HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » yallerdawg » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Fri Apr 4, 2014, 04:21 PM
Number of posts: 16,104

Journal Archives

'Big Little Lies' makes most of star-studded cast

The traditional 'whodunit' turned on its head!

Source: CNN, by Brian Lowry


Having seen the finale, "Big Little Lies" pays off its various threads splendidly, joining two previous HBO miniseries -- "The Night Of" and the first season of "True Detective" -- as a tight, self-contained narrative.

If networks are truly committed to this format, they would be doing themselves a service by not trying to transform every one that works into a franchise. Starting over from scratch is always riskier, but nobody needs a "Bigger Littler Lies."

"Big Little Lies" isn't the first series devoted to secrets in an outwardly idyllic small town, and it surely won't be the last. Yet far from feeling too big or little, this seven-episode run, on most every level, turned out to have been just right.

*WARNING* Spoilers at link: http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/31/entertainment/big-little-lies-finale/index.html

Your vote in the 2016 election explains almost everything about your climate beliefs

For “not a partisan issue,” climate change sure looks like a partisan issue.

Source: Vox


Majority of Americans Want Trump To Resign If His Campaign Colluded With Russia


It looks like they have it covered, FAKE PRECEDENT!


Trump's order signals end of US dominance in climate change battle

Source: The Guardian, by Damian Carrington

Is Donald Trump’s determination to send US climate change policy back into the dark ages an “existential threat to the entire planet”, as the architect of many of Barack Obama’s green measures warns? Or is global momentum towards a cleaner, safer future “unstoppable”, as the UN’s climate chief said recently?

The answer lies somewhere in between and you can choose your point on that scale according to your optimism about whether society, governments and businesses will together rise to the challenge of beating global warming.


China, the world’s biggest polluter, is now taking dramatic action to cut emissions, pushed by the foul air many of its citizens suffer and pulled by the likelihood of the low-carbon economy being the greatest growth story of the 21st century.


It is doubtful that Trump’s blitzkrieg on “bullshit” climate change will herald the end of civilisation. But, given the issue’s critical importance for all nations and their unprecedented cooperation to date, it might just signal the end of the US’s dominance as the world’s pre-eminent political and economic power, with others taking up the mantle. Trump’s campaign pledge was “Make America great again” – his legacy could be “Made China great again”.

Read it all at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/28/trump-climate-change-executive-order-us-dominance-china?utm_source=Fareed%27s+Global+Briefing&utm_campaign=1fb6eb3305-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_03_28&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f2e93382a-1fb6eb3305-83261917

Fact Check: Do 80 percent of Americans oppose sanctuary cities?

Of course this White House refers to an online poll.

Source: Washington Post, by Michelle Ye Hee Lee

“According to one recent poll, 80 percent of Americans believe that cities that arrest illegal immigrants for a crime should be required to turn them over to immigration authorities.”
— Attorney General Jeff Sessions, news briefing, March 27, 2017

“I think the last poll I saw on this issue, on sanctuary cities, was somewhere in the 80 percent that American people don’t support sanctuary cities, they don’t want their tax dollars used to finance people who are in this country illegally.”
— White House press secretary Sean Spicer, news briefing, March 14


There’s no official definition of “sanctuary.” It generally refers to rules restricting state and local governments from alerting federal authorities about people who may be in the country illegally. Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and state and local law enforcement can decide how much they want to cooperate with the federal government for immigration enforcement. (For more, check out our explainer and this graphic.)


A February McClatchy-Marist poll of U.S. adults asked two questions about sanctuary policies:

” ‘Sanctuary City’ is a term used to describe U.S. cities which do not enforce immigration laws and allow undocumented immigrants to live there and, in many cases, receive services. Which comes closer to your opinion? Undocumented immigrants should be deported so there is no reason to have sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities are needed to provide services to undocumented immigrants while they are in this country.” Response: 41 percent believed there was no reason to have them, and 50 percent believed they are needed.

“Do you support or oppose the federal government cutting funds to cities that provide sanctuary for undocumented immigrants?” Response: 42 percent supported, 53 percent opposed.

A Fox News poll this month of registered voters asked: “Some so-called ‘sanctuary’ cities refuse to assist federal authorities detain and deport illegal immigrants — do you favor or oppose penalizing those cities by taking away their federal funding?” Response: 41 percent supported and 53 percent opposed taking away federal funds from sanctuary cities.


Read it all at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/28/do-80-percent-of-americans-oppose-sanctuary-cities/?utm_term=.3c3ec458b319&wpisrc=nl_most-draw14&wpmm=1

A day in the life - "Robots are taking your job."

"I saw the news today, oh boy..."

The Robots Really Did Take People's Jobs, Study Confirms

Why 'sanctuary'? California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye explains (March 16, 2017):

Obviously, this argument didn't register with the DOJ or DHS considering the imperial White House-sanctioned remarks from Sessions.

Dear Attorney General Sessions and Secretary Kelly:

As Chief Justice of California responsible for the safe and fair delivery of justice in our state, I am deeply concerned about reports from some of our trial courts that immigration agents appear to be stalking undocumented immigrants in our courthouses to make arrests.

Our courthouses serve as a vital forum for ensuring access to justice and protecting public safety. Courthouses should not be used as bait in the necessary enforcement of our country’s immigration laws.

Our courts are the main point of contact for millions of the most vulnerable Californians in times of anxiety, stress, and crises in their lives. Crime victims, victims of sexual abuse and domestic violence, witnesses to crimes who are aiding law enforcement, limited-English speakers, unrepresented litigants, and children and families all come to our courts seeking justice and due process of law. As finders of fact, trial courts strive to mitigate fear to ensure fairness and protect legal rights. Our work is critical for ensuring public safety and the efficient administration of justice.

Most Americans have more daily contact with their state and local governments than with the federal government, and I am concerned about the impact on public trust and confidence in our state court system if the public feels that our state institutions are being used to facilitate other goals and objectives, no matter how expedient they may be.

Each layer of government — federal, state, and local — provides a portion of the fabric of our society that preserves law and order and protects the rights and freedoms of the people. The separation of powers and checks and balances at the various levels and branches of government ensure the harmonious existence of the rule of law.

The federal and state governments share power in countless ways, and our roles and responsibilities are balanced for the public good. As officers of the court, we judges uphold the constitutions of both the United States and California, and the executive branch does the same by ensuring that our laws are fairly and safely enforced. But enforcement policies that include stalking courthouses and arresting undocumented immigrants, the vast majority of whom pose no risk to public safety, are neither safe nor fair. They not only compromise our core value of fairness but they undermine the judiciary’s ability to provide equal access to justice. I respectfully request that you refrain from this sort of enforcement in California’s courthouses.

Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye


Retailers get aggressive in fight over GOP tax plan

A closed, isolationist economic system of capitalism will lead to its own self-destruction. If it costs x in labor to produce an item, and then the laborer is charged x (labor) + y (profit), you can see how unsustainable this is over time. This is what defines 'the haves' and 'the have nots' - those who can afford to buy the goods produced, and those who can't.

Retailers absolutely understand this.

Source: The Hill, by Naomi Jagoda

Retail groups are intensifying their effort to kill the proposed border-adjustment tax from House Republicans as the agenda in Congress shifts to tax reform following the failure of ObamaCare repeal. 

Under the border-adjustment proposal, imports would be subject to U.S. tax and exports would be exempt. Supporters of the proposal argue that it would boost domestic manufacturing. Opponents argue that the tax will result in higher prices for consumers.


On Friday afternoon, a coalition of retailers against the tax called Americans for Affordable Products sent out an email with the subject line, “With Healthcare Reform Bill Pulled, Focus Increases On Congress’ Border Adjustment Tax.”

Americans for Affordable Products already represents the largest employment sector in the country and speaks for nearly one in four jobs in our nation totaling over 42 million. The job creators joining the coalition recognize the Border Adjustment Tax is a direct threat to their existence and the jobs of their employees.

With the failure in Congress to garner sufficient support for the repeal and replacement of ObamaCare, the support of U.S. House leadership for the Border Adjustment Tax, which serves as a trillion-dollar tax increase on middle-income working households, risks the passage of badly-needed and historic tax reform.

The coalition announced in a press release Monday that it now has more than 400 members. The group argued the border-adjustment proposal threatens the ability of House Republican leaders to accomplish tax reform.


Read it all at: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/325975-retailers-get-aggressive-in-fight-over-gop-tax-plan

Trump's Approval Rating Is Now 2 Points Lower Than Obama's Lowest Rating Ever

PoliticusUSA, by Sarah Jones

Just two months in, President Donald Trump’s job approval rating fell from 41% to 36%, which is 2 points below President Obama’s all-time low rating. Yes, the President that Donald Trump the birther was so obsessed with was more popular than Donald Trump, and Trump managed to his this new low two months into his presidency.

According to a Gallup poll Trump’s “job approval rating fell to 36% for the three-day period of March 24-26, following Republican House leaders’ failed effort to pass a new healthcare bill that would have replaced the Affordable Care Act.”

Trump hit his prior low of 37% during the time period of March 16-18.

Gallup pointed out, “Trump’s current 36% is two percentage points below Barack Obama’s low point of 38%, recorded in 2011 and 2014.” Both 2011 and 2014 were years after President Obama took office in 2009, rather than the months it took the nation to disapprove of Trump at alarmingly high numbers.


Read the rest at: http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/27/trumps-approval-rating-falls-2-points-obamas-lowest-rating.html
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »