jml510
jml510's JournalDem. group sends fruit basket to Carnival Cruz
[IMG]
[/IMG]
Link: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/11/democratic-group-sends-lovely-fruit-basket-to-ted-cruz-as-gop-popularity-plummets/
Americans United For Change announced it had sent the gift to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), whose insistence on tying funding for the Affordable Care Act to funding for the federal government helped lead to the current shutdown.
Recent polls have shown the GOP favorability ratings have plunged to all-time lows for any political party, while Obama’s popularity has risen slightly and support for his signature health care law has grown.
“Dear Ted,” said the card on the fruit and snack basket sent by the group’s president, Brad Woodhouse. “A Texas sized thank you!! Thanks to you, Obamacare is more popular and the GOP is less so. Keep up the Good Work!! Yours, Americans United for Change.”
Woodhouse said the gag gift, which cost $91.98 including the service charge, was the best $90 the group has spent.
He said the gift was intended to poke fun at the tea party-backed lawmaker, but it also served a more sincere purpose.
“In the interest of humanity, we sent the food and snacks to his staff because the snack bars are shut down,” Woodhouse said.
Boehner has 2014 primary opponent
Link: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/boehner-gets-primary-challenger
Businessman Eric Gurr is challenging Boehner for the speaker's congressional seat, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Gurr told the paper he decided to run against Boehner after he backed U.S. military action in Syria.
"It was a tipping point," Gurr said. "I'm not a big fan of getting involved in the internal politics of another country."
Gurr also took issue with Boehner's approach to immigration reform, which the Speaker said needed a more incremental approach than the bipartisan Senate bill.
"They keep saying the immigration system is broken," Gurr told the Enquirer when asked about his opposition to the Senate bill. "That's absolute nonsense."
Gurr, the CEO of computer consulting firm the Best & Brightest Inc., admits that his chances of beating Boehner are slim given the speaker's influence and deep fundraising resources. Boehner has repeatedly easily won reelection in Ohio's 8th congressional district.
Little Miss Hispanic Delaware stripped of title, because she's not Latina enough
Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/hispanic-dethroned-latina-article-1.1469761
Jakiyah McKoy was crowned Little Miss Hispanic Delaware — only to face controversy over her heritage.
Little Miss Hispanic Delaware has been stripped of her title — for not being Latina enough.
Jakiyah McKoy, 7, has been left devastated after pageant sponsors Nuestras Raices Delaware ruled there was no proof she had at least 25% Latina blood.
Her family claims a grandparent was from the Dominican Republic — but without any documentation, the distraught beauty queen had to forfeit her crown.
The McKoys are now claiming it is the girl's darker skin — and not a lack of documentation — that is the reason her reign was cut short.
The claim led Daniel Jose Older to set up a Change.org petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/let-jakiyah-keep-her-crown?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=36996&alert_id=luTLDvceOB_HmYRkAQQXF
A petition in support of Jakiyah McKoy claims that the teeny beauty queen is being investigated because she is of African descent as well as Dominican.
"Nuestras Raices Delaware has blocked her win after an outcry from people claiming that, because she is black, she is 'not the best representative of Latin beauty,'" he wrote.
"The title is now pending while the committee 'investigates' Jakiyah's heritage. Meanwhile, none of the other competitors were subject to such an investigation," he added.
Nuestra Raices President Maria Parez, however, denied the allegations of racism.
"Color has nothing to do with it," she told Latino Rebels. "We're all Latinos. That's why we're so beautiful because we come in all different colors."
"Her parents were asked to bring in documentation. Of all of the documentation brought in there's nothing to confirm Dominican heritage," she added.
For the BOG--Pres. Obama sucks? Really?
x-Posted from GD.
So I was reading a Media Matters article, and I saw a couple of commenters who were displeased with the President thus far. The first person commented:
"I'm perfectly willing to concede to President Obama is a man of great intelligence, but he is also a great source of my apparent cynicism.
The 2008 Obama was the man. I loved that guy, and at that time, I wasn't even old enough to legally vote. Something changed once he was sworn in. The NSA program is illegal. The drone strike program is inhumane. President Obama is by own definition a moderate republican were it not for the fact that the Republican Party is a group of fringe lunatics.
The ACA is a compromise in and of itself. Earlier this year, Obama gave the Republicans Social Security cuts when they weren't even asking for it. I have no doubt in my mind that one of President Obama's main goals is to 'de-weaponize' the debt ceiling, a laudable goal to be certain. But I worry about what comes afterwords.
So, yes. I always maintain a bit of cynicism. Especially when our 'progressives' aren't progressive in any sense of the word. And that is my diatribe for tonight."
Another commenter responded, saying:
"You need not wait for an answer to how I feel about Obama.
Just like every other president before him, he sucks."
This was my response to comment #1:
"Actually, the NSA program is legal:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9241267/Controls_keep_NSA_spy_programs_legal_director_tells_Black_Hat_audience?source=rss_keyword_edpicks&google_editors_picks=true
With concerns to the drone strikes, that method is by no means perfect, but there are at least less of our troops being wounded, and the country is still being kept safe. Other countries use drone strikes, as well.
As far as SS goes, it has been well over 4 years, and Obama still has not made any cuts to it. If he were that eager to make cuts, he would've had plenty of willing Republicans to assist him. All he did was show to everyone how unreasonable and extreme the Republicans have been. He has been the adult in the room and willing to work together with Congress in order to get things done, but they have not been cooperative at all."
And here is my response to the 2nd comment:
"I don't think Obama is perfect, but I would have to take issue with that. It is tough for ANY president to get much accomplished when they have a Congress that is 100% committed to opposing him or her at all costs, no matter how ideologically pure the President may be. At one point, he even proposed a Jobs Bill, yet that was blocked by Congress. Considering all that he has accomplished like lowering the deficit and unemployment, drawing down both wars, extending tax cuts for working class and poor Americans, bringing the country a step closer towards single-payer, signing the Lily Ledbetter act, and being the 1st president to endorse gay marriage, I would argue that he has done a pretty good job thus far."
Anyway, thanks in advance for reading this, and feel free to share your thoughts on my responses. I think I might get thumbed down a bit for those comments, though, since some of the regulars on that site are in fact pretty cynical about President Obama.
Here is the link, BTW, in case if anyone wants to check the article out:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/10/10/ben-carson-uses-his-first-official-fox-appearan/196383
Pres. Obama sucks? Really?
So I was reading a Media Matters article, and I saw a couple of commenters who were displeased with the President thus far. The first person commented:
"I'm perfectly willing to concede to President Obama is a man of great intelligence, but he is also a great source of my apparent cynicism.
The 2008 Obama was the man. I loved that guy, and at that time, I wasn't even old enough to legally vote. Something changed once he was sworn in. The NSA program is illegal. The drone strike program is inhumane. President Obama is by own definition a moderate republican were it not for the fact that the Republican Party is a group of fringe lunatics.
The ACA is a compromise in and of itself. Earlier this year, Obama gave the Republicans Social Security cuts when they weren't even asking for it. I have no doubt in my mind that one of President Obama's main goals is to 'de-weaponize' the debt ceiling, a laudable goal to be certain. But I worry about what comes afterwords.
So, yes. I always maintain a bit of cynicism. Especially when our 'progressives' aren't progressive in any sense of the word. And that is my diatribe for tonight."
Another commenter responded, saying:
"You need not wait for an answer to how I feel about Obama.
Just like every other president before him, he sucks."
This was my response to comment #1:
"Actually, the NSA program is legal:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9241267/Controls_keep_NSA_spy_programs_legal_director_tells_Black_Hat_audience?source=rss_keyword_edpicks&google_editors_picks=true
With concerns to the drone strikes, that method is by no means perfect, but there are at least less of our troops being wounded, and the country is still being kept safe. Other countries use drone strikes, as well.
As far as SS goes, it has been well over 4 years, and Obama still has not made any cuts to it. If he were that eager to make cuts, he would've had plenty of willing Republicans to assist him. All he did was show to everyone how unreasonable and extreme the Republicans have been. He has been the adult in the room and willing to work together with Congress in order to get things done, but they have not been cooperative at all."
And here is my response to the 2nd comment:
"I don't think Obama is perfect, but I would have to take issue with that. It is tough for ANY president to get much accomplished when they have a Congress that is 100% committed to opposing him or her at all costs, no matter how ideologically pure the President may be. At one point, he even proposed a Jobs Bill, yet that was blocked by Congress. Considering all that he has accomplished like lowering the deficit and unemployment, drawing down both wars, extending tax cuts for working class and poor Americans, bringing the country a step closer towards single-payer, signing the Lily Ledbetter act, and being the 1st president to endorse gay marriage, I would argue that he has done a pretty good job thus far."
Anyway, thanks in advance for reading this, and feel free to share your thoughts on my responses. I think I might get thumbed down a bit for those comments, though, since some of the regulars on that site are in fact pretty cynical about President Obama.
Here is the link, BTW, in case if anyone wants to check the article out:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/10/10/ben-carson-uses-his-first-official-fox-appearan/196383
O'Reilly to Beck: If Obamacare implodes, Democrats will be "banished for 10-15 years"
O’Reilly told Beck he believes Ted Cruz‘s opposition to Obamacare is sincere, but at the same time he said compromise is essential for anything to get done and neither side can have the “my way or the highway” attitude.
O’Reilly also bemoaned how little people really care about this issue, tying technological distraction to political apathy that allows an “elite governing the country” doing whatever it wants without much public pushback, which Beck found to be a very “depressing,” “fascistic” painting of what’s to come.
O’Reilly said that about half of Americans simply have “no blanking clue what’s going on.” Beck asked him what he thinks is going to happen if Obamacare is implemented and turns into a massive disaster. O’Reilly responded, “Then the Democratic party will be banished for ten to fifteen years,” meaning the political fallout will be so great they’ll end up in the minority in both the House and Senate, and they won’t control the presidency in a long while.
[/IMG]Atlas Shrugged--a Review
It's not just Akin
More: http://itsnotjustakin.com
Rick Scott Signed Legislation Forcing Women To Undergo An Ultrasound Before An Abortion. According to the Tampa Bay Times, “Gov. Rick Scott on Saturday hosted a celebration of the four new laws intended to limit access to abortion…Lawmakers passed five abortion-related bills in the 2011 session. One requires women to receive an ultrasound before undergoing an abortion and be offered the opportunity to have it described to her…Asked what his response it to those who say the laws limit choice for women, Gov. Scott referred to the ultrasound bill, passed by a previous Legislature but vetoed by then Gov. Charlie Crist. ‘You should have the opportunity to see an ultrasound of your child,’ Scott said. ‘It’s your choice. You don’t have to. This creates choice. I think it’s very positive.’” [Tampa Bay Times, 7/30/11]
Gary Miller
Miller Co-Sponsored Controversial Bill That Only Provided Abortion Funding For Victims Of “Forcible Rape,” Implying That Some Rapes Were Not “Forcible.” On January 20, 2011, Grimm signed on as a cosponsor to HR 3, a bill to prohibit the use of federal funds for abortion-related services. One provision of the bill altered the exception in federal law that allowed for Medicaid funds to pay for abortions resulting from rape. Instead, the bill redefined the exception by prohibiting the use of federal funds to pay for abortion services in all instances except cases of “forcible rape,” rather than simply rape. This altered language endangered federal assistance for abortion services in a number of rape situations, such as statutory rape, that might have failed to meet the threshold of “forcible rape.” According to Think Progress, “Last year, Akin joined with GOP vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as two of the original co-sponsors of the ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,’ a bill which, among other things, introduced the country to the bizarre term ‘forcible rape.’ Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet the law also contains an exception for women who are raped. The bill Akin and Ryan cosponsored would have narrowed this exception, providing that only pregnancies arising from ‘forcible rape’ may be terminated. Because the primary target of Akin and Ryan’s effort are Medicaid recipients — patients who are unlikely to be able to afford an abortion absent Medicaid funding — the likely impact of this bill would have been forcing many rape survivors to carry their rapist’s baby to term.” The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on May 4, 2011, with Bachmann voting in favor, but no subsequent action was taken in the Senate. [HR 3, 1/20/11; Think Progress, 8/19/12]
Michele Bachmann
Bachmann Co-Sponsored Controversial Bill That Only Provided Abortion Funding For Victims Of “Forcible Rape,” Implying That Some Rapes Were Not “Forcible.” On January 20, 2011, Bachmann signed on as a cosponsor to HR 3, a bill to prohibit the use of federal funds for abortion-related services. One provision of the bill altered the exception in federal law that allowed for Medicaid funds to pay for abortions resulting from rape. Instead, the bill redefined the exception by prohibiting the use of federal funds to pay for abortion services in all instances except cases of “forcible rape,” rather than simply rape. This altered language endangered federal assistance for abortion services in a number of rape situations, such as statutory rape, that might have failed to meet the threshold of “forcible rape.” According to Think Progress, “Last year, Akin joined with GOP vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as two of the original co-sponsors of the ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,’ a bill which, among other things, introduced the country to the bizarre term ‘forcible rape.’ Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet the law also contains an exception for women who are raped. The bill Akin and Ryan cosponsored would have narrowed this exception, providing that only pregnancies arising from ‘forcible rape’ may be terminated. Because the primary target of Akin and Ryan’s effort are Medicaid recipients — patients who are unlikely to be able to afford an abortion absent Medicaid funding — the likely impact of this bill would have been forcing many rape survivors to carry their rapist’s baby to term.” The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on May 4, 2011, with Bachmann voting in favor, but no subsequent action was taken in the Senate. [HR 3, 1/20/11; Think Progress, 8/19/12]
Old Bush ll gem regarding tribal sovereignty
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Oakland, CA
Member since: Thu Oct 6, 2011, 03:00 PM
Number of posts: 10,893
