Archive for elections

GOP Senators Vote Against US Pledge of Allegiance

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

GOP

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all...

That's how the original Pledge of Allegiance goes. But the U.S. Senate, under the leadership of the Republican party, has undertaken to amend the age-old pledge. They're adding "except for minorities, the poor, and women."

It seems the GOP has determined there's a new meaning to phrases or words like "one Nation," "indivisible" and "liberty and Justice for ALL". It used to be that "All" means everyone. "Liberty and Justice" means freedom and fairness. Finally, "one nation" means united, as in the United States. Evidently, gone are the days...

Sadly yesterday the Senate Republicans, voted to trample their pledge. They voted down, as a unit, the Paycheck Fairness Act. Its purpose was to fix a wrong in our nation. It was to close the gap between wages of men and women doing the same job. And this bill would not cost anything. Here's what the proposed law would do, according to THE HILL:

The legislation punishes employers for retaliating against workers who share wage information, and puts the justification burden on employers as to why someone is paid less and allows workers to sue for punitive damages of wage discrimination.

So let's hear it for the patriotic Senate hypocrites from the GOP who swear by their patriotism yet feel it's important to trample on the very tenets of our Pledge of Allegiance. 

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

How Embarrassing - Obamacare Works For Former N.H. GOP Chairman

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Obamacare

Sometimes you can't win for losing, or so the old adage goes. And in New Hampshire, Fergus Cullen, the former chairperson of the Republican party, found himself on the short end of the stick -- by winning. How embarrassing is that? And this whole red-faced situation was provoked by that God-awful federal program called Obamacare.

Here's the problem -- the former chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party will save $1,000 a month in premiums for his family's health care package after signing up for a new policy through the federal Obamacare exchange. This sounds good, but how's he going to explain the windfall to his fellow GOP'ers who staunchly oppose the Affordable Care Act because it's bad? If it's found out that it works, then how do the Republicans in the House explain 50+ votes to defund or abolish it?

Have no fear. He's a Republican so he's found a way to spin it -- he's taking the Rumpelstiltskin approach, only backwards. He's going to take gold and spin it into thread. From HUFFPO:

But Fergus Cullen said the savings aren't enough to turn him into a supporter of the new health care law. He said he anticipates higher out-of-pocket costs with his new Anthem-administered plan, and he's frustrated by what he sees as a lack of information about coverage options. His old plan, which was pricey but covered what he needed, was cancelled by his insurer because it didn't meet Obamacare regulations.

It costs less. Covers more. Guarantees he can't be dropped for pre-existing conditions. Can be carried over regardless of his employer. Yes, it sure does seem like Obamacare has it in for Cullen. Poor guy. He's stuck with savings.

He claims he's forced to carry coverage in the new policy that he probably won't be using. True. He favors the À la carte  method of insurance where you buy only what you need. I wonder if that comes with a crystal ball or tarot cards because how do you know what you'll need until that catastrophic and unexpected surprise comes a knockin' on your door?

Now he'll have all that extra money and as a Republican, he'll probably want to see his savings grow. Lucky for him he has the nearby Foxwoods Indian Gaming Casino. He can try his luck there with $1000/month house money. And if he becomes addicted to gambling, he can blame that on Obamacare. Luckily for him psychological and substance addictions are now covered with the Affordable Care Act.

Damn. Maybe they'll just have to change the expression now to "Obamacare-- you just can't lose for winning."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Lindsey Graham Accused Of Being 'Ambiguously Gay'

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

gayAll politics in South Carolina is loco, I mean local. No, I take that back. With the recent comments by Republican U.S. senatorial candidate Dave Feliciano about sitting Senator Lindsey Graham, there's definitely a bit a craziness going on in the Palmetto state. HuffPo:

Police officer and political novice Dave Feliciano, who is contesting the Republican primary to unseat Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), said on the steps of the South Carolina state House Thursday that Graham is "ambiguously gay."

That dainty, gentlemanly squire from South Carolina, the one with that boyish, Beauregard flamboyance is gay -- or ambiguously gay? "Why I do, declare, how unsportin' of that kindly good-natured man, to be pulling the cotton down over our eyes and passing himself off as straight."

Come to think of it, don't ambiguously gay men participate in all kinds of "unseemly" activities? I guess when you settle in and think some about it, Mister Graham is kind of genteel. He's got smooth, soft skin and always has a determined look on his face. I just figured that it was gas -- even the finest cooked of southern cuisine can do that to a man. It's just so hard to think of him as a Liberace boy. Then again, those pursed lips. That soft-spoken, almost feminine voice. And that heaven-sent southern charm -- haven't seen anything like it since Frank Underwood in House of Cards. I suppose that should have been a give-away. Kevin Spacey, Lindsey Graham. I do see a certain resemblance. And it is a rare sight to see Senator Graham without Senator McCain on his arm. Those two do travel a lot together. Israel. England. France. Say, come to think of it, aren't those countries where gays are openly accepted?

Now all this talk has got me to wondering-- what Lindsey was referring to when he was photographed with that boyfriend of his, Mr. McCain? You know the picture I'm talking about -- the "size" discussion:

McCain Graham

And if it's what I'm thinking about, I'm quite insulted for Lindsey when that old cradle-robbing pervert Sen. McCain referred to Sen. Graham in this photo:

McCain size

Now I'm not one to tell tales out of school, but I did come across this home video. It's been circulatin' around the Mint Julep and Bourbon Society in Charleston for some time now. I was thinking it was just some plantation hoax, but now I'm having some second thoughts. Maybe good ol' Lindsey IS playing for the other side, in an ambiguous way.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Koch Brothers Caught Again In a Lie -- What's Else Is New?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

liars

The Koch brothers put millions of dollars into the anti-Obamacare campaign, and here's what they came up with for all those bucks.

It sure does sound convincing -- heart tugging. Gut wrenching. Here's poor Julie Boonstra painstakingly confessing that she was diagnosed with leukemia five years ago. Then, after Obamacare her health insurance plan was canceled. "Now, the out-of-pocket costs are so high, it's unaffordable," she says in this commercial. It sounds like this lady's gonna die.

What's a poor afflicted woman supposed to do? Damn that Obamacare.

Well, before we do anymore damning, let's examine this a little more closely. I'm sure the Koch brothers won't mind. Thanks to some fact checking at HuffPo:

Before her plan was canceled, Boonstra was paying a $1,100 monthly premium. That's $13,200 a year, without adding out-of-pocket expenses like co-pays and prescription drugs. But under her new plan, the Blue Cross Premier Gold, Boonstra's premiums are down to $571 a month, and out-of-pocket costs are capped at $5,100. That's a maximum annual expense of $11,952 a year.

She's actually saving $1,248 a year with Obamacare. Now why would Ms. Boonstra mislead us like that? It couldn't be political, could it?

Julie Boonstra

Boonstra told The Detroit News she had never been politically active before joining the anti-Obamacare campaign. The newspaper reported her ex-husband, Mark Boonstra, had served as chair of the Washtenaw County GOP, and was appointed by Gov. Rick Snyder (R) to the Michigan Court of Appeals in 2012.

Gotta take her at her word -- for as far as I could throw her. She twisted the situation with her illness, using it to drum up sympathy while lying through her teeth. And then she continues to lie saying she has never been politically active while her husband has been the beneficiary of GOP political appointments. Talk about splitting hairs.

Thanks Koch brothers for another enlightening episode of "My GOP addiction to Koch." As Rev. Al would say, "Nice try, but we gotcha!"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Utah Seeks Political Power By Giving Up 3/4ths Of It

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Salt lake city

Aside from salt and religion, not too much comes out of Salt Lake City -- well, unless you're a Mormon. And most of what I know about being a Mormon I learned from The Book Of Mormon -- the musical. I can't say that lifestyle is for me.

But I don't think that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints members are stupid by any means. They may be horny  (Utah leads the nation in pornographic purchases) but they are pretty savvy as a whole. They number 15 million members world-wide. Yet if they are the motivating factor in this latest scheme to become more relevant in the political world, they may have crested with Mitt Romney and now are walking back from that experiment.

According to The Hill:

In 2016, an unusual state could snatch the coveted first-primary spot away from New Hampshire if its legislature gets its way: Utah

The Utah state House voted overwhelmingly on Monday in favor of a bill that would allow the state to hold its presidential primary a week before any other state in the nation, via an entirely online system, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.

This is quite interesting on a number of levels. First, the primary is to be totally online. Yep, no open polls. Only internet voting. That's pretty progressive if you ask me. The state is 68% Mormon. I just never thought of all of those folks as being so progressive. Actually, the opposite might have been my first thought. I see now that I was wrong. You learn something new every day.

Yet here comes the confusing part. The state wants to up its profile as being politically meaningful. By pushing to become the first state in the nation to hold a primary, a spot normally held by New Hampshire, Utah very well might become more relevant. It could happen. But there's something else that could happen too if they choose to make this move. They'll have to face the wrath of Reince Priebus and the entire RNC.

Currently the state sends 40 delegates to the GOP nominating convention.

If Utah goes through with the change, its 40 GOP delegates to the national convention will be cut down to just nine.

Nine voices for a state that could have 40. That's roughly a 3/4 cut. Does that make them more or less relevant and meaningful or just another small voice at the convention?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

7 Dem. Redcoats Join All GOP Senators Turning Their Backs On The Constitution

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

GOP

GOP

Its was a sad day in Congress yesterday. As I reported, Darrell Issa demonstrated his immature and perhaps disqualifying behavior in a showdown with fellow committee member, Rep. Elijah Cummings. Issa's behavior has him now mocked and ridiculed everywhere except of course, with his main "employer," Fox News.

Elsewhere on the Capitol Hill, the GOP celebrated in infamy a 50th vote to repeal Obamacare. While there hasn't been enough time to vote on a jobs bill, immigration reform or an extension to jobless benefits, Speaker Boehner was able to squeeze in a futile symbolic vote which came up exactly like the last 49 attempts -- without any chance of forward movement. The cost of this clown show of votes in manpower? Millions of dollars in staff hours alone.

Hard as it may be to conceive, there was a greater affront to justice and our Constitution which took place yesterday. It happened in the Senate. The upper house voted on the president's nomination of Debo Adegbile to lead the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.

As Chris Hayes on All In points out, the precedent has been set now. If you have been a practicing attorney and been dealt a high profile case -- and won -- you're not viable for Senate approval as a presidential nominee. By doing your job, and doing it well, you're disqualified.

Our constitution has made clear that as Americans, we have certain rights, though the interpretations vary and that's what drives the religious right and the ultra-right Republicans. They love to hide behind, twist and turn their interpretations of these, especially the right to bear arms,  to freedom of speech and religious beliefs. What they did yesterday was abridge the Bill of Rights -- the sixth amendment. The part of that amendment that I'm referring to "... to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence [sic]."

HuffPo:

All Republicans and a handful of Democrats voted to sink Debo Adegbile’s nomination to lead the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. The overriding reason for their opposition was that he once represented Mumia Abu-Jamal, a death row inmate convicted 30 years ago of killing a Philadelphia police officer.

Adegbile did not make the decision to take on the case. When he became the head of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund in 2012, the group was already representing Abu-Jamal, and Adegbile continued to do so on a narrow constitutional issue. In other words, he was just doing his job by advocating for his client.

Using this litmus test to disqualify people from high government office, we'd have to veto Conservative hero Chief Justice John Roberts and the late President John Adams. They both defended and successfully gained acquittal for their clients accused of heinous or treasonous crimes. All Adegbile did was seek justice as was his obligation under the law. And he didn't get a guilty man freed, he got the sentence moved from death to life -- both would keep him off the streets. I pause to wonder if this victim of this murder was a black carpenter instead of a white cop if we'd even be having this discussion.

As Chris Hayes commented on the Republicans and Democrats who voted down this nomination based on providing adequate legal defense (and by the way, winning) to a defendant in court, "Shame on you, senators!"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

What Does Rand Paul Win In CPAC Straw Poll Really Mean?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

CPAC

Well, once again, Rand Paul has won the CPAC straw poll and the hootin' and hollerin' has already begun. The conservatives have spoken and the junior senator from Kentucky has been ordained "their man." Lord knows we're still eons away from them picking "their woman." That just wouldn't be socially acceptable to the old white man's club for boys.

Anyway, what's this overwhelming win for Paul really mean? How good of a predictor of the future is this victory? Well, to borrow loosely from Texas Senator Rafael 'Ted' Cruz, you should ask former Presidents, Rudy Giuliani, Steve Forbes, Ron Paul, George Allen and Jack Kemp — all of whom flamed out spectacularly in the GOP presidential primaries.

Edwin Starr

Remember the song, "War", by the legendary Edwin Starr? It was a big Motown hit back in 1969. Courtesy of Indylyrics, its refrain was:

War, huh, good God
What is it good for
Absolutely nothing
Listen to me...

If you replace the word "war" with "CPAC Straw Poll" you might have the true context of this "important" Rand Paul victory.

Yet if it does have any meaning as an indicator of things to come, look at the other results of yesterday's poll. Look at who came in behind Paul -- the other horses in the race according to Business Insider:

Here's the Top 9:

  • Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul — 31 percent
  • Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — 11 percent
  • Ben Carson — 9 percent
  • New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — 8 percent
  • Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — 7 percent
  • Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum — 7 percent
  • Florida Sen. Marco Rubio — 6 percent
  • Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan — 3 percent
  • Texas Gov. Rick Perry — 3 percent

So the conservatives have spoken and soundly so. By nearly a three to one margin, they picked Paul over Ted Cruz. That's huge. That's so far behind that you can't even hear the band playing in the front of the hall. Then you get a neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson.

Dr. Who?

The good doctor polled even better than much ballyhoo'd Chris Christie. Seems his reputation's carrying around a few extra pounds of tarnish. Then you get the rest of the clowns who piled into the conservative car.

The GOP, at least the conservative wing anyway, has nothing much to offer up but a lot of noise and echos of former presidents past, Rudy Giuliani, Steve Forbes, Ron Paul, George Allen and Jack Kemp. Now ask yourselves, conservatives, "How's that working out for ya?"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare