Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
June 27, 2014
"....this ruling still amounts to another attack on women’s reproductive rights. It is also this ruling is yet another incentive to vote in November. If Republicans take control of the Senate, the next Supreme Court Justice is all but certain to be someone who will share Scalia, Alito and Thomas’s views on women’s reproductive rights and all other matters before the Court...."
It is impossible to overlook the fact that women’s reproductive rights have been systematically eroded with personhood amendments, TRAP laws and rape insurance mandates. It’s just as impossible to overlook the misogynistic tone of panels on reproductive rights comprised exclusively of old white men who claim that keeping government out of your business means increasing government control over a woman’s reproductive business. Striking down a Massachusetts law that established buffer zones around Abortion clinics, on first amendment grounds, the SCOTUS has dealt another blow to women’s reproductive rights. The SCOTUS took issue with Massachusetts’ buffer zone law because it”restricts access to ‘public way[s]‘ and ‘sidewalks,’ places that have traditionally been open for speech activities and the Court has accordingly labels “traditional public fora.” The Scotusblog summarized the impact of the ruling:
In summarizing the background of buffer zones at reproductive health clinics, the SCOTUS pointed to the fact that this law was preceded by legislation that was modeled on Colorado’s floating buffer zone law. However, that law proved insufficient because anti-choice activists threw literature into cars, filmed and touched patients and blocked cars from accessing parking garages. That was when, Massachusetts passed the current law. The Court also pointed to the fact that the plaintiffs in this case are “sidewalk counsellors” who merely offer literature and only persist in their counselling if the woman “looks receptive.” That may very well be true, but it doesn’t remove the fact that previous legislative solutions proved ineffective in protecting people who have business with abortion clinics from the physical obstacles and intimidation by more zealous anti-choice activists. It does not remove the fact that reproductive care clinics endured bombings, workers were shot, and women have been intimidated and threatened before buffer zones were established. It is particularly interesting when you consider that this Court has its own buffer zone, but doesn’t believe women seeking reproductive care need one. The silver lining is a majority of the court rejected the plaintiff’s claim that the law was not a “content based.” or “viewpoint based” because
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/26/scotus-unanimously-strikes-buffer-zones-women-keeping-buffer-zone.html
HYPOCRISY ALERT: SCOTUS Keeps Its Own Buffer Zone While Telling Women THEY DON'T NEED ONE!
"....this ruling still amounts to another attack on women’s reproductive rights. It is also this ruling is yet another incentive to vote in November. If Republicans take control of the Senate, the next Supreme Court Justice is all but certain to be someone who will share Scalia, Alito and Thomas’s views on women’s reproductive rights and all other matters before the Court...."
It is impossible to overlook the fact that women’s reproductive rights have been systematically eroded with personhood amendments, TRAP laws and rape insurance mandates. It’s just as impossible to overlook the misogynistic tone of panels on reproductive rights comprised exclusively of old white men who claim that keeping government out of your business means increasing government control over a woman’s reproductive business. Striking down a Massachusetts law that established buffer zones around Abortion clinics, on first amendment grounds, the SCOTUS has dealt another blow to women’s reproductive rights. The SCOTUS took issue with Massachusetts’ buffer zone law because it”restricts access to ‘public way[s]‘ and ‘sidewalks,’ places that have traditionally been open for speech activities and the Court has accordingly labels “traditional public fora.” The Scotusblog summarized the impact of the ruling:
“The upshot of today’s ruling is that an abortion clinic buffer zone is presumptively unconstitutional. Instead, a state has to more narrowly target clinic obstructions. For example, the police can tell protesters to move aside to let a woman through to the clinic. But it cannot prohibit protesters from being on the sidewalks in the first instance.”
http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_opinions__June_26_2014?Page=0
http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_opinions__June_26_2014?Page=0
In summarizing the background of buffer zones at reproductive health clinics, the SCOTUS pointed to the fact that this law was preceded by legislation that was modeled on Colorado’s floating buffer zone law. However, that law proved insufficient because anti-choice activists threw literature into cars, filmed and touched patients and blocked cars from accessing parking garages. That was when, Massachusetts passed the current law. The Court also pointed to the fact that the plaintiffs in this case are “sidewalk counsellors” who merely offer literature and only persist in their counselling if the woman “looks receptive.” That may very well be true, but it doesn’t remove the fact that previous legislative solutions proved ineffective in protecting people who have business with abortion clinics from the physical obstacles and intimidation by more zealous anti-choice activists. It does not remove the fact that reproductive care clinics endured bombings, workers were shot, and women have been intimidated and threatened before buffer zones were established. It is particularly interesting when you consider that this Court has its own buffer zone, but doesn’t believe women seeking reproductive care need one. The silver lining is a majority of the court rejected the plaintiff’s claim that the law was not a “content based.” or “viewpoint based” because
"....it establishes buffer zones only at abortion clinics, as opposed to other kinds of facilities. First, the Act does not draw content-based distinctions on its face. Whether petitioners violate the Act “depends” not “on what they say,” Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U. S. 1, 27, but on where they say it. Second, even if a facially neutral law disproportionately affects speech on certain topics, it remains content neutral so long as it is ” ‘justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech.’.."
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1168_6k47.pdf
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1168_6k47.pdf
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/26/scotus-unanimously-strikes-buffer-zones-women-keeping-buffer-zone.html
June 26, 2014
Crazy time is alive and well!..............
Fox News host Neil Cavuto on Wednesday grilled Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) over the lawsuit that House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) intends to file against President Obama over his use of executive actions, and the segment quickly escalated into a shouting match. Cavuto asked Bachmann if the outrage over executive actions is just a "political football" that one party uses against the other.
"Has the President overreached with his power? Absolutely, he has. What are the tools available to the United States Congress to help enforce the separation of powers doctrine? In other words, the Constitution is a stop sign for the President as it is for the Congress, as it is for the Supreme Court," Bachmann responded. But Cavuto pressed Bachmann on why the House is just now bringing the lawsuit and suggested taking the President to court would be a fruitless effort.
"Where was your rage with Democrats when Democrats were going after President Bush on the same use of executive orders?" he asked. "Because I think you knew then that was a waste of time then. I think you know in your heart of hearts this is a waste of time now."
cont'
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/cavuto-bachmann-shouting-boehner-lawsuit
LOL!!- Cavuto, Bachmann Get Into EPIC SHOUTING MATCH Over Boehner Lawsuit
Crazy time is alive and well!..............
Fox News host Neil Cavuto on Wednesday grilled Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) over the lawsuit that House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) intends to file against President Obama over his use of executive actions, and the segment quickly escalated into a shouting match. Cavuto asked Bachmann if the outrage over executive actions is just a "political football" that one party uses against the other.
"Has the President overreached with his power? Absolutely, he has. What are the tools available to the United States Congress to help enforce the separation of powers doctrine? In other words, the Constitution is a stop sign for the President as it is for the Congress, as it is for the Supreme Court," Bachmann responded. But Cavuto pressed Bachmann on why the House is just now bringing the lawsuit and suggested taking the President to court would be a fruitless effort.
"Why not just fix things that are very, very wrong now rather than dragging someone to court over whether they overstepped their bounds? It just seems to me like an enormous waste of effort," he said.
"This could drag on for months, and we may not get anywhere," Bachmann admitted. "Again, it reflects the frustration of the American people and rightfully so."
Cavuto continued to press Bachmann, asking her why she hadn't already filed a lawsuit.
"Criminy, give me a second and I will tell you," she exclaimed.
The shouting between the two took a turn for the worst when Bachmann called for Congress to defund Obama.
"What we should do right now is defund the executive branch when we have the option," she said. "Cut it. Make it hurt. Because if they don't have money, they won't have power."
She then began talking about the IRS scandal.
"Separate issue, Congresswoman. Separate issue," Cavuto said. "You're conflating issues and being silly."
"This could drag on for months, and we may not get anywhere," Bachmann admitted. "Again, it reflects the frustration of the American people and rightfully so."
Cavuto continued to press Bachmann, asking her why she hadn't already filed a lawsuit.
"Criminy, give me a second and I will tell you," she exclaimed.
The shouting between the two took a turn for the worst when Bachmann called for Congress to defund Obama.
"What we should do right now is defund the executive branch when we have the option," she said. "Cut it. Make it hurt. Because if they don't have money, they won't have power."
She then began talking about the IRS scandal.
"Separate issue, Congresswoman. Separate issue," Cavuto said. "You're conflating issues and being silly."
"Where was your rage with Democrats when Democrats were going after President Bush on the same use of executive orders?" he asked. "Because I think you knew then that was a waste of time then. I think you know in your heart of hearts this is a waste of time now."
cont'
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/cavuto-bachmann-shouting-boehner-lawsuit
June 20, 2014
It was only a matter of time before the Scott dumb smirk was wiped off his face......
Court documents were unsealed today in Wisconsin that reveal prosecutors alleging that Scott Walker, the state’s Republican Governor, was at the center of a “criminal scheme” to illegally coordinate fundraising among conservative groups – including Karl Rove – during 2011 and 2012. Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice reporting for the Journal Sentinel wrote, “John Doe prosecutors allege Scott Walker at center of ‘criminal scheme’”:
On April 11, 2011 I wrote that, “Wisconsin Titanic: Criminal Probe Heading Scott Walker’s Way”. It’s been a long journey since then of the Governor paying a lot of money to lawyers who specialize in criminal activities while claiming he wasn’t even a target of the John Doe on-going investigation. Gov. Walker (R-WI) even won a recall campaign while his campaigns and administrations were under investigation. This should help explain why the IRS looks into ventures like Karl Rove’s tax exempt status, and it exposes the vast network of shady fundraising that the Supreme Court opened up with their Citizens United ruling.
Scott Walker has long been making eyes at the Oval Office as many Republicans had him pegged as either a dark horse candidate the 2016 nomination or a trendy choice for VP. 2016. But even his reelection campaign in November has to be the last thing on the governor’s mind right now. On another note, fellow Wisconsin Republican and current RNC Chairman Reince Preibus has to be getting nervous. The illegal dark money coordination scheme that Republicans have long been suspected of running has taken a significant step towards being exposed. The influx of Citizens United dark money is the only thing keeping the teetering Republican Party propped up. If it falls, the Republican Party will crumble.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/19/revealed-scott-walker-accused-court-docs-center-criminal-scheme-involves-karl-rove.html
BA-BOOM!!- Prosecutors Drop The Hammer On Scott Walker and ACCUSE HIM Of Running a CRIMINAL SCHEME
It was only a matter of time before the Scott dumb smirk was wiped off his face......
Court documents were unsealed today in Wisconsin that reveal prosecutors alleging that Scott Walker, the state’s Republican Governor, was at the center of a “criminal scheme” to illegally coordinate fundraising among conservative groups – including Karl Rove – during 2011 and 2012. Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice reporting for the Journal Sentinel wrote, “John Doe prosecutors allege Scott Walker at center of ‘criminal scheme’”:
Prosecutors allege that Gov. Scott Walker was at the center of an effort to illegally coordinate fundraising among conservative groups to help his campaign and those of Republican senators fend off recall elections during 2011 and ’12, according to documents unsealed Thursday.
In the documents, prosecutors lay out what they call a “criminal scheme” to bypass state election laws by Walker, his campaign and two top deputies — R.J. Johnson and Deborah Jordahl.
The governor and his close confidants helped raise money and control spending through 12 conservative groups during the recall elections, according to the prosecutors’ filings.
The documents include an email in which Walker tells Karl Rove, former top adviser to President George W. Bush, that Johnson would lead the coordination campaign. Johnson is also chief adviser to Wisconsin Club for Growth, a conservative group active in the recall elections.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/john-doe-prosecutors-allege-scott-walker-at-center-of-criminal-scheme-263839791.html
In the documents, prosecutors lay out what they call a “criminal scheme” to bypass state election laws by Walker, his campaign and two top deputies — R.J. Johnson and Deborah Jordahl.
The governor and his close confidants helped raise money and control spending through 12 conservative groups during the recall elections, according to the prosecutors’ filings.
The documents include an email in which Walker tells Karl Rove, former top adviser to President George W. Bush, that Johnson would lead the coordination campaign. Johnson is also chief adviser to Wisconsin Club for Growth, a conservative group active in the recall elections.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/john-doe-prosecutors-allege-scott-walker-at-center-of-criminal-scheme-263839791.html
On April 11, 2011 I wrote that, “Wisconsin Titanic: Criminal Probe Heading Scott Walker’s Way”. It’s been a long journey since then of the Governor paying a lot of money to lawyers who specialize in criminal activities while claiming he wasn’t even a target of the John Doe on-going investigation. Gov. Walker (R-WI) even won a recall campaign while his campaigns and administrations were under investigation. This should help explain why the IRS looks into ventures like Karl Rove’s tax exempt status, and it exposes the vast network of shady fundraising that the Supreme Court opened up with their Citizens United ruling.
Scott Walker has long been making eyes at the Oval Office as many Republicans had him pegged as either a dark horse candidate the 2016 nomination or a trendy choice for VP. 2016. But even his reelection campaign in November has to be the last thing on the governor’s mind right now. On another note, fellow Wisconsin Republican and current RNC Chairman Reince Preibus has to be getting nervous. The illegal dark money coordination scheme that Republicans have long been suspected of running has taken a significant step towards being exposed. The influx of Citizens United dark money is the only thing keeping the teetering Republican Party propped up. If it falls, the Republican Party will crumble.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/06/19/revealed-scott-walker-accused-court-docs-center-criminal-scheme-involves-karl-rove.html
June 17, 2014
"Aren't You The 'ONE' Who Got Us Into This Mess?."..........
First Mark Halperin and now Erin Burnett. I think hell may have just frozen over. Former Bushie and Iraq envoy Paul Bremer wasn't having such an easy time with the Villagers this Monday while making the rounds in the media and attempting to blame the deteriorating situation in Iraq entirely on the Obama administration.
Erin Burnett Grills Paul Bremer on Iraq: ‘Aren’t You the One Who Got Us into This Mess?’:
We won don't you know. And if we'd just ignored the status of forces agreement and said we were going to stay there forever whether the Iraqis wanted us there or not, we could have proven it. These guys need to go slither back into the holes they crawled out of.
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/erin-burnett-calls-out-paul-bremer-after
Erin Burnett CALLS OUT Paul Bremer After HE TRIES TO BLAME Obama Administration For Debacle In Iraq
"..Former Bush Iraq envoy Paul Bremer wasn't having such an easy time making the rounds on our cable news channels this Monday..."
"Aren't You The 'ONE' Who Got Us Into This Mess?."..........
First Mark Halperin and now Erin Burnett. I think hell may have just frozen over. Former Bushie and Iraq envoy Paul Bremer wasn't having such an easy time with the Villagers this Monday while making the rounds in the media and attempting to blame the deteriorating situation in Iraq entirely on the Obama administration.
Erin Burnett Grills Paul Bremer on Iraq: ‘Aren’t You the One Who Got Us into This Mess?’:
Bremer penned an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal under the headline “Only America Can Prevent a Disaster in Iraq,” in which he argued for some form of U.S. troops on the ground there. After 4,490 American lives lost and $1.7 trillion spent, Burnett asked him, “How can you advocate any more people, any more lives going to risk for that country?”
“Because it’s in our interest,” Bremer responded matter-of-factly, going to elaborate that the U.S. cannot allow Iraq to become a home base for terrorists like those that constitute the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
Taking on the role of the skeptical viewers, Burnett asked Bremer, “Aren’t you the one who got us into this mess?” She confronted Bremer with video from 2003 of him heralding Iraq’s “hopeful” future after the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Bremer defended his words and the actions the Bush administration took to bring democracy to Iraq, instead blaming the Obama administration for presiding over the deterioration of those gains over the last few years.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/erin-burnett-grills-paul-bremer-on-iraq-arent-you-the-one-who-got-us-into-this-mess/
“Because it’s in our interest,” Bremer responded matter-of-factly, going to elaborate that the U.S. cannot allow Iraq to become a home base for terrorists like those that constitute the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
Taking on the role of the skeptical viewers, Burnett asked Bremer, “Aren’t you the one who got us into this mess?” She confronted Bremer with video from 2003 of him heralding Iraq’s “hopeful” future after the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Bremer defended his words and the actions the Bush administration took to bring democracy to Iraq, instead blaming the Obama administration for presiding over the deterioration of those gains over the last few years.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/erin-burnett-grills-paul-bremer-on-iraq-arent-you-the-one-who-got-us-into-this-mess/
We won don't you know. And if we'd just ignored the status of forces agreement and said we were going to stay there forever whether the Iraqis wanted us there or not, we could have proven it. These guys need to go slither back into the holes they crawled out of.
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/erin-burnett-calls-out-paul-bremer-after
June 11, 2014
As if Virginia politics weren't bizarre enough, they got even weirder after Eric Cantor conceded the primary to virtual unknown Kochhead Dave Brat.
Washington Post:
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/all-hell-breaks-loose-cantor-hq-after
ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE At Cantor HQ After Concession
As if Virginia politics weren't bizarre enough, they got even weirder after Eric Cantor conceded the primary to virtual unknown Kochhead Dave Brat.
Washington Post:
Cantor addressed his supporters for about four minutes at a suburban Richmond hotel ballroom, then boarded an SUV without taking questions from reporters scurrying after him.
Then it got really rambunctious. In the room of downcast Cantor allies, a new energy suddenly erupted — but not the kind they wanted on election night. A group of immigration activists stormed the ballroom, screaming and waving a flag. “What do we want? Immigration reform! When do we want it? Now!”
A few Cantor supporters tried to block the protesters’ entrance into the ballroom, and pushing and shoving ensued. And before they reached the microphone, one Cantor supporter threw his glass of wine at a female protester. She swore at him in return.
A hotel employee took the microphone Cantor had used and told the protesters in Spanish that the police were on their way.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/chaos-erupts-at-cantor-election-night-headquarters-after-his-departure/2014/06/10/5710c56e-f106-11e3-bf76-447a5df6411f_story.html
Then it got really rambunctious. In the room of downcast Cantor allies, a new energy suddenly erupted — but not the kind they wanted on election night. A group of immigration activists stormed the ballroom, screaming and waving a flag. “What do we want? Immigration reform! When do we want it? Now!”
A few Cantor supporters tried to block the protesters’ entrance into the ballroom, and pushing and shoving ensued. And before they reached the microphone, one Cantor supporter threw his glass of wine at a female protester. She swore at him in return.
A hotel employee took the microphone Cantor had used and told the protesters in Spanish that the police were on their way.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/chaos-erupts-at-cantor-election-night-headquarters-after-his-departure/2014/06/10/5710c56e-f106-11e3-bf76-447a5df6411f_story.html
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/all-hell-breaks-loose-cantor-hq-after
June 11, 2014
A Weasel Sendoff,.....BUH-BYYYYYE YOOOOOUNG GUN!!.......................
Around 8 p.m. MSNBC began running B-roll footage of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor as though he died, and, well, he did politically. None of the major networks were prepared to cover a major election upset. In a GOP primary season where the big story had been the GOP establishment beating back the Tea Party, the story turned on a dime with Cantor’s stunning defeat. He is the first majority leader in history to lose in a primary in his own party since 1899. This is a huge victory for anti-immigration extremists, including Ann Coulter, Matt Drudge, Laura Ingraham and Mickey Kaus. Drudge is mocking Salon for writing that Cantor was likely to beat unknown far-right economics professor Dave Brat, but in fact Jim Newell got the pulse of the race right. Brat had accused Cantor of shoving immigration reform down the party’s throat – the right is obsessed with things being forced down their throats? – and with recent news about children crossing the border from Mexico vainly hoping for congressional sanity in the form of an immigration deal, the issue had new heat.
“Eric Cantor represents large corporations who want a never-ending supply of cheap, low-wage foreign labor,” Brat said in his stump speech. “Eric Cantor saying he opposes amnesty is like Barack Obama saying he opposes Obamacare.” On MSNBC Tuesday night, Chuck Todd recalled that this morning, in an interview, Dave Brat used “amnesty” roughly every fourth word. Of course Cantor was last seen trying to tell his voters that he was fighting Obama’s “amnesty” plan, but it clearly didn’t work. But it couldn’t happen to a more deserving guy. Cantor is another conscience-free Republican leader who courted the Tea Party when it seemed politically advantageous and then tried to run from it when it was clear it was going to bite him in the ass. He began plotting against President Obama the night he was inaugurated, and joined with Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy to promote their goofy, arrogant “Young Guns” slate of 2010 candidates. But they helped the GOP take back the House, and they were proud of channeling the Tea Party’s anger to help their party and hurt Democrats.
Cantor was key to scuttling a bipartisan solution to the 2011 debt ceiling standoff (which some Democrats, myself included, probably want to thank him for). He boasted to the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza that it was a “fair assessment” that he was the man behind House Speaker John Boehner’s pulling out of Grand Bargain talks with President Obama during the Grand Bargain negotiations of 2011. He argued that it was better to use the issue in the 2012 election. This point of view, of course, cost Mitt Romney the White House, and also led to the 2013 government shutdown, but Cantor’s right-wing power play couldn’t save his political career. He’s been playing with fire, and finally his career went up in smoke. He spent an astonishing $5 million – only 2 percent of it raised in small contributions – to Brat’s $122,000.
cont'
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/11/eric_cantor_got_what_he_deserved_a_political_frauds_stunning_demise/
ERIC CANTOR GOT WHAT HE DESERVED: A Political Fraud's Stunning Demise
Immigration foes killed the majority leader, as they’ll kill the GOP. It couldn’t happen to a more swell guy
A Weasel Sendoff,.....BUH-BYYYYYE YOOOOOUNG GUN!!.......................
Around 8 p.m. MSNBC began running B-roll footage of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor as though he died, and, well, he did politically. None of the major networks were prepared to cover a major election upset. In a GOP primary season where the big story had been the GOP establishment beating back the Tea Party, the story turned on a dime with Cantor’s stunning defeat. He is the first majority leader in history to lose in a primary in his own party since 1899. This is a huge victory for anti-immigration extremists, including Ann Coulter, Matt Drudge, Laura Ingraham and Mickey Kaus. Drudge is mocking Salon for writing that Cantor was likely to beat unknown far-right economics professor Dave Brat, but in fact Jim Newell got the pulse of the race right. Brat had accused Cantor of shoving immigration reform down the party’s throat – the right is obsessed with things being forced down their throats? – and with recent news about children crossing the border from Mexico vainly hoping for congressional sanity in the form of an immigration deal, the issue had new heat.
“Eric Cantor represents large corporations who want a never-ending supply of cheap, low-wage foreign labor,” Brat said in his stump speech. “Eric Cantor saying he opposes amnesty is like Barack Obama saying he opposes Obamacare.” On MSNBC Tuesday night, Chuck Todd recalled that this morning, in an interview, Dave Brat used “amnesty” roughly every fourth word. Of course Cantor was last seen trying to tell his voters that he was fighting Obama’s “amnesty” plan, but it clearly didn’t work. But it couldn’t happen to a more deserving guy. Cantor is another conscience-free Republican leader who courted the Tea Party when it seemed politically advantageous and then tried to run from it when it was clear it was going to bite him in the ass. He began plotting against President Obama the night he was inaugurated, and joined with Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy to promote their goofy, arrogant “Young Guns” slate of 2010 candidates. But they helped the GOP take back the House, and they were proud of channeling the Tea Party’s anger to help their party and hurt Democrats.
Cantor was key to scuttling a bipartisan solution to the 2011 debt ceiling standoff (which some Democrats, myself included, probably want to thank him for). He boasted to the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza that it was a “fair assessment” that he was the man behind House Speaker John Boehner’s pulling out of Grand Bargain talks with President Obama during the Grand Bargain negotiations of 2011. He argued that it was better to use the issue in the 2012 election. This point of view, of course, cost Mitt Romney the White House, and also led to the 2013 government shutdown, but Cantor’s right-wing power play couldn’t save his political career. He’s been playing with fire, and finally his career went up in smoke. He spent an astonishing $5 million – only 2 percent of it raised in small contributions – to Brat’s $122,000.
cont'
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/11/eric_cantor_got_what_he_deserved_a_political_frauds_stunning_demise/
June 10, 2014
In 1988 when I voted for George H. W. Bush for president, there was nothing unusual about it. From the time I turned 21, I had always voted Republican. But, after he broke his promise not to raise taxes and the country was in the midst of a recession, I reconsidered my position in 1992. As Bush floundered, the brilliant and charismatic campaign and message of William Jefferson Clinton hit the scene and I voted for my first Democrat.
During the next eight years, I watched how President Clinton oversaw the longest peacetime economic expansion in our history; how the nation enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate in decades; how the home ownership rate grew to the highest it's ever been in the country's history; how he improved economic equality that led to a strong economy and a surplus federal budget. Though his tenure was plagued with scandals and impeachment, it is important to remember, he was acquitted of all charges. In 1996, I still didn't consider myself a Democrat, even though I voted to reelect Clinton. I was an Independent who voted for the best person. But, when the Republican Party nominated George W. Bush in 2000...I began to think of myself as a Democrat.
Living in Texas, I saw Bush's policies and ignorance first hand. I could foresee many problems the country would face if he was elected and, unfortunately, he didn't prove me wrong. Against strong counsel from his own financial advisors, he cut taxes while starting two wars; something no other president had ever done. These decisions began the immeasurable damage to our country that would take decades to recover from. He took a substantial surplus, and turned it into a huge deficit; he changed America's standing in the world, by trying to force his views on other cultures; he chose to invade Iraq first, rather than Afghanistan, allowing Osama bin Laden to continue his reign of terrorism for years; he destabilized the Middle East which led to more insurgents. Bush and Cheney did not listen to Americans or our Allies and millions of lives were lost. As the neocons continually promote just one more war to spread democracy, I believe we should fix America's democracy first before we try to change the cultures of other countries to mirror our own.
Near the end of Bush's disastrous two-term Presidency, it was an easy decision for me to vote for Obama over McCain. But, it was the creation of the Tea Party facet of the Republican Party in 2010 that turned me into a loyal Democrat, rather than an Independent. I don't feel I abandoned the Republican Party but, I do feel the Republican Party abandoned me. Their emerging views on government, religion, women's rights, workers' rights, income inequality, violence against women, equal pay for women, minorities' voting rights, made me move away from these radical ideologues as quickly as possible. In 2014, the Republican Party is now split between the old GOP idealists and the new GOP obstructionists; between those who know their message is losing voters and want to change it and, those who would rather suppress and buy the vote, than change the message. The GOP no longer stands for Grand Old Party, but for Greedy Old Plutocrats.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerry-myers/why-im-no-longer-a-republ_b_5474464.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
Why I'm NO LONGER A Republican
In 1988 when I voted for George H. W. Bush for president, there was nothing unusual about it. From the time I turned 21, I had always voted Republican. But, after he broke his promise not to raise taxes and the country was in the midst of a recession, I reconsidered my position in 1992. As Bush floundered, the brilliant and charismatic campaign and message of William Jefferson Clinton hit the scene and I voted for my first Democrat.
During the next eight years, I watched how President Clinton oversaw the longest peacetime economic expansion in our history; how the nation enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate in decades; how the home ownership rate grew to the highest it's ever been in the country's history; how he improved economic equality that led to a strong economy and a surplus federal budget. Though his tenure was plagued with scandals and impeachment, it is important to remember, he was acquitted of all charges. In 1996, I still didn't consider myself a Democrat, even though I voted to reelect Clinton. I was an Independent who voted for the best person. But, when the Republican Party nominated George W. Bush in 2000...I began to think of myself as a Democrat.
Living in Texas, I saw Bush's policies and ignorance first hand. I could foresee many problems the country would face if he was elected and, unfortunately, he didn't prove me wrong. Against strong counsel from his own financial advisors, he cut taxes while starting two wars; something no other president had ever done. These decisions began the immeasurable damage to our country that would take decades to recover from. He took a substantial surplus, and turned it into a huge deficit; he changed America's standing in the world, by trying to force his views on other cultures; he chose to invade Iraq first, rather than Afghanistan, allowing Osama bin Laden to continue his reign of terrorism for years; he destabilized the Middle East which led to more insurgents. Bush and Cheney did not listen to Americans or our Allies and millions of lives were lost. As the neocons continually promote just one more war to spread democracy, I believe we should fix America's democracy first before we try to change the cultures of other countries to mirror our own.
Near the end of Bush's disastrous two-term Presidency, it was an easy decision for me to vote for Obama over McCain. But, it was the creation of the Tea Party facet of the Republican Party in 2010 that turned me into a loyal Democrat, rather than an Independent. I don't feel I abandoned the Republican Party but, I do feel the Republican Party abandoned me. Their emerging views on government, religion, women's rights, workers' rights, income inequality, violence against women, equal pay for women, minorities' voting rights, made me move away from these radical ideologues as quickly as possible. In 2014, the Republican Party is now split between the old GOP idealists and the new GOP obstructionists; between those who know their message is losing voters and want to change it and, those who would rather suppress and buy the vote, than change the message. The GOP no longer stands for Grand Old Party, but for Greedy Old Plutocrats.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerry-myers/why-im-no-longer-a-republ_b_5474464.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
June 10, 2014
Hey Vance, did you really seek advice from Duck Dynasty fauxbilly bigot Willie Robertson??........
If anything can be said for Louisiana Congressman Vance McAllister, it’s that he’s got balls. In April, McAllister was caught on camera having some extramarital fun with his district scheduler (and campaign donor) Melissa Ann Hixon Peacock, whom he terminated from her position after the affair became public. McAllister claimed he had confessed to his wife earlier in the year, and sought advice from Duck Dynasty fauxbilly bigot Willie Robertson. Robertson, who was McAllister’s State of the Union guest, advised McAllister to focus on his family, and work things out in private.
McAllister, who ran on “Christian values,” admitted on Thursday to another thing Jesus might not like: allowing his votes to be bought. While explaining how “money controls Washington” and work on Capitol Hill is “steady cycle of voting for fundraising and money instead of voting for what is right,” McAllister admitted that he has voted against legislation with a payoff in mind.
Ooops!
From the Ouachita Citizen:
McAllister said he voted “no” on legislation related to the Bureau of Land Management though he did not identify the bill. McAllister said a colleague on the House floor told him that he would receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation if he voted against the bill. He would not name his colleague since he “did not want to put their business out on the street.”
“I played dumb and asked him, ‘How would you vote?’” McAllister said. “He told me, ‘Vote no and you will get a $1,200 check from the Heritage Foundation. If you vote yes, you will get a $1,000 check from some environmental impact group.’”
That answer was a surprise, McAllister said.
“I said, ‘Are you serious?’ and he told me, ‘Yeah, wait and see,’” McAllister said.
McAllister said he voted against the bill but did not receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation. Federal law prohibits public officials, including members of Congress, from directly or indirectly seeking, accepting or agreeing to receive anything of value in return for the performance of any official act such as voting.
“I voted no, and I didn’t get a Heritage Foundation check but he did,” McAllister said. “I went back and checked with my friend, ‘I didn’t get a check, man. What were you talking about?’ He told me, ‘Well, I got one. Why didn’t you?’”
http://www.hannapub.com/ouachitacitizen/news/local_state_headlines/article_8a017c20-ed41-11e3-b622-0017a43b2370.html
McAllister’s friend opined that he was not given a check because Heritage and Gov. Bobby Jindal were “upset with [him]” because of the affair. “In case you didn’t know, the Heritage Foundation is upset with me and so is our governor,” McAllister said. “They are always trying to throw bullets at me. Once I told my friend about Gov. Jindal being mad at me, he said, ‘Well, that’s why you didn’t get a check.’”
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/breaking-disgraced-kissing-congressman
Breaking: Disgraced ‘KISSING CONGRESSMAN’ ADMITS Taking Cash For Votes!
Did Mr. Faux Christian 'Family Values' man cash-in on his votes?....
Hey Vance, did you really seek advice from Duck Dynasty fauxbilly bigot Willie Robertson??........
If anything can be said for Louisiana Congressman Vance McAllister, it’s that he’s got balls. In April, McAllister was caught on camera having some extramarital fun with his district scheduler (and campaign donor) Melissa Ann Hixon Peacock, whom he terminated from her position after the affair became public. McAllister claimed he had confessed to his wife earlier in the year, and sought advice from Duck Dynasty fauxbilly bigot Willie Robertson. Robertson, who was McAllister’s State of the Union guest, advised McAllister to focus on his family, and work things out in private.
McAllister, who ran on “Christian values,” admitted on Thursday to another thing Jesus might not like: allowing his votes to be bought. While explaining how “money controls Washington” and work on Capitol Hill is “steady cycle of voting for fundraising and money instead of voting for what is right,” McAllister admitted that he has voted against legislation with a payoff in mind.
Ooops!
From the Ouachita Citizen:
McAllister said he voted “no” on legislation related to the Bureau of Land Management though he did not identify the bill. McAllister said a colleague on the House floor told him that he would receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation if he voted against the bill. He would not name his colleague since he “did not want to put their business out on the street.”
“I played dumb and asked him, ‘How would you vote?’” McAllister said. “He told me, ‘Vote no and you will get a $1,200 check from the Heritage Foundation. If you vote yes, you will get a $1,000 check from some environmental impact group.’”
That answer was a surprise, McAllister said.
“I said, ‘Are you serious?’ and he told me, ‘Yeah, wait and see,’” McAllister said.
McAllister said he voted against the bill but did not receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation. Federal law prohibits public officials, including members of Congress, from directly or indirectly seeking, accepting or agreeing to receive anything of value in return for the performance of any official act such as voting.
“I voted no, and I didn’t get a Heritage Foundation check but he did,” McAllister said. “I went back and checked with my friend, ‘I didn’t get a check, man. What were you talking about?’ He told me, ‘Well, I got one. Why didn’t you?’”
http://www.hannapub.com/ouachitacitizen/news/local_state_headlines/article_8a017c20-ed41-11e3-b622-0017a43b2370.html
McAllister’s friend opined that he was not given a check because Heritage and Gov. Bobby Jindal were “upset with [him]” because of the affair. “In case you didn’t know, the Heritage Foundation is upset with me and so is our governor,” McAllister said. “They are always trying to throw bullets at me. Once I told my friend about Gov. Jindal being mad at me, he said, ‘Well, that’s why you didn’t get a check.’”
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/breaking-disgraced-kissing-congressman
June 8, 2014
Weasel (FOS) Alert:
Like clockwork, Johnny 'flip-flop' McCain makes his usual Sunday rounds pushing his tripe...... 
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on Sunday asserted that the five Taliban members traded for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was being held prison of war, were “hardcore military jihadists who are responsible for 9/11? and should have been detained indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay or some other U.S. prison. “First of all, I wouldn’t release these men,” McCain told CNN host Candy Crowley. “Ever?” Crowley wondered. “Not these men,” McCain insisted. “They were judged time after time during their confinement in Guantanamo, they were evaluated and judged as too great a risk to release. That was the judgement made.”
The Arizona Republican argued that Bergdahl knew when he joined the military that he was taking “certain risks, and among those risks are wounding, death, imprisonment. That’s why we cherish and love all of those men and women who serve so much.” Crowley pointed out McCain had supported a prisoner exchange with the Taliban to save Bergdahl earlier this year.
McCain, however, insisted that the president had chosen the wrong prisoners, but refused to say exactly which detainees he would have selected. “First of all, we’re not sending everybody home,” he chuckled. “We are going to send them — even if we close Guantanamo — we are going to send them to facilities inside the United States of America, that’s been the plan all along.” “Second of all, I believe we should keep these people because they are hardcore jihadists who are responsible for 9/11,” McCain continued. “Of course, nobody wants to release people who are responsible for 9/11, and these people that are released that were Taliban governing worked hand-in-glove with al Qaeda.”
cont'
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/08/john-mccain-obama-released-the-jihadists-responsible-for-911-to-get-sgt-bergdahl/
John (Flip-Flopper) McCain: Obama Released The ‘Jihadists Responsible For 9/11 To Get Sgt. Bergdahl
“My role as chief prosecutor was to review the information we had on the detainees to determine which ones we could potentially bring war crimes charges against,” Davis recalled. “When I saw the names of the five individuals, when they were reported last weekend, my first reaction was, ‘Who are they?’” “I never saw the names before, which means there was not enough information to even make it on our list of potential prosecution,” he explained. “To trade five of them for a U.S. service member, in my estimation, and I’m often critical of President [Barack] Obama, I think they struck a pretty good deal.”
Weasel (FOS) Alert:
Like clockwork, Johnny 'flip-flop' McCain makes his usual Sunday rounds pushing his tripe......
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on Sunday asserted that the five Taliban members traded for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was being held prison of war, were “hardcore military jihadists who are responsible for 9/11? and should have been detained indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay or some other U.S. prison. “First of all, I wouldn’t release these men,” McCain told CNN host Candy Crowley. “Ever?” Crowley wondered. “Not these men,” McCain insisted. “They were judged time after time during their confinement in Guantanamo, they were evaluated and judged as too great a risk to release. That was the judgement made.”
The Arizona Republican argued that Bergdahl knew when he joined the military that he was taking “certain risks, and among those risks are wounding, death, imprisonment. That’s why we cherish and love all of those men and women who serve so much.” Crowley pointed out McCain had supported a prisoner exchange with the Taliban to save Bergdahl earlier this year.
McCain, however, insisted that the president had chosen the wrong prisoners, but refused to say exactly which detainees he would have selected. “First of all, we’re not sending everybody home,” he chuckled. “We are going to send them — even if we close Guantanamo — we are going to send them to facilities inside the United States of America, that’s been the plan all along.” “Second of all, I believe we should keep these people because they are hardcore jihadists who are responsible for 9/11,” McCain continued. “Of course, nobody wants to release people who are responsible for 9/11, and these people that are released that were Taliban governing worked hand-in-glove with al Qaeda.”
cont'
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/08/john-mccain-obama-released-the-jihadists-responsible-for-911-to-get-sgt-bergdahl/
June 8, 2014
"Morons, Stupid, Ignoramuses, Bigots, Dying Off".........and thats being nice to them!!......
On "The Ed Show," Ed Schultz interviewed former Reagan advisor- slash- Bush 41 policy advisor Bruce Bartlett about the tea party as well as your favorite hypocrite and mine, Sen. John McCain. See: "Secret decoder ring decrypts behavior" of GOP v. Obama! Hint: Blatant hypocrisy #Bergdahlzi.
Let me put it this way: Bartlett didn't mince words. Or to put it another way, he showered us Dems with gifts. Bartlett blasted the hell out of "other Republicans," tea party "morons," and had a few words to say about Weather Vain McCain. It was as if the heavens opened and dropped bundles of unadulterated vindication upon our aching Lefty Lib heads. I may invite him to become a regular contributor to TPC. Oh, but I kid the rational Republican.
Ed and Former Reagan Advisor Bruce discussed how the GOP supported the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl earlier this year, yet changed their tune to adhere to conservative talking points once he was released. McCain has been the poster boy for this political exercise, as you can see by the Rachel Maddow video at the link.
Bartlett also stood by President Obama's decisions on the prisoner of war exchange, loud and clear.
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/former-reagan-advisor-tea-partiers-are
LOL!!- Former Reagan Advisor: Tea Partiers Are "Morons, Stupid, Ignoramuses, Bigots, Dying Off."
- (McCain) probably has his finger up in the air, looking around to see which way the tea party is blowing.
- But unfortunately, these people in the tea party are morons! I mean, they really are. They're stupid, they're ignoramuses, they have no idea what they're talking about, they're extremists, they're bigots.
- Fox-- which is essentially the Republican Party network, simply panders to the Republican Party line-- has an age 72 average viewing age. And so those people who make up the tea party are basically dying off.
- But unfortunately, these people in the tea party are morons! I mean, they really are. They're stupid, they're ignoramuses, they have no idea what they're talking about, they're extremists, they're bigots.
- Fox-- which is essentially the Republican Party network, simply panders to the Republican Party line-- has an age 72 average viewing age. And so those people who make up the tea party are basically dying off.
"Morons, Stupid, Ignoramuses, Bigots, Dying Off".........and thats being nice to them!!......
On "The Ed Show," Ed Schultz interviewed former Reagan advisor- slash- Bush 41 policy advisor Bruce Bartlett about the tea party as well as your favorite hypocrite and mine, Sen. John McCain. See: "Secret decoder ring decrypts behavior" of GOP v. Obama! Hint: Blatant hypocrisy #Bergdahlzi.
Let me put it this way: Bartlett didn't mince words. Or to put it another way, he showered us Dems with gifts. Bartlett blasted the hell out of "other Republicans," tea party "morons," and had a few words to say about Weather Vain McCain. It was as if the heavens opened and dropped bundles of unadulterated vindication upon our aching Lefty Lib heads. I may invite him to become a regular contributor to TPC. Oh, but I kid the rational Republican.
Ed and Former Reagan Advisor Bruce discussed how the GOP supported the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl earlier this year, yet changed their tune to adhere to conservative talking points once he was released. McCain has been the poster boy for this political exercise, as you can see by the Rachel Maddow video at the link.
Bartlett also stood by President Obama's decisions on the prisoner of war exchange, loud and clear.
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/former-reagan-advisor-tea-partiers-are
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
