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
July 19, 2014
Hey Johnny,....can't wait to see you try making yourself relevant on ALL the Sunday morning shows........
During an appearance on MSNBC’s PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton Friday evening, Salon columnist Joan Walsh took on Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for laying blame on President Barack Obama for yesterday’s shot down Malaysia Airlines passenger jet. McCain called Obama “cowardly” for refusing to intervene in Ukraine, but Walsh turned that word around on him.
“It’s just been cowardly,” McCain said on Fox News’ Hannity last night. “It’s a cowardly administration that we failed to give the Ukrainians weapons with which to defend themselves,” he continued, suggesting that the Russian separatists who allegedly shot down the plane “may not even have occupied and had access to these weapons” if the U.S. had aided the Ukrainians with weapons and troops.
“You don’t say that about the commander-in-chief,” Walsh told Sharpton today. “This is a man, I respect him for his service, but if we’re going to talk cowardly, somebody tried to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency so that he hoped to hold onto his right-wing base. Somebody that has a lot to atone for and a lot to think about shouldn’t be tossing around words like cowardly.”
BAAAAAAAM!!!.....................
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joan-walsh-to-mccain-cowardly-is-putting-palin-a-heartbeat-away-from-presidency/
BAM!!- Joan Walsh to McCain: ‘COWARDLY’ Is Putting Palin a ‘HEARTBEAT AWAY’ From Presidency
Joan Walsh sent one sailing into the air and nailed Senator 'Grumpy' John McCain right between the eyes with this one.
Hey Johnny,....can't wait to see you try making yourself relevant on ALL the Sunday morning shows........
During an appearance on MSNBC’s PoliticsNation with Al Sharpton Friday evening, Salon columnist Joan Walsh took on Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for laying blame on President Barack Obama for yesterday’s shot down Malaysia Airlines passenger jet. McCain called Obama “cowardly” for refusing to intervene in Ukraine, but Walsh turned that word around on him.
“It’s just been cowardly,” McCain said on Fox News’ Hannity last night. “It’s a cowardly administration that we failed to give the Ukrainians weapons with which to defend themselves,” he continued, suggesting that the Russian separatists who allegedly shot down the plane “may not even have occupied and had access to these weapons” if the U.S. had aided the Ukrainians with weapons and troops.
“You don’t say that about the commander-in-chief,” Walsh told Sharpton today. “This is a man, I respect him for his service, but if we’re going to talk cowardly, somebody tried to put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency so that he hoped to hold onto his right-wing base. Somebody that has a lot to atone for and a lot to think about shouldn’t be tossing around words like cowardly.”
BAAAAAAAM!!!.....................
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joan-walsh-to-mccain-cowardly-is-putting-palin-a-heartbeat-away-from-presidency/
July 19, 2014
~snip~
Can the Democratic Party return to its populist roots?
It’s an odd question. Unlimited corporate money is pouring into politics after the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision. Dramatic economic inequality is being exposed by best-selling economist Thomas Piketty. Politician Elizabeth Warren is ascendant in the Democratic Party. So the answer would seem to be yes. At the same time, Hillary Clinton, an extremely Wall Street-friendly candidate, is attracting the bulk of liberal support. Other candidates for the 2016, such as Martin O’Malley and Jay Nixon, may run, both solely as competent technocrats. In 2016, despite the seemingly potent moment, no serious candidate is directly challenging corporate power. It seems as if liberal Democrats are, to put it mildly, confused. The answer to this question may best be answered by looking at an improbably important race in New York state, for governor. A year ago, this race looked like a snooze, with a popular and powerful incumbent Democrat, Andrew Cuomo, cruising to re-election. But that was before two things happened. One, federal prosecutors began investigating possible criminal activity by Cuomo in tampering with a New York state anti-corruption panel known as the Moreland Commission. And two, Zephyr Teachout, a constitutional law professor and corruption scholar, began her campaign to challenge Cuomo, on this same question of corruption. And Teachout’s campaign, though a longshot, is no laughing matter. Larry Lessig, the reform advocate who has raised $12 million for a campaign against corruption, calls this “the most important money in politics race this year.” It’s not just a race about corruption; it’s the first shot of what might be a real revolt in the Democratic Party.
~snip~
Cuomo is a standard-bearer for the Democratic Party establishment — he’s a former Clinton cabinet official, New York attorney general, son of legendary liberal Mario Cuomo and a potential future presidential candidate. In the last six months, 16 billionaires have dumped money into his campaign. He has, as a lieutenant governor running mate, Kathy Hochul, a (non-registered) bank lobbyist and former upstate Democratic congresswoman with a long history of anti-immigrant activism. Teachout is an insurgent, a scholar of corruption and corporate influence in politics, as well as a longtime activist in Democratic politics. She chose as her running mate Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a specialist in internet law and former Federal Trade Commission official who coined the term ‘net neutrality’. What makes this race unusual is that Teachout and Wu have made addressing corporate power the centerpiece of their campaign. One of Teachout’s first specific policy proposals was to use New York government to block the Comcast-Time Warner merger in the state. This is more revolutionary than it looks. Everyone in New York City hates Time Warner, and telecommunications companies are among the least popular companies in the country. But when was the last time anyone got to vote against their cable company? That’s the chance Teachout and Wu want to give voters. They have also pledged to take on the perceived monopolistic power that Amazon is wielding over the publishing industry, which is centered in New York City. Their platform lists public financing of campaigns and caps on corporate contributions to political parties as critical mechanisms to root out corruption and run a government for the people.
~snip~
In 2006, the last competitive primary for governor, a little over 750,000 votes were cast in the Democratic primary. If the number of voters remains similar, 12% of the people needed to win have already signed up to put Teachout and Wu on the ballot. In other words, they already have 12% of the votes they need to win. That’s grassroots power, and there’s only upside since most Democrats have no idea yet that there’s another option on the ballot aside from Cuomo. There are several other secret weapons; Wu will be able to draw upon a rich trove of immigrant community votes, and the duo could bring in a vast network of liberal voters who dislike Cuomo and who belong to internet groups. Moveon alone has 293,000 list members in New York City. It’s a difficult race, but it is actually not impossible. Since the 1992 election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have been governed by a specific ‘New Democrat’ model. The basic theory of the ‘New Democrat’ model of governance is that Wall Street and multinational corporate elites produce wealth through the creation of innovative financial practices and technology, and that Democrats should then help middle class and poor citizens by taxing this wealth, and then using some of it to support progressive social programs. Financialization, which is a specific type of financial capitalism in which various elements of society are turned into revenue streams to be sold into financial markets, has been the order of the day.
~snip~
There is a hunger in the Democratic Party for making the party serve the interest of regular voters, not the rich. In 2008, liberal Democrats decisively broke from the Clinton legacy and voted for Barack Obama, with his mantra of hope and change. Obama, however, stocked his administration with Clinton administration officials like Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Janet Yellen. A joke going around Democratic circles after the election was that “Those supporting Obama got a president, those supporting Clinton got a job.” Obama broke with the Clinton name, but brought the Clinton intellectual legacy, and Clinton’s Wall Street-backed machine, into governance. Today, liberal Democratic primary voters are exhausted by six years of an administration under siege. Liberal Democratic voters still, by and large, do not view Obama’s failure to deliver on his promises as a failure of design or of personnel. Instead, they generally blame structural corruption in politics, or radical right-wing truculence. Obama, they think, is a good liberal man who did what he could. But looking ahead to 2016, many are attracted to what they perceive as Hillary Clinton’s pragmatism. They are ready to return to the Clinton family because they think what is needed is competence. The potentially transformative message of the Teachout-Wu campaign is that the problem is not solely one of personalities or tactical political approaches. Rather it is that the New Democrat model itself, and the Democratic party establishment, is fundamentally at odds with the party’s traditional liberalism.
cont'
http://www.salon.com/2014/07/19/the_most_important_money_in_politics_race_this_year_why_lefty_tea_party_may_be_here/
Zephyr Teachout & Tim Wu Try To RETURN DEMOCRATS To Their POPULIST ROOTS With A Serious Challenge
"....And Teachout’s campaign, though a longshot, is no laughing matter. Larry Lessig, the reform advocate who has raised $12 million for a campaign against corruption, calls this “the most important money in politics race this year.” It’s not just a race about corruption; it’s the first shot of what might be a real revolt in the Democratic Party..."
~snip~
Can the Democratic Party return to its populist roots?
It’s an odd question. Unlimited corporate money is pouring into politics after the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision. Dramatic economic inequality is being exposed by best-selling economist Thomas Piketty. Politician Elizabeth Warren is ascendant in the Democratic Party. So the answer would seem to be yes. At the same time, Hillary Clinton, an extremely Wall Street-friendly candidate, is attracting the bulk of liberal support. Other candidates for the 2016, such as Martin O’Malley and Jay Nixon, may run, both solely as competent technocrats. In 2016, despite the seemingly potent moment, no serious candidate is directly challenging corporate power. It seems as if liberal Democrats are, to put it mildly, confused. The answer to this question may best be answered by looking at an improbably important race in New York state, for governor. A year ago, this race looked like a snooze, with a popular and powerful incumbent Democrat, Andrew Cuomo, cruising to re-election. But that was before two things happened. One, federal prosecutors began investigating possible criminal activity by Cuomo in tampering with a New York state anti-corruption panel known as the Moreland Commission. And two, Zephyr Teachout, a constitutional law professor and corruption scholar, began her campaign to challenge Cuomo, on this same question of corruption. And Teachout’s campaign, though a longshot, is no laughing matter. Larry Lessig, the reform advocate who has raised $12 million for a campaign against corruption, calls this “the most important money in politics race this year.” It’s not just a race about corruption; it’s the first shot of what might be a real revolt in the Democratic Party.
~snip~
Cuomo is a standard-bearer for the Democratic Party establishment — he’s a former Clinton cabinet official, New York attorney general, son of legendary liberal Mario Cuomo and a potential future presidential candidate. In the last six months, 16 billionaires have dumped money into his campaign. He has, as a lieutenant governor running mate, Kathy Hochul, a (non-registered) bank lobbyist and former upstate Democratic congresswoman with a long history of anti-immigrant activism. Teachout is an insurgent, a scholar of corruption and corporate influence in politics, as well as a longtime activist in Democratic politics. She chose as her running mate Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a specialist in internet law and former Federal Trade Commission official who coined the term ‘net neutrality’. What makes this race unusual is that Teachout and Wu have made addressing corporate power the centerpiece of their campaign. One of Teachout’s first specific policy proposals was to use New York government to block the Comcast-Time Warner merger in the state. This is more revolutionary than it looks. Everyone in New York City hates Time Warner, and telecommunications companies are among the least popular companies in the country. But when was the last time anyone got to vote against their cable company? That’s the chance Teachout and Wu want to give voters. They have also pledged to take on the perceived monopolistic power that Amazon is wielding over the publishing industry, which is centered in New York City. Their platform lists public financing of campaigns and caps on corporate contributions to political parties as critical mechanisms to root out corruption and run a government for the people.
~snip~
In 2006, the last competitive primary for governor, a little over 750,000 votes were cast in the Democratic primary. If the number of voters remains similar, 12% of the people needed to win have already signed up to put Teachout and Wu on the ballot. In other words, they already have 12% of the votes they need to win. That’s grassroots power, and there’s only upside since most Democrats have no idea yet that there’s another option on the ballot aside from Cuomo. There are several other secret weapons; Wu will be able to draw upon a rich trove of immigrant community votes, and the duo could bring in a vast network of liberal voters who dislike Cuomo and who belong to internet groups. Moveon alone has 293,000 list members in New York City. It’s a difficult race, but it is actually not impossible. Since the 1992 election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have been governed by a specific ‘New Democrat’ model. The basic theory of the ‘New Democrat’ model of governance is that Wall Street and multinational corporate elites produce wealth through the creation of innovative financial practices and technology, and that Democrats should then help middle class and poor citizens by taxing this wealth, and then using some of it to support progressive social programs. Financialization, which is a specific type of financial capitalism in which various elements of society are turned into revenue streams to be sold into financial markets, has been the order of the day.
~snip~
There is a hunger in the Democratic Party for making the party serve the interest of regular voters, not the rich. In 2008, liberal Democrats decisively broke from the Clinton legacy and voted for Barack Obama, with his mantra of hope and change. Obama, however, stocked his administration with Clinton administration officials like Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Janet Yellen. A joke going around Democratic circles after the election was that “Those supporting Obama got a president, those supporting Clinton got a job.” Obama broke with the Clinton name, but brought the Clinton intellectual legacy, and Clinton’s Wall Street-backed machine, into governance. Today, liberal Democratic primary voters are exhausted by six years of an administration under siege. Liberal Democratic voters still, by and large, do not view Obama’s failure to deliver on his promises as a failure of design or of personnel. Instead, they generally blame structural corruption in politics, or radical right-wing truculence. Obama, they think, is a good liberal man who did what he could. But looking ahead to 2016, many are attracted to what they perceive as Hillary Clinton’s pragmatism. They are ready to return to the Clinton family because they think what is needed is competence. The potentially transformative message of the Teachout-Wu campaign is that the problem is not solely one of personalities or tactical political approaches. Rather it is that the New Democrat model itself, and the Democratic party establishment, is fundamentally at odds with the party’s traditional liberalism.
cont'
http://www.salon.com/2014/07/19/the_most_important_money_in_politics_race_this_year_why_lefty_tea_party_may_be_here/
July 19, 2014
This is the guy they should Impeach!..............
Why on Earth did you publish that pathetic piece of nonsense by John Boehner ("Obama is trampling Constitution"
? There is a reason why the current House of Representatives has, by far, the lowest approval rating in our nation's history. You, Mr. Boehner, have spent all of your time wasting taxpayer money on ridiculous charades and promoting an unconscionable agenda. You have voted over 50 times to cancel the Affordable Care Act. Doing so would take us back to the days of allowing Health Insurance Corporations to:
(1) Deny medical coverage and medical care to any person having a pre-existing medical condition, a highly serious illness or injury in their medical record, or a potentially inheritable and expensive medical disease in their family tree
(2) Simply cancel, at the annual renewal date, the health insurance policy of any person who was no longer profitable for them to cover
(3) Sell health insurance policies which are actually nothing more than vile pieces of garbage and a false sense of security because they have extremely low annual and/or lifetime benefit caps, or don't cover those conditions which are likely to cause financial ruin, or have such high patient deductible clauses and patient co-payment schedules that they are guaranteed to cause financial ruin
(4) Refuse to cover, under a parent's family health insurance policy, all children above the age of 17, instead of above the age of 25. The Affordable care Act wasn't the only conceivable path to achieving imperative patient protection goals, but if you simply repeal it, all of its patient protection requirements immediately vanish.
Every time that our nation has enacted a highly complex piece of new legislation, it has been necessary to delay implementation of some aspects of it. President Bush first delayed, and then cancelled, the fees which were supposed to be charged to seniors who were tardy in signing up for Medicare Part D.
Nobody, including you, objected.
Now you want to sue President Obama for delaying one aspect of the extremely lengthy & complex ACA? Have you completely lost your mind? Do you have any idea of how preposterous it is for you to sue the President for slowing down the implementation of one aspect of the ACA, thereby actually helping businesses, while you have devoted your entire political life to killing all patient protections?
Now let's talk about something which actually does cry out for severe punishment. Every legitimate economics expert on this planet warned that global economic chaos and catastrophe would result if the United States voted to default on its debts. So what did the majority of the members of your political party in the U.S. House of Representatives do? They chose to cast a vote in favor of default. This is, clearly, an act of treason and terrorism against not only our nation, but against all members of the human race. These individuals must be removed from office and imprisoned for a time period of not less than ten years, with no possibility of parole.
cont'
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/readers/2014/07/18/boehner-wasting-time-taxpayer-money-on-frivolous-suit/12838771/
Boehner WASTING TIME, TAX PAYER MONEY On Frivolous Suit
This is the guy they should Impeach!..............
Why on Earth did you publish that pathetic piece of nonsense by John Boehner ("Obama is trampling Constitution"
? There is a reason why the current House of Representatives has, by far, the lowest approval rating in our nation's history. You, Mr. Boehner, have spent all of your time wasting taxpayer money on ridiculous charades and promoting an unconscionable agenda. You have voted over 50 times to cancel the Affordable Care Act. Doing so would take us back to the days of allowing Health Insurance Corporations to:
(1) Deny medical coverage and medical care to any person having a pre-existing medical condition, a highly serious illness or injury in their medical record, or a potentially inheritable and expensive medical disease in their family tree
(2) Simply cancel, at the annual renewal date, the health insurance policy of any person who was no longer profitable for them to cover
(3) Sell health insurance policies which are actually nothing more than vile pieces of garbage and a false sense of security because they have extremely low annual and/or lifetime benefit caps, or don't cover those conditions which are likely to cause financial ruin, or have such high patient deductible clauses and patient co-payment schedules that they are guaranteed to cause financial ruin
(4) Refuse to cover, under a parent's family health insurance policy, all children above the age of 17, instead of above the age of 25. The Affordable care Act wasn't the only conceivable path to achieving imperative patient protection goals, but if you simply repeal it, all of its patient protection requirements immediately vanish.
Every time that our nation has enacted a highly complex piece of new legislation, it has been necessary to delay implementation of some aspects of it. President Bush first delayed, and then cancelled, the fees which were supposed to be charged to seniors who were tardy in signing up for Medicare Part D.
Nobody, including you, objected.
Now you want to sue President Obama for delaying one aspect of the extremely lengthy & complex ACA? Have you completely lost your mind? Do you have any idea of how preposterous it is for you to sue the President for slowing down the implementation of one aspect of the ACA, thereby actually helping businesses, while you have devoted your entire political life to killing all patient protections?
Now let's talk about something which actually does cry out for severe punishment. Every legitimate economics expert on this planet warned that global economic chaos and catastrophe would result if the United States voted to default on its debts. So what did the majority of the members of your political party in the U.S. House of Representatives do? They chose to cast a vote in favor of default. This is, clearly, an act of treason and terrorism against not only our nation, but against all members of the human race. These individuals must be removed from office and imprisoned for a time period of not less than ten years, with no possibility of parole.
cont'
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/readers/2014/07/18/boehner-wasting-time-taxpayer-money-on-frivolous-suit/12838771/
July 18, 2014
Heeeeeeeeeee's Baaaack On TV!!!.......John Meeeee-Cain!.................
Guess who Sen. John McCain blames for the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight 17? Yup, President Obama:
McCain's comments came during an appearance on Fox's Hannity show. He said that if Obama had simply armed the Ukrainians, then "these separatists may not even have occupied and had access to these weapons, which apparently, they got at an airfield." So according to expert McCain, if Obama had simply weaponized Ukraine, then these separatists never would have been able to get the weapon system they used to bring down the airplane. But hold on a moment ... how does McCain know that the missiles were obtained at an airfield, and that they weren't provided to the separatists by Russian military—or that Russian military personnel may have actually been operating the weapons? Well, based on this statement, also by McCain, and delivered during the same interview, it's pretty clear he has no idea, because just after saying that the people who shot down the plane did so with weapons they found at an airfield, he said that the separatists weren't actually separatists but were actually in fact Russian special operation forces:
Literally within seconds, McCain's story went from accusing Obama of letting a Ukrainian missile system fall into the wrong hands to accusing Russia of maintaining a special operation force that was responsible for shooting down the plane. Who knows, both of those scenarios seem plausible, but not at the same time ... unless, of course, your priority is attacking President Obama, which obviously is bitter McCain's real agenda.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/18/1314927/-McCain-blames-cowardly-Obama-administration-for-allowing-plane-attack?showAll=yes
McCain Blames 'COWARDLY' Obama Administration For Allowing Plane Attack
Heeeeeeeeeee's Baaaack On TV!!!.......John Meeeee-Cain!.................
Guess who Sen. John McCain blames for the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight 17? Yup, President Obama:
Mr. McCain said that Mr. Obama is running a “cowardly administration that failed to give the Ukrainians weapons with which to defend themselves.”
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/republicans-respond-to-the-ukraine-crash-by-blaming-president-obama/
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/republicans-respond-to-the-ukraine-crash-by-blaming-president-obama/
McCain's comments came during an appearance on Fox's Hannity show. He said that if Obama had simply armed the Ukrainians, then "these separatists may not even have occupied and had access to these weapons, which apparently, they got at an airfield." So according to expert McCain, if Obama had simply weaponized Ukraine, then these separatists never would have been able to get the weapon system they used to bring down the airplane. But hold on a moment ... how does McCain know that the missiles were obtained at an airfield, and that they weren't provided to the separatists by Russian military—or that Russian military personnel may have actually been operating the weapons? Well, based on this statement, also by McCain, and delivered during the same interview, it's pretty clear he has no idea, because just after saying that the people who shot down the plane did so with weapons they found at an airfield, he said that the separatists weren't actually separatists but were actually in fact Russian special operation forces:
To me, it's compelling evidence that this was done by the so-called separatists, which are, by the way, special operations, special forces of Russians, that are Russian-trained Russian military that call themselves separatists.
Literally within seconds, McCain's story went from accusing Obama of letting a Ukrainian missile system fall into the wrong hands to accusing Russia of maintaining a special operation force that was responsible for shooting down the plane. Who knows, both of those scenarios seem plausible, but not at the same time ... unless, of course, your priority is attacking President Obama, which obviously is bitter McCain's real agenda.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/18/1314927/-McCain-blames-cowardly-Obama-administration-for-allowing-plane-attack?showAll=yes
July 18, 2014
The arrogance of 1% elitist a$$holes who just won't accept no for an answer..........
By: Jason Easley
The idea that Mitt Romney may run for president again in 2016 is getting closer to becoming a reality as a Vox Populi Poll found that 70% of Republican primary voters are open to voting again for Romney. Republican primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina were asked if they would consider voting for Romney again for their party’s nomination in 2016. Twenty-three percent of South Carolina primary voters would vote for Mitt Romney again, and 51% would consider it. In New Hampshire, 30% would definitely vote for him, and 47% would consider it. In Iowa, 21% would definitely vote for him, and 53% would consider it.
The numbers in each state suggest that Romney already has enough support to win two or maybe all three of the first three primary states on the Republican calendar. Romney’s support has stayed fairly consistent with his 2012 performance. In 2012, Romney got 25% of the caucus vote in Iowa. Today, he is at 21% in the state. Romney got 39% of the 2012 GOP primary vote in New Hampshire, and he is at 30% today. In South Carolina, Romney got 28% of the vote in 2012, and he is sitting at 23% today. Romney’s lingering popularity with Republican primary voters suggests that voters aren’t in love with any of their possible options. Scandals have sunk Chris Christie and Scott Walker. Rand Paul remains a Paul, and his foreign policy views are completely out of step with most of the party. Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio have past support of immigration reform working against them, and the rest of the potential candidates hail from the Ted Cruz kooky wing of the party.
A glance through the alternatives makes it easy to understand why Romney remains popular with so many Republican primary voters. It might seem unbelievable, but Mr. 47% could be the least damaged Republican option out there. The big money voices in the GOP have been trying to cut a deal to clear the field and hand Romney the nomination, but they may not even need to do it. A path is forming for Mitt Romney to run for a third time, and win back to back Republican nominations. Romney would lose to Hillary Clinton by an even larger margin than he lost to President Obama, but Republicans in early voting states believe that he is their best option in what could be a historically bad field of candidates.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/18/gop-mitt-back-70-republican-voters-open-voting-romney-2016.html
LOL!!- GOP Wants MITT BACK: 70% Of Republican Voters Are Open to Voting For Romney in 2016
The arrogance of 1% elitist a$$holes who just won't accept no for an answer..........
By: Jason Easley
The idea that Mitt Romney may run for president again in 2016 is getting closer to becoming a reality as a Vox Populi Poll found that 70% of Republican primary voters are open to voting again for Romney. Republican primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina were asked if they would consider voting for Romney again for their party’s nomination in 2016. Twenty-three percent of South Carolina primary voters would vote for Mitt Romney again, and 51% would consider it. In New Hampshire, 30% would definitely vote for him, and 47% would consider it. In Iowa, 21% would definitely vote for him, and 53% would consider it.
The numbers in each state suggest that Romney already has enough support to win two or maybe all three of the first three primary states on the Republican calendar. Romney’s support has stayed fairly consistent with his 2012 performance. In 2012, Romney got 25% of the caucus vote in Iowa. Today, he is at 21% in the state. Romney got 39% of the 2012 GOP primary vote in New Hampshire, and he is at 30% today. In South Carolina, Romney got 28% of the vote in 2012, and he is sitting at 23% today. Romney’s lingering popularity with Republican primary voters suggests that voters aren’t in love with any of their possible options. Scandals have sunk Chris Christie and Scott Walker. Rand Paul remains a Paul, and his foreign policy views are completely out of step with most of the party. Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio have past support of immigration reform working against them, and the rest of the potential candidates hail from the Ted Cruz kooky wing of the party.
A glance through the alternatives makes it easy to understand why Romney remains popular with so many Republican primary voters. It might seem unbelievable, but Mr. 47% could be the least damaged Republican option out there. The big money voices in the GOP have been trying to cut a deal to clear the field and hand Romney the nomination, but they may not even need to do it. A path is forming for Mitt Romney to run for a third time, and win back to back Republican nominations. Romney would lose to Hillary Clinton by an even larger margin than he lost to President Obama, but Republicans in early voting states believe that he is their best option in what could be a historically bad field of candidates.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/18/gop-mitt-back-70-republican-voters-open-voting-romney-2016.html
July 18, 2014
Remember those Mississippi attack ads that painted conservative Republicans and tea partyers as racists? Turns out they were funded by Senate Republicans, RedState Editor-in-Chief Erick Erickson has confirmed. The advertisements by All Citizens for Mississippi, which attacked state Sen. Chris McDaniel and painted conservatives as racists, were partly funded by Sens. Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Rob Portman, Bob Corker and Roy Blunt.
In fairness, Tea Party rallies pretty much sell the idea of the movement as inherently racist, no highly paid media consultant required…
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/18/busted-mississippi-attack-ads-calling-tea-partyers-racists-were-funded-by-the-gop/
BUSTED! Mississippi ATTACK ADS Calling Tea Partyers Racists Were FUNDED BY THE GOP
Remember those Mississippi attack ads that painted conservative Republicans and tea partyers as racists? Turns out they were funded by Senate Republicans, RedState Editor-in-Chief Erick Erickson has confirmed. The advertisements by All Citizens for Mississippi, which attacked state Sen. Chris McDaniel and painted conservatives as racists, were partly funded by Sens. Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Rob Portman, Bob Corker and Roy Blunt.
“Mississippi Conservatives, in turn, was funded in part by Sally Bradshaw of the RNC’s Growth and Opportunity Project, former RNC Chairman and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, the United States Chamber of Commerce, and the political action committees created for Senators Mitch McConnell ($50,000), John Cornyn ($50,000), Rob Portman ($25,000), Bob Corker ($25,000), and Roy Blunt ($5,000),” the report said.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/senate-republicans-paid-mississippi-attack-ads-pai/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/senate-republicans-paid-mississippi-attack-ads-pai/
In fairness, Tea Party rallies pretty much sell the idea of the movement as inherently racist, no highly paid media consultant required…
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/18/busted-mississippi-attack-ads-calling-tea-partyers-racists-were-funded-by-the-gop/
July 17, 2014
S...........T.............F.............U..................................
On Thursday, shortly after news broke that a Malaysian airliner had crashed in Ukraine, apparently after being shot down by a missile, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) made sure to get himself in front of a television camera. McCain not only rushed over the MSNBC to speak to Andrea Mitchell about the developing situation, but he also ran over to CNN shortly after to get his face on that network and spout his opinions about the tragedy. Of course, to no one’s surprise, McCain beat his war drums, telling Mitchell that if Russia or pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine were involved, there’d “be hell to pay.”
McCain used his time with Mitchell to make rampant speculation over the cause of this tragic event while at the same time getting in his jabs at the Obama Administration over its lack of military action in Ukraine. Hilariously, McCain said he “didn’t want to draw conclusions,” yet proceeded to draw many conclusions during his time with Mitchell.
Going with the assumption that Russia is directly to blame for the downed airliner, McCain then attacked President Obama and Europe for only issuing economic sanctions on Vladimir Putin and Russia. He pushed for the United States to supply Ukraine with heavy weaponry.
At the end of the interview, McCain then made his big push for military action.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/17/msnbc-cnn-feed-john-mccains-narcissism-downed-airliner-ukraine.html
MSNBC And CNN FEED John McCain’s NARCISSISM Over Downed Airliner In Ukraine
S...........T.............F.............U..................................
On Thursday, shortly after news broke that a Malaysian airliner had crashed in Ukraine, apparently after being shot down by a missile, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) made sure to get himself in front of a television camera. McCain not only rushed over the MSNBC to speak to Andrea Mitchell about the developing situation, but he also ran over to CNN shortly after to get his face on that network and spout his opinions about the tragedy. Of course, to no one’s surprise, McCain beat his war drums, telling Mitchell that if Russia or pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine were involved, there’d “be hell to pay.”
McCain used his time with Mitchell to make rampant speculation over the cause of this tragic event while at the same time getting in his jabs at the Obama Administration over its lack of military action in Ukraine. Hilariously, McCain said he “didn’t want to draw conclusions,” yet proceeded to draw many conclusions during his time with Mitchell.
“This was an airliner headed towards Russian air space. And it has the earmarks — and I’m not concluding — but it has the earmarks of a mistaken identification of an aircraft that they may have believed was Ukrainian. If that’s true, this is a horrible tragedy event which was certainly unanticipated by anybody, no matter who they are.”
Going with the assumption that Russia is directly to blame for the downed airliner, McCain then attacked President Obama and Europe for only issuing economic sanctions on Vladimir Putin and Russia. He pushed for the United States to supply Ukraine with heavy weaponry.
“The sanctions so far in exchange for Crimea have been minuscule. These latest enacted by the Obama administration, I think, are helpful. But if you ask the Ukrainian government that’s struggling, they would say they need weapons with which to defend themselves.”
At the end of the interview, McCain then made his big push for military action.
“If it is the result of either separatist or Russian actions mistakenly believing that this was a Ukrainian war plane, I think there’s going to be hell to pay. And there should be.”
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/17/msnbc-cnn-feed-john-mccains-narcissism-downed-airliner-ukraine.html
July 16, 2014
Sen. Sanders said:
So when you see Republicans beating up on the IRS, when you see Republicans defunding or cutting back on funding for the IRS so there is less ability to monitor what these organizations are doing, this is not an accident. This is real goal, and let’s be very very clear. What the leadership of the Republican Party wants, and you should talk to them about it. They won’t deny it. Is they want to end all campaign finance regulations. They don’t want to have to go around in this circle anymore.
What they want is the ability of the Koch brothers and others to be able to contribute as much money as they want directly into the candidates that they support, and that is the direction in which we are moving. So you weaken the IRS. You come up with the phony social welfare situation. You pass Citizens. You have a Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United on McCutcheon. It leads us directly into a situation will billionaires own and control the candidates that they support.
What Sen. Sanders explained in the video above is what the Republican Party and the Koch brothers don’t want the American people to understand. The IRS scandal isn’t about the “targeting” of conservative groups. The scandal is a Republican attempt to scare the IRS off of looking into their dark money groups and the billionaires who fund them. Republicans are trying to protect their money machine.
The GOP is extremely dependent on large donors for their funding. They don’t have the small donor base that fuels the Democratic Party. This is why Republicans are pushing for more unlimited contributions in politics. More unlimited contributions mean more direct spending by billionaires to buy their candidates, and when a billionaire owns a member of Congress, that member no longer works for the American people.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/15/bernie-sanders-sends-shudders-koch-spines-explaining-republicans-attack-irs.html
Bernie Sanders Sends Shudders Up KOCH Spines By EXPLAINING WHY REPUBLICANS ATTACK THE IRS
"...Sen Bernie Sanders exposed a dirty little secret that the Kochs and other conservative billionaires don’t want you to know. The Republican attacks on the IRS are part of a deliberate strategy to help the Kochs buy our democracy...."
Sen. Sanders said:
So when you see Republicans beating up on the IRS, when you see Republicans defunding or cutting back on funding for the IRS so there is less ability to monitor what these organizations are doing, this is not an accident. This is real goal, and let’s be very very clear. What the leadership of the Republican Party wants, and you should talk to them about it. They won’t deny it. Is they want to end all campaign finance regulations. They don’t want to have to go around in this circle anymore.
What they want is the ability of the Koch brothers and others to be able to contribute as much money as they want directly into the candidates that they support, and that is the direction in which we are moving. So you weaken the IRS. You come up with the phony social welfare situation. You pass Citizens. You have a Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United on McCutcheon. It leads us directly into a situation will billionaires own and control the candidates that they support.
What Sen. Sanders explained in the video above is what the Republican Party and the Koch brothers don’t want the American people to understand. The IRS scandal isn’t about the “targeting” of conservative groups. The scandal is a Republican attempt to scare the IRS off of looking into their dark money groups and the billionaires who fund them. Republicans are trying to protect their money machine.
The GOP is extremely dependent on large donors for their funding. They don’t have the small donor base that fuels the Democratic Party. This is why Republicans are pushing for more unlimited contributions in politics. More unlimited contributions mean more direct spending by billionaires to buy their candidates, and when a billionaire owns a member of Congress, that member no longer works for the American people.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/15/bernie-sanders-sends-shudders-koch-spines-explaining-republicans-attack-irs.html
July 16, 2014
"Koch's favorite son Sam Brownback".............How's that working out for you Sammy?..........
Yes, those are Kansas Republicans putting their enthusiasm behind the Democrats looking to shovel Sam Brownback out of office. It looks like Kansans don't appreciate it when billionaires shove education cuts and austerity down their throats. From their press release:
Sam Brownback currently has one of the lowest approval ratings of any governor in the nation, which gives me a degree of hope for our future. It seems voters do not approve when their leaders are nothing more than billionaire puppets. Davis leads by 6 points in the polls right now at 47 percent, with Brownback at 41 percent and Libertarian Keen Umbehr at 5 percent. Bob Beatty at the Topeka Capital-Journal breaks down the numbers further:
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/07/scores-kansas-republicans-endorse
Scores Of Kansas Republicans ENDORSE Democratic Ticket For Governor
What an unprecedented slap in the face to the Kochs' favorite son, Sam Brownback.
"Koch's favorite son Sam Brownback".............How's that working out for you Sammy?..........
Yes, those are Kansas Republicans putting their enthusiasm behind the Democrats looking to shovel Sam Brownback out of office. It looks like Kansans don't appreciate it when billionaires shove education cuts and austerity down their throats. From their press release:
The group pointed to Brownback’s experimental tax plan, severe cuts to schools, and fiscally irresponsible budgeting as reasons for their historic decision. They also praised Davis’s moderate, commonsense leadership and his focus on proven solutions.
“We support Paul Davis and Jill Docking for many reasons, the first of which is their steadfast support for our public schools. Paul has been a champion of schools for his entire career,” said Carol Rupe Linnens, former member of the Kansas State Board of Education. “One of the unique values most Kansans share is a strong commitment to our schools and our top-notch education system. It is clear Sam Brownback does not share this Kansas value.”
Republicans for Kansas values strongly endorsed Davis’ record of bringing people together – regardless of political affiliation – to get things done for Kansas families.
http://www.davisforkansas.com/sections/media/53c43adf75c9a1d803000075
“We support Paul Davis and Jill Docking for many reasons, the first of which is their steadfast support for our public schools. Paul has been a champion of schools for his entire career,” said Carol Rupe Linnens, former member of the Kansas State Board of Education. “One of the unique values most Kansans share is a strong commitment to our schools and our top-notch education system. It is clear Sam Brownback does not share this Kansas value.”
Republicans for Kansas values strongly endorsed Davis’ record of bringing people together – regardless of political affiliation – to get things done for Kansas families.
http://www.davisforkansas.com/sections/media/53c43adf75c9a1d803000075
Sam Brownback currently has one of the lowest approval ratings of any governor in the nation, which gives me a degree of hope for our future. It seems voters do not approve when their leaders are nothing more than billionaire puppets. Davis leads by 6 points in the polls right now at 47 percent, with Brownback at 41 percent and Libertarian Keen Umbehr at 5 percent. Bob Beatty at the Topeka Capital-Journal breaks down the numbers further:
Diving into the numbers reveal some interesting nuggets. First, female voters prefer Davis over Brownback by 14 points. This advantage is likely related to the education issue, as women traditionally rank education higher than men do as a key issue. In the SurveyUSA poll, 73 percent of those who listed “education funding” as their top issue in the governor’s race said they were voting for Davis.
Second, those polled who consider themselves politically moderate favor Davis over Brownback 69 percent to 23 percent. While Brownback wins Republicans overall, 62 percent to 26 percent, the poll numbers indicate what looks to be a willingness by enough moderate Republicans to vote for Davis to make this election competitive.
http://cjonline.com/opinion/2014-07-13/bob-beatty-fasten-your-seat-belts-kansas-voters
Second, those polled who consider themselves politically moderate favor Davis over Brownback 69 percent to 23 percent. While Brownback wins Republicans overall, 62 percent to 26 percent, the poll numbers indicate what looks to be a willingness by enough moderate Republicans to vote for Davis to make this election competitive.
http://cjonline.com/opinion/2014-07-13/bob-beatty-fasten-your-seat-belts-kansas-voters
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/07/scores-kansas-republicans-endorse
July 15, 2014
George Takei’s experience with American democracy began shortly after he turned 5 years old, on a train car, flanked by armed guards, on his way to an internment camp for Japanese Americans. It took him many years to overcome his bitterness at the system that had trapped him there, made him feel like a criminal, and left his family homeless after World War II. As a young man, he blamed his father, telling him, “You led us like sheep to slaughter when you took us into that camp!” His father took a moment to reflect. “Maybe you’re right,” the elder Takei eventually said, before quietly leaving the room and shutting the door. “I realized I had hit a nerve. I had hurt him,” George Takei says now. “But there were other conversations, and what I remember of those conversations were his [arguments in favor of American] democracy.”
Takei, who rose to fame as the iconic Hikaru Sulu in the original Star Trek television series, changed his mind about America over time. He began to understand his father’s patriotism. To explain their internment, the elder Takei had said democracies are as great or as fallible as the people who participate in them—and that America’s system had soaring potential, even if their family had suffered a great injustice. It was crucial, then, to take part. It is through this lens that Takei is offering his support for campaign finance reform. Earlier this month, he encouraged his fans to donate to the Mayday Political Action Committee, a super PAC formed to end super PACs and limit the role of money in politics.
“The core of what our democracy is about ‘We the people,’ ‘All men are created equal.’ When we have a situation like the Koch brothers, [who] can donate multimillions of dollars to a campaign…you’ve got to fight fire with fire,” Takei told The Daily Beast. “‘We the people’ can fight that challenge with fire. We can’t each afford a million-dollar contribution, but we can afford $3. And there are a lot more of us, those who can afford $3.” It’s a fitting role for an actor whose seminal Star Trek performance took place in a utopian universe that had mostly eliminated the need for money. While Takei’s traditional advocacy has been LGBT rights, the young fans he’s attracted through his work on gay marriage and gay rights are whom he thinks of when he reflects on the issue of campaign finance.
“The thing that breaks my heart is that there are so many young people with ideals and principles who are engaged with nonprofits and community organizations. [They] refuse to register to vote because they think it’s corrupt,” he said. “And it is corrupt, when…money can buy an election. We’ve got to make our electoral process credible to the very people we need to make involved and engaged.” Launched in May, Mayday PAC has raised nearly $8 million in donations from more than 50,000 contributors. On the Fourth of July, Takei urged his 7.2 million Facebook fans to donate to the super PAC, a post that was shared nearly 8,000 timed and received more than 28,000 likes. Takei himself kicked in a symbolic $3. “I’m a person who believes in the ideal of one man, one vote—a true democracy, as opposed to a plutocracy where lobbyists can control the result of an election with their money, so I support campaign finance reform,” he said.
cont'
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/15/george-takei-sets-phasers-to-reform.html
GEORGE TAKEI Sets Phasers To REFORM
The ‘Star Trek’ star, gay-rights advocate, and social media powerhouse talks up his new cause—campaign finance—and faith in democracy.
George Takei’s experience with American democracy began shortly after he turned 5 years old, on a train car, flanked by armed guards, on his way to an internment camp for Japanese Americans. It took him many years to overcome his bitterness at the system that had trapped him there, made him feel like a criminal, and left his family homeless after World War II. As a young man, he blamed his father, telling him, “You led us like sheep to slaughter when you took us into that camp!” His father took a moment to reflect. “Maybe you’re right,” the elder Takei eventually said, before quietly leaving the room and shutting the door. “I realized I had hit a nerve. I had hurt him,” George Takei says now. “But there were other conversations, and what I remember of those conversations were his [arguments in favor of American] democracy.”
Takei, who rose to fame as the iconic Hikaru Sulu in the original Star Trek television series, changed his mind about America over time. He began to understand his father’s patriotism. To explain their internment, the elder Takei had said democracies are as great or as fallible as the people who participate in them—and that America’s system had soaring potential, even if their family had suffered a great injustice. It was crucial, then, to take part. It is through this lens that Takei is offering his support for campaign finance reform. Earlier this month, he encouraged his fans to donate to the Mayday Political Action Committee, a super PAC formed to end super PACs and limit the role of money in politics.
“The core of what our democracy is about ‘We the people,’ ‘All men are created equal.’ When we have a situation like the Koch brothers, [who] can donate multimillions of dollars to a campaign…you’ve got to fight fire with fire,” Takei told The Daily Beast. “‘We the people’ can fight that challenge with fire. We can’t each afford a million-dollar contribution, but we can afford $3. And there are a lot more of us, those who can afford $3.” It’s a fitting role for an actor whose seminal Star Trek performance took place in a utopian universe that had mostly eliminated the need for money. While Takei’s traditional advocacy has been LGBT rights, the young fans he’s attracted through his work on gay marriage and gay rights are whom he thinks of when he reflects on the issue of campaign finance.
“The thing that breaks my heart is that there are so many young people with ideals and principles who are engaged with nonprofits and community organizations. [They] refuse to register to vote because they think it’s corrupt,” he said. “And it is corrupt, when…money can buy an election. We’ve got to make our electoral process credible to the very people we need to make involved and engaged.” Launched in May, Mayday PAC has raised nearly $8 million in donations from more than 50,000 contributors. On the Fourth of July, Takei urged his 7.2 million Facebook fans to donate to the super PAC, a post that was shared nearly 8,000 timed and received more than 28,000 likes. Takei himself kicked in a symbolic $3. “I’m a person who believes in the ideal of one man, one vote—a true democracy, as opposed to a plutocracy where lobbyists can control the result of an election with their money, so I support campaign finance reform,” he said.
cont'
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/15/george-takei-sets-phasers-to-reform.html
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
