Ya just gotta love it. Via Heather.
Gotta love Elizabeth Warren. Despite the distractions that her eager fans have stirred up with huzzahs for her perceived run for the White House in 2016, she's digging in her heels and protecting us -- the working class. She's fighting big banks again and thankfully so. With a little bit of luck, Glass-Steagall, here we come.
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) warned in a speech Tuesday that the problem of banks considered "too big to fail" has only gotten worse since the 2008 financial crisis, potentially sowing the seeds of a future crisis.
"Today, the four biggest banks are 30 percent larger than they were five years ago. And the five largest banks now hold more than half of the total banking assets in the country," Warren said in a keynote address at a conference on the future of financial reform put on by the Roosevelt Institute, a think tank. "Who would have thought five years ago, after we witnessed firsthand the dangers of an overly concentrated financial system, that the 'too big to fail' problem would only have gotten worse?"
Well, E.W.'s game for a showdown. Watch this and you'll see why she's drawing more attention lately than Hillary Clinton. The big difference between these two wonderful ladies is that one is doing her damnedest to become American's first female President and the other is ordained to become so. Let's put the 2016 election aside and not lose sight of an impending issue. Banks are banking on E.W. falling short. They're scared. And listening to her, they and we all should be.
Well, I guess this has to be expected. The Republicans prove once again they are a people of their convictions -- anti-gay, anti-equality, anti-women's rights, anti-immigrant and anti-anything fair and just. They're back to their old tricks. They're the obstructionist party.
If a return to slavery came up, Speaker Boehner would most certainly bring it to the floor for a vote. After all, oppression is the "O" in the GOP. And without slavery, the price or running a small business has increased. That's not good for business. And Boehner's party is already grumbling about the child labor laws. What's the problem with kids working for a dollar a day for 12 hours a day. They're young. They can handle it. Forget giving them an education. Leave that to the white rich kids. And think of the savings to business if the weren't taxed for education. Given a chance, Boehner would do away with the minimum wage, too.
Today, the Senate is poised to pass ENDA: the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. And what does that bill do? It protects individuals rights so that workers can't be fire for their sexual orientation. Mind you, this is not a quota bill, it doesn't force any business to hire or have a certain percentage of LGBT employees. It just guarantees that they can't be fired just because of their sexual orientation.
Where's the controversy there?
Passing the bill in the Senate is very important. But it appears it's the yellow brick road leading up to a house run by the Wicked Warlock of Oz, Speaker Boehner. Throw open the curtain and you'll find the same warlock who caused the government shutdown for his own selfish, personal reasons. He's a petulant child who belongs in Oz. He's a coward,who lacks a heart and a brain.
He doesn't like anyone other that old, white, conservative gentiles. He's anti-Semitic -- not one Jew on his executive staff, he's anti-black and immigration -- look at his refusal to bring up SNAP votes and a pathway to citizenship for immigration. He's against women's rights, and was on record against the Lilly Ledbetter legislation. This is the Right-wing party leader.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) affirmed on Monday morning that he would oppose a law that would prohibit discrimination against gay and lesbian employees in the workplace, citing the possibility that it would put a financial burden on businesses.
How does this moron see this as an additional cost burden on business? Fairness in hiring doesn't cost a penny more. Breaking the law might cost additionally, but that's the reason we have these laws. To protect businesses and workers. The Speaker claims there will be more frivolous lawsuit claims. Maybe in his office. But not in the real world.
It's against the law to turn down hiring minorities. It's against the law to pay women less than men for an equal position. That doesn't change the cost of the business. It's a matter of practice, fairness and not cost.
Grow up, Boehner. Picking on minorities doesn't make you a bigger man, it makes you a child. A petulant one at that. So why don't you travel down that yellow brick road with Dorothy and Toto and if you're lucky, you'll find what you're lacking-- a heart, courage and a brain.
With the numerous polls out there on the media today, you can get a pulse of what people are thinking on almost every subject. How accurate they are depends on so many things -- especially the honesty of the people answering the survey. I'm sure the pollsters figure in the goofy answers, a percentage for lying, something else for people giving emotional answers or wanting to seem more tolerant than they really are. There's faked indignation, righteous and moral outrage and just simply stupid people who don't even understand the question.
So what are we to make of pundits and news readers when they say someone's popularity is at it's lowest or that the public favors a certain bill or law?
A lot has to do with where it comes from. Nate Silver was very accurate in the last presidential election predictions. I think he batted a thousand -- for non-sports lovers, that means he got 'em all right. All is a lot. That's like -- everything.
How many other places, organizations or polls have that kind of clairvoyance? Well, really not many, if any. Luck has a lot to do with it. But if you take luck out of the equation, and use proven fact, what you get are graphs and charts. They're far more reliable than polls because they measure what's really happened. It's after the fact number crunching.
Cenk Uygur broadcast a report on The Young Turks showing statistically how senators voted in the recent sessions of the 107th through the 111th (we're in the 113th currently) congress voted. Then those votes are compared those with wishes of their constituents during that time. Kind of a facts meets the polls hybrid kind of research.
The results are quite interesting. For instance, how often do the senators really listen to their constituents? Always? Sometimes? Never?
Well, now there's some proof and it might come as a shocking. What if I told you senators during these five sessions voted 100%* of the time with their constituents wishes? You'd be right. See, I said you'd be shocked.
Oh, if you were wondering about that little asterisk next to the 100%. That asterisks means, if you were wealthy. The numbers vary if you weren't in the upper 2%. The rich as we like to call them. Middle class people fared less positively, and it ranges down to 0% if you were poor. No asterisk needed for that. Pure zero.
Take a look and it'll all become much clearer. But what it boils down to is this-- if you have money, you got your desired vote. If you were poor, fuggedaboudit. You got bubkis.
Maybe this behavior explains why 60% of polling respondents to NBC News want to fire the entire Congress and start anew. But, taking into considering of the facts in the video above, that would mean that nobody would lose their seat as the rich are getting exactly what they want. They'll just buy the elections is necessary -- are you listening Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson?
Next election, think about it. Maybe a clean sweep wouldn't be so bad. A "Dump the Chump" vote might just be the cure for what ails ya! All of ya!
Think of this collection of talent: a who’s who of A-list Hollywood stars — Leonardo DiCaprio, Cameron Diaz, Jerry Seinfeld, Ben Stiller and Ben Affleck. Add to that group Danny DeVito, Jack Black, Jon Hamm, Nicolas Cage, Leonard Nimoy and director Woody Allen. There's more Oscar's there than at a de la Renta boutique. It's bound to be a hit, no matter what they call the project.
Well, it's not a movie. It's not a play. It's real life and these are among the many Hollywood venerables who have made contributions to the Alison Lundergan Grimes senatorial campaign in Kentucky. Her opponent? Mitch McConnell.
Yikes, talk about the battle of the heavyweights. Hollywood vs. McConnell. How did Mitch stir up that kind of hornets nest?
The outpouring of celebrity support comes amid a concerted effort by Jeffrey Katzenberg, one of Hollywood’s most prominent Democratic donors, to put Senate Minority Leader McConnell in the electoral bull’s-eye. HuffPo:
In a recent email drumming up support for Lundergan Grimes, Katzenberg cast McConnell as the chief Republican roadblock to Democrats’ agenda. He wrote that the Kentucky contest is “a pivotal election that can get the Senate working again.”
“There is no more important election being held next year in this country,” Katzenberg added, according to the email, per The Hollywood Reporter.
“As the Senate’s minority leader since 2007, McConnell has used the filibuster 420 times to block legislation and appointments that were supported by a clear majority of senators. ... We are talking about outright obstruction of the democratic process.”
And just so you know that the democrats aren't alone in their disdain for Mitch which rhymes with... Here's how the conservative Republicans, McConnell's own meat and potatoes supporters look at him:
This certainly is shaping up to be the must see
film, campaign of 2014, don't you think?
The Political Carnival T-Shirt
Modeled by @suzannegypsy
Lt. Col Barry Wingard is the lawyer for Gitmo detainee Fayiz Al-Kandari. For their ongoing story + related topics, please click on the link below:
Kuwaiti Citizen Detained at Guantanamo since 2002
The Political Carnival is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
Photographs on The Political Carnival site (please read):
Photographs from other sources sometimes appear on TPC for humorous or illustrative purposes. As it is not our intention to use these images in any inappropriate manner or to infringe upon any rights held by others, anyone holding legal rights in the use of these images who wishes to have them taken down please contact us immediately requesting such removal, with which we will comply promptly.