" problem...
Lies and misconceptions, your stock in trade.
Receiving payment from seven out of ten ACA enrollees just two weeks after the close of enrollment is extraordinarily positive, as Marc Boutin, vice-president of the nonprofit National Health Council has stated. " While more comprehensive data will come in later", he added, he called it, "a really good indication of the direction we're going."
The largest segment of Americans remaining uninsured is accounted ...more for by the low-income workers whom the extremist Right-Wing in state legislatures excluded from ACA coverage by refusing to accept the ACA provision for Medicaid expansion, as you well know.
MY unemployment statistic is THE rate that has been standard for decades. It's 6.3%. It is arrived at by the same metrics that measured unemployment under George the Worst at 10.0%. The "schooling" of which you speak which attacks this standard is specious partisan indoctrination mimicking the "re-education" programs that the Communists embarked on after taking over Vietnam - - although somewhat less convincing.
You are as shameless as you are transparent.
More shameless duplicity from your seemingly inexhaustible reservoir. That "same source" to which you and I both refer, states later in the article that many ACA enrollees haven't paid their premiums because, due to their having signed up just before the deadline, THEY DON'T OWE ANYTHING YET. One might suggest that you wait a year until all invoiced payments are processed before you conclude that ACA enrollees are deadbeats - but that wouldn't suit the extreme Right-Wing ...more catastrophist view of realities of which they disapprove.
THE Unemployment Rate, standing currently at 6.2%, is THE standard by which the health of the workforce is measured and has been THE standard for years. Your alternative is simply the ankle-biting of extreme Right-Wing critics who are appalled that the president's economic policies that they so hate are WORKING. All unemployment metrics, including your own preferred alternatives, were profoundly worse before President Obama and The Democrats took charge.
Thank god they won.
Obama's world...
1. I will have the most transparent administration.
2. I have Shovel ready jobs.
3. The IRS is not targeting anyone.
4. There is not a smidgen of corruption involving the IRS targeting.
5. If four Americans get killed, it is not optimal.
6. If somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them.
7. Under my plan of cap and trade system,electricity rates would ...more necessarily skyrocket.
8. ObamaCare will be good for America.
9. Your health insurance will be cheaper than your phone bill
10. You can keep your family doctor.
11. Premiums will be lowered by $2500
12. You can keep your current healthcare plan
GOOD LUCK FOLKS!!!!
Hard to hide from the facts
Sunshine is the best disinfectant
Well... It seems that is a two way boulevard.
On Monday, Hollywood announced a boycott against the Beverly Hills Hotel thanks to its ownership by the Sultan of Brunei, who recently declared that the country would be ruled under sharia law.
According to the Hollywood Reporter, that means that Brunei will now operate under laws that “call for violent punishment, including amputation and death by stoning, against those engaging in same-sex ...more activity and adultery by women
This is the first step of a Hollywood that will use its awesome power to call attention to the very real and tragic horrors homosexuals and women still face in Islamic countries.
Right Phil ?
I think you need a vacation from 27 east give Fox a try for a week and you will seem just how out of touch MSNBC with there host and two guests of the same opinion are
It is only then you will realize the truth lies somewhere in the middle
Ap... Ah... up-up-up-up-up. Debate, equal sign, over. Finished. Done. Ssh. The science is settled. The time for talking is past. Any other point of view, well, it’s Fox News. Fox News! It’s Rush Limbaugh. It’s Rush Fox Limbaugh News! It’s old white men. It’s the Koch Brothers. It’s an Islamo-homo-phobic-racist war on women stuck into binders by Rush Limbaugh on Fox News. And the person who made that offensive video will be punished I promise you. The future does not belong to those who have any other point of view. Because we have bi-partisan agreement. The science is settled. The experts have reached a consensus. The time for talking is past. The debate is over.
This message has been brought to you by Barack Obama, the Democrat party, an assorted collection of Marxist knuckleheads, but I repeat myself, the news media, but I repeat myself repeating myself, and Brandeis University. And Rutgers University. And ACT UP. And Planned Parenthood. Ans Phil. And Barack Obama. Again. Visit us at the debate-is-over-you’re-being-audited-you’re-under-arrest.com.
You don't know jack **** about the American Enlightenment, or American Republicanism, do you TCM? Guaranteed you know even less about Marx, who predicted Capitalism is self destructive. He also LAUDED certain aspects of capitalism, and defended it's traits which were not self destructive. He actually had a dual view of the capitalist system. BTW, plenty of proof for that self destruction theory, especially in the last thirty ...more years isn't there? Or maybe we should reference the Panic of 1857, which blew up the world economy, similar to the crash of 2007-2008. Or, how about the "Great Depression", where yet again "Capitalism" self destructed. Communism, especially in the former Soviet Union, North Korea, and even modern China is divergent, and foreign to anything Marx proposed in his writings, hypotheses, and theories. You should look to Tito's Yugoslavia for a closer system to what Marx had in mind for a very functional version of free market "Socialism".
Marx probably got some of his inspiration from Jeffersonian egalitarianism, and the French Revolution. He was born at about the same time the American Enlightenment period came to an end. Like the Democratic-Republican founders of this country, he despised aristocracy and elitism. The French Revolution occurred because it was inspired by Americans shedding the English yoke of Oligarchy, which was so kindly provided by the English Crown, and the Dutch East India company.
All you have is idiotic, parroted, Cold War stylized propagandist talking points spewing vomitously onto this page. The Federalist Party died in 1815, and should have stayed dead. Instead, "We" now have the modern "Republican Party", or GOP. For those who do not learn history, well, I'm sure you know the rest.
May whatever deity you believe in, have mercy on your soul...
So when any of us here on 27 East challenge that mantra, they are denying his pre conceived moral judgments and any other version of the facts is a contumacious notion one that is both foreign, and extremely risky for Phil to consider.
He has no way to process such information, Since It is not the way the NY times says it is... ...more so surly it is heresy.
Dan, he is not capable of watching Fox for a week or considering an opposing view point. it would shake the foundation of his belief system that people like Robert Reich, Paul Krugman and Ezra Klein have educated him to be reality.
I repeat, did hillary lie about benghazi while standing in front of the victims families and caskets !!!
that is all i want to know !!!
And just a little secret I think he is lonely and likes the negative attention
I resemble that!
Have a good weekend.
Breastfeeding offers no other options.
Its not fair to ask us two answer questions, What a joke
For me the issue is a simple one did Hillary Clinton lie about Benghazi while standing in front of the victims families and caskets
But you were to busy ignoring her to listen.
Now run along to bed little boy, Its getting late for you to be up causing a ruckus.
Don't worry school is out soon with that nice payed vacation. You can stay up a little later after June 15th and play Occupy Hill Street all you want.
The truth is finally starting to come out and this administrations legacy will be one of deceit and deception from the early campaigned days in 2006 getting worse and worse all the way up two the lame duck last two years with one word ringing the loudest
FAIL!
Bla Bla Bla
By philathome (7869), Southampton on May 10, 14 7:54 AM
Quote:
[You]
"get a job!!!"
-------------------------
[philathome]
"Got two.
And I work all year around.
Do you?"
----------------------------
[You]
"own my own business, work like a mad man for 10 months and take off for two, what's it to you?"
--------------------------------------
I don't care whether you work or not, bigfresh, but if you are going to be discourteously bombastic, you shouldn't ...more be piqued when someone imitates you in his response.
I wish this wasn't an anonymous board so I could actually study you people and what drives you. If you had let that statement be and not responded to it what would you feel?
First CFC (Chicago Fried Crow)
Now Cream of Crow
LMAO
But remember, "You didn't built it "Dude"
Generations of Americans before you pompous folk existed did.
"Nobody's right, if everybody's wrong."
~ Buffalo Springfield
Herewith, the four biggest right-wing lies about inequality, followed by the truth.
Lie number one: The rich and CEOs are America’s job creators. So we dare not tax them.
The truth ...more is the middle class and poor are the job-creators through their purchases of goods and services. If they don’t have enough purchasing power because they’re not paid enough, companies won’t create more jobs and our economy won’t grow.
We’ve endured the most anemic recovery on record because most Americans don’t have enough money to get the economy out of first gear. The economy is barely growing and real wages continue to drop.
We keep having false dawns. An average of 200,000 jobs were created in the United States over the last three months, but huge numbers of Americans continue to drop out of the labor force.
Lie number two: People are paid what they’re worth in the market. So we shouldn’t tamper with pay.
The facts contradict this. CEOs who got 30 times the pay of typical workers 40 years ago now get 300 times their pay not because they’ve done such a great job but because they control their compensation committees and their stock options have ballooned.
Meanwhile, most American workers earn less today than they did 40 years ago, adjusted for inflation, not because they’re working less hard now but because they don’t have strong unions bargaining for them.
More than a third of all workers in the private sector were unionized 40 years ago; now, fewer than 7 percent belong to a union.
Lie number three: Anyone can make it in America with enough guts, gumption and intelligence. So we don’t need to do anything for poor and lower-middle class kids.
The truth is we do less than nothing for poor and lower-middle class kids. Their schools don’t have enough teachers or staff, their textbooks are outdated, they lack science labs, their school buildings are falling apart.
We’re the only rich nation to spend less educating poor kids than we do educating kids from wealthy families.
All told, 42 percent of children born to poor families will still be in poverty as adults — a higher percent than in any other advanced nation.
Lie number four: Increasing the minimum wage will result in fewer jobs. So we shouldn’t raise it.
In fact, studies show that increases in the minimum wage put more money in the pockets of people who will spend it — resulting in more jobs and counteracting any negative employment effects of an increase in the minimum.
Three of my colleagues here at the University of California at Berkeley — Arindrajit Dube, T. William Lester and Michael Reich — have compared adjacent counties and communities across the United States, some with higher minimum wages than others but similar in every other way.
They found no loss of jobs in those with the higher minimums.
The truth is, America’s lurch toward widening inequality can be reversed. But doing so will require bold political steps.
At the least, the rich must pay higher taxes in order to fund better-quality education for kids from poor and middle-class families. Labor unions must be strengthened, especially in lower-wage occupations, in order to give workers the bargaining power they need to get better pay. And the minimum wage must be raised.
Don’t listen to the right-wing lies about inequality. Know the truth, and act on it.
~ Robert Reich
You just can't fix stupid.
And, just FYI "trickle down" is a pejorative. Remember to thank Will Rogers for that.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it”
~ Frederic Bastiat
"Republicans [...] simply don't know how to manage the economy. They're so busy ...more operating the trickle-down theory, giving the richest corporations the biggest break, that the whole thing goes to hell in a handbasket."
~Lyndon B. Johnson
"You know it's the rich pissing on the poor, that's their trickle-down theory"
~ Damien O'Connor
"There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it."
~ William Jennings Bryan
Such is the nature of hubris . . .
We get it. We understand, from your incessant and irrelevant self-serving posts, that you work really hard (and are a sycophant of the wealthy.) Congratulations - - and enough.
"We were responsible for the greatest revolution in the history of civilization. We gave to 98% of the human race freedoms that they have been lashed for, lost fingers for or had their heads chopped off for and we gave it to them for free and we are the most revolutionary nation that has ever been and ever will be and we don't know enough about ...more our constitution or our history to know why we should be proud of it,"
"George Washington said the constitution should be central, the party should be peripheral. Now we've got it all backed around and now the parties are central and the constitution is peripheral. We don't know anything about why the constitution is the most single greatest step toward humans improving civilization since the beginning of man's sojourn on earth," he said.
Huckabee asked Dreyfuss why he put his acting career on hold and is now focusing on his initiative to educate the citizenery on American civics.
"Let me put it to you in this way, you'll recognize this." Dreyfuss said. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Is there anything in that statement that anyone out there would disagree with?"
"Whenever you hear someone say American exceptionalism [doesn't exist], you should turn to that person and say, 'if you don't prove that statement, I'm going hit you right in the mouth.'
27dan's quote from Richard Dreyfus was a quote, and the phrase "hit you in the mouth" is common slang, like "hit you upside the head" -- you know -- a figure of speech which the speaker says to make a point, not to warn of an imminent actual violent act.
Right?
More importantly, you completely overlooked his POSITIVE point about "the importance of teaching the constitution and American exceptionalism."
Really phil . . . are ...more you sure about this train of thought . . .
Matt Kowalski: If you don't detach that arm's gonna carry you too far! Listen to my voice! You need to focus! I'm losing visual of you. In a few seconds I won't be able to track you. You need to detach. I can't see you any more. Do it now!
.
.
.
.
[detaching]
.
.
.
.
Hubris is another. The only thing we're the best at these days is incarcerating the most people per capita of any nation on the planet, and blowing the t*** off the world economy with our "exceptional" example.
"We" have a long way to go...
Thank god, I for one have had enough of that garbage being forced upon us
Amen!
Because both make as much rational sense...
"Mary, if I can instill into the minds of our American youth a love for their country and the principles on which it was founded, and create in them an ambition to carry on with the ideals which the early founders wrote into The Constitution, I shall ...more not have lived in vain." ~ James Upham
1892:
"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
1942:
"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
The only place the words "under God" can ever be considered to be recited in the "Pledge of Allegiance" are in a Church.
That's how the Establishment Clause works. Religion has NO PLACE in civic life. A pledge involving this nation, or it's symbols must be secular. No fancy legalese, or "opting out" can change it. The only thing that wouldn't violate the Constitution is if it was added to the Pledge in a pious environment. Civic life in this country should not, nor was ...more ever intended to be pious.
"Keep thy religion to thy self."
~ George Carlin
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ... "
This is what the 1st Amendment ACTUALLY SAYS about religion. YOU may read that to preclude any reference to an undefined "god" by government. I certainly don't. Nor, so far, do the Supremes.
To add "under God" by an Act of Congress is unconstitutional.
That's unconstitutional, ...more as
"If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us." ~ Justice Robert H. Jackson
But freaks out about saying one nation under god in the pledge?
Man this country has gone to hell.
hhs is also ok with abortion and defends the actions of local child pervert jay seers as not criminal but says killing a deer is the work of insensitive evil people
i don't get you two.
The three ways to overturn Roe v. Wade are:
• A constitutional amendment — That requires a two-thirds majority vote in each House of Congress followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states.
• Getting the U.S. Supreme to reverse its previous decision — This is by far the hardest method of overturning ...more Roe v. Wade, since judges are typically reluctant to reverse their own decisions or the decisions of their predecessors. Some have suggested appointing at least five solidly pro-life justices who would be willing to vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. This has already shown itself to be unworkable.
• Passing a law based on Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution to limit the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court — This requires a simple majority of both Houses of Congress and the president’s signature. If the president vetoes the bill, the veto can be overridden by two thirds of each House.
Overturning Roe v. Wade via Article III, Section 2 is clearly less difficult than either the constitutional amendment route or by trying to get the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse itself.
SO ? SO ? Who the H are you or the Dolphins to limit his free speech?
It seems clear is you that does not understand what the first amendment protects us from. Manly people like yourself
Piece of garbage
We know we will never get rid of guns;what we want is to make it harder for unstable people to get their hands on them.
Must be why so many here are all freaked out.
Lets stop the BS already, What Phil really wants is a gun registry... so in a martial law situation you know what doors to break down in the ...more middle of the night to collect the guns.
Maybe not this year but some day soon it will come to this.
Harry Reid did not like the people of Nevada sending his black ops BLM swat team packing and would have loved to round up the weapons and kill the cows.
Just watch Ed Schultz one night and you will see the true agenda of the left is to disarm the public. Once thats accomplished the country and all we fought for is finished.
We should have back round checks for concealed weapon carry licenses and need to re instate stop and frisk laws in the city's
Also need to better secure our schools not only for guns but knives and child predators like Jay Sears
You said , Georgia bla bla something
Quote:
"hhs is also ok with abortion and defends the actions of local child pervert jay seers as not criminal but says killing a deer is the work of insensitive evil people
i don't get you ... "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explicable by the fact that you, like other Right-Wingers on this forum, don't understand the concept of "ethical principle". ...more
- - -
to Captn America:
Quote:
"The left seeks every avenue they can to limit or ban firearms. You don't say "ok." In fact, the left even fund raises off it. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the ignoranti frequently lump me erroneously with the "left" (whatever that is), let me reassert here that we Liberals believe that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to own guns, a right that cannot be overridden short of a constitutional amendment.
- - -
to Mr. Z:
Actually, Justice Jackson wrote for the six to three MAJORITY in "West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette" which found that students don't have to SAY the pledge. However, the quote of his that you posted is dicta. In any case, neither the rest of the Supremes nor I believe that including "under god" in the pledge contravenes the 1st Amendment prohibition of "establishment".
You are quite wrong, again. The 2nd amendment language guaranteeing that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is clear and explicit. We Liberals believe that constitutional rights can only be modified by amendment or by accommodations (exhaustively considered and narrowly construed) necessitated by their impingement on other constitutional rights.
Folks' desire that their fear of these dangerous weapons should be assuaged ...more simply doesn't rise to the level of constitutional consideration.
I probably reject all the proposed infringements of the 2nd amendment that you do yourself, possibly more.
Young Supporters Struggle to Name Her Achievements...
The New York Times, which has actively helped Democrats and the White House perpetuate the phony "war on women" campaign against Republicans, reportedly fired its female executive editor because she complained about pay inequality at the so-called "paper of record."
Shame on The New York Times.
No to the new idolatry of money
55. One cause of this situation is found in our relationship with money, since we calmly accept its dominion over ourselves and our societies. The current financial crisis can make us overlook the fact that it originated in a profound human crisis: the denial of the primacy of the human person! We have created new idols. The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless ...more guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose. The worldwide crisis affecting finance and the economy lays bare their imbalances and, above all, their lack of real concern for human beings; man is reduced to one of his needs alone: consumption.
56. While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ideologies which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. Consequently, they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control. A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. Debt and the accumulation of interest also make it difficult for countries to realize the potential of their own economies and keep citizens from enjoying their real purchasing power. To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which have taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits. In this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, which become the only rule.
Such an advanced society which could travel the stars would probably have evolved beyond, and left behind the primitive belief in deity, or deities long before they discovered how to do so.
You are mad. I have told you that we Liberals believe that the 2nd amendment guarantees an individual citizen's right to keep and bear arms, just as it says. I further informed you that I probably am opposed to all of the infringements on this right to which you are opposed, and some others of which you haven't thought. However, since this doesn't sit well with your prejudicial preconception of Liberal belief, you have created a delusional counter-reality in which everything ...more is the opposite of what I have said.
You have allowed your ideological obsession utterly to derange you.
We Liberals support the constitution in its entirety. The extreme Right-Wing cannot understand our fidelity since its custom is to trumpet those provisions of the constitution which it likes while repudiating those that it doesn't.
Last May the DNC sent out a fundraising email signed by Communications Director Brad Woodhouse which made the political fight over Benghazi a reason to donate.
(repeat ad nauseum for Alinsky effect)
Seriously...how could such an esteemed org back a confirmed caucasian racist?
Sooo, what to do, what to do....
Support a confirmed colored racist? BINGO!!
Al Sharpton was honored with its "Person ...more of the Year" award Thursday evening.
In Sterling's absence.
Comparing Donald Sterling to Al Sharpton is inappropriate. Did Mr. Sterling ever defame innocent men with false accusations of gang-rape?
Mr. Sharpton is, and always has been, a dumb, lying, posturing, self-promoting, race-baiting, amoral, opportunistic pipsqueak. By contrast, all that can be said of Mr. Sterling is that he MAY be a racist.
But rather than creating new inventions, today’s corporations are parking their earnings abroad to avoid U.S. taxes and buying back shares of stock to pump up their prices. And instead of creating good jobs, they’re slashing average pay while turning top executives into America’s new royalty. (Corporate profits now constitute the largest percentage of the economy in 85 years, employee compensation is at its lowest level since 1948, and CEO pay has soared from 20 times that of the typical employee in the 1960s, to 273 times today.) Meanwhile, they’re spending ever more on politics, thereby undermining our democracy.
Given all this, it seems time to reexamine the privileged legal position of the corporation. One idea: Corporate charters should be reviewed every ten years and renewed only on condition that the ratio of CEO pay to the pay of average workers hasn’t exceeded 100 to one, the corporation hasn't been a serial lawbreaker, its earnings on U.S. sales have been fully taxed, and no earnings have been used to finance elections (a way around “Citizen’s United.”) What do you think?"
~ Robert Reich
FORWARD !
I believe we have been through a social experiment that cannot be ignored by history... an experiment that cannot be viewed as reasonable in retrospect.
Some will argue this administration was necessary, but no one will defend it as successful (except maybe Phil)
It promised to be transparent and uniting only to
unfold as sneaky ...more and partisan, its armature and over correcting nature as embarrassing as its denial of truth facts and apology for country.
History will come to esteem the prescience of the Obama administration, as it will deplore the vacuous meanness of the opposition Republicans whose "Know Nothing" obstructionism to all economically prudent and socially essential legislation will consign them to the same historical niche that THAT party eventually enjoyed.
Rubbish. America has never been stronger. Moreover it was Karl Rove who introduced systematic divisive politicking in order to elect George the Worst. Even so, but 18% of the citizenry are Tea Partiers, their numbers just seem greater because they incessantly bellow sensational lies. The rest or Americans hold rational political opinions and don't feel any more "divided" than usual.
Tea Partiers castigate "the media" because it won't support their mendacious ...more fantasies. On the other hand, there are innumerable Right-Wing media sources willing to give credence to every outrageous fabrication to spring from the imagination of these True Believers. Far from hiding presidential misdeeds, the mainstream media spends an incredible amount of time examining (and then discounting) the serial hallucinations of misfeasance manufactured by unethical Right-Wing propagandists.
It is the Right-Wing that is, and has been, responsible for our extraordinary deficit spending ever since George the Worst blew up the economy. If they would abandon ideological extremism in favor of minimal fiduciary oversight (instead of periodically threatening to destroy the nation's credit worthiness) we would be in surplus right now.
Finally, there is nothing that the Right-Wing enjoys more than to cackle about America being doomed. It isn't, and it won't be, as long as we keep Right-Wing nutters out of power. Nevertheless, these yahoos ARE tedious. However, we are fortunate that they spend most of their time talking to each other or they would drive us as mad as they are themselves.
Congratulations, class of 2014: You’re totally screwed
College costs more and more, even as it gets objectively worse. Only people worse off than indebted grads: adjuncts
THOMAS FRANK _ SALON
Until this changes, we're gettin' nowhere fast.
" . . . we're gettin' nowhere fast."
A cogent observation . . .
Republicans have a 77% chance of taking the Senate
BY JOHN SIDES
May 16 at 6:30 am
Our new Senate forecast gives the Republicans a 77 percent chance of a Senate majority.
Saying currently no one is trying very hard to revive the American Dream, and about what it will take to restore what she called the “basic bargain” that only hard work, effort and drive will lead to future success,
I commend you Mrs. Clinton That is a far better and positive message then the garbage we have been listening to for the past five years. Nice job
Absolutely, 100% ignorant statement.
HARRY REID: VOTE TO AMEND U.S. CONSTITUTION TO LIMIT POLITICAL SPEECH
On May 15, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on June 3 on amending the U.S. Constitution to limit political speech. If ultimately adopted, it would mark the first time in American history that a constitutional amendment ...more rescinded a freedom listed as among the fundamental rights of the American people. WOW!
Reid eschews amending the Constitution for reasons like requiring the federal government to balance the federal budget (can't have that), ...more or protecting marriage as the union of one man and one woman (horrors!). But take away a citizen's Constitutionally protected right to free speech? Hell yeah, Dirty Harry's all for that!
Justice Scalia in particular, by virtue of his focus on history to understand the intent of laws, was the most off-base.
A corporation was not a "person" and the Bill of Rights was not intended to protect corporations.
Period.
The first basis is a principle in Blackstone referring directly to the unborn, as clear and direct as any reference to the ...more Right to Privacy, or any of the other rights listed in the Bill of Rights. It is a clear declaration of rights and refers specifically to the unborn:
"Qui in utero, est pro jam nato habetur quoties de ejus commodo quaeritur: One who is in the womb is held as already born, whenever a question arises for its benefit."
According to English Common Law, the unborn have all the rights of the born, and these rights have been embodied in our Constitution in the 9th Amendment. All the rights in the Bill of Rights apply to the unborn, as well as the born.
These two red flags have marked the path, with floodlights of darkness, for the eventual utter destruction ...more of our freedoms by what President Dwight David "Ike" Eisenhower called the Military-Industrial Complex.
***** Ike's warnings resonate today. *****
PS -- It feels as if the milk has run dry, so to speak (on-topic for article about breastfeeding . . . )
_______________________________________________________
" . . . we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic ...more processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together . . . "
Just clarifying -- move on please.
hows the weather
A mix of clouds and sun with gusty winds. High 66F. Winds NW at 20 to 30 mph.
Evening: Partly cloudy. Low 51F. Winds NW at 10 to 15 mph.
Thank you.
Before that, you can grow the same cells in a petri dish.
And as far as the "Citizens United" decision, as well as the Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision, the founders of this country are spinning in their respective graves. Corporations were not permitted to influence elections, donate to political campaigns, or conduct any activities outside of their chartered purpose. A violation of any sort meant you were stripped of ...more your charter.
Writing a letter, speaking your mind, or yelling from ...more a soapbox is free speech. Throwing untold millions, and possibly billions in lobbying dollars is NOT free speech. Lobbyists were not permitted to exist when this country was founded either. They came along during the Civil War, and like a plague "We" can't seem to get rid of them.
Its just the way you belittled the topic "your words your issue"
it struck me as cold. It is really something we should all condemn as a barbaric selfish act of convenience.
besides how long can you discuss a fabricated topic like woman hoping local cops can be educated about breastfeeding. the women is obviously looking for attention, its so ridiculous.
now please leave me alone philip i know you will only try and upset me more its what you like to do.
Someone mistakes know for no, kind of wipes out any valid point they would make.
blank!'s point is well taken that the spelling errors such as know vs. no, there vs. their, etc., really do lessen the lesson sometimes!
Unlessen they don't?
[double entendre intended]
He's in charge of these departments. At some point you've got to ask where has he been and where is the competence, the elementary competence, he promised when he ran in 2008?
"One of Hollywood’s most revered said this week that the recent government shutdown had less to do with Republican objection to liberal policy or reluctance to incur more debt, and more to do with anti-Obama sentiment that rose to the level of racism.
During an interview on CNN, actor and director Robert Redford first expressed sympathy for President Obama: “I think he’s a good man. I think he’s an intelligent man, a compassionate man ...more who can’t function in that environment.”
He then spoke of the partisan atmosphere on Capitol Hill — finding fault especially with those on the right.
“It’s so divided now with the people that are so narrow and so limited that they would take us back into the past,” Mr. Redford said, as United Press International reported. “And I was trying to figure out, why are these people behaving so stupidly? Why are they behaving so horribly that it’s crippling our whole country?
Mr. Redford, 77, then answered his own question.
“I think it has to do with fear. I think it’s a group of people that are so afraid of change, and they’re so narrow-minded that some people — when they see change coming — get so threatened by change, they get angry and they get terrorized and then they get vicious. I think that’s who these people are. They’re so afraid of change that they’re behaving miserably,” he said, as UPI reported.
And then he dropped the “r-word,” alleging racism.
Mr. Redford said, UPI reported: “There is a body of congressional people that wants to paralyze the system. I think what sits underneath it, unfortunately, is there’s probably some racism involved, which is really awful. I think just the idea of giving credit to this president, giving him credit for anything, is abhorrent to them so they’ll go against it. … They’re representing their own self-interests, which is very narrow and in some cases bigoted.”
Because your IQ must simply eclipse that of Robert Redford. We can so obviously tell by your adherence to diction and grammar!!!
Buh bye (and good riddance in my opinion).
We as a country are moving on and leaving behind the dinosaurs of racism . . . . .
This is the typical garbage from the WH. Obama can't even try because the
Repubs are too mean. The lawlessness of this administration has pushed the
country over a Constitutional tipping point. Tyranny reigns.If he wasn't the first black president, he would have been impeached by now. Obama knows this and the others are afraid that if they move forward with impeachment, obama will pull that race card somthing else that should ...more no longer tolerated.
By LOUISE MARIE RANTZAU May 16, 2014 11:56am
I work for McDonald’s and I make $21 an hour.
No, that isn’t a typo. It’s really my salary.
You see, I work for McDonald’s in Denmark, where an agreement between our union and the company guarantees that workers older than 18 are paid at least $21 an hour. Employees younger than 18 make at least ...more $15 — meaning teenagers working at McDonald’s in Denmark make more than two times what many adults in America earn working at the Golden Arches.
To anyone who says that fast-food jobs can’t be good jobs, I would answer that mine isn’t bad. In fact, parts of it are just fine. Under our union’s agreement with McDonald’s, for example, I receive paid sick leave that workers are still fighting for in many parts of the world. We also get overtime pay, guaranteed hours and at least two days off a week, unlike workers in most countries. At least 10 percent of the staff in any given restaurant must work at least 30 hours a week.
But in New York last week, I met fast-food workers from around the world who aren’t as lucky as I am. We marched through Midtown Manhattan demanding a fair wage and respect at the workplace.
Many of the US workers I met make less than $9 an hour. And unlike in Denmark, where most fast-food workers are young people looking to make extra money while in school, the vast majority of US fast-food workers are adults trying to support their families. Roughly 70 percent are in their 20s or older, according to a recent study, and more than a quarter are raising kids.
I met Jessica Davis, for example, who works at a McDonald’s in Chicago and has two daughters — one 4 years old and the other 4 months old. After working four years at McDonald’s, she makes $8.98 an hour and has no stable work schedule.
How can fast-food companies expect employees to work hard but not pay them enough to live on? All fast-food workers should be able to support themselves while helping large companies like McDonald’s make huge profits.
Employees also deserve a voice in their workplace — as we have in Denmark — and McDonald’s should respect the right of employees in all countries to organize and speak for themselves.
McDonald’s didn’t give us our union. We had to fight for it. It was a five-year struggle that involved many demonstrations like the ones that will stretch across the globe on Thursday.
In Denmark, I will be in one of them. – Reuters
Thure W. (shwicksdad) Political Pundit
2,962 Fans
To the conservative right wing: These men aren't after what you are. They are spending lots of money to make you think they are. You are worthless to them except to toil to make them money. When you aren't useful to them anymore, they will discard you like dirty socks. Bank on it. If you work for a living, don't think for a moment you will be better off in the world they envision. Once they have ...more power, they and those like them will be allowed to do anything they wish to make and keep money and be exempt from paying for anything. Immune from law, immune from accountability and able to do anything they wish to you. If they want the Middle East oil fields, they will send you and your children off to a war to die by the thousands to get it. Your death and your children's deaths are of no consequence to them so a million or two of you dying to make them even more wealthy and powerful costs them nothing. It will be your money paying to build the weapons of war, not theirs. These are twisted megalomaniacs that are funding an all out propaganda campaign to convince you that they want what you want, and you're being stupid enough to buy it.
20 May 12:08 PM
How have we benefitted from "deregulation"? Pollution of the environment, economic meltdowns, economic bubbles, and black contract derivatives are not positives. Neither are "Too Big to Fail" and too big to prosecute companies. The Federalists lost in by 1815. Maybe you should find a party to follow whose ideas haven't already failed previously, or follow the pipe dream called "trickle down". It failed in 1857, 1929, and SPECTACULARLY in 2008. "Horse and Sparrow"? More like "horses**t economics".
AND, if you can't define Socialism you really shouldn't use the word...
ISBN-13: 9780195039146
Pub. Date: October 2009
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
What a gossipy, mean and vindictive finger-pointing Ship of Fools!
Not sure if you meant to quote from the movie, but you came close (as I recall).
"My name is Karl Glocken and this is a ship of fools! I am a fool. You’ll meet more fools as we go along. This tub is packed with them. Emancipated ladies and ballplayers. Lovers. Dog lovers. Ladies of joy. Tolerant Jews, Dwarfs. All kinds. And who knows—if you look closely enough, you may even find yourself on board."
Have a good weekend.
~
~ Dan Didio, Writer, Editor, Publisher
Have a good weekend!
Another proof that the Brock University finding on the relative intelligence of conservatives is spot on.
"Sanders to Introduce VA Accountability Bill
Friday, May 23, 2014
New Push Planned for Veterans Benefits
Bill Blocked by Senate Republicans
BURLINGTON, Vt., May 23 – U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Bernie Sanders said today that he will introduce legislation to increase accountability at the Department of Veterans Affairs and reintroduce comprehensive legislation – which Senate Republicans blocked last ...more winter – to improve VA health care, education, job-training and other benefits."
- press release from Sen. Bernie Saunders website
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go, Captn. The new version of the bill will not only actually improve veterans' care (the Democratic concern) and alleviate that nasty backlog that has made Republicans so righteously irate of late but will also address the "accountability" issue (the Republican concern.)
Under the circumstance, I am sure that we can expect the Republicans to pass the bill. We owe the veterans. (Well, Democrats think that they do, at least.)
You'd see **** get fixed pretty quick, IMHO...
~ Goethe
Trickle down, Reaganomics, Mellonomics, Horse and Sparrow, it's all the same thing. It failed in 1837,1857, 1866, royally in 1869, 1873 heralded the Long Depression, 1893, 1896, 1901, 1907, massively in 1929, 1937,(note the 50 year gap, thanks to the CEA of 1936 and Glass-Steagall) 1987, 1989, 1990, 1997, 2000, and SPECTACULARLY during 2007-2008.
No matter what you call it, it is what it is. HORSE**** ECONOMICS.
~ Gaius Marcius (Caius Martius) Coriolanus
#yesallwomen LoL
There is you Hilary campaign tactical forecast
She is only 1 quarter as bad as Obama
The progressive movement really wants Elizabeth Warren she would pick up where Barry left off and continue to destroy what little is left of our constitution.
You wouldn't understand the vernacular the document is written in if I spent a week coaching you in the King's English. Via etymology, most of the language means something completely different than it does today. An obsolete definition of "wealth" which applies to the period is "happiness". Thusly, the word "commonwealth" meant something totally different back then.
AND, it's not just because English is your ...more second language. You'd have the same trouble with most any average citizen.
Ben Carson = Good
Elizabeth Warren = BAD
Berny Sanders = BAD
Condi Rice = GOOD
your not fooling anyone with that anymore, but it is amusing to watch you think you are.
Only now after King Barack Hussein Obama II has had a chance to read about his latest scandal in the news paper and finally realized there was a problem has begrudgingly relieved Eric Shinseki of his command
VA funding year over year as follows:
2009:$97.7 billion;
2010:$127.2 billion;
2011: $125.5 billion;
2012: $126.8 billion;
2013: $139.1 billion;
2014: $153.8 billion;
2015: $163.9 billion.
March 19, 2010 – just days before Obamacare became law, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a speech before the Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it !"
Sanders whole heartedly voted for that Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Why didn't you let any ...more Republicans or we, citizens read it before you passed it. You are an incredible hypocrite!
Put Phil back in his can.
Senate majority in 14
Yes we Can !
Yes we Can!
MEH.
More disabled workers paid just pennies an hour
By Anna Schecter, Monica Alba and Mark Schone
A national charity whose executives earn six-figure salaries used a legal loophole to pay disabled workers as little as three and four cents an hour, according to documents obtained exclusively by NBC News.
An NBC ...more News investigation recently revealed that Goodwill Industries, which is among the non-profit groups permitted to pay disabled workers far less than minimum wage because of a federal law known as Section 14 (c), had paid workers as little as 22 cents an hour.
Read the original NBCNews.com story
Now newly obtained federal documents show that at least 13 Goodwill franchises in 10 states paid 140 workers even less.
According to Department of Labor filings acquired via the Freedom of Information Act, two Goodwill franchises in Fort Worth, Texas paid 51 employees less than 10 cents an hour in 2011, with 14 earning just four cents an hour for tasks described as “assembly.”
Franchises in Michigan, Maryland, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Virginia also paid employees 21 cents or less between 2008 and 2011, according to the documents. One franchise in Fairfield, Ohio paid a worker just three cents an hour for hanging clothes in 2008.
“The results of your FOIA request reinforce that people with disabilities are devalued in this situation and the operators of these programs are not keeping pace with the times,” said Clyde Terry of the National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency that advises the White House and Congress on disability policy.
“This may have been appropriate in the 1930s,” said Terry, “but in this day and age with the advances of technology, health care and education, is this the best we can do?”
A spokesperson for Goodwill International Industries countered that it was "misleading" to "cherrypick" low wages, calling them "extraordinary situations."
Section 14 (c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which was passed in 1938, allows employers to obtain special minimum wage certificates from the Department of Labor. The certificates give employers the right to pay disabled workers according to their abilities, with no bottom limit to the wage.
Most, but not all, special wage certificates are held by non-profit organizations like Goodwill that then set up their own so-called "sheltered workshops" for disabled employees, where participants typically perform manual tasks like hanging clothes.
The non-profits use “time studies” to calculate the salaries of Section 14 (c) workers. With a stopwatch, staff members time how long it takes a disabled worker to complete a task. That time is compared with how long it would take a person without a disability to do the same task. The non-profit then applies a formula to calculate a rate of pay, which may be equal to or less than minimum wage. The tests are repeated every six months, and wages can rise or fall.
The non-profit certificate holders can also place employees in outside, for-profit workplaces including restaurants, retail stores, hospitals and even Internal Revenue Service centers. Between the sheltered workshops and the outside businesses, more than 216,000 workers are eligible to earn less than minimum wage because of Section 14 (c), though many end up earning the full federal minimum wage of $7.25 or more.
Goodwill’s figures show that the non-profit currently has 69 local franchises employing 7,300 workers eligible to be paid less than minimum wage. NBC News obtained a range of filings from 2008 to 2012 for 89 different franchises.
According to Goodwill’s figures, nationally the average hourly wage for those Section 14 (c) employees is $7.47 an hour.
"The low wages you have referenced are extraordinary situations," said Goodwill Industries International spokesperson Lauren Lawson. “For example, sometimes an employee will work for a few minutes but then stop producing for the rest of the shift because of an emotional or behavioral issue. Unlike a typical employer, Goodwill does not dismiss an employee in such situations.”
Dan Buron, executive director of Goodwill Industries of Southeastern Michigan, which paid a worker six cents an hour in 2010, said the organization’s work program is meant to “provid[e] the most significantly disabled individuals in our community with work that will either lead to competitive employment; or for those where this may not be possible, to enjoy the many personal, social and economic benefits of working.”
Buron also said that in January 2013, Goodwill Industries of Southeastern Michigan “established a floor wage of $1.85 for all participants” in its program.
A spokesperson for Goodwill of Northern Wisconsin and Upper Michigan, which paid one worker in Marinette, Wisc. 16 cents an hour and another 19 cents in 2010, said the organization currently has one program participant “with significant and multiple disabilities” who makes 19 cents per hour.
“The person attends very few hours and cannot work without close, one-on-one supervision from staff to complete any task,” said the spokesperson, who noted that some participants earn more than the minimum wage, including one who is paid $9.38 per hour.
The CEO of the Hagerstown, Maryland Goodwill, which paid a “hand packager” 15 cents in 2011, said the wage was appropriate. “For the person in question, the pay rate was accurate for his/her productivity on the work we were doing then and for the amount of it that we had,” said Craig MacLean in an emailed statement. “The same rationale applies to the person on the same document … who was being compensated for his/her production at $8.24 because of vastly greater skill and dexterity.”
The National Council on Disability’s Terry said he was unsurprised by the wages revealed in the documents, and called for an end to the “sheltered workshops” that pay subminimum wages.
“We want to support people with disabilities to find integrated employment so they can fully participate in community life, contribute to their company’s bottom line, and have a full life,” said Terry, who chairs the council’s Subminimum Wage and Supported Employment committee. “It’s time these sheltered workshops be phased out.”
In an earlier interview with NBC News, Goodwill International CEO Jim Gibbons defended time studies and the Section 14 (c) approach. He said that for many people who make less than minimum wage, the experience of work is more important than the pay.
“It’s typically not about their livelihood. It’s about their fulfillment. It’s about being a part of something. And it’s probably a small part of the overall program,” he said.
Read Goodwill's full statement
In the same interview, Gibbons also defended the compensation earned by some Goodwill executives. His salary and deferred compensation totaled $729,000 in 2011, while the CEO of Goodwill Industries of Southern California earned $1.1 million and the top executive in Portland, Oregon earned more than $500,000.
“These leaders are having a great impact in terms of new solutions, in terms of innovation, and in terms of job creation,“ said Gibbons.
Cruz finished in first place in the annual conference's presidential straw poll at 30.33%. Dr. Ben Carson, a Fox News commentator and conservative activist, finished in second with 29.38% while Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, was third with 10.43%.
Ill gladly take any of the three
Phil and the rest of the progressive cult are angling for Elizabeth Warren thats who they really want for obvious reasons (She is a radical and will pick up destroying what is left of our republic, where BHO left off)
CHRIS MATTHEWS:Asking What Hillary Clinton Was Doing During Benghazi Here's one question I think she may have a problem with, and David Corn, you and I are in the business here. Putting down the idea that there's ...more a problem with her not going Meet the Press and all the other Sunday programs, which are the big programs of record on the weekends,
Hallelujah! Providence divines Ted the next Republican Presidential nominee. May ALL Republicans come to this realization!
to 27dan:
Here's the full quote of Nancy Pelosi's statement, "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it away from the fog of the controversy."
In further explanation she stated, "What I was saying there is we are House and the Senate. We get a bill. We go to conference or we ping-pong it, ...more and then you see what the final product is."*
Clearly she meant that until the bill is voted on, it has no final form. It is, until then, still subject to innumerable (and contentious) amendments that can be added by any member of congress.
Republican propagandists well understood this but their unscrupulous misuse of the incident is hardly surprising (as is the ignorant Right-Wing mimicry on this forum.)
* Meet the Press, November 17, 2013
Rubbish. Your misinterpretation of Rep. Pelosi's words is a typical, fanciful Right-Wing distortion. She was speaking of the dedication that was required to pass the bill over obdurate and mean-spirited Republican intransigence.
Regarding, Sen. Ayotte, it's a shame that she didn't care about the thousands who would have died had her opposition to Affordable Care been successful. Death, one might observe, is rather finally HARMFUL.
You are all sentenced to read Steve Martin's book Pure Drivel. I will also have to re-read.
At least it's hemmed in here, and not spreading to other threads like pestilence...
At the risk of offending an extreme Right-Winger with fact, here's what the CBO said about increasing unemployment insurance in a January 14, 2010 report:
“Policies that could be implemented relatively quickly or targeted toward people whose consumption tends to be restricted by their income, such as ... INCREASING AID TO THE UNEMPLOYED, would have the LARGEST EFFECTS ON OUTPUT AND EMPLOYMENT PER DOLLAR OF BUDGETARY COST in 2010 and 2011.” (emphasis ...more added.)
Rep. Pelosi was CORRECT.
The 500 “million” slip-of-the-tongue upon which Right-Wing ankle-biters pounced was corrected by the representative in a subsequent interview (although for reasonable people this was hardly necessary.) She meant to say “thousand”.
Regarding your duplicitous immigration comment, Rep. Pelosi actually stated that raids that SEPARATED UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS FROM THEIR DOCUMENTED CHILDREN were “un-American”, not immigration law enforcement. We Liberals agree, but I don't suppose that the stone-hearted Right-Wing perceives a distinction.
Finally, the Gallup Poll of March 22, 2010 (Rep. Pelosi's speech took place on March 9) showed that but 40% of Americans opposed Affordable Care.
[“sigh”]
to TheTurtle:
Some threads (like this one) regardless of the purpose with which they may have started life, become venues for local residents who like to engage in debate, usually about politics. I think that most readers realize this and don't expect posts on these superannuated threads to bear any relation to the original article. Additionally, I doubt that many people read these comments other than those who also post them, so it's a harmless co-option.
The fact is that, by default, the Press "comments" section has become the local online political debating forum in the absence of any other.
Unfortunately, some innocents occasionally wander into the neighborhood by ingenuously clicking on the "Recent Comments" section on the Press front page. To those, apologies.
DISGUST ...
Qatar allowing released Taliban men to move freely in country...
Reintegration: Military hides Bergdahl from public view...
FLASHBACK: 'Converted to Islam And Taught Captors Bomb Making Skills'...
NYT: Left note explaining desertion before going AWOL...
REPORT: Wanted to Renounce Citizenship...
Bergdahl: ...more America 'the Most Conceited Country in the World'...
Team Leader: 'A lot more to story than soldier walking away'...
Death sentence 'in the realm of possibilities'...
Pentagon knew whereabouts but didn't risk rescue...
14 SOLDIERS WERE LOST Searching for Bergdahl...
Team Leader Suspects Bergdahl Sought Taliban, Improved Their IED Attacks...
Never Officially Listed as POW...
WH Apologizes for Breaking Law with Prisoner Swap...
Push to impeach Obama surges in last 24 hours...
Carney Won't Say if U.S. Negotiated with Terrorists...
White House apologizes for 'oversight' in notification failure...
FATHER: 'I am still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners'...
MAG: White House Overrode Internal Objections To Terrorist Release...
'Suck it up and salute'...
Rubio: Obama 'Believes He's Become Monarch Or Emperor'...
Anger explodes...
Barack Obama, fresh off of a deal with international terrorists, is announcing a new effort to target domestic terror...
MSNBC crowd to see what the rest of the world was talking about since they are ignoring the big story over there and talking about why Elizabeth Warren should reconsider a run against Hillary
Would that they were.
That is 0bama.
Translation back to trying a new angle to repel the 2nd
... unless the captain is a extremist Right-Winger. In which case he would launch an investigation to see if the seaman had gone over the side involuntarily ...more and then inquire up the chain of command as to whether he should be rescued. It the answer to either question was "no", he'd let him drown - although the decision by that time would be moot anyway.
* N Y Times, June 2, 2014
To judge by their appearance on this forum, extreme Right-Wingers gave up any pretense at "thinking" years ago, if by thinking one means objective analysis and rational conclusion. They simply finesse reality to fit the tenets of their faith and then relentlessly bat their delusional observations back and forth between each other (supra.)
Their behavior is, however, instructive. Citizens whose clarity remains intact can learn from a study of their madness how ...more cults like "Heaven's Gate" come to be, and are cautioned by outcome of THAT faith against allowing Tea Partiers any access to power lest the Heaven's Gate tragedy be played out on a larger scale.
To recap, obama released five high-value, high-risk terrorists from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who it appears was a deserter, and has been known to be a deserter for a couple of years. People who served with him are calling on the military to court martial Bergdahl. Media reports indicate that at least six Americans died in their efforts to rescue ...more him.some say 12
In de facto negotiating with the Taliban and acceding to their demands, the president violated a law he signed, requiring him to inform Congress 30 days in advance of any prisoner release from Guantanamo Bay. And the effect of this deal will be to incentivize the capture of more Americans, since it obviously pays dividends.
Yet the administration took this humiliating accommodation and portrayed it as a victory of American values and purpose. The president held a Rose Garden event on Saturday extolling the deal. National Security Adviser Susan Rice referred to it as an “extraordinary day for America” that deserves to be “celebrated.” And Ms. Rice said of Sgt. Bergdahl, “He served the United States with honor and distinction.” Really?
can we talk about impeaching this radical man from power now?
Shameless hypocrisy.
i also would like someone to answer that question
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I want to put this into context with John Heilemann, and ask you a question. I think it's three tough questions. The question about his health, it's a controversy. Why, then, also given his background and everything that we are finding from people who served with him and people who have covered this story and letters that ...more he's written home -- why would Susan Rice be sent out, Susan Rice, be sent out repeatedly to say he served honorably and really push that as one the fundamental reasons behind this swap? And thirdly, with the White House contending they consulted Congress -- am I correct, that happened, right? Yes? Yes? They said they consulted Congress. And members of Congress saying they weren't consulted. What's going on here? What is going on here? Seriously, I don't understand it.
nor do we mika, nor do we
BERGDAHL HOMETOWN WELCOME CANCELED...
3 More Members Of Platoon Speak Out...
We Were Told 'To Keep Quiet'...
White House miscalculated reaction...
Faces growing fury in Congress...
PANETTA: I opposed...
WILL: When a president goes rogue...
LAW PROF: The President Nixon Always Wanted To Be...
Detainee Release Rattles Afghans...
Biden remains 'neutral'...
IMPEACHMENT' IF HE DOES IT AGAIN
Thank god that the well-being of our servicemen doesn't ...more actually depend on the goodwill of these mean-spirited armchair warriors.
Finally, it looks that the President may indeed have violated a law in order to secure Bergdahl's release. If so, I will be happy to await the verdict of the American people (after the shrilly caterwauling Right-Wing extremists have paused to draw breath) regarding the penalty he should suffer for his successful effort to bring home one of our boys.
Lets assume obama did not swagger out with his octo arms around the mothers waist and then listen with a smirk and a smile while the father recited what amounts to a Islamic call of victory in Pashtu,
Lets also assume that Bergdahl did not tweet , and then delete the following message: “I am ...more still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners. God will repay for the death of every Afghan child, ameen!”
So assuming even after knowing all that we should feel joy for this deserter and his family who all seem to have a sever case of Stockholm syndrome and assuming once again he is a POW and a hero like Susan Rice and Jay Carney would have us believe.You could then maybe make a case for trading one of the Teliban A Team for Bergdahl provided you gave 30 days notice for congressional comment as required and specifically re promised in a letter from Hillary Clinton reassuring no release of these 5 highest ranking radical Islamic terrorists without first going to congress.
Now HHS, Stop wasting are time trying to spin this travesty perpetrated on the American public and the family's who lost the sons trying to rescue this deserting America loathing piece of trash.
We haven't installed a dictatorship in years...
Thanks to both of you for proving my point about the callous insensitivity (and, especially in this case, the gobsmacking stupidity) of the extreme Right-Wing. To reiterate, it is an unassailable tenet of the American military, upon which all servicemen rely, that they will not be left behind. YOU would replace that guarantee with equivocation.
Your fanciful fictionalization of the facts (e.g. five previously unknown Talibani have now become "masterminds") ...more does not obviate your deplorable intent. You want to strip American servicemen of our guarantee of their rescue (even if they are "bad" [or a "loathsome piece of trash" in the estimate of the always even-handed, compassionate, and forethoughtful 27dan.])
Evidence from the field is that the Taliban was getting tired of holding Bergdahl and was beginning to question the value of keeping him alive. Additionally, video of Bergdahl showed his health to be deteriorating. So there were timely reasons for the president to decide not to delay for congressional action. Moreover, at the time of his signing of the law requiring congressional notification, the president issued a signing statement asserting that he could legally override it under his executive powers.
In any case, as I have said, I will rely on the American public (82% of whom are NOT doctrinaire extremists) to judge President Obama's culpability.
Another one of our boys has come home. Thank god.
This has to be one of the saddest displays of chest beating, and bombast I've observed in quite some time.
Phil, why do you always infer the worst possible interpretation of every poster you debate with? You do it every single time. Is that the only way to distract, with smoke and mirrors? Not a single post suggested that we leave out service men and women behind even if some posters questioned ...more Bergdahl's worthiness. Doesn't mean they are against POW's. You know well right that conservatives love our military and our soldiers.
Gotta, admit, that is pretty funny.
By dnice (1208), Hampton Bays on Jun 4, 14 8:54 PM"
This is the point I was trying to make Phil. You sensationalize and try to twist posts. Show me where I convicted him of anything. I asked a question which you conveniently didn't answer. You took my question and tried to paint it as an accusation.
Law professor tells senators: If money is speech, outlawing prostitution is unconstitutional
By Eric W. Dolan
Wednesday, June 4, 2014 11:26 EDT
An American law professor told senators on Tuesday that outlawing prostitution was a violation of the First Amendment if spending money was a form of free speech.
“Your other point though about money not equaling speech is a critical point for people to understand,” American University ...more professor Jamie Raskin said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. “There are lots of forms of purchase and exchange that we criminalize, for example, buying sex. We don’t say if someone wants to purchase the services of a prostitute, well that is just an expression of their speech.”
the Obama administration is willing to engage in irresponsible and illegal acts, bowling their way through mismanagement and cronyism and the rule of law to achieve their aims, no matter the cost. It is the same approach they used in his single domestic policy lol achievement obamacare, and they have not stopped using it since.
And there will be costs. Not for Obama, of course – for him, there are no consequences except bad poll numbers. He doesn’t appear to care about those any more. But the latest CNN numbers are as grim as it gets. For Obama on the issues, the poll finds him on the wrong side of roughly 60 percent of Americans across the board: Economy 38-61, Health care 36-63, Foreign affairs 40-57, Budget 31-67, Immigration 35-61, Guns 33-64, Afghanistan 42-56, VA medical facilities 37-58, Ukraine 38-53. His overall approval is 43-55, down to 34-63 among independents. And when it comes to helping the middle class, the main issue Obama has trumpeted with his rhetoric on inequality and class division, he’s upside down to the tune of 40-58.
Why did this happen? Why did Obama fail? The typical answer from the left is one of racism or bigotry or Republican extremism. but its more like obama’s inability to actually live up to his promise as a unifier
“is not excess of criticism, but an absence of self-criticism.” The Obama of 2008 promised he would end divisiveness by bringing us together – instead, as president, he has sought to end divisiveness by forcing everyone to accept his views. And in the end, he has achieved neither.
From the Koch brothers.
You just can't fix stupid.
We have to let these people go no matter what once our "war" is over. This administration managed to get something, for what would have been nothing. And you know that the Fourth Estate would have found a way to publicize this, and the "right" sure would regardless because they think doing everything within their ability to make this man a "failure" will somehow make them better or more appealing somehow.
And, ...more simply spouting other's opinions which have no real basis in logic or reality is stupid. BF is parroting, not formulating.
War is a racket, and it's ramifications are rarely, if ever palatable. And, I thought I'd use a better noun for my previous aphorism: Bellum est circumscriptorem.
Probably not...
They would have complained regardless of how the deal was made."
You really think that is a trait exclusive to the right? Talk about denial
I deal with the general public day in, and day out. I take the time to read what people say in reviews, comments, blogs. You get to see how people think, and what kind of precursory preconceived notions lead to irrational conclusions devoid of logical thought and often reason.
The biggest mistake often made is that things are simple, and numbers or statistics don't matter. It should be noted that ...more it is numbers and statistics which paved the way to calculating a round trip to the moon. When applied correctly, calculus can achieve wonders like interplanetary travel. When applied incorrectly for the sake of hubris, ego, and the wanton pursuit of monetary wealth and power, you get war and economic disaster.
I look around, and despite wondrous technological advancement and achievement, we still live in a primitive society.
As you requested, herewith find citations authenticating that Bergdahl's health was deteriorating and that, as a result, Taliban interest in keeping him alive was diminishing. (Data freely available to anyone interested in finding fact rather than in broadcasting ignorant propaganda.):
“A secret intelligence analysis, based on a comparison of Taliban videos of Sgt. Bergdahl in captivity in 2011 and December 2013 that were provided to the U.S., found that ...more the soldier's rate of deterioration was accelerating ... Officials who have seen the video described Sgt. Bergdahl's condition as 'alarming.'” ...
"'We believe [the Taliban] saw Bergdahl as a golden egg. That is why they kept him alive and as healthy as possible. But as he deteriorated, some people believe he became more of a burden to them', the [defense department] official said. 'And as the war was ending some of them [Taliban] came to doubt his value. He was more of a liability as his health declined.'"
- Secret Videos Prompted Bowe Bergdahl Taliban Prisoner Swap, (The Wall Street Journal, June 3, 2014)
Quote:
“hhs, your lawed extremist conclusions are based on incorrect, flawed and failed assumptions; those being, that a trade for five known terrorist and killers was the only option. It was not. “
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pray tell us the alternatives of which you speak. Would they produce a successful outcome before Bergdahl was (unfortunately) dead? Would that qualification be important in your estimation (especially considering that he was “bad”?)
Thanks to President Obama's decisive action, every American serviceman remains assured that if he is captured by the enemy, we will move heaven and earth to get him back, even if he isn't a very good soldier. THAT'S the truth that this story proclaims and for which it will long be remembered (especially by military personnel and their families and by anyone thinking of joining the military.)
to dnice:
Quote:
“Complete BS hhs. If you think the US gov't leaves no soldier behind, you are delusional."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are mistaken. If you can cite a single case in proof, please do so.
Quote:
“Don't try to portray conservatives as anti military when it is exactly the opposite.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have never done so. The point that I have made repeatedly about the extreme Right-Wing is that it is emotionally malformed and incapable of empathy or compassion, as this case so perfectly manifests. Folks of normal conscience might wonder whether going AWOL in the middle of a primitive foreign country controlled by hostile psychopathic killers might indicate something about mental state of the twenty-year-old who did so (as former Bush White House adviser John Bellingham indicated supra.) But not the extreme Right-Wing. It's response has been (definitively) ignorant, obtuse, malicious and vindictive. It could not be otherwise.
If the Taliban thinks this is a "win", they are about as smart as the people griping about it. We took something worth nothing in eventuality and ...more recovered an American citizen with it.
FUD is not helping.
Just watch it.
"Today’s jobs numbers are only enough to tread even with population growth, maintaining unemployment at 6.3 percent. When you include discouraged workers, the unemployment rate doubles to an alarming 12.2 percent. There are still 3.2 million fewer full-time employed persons than there were in 2007," ...more says Sessions.
"Since President Obama came into office in 2009, 7.2 million people have left the workforce entirely. One out of every six men aged 25–54 is not working. Employment in this group fell by 72,000 last month, while the number of employed women aged 25–54 fell by 37,000. Meanwhile, the workforce participation rate for women is at its lowest level in 23 years. Median household income is down almost $2,300 from what it was when the President took office. Real wages are lower than they were in 1999. Growth in the first quarter of this year was negative.
"These numbers are grim and make clear that this economy is nowhere close to performing at an acceptable level."
Thanks! I am definitely going to have to make some time for that. Gore Vidal is one of my idols. He actually gave me my penchant for aphorisms. Will they be running it through June, or all summer?
Theres a real role model
Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to remember her own son could not stomach her politics either
How foolish of me. On the one side we have an "intelligence analysis" of the data - and on the other Joe Manchin's "opinion" (supporting the Right Wing preconception) of a video. How could I have overlooked the qualitative difference that makes Manchin more authoritative here?
Quote:
"While you agree that Bergdahl is worthy of a dishonorable discharge and evidence to date suggests he deserted in a time of war which is punishable by death, it is amusing ...more the accolades you give to Obama for his 'swift decision' when Bergdahl deserted in 2009.
-----------------------------------------------------------
You're reading for time rather than for comprehension again. Nowhere did I ever state that I believed that Bergdahl deserved a dishonorable discharge, nor, certainly, merited being shot as a deserter as you propose. Furthermore, you have misunderstood my reference to the president's "decisive action", that being his decision to seize the opportunity to rescue Bergdahl when he saw the opportunity. YOUR reference seems to be to some failure of the president when Bergdahl originally disappeared. Do you fault him for not traveling to Afghanistan and searching personally? What?
While the extremist Right-Wing would prefer to see Bergdahl lined up against a wall and shot (or, at the least, abandoned to his fate for all time in Afghanistan), the rest of Americans, those with compassionate hearts, are just glad to see him home. If an investigation shows him to bear fault, so be it. Fortunately, military justice, rather than the splenetic opinions of cold-blooded Right-Wing ideologues, will decide his fate.
to Captn America:
More lies.
Bergdahl WAS de facto “AWOL” since INTENT is not required for this transgression. Intent IS, however, required for the charge of "Desertion". YOUR "classic definition" is NOT the military's (UCMJ, Articles 85 &86.) Your assertion that Bergdahl is a deserter is simply another of your transparent, partisan falsehoods. Bergdahl's status re desertion will be determined by a military court marshal, if convened. D'uh.
Your ...more quote referring to the president bypassing the intel community is the self-serving comment of Sen. Marc Rubio as told to Fox News. Do you have any other sources whose objectivity might be less suspect?
Diane Feinstein's statement, to which you refer, is as follows: “No, I don’t think there was a credible threat, BUT I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE NO INFORMATION THAT THERE WAS." [emphasis added] It was in answer to the question of whether she thought that the Taliban would have killed Bergdahl IF DETAILS OF THE PENDING AGREEMENT HAD LEAKED OUT, not, as you imply, in answer to the question of whether the Taliban would have killed him had his health deteriorated further and his value to them diminished (as the intelligence analysis found.) You have attempted to dupe readers by posting a misquotation within a misdirection.
Truly, you and shame are utter strangers.
If you thought President Obama’s release of five top Taliban commanders in exchange for POW Bowe Bergdahl was bad, wait until you see what his Gitmo parole board plans.
Desperate to empty the Guantanamo Bay prison by the end of his term, Obama quietly is giving “get out of jail free” cards for the flimsiest of excuses.
One al Qaeda suspect captured in Afghanistan is considered reformed because he took up yoga and read a biography of the ...more Dalai Lama. Another is eligible for release because of his “positive attitude.”
And one longtime detainee, a former bodyguard for Osama bin Laden, is now harmless because he’s going to start a “milk and honey farm.”
Go look at the pictures of these three you can see the evil intention in there eyes, "Thats right I said It"
Milk and Honey Farm ROTFLOL. get ready for the next 9-11 and remember !
Dear god, you quote the section of the UMCJ requiring "intent" for desertion and then ignore it. Your previous post said, in your words that "[Bergdahl] had missed important duty as part of a military deployment, the classic definition of desertion." That's total BS, as my reference to the UMCJ and its requirement for "intent" proved.
Nevertheless, rather than apologize for your error, your REPEAT it without correcting your prior assumption that he IS a deserter ...more and that the only function of a court martial would be to determine his degree of punishment. ("And while death is a possible punishment for such an offense, it goes without saying that will be the determination of military justice. Once again, duh.")
I reiterate, Sen Feinstein's response had NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO with the intelligence analysis finding that Bergdahl's health was declining and his value to the Taliban diminishing thereby. However, rather than apologize for you deliberate misrepresentation, you ignore its substance and post irrelevant dicta about general senate intelligence committee ignorance. (Just to refresh your memory, the previous discussion dealt SOLELY with this question. Here's what you said, apropos of it: "Don't waste my time. It's the same information recorded five months ago that prompted middle ground democrats like Joe Manchin to determine they were not convinced that Bergdahl's health was in danger when compared to current day video.")
One notes that your only source for the assertion that President Obama bypassed the intelligence remains Marc Rubio, the tweedledee of the senate Tea Party twins.
As is your habit, you continue to deposit layer after layer of lies, misrepresentation and misdirection upon your initial falsehoods rather than admit your fabrication. I once compared you to Baghdad Bob. That was a disservice. Compared to you, he's Diogenes.
The entire debacle is politically motivated BS. Saint Ronnie sold 1500 missiles to Iran (clandestinely) for three hostages, who were replaced by three more. Would it have been more palatable if we got $10K a head to boot for each man? I believe it was George Shultz who called the entire debacle a "hostage bazaar". It's business as usual, unless your blithely ignorant ...more of history.
My advice? Do your country a favor. Don't travel to potentially dangerous destinations, and bring our boys home.
"What me worry?"
AEN
Rest in Peace, Sister Jackie Walsh, 23 months -- 99 weeks -- later.
United States of Amnesia.
Perhaps it is that your enormous proboscis as depicted on your avatar is affecting your ability to read the printed word rather than that my high hat is preventing my absorption of its meaning. I, at least, can see clearly that the citation that you post does NOT assert that desertion can EVER be found in the absence of intent.
Here's your cite:
“The primary difference between the two offenses is intent to remain away permanently, OR (emphasis ...more added) if the purpose of the absence is to shirk "important duty," (such ...more as a combat deployment)”.
Here's the relevant part of the same article that you neglected to read:
“If the INTENT of the absence was to 'shirk important duty,' [Paragraph (2) of UCMJ, Article 85] such as a combat deployment, then the 'INTENT to remain away PERMANENTLY' [Paragraph (1) of UCMJ Article 85] to support a charge of desertion is not necessary.” [Emphasis & emendations added]
What you construed to be an exception for the requirement of intent was merely the author's description of the circumstances wherein an AWOL status can be determined to be desertion even if it was not the intent of the perpetrator to be AWOL PERMANENTLY.
Whether found under Paragaraphs (1) or (2) of UCMJ Article 85, "intent" is a sine qua non of the charge of desertion.
Thus, your assertion that, “Intent is just one of two factors that elevate AWOL status to desertion. Either can be applied.”, is absolutely, unequivocally WRONG.
AWOL is a "status" charge. Regardless of the reason, a soldier is AWOL if he doesn't show up. It doesn't require adjudication.
"Desertion" requires "intent", either not to show up permanently or, AS YOU PROXIMATE QUOTE SHOWS, to avoid hazardous duty. (For god's sake, the word "intent" recurs repeatedly in the paragraph.)
You cannot infer intent from status, it has to be determined by a military court martial.
Ergo, your assumption of Bergdahl's ...more guilt (of desertion), in the absence of a finding of intent, and after reading the relevant UCMJ statutes, is psychological denial so extreme as to be symptomatic of mental illness.
Thus does your behavior on this forum become clear.
AMERICA STUGGLES WITH SURGE IN CHILD MIGRATION...
Kids Complaining Burritos They're Being Fed Making Them Sick...
JUDGE: 'Government has simply chosen not to enforce border laws'...
Third military base opens for migrants...
Agents threatened with firing after photos leak...
MEMO: 230,000 children expected over 24 months...
Officers diverted from handling crimes...
'40% of agents not at border'...
Sen. Sessions: Obama 'committed to escalating lawlessness'...
Congressman: ...more Impeach Holder for Allowing 'Illegal Alien Smuggling'...
Supreme Court rules against immigrants over visa eligibility...
Obama: 50-50 chance House acts on amnesty next month...
PAPER: Why does GOP want it?
If you're going to post revisionist codswallop to conceal your previous errors, you at least should not do so in the same thread with the blunders themselves. Here's what you originally said, mere inches above, after I had stated that Bergdahl was AWOL:
"In classic hhs slippery fashion you classify Bergdahl as being AWOL. Problem with that incorrect reclassification, he wasn't merely AWOL, he had missed important duty as part of a military deployment, the classic ...more definition of desertion. "
As you have finally admitted, several thousand tortuously verbose words later, "I" was correct and YOU were wrong, since no competent authority had decided that Bergdahl had absented himself WITH THE INTENT of avoiding a deployment. He WAS "MERELY" AWOL; he was NOT a deserter as YOU "classified" him.
I appreciate your wanting to save face by trying to trim your sales in the face of incontrovertible proof of your ignorance but do you really expect anyone to fall for your puerile rationalizations?
Chicken pox, staph infection fears...
Widespread sexual activity...
Feds violating child abuse laws?
Valerie Jarrett in secret meetings with activists...
PAPER: Influx 'threatens to transform nation'...
Questions surround surge at border...
Border Agent Issues Plea for Help, Says USA Overrun By Criminal Aliens...
Deportation costs soar...
THIRD military base tapped to house illegal immigrant children...
And China will call in the debt - that you can count on - ...more what a mess these idiot Obama voter have created .
You almost had me until you blamed "Obama voters".
Quote:
"Well if you REALLY want to get technical o’ not-so-wise one, we’re both wrong for Bergdahl hasn’t been formally charged with anything. LOL! So was Bergdahl potentially AWOL what says the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION? Yes. Is he potentially a deserter in the court of public opinion having shown intent (GASP) of missing important duty at a time of military deployment? Yes!"
----------------------------------------------------------
You ...more STILL don't get it. Bergdahl "WAS" AWOL. No opinion is needed for this classification. He didn't show up. (Perhaps it will be easier for you to understand if you substitute, "Not Here", for AWOL.)
In contrast, regardless of what the "court of public opinion" (or you) thinks, he is NOT a deserter until a military tribunal so finds him.
Quote:
"You on the other hand continue to arrogantly even consider or acknowledge that Bergdahls actions might even, maybe, potentially – whatever – qualify as desertion - whether charged or convicted by a military court, of which doesn't necessarily address the potential depravity of his actions."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolute rot. Sure, Bergdahl MAY be guilty of desertion but it's going to take a court determination of his intent (perhaps based on circumstantial evidence) to arrive at that conclusion. MY objection was to your "finding" (see my iteration of your statement in my proximate post) that Berdgahl WAS a deserter (rather than "merely" AWOL) due to the circumstances of his absence. You were wrong. Since then you have expended an enormous amount of verbiage trying to obscure that mistake and now pretend that you "really" meant that people's "opinion" was that he was a deserter (even if "really", he wasn't.)
Quote:
"And while you glancingly acknowledge that Obama committed a crime, the only incontrovertible proof would be your ignorance for you demonstrated your locked-in and preconceived beliefs and hatred – top to bottom - starting off your tirade with the typical vitriol and venom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More lies. I never did. Both President Obama's status as head of the executive branch of government (as noted in his signing statement) and as commander-in-chief of the armed forces overrode any need to notify congress.
I find the rest of your paragraph difficult to follow but perhaps you could post examples of my "preconceived beliefs and hatred" in order for me to address your perception.
Cantor loss, a defeat for amnesty", Tonight is as we look at this extraordinary upset is what does this tell us about the role of the tea party within the Republican party? And what it tells me is the Republican party cannot ignore the tea party.
Take a long time to think about whether you would prefer one more Democrat in Congress and be able to get rid of John Boehner.
Let's see how many voters the RINOs really have. If they like spending money to defeat the voices of ...more those who represent us, let them get their own votes for the general election.
One more Congressional Democrat can't sell our principles out but Boehner and McConnell have been doing it daily.
In the 1960s, professors Andrew Cloward and Francis Fox Piven of Columbia University, obama’s alma mater, devised a plan to provoke chaos by deliberately overwhelming governmental systems and the U.S. ...more economy to the point of collapse, paving the way for state intervention that would ultimately replace America’s free-enterprise republic with a collectivist system.
Reuters/Ipsos 6/11 - 6/5 Approve 38 Disapprove 55 -17
Congress Job Approval Starts 2014 at 13% - Gallup.Com
and the American apology tour continues,
ISLAMISTS CLOSE IN ON BAGHDAD
IRAQ ANARCHY SPIRAL...
Terrorists 'full-blown army'...
Medieval Sharia Law Imposed...
Thousands of Iraqis take up arms...
Army Collapses...
PM Asks USA for Strikes...
Iran Deploys Forces...
Americans evacuated...
Germany ...more calls on citizens to leave immediately...
FLASHBACK: Biden: Iraq One of Obama's 'Great Achievements'...
King Barack Hussein Obama II Legacy in Iraq
First Falluja, then Mosul, and now the oil-refinery town of Bayji. The rapid advance of Al Qaeda-inspired militants across the Sunni heartland of northern and western Iraq has been stunning and relentless—and utterly predictable. Here’s a forecast: the bad news is just beginning.
The capture of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, by Sunni extremists on Tuesday is the most dramatic example of the ...more resurgence of the country’s sectarian war, which began almost immediately after the withdrawal of the last American forces in December, The fighters who took Mosul are attached to an Al Qaeda spawn called the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, which is now poised to carve out a rump state across the Sunni-dominated lands that stretch from western Baghdad to the Syrian border and beyond.
WHAT A MESS
"Actually, they're coming here because of increased violence in central America"
because it's politically expedient for your cause
He has got his own constitution that he is operating under. He now regulates the entire healthcare system. And the story that was missed among all the scandals that are supposedly undoing his presidency is the climate change regulations. This is all by regulation; nothing in legislation.
He doesn't need the Congress, which is going to revolutionize ...more and put control of U.S. energy, which is the U.S. economy, in the Environmental Protection Agency. You want to run America? Don't run for the presidency, get yourself appointed head of the E.P.A. It makes Stalin's five-year plans look like a picnic the way they're going to have control of the economy. He doesn't need Congress; he doesn't need popularity.
So the girls can go to school without fear and grow up to lead this region of animal men out of there caves. You would think you would be for such a concept, But no your an hypocritical ideologue. In this country you support the barbaric act of convenience known as abortion on demand... you say its a womens right to choice... but then would leave the little girls and young ...more women getting raped by the animal Islamic patriarch society over there with no rights ? They are on there own. Why should every country be just like us? your twisted in the head my friend... and your some sort of counciler to children, God Help us
As for sacrifice, We already made the sacrifice and it would seem Obama made sure it was for all for nothing.
Contrary to your latest lie, President Obama committed no crime. It is no crime to disobey a law that is invalid, as is the law requiring notification of congress, trespassing, as it does on the president's authority as leader of the executive branch and as supreme commander of the armed forces.
There is, of course, a remedy that House Republicans can employ to sanction a "criminal" president. It's called IMPEACHMENT, and the founding fathers included it in ...more the constitution specifically for situations such as this. Since Republicans hold the House, if enough of them share your ignorant opinion, we can expect articles to be drawn.
Here's some other opinions which you expressed earlier in the thread and have since abjured or amended:
Quote:
"In classic hhs slippery fashion you classify Bergdahl as being AWOL. Problem with that incorrect reclassification, he wasn't merely AWOL, he had missed important duty as part of a military deployment, the classic definition of desertion."
"INTENT is just one of two factors that elevate AWOL status to desertion. Either can be applied. To provide a source to my point I’ll point you to about dot com, AWOL and Desertion by Rod Powers. In it he notes “The primary difference between the two offenses is intent to remain away permanently, OR (emphasis added) if the purpose of the absence is to shirk "important duty," (such as a combat deployment)”. It [i.e INTENT] is NOT the sole factor as you have stated." [Emphasis & emendations added.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, initially you asserted that Bergdahl was a deserter by virtue of having "missed important duty" (full stop) which "elevated" his AWOL status to desertion. Your employment of weasel words subsequently doesn't conceal your ignorance.
Quote:
“Your arrogance and ignorance as usual hhs, knows no bounds. I also leave you with this: Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), said she couldn't find any evidence indicating there was a 'credible threat' (to Bergdahl's life) in this regard."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whereas your misleading quote makes it appear that the senator is affirming that she didn't think that Bergdahl was in danger of being killed because his health was deteriorating, in reality, as I pointed out, she is actually referring to and entirely different question which was NOT our subject of discussion. Once again, you subsequently tried to weasel out of your deception by claiming that you were referring to Senate Intelligence Committee ignorance GENERALLY, showing a contempt for your readers' intelligence that is insulting.
Finally, we come to you most proximate exposition of ignorance (or denial[?]):
Quote:
“I get it just fine. You want it both ways – to ignore military justice when it suits your argument (AWOL), but embrace it when it doesn’t (desertion) – when neither have been charged or applied to date. Facts dictate that he likely not only AWOL, but also a deserter … "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Captn America, as this quote shows, you STILL don't get it at all. Bergdahl WAS AWOL in Afghanistan. No court martial is needed to determine that. He didn't show up – He didn't have a pass – He's AWOL. Whether he is sanctioned for that behavior will depend on the finding of a court marshal, perhaps the same one that considers whether or not he is a deserter (which he currently IS NOT.) “I” have consistently used the appropriate terminology, as defined by the UCMJ, to describe Bergdahl's status. It is YOU who pick and choose which bits of the UCMJ articles you like, just as you do with the constitution.
Again, you are not reading critically. Sen. Feinstein expresses dismay that the president didn't follow the law and notify the committee. That's reasonable, although presidential advisers have noted the exigencies that prevented them from so doing in this case. It's a complaint, not an accusation, as noted by the fact that she avoids the buzzword, "broke", that you employ.
However, even if he "broke" the law, which I have no qualms about saying he "might" have ...more (depending on the acuteness of those exigencies), the law is void because it unconstitutionally violates the separation of powers and President Obama's status as chief executive and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The constitution trumps statute. Regardless of the spin that the Republicans may put on the circumstances, the fact is that President Obama acted constitutionally and legally.
["sigh"] Perhaps you should ask the lunatic Right-Wing extremists in the House to draft articles of impeachment. THAT'S the legal remedy that you seek and the ONLY means by which a judicial determination can be reached as to the legality of the president's actions.
Alas, even the lunatic Right-Wing will not do something so stupefyingly dumbheaded as that, but we live in hope. (In between World Cup matches, we could enjoy watching Right-Wingers embarrass themselves.)
So stop your caterwauling and complaining. If you are unhappy with the judicial remedies provided, raise the bloody flag of revolution. Not doubt your demented colleagues will flock to your banner - - - whereupon we can institutionalize you all.
A new CNN survey suggests obama is even more unpopular as President George W. Bush.
Just over half of those polled, 51 percent, have an unfavorable view of obama, and 51 percent currently feel the same about Bush, according to a CNN/ORC International poll released Thursday.
Forty-seven percent of the public has a favorable rating of obama, which CNN said is a new low for him, and roughly identical to Bush’s ...more favorable rating
obama scored from 5 to 17 points lower than GWB in areas such as foreign policy and the economy
The dam has cracked wide open and the MSM cant patch it up fast enough... like UD said above wow what a mess...
This from todays Wall street Jornal...
The fall of Mosul, Iraq, to al Qaeda terrorists this week is as big in its implications as Russia's annexation of Crimea. But from the Obama presidency, barely a peep.
Barack Obama is fiddling while the world burns. Iraq, Pakistan, ...more Ukraine, Russia, Nigeria, Kenya, Syria. These foreign wildfires, with more surely to come, will burn unabated for two years until the United States has a new president. The one we've got can barely notice or doesn't care...
The big Obama bet is that Americans' opinion-polled "fatigue" with the world (if not his leadership) frees him to create a progressive domestic legacy. This Friday Mr. Obama is giving a speech to the Sioux Indians in Cannon Ball, N.D., about "jobs and education."
Meanwhile, Iraq may be transforming into (a) a second Syria or (b) a restored caliphate. Past some point, the world's wildfires are going to consume the Obama legacy. And leave his successor a nightmare.
From the WH Schedule for June 12, 2014
10:55 am The President holds a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Tony Abbott of Australia; the Vice President also attends
Oval Office
Pool Spray at the Bottom
Gather Time 11:40AM – Brady Press Briefing Room
12:30 pm The President and the ...more Vice President meet for lunch
Private Dining Room
Closed Press
2:05 pm The President honors the WNBA Champion Minnesota Lynx
East Room
Open Press
Pre-set 12:50PM; Final Gather 1:40PM – North Doors of the Palm Room
Thank you Elon Musk, and special thanks to Gene Roddenberry for dreaming of a future where self improvement defines wealth, not the size of your trophies.
The King has spoken
'We are not gullible enough to believe thousands came without aid and assistance'
An organization of former Border Patrol agents Wednesday charged that the federal government, under the administration of President Obama, is deliberately arranging for a flood of immigrant children to arrive in America for political purposes
“This is not a humanitarian crisis. It is a predictable, orchestrated and contrived assault on the ...more compassionate side of Americans by her political leaders that knowingly puts minor illegal alien children at risk for purely political purposes,” said the statement released by the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers.
“Certainly, we are not gullible enough to believe that thousands of unaccompanied minor Central American children came to America without the encouragement, aid and assistance of the United States government,” the officers said.
Obama “attempt to flood border” part of infamous socialist “Cloward-Piven” strategy
“Anyone that has taken two six- to seven-year-old children to an amusement park can only imagine the problems associated with bringing thousands of unaccompanied children that age up through Mexico and into the United States.”
Republicans are blaming Obama’s immigration policies for enticing the illegals, particularly the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program launched in 2012, which recently was renewed.
More than 33,000 have been caught in Texas alone over the last eight months, the report said, overwhelming Border Patrol capabilities.
A federal judge even concluded the White House “has simply chosen not to enforce … border security laws.”
Never in the last 50 years here in the US have I seen the country go so far towards communism. Here are just a few examples of slogans and concepts directly lifted from communism/Marxism:
Forward!
Single payer
Income inequality
Fairness
Spread the wealth
Income redistribution
Report suspicious activity to the President's ...more website
Mao in the White House
Communists on Obama's team
Disarm the population
New Party
Grade Schoolers singing about Dear Leader (Mm, mm, mm Barack Hussein Obama)
Actually, you're probably clueless...
War is what happens when diplomacy gives way to violence, and primitive instinct. Which type of "war" is the question. A war of words, or a war of weapons.
Money sucking greed
Watch the human gluttony
All these mouths to feed
Contortion
Contortion in my head
Contortion
All I see is red
Rape the earth of everything
Shoot it through the brain
Man remains the carnivore
Selfish and insane
Contortion
Contortion in my head
Contortion
All I see is red
Money sucking greed
All these mouths to feed
Shoot it through the brain
...more Selfish and insane
Contortion
Contortion in my head
Contortion
All I see is red
Live to take and take to live
Don't put nothing back
Bleed the system never give
Hung to dry and crack
The one way that Iraq differs from Vietnam is that whereas large-scale killing ended in Vietnam with the North Vietnamese victory, in Iraq the bloodshed will continue indefinitely. After the fanatical, murderous, SUNNI Muslim terrorist rebel group (the ISIS) is victorious, the SHIITE Muslims, who are the predominant Islamic sect in Iraq, will form their own fanatical, murderous, SHIITE Muslim terrorist ...more rebel group, and rise in revolt. The likelihood is that sectarian slaughter will continue for decades, cause millions of deaths, and only end when a merciless psychopath like Saddam Hussein or the Ayatollah Khomeini takes power.
Afghanistan will follow suit in a few years, except that the continuing slaughter will be motivated by tribal antagonisms since ALL Afghanis are good, card-carrying Sunnis.
Unfortunately, the USA will be obligated, as a result of our occupations, to accept lots of Iraqis and Afghanis who cooperated with us as political refugees, and, as sure as night follows day, some of their children will be "radicalized" and kill fellow Americans in the name of Allah.
This SHOULD teach us never again to engage in conflicts like this from any nearer than 10,000 feet above ground - - but it won't.
June 12, 2014 - 2:55 PM
This guy is in way over his head and the people finally can see it!
WHAT A MESS !
39.5 billion
When Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi walked away from a U.S. detention camp in 2009, the future leader of ISIS issued some chilling final words to reservists from Long Island.
The Islamist extremist some are now calling the most dangerous man in the world had a few parting words to his captors as he was released from the biggest U.S. detention camp in Iraq in 2009.“He said, ‘I’ll see you guys in New York,’”
Iraq,
2009
Bin sippin the brandy tonight?
Just 'cause I'm hardly speakin', don't think I ain't readin'...
Border Patrol Threatened With Criminal Charges for Speaking to Reporters...
Agents changing diapers, heating baby formula for surge of children...
And how would you react to federal agents commenting on the deplorable conditions you allow your children to endure? Your house, your problem.
And if 0bama wants to hire the most expensive and most inexperienced babysitters on the planet, who are we to complain? I mean, just because WE have to pay for them? oh, wait......there is ...more THAT!
OK kids, time for bed. Eat up!
As Ike said in the 1950's and 60's -- beware the Military/Industrial Complex.
The United States of Amnesia
Now, the idea -- here we have Nixon lost 18 minutes. Obama's now lost two years of emails, and one thing that people don't remember, the second article of impeachment for Richard Nixon was ...more the abuse of the IRS to pursue political enemies. This is a high crime; this is not a triviality.
"The documents and an internal IRS report being sent to congressional committees reveal that the tax agency used terms that included "progressive" and "occupy" to flag progressive organizations for extra scrutiny before the 2012 elections.
The revelations greatly complicate the political scandal that has engulfed the IRS over the past few weeks. An inspector general report in mid-May revealed the tax agency had screened conservative groups with words like "tea party" in their ...more name when considering applications for tax-exempt status. Lawmakers from both parties quickly denounced the creation of such "Be On The Lookout," or BOLO, lists. Republicans in particular argued the finding proved the IRS was trying to tip the scales of the election during the heat of the campaign.
Now it appears the agency's BOLOs were applied to organizations across the ideological spectrum. The IRS also screened groups advocating on behalf of Israeli settlements who were applying for non-profit 501(c)(4) status -- a criterion that may on its own prove politically toxic.
A request for comment from the IRS was not immediately returned. The news of the progressive BOLO was first reported by The Associated Press.
John Shafer, manager of the tax-exempt division in the IRS Cincinnati office had told congressional investigators that BOLOs were applied not for purposes of punishing conservative groups, but to ensure that similar organizations were being categorized and screened by the same group of IRS officials. The concern, he said, was that two different tea party groups would get two different decisions on non-profit status. So, the Cincinnati office developed filters to make sure that everything was categorized as cleanly as possible, he said."
Breaking News ------The US will take no action against ISIS if they promise to accept global warming.
who is running things ?
it is very scary it feels like the train is about to come off the rails and the engineer is passed out with his arm on the accelerator and the door is bolted shut!
Not to worry, Erin 27 E, your perception is a delusion caused by your associating exclusively with demented Right-Wingers. Talking to normal people (or, at most, hiring the services of a cult deprogrammer for a bit) will restore your health and clear your vision.
The engine of state is running powerfully and normally. It's just that the nutters have missed the train.
I am sure he will be none partisan and professional during your session
Wow check this out ...This is Watergate times 100,000. Iran-Contra to the power of 2 billion.
By RACHAEL BADE 6/18/14 9:59 PM EDT
Ex-IRS official Lois Lerner’s crashed hard drive has been recycled, making it likely the lost emails of the lightening rod in the tea party targeting controversy will never be found, according to multiple sources.
“We’ve been informed that the hard drive has been thrown away,
Earlier this week, Ways and Means Republicans said as many as six IRS employees involved in the scandal also lost email in computer crashes, including the former chief of staff for the acting IRS commissioner. Transparent enough?
"A bad hard drive, like other broken Information Technology equipment, is sent to a recycler as part of our regular process,” an IRS spokesman said in response to a query from POLITICO. "The dog ate my homework"
Phil quips "Cappie ...more and the right are furious about not being able to prove what any of the investigations allege" just to prove 0bama's quote of "not even a smidgen of corruption" at the IRS.
transparent as glass
Rep. Lou Barletta said Monday that President Barack Obama would lose an impeachment vote in the House of Representatives
'He’s just absolutely ignoring the Constitution, the laws and checks and balances...
and running completely out of control.
Quote:
"Rep. Lou Barletta said Monday that President Barack Obama would lose an impeachment vote in the House of Representatives"
-------------------------------------------------
So impeach him, then! Geez, what a wuss.
The reason that Rep. Barletta WON'T draw up articles of impeachment is that he knows that most House members, including all those not in thrall to Tea Party ideology, know that President Obama's behavior is, and always has been, ...more constitutionally righteous and legal. Extremist Right-Wingers are just morose that their attempts to hobble the functioning of the federal government have been less successful than they would like.
Notwithstanding its feckless effect, however, the whinging and whining of impotent Tea Partiers is music to the ears of the rational, who look forward to their recitals, in ever increasing volume, until President Clinton takes office.
Weird organisms emerge from the deep, dark biosphere
18 June 2014 by Catherine Brahic, Sacramento
Magazine issue 2974. Subscribe and save
For similar stories, visit the Micro-organisms , Mysteries of the Deep Sea and Genetics Topic Guides
THE strange organisms that eke out a living deep beneath our feet are finally being revealed by genetics. Many of them are small, co-dependent and fuelled by mysterious sources of energy.
We know ...more that billions of microorganisms inhabit the earth, the underground aquifers that supply our drinking water, and even the deep nether regions of Earth's crust, far beneath the seabed. But we know nothing about what most of these microbes are and how they live. Some of them, in the so-called "dark energy biosphere", are the deepest living organisms, somehow surviving hundreds of metres underground, far from the sun's life-giving light.
"We know there are microbes living down there, but we have no idea what they do," says Beth Orcutt of the Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences in East Boothbay, Maine. "We want to go after them."
At the Goldschmidt conference in Sacramento, California, last week, Orcutt and Jill Banfield of the University of California, Berkeley, presented separate detailed surveys of these microbes, revealing what kinds of organisms live in such strange habitats and offering tantalising hints about their lifestyles. It is our first close look at an utterly alien world.
Banfield is using a brute-force approach called metagenomics. Essentially, she sequences the genomes of every organism in a given water or soil sample en masse; an entire community at once. It's a kind of genetic census, and gives a sense of the richness of an ecosystem and how its members interact.
Metagenomics has already been used to sequence people's gut flora, and the geneticist Craig Venter famously tried to sequence the uncounted microbes living in the ocean. But sequencing the full genomes of dozens or hundreds of species in one hit has proved challenging, so studies tend to focus on simple communities with relatively few species, or to settle for random chunks of DNA rather than complete genomes (Science, doi.org/s7m).
To solve this problem, Banfield is using sophisticated algorithms to digitally reassemble snippets of DNA into entire genomes. Her team has used this method to identify the microbes living in an aquifer near the Colorado River in Rifle, Colorado. They say they can now reliably get complete genomes from hundreds of organisms in one go, including rare ones that make up less than 0.1 per cent of the ecosystem.
"People have wanted to do that for ages," says Orcutt. "Whatever computational approach they are using is revolutionary."
The analysis has revealed some known microbes and many completely unstudied ones. Many of these mystery microbes are very small cells, with small genomes laced with unfamiliar genes. "Fifty per cent of the genes in these genomes have no known function," says Banfield – an unusually high proportion.
Some of the microbes seem to lack a metabolism, so cannot feed themselves and may be reliant on other species for survival. As a result, they could never be grown in isolation in the lab, which helps explain why they have never been seen before.
Banfield has now used the DNA sequences to draw a family tree of all the microbes her team found in the aquifer. They found lots of completely unknown organisms, unrelated to anything that has ever been grown in a lab. All of these cryptic organisms clumped into one branch of the family tree.
Meanwhile, Orcutt is focusing not on aquifers but on hidden rivers flowing deep beneath the seabed, through cracks in the Earth's crust. These channels may connect seemingly separate parts of the underworld.
To access them, she uses boreholes that have been drilled into the Juan de Fuca ridge in the north-eastern Pacific, where the Pacific plate dives beneath the North American plate.
The boreholes have been in place since 2010, sealed off at the top. In 2013, Orcutt's team used a remotely operated underwater vehicle to collect water from observatories attached to the boreholes (pictured). This water should all have seeped up from the subsurface rivers below, rather than washing in from the ocean above. "These are probably the most pristine samples we've ever got from the deep marine biosphere," says Orcutt.
Rather than sequencing all the microbes at once, Orcutt's team picked out individual cells, broke them open, then collected and sequenced their DNA. Like Banfield, they found many organisms new to science.
Orcutt says the first question is how they survive. Their genes suggest they consume methane, which by itself is not surprising, as many other microbes use this as a source of energy. But earlier studies found hardly any methane beneath the Juan de Fuca ridge, says Orcutt.
We already knew that life in the deep subsurface is sparse. It may be that what does survive down there is scraping by on a larder that is virtually bare, effectively pushing at life's lower limits.
This article appeared in print under the headline "Light cast on deep, dark biosphere"
Best thing I've read today,
Dear Mr. President,
Your White House currently has, in its possession, emails to and from a woman named Lois Lerner. They come from the period 2009 to 2011, as your tax-collecting agency abused and marginalized the conservative movement from Washington to El Monte, California. Your own White House officials were in contact, over email, with Ms. Lerner during this time.
You ...more need to give up those emails now. Congress needs them to determine how much abuse occurred, who ordered it, and who covered it up. It’s a law-enforcement matter in the present. But what about the future?
We understand that it’s hard for you to show the country exactly what’s been happening in your administration. Heck, it would be hard for the country too.
Nobody wants to think that you, that you could have overseen a program of harassment that threatens the very fabric of our democracy. Nobody really wants to think that it was anything other than a computer crash, a goof-up by rogue agents in the Cincinnati office, a phony scandal.
You dealt with scandals in the cutest way possible. Your excuses were outlandish, childish, completely out of proportion to the gravity of the alleged conduct involved. Remember when al-Qaida attacked our consulate, murdered our ambassador and you blamed it on a Youtube video? When a terrorist group you failed to prosecute kidnapped schoolgirls and your staff tweeted sad-face White House selfies? When you settled the whole Obamacare rollout between the ferns of an Internet comedy show?
Or when the IRS targeting scandal — the one about the government suppressing the political speech of conservatives across the nation — gained its own presidential sound-byte befitting a children’s lesson: “Not a smidgen of corruption.” (Let’s not forget that you once called it “outrageous.”)
And now, six years in, you’re at it yet again.
“You’ve never heard of a computer crashing before?” your new White House press flack Josh Earnest said yesterday to your fans in the media. It doesn’t matter, really, whether the computer crash ever actually happened. All that matters is that it’s plausible. It’s been heard of before. It’s another fatuous screwup in the running sitcom that is your government. Can’t we all just picture that computer crashing and Lois Lerner being all frazzled about it, just like us and our work friends at the office!
Does it matter that your IRS commissioner said back in March that Lerner’s emails were all saved on a computer server? Does it matter that the IRS was legally required to keep all agency emails and to even print them out in the event of a computer crash? Or is it all just another fable, cooked up by the handpicked literary types that craft the narrative of your administration? Is Ms. Lerner’s computer crash just like the YouTube video before it, just eccentric enough to seem true?
Your administration has shown little regard for the Fourth Amendment, an outright hatred for the Second, a misunderstanding of how to exploit the Fifth, and, well, y’all just pretended the Tenth wasn’t even there. But the IRS targeting scandal, which now revolves around Ms. Lerner’s emails, could be your government’s greatest assault on the First.
If those who disagree with the government are no longer allowed to exercise their political speech, then we have effectively tossed out the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. We no longer practice the democracy of Jefferson and Madison. We no longer keep Franklin’s republic. We go the way of so many other great democracies — like the kind that elected Julius Caesar emperor for life.
This is no joke. This is no cute little sound byte. This is no computer crash. This is the abyss staring at us as we stand on the edge of history. Have we ever been this close before? Did Nixon ever pause from his break-ins, Reagan from his hostage deals, Clinton from his office romps, to carry out the assassination of an entire ideology practiced by half of their own people?
Give up those emails. Give up those emails or you will not only stand as a disgrace in our history books, but you will threaten to burn those history books themselves. Give up those emails or know that you will have done more to corrupt our democratic institutions than any man or woman before you. And then think about what could come after you.
For the sake of so much that is better, that is more inspiring, that is more important to our country and the world than you will ever be: give up those emails. Give up the disgraces hidden within them so as to relieve us of the disgrace playing out today in front of our very eyes.
We know it might pain you to hear it, but you’re not the most important part of this anymore. Give up those emails. And let us read what your government has done.
This is Cloward-Piven, overwhelm the system, turn it upside down and inside out. Tomorrow he'll say, "Yes, PLEASE stay!"
America, you're being eaten out from within. This Boy-king is a despot without a conscience,
I for one would love to know
How Obama procured that house in Chicago, Oh wait that was 27 scandals ago.
Sheriff : Obama's 'dumping of illegals intentional'...
House them IN DC!!
Boehner: 'Administration's own making'...
Calls for National Guard to be deployed...
Frustrated Agents Look For New Jobs...
Rick Perry Unloads...
Migrants amassing at Rio Grande's edge...
Militia groups call members to border...
130,000 minors expected to arrive in coming year...
Miami Public Schools Issue SOS...
Illegal teen arrested for assault at Border ...more Patrol station...
You apply from your country of origin and wait till you get called, you fill out form N-400, application for naturalization, you are issued a green card, then you study, learn the language, and keep your nose clean
After 5 years probation you are eligible to take a test to show you are able to read, write, and speak English and have knowledge and an understanding of U.S. history and government (civics).
At that ...more point if you are deemed to be a person of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States during all relevant periods under the law you get sworn in become a citizen get a job and start to pay taxes
Maybe they're just trying to take back the part of the country w stole from them."
By philathome , Southampton on May 13, 10 11:00 PM
very disturbing way of thinking,
By David Ferguson
Saturday, June 21, 2014 15:03 EDT
A team of volunteer researchers uncovered a mass grave in south Texas this week, where the bodies of Mexican migrants were discarded like trash as they died trying to enter the United States.
The Corpus Christie Caller-Times reported that the anthropologists working at the site found bodies in garbage bags, shopping bags, crammed into ...more body bags with other cadavers and some with no containers at all.
“To me it’s just as shocking as the mass grave that you would picture in your head, and it’s just as disrespectful,” said University of Indianapolis forensic anthropologist Krista Latham to the Caller.
The bodies began piling up at Sacred Heart Burial Park in Brooks County, Texas about eight years ago. The forensic anthropologists on the all-volunteer team have devoted years to identifying and providing proper burials to migrants who died of exposure trying to evade Border Patrol checkpoints and enter the country.
The south Texas borderlands regularly reach temperatures higher than 100 degrees during the summer. Hundreds of men, women and children have died in the last few years in Brooks County alone.
The research teams examined approximately 110 unidentified cadavers, beginning in 2013. The bodies were recovered from 52 excavations performed on the county-owned, public side of the cemetery. The actual number of bodies is unknown because so many of the excavation sites contained multiple, intermingled bodies. Further testing will be needed to separate out all of the remains.
County officials said that for the last 16 years or more, whenever they found bodies in the desert, they were handed over to local funeral home, Funeraria del Angel Howard-Williams. The county paid the funeral home a stipend of $450 each to dispose of the bodies.
Investigators found temporary grave markers and other items used by Howard-Williams in burials. A spokesperson for the company declined to comment, referring the Caller to Jessica McDunn, a spokesperson for the funeral home’s parent company, Houston-based Service Corporation International.
“No matter if this is one of our client families we serve on a traditional basis or a migrant family’s loved one we’re serving and we don’t have any identification of the loved one, I do want to let you know it is our policy to treat the decedent with care, to treat them just like we would treat anyone else,” McDunn said in a statement.
Howard-Williams, said McDunn, has records pertaining to the burials, but “this does not amount to confirmation that Howard-Williams was involved in depositing the remains in the manner the researchers described.”
“The whole thing sounds really bizarre,” said Jon Stephenson of the Texas Cemeteries Association. “I can’t imagine why a professional funeral home or cemetery or anybody would take that attitude. It doesn’t make sense.”
Immigrant rights advocate Eddie Canales said, “I think it’s very hard for people to connect in the fact that these were human beings. It just goes to the language, to the words, and words mean a lot: ‘All these were illegals.’”
“Even in death,” Canales said, “they wound up not getting the proper respect.”
Teenager builds browser plugin to show you where politicians get their funding
How the US sent $12bn in cash to Iraq. And watched it vanish
Special flights brought in tonnes of banknotes which disappeared into the war zone
David Pallister
The Guardian
The US flew nearly $12bn in shrink-wrapped $100 bills into Iraq, then distributed the cash with no proper control over who was receiving it and how it was being spent.
The staggering scale of the biggest transfer of cash in the history of the Federal Reserve has been graphically ...more laid bare by a US congressional committee.
In the year after the invasion of Iraq in 2003 nearly 281 million notes, weighing 363 tonnes, were sent from New York to Baghdad for disbursement to Iraqi ministries and US contractors. Using C-130 planes, the deliveries took place once or twice a month with the biggest of $2,401,600,000 on June 22 2004, six days before the handover.
Details of the shipments have emerged in a memorandum prepared for the meeting of the House committee on oversight and government reform which is examining Iraqi reconstruction. Its chairman, Henry Waxman, a fierce critic of the war, said the way the cash had been handled was mind-boggling. "The numbers are so large that it doesn't seem possible that they're true. Who in their right mind would send 363 tonnes of cash into a war zone?"
The memorandum details the casual manner in which the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority disbursed the money, which came from Iraqi oil sales, surplus funds from the UN oil-for-food programme and seized Iraqi assets.
"One CPA official described an environment awash in $100 bills," the memorandum says. "One contractor received a $2m payment in a duffel bag stuffed with shrink-wrapped bundles of currency. Auditors discovered that the key to a vault was kept in an unsecured backpack.
"They also found that $774,300 in cash had been stolen from one division's vault. Cash payments were made from the back of a pickup truck, and cash was stored in unguarded sacks in Iraqi ministry offices. One official was given $6.75m in cash, and was ordered to spend it in one week before the interim Iraqi government took control of Iraqi funds."
The minutes from a May 2004 CPA meeting reveal "a single disbursement of $500m in security funding labelled merely 'TBD', meaning 'to be determined'."
The memorandum concludes: "Many of the funds appear to have been lost to corruption and waste ... thousands of 'ghost employees' were receiving pay cheques from Iraqi ministries under the CPA's control. Some of the funds could have enriched both criminals and insurgents fighting the United States."
According to Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, the $8.8bn funds to Iraqi ministries were disbursed "without assurance the monies were properly used or accounted for". But, according to the memorandum, "he now believes that the lack of accountability and transparency extended to the entire $20bn expended by the CPA".
To oversee the expenditure the CPA was supposed to appoint an independent certified public accounting firm. "Instead the CPA hired an obscure consulting firm called North Star Consultants Inc. The firm was so small that it reportedly operates out of a private home in San Diego." Mr Bowen found that the company "did not perform a review of internal controls as required by the contract".
However, evidence before the committee suggests that senior American officials were unconcerned about the situation because the billions were not US taxpayers' money. Paul Bremer, the head of the CPA, reminded the committee that "the subject of today's hearing is the CPA's use and accounting for funds belonging to the Iraqi people held in the so-called Development Fund for Iraq. These are not appropriated American funds. They are Iraqi funds. I believe the CPA discharged its responsibilities to manage these Iraqi funds on behalf of the Iraqi people."
Bremer's financial adviser, retired Admiral David Oliver, is even more direct. The memorandum quotes an interview with the BBC World Service. Asked what had happened to the $8.8bn he replied: "I have no idea. I can't tell you whether or not the money went to the right things or didn't - nor do I actually think it's important."
Q: "But the fact is billions of dollars have disappeared without trace."
Oliver: "Of their money. Billions of dollars of their money, yeah I understand. I'm saying what difference does it make?"
Mr Bremer, whose disbanding of the Iraqi armed forces and de-Ba'athification programme have been blamed as contributing to the present chaos, told the committee: "I acknowledge that I made mistakes and that with the benefit of hindsight, I would have made some decisions differently. Our top priority was to get the economy moving again. The first step was to get money into the hands of the Iraqi people as quickly as possible."
Millions of civil service families had not received salaries or pensions for months and there was no effective banking system. "It was not a perfect solution," he said. "Delay might well have exacerbated the nascent insurgency and thereby increased the danger to Americans."
It's funny that Bush is related to Franklin Pierce.
Truth is harder to find than a needle in a haystack lately. You can't just claim to be driving on down the road of life, all the while sitting in still in the dark with your lights out.
By philathome (8157), Southampton on Jun 21, 14 6:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like we have been saying in here for months they do not want Hillary they want that communist Liz Warren
he underestimated the threat in a major way!
Report by researchers from Princeton and Northwestern universities suggests that US political system serves special interest organisations, instead of voters
"Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to ...more democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened."
- From a recent study titled Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens by Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin I. Page of Northwestern University
The realization that these folks will not have their viewpoints represented therein rankles all democratic republicans. With this in mind, let's hope that committed Tea Partiers join together and put forward their own, independent candidates in the general election.
Let's ...more give Americans a real choice!
WASHINGTON -- "There is something a bit strange, there is something a bit unusual about a Republican primary that's decided by liberal Democrats."
With this in mind, is it not time for the Tea Party to stop lamenting the state of the nation and to show some spine. It could start in Mississippi where Chris McDaniel, a true-blue Tea Partier, has refused to concede ...more in the Republican primary. A 3rd party candidacy for McDaniel, backed by $100 million or so of Koch brothers' money, just might put him into office over the aging Cochran.
It certainly is worth an effort, especially since the alternative is a continuation of the Tea Party's feckless, impotent, mewling jeremiads.
Moreover, a successful McDaniel campaign could pave the way for a Ted Cruz candidacy (Republican or 3rd party) in 2016!
This is the opportunity for the Tea Party to (finally) pick up its socks.
How unabashedly dishonest
about 47% of the country truly disgusts' me
Even Phil can't spin it that hard.
True, a 3rd party candidacy might neutralize both the nouveau party and its parent in the short term. However, an effective challenge to the status quo party political establishment could change the ideology of the traditional party or replace that party with a party founded specifically on new ideology, as has happened previously in our country.
It would seem to me that Tea Partiers have little to lose. To judge from their opinions herein, it makes little difference ...more to them whether a Democrat or a RINO sits in congress. That being the case, does it not make abundantly better sense for them to choose to fight the good fight rather than to continue to carp fecklessly like washerwomen?
Promoting McDaniel's 3rd party candidacy would, for instance, give Tea Partiers in Mississippi a chance to vote for someone who shares their opinion that destroying the country's credit rating by causing it to default on the national debt is "nothing dangerous or extreme". Should they decline to do so, Mississippi will return to congress yet again a senator who believes in the traditional fiduciary responsibility that they disdain.
It is patently obvious that Tea Partiers are afraid to put their skin in the game, a cowardly character defect which renders them insignificant and ineffectual politically. As a consequence, their life expectancy is short. With that in mind, we should all take care to enjoy the entertainment provide by their nonsensical capering. They will not be among us for long.
This man does:
"Gordon S. Wood is Alva O. Way Professor of History Emeritus at Brown University. His books include the Pulitzer Prize-winning The Radicalism of the American Revolution, the Bancroft Prize-winning The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787, The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin, and The Purpose of the Past: Reflections on the Uses of History. He writes frequently for The New York Review ...more of Books and The New Republic."
My guess is you are a bull**** artist just like every other zealot who espouses freedom, but ends up defending anarchy's worst attributes.
obama’s big gamble on recess appointments was smacked down unanimously by the Supreme Court on Thursday, an embarrassing setback for the administration just as Republicans are turning up the heat on alleged overreaches by the chief executive.
The justices all agreed that obama took executive power too far by naming three nominees to a key labor panel during a three-day Senate recess in 2012.
"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."
Teabaggers: Your "hero" Reagan made 240 recess appointments. And his Senate was not so pathetic and despicable to use pro forma sessions where only one Senator was present to break up a "recess". Pretty low, even for today's "we ...more will destroy this President" GOP. PATHETIC LOSERS, and inextricably SORE LOSERS at that.
"LAWFULNESS OF RECESS APPOINTMENTS DURING A RECESS OF THE SENATE NOTWITHSTANDING PERIODIC PRO FORMA SESSIONS"
The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a “Recess of the Senate” under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments."
Under ordinary circumstances, the Senate would have been in session. The president will make his appointments based on normal procedure. The reason they are "illegal" is the unprecedented war being waged on the Oval Office. They are only "illegal" because of the pro forma sessions, which are out not normally conducted. They are meant to be used ...more for business, not via war college strategy. So yes, they are PATHETIC, petulant, whining, pi$$ poor LOSERS.
You are correct about checks and balances, but the dismissal of their abuse by the Senate on your part is unconscionable. And, I'm not really a total "lefty". I just have a big heart, and know what it's for. Anyone who has tested the assumption that I don't know when to close it has not fared well.
bho clearly has completely failed at doing what the president has to do, which is work with the other side. But the worst part of it is he doesn't give a shite about the constitution. There will be presidents after him. And if he he gets away with all this overreach... creating laws, rewriting laws, ignoring laws... it will be a defeat for the country and for the rule of law, and I think that's the worst part of this. If this were a Republican, ...more he would by now be impeached over all of these abuses.
There is no overreach. There is no socialist plot. There is no false citizenship. There is no issue "working with the other side" on the part of the president. The current state of the GOP is deplorable, and sad. They don't represent the people of this nation, and have done everything they can to support their handlers instead of the middle class. There is a GOP candidate who claims his opponent is dead, and has been replaced ...more by a body double. There is a failed Tea Party candidate who called for not only the assassination of the president, but his daughters as well. There is another group of GOP members who broke into the governor's office on Father's Day to "deliver" a budget. There are so many more than this to list including "conservative" TV and radio hosts.
These people are CRAZY. Stone cold ******** nuts.
There is no usurpation. There is no shredding of the Constitution. However, I do see signs of paranoid delusional disorder in the GOP.
And, it's not the greatest country on Earth. We don't even make the top 10 in the global peace index, we are 13th in acceptance of homosexuality, 23rd in gender equality, 33rd in internet download speed, 46th regarding freedom of the ...more press, 26th in child well being, 24th in LITERACY, 24th in freedom from corruption, 16th in compensation for manufacturing, 9th in retirement security, and 6th in public expenditure for health care.
We are #1 in only a few key categories:
Number of plastic surgeons, wine consumption, female Olympic figure skating gold medals, ultra high net worth individuals, and most people incarcerated per capita. We without question hold the title in regard to the last category.
You're full of ****, and only you can change that.
What a wonderful post. It exposes the delirious, stream-of-consciousness apparitions which engulf the minds of True Believers and utterly obstruct their awareness of the real world.
We are thankful, however, that we were spared the irony of your "authenticating" your hallucinations with citations from your favored extreme Right-Wing propaganda organs which themselves bear so much of the responsibility for your disorder.
My guess is you don't know the first thing about him, and just like to sling labels because you think it makes you sound relevant. Oligarchy is dictatorship by the bourgeoisie. How many times has capitalism self destructed since Tulip Mania?
There are probably a dozen variants of "socialism", and a couple are "free market". I don't agree with all of his ideas, and agree even less with the extreme ...more version of socialism (communism) I do believe that if you pay your dues, there should be a safety net for a citizen should all else fail.
Had Marx had the opportunity to witness 20th century communism I'm reasonably sure he would have vehemently, and soundly rejected it as a perversion of his ideas. Despite it's iconic label, every version from Stalinism to Maoism was at it's heart an Oligarchy, or more generally a polyarchy where a few held power while the people were left disillusioned and powerless. Which, incidentally, is the polar opposite of what Marx believed.
As far as capitalism self destructing, it has done so more than FIFTY times since Tulip Mania, and the recession far outstrip that number. However, there is a VERY noticeable gap between 1937, and 1972 when markets were quite stable. This was the era of Glass-Stegall, the 1936 CEA, and before deregulation took us back to the days of massive volatility in markets.
Might you have a lucid, intelligent retort?
Are you part of the Lavender Scare as well?
Mets fan, um I mean Phil's fan, your contribution level is way lower than marlinspikes.
From what I can see, and from a few fellow mods who read this thread, the consensus is not only marlin, but BF would have been given their walking papers quite some time ago. No real intelligent substance, or contribution to the issues would be the prevailing reason.
From what I can see, and from a few fellow mods who read this thread, the consensus is not only marlin, but BF would have been given their walking papers quite some time ago. No real intelligent substance, or contribution to the issues would be the prevailing reason.
Kind of like your own star chamber;) Any ...more form of censorship can be dangerous.
If you violate those conditions it is grounds for dismissal. It's that simple. You break the agreed upon rules, you are gone. It's not different than being suspended, or expelled. People at another site I volunteer at who break the contract get the title "I can't follow the rules" highlighted under their profile in red.
27east is pretty lenient as far as I can see.
To: My Fellow Zillionaires
"Our country is rapidly becoming less a capitalist society and more a feudal society. Unless our policies change dramatically, the middle class will disappear, and we will be back to late 18th-century France. Before the revolution.
And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won’t last.
If we don’t do something to fix the ...more glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us. No society can sustain this kind of rising inequality. In fact, there is no example in human history where wealth accumulated like this and the pitchforks didn’t eventually come out. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It’s not if, it’s when."
A kindly reminder to Congress:
All the vets you are screwing, have been trained to kill. And, many have been trained to do it clandestinely, and without so much as a whisper...
Since is here."
This from the king of restraint. Can give it but not take it. You fool nobody on this site, even posters from your own political affiliation. So I guess if I searched the internet for items to cut and paste here I would be making more of a contribution eh?
"Your" forum sounds like a little slice of Liberal Paradise, Mr Z, free speech is tolerated as long as the power elite agree with it! Referring to Marx in a positive manner shows where your heart is, no wonder you're all about class envy.
What that means is if you violate that contract, and post inane or inflammatory blurbs which have no substance or fiber, you break your word and are removed. Much like "Preliator" grossly violated the rules or decency, as well as decent decorum and had his first profile banned. Rules are inherent to civilization. Without them, civilization cannot exist. All you get is anarchy, ...more much like the unethical and immoral actions deregulation has allowed for. Thank you Enron, all the bubbles, and especially to the "Committee to Save the World" for failing to regulate derivatives as Brooksley Born advised.
Your "free market" fantasy doesn't exist. But capitalisms unchecked ability to destroy itself sure does. But, you just don't seem to be any good at history...
What that means is if you violate that contract, and post inane or inflammatory blurbs which have no substance or fiber, you break your word and are removed. Much like "Preliator" grossly violated the rules or decency, as well as decent decorum and had his first profile banned. Rules are inherent to civilization. Without them, civilization cannot exist. All you get is anarchy, ...more much like the unethical and immoral actions deregulation has allowed for. Thank you Enron, all the bubbles, and especially to the "Committee to Save the World" for failing to regulate derivatives as Brooksley Born advised.
Your "free market" fantasy doesn't exist. But capitalisms unchecked ability to destroy itself sure does. But, you just don't seem to be any good at history...
Anarchy does not.
Simplicity is genius.
Just make sure your rules engender freedom, instead of throttling it.
I don't know why there is so much concern about "trolls". Surely, the easiest response to their inane posts is simply to ignore them.
Most annoying, on the other hand, are those forum participants who habitually mask the inanity of their assertions with partisan, irrelevant and misapplied citations and then truculently refuse to admit their vacuous mendacity when their deviousness is exposed.
Nonetheless, censoring these miscreants is both feckless and ...more boring, and deprives others of the enjoyment of holding them up to public opprobrium and ridicule.
Censorship is only appropriate in the kiddie pool. Correspondents who prefer those (dubious) waters rather than "adult swim" are free to seek them out.
TWO COWS ~{Matthias Varga}
SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour
COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk
FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk
NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you
BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, ...more and then
throws the milk away
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income.
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.
SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.
A GREEK CORPORATION
You have two cows. You borrow lots of euros to build barns, milking sheds, hay stores, feed sheds, dairies, cold stores, abattoir, cheese unit and packing sheds.
You still only have two cows.
A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called a Cowkimona and market it worldwide.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.
A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the ** out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive...
Quote:
"In the end, it’s a personal pleasure for me to give these people a taste of their own medicine ..."
----------------------------------------------------------------
We are glad that you have found such satisfaction in your own performance. Please enable us to share in your pleasure by pointing out a some examples (or just one, single one) wherein you have done so.
Your humility is exceeded only by your rationality.
It seems that the Ukraine has signed a trade pact with the EU, Russia is in recession and holding onto the Crimea which it used to rent anyway, and Putin now watches as Ukraine pulls away from the Russian sphere of influence. Looks like all Putin's bluster and strong arming got him what he deserves.
A bag full o' nothing...
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — For thousands of years, Native Americans used the river banks here to cross a gap in the Appalachian Mountains, and trains sped through during the Civil War to connect the eastern and western ...more parts of the Confederacy. In the 21st century, it is the Internet that passes through Chattanooga, and at lightning speed.
“Gig City,” as Chattanooga is sometimes called, has what city officials and analysts say was the first and fastest — and now one of the least expensive — high-speed Internet services in the United States. For less than $70 a month, consumers enjoy an ultrahigh-speed fiber-optic connection that transfers data at one gigabit per second. That is 50 times the average speed for homes in the rest of the country, and just as rapid as service in Hong Kong, which has the fastest Internet in the world.
It takes 33 seconds to download a two-hour, high-definition movie in Chattanooga, compared with 25 minutes for those with an average high-speed broadband connection in the rest of the country. Movie downloading, however, may be the network’s least important benefit.
“It created a catalytic moment here,” said Sheldon Grizzle, the founder of the Company Lab, which helps start-ups refine their ideas and bring their products to market. “The Gig,” as the taxpayer-owned, fiber-optic network is known, “allowed us to attract capital and talent into this community that never would have been here otherwise.”
Since the fiber-optic network switched on four years ago, the signs of growth in Chattanooga are unmistakable. Former factory buildings on Main Street and Warehouse Row on Market Street have been converted to loft apartments, open-space offices, restaurants and shops. The city has welcomed a new population of computer programmers, entrepreneurs and investors. Lengthy sideburns and scruffy hipster beards — not the norm in eastern Tennessee — are de rigueur for the under-30 set.
“This is a small city that I had never heard of,” said Toni Gemayel, a Florida native who moved his software start-up, Banyan, from Tampa to Chattanooga because of the Internet speed. “It beat Seattle, New York, San Francisco in building the Gig. People here are thinking big.”
But so far, it is unclear statistically how much the superfast network has contributed to economic activity in Chattanooga over all. Although city officials said the Gig created about 1,000 jobs in the last three years, the Department of Labor reported that Chattanooga still had a net loss of 3,000 jobs in that period, mostly in government, construction and finance.
EPB, the city-owned utility formerly named Electric Power Board of Chattanooga, said that only about 3,640 residences, or 7.5 percent of its Internet-service subscribers, are signed up for the Gigabit service offered over the fiber-optic network. Roughly 55 businesses also subscribe. The rest of EPB’s customers subscribe to a (relatively) slower service offered on the network of 100 megabits per second, which is still faster than many other places in the country.
Continue reading the main story
Some specialists say the low subscriber and employment numbers are not surprising or significant, at least in the short term. “The search for statistical validation of these projects is not going to turn up anything meaningful,” said Blair Levin, executive director of Gig.U, a high-speed Internet project that includes more than three dozen American research universities. Mr. Levin cited “Solow’s paradox,” the 1987 observation by Robert M. Solow, a recipient of the Nobel in economic science who wrote that “you can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.”
Such is the case with many new technologies, Mr. Levin said. No one is going to design products that can run only on a one-gigabit-per-second network if no such networks exist, he said. But put a few in place, he added, and soon the supply of applications will drive a growing demand for the faster connections.
Chattanooga’s path to Gig City is part of a transformation that began long before most Americans knew the Internet existed. Named America’s most-polluted city in 1969 because of largely unregulated base of heavy manufacturing, Chattanooga has in the last two decades cleaned its air, rebuilt its waterfront, added an aquarium and become a hub for the arts in eastern Tennessee. In more recent years, an aggressive high-tech economic development plan and an upgrade of the power grid by EPB moved Chattanooga toward the one-gigabit connection.
In 2009, a $111 million federal stimulus grant offered the opportunity to expedite construction of a long-planned fiber-optic network, said David Wade, chief operating officer for the power company. (EPB also had to borrow $219 million of the network’s $330 million cost.) Mr. Wade said it quickly became apparent that customers would be willing to pay for the one-gigabit connection offered over the network.
Chattanooga has been joined in recent years by a handful of other American cities that have experimented with municipally owned fiber-optic networks that offer the fastest Internet connections. Lafayette, La., and Bristol, Va., have also built gigabit networks. Google is building privately owned fiber systems in Kansas City, Kan.; Kansas City, Mo.; and Austin, Tex., and it recently bought a dormant fiber network in Provo, Utah.
The systems are the leading edge of a push for ever-faster Internet and telecommunications infrastructure in a country that badly lags much of the world in the speed and costs of Web connections. Telecommunications specialists say that if the United States does not keep its networks advancing with those in the rest of the world, innovation, business, education and a host of other pursuits could suffer.
Even so, few people, including many who support the systems, argue that everyone in the country now needs a one-gigabit home connection. Much of the public seems to agree. According to Federal Communications Commission statistics, of the households where service of at least 100 megabits per second was available (one-tenth as fast as a gigabit), only 0.12 percent subscribed at the end of 2012. In Chattanooga, one-third of the households and businesses that get electric power from EPB also subscribe to Internet service of at least 100 megabits.
Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story
But just as few people a decade ago thought there would be any need for one terabyte of data storage on a desktop computer (more than 200 million pages of text, or more than 200 movies), even the most prescient technology gurus have often underestimated the hunger for computer speed and memory.
Fiber-optic networks carry another benefit, which is the unlikelihood that a potentially faster network will come along soon. Fiber optics can transmit data at close to the speed of light, and EPB officials say the technology exists for their network to carry up to 80 connections of 10 gigabits per second at once.
Those who use Chattanooga’s one-gigabit connection are enthusiastic. Mr. Gemayel, the Florida native who moved Banyan here from Tampa, first passed through Chattanooga in 2012, when he heard about an entrepreneurial contest sponsored by The Company Lab with a $100,000 prize. Banyan, which was working on a way to share real-time editing in huge data files quickly among far-flung researchers, won the contest. Mr. Gemayel returned to Tampa with his check.
But once there he discovered that his low-bandwidth Internet connection was hampering the development of his business. By the beginning of 2013, he had moved to Chattanooga.
Other companies have become Gig-related successes. Quickcue, a company that developed a tablet-based guest-management system for restaurants, began here in 2011 and over the next two years attracted about $3 million in investments. In December, OpenTable, the online restaurant reservations pioneer, bought Quickcue for $11.5 million.
Big technology dreams do not always pan out, of course, and Chattanooga is familiar with failed experiments. The city spent millions of dollars in the last five years to build a citywide Wi-Fi network, known as the “wireless mesh,” intended for use by residents and city agencies. It sits largely unused, and its utility has largely been usurped by 4G wireless service.
Few people here would say that the Gig has even begun to be used to its fullest. “The potential will only be capped by our selfishness,” said Miller Welborn, a partner at the Lamp Post Group, the business incubator where Banyan shares office space with a dozen other start-ups. “The Gig is not fully useful to Chattanooga unless a hundred other cities are doing the same thing. To date, the best thing it’s done for us is it put us on the map.”
For all the optimism, many boosters are aware there are limits to how far the Gig can take the city, particularly as it waits for the rest of the country to catch up.
“We don’t need to be the next Silicon Valley,” Mayor Andy Berke said. “That’s not who we’re going to be, and we shouldn’t try to be that. But we are making our own place in the innovation economy.”
Emblematic of the gravity of this corrosive decision is the reaction by the plaintiffs, "Barbara Green, a founder of Hobby Lobby, called the ruling 'a victory, not just for our family business, ...more but for all who seek to live out their faith.'"
"Faith" has just trumped the 1st Amendment. If the Hobby Lobby owners want to impose their religious beliefs on their employees, they should buy back the outstanding stock and revert to a non-corporate, private business structure.
When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country’s founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden ...more from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these*:
◾Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
◾Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
◾Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
◾Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
◾Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
◾Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight controll of the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.
States also limited corporate charters to a set number of years. Unless a legislature renewed an expiring charter, the corporation was dissolved and its assets were divided among shareholders. Citizen authority clauses limited capitalization, debts, land holdings, and sometimes, even profits. They required a company’s accounting books to be turned over to a legislature upon request. The power of large shareholders was limited by scaled voting, so that large and small investors had equal voting rights. Interlocking directorates were outlawed. Shareholders had the right to remove directors at will.
In Europe, charters protected directors and stockholders from liability for debts and harms caused by their corporations. American legislators explicitly rejected this corporate shield. The penalty for abuse or misuse of the charter was not a plea bargain and a fine, but dissolution of the corporation.
In 1819 the U.S. Supreme Court tried to strip states of this sovereign right by overruling a lower court’s decision that allowed New Hampshire to revoke a charter granted to Dartmouth College by King George III. The Court claimed that since the charter contained no revocation clause, it could not be withdrawn. The Supreme Court’s attack on state sovereignty outraged citizens. Laws were written or re-written and new state constitutional amendments passed to circumvent the (Dartmouth College v Woodward) ruling. Over several decades starting in 1844, nineteen states amended their constitutions to make corporate charters subject to alteration or revocation by their legislatures. As late as 1855 it seemed that the Supreme Court had gotten the people’s message when in Dodge v. Woolsey it reaffirmed state’s powers over “artificial bodies.”
But the men running corporations pressed on. Contests over charter were battles to control labor, resources, community rights, and political sovereignty. More and more frequently, corporations were abusing their charters to become conglomerates and trusts. They converted the nation’s resources and treasures into private fortunes, creating factory systems and company towns. Political power began flowing to absentee owners, rather than community-rooted enterprises.
The industrial age forced a nation of farmers to become wage earners, and they became fearful of unemployment–a new fear that corporations quickly learned to exploit. Company towns arose. and blacklists of labor organizers and workers who spoke up for their rights became common. When workers began to organize, industrialists and bankers hired private armies to keep them in line. They bought newspapers to paint businessmen as heroes and shape public opinion. Corporations bought state legislators, then announced legislators were corrupt and said that they used too much of the public’s resources to scrutinize every charter application and corporate operation.
Government spending during the Civil War brought these corporations fantastic wealth. Corporate executives paid “borers” to infest Congress and state capitals, bribing elected and appointed officials alike. They pried loose an avalanche of government financial largesse. During this time, legislators were persuaded to give corporations limited liability, decreased citizen authority over them, and extended durations of charters.
Attempts were made to keep strong charter laws in place, but with the courts applying legal doctrines that made protection of corporations and corporate property the center of constitutional law, citizen sovereignty was undermined. As corporations grew stronger, government and the courts became easier prey. They freely reinterpreted the U.S. Constitution and transformed common law doctrines.
One of the most severe blows to citizen authority arose out of the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. Though the court did not make a ruling on the question of “corporate personhood,” thanks to misleading notes of a clerk, the decision subsequently was used as precedent to hold that a corporation was a “natural person.” This story was detailed in “The Theft of Human Rights,” a chapter in Thom Hartmann’s recommended book Unequal Protection.
From that point on, the 14th Amendment, enacted to protect rights of freed slaves, was used routinely to grant corporations constitutional “personhood.” Justices have since struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws enacted to protect people from corporate harm based on this illegitimate premise. Armed with these “rights,” corporations increased control over resources, jobs, commerce, politicians, even judges and the law.
A United States Congressional committee concluded in 1941, “The principal instrument of the concentration of economic power and wealth has been the corporate charter with unlimited power….”
Many U.S.-based corporations are now transnational, but the corrupted charter remains the legal basis for their existence. At Reclaim Democracy!, we believe citizens can reassert the convictions of our nation’s founders who struggled successfully to free us from corporate rule in the past. These changes must occur at the most fundamental level — the U.S. Constitution.
We are indebted to our friends at the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD) for their research, adapted with permission for this article. Sources include:
◾Taking Care of Business: Citizenship and the Charter of Incorporation by Richard L. Grossman and Frank T. Adams (published by POCLAD) was a primary source
◾The Transformation of American Law, Volume I & Volume II by Morton J. Horwitz
~ Courtesy of "Reclaim Democracy"
I guess it's OK to pad your retirement with what violates your core beliefs...
According to Wikipedia, Hobby Lobby is a wholly-owned corporation. Correct me, but I believe that that means that all the stock is held by the owners and not offered for sale. That DOESN'T make it an unincorporated, "private" company.
to Captn America:
Your response ignores the fact that this decision once again establishes an intellectual construct (a corporation) as the equivalent in right of flesh-and-blood citizens - - and the dangers inherent in ...more that holding.
The Prez takes an oath to "faithfully execute the office of President of the US, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the US." Said Constitution requires the President to administer the laws enacted by the legislative branch, not just the ones he chooses to, and does not grant the right to arbitrarily change them, as in the case of ACA. The Supremes seem, unanimously, clear on this: As Dan said , nice job SCOTUS! got ...more it right!
Only an ignoramus would claim he violated the Constitution. Straight from the SCOTUS:
"Because the Senate was in session during its pro forma sessions, the president made the recess appointments before us during a break too short to count as recess," said Breyer, the lone justice to have worked for the Senate. "For that reason, the appointments are invalid." He was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, ...more Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
And according to YouGov.com poll published hours before the U.S. plays Belgium on Tuesday, liberals are tuning in far more than anyone else.
As for soccer viewing when the World Cup is not being played, liberals are the only ones who watch the sport.
Overall, 28 percent of the nation considers the sport the “most boring to watch.” even worse than curling
Strip politics ...more out of the equation, and 70 percent of the us is not watching the World Cup closely" or "not at at all."
Poll after poll shows President Obama’s approval rating continues to slide, and one new Quinnipiac University Poll finds that voters say Mitt Romney would have been a better choice in 2012.
With Obama deploying military troops to Iraq, failing to find compromise with Congress and seeing major defeats in the Supreme Court, the endless scandels and goverment overeach voters continue to abandon ship.
Quinnipiac found 45 percent of voters say the country ...more would have been better off if . Romney, the 2012 GOP nominee, had been elected, while just 34 percent say Obama remains a better choice. Even Democrats aren’t so sure — just 74 percent of them told the pollsters. Obama was clearly the better pick in the last election.
Voters also rate him the worst president since World War II, topping even his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who had left office with terrible ratings.
“Over the span of 69 years of American history and 12 presidencies, President Barack Obama finds himself at the bottom of the popularity barrel,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.
A Zogby Analytics Poll released Wednesday also found Obama slipping in that survey, to 40 percent approval, while his disapproval leapt 4 percentage points from last month to reach 54 percent.
Nearly half of voters told the Zogby poll that Mr. Obama is “unable to lead the country.”
Thirty years ago we were #1 in quantity, and quality of diplomas. We now rank 18th in global education.
Probably explains a lot...
["sigh"] We understand. You are politically impotent and you are, therefore, unhappy. The question is why you keep trumpeting the fact. Why continue to call attention to your own uselessness?
President Obama will be your president until 2017 no matter how his popularity polls and no matter how many jeremiads extreme Right-Wing True Believers post.
But don't let us stop you. Right-Wing whinging and whining is positively musical.
John Zogby: 'Its it all over for Obama'
BY PAUL BEDARD | JULY 2, 2014 | 9:44 AM
REPORT CARD JOHN ZOGBY QUINNIPIAC
President Obama is suffering from down in the dumps approval ratings.
President Obama's approval numbers are in the cellar, a new Quinnipiac University survey just dubbed him the worst president in six decades,
~ John Stewart
Prez 'has earned every bit of an abysmal approval rating'
The Billings, Montana, Gazette, the biggest newspaper in a region that includes portions of North Dakota, Wyoming and Idaho, is admitting its endorsement of Barack Obama for president in 2008 was a mistake.
“Sometimes, you have to admit you’re wrong,” the newspaper said in an unbylined editorial June 27. “And, we were wrong.”
It listed a ...more series of scandals and controversies generated by the Obama administration and the lack of progress on real issues.
billingsgazette“These are all signs – none of them definitive on their own, necessarily. However, when taken in completely, these demonstrate a disturbing trend of incompetence and failure.
Pobrecito. We are all so sorry that you can do nothing but fulminate impotently about what a bad person President Obama is. Not to worry, though, Soon his incompetent performance (in your estimation) will be obviated by an incomparably effective chief executive (Pres. Clinton.)
I will take Hillary over this anti American Constitution trashing Administration any day HHS
How many of these children are from Venezuela, or Honduras which earned the title murder capital of the world? How many are fleeing Belize City, Guatemala City, San Salvador, Panama City, or the top notch Tegucigalpa? How many are fleeing gang violence? How many are orphans of the "Drug War"?
How many qualify for asylum?
Food for thought as you ponder the words of Emma Lazarus this weekend...
Just make sure that you're armed to the teeth...
Is an UNVERIFIED, UNACCREDITED story such as this serious enough to merit national news coverage? It certainly is to Fox and Breitbart who trumpet any alleged ...more instance of government impropriety as damning proof of presidential misconduct.
I'll wait to see what the objective media make of the story after it has been properly investigated. My guess is that BCFS, the non-profit health and human services organization subcontracted to run the facility, will be made to be more forthcoming (if, indeed, any substance to the charges at all is found.)
Of course, if subsequent investigations find the original story to have been over-the-top alarmism, the Right-Wing advocacy media won't take notice.
Since George the Worst annihilated prosperity in 2007, the malingering Republicans in Congress haven't done a lick of work, unless one considers their constant sabotage of economic recovery programs to be "work". Notwithstanding their truculent intransigence, the Democrats, alone, have so resuscitated the economy that we are on the brink of achieving statistically full employment. (Had the extremist Right-Wingers actually cooperated, we would have been here over two years ...more ago.) Indeed, the Democrats' success is astonishing when one considers that the Republicans destroyed a staggering 40%(!!) of Americans' net worth in their enthrallment to "deregulation" (aka "unbridled rapacity"?)*
Nonetheless, and despite the current proof that extremist Republican beliefs are no more rational than a child's belief in the Easter Bunny, they continue to assert their righteousness with numbing repetitiveness.
It is only the unplumbable pockets of solipsistic, super-wealthy Republican psychopaths that prevents average Americans from recognizing clearly that they are being treated like sheep (or dogs.)
Nevertheless, when Americans compare reality to the scenario that has been foisted on them by the plutocratic Republican propagandist media, their eminent common sense will take over. By November of this year, the electorate will recognize that extremist Republican candidates worship a false god.
* Forbes (June 11, 2012)
Do you really think that you would find my posts more enjoyable if I used a more modest vocabulary? "I" think that it would make it less fun. Also, $10 words convey more in their meaning than $.25 words whose definitions are more vague or variable. Additionally, while I appreciate the fact that some may find it annoying to have to look up the definition of words with which they are unfamiliar, that's what "I" have always done.
I didn't ignore the staggering debt. ...more The Democrats propose increased taxation and decreased spending, the only pragmatic formula. It is the Republicans who refuse to agree to ANY tax increase (while ignoring the simple fact that NO representative, Democrat OR Republican, will propose that the federal money that goes to HIS district should be reduced in order to retire the debt.)
Were I REALLY trying to convince Republicans of the merits of the Democratic platform, I would probably adopt a different strategy, but, frankly, this forum is just for kicks, and enables me to enjoy wordplay.
I am almost always opposed to tax increases. However, I might be in favor of an increase if they cut spending first. Show me you can reign in spending in the right areas and I would be willing to swallow an increase. I know they won't do it.
"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men: Therefore the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change ...more the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require it."
~ John Adams, Article VII, Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1780)
The Founding Fathers backed Thomas Piketty – and feared a powerful 1 percent
This 4th of July, remember the truth about founding fathers, and their prescient warnings about income inequality
Joseph Blasi
Poll after poll shows President Obama’s approval rating continues to slide, and one new Quinnipiac University Poll finds that voters say Mitt Romney would have been a better choice in 2012.
With Obama deploying military troops to Iraq, failing to find compromise with Congress and seeing major defeats in the Supreme Court, the endless scandels and goverment overeach voters continue to abandon ship.
Quinnipiac found 45 percent of voters say the country ...more ...more would have been better off if . Romney, the 2012 GOP nominee, had been elected, while just 34 percent say Obama remains a better choice. Even Democrats aren’t so sure — just 74 percent of them told the pollsters. Obama was clearly the better pick in the last election.
Voters also rate him the worst president since World War II, topping even his predecessor, President George W. Bush, who had left office with terrible ratings.
“Over the span of 69 years of American history and 12 presidencies, President Barack Obama finds himself at the bottom of the popularity barrel,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.
A Zogby Analytics Poll released Wednesday also found Obama slipping in that survey, to 40 percent approval, while his disapproval leapt 4 percentage points from last month to reach 54 percent.
Nearly half of voters told the Zogby poll that Mr. Obama is “unable to lead the country.”
Fiddle Fiddle Fiddle
Its time to go now, Bu Buy
A.B. Stoddard's vacuous ruminations are what passes for "news" on Fox. They are nonsensical, silly, superficial observations without foundation (or any attempt to provide one.) Both her appearance on Fox and her quotation herein are further proof of the authenticity of the Brock University findings regarding conservative intellectual inadequacy.
As usual, Breitbart has mislead its readers by skewing data (the Pew survey) for partisan political purposes. ...more In actuality, survey participants were asked whether the phrase, "'often feel proud to be an American' describes them well". That's an entirely different question from, "Are you proud to be an American?" This is just another example of Breitbart's shameless duplicity, typical of the habitual partisan dishonesty with which it reports "news". (One is reminded of its recent alarm that "contagious diseases" were rampant at a federal center holding undocumented immigrant children. [Said diseases turned out to be lice and scabies.]) "The Onion" is a more reliable source.
You say "It is the Republicans who refuse to agree to ANY tax increase"
That could not be a bigger fairytale, conservatives are for tax reform but a system like a V A T tax where necessities like food, shelter, and medicine are exempt. A system where the elimination of the IRS stops the party currently in power from using it to target political enemy's, ...more A system where everyone as some skin in the game.
The main problem as I see it is you have a president using all the powers of the office to reward his friends and destroy enemies, he is very arrogant and is defying the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to advance his own interests. He is weakening our military, dismantling our national defenses, and putting America’s security at risk,
HHS you seem to have no sense of borders or the rule of law when it comes to illegal invasion. and that will lead to this country being no better than the one I fled (legally) 30 years ago, this president ignoring two centuries of immigration laws to drag as many illegal aliens as possible across our borders, keep them from assimilating, addict them to dependency and, ultimately, buy their loyalty at the polls!
One cannot but note that you haven't mentioned that the Republican Party only supports a VAT if the 16th Amendment (the Income Tax) is repealed. That precondition renders their support moot, as they, and you, know. Just another example of duplicity from the Right-Wing.
Trotting out the "same-o' same-o'" about President Obama acting illegally doesn't make it any more true the 50,000th time it's said than it was the 1st time. If the Republicans really ...more believed their cant, they would impeach him. They have the necessary votes in the House. They won't because such frivolous fecklessness would make them an ever bigger laughingstock than their threat to destroy the country's credit did.
Your assertion that the president is "weakening our military, dismantling our national defenses, and putting America's security at risk" is a particularly surreal delusion of the Right-Wing. How about taking a stab at substantiating any one piece of that fantasy?
If you really believe your comments about the president and illegal immigration, you are beyond reach rationally. Do Right-Wing ideologues observe observe NO limits to their fantasizing? Even if one accredits the ridiculous motivation that you ascribe to him, your delirious scenario is logistically impossible.
You exhibit the symptoms of the auto-hypnosis that defines Right-Wing faith.
Republican Scandal Dies As Hillary Clinton Reveals University Speaking Fees Donated to Charity
By: Jason Easley more from Jason Easley
Saturday, July, 5th, 2014
Another Republican "scandal" has been blown to tiny bits as Hillary Clinton has confirmed that all of her speaking fees from universities are donated to charity.
Former Sec. Clinton told ABC News that her speaking fees from universities get ...more donated to the Clinton Foundation, “All of the fees have been donated to the Clinton Foundation for it to continue its life-changing and life-saving work. So it goes from a foundation at a university to another foundation.”
The last point the Mrs. Clinton made was an important one. She is not accepting money from a university’s general fund, which comes from student tuitions. University foundations are funded by donations from alumni and others. The whole idea that Republicans have been pushing is that Hillary Clinton was accepting six-figure speaking fees while students are being crushed under rising tuition costs and student loan debt.
Republicans are trying to stop Hillary Clinton by taking a page out President Obama’s book. Just as the president did to Mitt Romney in 2012, Republicans are trying to label Clinton wealthy and out of touch. The hypocrisy of this position is mind boggling as it has been the Republican Party that has refused to raise taxes on the wealthy, create jobs, extend unemployment benefits, and offered a platform that can best be described as protecting the rich while screwing the rest.
In other words, it is impossible to take their claims that Hillary Clinton doesn’t care about regular folks seriously.
It is a valid question to debate whether or not any university should be dishing out six-figure speaking fees to anyone. There are probably better ways to spend their money, but that question has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. If students don’t want the university to spend the money on big dollar speakers, it is something that they need to take up with university itself.
What Hillary Clinton is doing is much more transparent than how Republicans collect their speaking fees. Top Republicans have for years insisted that they be paid for their appearances in book purchases. Before he ran for president in 2012, Mitt Romney declined speaking fees, but insisted that institutions buy thousands of copies of his book. Romney was just one example of how Republicans push books that nobody seems to read to the top of the bestseller list.
If a university decides that it just has to spend big bucks to lure a national speaker to campus, it is better that the fee goes to charity instead of getting wasted on thousands of copies of a book that nobody wants. This is another attempted Republican scandal that is going to nowhere, but it says a lot about the Republican Party that they are trying so hard to damage Hillary Clinton before the 2016 process has begun.
America remains ready for Hillary, and this fact is terrifying Republicans to death.
There is a mental disorder called "psychological ...more projection", and the GOP has got it bad...
Presidents and the Economy: A Forensic Investigation
Alan S. Blinder and Mark W. Watson
Woodrow Wilson School and Department of Economics
Princeton University
November 2013
"The U.S. economy has performed better ...more when the President of the United States is a Democrat rather than a Republican, almost regardless of how one measures performance. For many measures, including real GDP growth (on which we concentrate), the performance gap is both large and statistically significant, despite the fact that postwar history includes only 16 presidential terms. This paper asks why. We find that the answer is not found in technical time series matters (such as differential trends or mean reversion), nor in systematically more expansionary monetary or fiscal policy under Democrats. Rather, it appears that the Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior TFP performance, and more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. Many other potential explanations are examined, but they fail to explain the partisan growth gap."
"This paper begins in Section 1 by documenting this stunning fact. The fact is not “stylized.” The superiority of economic performance under Democrats rather than Republicans is nearly ubiquitous; it holds almost regardless of how you define success. By many measures, the performance gap is startlingly large--so large, in fact, that it strains credulity, given how little influence over the economy most economists (or the Constitution, for that matter) assign to the President of the United States.
Migration and Refugee Assistance Act
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965
United States Refugee Act of 1980
By philathome , Southampton on Jun 21, 14 6:42 PM
BORDER BREAKDOWN:
RESIDENTS REVOLT: MIGRANT BUSES FACE RESISTANCE...
PROTESTERS WON'T BACK DOWN...
TENSE STANDOFF...
'F**K AMERICA': PRO-AMNESTY CROWD BURNS FLAG?
6 ARRESTED...
President pushes amnesty at naturalization ceremony...
TX Trip: Three Fundraisers -- No Border Visit...
Interactive map: Government effort to relocate illegals...
Obama Look-Alike Killed in Ad...
RISK: ISIS ties to Mexican drug lords...
Rancher ...more Discovers $2M Pot Farm on Land...
Activist distributes flashlights to border crossers...
FEDS THREATEN JOURNALIST WITH PRISON...
PRUDEN: Wave of illegals risks turning USA into Third World country...
By philathome , Southampton on May 12, 10 7:55 PM
It seems superfluous to those of us of normal emotional ...more and ethical formation to argue that this is the only proper way to treat these innocents - - but the extreme Right is not normal (and still but a tiny percentage of the voting population, thanks be to god.)
No, this is when you prove your lack of cognizant and cogent thought.
The issue is orphaned/refugee children, not an entire family unit.
Neither are they refugees. The violence they are "fleeing" has been around for decades. All of a sudden, they need to illegally seek refuge.
They are political pawns, nothing more.
You make me sick, Someday you will get what you think you want and when you turn this country into the one I left you will realize what a fool you have been!
"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men: Therefore the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require it."
~ John Adams, Article ...more VII, Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1780)
Jacka$$.
or be subject to garbage like the following
Common Core teaches Constitution
as 'living document'
Federalist Paper 29: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
It requires ...more no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their usefulness. This desirable uniformity can only be accomplished by confiding the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority. It is, therefore, with the most evident propriety, that the plan of the convention proposes to empower the Union "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, RESERVING TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS."
Of the different grounds which have been taken in opposition to the plan of the convention, there is none that was so little to have been expected, or is so untenable in itself, as the one from which this particular provision has been attacked. If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty, an efficacious power over the militia, in the body to whose care the protection of the State is committed, ought, as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the pretext to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can command the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call for the military arm in support of the civil magistrate, it can the better dispense with the employment of a different kind of force. If it cannot avail itself of the former, it will be obliged to recur to the latter. To render an army unnecessary, will be a more certain method of preventing its existence than a thousand prohibitions upon paper.
In order to cast an odium upon the power of calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, it has been remarked that there is nowhere any provision in the proposed Constitution for calling out the POSSE COMITATUS, to assist the magistrate in the execution of his duty, whence it has been inferred, that military force was intended to be his only auxiliary. There is a striking incoherence in the objections which have appeared, and sometimes even from the same quarter, not much calculated to inspire a very favorable opinion of the sincerity or fair dealing of their authors. The same persons who tell us in one breath, that the powers of the federal government will be despotic and unlimited, inform us in the next, that it has not authority sufficient even to call out the POSSE COMITATUS. The latter, fortunately, is as much short of the truth as the former exceeds it. It would be as absurd to doubt, that a right to pass all laws NECESSARY AND PROPER to execute its declared powers, would include that of requiring the assistance of the citizens to the officers who may be intrusted with the execution of those laws, as it would be to believe, that a right to enact laws necessary and proper for the imposition and collection of taxes would involve that of varying the rules of descent and of the alienation of landed property, or of abolishing the trial by jury in cases relating to it. It being therefore evident that the supposition of a want of power to require the aid of the POSSE COMITATUS is entirely destitute of color, it will follow, that the conclusion which has been drawn from it, in its application to the authority of the federal government over the militia, is as uncandid as it is illogical. What reason could there be to infer, that force was intended to be the sole instrument of authority, merely because there is a power to make use of it when necessary? What shall we think of the motives which could induce men of sense to reason in this manner? How shall we prevent a conflict between charity and judgment?
By a curious refinement upon the spirit of republican jealousy, we are even taught to apprehend danger from the militia itself, in the hands of the federal government. It is observed that select corps may be formed, composed of the young and ardent, who may be rendered subservient to the views of arbitrary power. What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by the national government, is impossible to be foreseen. But so far from viewing the matter in the same light with those who object to select corps as dangerous, were the Constitution ratified, and were I to deliver my sentiments to a member of the federal legislature from this State on the subject of a militia establishment, I should hold to him, in substance, the following discourse:
"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.
"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
Thus differently from the adversaries of the proposed Constitution should I reason on the same subject, deducing arguments of safety from the very sources which they represent as fraught with danger and perdition. But how the national legislature may reason on the point, is a thing which neither they nor I can foresee.
There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia, that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or with raillery; whether to consider it as a mere trial of skill, like the paradoxes of rhetoricians; as a disingenuous artifice to instil prejudices at any price; or as the serious offspring of political fanaticism. Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? What reasonable cause of apprehension can be inferred from a power in the Union to prescribe regulations for the militia, and to command its services when necessary, while the particular States are to have the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS? If it were possible seriously to indulge a jealousy of the militia upon any conceivable establishment under the federal government, the circumstance of the officers being in the appointment of the States ought at once to extinguish it. There can be no doubt that this circumstance will always secure to them a preponderating influence over the militia.
In reading many of the publications against the Constitution, a man is apt to imagine that he is perusing some ill-written tale or romance, which instead of natural and agreeable images, exhibits to the mind nothing but frightful and distorted shapes "Gorgons, hydras, and chimeras dire"; discoloring and disfiguring whatever it represents, and transforming everything it touches into a monster.
A sample of this is to be observed in the exaggerated and improbable suggestions which have taken place respecting the power of calling for the services of the militia. That of New Hampshire is to be marched to Georgia, of Georgia to New Hampshire, of New York to Kentucky, and of Kentucky to Lake Champlain. Nay, the debts due to the French and Dutch are to be paid in militiamen instead of louis d'ors and ducats. At one moment there is to be a large army to lay prostrate the liberties of the people; at another moment the militia of Virginia are to be dragged from their homes five or six hundred miles, to tame the republican contumacy of Massachusetts; and that of Massachusetts is to be transported an equal distance to subdue the refractory haughtiness of the aristocratic Virginians. Do the persons who rave at this rate imagine that their art or their eloquence can impose any conceits or absurdities upon the people of America for infallible truths?
If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia, irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition, for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration? Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.
In times of insurrection, or invasion, it would be natural and proper that the militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a common enemy, or to guard the republic against the violence of faction or sedition. This was frequently the case, in respect to the first object, in the course of the late war; and this mutual succor is, indeed, a principal end of our political association. If the power of affording it be placed under the direction of the Union, there will be no danger of a supine and listless inattention to the dangers of a neighbor, till its near approach had superadded the incitements of selfpreservation to the too feeble impulses of duty and sympathy.
PUBLIUS.
=====================================
Just so you know, that "well regulated militia" had strictly monitored and inventoried caches of weapons. This was of course, before we had a professional military. Ordinarily the only personal weapons were held for self sustaining activities like hunting. Unlike a chicken in every pot, there was never a cannon in every house.
If you actually believe that our military men and women would break their oaths, engage in a coup and you need assault weapons in your home then you are the problem.
Paranoid FUD.
He promised to bring us together. Instead, he drove us apart.
By Ben Domenech
JUNE 4, 2014
The events of the past week illustrate the degree to which Barack Obama has become a failed president.
When Obama burst onto the national scene, he almost immediately became an inspirational figure. His promise spoke to our hearts as Americans and our desire for dramatic change in the wake of the fractious Bush years. His personal story ...more and his optimism about the future sounded an affirming and uplifting note at a time when Americans were losing their hope for what tomorrow could bring. For a moment, it seemed like the promise of a uniter, not a divider, could provide leadership which, whatever Obama’s personal ideology, could lead to a healthier politics and a less fractured society.
Obama’s tenure in office has turned all these hopes into despair, despair in the corruption of our institutions, in the capability of our government, in our ability to manage large systems and more.
We are monkeys with money and guns."
~ Tom Waits
Your extremism blinds you. In fact, the Obama administration has deported more undocumented aliens (around two million) than any other.* Moreover, the current crisis stems from a law passed under George the Worst that mandated that unaccompanied minors appear before a judge before being repatriated. The backlog caused by this law has enabled them to remain here for years while their cases await adjudication. It is this circumstance, created by the Republicans, that ...more the human smugglers have discovered and are exploiting.
Not for the first time, Democrats are left to deal with a problem created by a previous Republican administration whose malingering successors simply sit on their hands and carp.
* The Economist, Feb. 8, 2014
Another mendacious response, untrue in every word (including "and" and "the" [apologies to Mary McCarthy.])
First, the figure of two million deportations is ACCURATE, no matter how you attempt to finesse it. Whether apprehended at the border and returned within hours or apprehended anywhere else and returned within days or months, they are STILL deported. "Stronger boarder enforcement", as you say, has made this possible. Thank you, President Obama.
Secondly, ...more there are MORE beds available now to house detainees than there EVER were under George the Worst.
The Republicans screwed the pooch, again, and now lambast the Democrats for their effort to clean up another Republican mess, again.
Just to be absolutely clear, the president CANNOT deport these children peremptorily, as the extreme Right-Wing desires, because George the Worst's law FORBIDS him from so doing. The same would be true were Mitt Romney president ["shudder"], much to his chagrin.
POSTED: MONDAY, JULY 7, 2014 1:16 AM
7 Jul 2014, 1:51 PM PDT
Monday on Newsmax TV's "The Steve Malzberg Show," Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said President Barack Obama has been encouraging the current flood of illegal immigrant woman and children with his executive actions in an attempt to "turn Texas Blue" and potentially 'turn America blue."
Right wing religious nut jobs like Perry would do well to read a real good book:
“The values of science and the values of democracy are concordant, in many cases indistinguishable.”
“Science is a way to call the bluff of those who only pretend to knowledge. It is a bulwark against mysticism, against superstition, against religion misapplied ...more to where it has no business being.”
“Christianity may be good and Satanism evil. Under the Constitution, however, both are neutral. This is an important, but difficult, concept for many law enforcement officers to accept. They are paid to uphold the penal code, not the Ten Commandments … The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don’t like that statement, but few can argue with it.”
“Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.”
~ Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
In more than a year since its publication on April 19, 2013, there has been no substantiation of Ms. Vaughan's report by other investigators or reporters. One cannot but wonder if its origin within the Center for Immigration Studies (a politically conservative organization advocating immigration reduction), and its appearance in William F. Buckley's old magazine, is indicative of its reliability, or, it could simply be that since the report attacks the methodology by ...more which the two million (deportees) figure was arrived at but not the figure itself, that the media has judged it irrelevant. I rather suspect the latter. Note that the article in the politically neutral "Economist" from ten months later (Feb 8. 2014) which "I" cited, ignores Ms. Vaughan's assertions entirely.
In any case, we accept your offer to provide "tons more" of citations authenticating the report.
to They call me:
Rep. Louie Gohmert is rightly concerned that Texas will become Democratic. Demographic trends make this inevitable. However, suggesting that the president is trying to flood Texas with undocumented aliens in order to achieve this is a clear symptom the severe Republican paranoia that caused them to choose Ted Cruz as senator. When minor Hispanic children currently living in Texas reach their majority, the extremist Right-Wing Republican reign in Texas will be over (as will the estimable Ted.) Sorry, Louie
One doesn't know whether you are actually intentionally mendacious or simply egregiously sloppy in your research. The very article that you cite ("Lies, Damned Lies, and Obama’s Deportation Statistics") in proof that deportations are down states, "The Economist is also right, because if you combine the Obama’s return and removal numbers, he is well over the controversial 2 million mark."* Did you bother to read the whole thing or just stop where you erroneously ...more thought that it supported your case - or is this another example of your duplicitous selective editing?
The uncontroverted FACT is that over two million undocumented aliens have been deported to date by the Obama administration. Not even your benighted Right-Wing propaganda organs deny it. Nonetheless, one has no doubt that YOU still will since you have demonstrated previously that you believe that your own Right-Wing OPINION - and FACT are synonyms.
* Anna O. Law, The Washington Post, April 21, 2014 (Guest post)
The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”
~ Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
"As you [Energy & Environment Cabinet official] sit there in your chair with your data, we sit up here in ours with our data and our constituents and stuff behind us. I won’t get into the debate about climate change but I’ll simply point out that I think in academia we all agree that the temperature on Mars is exactly as it is here. Nobody will dispute that. Yet there are no coal mines on Mars. There’s no factories on Mars ...more that I’m aware of."
The mean temperature on Mars is -81 degrees. DOH!!
Here is a good read:
The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science- and Reality, by Chris Mooney
Best quote ever: "That stupid teacher lady told me I was Homo Sapiens. I told her nuh-uh, I'm hetero sapiens."
To reiterate, the Washington Post article that YOU cite affirms that the Obama administration has "put back over the border" (your semantic quibble re "deported" v. "excluded" v. "returned" is noted) over two million undocumented immigrants. On the other hand, YOUR naked assertion that George the Worst's numbers "far exceed" this total is insubstantial partisan wishfulness.
The president's remarks as prepared:
Hello, El Paso! It’s great to be back here with all of you, and to be back in the Lone Star State. I love coming to Texas. Even the welcomes are bigger down here. So, to show my appreciation, I wanted to give a big policy speech… outdoors… right in the middle of a hot, sunny day.
I hope everyone is wearing sunscreen.
Now, about a week ago, I delivered the ...more commencement address at Miami Dade Community College, one of the most diverse schools in the nation. The graduates were proud that their class could claim heritage from 181 countries around the world. Many of the students were immigrants themselves, coming to America with little more than the dreams of their parents and the clothes on their backs. A handful had discovered only in adolescence or adulthood that they were undocumented. But they worked hard and gave it their all, and they earned those diplomas.At the ceremony, 181 flags – one for every nation represented – was marched across the stage. Each was applauded by the graduates and relatives with ties to those countries. But then, the last flag – the American flag – came into view. And the room erupted. Every person in the auditorium cheered. Yes, their parents or grandparents – or the graduates themselves – had come from every corner of the globe. But it was here that they had found opportunity, and had a chance to contribute to the nation that is their home.
It was a reminder of a simple idea, as old as America itself. E pluribus, unum. Out of many, one. We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants – a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America’s precepts. That’s why millions of people, ancestors to most of us, braved hardship and great risk to come here – so they could be free to work and worship and live their lives in peace. The Asian immigrants who made their way to California’s Angel Island. The Germans and Scandinavians who settled across the Midwest. The waves of the Irish, Italian, Polish, Russian, and Jewish immigrants who leaned against the railing to catch that first glimpse of the Statue of Liberty.
This flow of immigrants has helped make this country stronger and more prosperous. We can point to the genius of Einstein and the designs of I. M. Pei, the stories of Isaac Asimov and whole industries forged by Andrew Carnegie.
And I think of the naturalization ceremonies we’ve held at the White House for members of the military, which have been so inspiring. Even though they were not yet citizens, these men and women had signed up to serve. One was a young man named Granger Michael from Papua New Guinea, a Marine who deployed to Iraq three times. Here’s what he said about becoming an American citizen. “I might as well. I love this country already.” Marines aren’t big on speeches. Another was a woman named Perla Ramos. She was born and raised in Mexico, came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and joined the Navy. She said, “I take pride in our flag … and the history we write day by day.”
That’s the promise of this country – that anyone can write the next chapter of our story. It doesn’t matter where you come from; what matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded; that you believe all of us are equal and deserve the freedom to pursue happiness. In embracing America, you can become American. And that enriches all of us.
Yet at the same time, we are standing at the border today because we also recognize that being a nation of laws goes hand in hand with being a nation of immigrants. This, too, is our heritage. This, too, is important. And the truth is, we’ve often wrestled with the politics of who is and who isn’t allowed to enter this country. At times, there has been fear and resentment directed toward newcomers, particularly in periods of economic hardship. And because these issues touch on deeply held convictions – about who we are as a people, about what it means to be an American – these debates often elicit strong emotions.
That’s one reason it’s been so difficult to reform our broken immigration system. When an issue is this complex and raises such strong feelings, it’s easier for politicians to defer the problem until after the next election. And there’s always a next election. So we’ve seen a lot blame and politics and ugly rhetoric. We’ve seen good faith efforts – from leaders of both parties – fall prey to the usual Washington games. And all the while, we’ve seen the mounting consequences of decades of inaction.
Today, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. Some crossed the border illegally. Others avoid immigration laws by overstaying their visas. Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families. But they’ve broken the rules, and have cut in front of the line. And the truth is, the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are trying to immigrate legally.
Think about it. Over the past decade, even before the recession, middle class families were struggling to get by as costs went up but incomes didn’t. We’re seeing this again with gas prices. Well, one way to strengthen the middle class is to reform our immigration system, so that there is no longer a massive underground economy that exploits a cheap source of labor while depressing wages for everyone else. I want prosperity in this country to be widely shared. That’s why immigration reform is an economic imperative.
And reform will also help make America more competitive in the global economy. Today, we provide students from around the world with visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities. But our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or power a new industry right here in the United States. So instead of training entrepreneurs to create jobs in America, we train them to create jobs for our competition. That makes no sense. In a global marketplace, we need all the talent we can get – not just to benefit those individuals, but because their contributions will benefit all Americans.
Look at Intel and Google and Yahoo and eBay – these are great American companies that have created countless jobs and helped us lead the world in high-tech industries. Every one was founded by an immigrant. We don’t want the next Intel or Google to be created in China or India. We want those companies and jobs to take root in America. Bill Gates gets this. “The United States will find it far more difficult to maintain its competitive edge,” he’s said, “if it excludes those who are able and willing to help us compete.”
It’s for this reason that businesses all across America are demanding that Washington finally meet its responsibility to solve the immigration problem. Everyone recognizes the system is broken. The question is, will we summon the political will to do something about it? And that’s why we’re here at the border today.
In recent years, among the greatest impediments to reform were questions about border security. These were legitimate concerns; it’s true that a lack of manpower and resources at the border, combined with the pull of jobs and ill-considered enforcement once folks were in the country, contributed to a growing number of undocumented people living in the United States. And these concerns helped unravel a bipartisan coalition we forged back when I was a United States Senator. In the years since, “borders first” has been a common refrain, even among those who previously supported comprehensive immigration reform.
Well, over the past two years we have answered those concerns. Under Secretary Napolitano’s leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible. They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history. The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents – more than twice as many as there were in 2004, a build up that began under President Bush and that we have continued.
They wanted a fence. Well, that fence is now basically complete.
And we’ve gone further. We tripled the number of intelligence analysts working the border. I’ve deployed unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the skies from Texas to California. We’ve forged a partnership with Mexico to fight the transnational criminal organizations that have affected both of our countries. And for the first time we are screening 100 percent of southbound rail shipments – to seize guns and money going south even as we go after drugs coming north.
So, we have gone above and beyond what was requested by the very Republicans who said they supported broader reform as long as we got serious about enforcement. But even though we’ve answered these concerns, I suspect there will be those who will try to move the goal posts one more time. They’ll say we need to triple the border patrol. Or quadruple the border patrol. They’ll say we need a higher fence to support reform.
And I’d point out, the most significant step we can take now to secure the borders is to fix the system as a whole. so that fewer people have incentive to enter illegally in search of work in the first place. This would allow agents to focus on the worst threats on both of our borders – from drug traffickers to those who would come here to commit acts of violence or terror.
So, the question is whether those in Congress who previously walked away in the name of enforcement are now ready to come back to the table and finish the work we’ve started. We have to put the politics aside. And if we do, I’m confident we can find common ground. Washington is behind the country on this. Already, there is a growing coalition of leaders across America who don’t always see eye-to-eye, but who are coming together on this issue. They see the harmful consequences of this broken system for their businesses and communities. They understand why we need to act.
So what would comprehensive reform look like?
First, we know that government has a threshold responsibility to secure the borders and enforce the law. Second, those who are here illegally have a responsibility as well. They have to admit that they broke the law, pay their taxes, pay a fine, and learn English. And they have to undergo background checks and a lengthy process before they can get in line for legalization.
Stopping illegal immigration also depends on reforming our outdated system of legal immigration. We should make it easier for the best and the brightest to not only study here, but also to start businesses and create jobs here. In recent years, a full 25 percent of high-tech startups in the U.S. were founded by immigrants, leading to more than 200,000 jobs in America. I’m glad those jobs are here. And I want to see more of them created in this country.
Today, the immigration system not only tolerates those who break the rules, it punishes the folks who follow the rules. While applicants wait for approval
Bla Bla Dream Act Bla Bla Bla so Josa can be an astronaut Bla Bla Bla Ect.
That is what we are fighting for. We are fighting for every boy and girl like José with a dream and potential just waiting to be tapped. We are fighting to unlock that promise, and all that it holds not just for their futures, but for the future of this great country.
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.
Maybe they’ll say we need a moat. Or alligators in the moat.
Thank you for your concession of error, however rationalized. Needless to say, though, your malicious characterization of a decent man who is compelled to direct that unpleasant measures be enforced in order to secure our border, but who is doing so with the maximum degree of compassion possible under the circumstances, is definitive, callous, Right-Wing extremist meanness.
"You want to hit this?" the man said while Obama was making his way through the crowd at a Denver bar.
"Asked him if he wanted a hit of pot...he gave him the thumbs up approvingly laughed! omg
People are the problem, not "drugs". A lack of respect, and maturity on the part of a human being for mind or consciousness altering substances is not the fault of the substance. It is a failure on the part of the human being.
For reference, your body manufactures at least three grams of ethanol ...more per day naturally. In some cases, there are people whose body manufactures more than that. It's called "auto brewery syndrome" and some cases are more severe than others. People like that tend to stay away from sugar, "carbs", and maintain a calorie restricted diet. There's nothing quite like waking up feeling hung over, when you haven't touched a drop.
No matter how long a “laundry list” (or “tons”) of opinions and unverified statistics by Right-Wing advocacy groups you post, they still don't add up to a single fact, and your characterization of them as “evidence” is risible. An example is your naked assertion that George the Worst deported “far more” undocumented immigrants than President Obama without citing a single authority is support of your contention. By comparison, ...more there are a plethora of references affirming the contrary. (Read “President Obama will surpass two million deportations” by Tanya Golash-Boza, Ph.D., U. of Cal., Merced, in which the author predicts that the president's total will eventually reach 3 million.)
Additionally, you resort in your ultimate post to your devious habit of dumping a gob of irrelevant data in the text in order to disguise the vacuity of your argument. That list of categories of criminal convictions would be damning were it not for the fact that you don't mention to what it refers nor attribute its source (although one suspects it originates from one of your favorite disreputable Right-Wing propaganda organs whose identity you omit for the sake of credibility.) In any case, one is puzzled as to what relevance it could have to the crisis of innocent, undocumented immigrant children, few if any of whom would be found in any of those categories.
Finally, in recognition of the immigrant children crisis and other border protection deficiencies, the president has proposed a $3.7 billion funding bill to rectify the situation. The Republicans are expected to reject it since politically it is so much more attractive to them to carp and complain than to actually fix anything.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
No matter how long a “laundry list” (or “tons”) of opinions and unverified statistics by Right-Wing advocacy groups you post, they still don't add up to a single fact, and your characterization of them as “evidence” is risible. An example is your naked assertion that George the Worst deported “far more” undocumented immigrants than President Obama without citing a single authority is support of your contention. By comparison, ...more there are a plethora of references affirming the contrary. (Read “President Obama will surpass two million deportations” by Tanya Golash-Boza, Ph.D., U. of Cal., Merced, in which the author predicts that the president's total will eventually reach 3 million.)
Additionally, you resort in your ultimate post to your devious habit of dumping a gob of irrelevant data in the text in order to disguise the vacuity of your argument. That list of categories of criminal convictions would be damning were it not for the fact that you don't mention to what it refers nor attribute its source (although one suspects it originates from one of your favorite disreputable Right-Wing propaganda organs whose identity you omit for the sake of credibility.) In any case, one is puzzled as to what relevance it could have to the crisis of innocent, undocumented immigrant children, few if any of whom would be found in any of those categories.
Finally, in recognition of the immigrant children crisis and other border protection deficiencies, the president has proposed a $3.7 billion funding bill to rectify the situation. The Republicans are expected to reject it since politically it is so much more attractive to them to carp and complain than to actually fix anything.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
President Barack Obama’s approval rating is higher among Muslims than any other group, a new poll says.
According to a Gallup poll released Friday that tracked responses for the first six months of 2014, 72 percent of Muslims said they approve of the president, compared with just 20 percent who disapprove.
........ so there was this woman breast feeding her baby and the cop tells her??
In ...more that period either the woman or the cop must also have mentioned Jimmy Carter, Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan, Rand Paul, Bill Clinton, Dwight D. Eisenhower, George Bush, the other George Bush, Alan Greenspan, Wendy Gramm, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Franklin Pierce (!), Hilary Clinton, Osama Bin Laden, Donald Regan, Albert Einstein, Marcel Marceau, Diane Sawyer and John Boehner.
In the following two months I'm sure the breastfeeder and the cop must have also discussed gas prices, evolution, plane crashes, overfishing, Sesame Street and the Academy Awards and mentioned Andrew Cuomo, Mark Sanchez, Donald Rumsfeld, Steve Bellone, Cee Lo Green, Anna Throne-Holst, Michael Bloomberg, Justin Bieber and Al Gore.
Isn't it time to end this all?
Minnesota Republican explains where AIDS comes from
"When questioned about his position on social issues, [Minnesota House candidate Bob Frey (R)] added that it “does certainly need to be addressed for what it is. It’s not about the gay agenda but about the science and the financial impact of that agenda. It’s more about sodomy than about pigeonholing a lifestyle.”
Frey then explained his view: “When ...more you have egg and sperm that meet in conception, there’s an enzyme in the front that burns through the egg. The enzyme burns through so the DNA can enter the egg. If the sperm is deposited anally, it's the enzyme that causes the immune system to fail. That’s why the term is AIDS – acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.”
'The A**hole Effect': What Wealth Does to the Brain
As people get richer, they are more likely to feel entitled, to exploit others, and to cheat.
Call it the a****** effect. That is the term coined by US psychologist Paul Piff after he did some stunning new research into the effects of wealth and inequality on people’s attitudes.
As we ponder [Australian politician] Joe Hockey’s budget and his division ...more of the world into "leaners" and "lifters", as we learn from Oxfam that the richest 1% of Australians now own the same wealth as the bottom 60%, we would do well to consider the implications of Piff’s studies. He found that as people grow wealthier, they are more likely to feel entitled, to become meaner and be more likely to exploit others, even to cheat.
Piff conducted a series of revealing experiments. One was remarkably simple. Researchers positioned themselves at crossroads. They watched out for aggressive, selfish behaviour among drivers, and recorded the make and model of the car. Piff found drivers of expensive, high-status vehicles behave worse than those sputtering along in battered Toyota Corollas.
They were four times more likely to cut off drivers with lower status vehicles. As a pedestrian looking carefully left and right before using a crossing, you should pay attention to the kind of car bearing down on you. Drivers of high-status vehicles were three times as likely to fail to yield at pedestrian crossings. In contrast, all the drivers of the least expensive type of car gave way to pedestrians.
Fascinated by these results, Piff and his colleagues then looked at what created these impulses to bad behaviour. In their laboratory, the richest students were more likely to consider "stealing or benefiting from things to which they were not entitled" than those from a middle-class or lower-class background. Even people simply primed to feel rich helped themselves to more sweets meant for children in a lab next door than those primed to feel disadvantaged.
The reason, it turns out, is that even thoughts of being wealthy can create a feeling of increased entitlement — you start to feel superior to everyone else and thus more deserving: something at the centre of narcissism. They found this was true of people who were, in real life, better off. Wealthier people were more likely to agree with statements like "I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than other people" and place themselves higher on a self-assessed "class ladder" that indicated increasing levels of income, education and job prestige. This had straightforward and clearly measurable effects on behaviour.
For example, when told that they would have their photograph taken, well-off people were more likely to rush to the mirror to check themselves out and adjust their appearance. Asked to draw symbols, like circles, to represent how they saw themselves and others, more affluent people drew much larger circles for themselves and smaller ones for the rest of humankind. If you think of yourself as larger than life, larger and more important than other people, it is hardly surprising that your behaviour would become oriented towards getting what you think you deserve.
As Piff says, this goes way beyond the individual, to noxious social attitudes – like being punitive towards the poor while living the "because I’m worth it" lifestyle. As a society becomes wealthier, it can get more narcissistic, less empathetic and unwilling to look after the vulnerable. A majority of Republicans in a recent poll said they thought the poor in America had it easy. Greater feelings of entitlement might also lead to a tax revolt by the upper classes. It is the logic of "I’ve earned it", "It’s mine", and, "Why should I have to use my hard-earned cash for those inferior scroungers, the poor?"
Wealth cultivates attitudes that are against redistribution and for privilege, Piff said:
The more severe inequality becomes, the more entitled people may feel and less likely to share resources they become. The wealthier [that] segments of society become then, the more vulnerable communities may be to selfish tendencies and the less charity the least among us can expect.
This is just what happened with Joe Hockey’s budget. According to John Hewson, the disposable income of lower income and single income groups were cut by 12-15%, while those on higher incomes only suffered a temporary cut of less than 1%.
It would be reasonable to object here, and point to famous and inspiring examples of philanthropy by wealthy individuals like Bill Gates. Yet Piff found such generosity from the wealthy was by no means the norm. In another arresting and counterintuitive finding, he discovered the richer the meaner — despite having more to give, wealthier people were less likely to be generous and give to charity.
Well-off people were less likely to help a person who entered the laboratory in distress, unless they had just watched a video about child poverty. In a series of controlled experiments, lower-income people and those who identified themselves as being on a relatively low social rung were consistently more generous with limited goods than upper-class participants were.
"There’s this idea that the more you have, the less entitled and more grateful you feel; and the less you have, the more you feel you deserve. That’s not what we find," Piff said. "This seems to be the opposite of noblesse oblige."
Outside the lab, Piff found that the rich donated a smaller percentage of their wealth than poorer people. In 2011, the wealthiest Americans, those with earnings in the top 20%, contributed 1.3% of their income to charity, while those in the bottom 20% donated 3.2% of their income. The trend to meanness was worst in plush suburbs where everyone had a high income, and never laid eyes on a poor person. Insulation from people in need, Piff concluded, dampened charitable impulses.
Poorer people were also more likely to give to those charities servicing the genuinely needy. The rich gave to high-status institutions such as already well-endowed art galleries, museums and universities, while Feeding America, which deals with the nation’s poorest, got nothing.
These qualities are not set in concrete. "We’re not suggesting rich people are bad at all," said Piff, "but rather that psychological effects of wealth have these natural effects.’ It is, he said, a function of greater prosperity, rather than innate qualities of rich people.
Piff found that when shown images of children in poverty, the wealthy could behave more empathetically. Like the long campaign for the NDIS, which sensitised people to the plight of those with a disability or those caring for them, people can respond to good political leadership which primes them for generosity rather than meanness.
However, as our society gets wealthier, we need to pay attention to his sober observation:
While having money doesn’t necessarily make anybody anything, the rich are way more likely to prioritise their own self-interests above the interests of other people. They are more likely to exhibit characteristics we would stereotypically associate with, say, assholes.
As inequality mounts and the policies entrenching it remain, as politicians are increasingly drawn from the top 10% or even 1%, we need to pay heed to this research.
The whole idea of "leaners" and "lifters" is the central teaching of the right wing ideologue, Ayn Rand, who penned books like The Virtue of Selfishness. It’s a self-serving crock. Rand found out the hard way. After a lifetime proselytising on behalf of the "producers" and denouncing anyone needing government assistance as "parasites," when Rand became old and sick, she discovered that even a bestselling author could not afford health care in the neoliberal US. She availed herself of Medicare and ended her life on what she had despised – social security. Maybe Joe Hockey will learn in old age that leaning comes to all of us.
This is an edited extract from Anne Manne's new book, The Life of I: the new culture of narcissism, published by Melbourne University Press.