Archive for michigan

SCOTUS upholds Michigan’s Affirmative Action Ban

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Michigan

SCOTUS upholds Michigan’s Affirmative Action Ban (via FreakOutNation)

    The latest news from a SCOTUS that still denies the reality of racism in the US – Today, the Supremes upheld Michigan’s ban on Affirmative Action in college admissions.  To qualify this a bit, if the people of any one state vote to kill Affirmative…

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Freedom Of Speech vs. Freedom of Religion

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Religious

Oh, boy. It seems when you use the US Bill of Rights to defend one extremist position, you might discover yourself trampling on another. And so we find the case in the Michigan City of  Warren, with their Mayor, Jim Fouts.

From THE RAW STORY:

A Michigan mayor who says that he believes in freedom of religion has refused to allow atheists to set up a so-called “Reason Station” inside City Hall, saying it could upset Christians visiting the nearby “Prayer Station.”

Yes, you read that correctly. 'A Prayer Station'' for Christians, good. A 'Reason Station' for Atheists, bad.

As an individual or an organization, you can preach and promote a belief, but you cannot preach or promote logic and reason. That, it seems, is unconstitutional and violates the Bill of Rights.

“I emphasize one thing,” he (Mayor Fouts) added. “The government cannot restrict an individual’s freedom of speech, but an individual cannot restrict the government’s freedom of speech.”

Yet that's exactly what the Mayor did. He restricted freedom of speech. What Fouts seems to have overlooked is what happens when the government restricts an individual's rights to the same freedoms it grants.

Religious Freedom may mean freedom from religion. At least expounding that belief does. But evidently that's not so in the City of Warren, Michigan.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Michigan's Rape Insurance -- A Tragic Catch-22

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

rape

We all know what a Catch-22 is: A situation in which a desired outcome or solution is impossible to attain because of a set of inherently illogical rules or conditions. Or to borrow from the famous New England expression when asked for directions, "You can't get there from here."

And that is the condition in the state of Michigan as of Thursday, March 13, 2014: you can't get there from here.

Legislation known as "The Rape Insurance bill," which passed in the Republican dominated state house has become law. Yes, wake up all you sleepy-head women in Michigan!  As of today, if you get raped, and somehow become preggers despite what Todd Akin said, your insurance will no longer cover an abortion. Well, that's not fully true. Insurance companies can cover this procedure if you purchased a separate rape insurance policy -- in advance.

So, all you have to do is plan ahead for your next rape. C'mon, women - take some personal responsibility! Is that so much to ask? After all, it generally takes two to tango, if you catch my drift.

Just go out and get some rape insurance. Don't make a big to-do out of this. It's for your own protection. I mean we all have auto insurance because everyone gets into a fender bender from time to time. And we hopefully now all have health insurance (ACA) because sooner or later we all have medical issues. So why not just carry rape insurance?

Well, that's a good question. Sadly the answer isn't quite as good. NO INSURANCE CARRIERS IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN CARRY RAPE INSURANCE.

It seems there's a mandated insurance coverage should this situation arise, but not a mandated provider for that coverage. That's the Catch-22. There's where the insanity lies. And that's why you can't get there from here.

This is literally all the Republican's fault. And Gov. Rick Snyder signed the bill into law.

If you want to feel the outrage, listen to Rachel Maddow railing over this last night.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Friday Links

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Friday Links from The Political Carnival

Witch trialImage: Wikipedia

The Long, Sordid History Of Discrimination Against Christians in America

O'Reilly: 'There's gotta be some downside to having a woman president'

Higgins Says Social Security Violating Own Rules on Amherst Closing

Buying a Gun on Facebook Takes 15 Minutes

Western Spy Agencies Infiltrating, Warping World of Online Activism

Harry Reid Slams The Koch Brothers For Lying To The American People About Obamacare

Michigan Democrat taking Koch brothers head on over Obamacare

Jon Stewart blasts Fox News for stoking Arizona homophobes' fear

NC Republican Senate Candidate Is Getting Hammered Over Obamacare

Man who beheaded Greyhound passenger gets unescorted bus trips.

Lemerick, Ireland: Talk about culture is everywhere.

This app is fueling the uprising in Venezuela

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Satan Sides With Michigan RNC Vice Chairman

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

GodHatesFagsw396h256

When you're running for any kind of office, it's always best to tell the truth, speak your mind and let people know where you stand. And when you're elected to office, it's helpful to know what you're doing and how you're serving us.
From HuffPo:

A new candidate for a Michigan seat on the Republican National Committee wants gays "purged" from the GOP and claims homosexuality is a "perversion" created by Satan himself.  Mary Helen Sears of Houghton County in the state's Upper Peninsula, elected vice chair of the Michigan Republican Party's 1st District last year, posted a rant in April on the Schoolcraft County GOP website -- preceded by a warning asking readers to "please use your discretion before taking any decisions based on the information in this blog."

Gee, how considerate of Ms. Sears to offer such a warning. We wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong impression of how she feels in this or any other issue. Face issues head on, I'm sure she always says.

"How do you handle a hungry man? The Manhandlers." That's the old ad slogan for Campbell's Soup. But that was way back in the mid '70s. We're in the 2024 generation. What does the vice chair of the Michigan Republican Party have to say now?

In the post, Sears claimed that homosexuals prey on children, argued that "Satan uses homosexuality to attack the living space of the Holy Spirit" and advocated that Republicans "as a party should be purging this perversion and send them to a party with a much bigger tent."

Where are the looney bin keepers and white-suited men when you need them? Can you believe this woman is a GOP member? On top of that she's a gay basher? And an ignorant hater?

Sadly she's not alone. Take Dave Agema, a former Michigan state lawmaker who has regularly made anti-gay comments and has been condemned by fellow Republicans, including Gov. Rick Snyder. He's also serving on the Michigan Republican National Committee.

Here I thought it was just West Virginia that's suffering the ill effects of tainted water. Surely there much be some leakage of some kind of crazy juice or insane sauce up in Michigan.

Ms. Sears is up in arms over the seeming tolerance of gays in our society. And the same with communism. She's attacking the higher education leaders as well:

...wrote that Communist college professors were indoctrinating young people and claimed that Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory "gave rise to Hitler’s Third Reich, Mussolini’s Italy and Stalin’s Russia."

She's lumped communism into the ills and dangers following any of us who dare allow gays to roam freely, preying on our young along with college professors who are out to corrupt our older children's minds. Paranoid, much?

"If the GOP continues down this trend and stand for perversions and the daily social fad ... The GOP will be truly dead and Satan will have had his day," Sears wrote.

It's at times like this when you can't help wonder who left the door open to the insane asylum.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Balance Budget Or Else -- Cut Your Pay

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Balance the Budget

Well you have to hand it to the Republicans, or actually two of them. Both from Michigan, they want to put their money where their mouth is -- and they want the rest of Congress to join them.

Rep. Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.) on Wednesday proposed a new bill that would require congressional salaries to be cut 15 percent any time Congress fails to balance the budget.

Bentivolio said his Spending Accountability Act, H.R. 3993, is needed to give Congress an incentive to cut the annual budget deficit, which is now at $600 billion per year and expected to rise.

"I think my colleagues need a little more motivation to do the right thing and balance the budget," Bentivolio said Thursday. "They're hitting the American taxpayer in the pocketbook by accumulating so much debt.

Rep. Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.) and his co-sponsor is Rep. Dan Benishek (R-Mich.), and must feel they have no chance at re-election because they're pulling out all of the stops to make one last, desperate attempt to woo voters and to keep their jobs. They're challenging all of their fellow Congress persons to balance the federal budget or take a pay cut. This certainly won't get them invited to too many congressional parties.

Voting against this bill would make the rest of Congress look like the money grubbing representatives they generally are. Gee, I kind of like that. Put up or shut up. 

Of course this bill will never see the light of day, but even if, miracle of miracles, Boehner brought it to the floor, it wouldn't have much effect. If the bill were passed into law, it would not apply to the current Congress due to the 27th Amendment, which says pay adjustments can only apply to the next Congress, not the current one.

But you can't fault these two GOP'ers for trying -- at least they're willing to pay a price for not doing their jobs. Of course when you make a base pay of $174,000 a year, after taking a 15% pay cut, you're still doing okay -- $147,900. Not too shabby for working less that 120 days a year.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

What Is The Purpose of Prison, Punishment Or Rehabilitation?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Prisonw398h248

Why do we send people to prison? One reason is punishment for committing a crime. Another is to rehabilitate those who committed the wrongdoing. What good is locking someone up if they're just going to come out and commit the same or worse crimes? And so, that leads me to this report from ABC News 10 San Diego:

The part that interests me is the rehabilitation part of incarceration. If someone does time and then gets out of the slammer and commits another crime, then their initial stay behind bars was a failure in my eyes. We paid to feed, clothe and house them. Then we send them out to re-commit those crimes or maybe worse, new crimes they learned about while behind bars. In that case, we got nothing in return but more crime. So we didn't do our job.

Now you take Judy Lynn Hayman. She was 23 years old when she escaped from a Midwestern prison 37 years ago. Yesterday she was captured in San Diego where she lived a crime free life for THIRTY-SEVEN YEARS.

Hayman pleaded guilty in June 1976 to a larceny charge in Wayne County, Mich., and was sentenced to serve between 16 months and two years in custody, according to prison officials there.

Ten months later, she escaped from the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility. She remained a fugitive until this week, using various aliases.

Let's consider whatever she did was wrong, non-violent, but wrong. She pleaded guilty and served 10 months time -- perhaps enough for her particular non-violent crime of larceny. Unfortunately, her sentence was for a minimum of 16 months, so her early departure wasn't condoned.

Prison was too barbaric and cruel to her. She felt she was ready to reintegrate into society as a law abiding citizen. She couldn't take it any longer and she took a huge chance and broke out. We may think she was free, but think again.

She lived not only the remainder of her sentence but the ensuing 35 or so years constantly looking over her shoulder, the fear of being discovered and re-apprehended for who she really was, an escaped con. That's a hefty weight to bear. Living in fear can be even more of a punishment than a physical prison.

During that time she gave birth to, raised and supported a son -- he's living crime free so obviously she was a good and strong influence on him and his character or he'd be doing time in a cell like his mom once did.

The point is not whether this woman was right in escaping, but what to do with her now? Should she be charged with unlawful escape and add that onto her prior sentence or should we look at what the purpose was in incarcerating her to start with? She was to be punished, granted. And she did serve 10 months, basically 2/3's of her minimum sentence. But hasn't she proved by her exemplary existence after her escape that she had learned her lesson? Aren't those 30 plus years living in fear worth some credit?

judy-hayman-jpg

I hope the Michigan justice system will take into consideration what for and why they sentence people to jail. I'd prefer a woman or man who's rehabilitated be back on the streets than someone who's served their term and reverts to recidivism. Prison isn't a good environment under any circumstances. Yet it does serve a purpose. But sometimes correctional institutions (notice the word correctional and not punishment) don't do their job. Maybe they did with Judy Lynn Hayman. She's proven she's learned the lesson of her bad ways. I'm hoping Michigan can see that and take it into consideration. We'll see.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare