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
MrWendel
MrWendel's Journal
MrWendel's Journal
January 19, 2016
In a campaign season that is starting to become overwhelmed with a proliferation of endorsements, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has recently captured two of the most poignant – the mothers of Travyon Martin and Jordan Davis.
The 2012 shooting deaths of both unarmed African-American teenagers in Florida helped galvanize the “Black Lives Matter” movement nationwide and made unlikely activists out of their grieving mothers, Sybrina Fulton and Lucia McBath. In two separate op-eds, the women have thrown their weight behind the 2016 candidacy of Clinton, who has made her staunch advocacy for more effective gun control legislation a centerpiece of her campaign for the Democratic nomination.
In her Jan. 11 op-ed for CNN, Fulton wrote “In spending some time with [Hillary Clinton] in person, I also found a mother and a grandmother who truly heard me, and understood the depth of my loss.” She also praised Clinton’s advocacy for the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban, as well as her opposition to the controversial immunity laws, which protect gun distributors from liability.
“She knew all the statistics. But like so many, I’ve long since grown numb to the numbers. So instead, we talked about Trayvon and other families who have lost a loved one to gun violence. We talked about all of the wishes and hopes we had for their lives. And knowing we can never get them back, we discussed how to prevent more moms from losing their sons to gun violence,” wrote Fulton, who added that she believed the former secretary of state would not just uphold President Obama’s recent gun control executive orders, but expand on them.
Lucia McBath has echoed some of the same sentiments in an op-ed published Tuesday on BET.com. She also cited Clinton’s willingness to repeal the so-called “Charleston loophole,” which has been linked to Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church massacre suspect Dylann Roof’s legal purchase of a weapon, as a significant factor in determining her vote.
(More in link)
The mothers of Trayvon Martin, Jordan Davis make poignant Clinton endorsements
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-mothers-trayvon-martin-jordan-davis-make-poignant-clinton-endorsementsIn a campaign season that is starting to become overwhelmed with a proliferation of endorsements, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has recently captured two of the most poignant – the mothers of Travyon Martin and Jordan Davis.
The 2012 shooting deaths of both unarmed African-American teenagers in Florida helped galvanize the “Black Lives Matter” movement nationwide and made unlikely activists out of their grieving mothers, Sybrina Fulton and Lucia McBath. In two separate op-eds, the women have thrown their weight behind the 2016 candidacy of Clinton, who has made her staunch advocacy for more effective gun control legislation a centerpiece of her campaign for the Democratic nomination.
In her Jan. 11 op-ed for CNN, Fulton wrote “In spending some time with [Hillary Clinton] in person, I also found a mother and a grandmother who truly heard me, and understood the depth of my loss.” She also praised Clinton’s advocacy for the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban, as well as her opposition to the controversial immunity laws, which protect gun distributors from liability.
“She knew all the statistics. But like so many, I’ve long since grown numb to the numbers. So instead, we talked about Trayvon and other families who have lost a loved one to gun violence. We talked about all of the wishes and hopes we had for their lives. And knowing we can never get them back, we discussed how to prevent more moms from losing their sons to gun violence,” wrote Fulton, who added that she believed the former secretary of state would not just uphold President Obama’s recent gun control executive orders, but expand on them.
Lucia McBath has echoed some of the same sentiments in an op-ed published Tuesday on BET.com. She also cited Clinton’s willingness to repeal the so-called “Charleston loophole,” which has been linked to Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church massacre suspect Dylann Roof’s legal purchase of a weapon, as a significant factor in determining her vote.
(More in link)
January 19, 2016
By Scan
?1453153534
Greetings y’all! Lysis is on the road this week and asked me to cover HNV for a couple of days… and who am I to say no? We’re now less than two weeks from the Iowa caucuses and just had a great debate. This is a damn exciting time for political junkies.
As for who won the last face-off, obviously it depends on who you ask. However, Slate’s headline says it as plainly as possible and I agree completely... Hillary Clinton Won Sunday Night’s Debate:
This was not a solitary opinion. Politico’s large group of Democratic insiders in the early states also thought it wasn’t close:
Here’s how it looks in graph form:
(More in link)
Hillary News & Views 1.19: Another Debate Win, Flint, MLK, and More Krugman Kudos
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/19/1471503/-Hillary-News-Views-1-19-Another-Debate-Win-Flint-MLK-and-More-Krugman-KudosBy Scan
?1453153534
Greetings y’all! Lysis is on the road this week and asked me to cover HNV for a couple of days… and who am I to say no? We’re now less than two weeks from the Iowa caucuses and just had a great debate. This is a damn exciting time for political junkies.
As for who won the last face-off, obviously it depends on who you ask. However, Slate’s headline says it as plainly as possible and I agree completely... Hillary Clinton Won Sunday Night’s Debate:
Clinton was once again in superior form Sunday night in South Carolina, besting Sen. Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley in the last Democratic debate before the Iowa caucus.
Clinton’s debating performance is formidable because it combines her intelligence with a sincerity and level of conviction that often seem absent in other forums. When she opened the debate speaking of Martin Luther King Jr.’s role fighting for increased wages, she used his career as a subtle metaphor for what she is pitching: principled leadership with a strong practical bent. That mixture, along with her strength in close-quarter combat and an ability to wrap herself in President Obama’s record—something that played well to the Charleston crowd in the auditorium—was what won her this debate.
This was not a solitary opinion. Politico’s large group of Democratic insiders in the early states also thought it wasn’t close:
Bernie Sanders is riding a wave of momentum in Iowa and New Hampshire, but his performance in Sunday night’s debate failed to dislodge Hillary Clinton from her perch as national front-runner for the Democratic nomination.
That’s according to Democratic members of The POLITICO Caucus — a panel of leading strategists, operatives and activists in Iowa, New Hampshire and the two states that will follow with nominating contests next month: Nevada and South Carolina, where Sunday’s debate was held.
…
Most Democratic insiders felt Clinton effectively dinged Sanders with her aggressive approach to Sanders’ opposition to some stricter gun laws and his statements supporting a single-payer health care system.
“She gave as good as she got,” said an Iowa Democrat. “Sanders at times seemed unable to control his emotions.”
“The conjuring up of Bernie Sanders' voting record on several issues took a nick out of his vaunted, saintly consistency,” added a Nevada Democrat.
Here’s how it looks in graph form:
(More in link)
January 19, 2016
"Picking your opponent" is an age-old political manipulation tactic.
Republican operatives are having a strange crush on Bernie Sanders.
During Sunday night’s Democratic debate, the Republican National Committee made the unusual move of sending no fewer than four real-time e-mails to reporters defending the self-described democratic socialist from attacks by Hillary Clinton or echoing his message against her. Based on their content, one could be forgiven for thinking the RNC communiques came from the Sanders campaign.
One RNC e-mail, which was titled “Clinton’s Misleading Health Care Attack,” defended the Vermont senator from what it described as “the Clinton campaign’s inaccurate remarks on Sanders’ single-payer plan,” and quoted news articles that featured rebuttals of her arguments. A second message countered Clinton’s attacks on Sanders over gun control by pointing out her gun-friendly statements in the past. Two other e-mails sought to bolster Sanders’ case that Clinton is too close to Wall Street and the drug industry.
After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate. “Clinton needed a win last night. Instead, everyone is talking about how well Bernie Sanders, her chief rival, did,” the group’s communications director Jeff Bechdel wrote to reporters.
Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’ case against Clinton: that she has received large sums of campaign contributions from Wall Street, and therefore can't be trusted to crack down on big banks. “Hillary rewarded Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout, then Wall Street made her a multi-millionaire,” a narrator in the ad says. “Does Iowa really want Wall Street in the White House?”
"In Iowa, American Crossroads is helping Bernie Sanders by depicting Hillary Clinton as a Wall Street insider," Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, wrote on his blog.
"My guess is that Republican operatives know that Clinton is likely to win the nomination even if Sanders upsets her in Iowa and New Hampshire. But an extended challenge will force her to use up money too early, and nudge her farther to the left," Pitney wrote in an e-mail to Bloomberg. Whether it will work remains to be seen, he said. "But at this stage, campaigns will grab for every advantage they can get."
Priorities USA, a group backing Clinton, said the ad was designed by Republicans to “interfere with our primary process” in an “attempt to clear their path to the White House.”
At Sunday night's debate, Clinton made a note of the ad, too. “I’m the one they don’t want to be up against,” she said, referring to the financial sector.
The efforts indicate that Republicans aren't buying recent polls that show Sanders out-performing Clinton in hypothetical head-to-head match-ups against GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump. One reason may be that, unlike Sanders, Clinton has been through the wringer of Republican attacks. While a spokesman for Sanders didn't immediately return a request for comment on the Republican attempts to boost him, the senator went out of his way in Sunday's debate to invoke recent surveys to make the case that he's electable.
“In terms of polling, guess what? We are running ahead of Secretary Clinton in terms of taking on my taking on my good friend, Donald Trump,” Sanders said. A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds him leading Trump nationally by 15 points, while Clinton leads Trump by 10 points.
Republican candidate John Kasich indicated in a debate last week that he'd love to face Sanders. "We're going to win every state," he said, "if Bernie Sanders is the nominee."
Republican Operatives Are Trying to Help Bernie Sanders
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-19/republican-operatives-are-trying-to-help-bernie-sanders"Picking your opponent" is an age-old political manipulation tactic.
Republican operatives are having a strange crush on Bernie Sanders.
During Sunday night’s Democratic debate, the Republican National Committee made the unusual move of sending no fewer than four real-time e-mails to reporters defending the self-described democratic socialist from attacks by Hillary Clinton or echoing his message against her. Based on their content, one could be forgiven for thinking the RNC communiques came from the Sanders campaign.
One RNC e-mail, which was titled “Clinton’s Misleading Health Care Attack,” defended the Vermont senator from what it described as “the Clinton campaign’s inaccurate remarks on Sanders’ single-payer plan,” and quoted news articles that featured rebuttals of her arguments. A second message countered Clinton’s attacks on Sanders over gun control by pointing out her gun-friendly statements in the past. Two other e-mails sought to bolster Sanders’ case that Clinton is too close to Wall Street and the drug industry.
After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate. “Clinton needed a win last night. Instead, everyone is talking about how well Bernie Sanders, her chief rival, did,” the group’s communications director Jeff Bechdel wrote to reporters.
Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’ case against Clinton: that she has received large sums of campaign contributions from Wall Street, and therefore can't be trusted to crack down on big banks. “Hillary rewarded Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout, then Wall Street made her a multi-millionaire,” a narrator in the ad says. “Does Iowa really want Wall Street in the White House?”
"In Iowa, American Crossroads is helping Bernie Sanders by depicting Hillary Clinton as a Wall Street insider," Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, wrote on his blog.
"My guess is that Republican operatives know that Clinton is likely to win the nomination even if Sanders upsets her in Iowa and New Hampshire. But an extended challenge will force her to use up money too early, and nudge her farther to the left," Pitney wrote in an e-mail to Bloomberg. Whether it will work remains to be seen, he said. "But at this stage, campaigns will grab for every advantage they can get."
Priorities USA, a group backing Clinton, said the ad was designed by Republicans to “interfere with our primary process” in an “attempt to clear their path to the White House.”
At Sunday night's debate, Clinton made a note of the ad, too. “I’m the one they don’t want to be up against,” she said, referring to the financial sector.
The efforts indicate that Republicans aren't buying recent polls that show Sanders out-performing Clinton in hypothetical head-to-head match-ups against GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump. One reason may be that, unlike Sanders, Clinton has been through the wringer of Republican attacks. While a spokesman for Sanders didn't immediately return a request for comment on the Republican attempts to boost him, the senator went out of his way in Sunday's debate to invoke recent surveys to make the case that he's electable.
“In terms of polling, guess what? We are running ahead of Secretary Clinton in terms of taking on my taking on my good friend, Donald Trump,” Sanders said. A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds him leading Trump nationally by 15 points, while Clinton leads Trump by 10 points.
Republican candidate John Kasich indicated in a debate last week that he'd love to face Sanders. "We're going to win every state," he said, "if Bernie Sanders is the nominee."
January 18, 2016
Paul Krugman has entered the healthcare reform fray on behalf of Hillary Clinton, a fact which will no doubt disappoint many progressives. In a op-ed titled “Health Reform Realities,” Krugman argues that though Obamacare is “a kludge: a somewhat awkward, clumsy device with lots of moving parts,” it works:
In other words, the Affordable Care Act was a big win for us against Republicans, who fought any reform at all. Most will remember the failed Bill Clinton attempt to get healthcare reform done during his administration. As Krugman puts it,
Most Democrats probably agree that single payer is better than what we have. It is what most of us wanted to begin with, after all. But how practical is it as a goal? Krugman reminds us that we barely got Obamacare even with a Democratic controlled Senate. If single payer had been a possibility, we would already have it.
But we don’t.
This is a big bone of contention now between Sanders and Clinton. Jason Easley wrote here regarding the Democratic debate:
In Krugman’s opinion, the candidates should “focus their main efforts on other issues.” You know, those we haven’t already won, even if the victory was not all we had hoped for. Krugman lists the many problems with pushing for single payer, including the massive influence of the insurance companies, the necessity of raising taxes to pay for it – not only the rich but the middle class – and the disruption to people who already have insurance they are satisfied with.
Krugman makes a powerful argument when he says “progressives must set some priorities,” and calls Sander’s goal of single payer “a quixotic attempt at a do-over, not of a political failure, but of health reform — their biggest victory in many years.” Any president only has so much political capital. There are battles we haven’t fought and won – to any degree whatsoever – that it might make more reasonable objectives for an incoming president.
Paul Krugman Says Hillary Clinton is Right and Bernie Sanders is Wrong on Healthcare
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/18/paul-krugman-hillary-bernie-wrong-healthcare.htmlPaul Krugman has entered the healthcare reform fray on behalf of Hillary Clinton, a fact which will no doubt disappoint many progressives. In a op-ed titled “Health Reform Realities,” Krugman argues that though Obamacare is “a kludge: a somewhat awkward, clumsy device with lots of moving parts,” it works:
Health reform is the signature achievement of the Obama presidency. It was the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare was established in the 1960s. It more or less achieves a goal — access to health insurance for all Americans — that progressives have been trying to reach for three generations. And it is already producing dramatic results, with the percentage of uninsured Americans falling to record lows.
In other words, the Affordable Care Act was a big win for us against Republicans, who fought any reform at all. Most will remember the failed Bill Clinton attempt to get healthcare reform done during his administration. As Krugman puts it,
The question for progressives — a question that is now central to the Democratic primary — is whether these failings mean that they should re-litigate their own biggest political success in almost half a century, and try for something better.
Most Democrats probably agree that single payer is better than what we have. It is what most of us wanted to begin with, after all. But how practical is it as a goal? Krugman reminds us that we barely got Obamacare even with a Democratic controlled Senate. If single payer had been a possibility, we would already have it.
But we don’t.
This is a big bone of contention now between Sanders and Clinton. Jason Easley wrote here regarding the Democratic debate:
Former Sec. of State Clinton’s argument is that the country should not tear up with Affordable Care Act and start over again with a new debate would set the country back. Bernie Sanders argued that his Medicare for all plan would cover the 29 million people who still don’t have healthcare.
Sanders said what this debate is really about is whether “we have the guts to stand up to the health insurance industry and the pharmaceutical companies. Clinton pointed out that during the ACA debate Democrats could not get support for the public option. Clinton clearly has been shaped by her experience in the 1990s of trying to pass healthcare reform. The debate within the Democratic Party comes down to whether Democrats should stay on ACA path or take a shot at Medicare for all.
In Krugman’s opinion, the candidates should “focus their main efforts on other issues.” You know, those we haven’t already won, even if the victory was not all we had hoped for. Krugman lists the many problems with pushing for single payer, including the massive influence of the insurance companies, the necessity of raising taxes to pay for it – not only the rich but the middle class – and the disruption to people who already have insurance they are satisfied with.
Krugman makes a powerful argument when he says “progressives must set some priorities,” and calls Sander’s goal of single payer “a quixotic attempt at a do-over, not of a political failure, but of health reform — their biggest victory in many years.” Any president only has so much political capital. There are battles we haven’t fought and won – to any degree whatsoever – that it might make more reasonable objectives for an incoming president.
January 18, 2016
The Republican Party is banking on Marco Rubio to save them from their Cruz/Trump future, but Hillary Clinton showed the GOP a new nightmare by destroying Rubio in minutes on CBS’s Face The Nation.
Marco Rubio is supposed to be the Republican establishment’s great hope who can take the nomination from Trump and Cruz then go on to defeat Hillary Clinton in the fall. This is the story that Republicans and the mainstream media have been telling themselves. The problem is that Marco Rubio isn’t very smart when it comes to foreign policy. He is definitely not as skilled, experience, and intelligent as former Sec. of State Clinton.
The worst nightmare for Republicans is that Rubio somehow wins their nomination then falls flat on his face when debating Clinton. The ease with which Clinton dismantled Rubio’s point should scare Republicans and give voters a reason to respect Bernie Sanders. None of the Republican candidates seem like they would have a chance against Clinton, but Sanders is going toe to toe with her in the early states.
Republicans find themselves hoping that Sanders wins because they think that he would be easier to beat than Hillary Clinton. Former Sec. Clinton tossed Rubio’s point aside like it was nothing.
The Republican establishment better go back to the drawing board, because Marco Rubio looks outmatched against Hillary Clinton.
(Video in link)
Republican Nightmares Come True As Hillary Clinton Destroys Marco Rubio
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/17/republican-nightmares-true-hillary-clinton-destroys-marco-rubio.htmlThe Republican Party is banking on Marco Rubio to save them from their Cruz/Trump future, but Hillary Clinton showed the GOP a new nightmare by destroying Rubio in minutes on CBS’s Face The Nation.
DICKERSON: Good morning, Secretary Clinton.
After this prisoner exchange, Senator Marco Rubio said — quote — “If you take an American hostage, Barack Obama will cut a deal with you, whether it’s Bowe Bergdahl, what he did with the Castro brothers, and now what he’s done with Iran.”
Your reaction to that?
HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I think it’s just typical political rhetoric, and it overlooks some very basic, important issues.
Number one, we always try to get Americans back who are unjustly held. I certainly did when I was secretary of state. And when I was a senator, I advocated for the Bush administration to do the same for people who have been unlawfully held in foreign countries.
Secondly, the important news here is that the Iranian agreement to put a lid on the nuclear weapons program of Iran is being implemented. The Iranians have so far fulfilled their side of the bargain by destroying centrifuges, by shipping out 98 percent or so of their enriched uranium out of their country, even making one of their plutonium reactors under construction no longer able to be ever used because they have poured cement into it.
So, the real issue here is, if you’re committed to making the world safer and to show strong American leadership, you have to engage in patient, persistent diplomacy with people who are not your friends. They are on the other side of a lot of the issues and values that you hold very dear, and that is certainly true for the United States.
Marco Rubio is supposed to be the Republican establishment’s great hope who can take the nomination from Trump and Cruz then go on to defeat Hillary Clinton in the fall. This is the story that Republicans and the mainstream media have been telling themselves. The problem is that Marco Rubio isn’t very smart when it comes to foreign policy. He is definitely not as skilled, experience, and intelligent as former Sec. of State Clinton.
The worst nightmare for Republicans is that Rubio somehow wins their nomination then falls flat on his face when debating Clinton. The ease with which Clinton dismantled Rubio’s point should scare Republicans and give voters a reason to respect Bernie Sanders. None of the Republican candidates seem like they would have a chance against Clinton, but Sanders is going toe to toe with her in the early states.
Republicans find themselves hoping that Sanders wins because they think that he would be easier to beat than Hillary Clinton. Former Sec. Clinton tossed Rubio’s point aside like it was nothing.
The Republican establishment better go back to the drawing board, because Marco Rubio looks outmatched against Hillary Clinton.
(Video in link)
January 18, 2016
After Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D) slammed Gov. Rick Snyder (R-MI) for the ongoing water crisis in Flint, Michigan, the governor voiced displeasure on Monday that she was “politicizing” the situation.
“People can draw their own conclusions, but that’s what it appears to me,” the Republican governor told The Detroit News at a Martin Luther King Day breakfast at the University of Michigan-Flint.
During Sunday night’s Democratic presidential debate, Clinton said that “every single American should be outraged” over the lead-contaminated water, criticizing Snyder for acting “as though he didn’t really care” and saying he “stonewalled” requests for help.
“Obviously, I care,” Snyder told the publication, referencing Clinton’s comments. “I’m here today. We’ve done a number of actions. We’re going to keep working on putting solutions in place.”
He added, “And what I would say is, politicizing the issue doesn’t help matters. Let’s focus in on the solution and how to deal with the damage that was done and help the citizens of Flint and make Flint a stronger community.”
Snyder has apologized in the past for the state’s role in the water crisis. But the consequences of the water crisis may be irreversible. Lead can affect children’s brain development, with “no known level of lead exposure that is considered safe,” according to the World Health Organization.
Flint residents have had to use filters and bottled water since the water became contaminated with lead in April 2014 after the city switched its supply source and treatment, drawing corrosive and polluted water from the Flint River. Previously, Flint’s water source came from Lake Huron. The measure was intended as a cost-cutting move, while the city waited for a new pipeline to Lake Huron to be built. But the switch to river water resulted in spiked lead levels in children. The water supply was switched back to Lake Huron water in December 2015, but contamination concerns remain because the river water likely damaged pipes and other infrastructure, the Detroit Free Press reported.
Flint residents filed a class-action lawsuit last week against Snyder and the state and local governments for not intervening in the water crisis sooner. The lawsuit alleged that officials knowingly replaced safe drinking water with lead-poisoned water and charged residents for it.
Snyder has faced increasing backlash for his slow response to the Flint water crisis. Water was only distributed days after he declared a state of emergency in early January. Flint officials declared a state of emergency on the city level several weeks prior. Last week, Snyder deployed his state’s National Guard, who are going door-to-door to distribute clean drinking water, new filters, and lead testing kits.
Michigan Governor Under Fire For Flint Water Crisis, Blames Clinton For ‘Politicizing’ Issue
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2016/01/18/3740439/gov-rick-snyder-flint-water-politicize/After Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D) slammed Gov. Rick Snyder (R-MI) for the ongoing water crisis in Flint, Michigan, the governor voiced displeasure on Monday that she was “politicizing” the situation.
“People can draw their own conclusions, but that’s what it appears to me,” the Republican governor told The Detroit News at a Martin Luther King Day breakfast at the University of Michigan-Flint.
During Sunday night’s Democratic presidential debate, Clinton said that “every single American should be outraged” over the lead-contaminated water, criticizing Snyder for acting “as though he didn’t really care” and saying he “stonewalled” requests for help.
“Obviously, I care,” Snyder told the publication, referencing Clinton’s comments. “I’m here today. We’ve done a number of actions. We’re going to keep working on putting solutions in place.”
He added, “And what I would say is, politicizing the issue doesn’t help matters. Let’s focus in on the solution and how to deal with the damage that was done and help the citizens of Flint and make Flint a stronger community.”
Snyder has apologized in the past for the state’s role in the water crisis. But the consequences of the water crisis may be irreversible. Lead can affect children’s brain development, with “no known level of lead exposure that is considered safe,” according to the World Health Organization.
Flint residents have had to use filters and bottled water since the water became contaminated with lead in April 2014 after the city switched its supply source and treatment, drawing corrosive and polluted water from the Flint River. Previously, Flint’s water source came from Lake Huron. The measure was intended as a cost-cutting move, while the city waited for a new pipeline to Lake Huron to be built. But the switch to river water resulted in spiked lead levels in children. The water supply was switched back to Lake Huron water in December 2015, but contamination concerns remain because the river water likely damaged pipes and other infrastructure, the Detroit Free Press reported.
Flint residents filed a class-action lawsuit last week against Snyder and the state and local governments for not intervening in the water crisis sooner. The lawsuit alleged that officials knowingly replaced safe drinking water with lead-poisoned water and charged residents for it.
Snyder has faced increasing backlash for his slow response to the Flint water crisis. Water was only distributed days after he declared a state of emergency in early January. Flint officials declared a state of emergency on the city level several weeks prior. Last week, Snyder deployed his state’s National Guard, who are going door-to-door to distribute clean drinking water, new filters, and lead testing kits.
January 18, 2016
“I don’t need to be politically correct,” GOP frontrunner Donald Trump said today during his convocation at Liberty University, where he bragged of a massive crowd and attendance was mandatory for students. As it turns out, Trump didn’t need to be biblically correct, either.
He went on to attempt to quote the Christian Bible, but didn’t quite know how to attribute his chosen passage to the second epistle from which it came. (Note that Liberty University is known for being extremely religious and extremely conservative.)
“Two Corinthians, right?” he asked the crowd, perhaps seeking genuine affirmation that he was, in fact, right. “Two Corinthians, 3:17, that’s the whole ballgame! Where the spirit of the Lord — right? Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty, and here there is Liberty College — er, Liberty University!”
He continued seeking validation, asking, “Is that the one? Is that the one you like? I think that’s the one you like! I loved it!”
After incorrectly identifying the institution at which he was speaking, he summed it up thusly: “It’s so representative of what’s taking place.”
Ain’t that the gospel truth?
(Video in link)
Watch: Liberty University Students Laugh at Trump Quoting From ‘Two Corinthians’
http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-liberty-university-students-laugh-at-trump-quoting-from-two-corinthians/“I don’t need to be politically correct,” GOP frontrunner Donald Trump said today during his convocation at Liberty University, where he bragged of a massive crowd and attendance was mandatory for students. As it turns out, Trump didn’t need to be biblically correct, either.
He went on to attempt to quote the Christian Bible, but didn’t quite know how to attribute his chosen passage to the second epistle from which it came. (Note that Liberty University is known for being extremely religious and extremely conservative.)
“Two Corinthians, right?” he asked the crowd, perhaps seeking genuine affirmation that he was, in fact, right. “Two Corinthians, 3:17, that’s the whole ballgame! Where the spirit of the Lord — right? Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty, and here there is Liberty College — er, Liberty University!”
He continued seeking validation, asking, “Is that the one? Is that the one you like? I think that’s the one you like! I loved it!”
After incorrectly identifying the institution at which he was speaking, he summed it up thusly: “It’s so representative of what’s taking place.”
Ain’t that the gospel truth?
(Video in link)
January 18, 2016
By Zeta Retuculi
Hillary Clinton was smart to praise President Obama at every opportunity at yesterday’s debate in South Carolina. The President’s approval are on the upswing. Both Gallup and Rasmussen daily tracking have him at 49 and now the Washington Post / ABC News poll has him at 51%.
“A bare 51 percent majority of the public approves of President Obama's job performance in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, while 45 percent disapproves. Although tepidly positive, those are Obama's best numbers since May 2013 in Post-ABC surveys.
Obama's rebound is more striking compared with one year ago. Last October, just before Democrats' major losses in the 2014 midterm elections, his approval ratings ranged between 40 percent and 43 percent — the lowest of his presidency. "Strong" disapproval of Obama outpaced strong approval by a roughly 2-to-1 margin.
Today, not only is his approval rating up 11 points from its lowest point, but strong opinions of him are more closely divided; 35 percent strongly disapprove, while 28 percent strongly approve.”
www.washingtonpost.com/…
Good for Hillary to point out Bernie’s efforts back in 2011 to look for primary challenger to President Obama.
It will be hard for Bernie to appeal to African-Americans with his constant dissing of President Obama by talk of revolution.
Poll: Obama’s approval rating is back over 50 percent; Hillary Running on Obama Legacy
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/18/1471313/-Poll-Obama-s-approval-rating-is-back-over-50-percent-Hillary-Running-on-Obama-LegacyBy Zeta Retuculi
Hillary Clinton was smart to praise President Obama at every opportunity at yesterday’s debate in South Carolina. The President’s approval are on the upswing. Both Gallup and Rasmussen daily tracking have him at 49 and now the Washington Post / ABC News poll has him at 51%.
“A bare 51 percent majority of the public approves of President Obama's job performance in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, while 45 percent disapproves. Although tepidly positive, those are Obama's best numbers since May 2013 in Post-ABC surveys.
Obama's rebound is more striking compared with one year ago. Last October, just before Democrats' major losses in the 2014 midterm elections, his approval ratings ranged between 40 percent and 43 percent — the lowest of his presidency. "Strong" disapproval of Obama outpaced strong approval by a roughly 2-to-1 margin.
Today, not only is his approval rating up 11 points from its lowest point, but strong opinions of him are more closely divided; 35 percent strongly disapprove, while 28 percent strongly approve.”
www.washingtonpost.com/…
Good for Hillary to point out Bernie’s efforts back in 2011 to look for primary challenger to President Obama.
It will be hard for Bernie to appeal to African-Americans with his constant dissing of President Obama by talk of revolution.
January 17, 2016
Hillary Clinton is "delighted" he "flip-flopped" on a law shielding gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits.
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Saturday night distanced himself from a law he voted for that gave gun manufacturers and dealers legal immunity, announcing that he supports a bill that would amend the law.
In 2005, Sanders, as a congressman, voted for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a bill backed by the National Rifle Association that shielded gun makers and sellers from being sued if their guns were used to commit crimes. Then-Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois voted against the bill.
Sanders’ new position on the legislation came the night before he was set to face off against Clinton and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley in the last Democratic presidential debate, in Charleston, South Carolina, before the Iowa caucuses Feb. 1 and New Hampshire primary Feb. 9.
Sanders has gradually expressed more of an openness to revisit the law since Clinton’s campaign began to use it as an illustration of his mixed record on gun control. Last June, Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said that the senator would make the same vote for the immunity law were it to come up again. In December, Sanders said that he was open to rethinking the law, but wouldn’t call his vote a mistake. Earlier this month, he said he’d vote to revise it.
(More in link)
Bernie Sanders Backs Bill That Would Undo A Gun Law He Voted For
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-guns_569bac04e4b0778f46f99ef7Hillary Clinton is "delighted" he "flip-flopped" on a law shielding gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits.
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Saturday night distanced himself from a law he voted for that gave gun manufacturers and dealers legal immunity, announcing that he supports a bill that would amend the law.
In 2005, Sanders, as a congressman, voted for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a bill backed by the National Rifle Association that shielded gun makers and sellers from being sued if their guns were used to commit crimes. Then-Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois voted against the bill.
Sanders’ new position on the legislation came the night before he was set to face off against Clinton and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley in the last Democratic presidential debate, in Charleston, South Carolina, before the Iowa caucuses Feb. 1 and New Hampshire primary Feb. 9.
Sanders has gradually expressed more of an openness to revisit the law since Clinton’s campaign began to use it as an illustration of his mixed record on gun control. Last June, Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said that the senator would make the same vote for the immunity law were it to come up again. In December, Sanders said that he was open to rethinking the law, but wouldn’t call his vote a mistake. Earlier this month, he said he’d vote to revise it.
(More in link)
January 15, 2016
Sometimes, even a second set of eyes aren’t enough to keep a monumental blunder from going to print, as a recent advertising flyer for a Martin Luther King, Jr. Day event at an Air Force shooting range demonstrates. Air Force officials in Georgia have pulled down and apologized for a flyer with a photo of the slain civil rights icon advertising a “Martin Luther King, Jr. Fun Shoot”:
Okay, perhaps even a third or fourth set of eyes aren’t enough, either. They got rid of the picture, but they’re still having a Martin Luther King, Jr. Fun Shoot?” What’s on tap for Pearl Harbor Day, a Family Strafing Jubilee?
It’s fine if you want to spend your bonus day off popping off rounds, but maybe don’t brand it with a historical figure who was gunned down by a sniper. This is just one more reason why diversity is important, because for many people, it’s not just another day off or an excuse for a doorbuster sale.
Air Force Officials Apologize For Martin Luther King Day ‘Fun Shoot’ Flyer
http://www.mediaite.com/online/air-force-officials-apologize-for-martin-luther-king-day-fun-shoot-flyer/Sometimes, even a second set of eyes aren’t enough to keep a monumental blunder from going to print, as a recent advertising flyer for a Martin Luther King, Jr. Day event at an Air Force shooting range demonstrates. Air Force officials in Georgia have pulled down and apologized for a flyer with a photo of the slain civil rights icon advertising a “Martin Luther King, Jr. Fun Shoot”:
The flyer advertised a noon gathering on Jan. 18 for the Robins Air Force Base Trap and Skeet Club. An official at the military base’s Outdoor Recreation office said it was created by a marketing team.
“We didn’t make the flyer,” said Leroy Minus, the official. “We squared it away. We got rid of the picture.”
The base, in a statement, called it an “honest mistake.”
Okay, perhaps even a third or fourth set of eyes aren’t enough, either. They got rid of the picture, but they’re still having a Martin Luther King, Jr. Fun Shoot?” What’s on tap for Pearl Harbor Day, a Family Strafing Jubilee?
It’s fine if you want to spend your bonus day off popping off rounds, but maybe don’t brand it with a historical figure who was gunned down by a sniper. This is just one more reason why diversity is important, because for many people, it’s not just another day off or an excuse for a doorbuster sale.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Jul 22, 2015, 02:19 PMNumber of posts: 1,881
