April 29, 2015

'Burn In Hell' SCOTUS Protestor Was Arrested At Obama's 2013 Inaugural

WASHINGTON (AP) — The protester who interrupted the Supreme Court's historic argument over gay marriage is an anti-abortion activist with a history of disrupting public events.

Rives Miller Grogan was arrested Tuesday after he began yelling in the courtroom that supporters of gay marriage "will burn in hell."

Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said he was charged with making a "harangue" or using loud or threatening language in court and demonstrating with the intent of interfering with the administration of justice. Grogan made headlines in 2013 when he climbed a tree near the U.S. Capitol and shouted during President Barack Obama's inaugural address. He was convicted on misdemeanor charges and ordered to stay away from the U.S. Capitol grounds.

He's been convicted at least five times since 2009 of disorderly conduct and similar charges.

###

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/supreme-court-protester-history-disrupting-capitol-events

April 28, 2015

Trumps Says He’ll Build Massive Wall on Mexican Border

Source: PoliticalWire/WashPost



Donald Trump, at a campaign event in New Hampshire, touted his building expertise to show how he’ll tackle border security and immigration reform, the Washington Post reports.

Said Trump: “I will build the best wall, the biggest, the strongest, not penetrable, they won’t be crawling over it, like giving it a little jump and they’re over the wall, it costs us trillions. And I’ll have Mexico pay for the wall. Because Mexico is screwing us so badly. I will take it from out of just a small fraction of the money they’ve been screwing us for over the last number of years.”

###

Read more: http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=104648570&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4937023

---

Extra Bonus Quote of the Day

“I will disclose my records. I will disclose everything. And I tell you what: People will be very, very, impressed.”

— Donald Trump, quoted by the Washington Post, on his flirtations with a presidential bid.

###

http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=104648011&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4937023

April 28, 2015

Paul Says It Was a Mistake to Topple Saddam Hussein

Source: PoliticalWire/NYT



Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) “said flatly that it had been a mistake for the United States to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. And he suggested that the situation in Libya had deteriorated because of the overthrow of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi,” thew New York Times reports.

Said Paul: “Each time we topple a secular dictator, I think we wind up with chaos, and radical Islam seems to rise.”

###

Read more: http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=104648865&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4937023

April 28, 2015

Yes, George W. Really Should Remain Silent - By Josh Marshall

By JOSH MARSHALL Published APRIL 28, 2015, 9:06 AM EDT

For all my many criticisms of him during his presidency, I have come to respect President Bush's post-presidency. He's kept out of the toxic political battles that came after he left office. He's had the confidence or perhaps simply the realism and detachment to leave it to posterity to judge his presidency and not try to duke it out in the 24/7 press cycle like his toxic second Dick Cheney. And there are moments of grace, like the recent 50th anniversary commemoration of the the March on Selma. DC's Republican leadership stayed away. But Bush was there. One might argue that there was little to be gained by Republicans attending since, in the nature of things, it was not going to be a receptive audience and they would be upstaged infinitely by the iconic symbolism of an African-American President. But the same applies to Bush. And he was there.

But there's another side to Bush's post-presidential silence - one often ascribed to the virtues of the Bush clan itself: it is merited and it is wise. For Bush himself.

As you may have noticed, President Bush attended the Sheldon Adelson presidential cattle call Saturday. And though his comments were private, someone transcribed them in some detail and then leaked them to Josh Rogin of Bloomberg. The remarks aren't terribly detailed or specific. He thinks President Obama is naive and has placed the US in strategic retreat around the globe and particularly in the Middle East. He criticizes the President for withdrawing all US troops from Iraq, says he's misjudging the Iranians and believes his successor has no plan to combat ISIS. “You think the Middle East is chaotic now? Imagine what it looks like for our grandchildren. That’s how Americans should view the deal," he reportedly said.

Republicans can carry on and complain that six years into his presidency, President Obama is still pointing to the mess left him by his predecessor. But the White House harps on this point because it has the virtue of being true and the public knows it. More than six years in, poll after poll supports this claim. In fact, it is probably fair to say that there is no president in living memory, perhaps no president in the last century, who has left such an unmitigated mess to his successor. Whatever his public discretion, Bush's comments show he still inhabits a bubble of denial about the challenges the country faces and his central role in exacerbating, and in many cases creating, them.

Perhaps the biggest mess is the post-2008 crisis economy. This was a staggering mess to recover from. But Bush and his defenders at least have an argument that the entirety of the collapse can't be laid at his feet. Yes, it happened on his watch, after almost eight years of his presidency. But the roots of the crisis stretched back into a climate of financial services deregulation that he accelerated but didn't begin. A lot of it goes back to the Clinton administration and before Reagan, even the Carter administration. This isn't to absolve Bush. He has much to answer for. But you cannot point to decisive and contingent decisions he made which caused the crisis.

On foreign policy the verdict is very, very different. If our two primary challenges in the Middle East today are ISIS and Iran, neither is at all imaginable in their current form absent the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. The situation with ISIS probably speaks for itself. With a unified Iraq and without the insurgency that followed the US invasion, there would be no ISIS. Some version of it might hypothetically exist in Syria. But ISIS is an Iraqi creation, which made a hejira of sorts into Syria to return Iraq in force. In any case, no 2003 invasion, no ISIS. Saddam Hussein's regime was awful, repressive and aggressive. But it held together, brutally, the fulcrum of ethnic and sectarian divisions that have spilled in all directions since his fall.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/yes-george-w-really-should-remain-silent

April 28, 2015

Cruz thinks he can improve on Karl Rove's results among "gays, guns and God" voters. Not in 2016...

Ted Cruz has no path to win: His play for evangelical vote won’t fly as GOP’s Wall Street and Tea Party wings collide

The Texas senator thinks he can improve on Karl Rove's results among "gays, guns and God" voters. Not in 2016...

JOHN STOEHR

For the 2004 election, Karl Rove resolved to avoid a too-close-to-call repeat of the 2000 contest. He believed as many as 4 million white evangelical voters failed to show up in the race between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Four years later, President Bush was enjoying strong approval ratings as a “war president,” but Rove wasn’t taking any chances. He set out to inflame conservative fear with a campaign strategy built on a theme of “Gays, Guns and God.”

White evangelical voters are a fickle lot. They don’t support just any Republican. They need to be courted. Wined and dined, you might say. John McCain, who never cared for social conservatives or their penchant for governmental control over private behavior, saw 2 million fewer white evangelical votes than President Bush did four years prior. Even more stayed home in 2012.

In launching his 2016 campaign at Liberty University, Ted Cruz was making clear his intention to be the Republican candidate of the “gays, guns and God” bloc. But, according to Bloomberg Politics‘ Dave Weigel and Ben Brody, the Texas senator is aiming higher than Rove did. Cruz, they said, is banking on the theory “that 8 million to 9 million white evangelical voters haven’t been turning out. As many as 35 million of their peers had, but if the exit polls were right, enough evangelicals stayed home to lose states like Ohio and Florida” in 2008 and 2012.

So Cruz cut to the chase in Lynchburg: “Roughly half of born-again Christians aren’t voting. They’re staying home. Imagine, instead, millions of people of faith all across America coming out to the polls and voting our values.”

It’s a gamble, as presidential politics tends to be. But his odds are made longer by two factors. One is obvious. Cruz is hoping to double the “gays, guns and God” bloc — 4 million more than Rove got. Not easy. The other reason is more complicated, and it has nothing to do with immigration.

more
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/28/ted_cruz_has_no_path_to_win_his_play_for_evangelical_vote_wont_fly_as_gops_wall_street_and_tea_party_wings_collide/

April 28, 2015

The Supreme Court can’t fix Cruz’s America: Why bigotry will survive even if marriage equality wins

The Supreme Court can’t fix Ted Cruz’s America: Why bigotry will survive even if marriage equality wins

Even if the Supreme Court rules for gay marriage, Cruz proves that much still needs to be done for LGBT rights

HEATHER DIGBY PARTON

Today’s oral arguments in the Supreme Court marriage equality case may or may not be exciting, but the importance of the outcome cannot be overstated. We are witnessing before us one of the greatest expansions of civil rights in decades, and if the high court decides to be part of the future instead of the past, this advance will codify into law the basic human right of marriage for gays and lesbians throughout America. This country has come a long way very quickly and it’s inspiring to see it happen.

There is no guarantee, of course. There is still a cultural divide on the issue, as we saw in the recent “religious liberty” controversy in Indiana. Like the nation at large, the Court is divided too. It’s assumed that the four more liberal judges will vote in favor. If any of the the uber-conservative triumvirate of Scalia, Alito and Thomas were to vote with them, it would be a judicial curveball of historic proportions. (Translation: Don’t count on it.) This leaves Chief Justice John Roberts who has shown some propensity for consensus building, and could vote with the liberals; as well as, of course, Anthony Kennedy, the justice known mostly for majority-straddling (and right-leaning) position on the bench.

As Ian Millhiser wrote at Think Progress, Kennedy’s record on gay rights cases is something else:

Nearly every gay rights victory handed down by the Supreme Court has Justice Anthony Kennedy’s name on it. Kennedy authored the very first Supreme Court decision recognizing that anti-gay laws can violate the Constitution’s promise of equality, and he followed that up with decisions targeting sex bans and ending marriage discrimination by the federal government. In the likely event that the Court declares marriage discrimination unconstitutional throughout the nation this June, expect to find Justice Kennedy’s name on that decision as well.

The fact that the same justice repeatedly writes in the same issue area can be a sign that they find that area particularly interesting, but it is also true that closely divided cases are frequently assigned to the most on-the-fence member of the Court — on the theory that no one can tailor an opinion to their own idiosyncratic views better than themselves. Kennedy’s record supports the latter interpretation, as he’s fretted in the past about the “uncharted waters” facing the Court if it hands down a decision bringing marriage equality to the entire nation. Since then, however, the Court has allowed lower court decisions supporting marriage equality to take effect — a strong sign that Kennedy has made up his mind in favor of equality.

more
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/28/the_supreme_court_cant_make_ted_cruz_disappear_why_american_bigotry_will_survive_even_if_marriage_equality_wins/

April 28, 2015

Sean Hannity shamed by Baltimore protester: “You’re not concerned about the welfare of black people!

The Fox News host yelled a lot and then ended the interview early

JOANNA ROTHKOPF

Fox News host Sean Hannity placates his elderly, close-minded viewers by letting them live vicariously through him as he scolds a black protester. On Monday evening, Hannity interviewed Adam J. Jackson, CEO of Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle and a nonviolent protester in Baltimore.

“Is this the type of protest you want to be a part of?” Hannity asked.

“First and foremost, I’m not going to talk about the violence that people are talking about,” Jackson replied. “This is a response to the violence of the Baltimore City Police Department. People talking about fires burning in Baltimore, there’s been fires burning of mass incarceration, racist policing practices, so this is an outgrowth of that.” Jackson is referring to the protests that have plagued Baltimore for the past few days in response to the unexplained death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray while he was in police custody.

“Isn’t this a minority-run city in terms of its politics?” Hannity responded. “You said racism but this is a majority minority police department and you’re calling the black officers in Baltimore racist?”

“We’re not talking about individual people who are racist,” Jackson said. “I’m talking about the elite class and politicians in Baltimore. More people like Martin O’Malley who have legally arrested 757,000 black people–”

“Martin O’Malley is out of office– he’s not in office anymore.”

“The genealogy of this very problem in Baltimore starts with people like him, the mayor, these laws and public policy,” Jackson responded.

-snip-

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/28/sean_hannitys_condescending_baltimore_interview_is_this_the_type_of_protest_you_want_to_be_a_part_of/

April 28, 2015

During Baltimore Riots, Trump Trolls City, National Leadership

Donald Trump took to Twitter on Monday night and Tuesday morning to sound off about the Baltimore riots, and what he claimed was ineffective leadership on the part of Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, and President Obama.

Donald J. TrumpVerified account
?@realDonaldTrump

Wow, 15 policemen hurt in Baltimore, some badly! Where is the National Guard. Police must get tough, and fast! Thugs must be stopped.

Reply Retweet Favorite

Donald J. Trump Verified account
?@realDonaldTrump

Our great African American President hasn't exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-twitter-baltimore-riots

April 28, 2015

Baltimore Mayor, Maryland Guv Abruptly Leave Don Lemon Interview

The mayor of Baltimore and the governor of Maryland both walked off an interview with CNN's Don Lemon after he questioned whether officials were quick enough to react to violence in Baltimore in the wake of the death of Freddie Gray.

Lemon began the interview by asking the two officials why Maryland did not activate a state of emergency until Monday when the order was ready on Saturday, according to a clip highlighted by Mediaite. Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) explained that the state prepared the order ahead of time, and that he signed the order when Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake asked for the state's help.

Lemon then turned to the mayor, asking why she took to long to ask for back-up. "We have to respond to what was going on on the ground. We’ve seen what happened when other jurisdictions have overreacted and brought in resources that escalated the violence on the street, and I didn’t want that to happen in Baltimore," Rawlings-Blake responded. "When we saw the breakout violence in the small groups, we realized that it was time to bring in additional resources."

Lemon asked twice more why Maryland did not declare a state of emergency sooner.
Rawlings-Blake said that she did not want Baltimore to become a "military state" and wanted to facilitate free speech for peaceful protesters.

After a 10-minute long interview with Lemon, the two officials left the interview as Lemon asked about curfews.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/don-lemon-baltimore-hogan-rawlings-blake

April 28, 2015

Christie: The Media Made My Poll Numbers Go So Low

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), a potential presidential candidate in 2016, on Monday placed blame on the media for his low approval ratings.

During an interview with NJ101.5 radio's "Ask the Governor," Christie dismissed the hit he has taken in the polls since the Bridgegate scandal broke.

"If you're going to have relentlessly negative coverage from the media, it's going to affect your poll numbers," Christie said, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Christie's approval ratings sunk to the lowest of any governor this year in an April Quinnipiac poll. Fifty-six percent of New Jersey voters said they disapproved of the job Christie is doing, while just 38 percent said they approved.

###

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/chris-christie-polls-media-coverage

----------------------------

Christie blames the media for his low poll numbers; Bobby Jindal attributes his low poll numbers to doing the job he was elected to do.