The Republican talking point about labor participation was recently torpedoed by Factcheck.org. Among the facts...
Sen. Lindsey Graham said the labor participation rate “is at an all-time low.” That’s not accurate. It was lower between 1948 and 1978.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus blamed the shrinking participation rate on “the Obama economy,” but economists say most of the decline, which has been happening for more than a decade, is due to demographics, including the trend of baby boomers reaching retirement age and deciding to no longer work.
More specifically...
1) The aging of baby boomers. A lower percentage of older Americans choose to work than those who are middle-aged. And so as baby boomers approach retirement age, it lowers the labor force participation rate.
2) A decline in working women. The labor force participation rate for men has been declining since the 1950s. But for a couple decades, a rapid rise in working women more than offset that dip. Women’s labor force participation exploded from nearly 34 percent in 1950 to its peak of 60 percent in 1999. But since then, women’s participation rate has been “displaying a pattern of slow decline.”
3) More young people are going to college. As BLS noted, “Because students are less likely to participate in the labor force, increases in school attendance at the secondary and college levels and, especially, increases in school attendance during the summer, significantly reduce the labor force participation rate of youths.”
So no matter who was president, and independent of the health of the economy, BLS projected in 2006 that labor force participation rates were going to go down.
As usual, conservatives feel that they are entitled to their own facts:)
Friday, March 13, 2015
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Disturbing Parallels
TPM has a post up about the parallels between the segregationists that opposed the Civil Rights movement during the 1950s and 1960s and the Tea Partiers we see today. It's incredibly disturbing and nauseating. As the president noted...
[A]t the time of the marches, many in power condemned rather than praised them. Back then, they were called Communists, half-breeds, outside agitators, sexual and moral degenerates, and worse – everything but the name their parents gave them. Their faith was questioned. Their lives were threatened. Their patriotism was challenged.
Conservatives today have said all of these things about liberals and progressives. Indeed, the same people that were against federal government involvement in Alabama are blowing bowels all over our country about federal government involvement in health care and immigration.
Of course, these are the same people that think the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery.
[A]t the time of the marches, many in power condemned rather than praised them. Back then, they were called Communists, half-breeds, outside agitators, sexual and moral degenerates, and worse – everything but the name their parents gave them. Their faith was questioned. Their lives were threatened. Their patriotism was challenged.
Conservatives today have said all of these things about liberals and progressives. Indeed, the same people that were against federal government involvement in Alabama are blowing bowels all over our country about federal government involvement in health care and immigration.
Of course, these are the same people that think the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery.
Hillary Mental Meltdown Syndrome
Republicans have really become unhinged since the Hillary Clinton email kerfuffle began. Of course, they are like this with all of their opponents, especially the ones that have kicked their ass electorally (Bill, Barack). Now they want to see every single email she has ever sent which strikes me as odd for a number of reasons. Aren't they the party that prides themselves on the privacy of the individual? Their calls for all her emails runs counter to this tenet. It also shows their secret, authoritarian streak that they would like to keep hidden but somehow manages to always reveal itself.
Like the adolescent gossip that has to know what's going on all over the school, they REALLY want to know about every detail of Hillary's life. In more than a few ways, it strikes me as somewhat perverse. What they also don't realize is that their demands for all her emails, which grow more shrill by the minute, will eventually lead to demands for ALL THEIR EMAILS. I realize that some Senators like Lindsey Graham claim to never use email but I'm sure that many Republican Senators and Congressmen do use email.
So, does that mean we get to see their emails now too?:)
Like the adolescent gossip that has to know what's going on all over the school, they REALLY want to know about every detail of Hillary's life. In more than a few ways, it strikes me as somewhat perverse. What they also don't realize is that their demands for all her emails, which grow more shrill by the minute, will eventually lead to demands for ALL THEIR EMAILS. I realize that some Senators like Lindsey Graham claim to never use email but I'm sure that many Republican Senators and Congressmen do use email.
So, does that mean we get to see their emails now too?:)
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Have High Stock Prices Slowed Down the Economy?
Conservatives like Paul Ryan have been crying wolf about inflation in the general economy for years now, yet inflation has been essentially flat for the last two decades. A large part of the reason is that wages have been stagnant, declining in real terms during the Bush years. It's only now getting better, with companies like Walmart announcing minimum wage increases.
Yet there is something that has experienced wild Weimar levels of inflation that Republicans have been predicting: stock prices. The stock market more than doubled between 2009 and 2015.
The economy has been improving slowly since the recession, with the United States doing better than most countries. But world-wide the economy has been pretty lackluster, in part because governments -- especially in Europe -- drastically cut spending at a time when their economies needed a boost.
A big reason stock prices have gone up so much is stock buy backs. For example, just this week GM announced $5 billion in stock buybacks and $5 billion in dividends. Target, which just laid off 1,700 workers, announced that it will buy back $15 billion worth of stock over the next five years:
How do companies justify buy backs? They claim it will increase earnings per share, a metric that shareholders use to measure share values. Not by increasing earnings, but by reducing the number of shares. It's sheer sophistry. Instead of doing something concrete to make the company actually earn more money, they will spend billions just to make it look like they're earning more money.
But why do shareholders deserve more money? The overwhelming majority of them contribute absolutely nothing to a company's bottom line. They simply buy stock on the open market from other shareholders, who bought it from other shareholders, who bought it from other shareholders.
"Activist" investors like Carl Icahn have become the norm. They buy up stock in companies and squeeze the cash out of them like Gordon Gekko, with little care for the future of the company or its workers.
The vast majority of shareholders take no real risks, never contribute a single dime to the companies they own stock in, never do a lick of work to contribute to the company's success. They're just playing roulette on the stock market instead of in a casino.
But increasingly, shareholders are forcing corporate management to make foolish short-term decisions that take cash out of the company to pay off shareholders in dividends, and jack up the stock price by spending billions on stock buybacks.
So you gotta ask: how much are cynical economic manipulations like stock buybacks slowing the growth of the economy? Companies justify the buybacks by saying that demand for the their products is low, so there's no sense in spending money on expanding their business, so they consolidate their gains. But it all goes into the hands of shareholders.
But why demand is low? Because companies are laying people off and paying lower wages, and fewer people can afford to buy the products the companies make.
Instead of the vicious cycle of inflation that Republicans keep predicting, we're stuck in the virtueless cycle of wage deflation for the people who actually do all the work, and hyperinflation in stock prices that reward the leeches on Wall Street who caused the recession in the first place.
Yet there is something that has experienced wild Weimar levels of inflation that Republicans have been predicting: stock prices. The stock market more than doubled between 2009 and 2015.
The economy has been improving slowly since the recession, with the United States doing better than most countries. But world-wide the economy has been pretty lackluster, in part because governments -- especially in Europe -- drastically cut spending at a time when their economies needed a boost.
Companies are not sharing their profits with the people who actually do all the work.
But even though the fundamentals have been mediocre, corporate profits have been very high ever since the recession. How come? Partly because companies have been making fewer workers do more work for less money. Companies are not sharing their profits with the people who actually do all the work.A big reason stock prices have gone up so much is stock buy backs. For example, just this week GM announced $5 billion in stock buybacks and $5 billion in dividends. Target, which just laid off 1,700 workers, announced that it will buy back $15 billion worth of stock over the next five years:
As its new buyback effort kicks in, Target again joins the sizable number of American companies to rely on the financial maneuver, which has drawn criticism despite its uplifting effect on corporate results and stock values.You can give GM the benefit of the doubt, a reward for investors who bought company stock to help it recover after the federal government bailed it out. But Target's stock buyback is simple extortion: shareholders have vowed to destroy the company unless they get their pound of flesh.
Josh Mason, a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute in New York who has written about the history of buybacks, said they first accelerated in the 1980s and even more in the last decade. This paralleled a shift in corporate thinking that managers should place shareholders’ interests above those of employees and customers, he said.
“It’s the natural effect of the shareholders’ revolution,” Mason said. “People who own stock want to see money in their pockets now.”
How do companies justify buy backs? They claim it will increase earnings per share, a metric that shareholders use to measure share values. Not by increasing earnings, but by reducing the number of shares. It's sheer sophistry. Instead of doing something concrete to make the company actually earn more money, they will spend billions just to make it look like they're earning more money.
Companies are spending billions placating activist investors instead of building for the future.
Target is not unique. Shareholders across the board have been demanding they be placated. Thus, companies are no longer investing money in their futures. Target's stock buybacks will only make it more difficult for the ailing company fix its problems. But why do shareholders deserve more money? The overwhelming majority of them contribute absolutely nothing to a company's bottom line. They simply buy stock on the open market from other shareholders, who bought it from other shareholders, who bought it from other shareholders.
"Activist" investors like Carl Icahn have become the norm. They buy up stock in companies and squeeze the cash out of them like Gordon Gekko, with little care for the future of the company or its workers.
The vast majority of shareholders take no real risks, never contribute a single dime to the companies they own stock in, never do a lick of work to contribute to the company's success. They're just playing roulette on the stock market instead of in a casino.
But increasingly, shareholders are forcing corporate management to make foolish short-term decisions that take cash out of the company to pay off shareholders in dividends, and jack up the stock price by spending billions on stock buybacks.
So you gotta ask: how much are cynical economic manipulations like stock buybacks slowing the growth of the economy? Companies justify the buybacks by saying that demand for the their products is low, so there's no sense in spending money on expanding their business, so they consolidate their gains. But it all goes into the hands of shareholders.
But why demand is low? Because companies are laying people off and paying lower wages, and fewer people can afford to buy the products the companies make.
Instead of the vicious cycle of inflation that Republicans keep predicting, we're stuck in the virtueless cycle of wage deflation for the people who actually do all the work, and hyperinflation in stock prices that reward the leeches on Wall Street who caused the recession in the first place.
Reaping What They Sow
When you help create an instransigent ideology, this is what you get.
Tea Party Divided by Export-Import Bank
“At the end of the meeting, there were a lot of angry Texans there,” said Mr. Schubert, who identifies himself as a Tea Party Republican. “We didn’t come there to talk the talking points. We were there to talk the complexities of international trade.”
Well, there's your first mistake. Complexities isn't something that the people YOU helped elect do. Their minds are very simple. Stomp your feet. Shout about the government. Act like an adolescent.
I feel no sympathy for these businessmen. What did they think was going to happen?
Tea Party Divided by Export-Import Bank
“At the end of the meeting, there were a lot of angry Texans there,” said Mr. Schubert, who identifies himself as a Tea Party Republican. “We didn’t come there to talk the talking points. We were there to talk the complexities of international trade.”
Well, there's your first mistake. Complexities isn't something that the people YOU helped elect do. Their minds are very simple. Stomp your feet. Shout about the government. Act like an adolescent.
I feel no sympathy for these businessmen. What did they think was going to happen?
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Adolescent Babies
When have the Democrats ever done anything like this?
GOP Tries to Undercut Nuclear Deal With Warning to Iran
Seriously, what a bunch of fucking adolescent babies!
Barack Obama must fail at everything he does regardless of the cost to the United States' standing in the world. Like the adolescent that wants to destroy the roof over his head and the table that feeds him, Republicans have honestly gone way over the line on this one. Imagine what would happen if Democrats did something like this. The right wing bubble would be screaming about treason and traitors!
Worse, the Republicans who signed this letter are completely failing (as usual) to think in a forward fashion. Iran is likely going to be a future ally in the region (see also: the real reason Bibi Netanyahu is blowing a bowel) because of the threat of ISIL. We are going to need Iran if we want to stop these guys. Don't they understand this?
Ah, right...understand...a word that is eternally absent from their vocabulary.
GOP Tries to Undercut Nuclear Deal With Warning to Iran
Seriously, what a bunch of fucking adolescent babies!
Barack Obama must fail at everything he does regardless of the cost to the United States' standing in the world. Like the adolescent that wants to destroy the roof over his head and the table that feeds him, Republicans have honestly gone way over the line on this one. Imagine what would happen if Democrats did something like this. The right wing bubble would be screaming about treason and traitors!
Worse, the Republicans who signed this letter are completely failing (as usual) to think in a forward fashion. Iran is likely going to be a future ally in the region (see also: the real reason Bibi Netanyahu is blowing a bowel) because of the threat of ISIL. We are going to need Iran if we want to stop these guys. Don't they understand this?
Ah, right...understand...a word that is eternally absent from their vocabulary.
Monday, March 09, 2015
Enjoying The Republican Reaction
I have to admit that I'm enjoying the Republican reaction to the Hillary email (see: Fake Scandal #389). As they usually do, they end up making things worse for themselves than for their intended target.
Lindsey Graham: I've never sent an email
Wow...way to go, dude!! You've managed to sound antiquated, completely out of touch, technologically illiterate and dishonest all at the same time...in many ways, an excellent summation of the Republican party today.
Even Republican media strategists like Rick Wilson aren't helping either.
After eagerly cheerleading Barack Obama for eight years, they stood ready to help break the ultimate glass ceiling and play their role as part of the uncritical chorus of Hillary Clinton’s coronation, first as the Democratic nominee then as President. It’s why they hate this story.
Complete straw man. Worse, if you read the whole piece, he ends up contradicting himself and offers no real solutions to our actual problems.
Why does the Right hate the media so much? Because they call them on their bullshit and have fat faces with their facts and stuff. The media loves this story about Hillary because they are operating under the false assumption that the rest of the country gives a shit. The only people that care are the media and right wing bloggers. Go ask a couple of average Americans if they even know about Hillary's email kerfuffle. They will probably respond with a query about what's being done about actual problems like climate change, immigration, wage stagnation or the institutional racism that is present in our criminal justice system.
The real scandal last week was the Justice Department's findings with Ferguson. If the presidential candidates were smart and wanted more votes, they'd be talking more about this. So far, the only one that is talking about it is Rand Paul. Smart guy...
Lindsey Graham: I've never sent an email
Wow...way to go, dude!! You've managed to sound antiquated, completely out of touch, technologically illiterate and dishonest all at the same time...in many ways, an excellent summation of the Republican party today.
Even Republican media strategists like Rick Wilson aren't helping either.
After eagerly cheerleading Barack Obama for eight years, they stood ready to help break the ultimate glass ceiling and play their role as part of the uncritical chorus of Hillary Clinton’s coronation, first as the Democratic nominee then as President. It’s why they hate this story.
Complete straw man. Worse, if you read the whole piece, he ends up contradicting himself and offers no real solutions to our actual problems.
Why does the Right hate the media so much? Because they call them on their bullshit and have fat faces with their facts and stuff. The media loves this story about Hillary because they are operating under the false assumption that the rest of the country gives a shit. The only people that care are the media and right wing bloggers. Go ask a couple of average Americans if they even know about Hillary's email kerfuffle. They will probably respond with a query about what's being done about actual problems like climate change, immigration, wage stagnation or the institutional racism that is present in our criminal justice system.
The real scandal last week was the Justice Department's findings with Ferguson. If the presidential candidates were smart and wanted more votes, they'd be talking more about this. So far, the only one that is talking about it is Rand Paul. Smart guy...
Sunday, March 08, 2015
Good Words
We've come a long way...
What happened in Ferguson may not be unique but it’s no longer endemic. It’s no longer sanctioned by law or custom, and before the civil rights movement, it most surely was.
And we have a long way to go...
We don’t need the Ferguson report to know that’s not true. We just need to open our eyes and our ears and our hearts to know that this nation’s racial history still casts its long shadow upon us. We know the march is not yet over; we know the race is not yet won. We know reaching that blessed destination where we are judged by the content of our character requires admitting as much.
Understanding the nuances of this is vital if one wants to understand race in the United States today.
Saturday, March 07, 2015
Supreme Court of United States Gives Air Time To Right Wing Blogger
It comes as absolutely no surprise to me that the face of King V Burwell suffers from Obama Mental Meltdown Syndrome.
The man who could cripple Obamacare isn’t shy about telling the world that he thinks the president is an “idiot,” posting altered images of the first lady in Middle Eastern clothing and expressing his hatred for the “Democraps” who enacted the health care law.
A review of King’s public social media accounts show he is a proud grandfather who loves his family, enjoys cooking and sharing photos from conservative blogs. One image shows a photo from the movie “Back to the Future” with instructions to the time traveler: “Marty, there is no time to lose. You must go back in time and give Obama’s dad a condom.”
On Facebook, King frequently criticizes Obamacare and immigration policies and espouses support for limited government, the Second Amendment and Republican political candidates. He jokes often that the federal government is watching him.
Great...
So, somehow, the Supreme Court of the United States managed to give air time to a fucking right wing blogger. I do take heart in one thing, though...
“So do you think NSA, FBI and the other three letter government workers watch face book? Just wonder because if they do I’ll have a house full of them soon. I guess we will be able to enjoy a cold beer and make fun of the idiot in the White House,” he posted on Oct. 8, 2013. “I sued the irs over this bull shit so … get ready.”
So much for the "frivolous" lawsuits meme!
The man who could cripple Obamacare isn’t shy about telling the world that he thinks the president is an “idiot,” posting altered images of the first lady in Middle Eastern clothing and expressing his hatred for the “Democraps” who enacted the health care law.
A review of King’s public social media accounts show he is a proud grandfather who loves his family, enjoys cooking and sharing photos from conservative blogs. One image shows a photo from the movie “Back to the Future” with instructions to the time traveler: “Marty, there is no time to lose. You must go back in time and give Obama’s dad a condom.”
On Facebook, King frequently criticizes Obamacare and immigration policies and espouses support for limited government, the Second Amendment and Republican political candidates. He jokes often that the federal government is watching him.
Great...
So, somehow, the Supreme Court of the United States managed to give air time to a fucking right wing blogger. I do take heart in one thing, though...
“So do you think NSA, FBI and the other three letter government workers watch face book? Just wonder because if they do I’ll have a house full of them soon. I guess we will be able to enjoy a cold beer and make fun of the idiot in the White House,” he posted on Oct. 8, 2013. “I sued the irs over this bull shit so … get ready.”
So much for the "frivolous" lawsuits meme!
Friday, March 06, 2015
Thursday, March 05, 2015
Ferguson: Racism in Action, or Just Plain Old Greed?
The Department of Justice has issued its report on the police in Ferguson, Missouri, and it's completely disgusting.
The city Finance Director ordered the Chief of Police to increase revenue by writing more tickets. The police attack blacks preferentially, stopping and arresting them at a higher rate than whites.
A black woman parked her car illegally once, got two tickets for $152, and when she couldn't pay the fine, she was arrested twice, and spent six days in jail. The city refused partial payments, and over seven years she has paid $550, and but they keep jacking up the fines and she still owes $541.
And when these people are jailed, the time served isn't even recorded by the court to reduce their fine.
Cops just drive up to people sitting in cars or waiting for the bus and harass them, accusing them of being pedophiles.
And because these people have no money, they can't hire a lawyer to sue these bastards.
The Ferguson city government is trying to balance its budget on the backs of its poorest citizens, who are overwhelmingly black. This is part of a larger pattern of the rich and powerful using their economic clout to take away what little money the poor have. This pattern is well established with payday lenders who entrap the disadvantaged in an endless cycle of usurious loans, and rent-to-own stores that charge twice what you can get products for at Walmart.
Does Ferguson do this for malicious and racist reasons, just to keep blacks down? Or is it just because the poor can't afford to pay the fines up front, which means that -- like the payday lenders -- they can just keep poor blacks on the hook forever, charging them again and again and again for the same minor infractions that whites are never charged with, because the cops don't even patrol those areas since they're ostensibly "low crime?"
This is the kind of crap that African Americans in Ferguson have to put up with every day of their lives. And it's not just Ferguson. This happens all over the country, as with Eric Garner in New York. More disgustingly, it's not just African American adults, it's even the kids.
For example, in Georgia two girls, one white and one black, wrote on a lavatory stall. The treatment they received at the hands of the system was totally different. The white girl's parents paid $100 restitution and that was basically it. But Mikia Hutchings couldn't afford to pay:
Worse, why are the cops are wasting their time harassing twelve-year-old children instead of doing real police work? How many hours of the court's and the police department's time were wasted? Ten? Twenty? Forty? This city most likely spent $1,000 to $5,000 in a vain attempt to extract a $100 fine from a 12-year-old.
It's hard to believe that cities like Ferguson can recoup the salaries of court officials and police officers with fines levied against African Americans who can't pay them for puffed-up offenses they don't even bother to charge whites with. And I thought putting people in jail for not paying fines went away with debtor's prison? Apparently not... Private probation companies are raking in millions by putting poor people in jail for non-payment of fines.
Do these cities have more cops than they need, if they have nothing better to do with their time than hassle poor people? Or write racist emails at work joking about how Obama wouldn't be president for more than four years because "what black man holds a steady job for four years?"
No wonder their budgets are in such a mess.
Sounds like a whole lot of these folks should be fired.
The city Finance Director ordered the Chief of Police to increase revenue by writing more tickets. The police attack blacks preferentially, stopping and arresting them at a higher rate than whites.
A black woman parked her car illegally once, got two tickets for $152, and when she couldn't pay the fine, she was arrested twice, and spent six days in jail. The city refused partial payments, and over seven years she has paid $550, and but they keep jacking up the fines and she still owes $541.
And when these people are jailed, the time served isn't even recorded by the court to reduce their fine.
Cops just drive up to people sitting in cars or waiting for the bus and harass them, accusing them of being pedophiles.
The only reason the cops arrest these people is because they resisted arrest.
In all cases where the only reason cops arrested a stopped driver is for "resisting arrest," the victim was black. Yeah, you read that right. The only reason they arrest these people is because they resisted arrest. If you're black and you complain when the cops in Ferguson harass you, they arrest you.And because these people have no money, they can't hire a lawyer to sue these bastards.
The Ferguson city government is trying to balance its budget on the backs of its poorest citizens, who are overwhelmingly black. This is part of a larger pattern of the rich and powerful using their economic clout to take away what little money the poor have. This pattern is well established with payday lenders who entrap the disadvantaged in an endless cycle of usurious loans, and rent-to-own stores that charge twice what you can get products for at Walmart.
Does Ferguson do this for malicious and racist reasons, just to keep blacks down? Or is it just because the poor can't afford to pay the fines up front, which means that -- like the payday lenders -- they can just keep poor blacks on the hook forever, charging them again and again and again for the same minor infractions that whites are never charged with, because the cops don't even patrol those areas since they're ostensibly "low crime?"
This is the kind of crap that African Americans in Ferguson have to put up with every day of their lives. And it's not just Ferguson. This happens all over the country, as with Eric Garner in New York. More disgustingly, it's not just African American adults, it's even the kids.
For example, in Georgia two girls, one white and one black, wrote on a lavatory stall. The treatment they received at the hands of the system was totally different. The white girl's parents paid $100 restitution and that was basically it. But Mikia Hutchings couldn't afford to pay:
While both students were suspended from school for a few days, Mikia had to face a school disciplinary hearing and, a few weeks later, a visit by a uniformed officer from the local Sheriff’s Department, who served her grandmother with papers accusing Mikia of a trespassing misdemeanor and, potentially, a felony.
As part of an agreement with the state to have the charges dismissed in juvenile court, Mikia admitted to the allegations of criminal trespassing. Mikia, who is African-American, spent her summer on probation, under a 7 p.m. curfew, and had to complete 16 hours of community service in addition to writing an apology letter to a student whose sneakers were defaced in the incident.It is just crazy that a school is involving the police and the courts in cases of childish misbehavior. The rich can just buy their way out of all their problems, while the poor have their entire lives ruined from childhood on.
Worse, why are the cops are wasting their time harassing twelve-year-old children instead of doing real police work? How many hours of the court's and the police department's time were wasted? Ten? Twenty? Forty? This city most likely spent $1,000 to $5,000 in a vain attempt to extract a $100 fine from a 12-year-old.
It's hard to believe that cities like Ferguson can recoup the salaries of court officials and police officers with fines levied against African Americans who can't pay them for puffed-up offenses they don't even bother to charge whites with. And I thought putting people in jail for not paying fines went away with debtor's prison? Apparently not... Private probation companies are raking in millions by putting poor people in jail for non-payment of fines.
Do these cities have more cops than they need, if they have nothing better to do with their time than hassle poor people? Or write racist emails at work joking about how Obama wouldn't be president for more than four years because "what black man holds a steady job for four years?"
No wonder their budgets are in such a mess.
Sounds like a whole lot of these folks should be fired.
It MUST Be About BENGHAZI
As I predicted, conservatives are only interested in the Hillary email kerfuffle as it relates to Benghazi. Like a dog that just won't let go of that Frisbee, they are laser focused in on the emails that pertain to the thing they still think they can "get" Obama on and win (see: still with the sour grapes that he got bin Laden and Bush didn't).
At first, I couldn't figure out why they haven't been more vocal about these emails but this piece on Politico explains it quite well. They know that their emails are next. In fact, I predict that every candidate who currently holds public office is going to have to release all their emails to the public. Further, their silence calls attention to the fact that it was the New York Fucking Times that broke this story. So, I guess the whole "liberal media" narrative has been blown to shit...again.
The media does deserve some criticism, though, because we are likely going to have to hear about this shit for the next 20 months along with a bunch of bullshit stories about the rest of the candidates. Wouldn't it be nice if we looked at how each candidate might, y'know, address the myriad of challenges our nation faces?
At first, I couldn't figure out why they haven't been more vocal about these emails but this piece on Politico explains it quite well. They know that their emails are next. In fact, I predict that every candidate who currently holds public office is going to have to release all their emails to the public. Further, their silence calls attention to the fact that it was the New York Fucking Times that broke this story. So, I guess the whole "liberal media" narrative has been blown to shit...again.
The media does deserve some criticism, though, because we are likely going to have to hear about this shit for the next 20 months along with a bunch of bullshit stories about the rest of the candidates. Wouldn't it be nice if we looked at how each candidate might, y'know, address the myriad of challenges our nation faces?
Wednesday, March 04, 2015
Hillary's Emails
Yesterday's revelation that Hillary Clinton used her personal email while Secretary of State seems like no big deal to me. John Kerry is the first Secretary of State to actually use the government email. Condeleeza Rice didn't use email and Colin Powell used his personal email. This all has the smell of government silliness.
But it should matter to Hillary Clinton because, once again, she's seen as hiding something. Handing over 55,000 emails is nice but now we will have every fat ass blogger with man titties howling about secrecy and Benghazi again because she didn't hand over all of them. I see a lot of tone deafness within her almost launched campaign and she needs to tighten up that shit most ricky tick.
The air of inevitability thing is what did her in during the 2008 campaign. That's why I think it would behoove the Democrats to put up some serious challengers to her so she can stay on her game. If she somehow manages to end up tanking, at least they will have some other players in the mix. Right now their other star (Elizabeth Warren) has repeatedly said she is not running. Let's see some new faces like JoaquÃn or Julian Castro. What about Maggie Hassan? Or my own Amy Klobuchar?
Hillary needs to get kicked in the ass a bit if she's going to earn it.
But it should matter to Hillary Clinton because, once again, she's seen as hiding something. Handing over 55,000 emails is nice but now we will have every fat ass blogger with man titties howling about secrecy and Benghazi again because she didn't hand over all of them. I see a lot of tone deafness within her almost launched campaign and she needs to tighten up that shit most ricky tick.
The air of inevitability thing is what did her in during the 2008 campaign. That's why I think it would behoove the Democrats to put up some serious challengers to her so she can stay on her game. If she somehow manages to end up tanking, at least they will have some other players in the mix. Right now their other star (Elizabeth Warren) has repeatedly said she is not running. Let's see some new faces like JoaquÃn or Julian Castro. What about Maggie Hassan? Or my own Amy Klobuchar?
Hillary needs to get kicked in the ass a bit if she's going to earn it.
Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Standing in King V Burwell
Two recent stories in the Wall Street Journal (here and here) raise significant queries as to whether or not the people bringing suit against the ACA have standing to even do so.
Legal experts say the fact that Mr. King could avoid paying the penalty for lacking insurance by enrolling in VA coverage undermines his legal right to bring the case, known as “standing.” The wife of a second plaintiff has described her husband on social media as being a Vietnam veteran. The government previously questioned the standing of a third plaintiff on the grounds that her income may exempt her from paying the penalty for lacking insurance, but a lower court didn’t address the issue.
So, why did they bring about this suit?
Mr. King said his challenge to the law is “not about me,” but rather an effort he undertook for his family and others to bring down the health law.
Ah, so he suffers from Obama Mental Meltdown Syndrome....always a sound reason to go to the Supreme Court.
Worse, we are still stuck on the "not letting him win no matter what!!" mentality.
Legal experts say the fact that Mr. King could avoid paying the penalty for lacking insurance by enrolling in VA coverage undermines his legal right to bring the case, known as “standing.” The wife of a second plaintiff has described her husband on social media as being a Vietnam veteran. The government previously questioned the standing of a third plaintiff on the grounds that her income may exempt her from paying the penalty for lacking insurance, but a lower court didn’t address the issue.
So, why did they bring about this suit?
Mr. King said his challenge to the law is “not about me,” but rather an effort he undertook for his family and others to bring down the health law.
Ah, so he suffers from Obama Mental Meltdown Syndrome....always a sound reason to go to the Supreme Court.
Worse, we are still stuck on the "not letting him win no matter what!!" mentality.
Monday, March 02, 2015
House Republicans to Host Sharia Law Foreign Leader
Lots of Republicans think the United States is a Christian nation, and that Congress and state legislatures should make it official. Yet Republicans in Congress are asking the leader of a foreign country that recognizes Muslim Sharia Law to lecture Americans about moral imperatives.
They criticize President Obama because he frames the war against the so-called Islamic State as an action against criminals and terrorists. Obama refuses to give into the terrorists' narrative that they somehow represent Islam, and that Islam and Christianity are somehow at war. The president believes that if the United States is perceived as embarking on another Crusade in the Middle East, as Republicans appear to fervently desire by their pious declarations, then other Muslims will feel that the US is waging a war against them as well.
Anti-Islamic rhetoric has reached a fevered pitch in many parts of the United States since 2001. Republican-controlled legislatures have debated or passed laws that prohibit "Sharia" law, or recognizing any form of "foreign" law. They believe that only "Christian" law should apply in the United States.
In Israel Judaism is the official state religion. Religious law governs family matters. That means that in order for a Jewish woman to get a divorce, she has to get her husband's permission, even if she's an atheist Russian emigree who's never set foot in a synagogue. Some women have been forced to wait for decades to get a divorce, held hostage by husbands who are free to take up with other women and have children who will be recognized as Jews by the rabbinate.
However, Israel has a very large Muslim population, and a sizable Christian one. That means that Israel also recognizes Sharia courts:
Yeah, there are complex historical reasons for this. But it just shows how foolish the idea is that a democracy should have an official state religion, especially Christianity. Because there's no such monolithic thing called "Christianity" -- or Judaism or Islam, for that matter, which demonstrates what a farce the Israeli situation is.
The theocracies in Iran and Saudi Arabia illustrate the evils of official state religions run amok, and even Britain has several dark pages in its history when the State wielded religious power to murder its political opponents.
Religious laws governing marriage and family are all over the map in Christianity: most protestant faiths allow divorce, Catholicism bans it, and when it started, Mormonism allowed polygamy, and some adherents still claim it does.
Think of the utter chaos trying to enforce several hundred religious courts in this country over issues of marriage, divorce and child custody and especially inheritance, considering how frequently Americans marry people of other faiths, and how Americans can simply change faiths by walking across the street.
Despite the popular claim to the contrary, morality can, is and should be legislated. By Americans, for all Americans who alive right and here and now. Not by decree of some self-styled foreign oracle who's been dead for centuries, for a tiny sliver of Americans who think they know better than everyone else.
The irony is that our modern secular moral code is stronger and more just than so-called morality of the Bible, which condoned, promoted and even glorified genocide, vengeful murders, ritual human sacrifice, polygamy and slavery.
They criticize President Obama because he frames the war against the so-called Islamic State as an action against criminals and terrorists. Obama refuses to give into the terrorists' narrative that they somehow represent Islam, and that Islam and Christianity are somehow at war. The president believes that if the United States is perceived as embarking on another Crusade in the Middle East, as Republicans appear to fervently desire by their pious declarations, then other Muslims will feel that the US is waging a war against them as well.
Anti-Islamic rhetoric has reached a fevered pitch in many parts of the United States since 2001. Republican-controlled legislatures have debated or passed laws that prohibit "Sharia" law, or recognizing any form of "foreign" law. They believe that only "Christian" law should apply in the United States.
Common law, the basis of American law, predates Christianity.
However, the Christian part of the bible, the New Testament, doesn't establish any laws: it's just the story of Jesus, plus some dire predictions about hellfire and damnation. The part of the Bible that contains actual laws is the Torah, also known as the Old Testament. This set of laws, known as Mosaic Law, is not Christian, it's Jewish law, and is expanded upon by the Talmud. American law is based on British common law, which existed before Christianity.In Israel Judaism is the official state religion. Religious law governs family matters. That means that in order for a Jewish woman to get a divorce, she has to get her husband's permission, even if she's an atheist Russian emigree who's never set foot in a synagogue. Some women have been forced to wait for decades to get a divorce, held hostage by husbands who are free to take up with other women and have children who will be recognized as Jews by the rabbinate.
However, Israel has a very large Muslim population, and a sizable Christian one. That means that Israel also recognizes Sharia courts:
The jurisdiction of the Sharia CourtsRepublicans invited Bibi Netanyahu, a foreign leader, to come scare Americans with stories of Muslim bogeymen, when his own country allows Sharia Courts dictate the most basic rights of Israeli citizens to marry, divorce, have children and inherit property.
Under the Palestine Order in Council 1922-1947, the Sharia Courts were given jurisdiction to adjudicate the following matters in accordance with the Sharia Courts Procedure Law for the year 1333 E:
- Marriages - Proof of marriage, annulment of marriage, ratification of marriage, bride prices and dowries.
- Divorce - Proof of divorce, arbitration, separation and dissolution of marriage.
- Maintenance - Wife, son, father and grandfather.
- Legal capacity and guardianship.
- Custody of children - visitation and accommodation arrangements.
- Inheritance.
Yeah, there are complex historical reasons for this. But it just shows how foolish the idea is that a democracy should have an official state religion, especially Christianity. Because there's no such monolithic thing called "Christianity" -- or Judaism or Islam, for that matter, which demonstrates what a farce the Israeli situation is.
The theocracies in Iran and Saudi Arabia illustrate the evils of official state religions run amok, and even Britain has several dark pages in its history when the State wielded religious power to murder its political opponents.
Religious laws governing marriage and family are all over the map in Christianity: most protestant faiths allow divorce, Catholicism bans it, and when it started, Mormonism allowed polygamy, and some adherents still claim it does.
Think of the utter chaos trying to enforce several hundred religious courts in this country over issues of marriage, divorce and child custody and especially inheritance, considering how frequently Americans marry people of other faiths, and how Americans can simply change faiths by walking across the street.
Our modern secular moral code is stronger than so-called biblical morality.
And an official state religion is unnecessary. Morality has nothing to do with religion -- it's just a set of rules established to govern social interaction. Morality is merely informed by religion and philosophy, not dictated by them.Despite the popular claim to the contrary, morality can, is and should be legislated. By Americans, for all Americans who alive right and here and now. Not by decree of some self-styled foreign oracle who's been dead for centuries, for a tiny sliver of Americans who think they know better than everyone else.
The irony is that our modern secular moral code is stronger and more just than so-called morality of the Bible, which condoned, promoted and even glorified genocide, vengeful murders, ritual human sacrifice, polygamy and slavery.
The Gun Cult Completely Dismantled
I love how Jefferies takes apart every single argument made by members of the Gun Cult. He's right...there really is only one valid argument to have a gun...because they like them. The rest are all bullshit.
Of course, that's not the best part, though. The comparison of slavery to gun rights is so fucking spot on that I found myself laughing out loud. Not surprising that it's the descendants of the same people who bitched about their right to own slaves being taken away that are now screaming, "Don't take away my guns!!!!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)