Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
April 28, 2014
.
Bob Schieffer: ROMNEY MAY CONSIDER 2016 RUN
Bob Schieffer: I Have a Source...
Bob Schieffer on Face the nation: "I have a source that told me that if Jeb Bush decides not to run, that Mitt Romney may actually try it again"
Bob Schieffer on Face the nation: "I have a source that told me that if Jeb Bush decides not to run, that Mitt Romney may actually try it again"
.
April 28, 2014
Is the Bundy blowup nothing more than kabuki theater 'misdirection' just to hide a Koch land grab?.....
~snip~
To briefly review the real reason Republicans, conservative media, and the Kochs’ supported Bundy’s armed confrontation of federal agents executing a federal court order; one just has to consider Rand Paul’s comments when he scolded Harry Reid. Paul attempted to justify Bundy and armed militias actions as opposing government overreach and not as Harry Reid asserted “domestic terrorism.” Paul criticized the BLM and federal endangered species laws he called “government overreach, government gone amuck with this Endangered Species Act. There is a legitimate constitutional question here about whether the state should be in charge of endangered species or whether the federal government should be.” Paul, conservative media, and Republicans beholden to the Kochs contend the federal government has no right or claim to public land.
The Koch brothers’ paid ALEC to create several pieces of “model legislation” for Republican states to “demand that Congress extinguish title and government jurisdiction over public lands that are held in trust by the US federal government” such as ALEC’s “Eminent Domain Authority for Federal Lands Act.” In 2012 Utah’s Mormon governor, Bundy and ALEC supporter Gary Herbert signed “The Transfer of Public Lands Act” mandating the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management relinquish their domain to Utah Republicans no later than 2015 or the conservative Supreme Court will do it for them. It is important to remember that Cliven Bundy’s primary assertion was that the federal government had no right, or claim, to public land it had purchased from Mexico and why the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity and Republicans fell over themselves to support Bundy’s claim of “government overreach.”
Once a state seized federal government land, they were free to sell off the land to the Koch brothers to “unleash the energy” under the ground conservatives claimed the federal government had “gone amuck protecting with this Endangered Species Act” and “environmental protections” they had no authority to impose. ALEC has a wealth of legislation giving states authority to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from overreaching to prevent Republican states from flaunting environmental protections the Koch brothers want eliminated. This was why Cliven Bundy was heavily promoted as a conservative hero by conservative media, the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity, and Republicans beholden to the dirty energy sector. The revelation that their “cause célèbre” was a lifelong racist put a damper on the face of opposition to federal land ownership, and as Bundy and his supporters’ lunacy continues being revealed it is likely they will rue the day they chose him as their land grab hero.
According to a reporter with Esquire, Bundy’s demand that sheriffs across America disarm and confiscate weapons from federal agents came from a revelation from god inspired by his close association with fellow Mormon and Oath Keeper Richard Mack. Bundy spoke to militia supporters after BLM officials released his cattle, and reprimanded them for disobeying the word of god that was delivered through him. Armed militias failed, for example, to follow his explicit instructions to tear down the toll booths at Lake Mead and disarm the Park Service. Bundy said, “The message I gave to you all was a revelation that I received. And yet not one of you can seem to even quote it. Here, something I delivered was inspired by God and yet we haven’t even carried it forth for even a couple of days.” Apparently, even though armed militias stopped the BLM, they failed to do it “within one hour” as the revelation from god demanded. So, Bundy, emulating Mormon founder Joseph Smith, received another revelation. “It come to my mind real plain, and I heard a voice say, ‘Sheriff Gillespie, your work is not done. Every sheriff across the United States, take the guns away from the United States bureaucrats.’” This is the man conservatives, the Kochs, and Republicans backed to facilitate seizing federal land for the Koch brothers to mine, frack, and drill without interference from “government overreach.”
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/04/28/koch-brothers-cliven-bundy-part-plan-seize-public-land.html
The KOCH Brothers Used Cliven Bundy as Part Of Their PLAN TO SEIZE PUBLIC LAND
"..The Kochs, Americans for Prosperity, Fox News, and Republicans failed to properly vet their conservative hero for their crusade to seize federal land for oil and gas unfettered by environmental and endangered species protections..."
Is the Bundy blowup nothing more than kabuki theater 'misdirection' just to hide a Koch land grab?.....
~snip~
To briefly review the real reason Republicans, conservative media, and the Kochs’ supported Bundy’s armed confrontation of federal agents executing a federal court order; one just has to consider Rand Paul’s comments when he scolded Harry Reid. Paul attempted to justify Bundy and armed militias actions as opposing government overreach and not as Harry Reid asserted “domestic terrorism.” Paul criticized the BLM and federal endangered species laws he called “government overreach, government gone amuck with this Endangered Species Act. There is a legitimate constitutional question here about whether the state should be in charge of endangered species or whether the federal government should be.” Paul, conservative media, and Republicans beholden to the Kochs contend the federal government has no right or claim to public land.
The Koch brothers’ paid ALEC to create several pieces of “model legislation” for Republican states to “demand that Congress extinguish title and government jurisdiction over public lands that are held in trust by the US federal government” such as ALEC’s “Eminent Domain Authority for Federal Lands Act.” In 2012 Utah’s Mormon governor, Bundy and ALEC supporter Gary Herbert signed “The Transfer of Public Lands Act” mandating the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management relinquish their domain to Utah Republicans no later than 2015 or the conservative Supreme Court will do it for them. It is important to remember that Cliven Bundy’s primary assertion was that the federal government had no right, or claim, to public land it had purchased from Mexico and why the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity and Republicans fell over themselves to support Bundy’s claim of “government overreach.”
Once a state seized federal government land, they were free to sell off the land to the Koch brothers to “unleash the energy” under the ground conservatives claimed the federal government had “gone amuck protecting with this Endangered Species Act” and “environmental protections” they had no authority to impose. ALEC has a wealth of legislation giving states authority to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from overreaching to prevent Republican states from flaunting environmental protections the Koch brothers want eliminated. This was why Cliven Bundy was heavily promoted as a conservative hero by conservative media, the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity, and Republicans beholden to the dirty energy sector. The revelation that their “cause célèbre” was a lifelong racist put a damper on the face of opposition to federal land ownership, and as Bundy and his supporters’ lunacy continues being revealed it is likely they will rue the day they chose him as their land grab hero.
According to a reporter with Esquire, Bundy’s demand that sheriffs across America disarm and confiscate weapons from federal agents came from a revelation from god inspired by his close association with fellow Mormon and Oath Keeper Richard Mack. Bundy spoke to militia supporters after BLM officials released his cattle, and reprimanded them for disobeying the word of god that was delivered through him. Armed militias failed, for example, to follow his explicit instructions to tear down the toll booths at Lake Mead and disarm the Park Service. Bundy said, “The message I gave to you all was a revelation that I received. And yet not one of you can seem to even quote it. Here, something I delivered was inspired by God and yet we haven’t even carried it forth for even a couple of days.” Apparently, even though armed militias stopped the BLM, they failed to do it “within one hour” as the revelation from god demanded. So, Bundy, emulating Mormon founder Joseph Smith, received another revelation. “It come to my mind real plain, and I heard a voice say, ‘Sheriff Gillespie, your work is not done. Every sheriff across the United States, take the guns away from the United States bureaucrats.’” This is the man conservatives, the Kochs, and Republicans backed to facilitate seizing federal land for the Koch brothers to mine, frack, and drill without interference from “government overreach.”
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/04/28/koch-brothers-cliven-bundy-part-plan-seize-public-land.html
April 28, 2014
I'm sure you would Lloyd, I'm sure you would!..........
NEW YORK — The biggest parlor game on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms these days is guessing whether former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will run for president and save the GOP’s old establishment base from its rising populist wing. The second most popular game is guessing what happens if Jeb says no. Two dozen interviews about the 2016 race with unaligned GOP donors, financial executives and their Washington lobbyists turned up a consistent — and unusual — consolation candidate if Bush demurs, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie doesn’t recover politically and no other establishment favorite gets nominated: Hillary Clinton.
Most donors and Wall Street titans have not lined up with any candidate yet, waiting for the field to take shape after the midterms. But if Bush doesn’t run, the list of Republican saviors could be short. Some donors fear Christie will never overcome the Bridgegate scandal. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin so far seems more inclined to stay in the House than to run for president. And to varying degrees, other candidates — such as Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Govs. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and John Kasich of Ohio — are either unknown or untrusted.
The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation. “If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine,” one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. “We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.”
Most top GOP fundraisers and donors on Wall Street won’t say this kind of thing on the record for fear of heavy blowback from party officials, as well as supporters of Cruz and Rand Paul. Few want to acknowledge publicly that the Democratic front-runner fills them with less dread than some Republican 2016 hopefuls. And, to be sure, none of the Republican-leaning financial executives are so far suggesting they’d openly back her. But the private consensus is similar to what Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein said to POLITICO late last year when he praised both Christie — before the bridge scandal — and Clinton. “I very much was supportive of Hillary Clinton the last go-round,” he said. “I held fundraisers for her.” People close to Blankfein say the same calculus applies to a Jeb Bush-Hillary Clinton race as it would to a Christie-Clinton contest. “Those would be two very good choices and we’d be perfectly happy with them,” a person close to Blankfein said. Blankfein is a self-described Democrat, but his comments about Christie and Clinton reflect the ambidextrous political approach that many Republicans and Democrats on Wall Street take.
cont'
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/wall-street-republicans-hillary-clinton-2016-106070.html?hp=t1
WALL STREET Republicans' Dark Secret: Hillary Clinton 2016
“...I very much was supportive of Hillary Clinton the last go-round,” he said. “I held fundraisers for her.” People close to Blankfein say the same calculus applies to a Jeb Bush-Hillary Clinton race as it would to a Christie-Clinton contest. “Those would be two very good choices and we’d be perfectly happy with them......"
Lloyd Blankfein
Lloyd Blankfein
I'm sure you would Lloyd, I'm sure you would!..........
NEW YORK — The biggest parlor game on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms these days is guessing whether former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will run for president and save the GOP’s old establishment base from its rising populist wing. The second most popular game is guessing what happens if Jeb says no. Two dozen interviews about the 2016 race with unaligned GOP donors, financial executives and their Washington lobbyists turned up a consistent — and unusual — consolation candidate if Bush demurs, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie doesn’t recover politically and no other establishment favorite gets nominated: Hillary Clinton.
Most donors and Wall Street titans have not lined up with any candidate yet, waiting for the field to take shape after the midterms. But if Bush doesn’t run, the list of Republican saviors could be short. Some donors fear Christie will never overcome the Bridgegate scandal. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin so far seems more inclined to stay in the House than to run for president. And to varying degrees, other candidates — such as Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Govs. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and John Kasich of Ohio — are either unknown or untrusted.
The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation. “If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine,” one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. “We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.”
Most top GOP fundraisers and donors on Wall Street won’t say this kind of thing on the record for fear of heavy blowback from party officials, as well as supporters of Cruz and Rand Paul. Few want to acknowledge publicly that the Democratic front-runner fills them with less dread than some Republican 2016 hopefuls. And, to be sure, none of the Republican-leaning financial executives are so far suggesting they’d openly back her. But the private consensus is similar to what Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein said to POLITICO late last year when he praised both Christie — before the bridge scandal — and Clinton. “I very much was supportive of Hillary Clinton the last go-round,” he said. “I held fundraisers for her.” People close to Blankfein say the same calculus applies to a Jeb Bush-Hillary Clinton race as it would to a Christie-Clinton contest. “Those would be two very good choices and we’d be perfectly happy with them,” a person close to Blankfein said. Blankfein is a self-described Democrat, but his comments about Christie and Clinton reflect the ambidextrous political approach that many Republicans and Democrats on Wall Street take.
cont'
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/wall-street-republicans-hillary-clinton-2016-106070.html?hp=t1
April 28, 2014
WHAT??.......
Rochelle Sterling is mad as hell and she’s not going to take it any more. Married to Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for 50 years, Rochelle has watched him lavish millions of dollars on his new girlfriend, Vanessa Stiviano, the past few years. She wants the spending stopped and the money back. Sterling, 80, now embroiled in a controversy over racist comment, has been openly dating Stiviano, 38, for almost four years, and his wife, according to a lawsuit shes filed against the mistress, is simply “a married woman seeking to protect and recover community property in her individual capacity.”
According to the lawsuit, Donald Sterling has used their community funds to lavish a multiple of gifts on Stiviano, who has five aliases. According to the Los Angeles Times, those gifts include $1.8 million for the purchase of an apartment in downtown L.A., $240,000 in living expenses, a Ferrari, two Bentleys and a Range Rover! Stiviano has enjoyed showing off her lover’s generosity and has frequently posted photos of herself with his gifts on her Instagram account. The March 7 lawsuit also alleges that Donald Sterling himself had asked Stiviano to return the money. It’s unclear if that’s accurate but attorney, Mac Nehoray, told the Times that a gift cannot be revoked by the giver and that there is not “a peppercorn of a fact” that any fraud or undue influence was involved.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/04/donald-sterling-wife-sues-girlfriend-for-millions-spent-on-her/
Wife Of Clippers Owner Donald Sterling SUES HIS MISTRESS For Millions She Says He’s Spent On Her
"..Wife Of L.A. Clippers Owner Donald Sterling Sues His Mistress For Millions She Says He’s Spent On Her.."
WHAT??.......
Rochelle Sterling is mad as hell and she’s not going to take it any more. Married to Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for 50 years, Rochelle has watched him lavish millions of dollars on his new girlfriend, Vanessa Stiviano, the past few years. She wants the spending stopped and the money back. Sterling, 80, now embroiled in a controversy over racist comment, has been openly dating Stiviano, 38, for almost four years, and his wife, according to a lawsuit shes filed against the mistress, is simply “a married woman seeking to protect and recover community property in her individual capacity.”
According to the lawsuit, Donald Sterling has used their community funds to lavish a multiple of gifts on Stiviano, who has five aliases. According to the Los Angeles Times, those gifts include $1.8 million for the purchase of an apartment in downtown L.A., $240,000 in living expenses, a Ferrari, two Bentleys and a Range Rover! Stiviano has enjoyed showing off her lover’s generosity and has frequently posted photos of herself with his gifts on her Instagram account. The March 7 lawsuit also alleges that Donald Sterling himself had asked Stiviano to return the money. It’s unclear if that’s accurate but attorney, Mac Nehoray, told the Times that a gift cannot be revoked by the giver and that there is not “a peppercorn of a fact” that any fraud or undue influence was involved.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/04/donald-sterling-wife-sues-girlfriend-for-millions-spent-on-her/
April 28, 2014
By: Jason Easley
The FBI investigating a lobbying firm that is close to Republican Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback for running a pay to play scheme involving access to the governor.
According to the Topeka Capital-Journal:
Brownback would be the third Republican governor who is caught up in an investigation. Texas Gov. Rick Perry and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie are also being investigated. What is being investigated is a possible pay to play scandal which could mirror much of the ugly relationship between money and politics that makes Capitol Hill go. Brownback has taken the DC environment that he lived in as a senator, and transferred it to the state of Kansas.
As the governor, Brownback passed what liberal and conservative experts agree is the worst piece of tax reform legislation in the country. Brownback led a 2012 movement that purged moderate Republicans from the state senate, and replaced them with tea partiers. All of these actions have cost him the support of moderate Republicans in the state. A recent, and notoriously unreliable, Rasmussen poll has Brownback leading his Democratic challenger by 7 points, despite the fact that his approval rating remains upside-down.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/04/27/republican-fbi-investigates-lobbyists-close-kansas-gov-sam-brownback.html
BAH-BOOM!!- Another Republican Down as FBI INVESTIGATES LOBBYISTS Close To Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback
By: Jason Easley
The FBI investigating a lobbying firm that is close to Republican Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback for running a pay to play scheme involving access to the governor.
According to the Topeka Capital-Journal:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is exploring whether confidantes of Gov. Sam Brownback operated influence-peddling operations in Kansas pivoting on personal access to the Republican governor and top administration officials.
The Topeka Capital-Journal learned the months-long inquiry involves Parallel Strategies, a rapidly expanding Topeka consulting and lobbying firm created in 2013 by a trio of veteran Brownback employees who left government service to work in an environment where coziness with former colleagues could pay dividends.
Of concern to the FBI were behind-the-scenes financial arrangements related to Brownback’s privatization of the state’s $3 billion Medicaid program. The governor’s branding of KanCare handed to three for-profit insurance companies exclusive contracts to provide Medicaid services to 380,000 of Kansas’ disabled and poor.
http://m.cjonline.com/news/2014-04-26/sources-fbi-examines-lobbying-brownback-loyalists
The Topeka Capital-Journal learned the months-long inquiry involves Parallel Strategies, a rapidly expanding Topeka consulting and lobbying firm created in 2013 by a trio of veteran Brownback employees who left government service to work in an environment where coziness with former colleagues could pay dividends.
Of concern to the FBI were behind-the-scenes financial arrangements related to Brownback’s privatization of the state’s $3 billion Medicaid program. The governor’s branding of KanCare handed to three for-profit insurance companies exclusive contracts to provide Medicaid services to 380,000 of Kansas’ disabled and poor.
http://m.cjonline.com/news/2014-04-26/sources-fbi-examines-lobbying-brownback-loyalists
Brownback would be the third Republican governor who is caught up in an investigation. Texas Gov. Rick Perry and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie are also being investigated. What is being investigated is a possible pay to play scandal which could mirror much of the ugly relationship between money and politics that makes Capitol Hill go. Brownback has taken the DC environment that he lived in as a senator, and transferred it to the state of Kansas.
As the governor, Brownback passed what liberal and conservative experts agree is the worst piece of tax reform legislation in the country. Brownback led a 2012 movement that purged moderate Republicans from the state senate, and replaced them with tea partiers. All of these actions have cost him the support of moderate Republicans in the state. A recent, and notoriously unreliable, Rasmussen poll has Brownback leading his Democratic challenger by 7 points, despite the fact that his approval rating remains upside-down.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/04/27/republican-fbi-investigates-lobbyists-close-kansas-gov-sam-brownback.html
April 26, 2014
WARNING: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE:....BOOM!!....BAM!!.....................
ESPN’s Keith Olbermann, rapper Snoop Dogg, Magic Johnson and others have spoken up about an audio recording purported to be of LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling making a blazingly racist rant that emerged Friday night. Olbermann took to his Twitter account and wrote, “Repeating: Time for #Clippers players to step up. Refuse to play till NBA moves against this racist jackass #Sterling. NBA can’t defend him.” Snoop Dogg tweeted, “Fuc [sic] the owner!!!” and wrote that he would be happy to buy the team from Sterling, then sell it to Magic Johnson.
The rapper also posted a blistering video statement, which is embedded below. The argument between Sterling and his girlfriend V. Stiviano began when Stiviano posted a photo of herself and basketball legend Magic Johnson on Instagram. On Saturday, Johnson tweeted that he will be boycotting the franchise as long as Sterling is associated with it. Calling the remarks “a black eye for the NBA,” Johnson wrote on Saturday, “TMZ reported this morning that Clippers owner Donald Sterling doesn’t want me or other African-Americans to come to Clippers games, and I will never go to a Clippers game again as long as Donald Sterling is the owner.”
Clippers player DeAndre Jordan posted a blank, black square to Instagram, which many are interpreting as a gesture of protest. On Friday night, TMZ Sports published audio tape of Sterling berating Stiviano and ordering her not to appear in social media with “minorities” or to bring any African-Americans to L.A. Clippers games. “It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people,” Sterling said. “Do you have to?”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/26/keith-olbermann-snoop-dogg-urge-l-a-clippers-players-to-strike-over-sterling-rant/
BOOM!!- Keith Olbermann, Snoop Dogg URGE L.A. Clippers Players To STRIKE OVER STERLING RANT
WARNING: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE:....BOOM!!....BAM!!.....................
ESPN’s Keith Olbermann, rapper Snoop Dogg, Magic Johnson and others have spoken up about an audio recording purported to be of LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling making a blazingly racist rant that emerged Friday night. Olbermann took to his Twitter account and wrote, “Repeating: Time for #Clippers players to step up. Refuse to play till NBA moves against this racist jackass #Sterling. NBA can’t defend him.” Snoop Dogg tweeted, “Fuc [sic] the owner!!!” and wrote that he would be happy to buy the team from Sterling, then sell it to Magic Johnson.
The rapper also posted a blistering video statement, which is embedded below. The argument between Sterling and his girlfriend V. Stiviano began when Stiviano posted a photo of herself and basketball legend Magic Johnson on Instagram. On Saturday, Johnson tweeted that he will be boycotting the franchise as long as Sterling is associated with it. Calling the remarks “a black eye for the NBA,” Johnson wrote on Saturday, “TMZ reported this morning that Clippers owner Donald Sterling doesn’t want me or other African-Americans to come to Clippers games, and I will never go to a Clippers game again as long as Donald Sterling is the owner.”
Clippers player DeAndre Jordan posted a blank, black square to Instagram, which many are interpreting as a gesture of protest. On Friday night, TMZ Sports published audio tape of Sterling berating Stiviano and ordering her not to appear in social media with “minorities” or to bring any African-Americans to L.A. Clippers games. “It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people,” Sterling said. “Do you have to?”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/26/keith-olbermann-snoop-dogg-urge-l-a-clippers-players-to-strike-over-sterling-rant/
April 26, 2014
NET NEUTRALITY Supported By President Obama
Lets refresh and remind the promises made.
April 26, 2014
Another shithead Bundy.........They are falling out from the skies now..........................
TMZ Sports has obtained audio of Sterling making the racist declaration during a heated argument on April 9th with V. Stiviano ... after she posted a photo on Instagram posing with Magic. Sterling rails on Stiviano -- who ironically is black and Mexican -- for putting herself out in public with a black person (she has since taken the pic down). But it doesn't end there. You have to listen to the audio to fully grasp the magnitude of Sterling's racist worldview. Among the comments:
Sterling has a documented history of allegedly racist behavior -- he's been sued twice by the federal government for allegedly refusing to rent apartments to Blacks and Latinos. He was also sued by former Clippers exec Elgin Baylor for racial discrimination -- though a jury was ultimately not convinced and shot down Baylor's case.
cont'
http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/26/donald-sterling-clippers-owner-black-people-racist-audio-magic-johnson/
Clippers Owner Donald Sterling to GF - DON'T BRING BLACK PEOPLE TO MY GAMES Including Magic Johnson
"..L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling told his GF he does NOT want her bringing black people to his games ... including Magic Johnson ... and it's ALL on tape..."
Another shithead Bundy.........They are falling out from the skies now..........................
TMZ Sports has obtained audio of Sterling making the racist declaration during a heated argument on April 9th with V. Stiviano ... after she posted a photo on Instagram posing with Magic. Sterling rails on Stiviano -- who ironically is black and Mexican -- for putting herself out in public with a black person (she has since taken the pic down). But it doesn't end there. You have to listen to the audio to fully grasp the magnitude of Sterling's racist worldview. Among the comments:
-- "It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people. Do you have to?" (3:30)
-- "You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want. The little I ask you is not to promote it on that ... and not to bring them to my games." (5:15)
-- "I’m just saying, in your lousy f******* Instagrams, you don’t have to have yourself with, walking with black people." (7:45)
-- "...Don't put him [Magic] on an Instagram for the world to have to see so they have to call me. And don't bring him to my games." (9:13)
-- "You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want. The little I ask you is not to promote it on that ... and not to bring them to my games." (5:15)
-- "I’m just saying, in your lousy f******* Instagrams, you don’t have to have yourself with, walking with black people." (7:45)
-- "...Don't put him [Magic] on an Instagram for the world to have to see so they have to call me. And don't bring him to my games." (9:13)
Sterling has a documented history of allegedly racist behavior -- he's been sued twice by the federal government for allegedly refusing to rent apartments to Blacks and Latinos. He was also sued by former Clippers exec Elgin Baylor for racial discrimination -- though a jury was ultimately not convinced and shot down Baylor's case.
cont'
http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/26/donald-sterling-clippers-owner-black-people-racist-audio-magic-johnson/
April 26, 2014
The Public should SWAMP the FCC with protest emails for their upcoming Net Neutrality Plans......
The FCC’s upcoming net neutrality plan has already touched off such a blaze of reaction that the agency has set up an email box where the public can send comments about it. The coming proposal has generated so much commentary, before even being released, that on Friday the U.S. Federal Communications Commission started accepting comments at openinternet@fcc.gov. Normally, anyone who wanted to weigh in on an FCC proposal would have to wait for the agency to issue a “notice of proposed rulemaking” and start soliciting comments to its Electronic Comment Filing System. That will happen for the net neutrality issue on May 15, assuming the full Commission votes at its meeting that day to move the proposal forward.
But the email address means it will start accepting comments now. It’s not the first time the agency has sought comments early, but it suggests it’s keen to be seen as open to feedback on this issue. Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated the proposal among his fellow commissioners on Thursday. The actual text of the plan is not yet public, but the agency has said it would let Internet service providers give preferential treatment to some content providers on “commercially reasonable” terms. Watchdog groups say that could force consumers to pay more and squeeze out startups that can’t afford anything but the slow lane.
The FCC’s former rules on the issue were struck down by a federal appeals court in January. Now Wheeler is pushing to get the new regulations on the books by the end of this year. Wheeler has circulated the proposals among his fellow commissioners, who are set to address them at a regular agency meeting on May 15.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2148700/under-fire-over-net-neutrality-plans-fcc-seeks-early-feedback.html
Under Fire Over NET NEUTRALITY Plans, FCC SEEKS EARLY FEEDBACK
In a blog post on Thursday, Wheeler denied reports that his plans would abandon the FCC’s commitment to an open Internet. But numerous advocacy groups don’t buy it. Campaigns are already calling for consumers to protest the plans to the White House and lawmakers.
Email box where the public can send comments: openinternet@fcc.gov
Email box where the public can send comments: openinternet@fcc.gov
The Public should SWAMP the FCC with protest emails for their upcoming Net Neutrality Plans......
The FCC’s upcoming net neutrality plan has already touched off such a blaze of reaction that the agency has set up an email box where the public can send comments about it. The coming proposal has generated so much commentary, before even being released, that on Friday the U.S. Federal Communications Commission started accepting comments at openinternet@fcc.gov. Normally, anyone who wanted to weigh in on an FCC proposal would have to wait for the agency to issue a “notice of proposed rulemaking” and start soliciting comments to its Electronic Comment Filing System. That will happen for the net neutrality issue on May 15, assuming the full Commission votes at its meeting that day to move the proposal forward.
But the email address means it will start accepting comments now. It’s not the first time the agency has sought comments early, but it suggests it’s keen to be seen as open to feedback on this issue. Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated the proposal among his fellow commissioners on Thursday. The actual text of the plan is not yet public, but the agency has said it would let Internet service providers give preferential treatment to some content providers on “commercially reasonable” terms. Watchdog groups say that could force consumers to pay more and squeeze out startups that can’t afford anything but the slow lane.
The FCC’s former rules on the issue were struck down by a federal appeals court in January. Now Wheeler is pushing to get the new regulations on the books by the end of this year. Wheeler has circulated the proposals among his fellow commissioners, who are set to address them at a regular agency meeting on May 15.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2148700/under-fire-over-net-neutrality-plans-fcc-seeks-early-feedback.html
April 26, 2014
Judging by new FCC Chair Tom Wheeler’s vision of net neutrality, one might think the commission has no understanding of the very concept it is claiming to try to enforce. But that wasn’t so only a few years ago, when the FCC laid out a version of neutrality that is very, very different from the snake oil Wheeler is attempting to sell as a cure-all tonic. Like someone fresh out of a bad relationship looking back longingly at old photos of a former loved one, the folks at ArsTechnica recently revisited the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet guidelines — which were gutted earlier this year by a federal appeals court — to see just how far the commission has turned away from what was once a clear position on net neutrality. For those playing catch-up, the big problem with Wheeler’s new neutrality proposal is that it allows for so-called “fast lane” access, meaning an Internet service provider can charge a premium to a content company (like Netflix, Amazon, or anyone else) for better data delivery to its end users.
As we pointed out, this may take away any incentive for ISPs to make widely available improvements to their networks — a fact that the FCC acknowledged in 2010. The old neutrality guidelines state that giving ISPs the ability to charge “edge providers” — those sites and services that devour bandwidth — for prioritized access to customers could incentivize broadband providers “to allow congestion rather than invest in expanding network capacity.” “Broadband providers would be expected to set inefficiently high fees to edge providers because they receive the benefits of those fees but are unlikely to fully account for the detrimental impact on edge providers’ ability and incentive to innovate and invest,” wrote an FCC that actually believed in something resembling net neutrality. The FCC also recognized that fast lanes would result in a sort of “arms race” between competing content companies, each trying to pay slightly more to ISPs for a competitive advantage over the other.
“If one edge provider pays for access or prioritized access to end users, subscribers may tend to favor that provider’s services, and competing edge providers may feel that they must respond by paying, too,” wrote the commission. The FCC also beat us to the punch in pointing out that the fast lane fees paid by content companies would mean less money to spend on their own innovation, and would put up a barrier to entry for smaller startup ventures without sufficiently deep pockets. And what about those content companies — like say, a consumer news site that takes no money from advertisers — that can’t or won’t pay for improved access? Once again, the FCC of 2010 looked into its crystal ball and saw doom.
cont'
http://consumerist.com/2014/04/25/you-know-who-made-a-great-case-against-internet-fast-lanes-the-fcc/
You Know Who Made A Great Case AGAINST Internet Fast Lanes? THE FCC!!
Judging by new FCC Chair Tom Wheeler’s vision of net neutrality, one might think the commission has no understanding of the very concept it is claiming to try to enforce. But that wasn’t so only a few years ago, when the FCC laid out a version of neutrality that is very, very different from the snake oil Wheeler is attempting to sell as a cure-all tonic. Like someone fresh out of a bad relationship looking back longingly at old photos of a former loved one, the folks at ArsTechnica recently revisited the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet guidelines — which were gutted earlier this year by a federal appeals court — to see just how far the commission has turned away from what was once a clear position on net neutrality. For those playing catch-up, the big problem with Wheeler’s new neutrality proposal is that it allows for so-called “fast lane” access, meaning an Internet service provider can charge a premium to a content company (like Netflix, Amazon, or anyone else) for better data delivery to its end users.
As we pointed out, this may take away any incentive for ISPs to make widely available improvements to their networks — a fact that the FCC acknowledged in 2010. The old neutrality guidelines state that giving ISPs the ability to charge “edge providers” — those sites and services that devour bandwidth — for prioritized access to customers could incentivize broadband providers “to allow congestion rather than invest in expanding network capacity.” “Broadband providers would be expected to set inefficiently high fees to edge providers because they receive the benefits of those fees but are unlikely to fully account for the detrimental impact on edge providers’ ability and incentive to innovate and invest,” wrote an FCC that actually believed in something resembling net neutrality. The FCC also recognized that fast lanes would result in a sort of “arms race” between competing content companies, each trying to pay slightly more to ISPs for a competitive advantage over the other.
“If one edge provider pays for access or prioritized access to end users, subscribers may tend to favor that provider’s services, and competing edge providers may feel that they must respond by paying, too,” wrote the commission. The FCC also beat us to the punch in pointing out that the fast lane fees paid by content companies would mean less money to spend on their own innovation, and would put up a barrier to entry for smaller startup ventures without sufficiently deep pockets. And what about those content companies — like say, a consumer news site that takes no money from advertisers — that can’t or won’t pay for improved access? Once again, the FCC of 2010 looked into its crystal ball and saw doom.
cont'
http://consumerist.com/2014/04/25/you-know-who-made-a-great-case-against-internet-fast-lanes-the-fcc/
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
