“This newspaper gave me a paper cut.”
Mailing things.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
17 Things Politicians Do That We All Stopped Doing A Long Time Ago
↧
↧
Another Republican Senate Candidate Is A Plagiarist
Copy+Paste
A Republican senate candidate in Nebraska appears to have heavily plagiarized his position on immigration from a Michele Bachmann press release, Arizona Sen. John McCain's immigration reform plan, and a report from the Federation for Immigration Reform. In many instances, Omaha banker Sid Dinsdale's text is exactly the same as another text.
Dinsdale is vying with tea party favorite Ben Sasse and establishment favorite Shane Osborn for Nebraska's open U.S. Senate seat that is being vacated by the retiring Sen. Mike Johanns.
Here's Bachmann:
The last time our immigration laws were overhauled was in 1986, with amnesty granted to three million illegal immigrants. At the time, Americans voters were led to believe this would solve our immigration problem. However, since then the number of illegal immigrants has quadrupled (by conservative estimates). Rather than repeating the mistakes of the past, we must do everything we can to secure our nation's borders. We need to push for more Border Patrol officers, and stand by them. We need to complete the border fence across the entire US-Mexico frontier, make E-Verify mandatory, and eliminate funding for states and cities that knowingly harbor illegal immigrants.
Additionally, states like Arizona must not be ostracized for trying to protect their borders, simply codifying state enforcement of federal law, nor should they face reprisal from a federal government that has failed in its responsibility to enforce immigration laws.
And here's Dinsdale:
The last time our immigration laws were overhauled was in 1986, when amnesty was granted to three million illegal immigrants. At the time, we were made to believe that this would solve our immigrant problem but since then, the number of illegal immigrants has, by conservative estimates, quadrupled. We know now that amnesty is not an option. Rather than repeating the mistakes of the past, we must do everything we can to secure our nation's borders. However, it is foolish to believe that a one-size-fits-all approach is what will work. We need more border patrol agents, to complete the fence, to increase surveillance and border enforcement technology along our southern border, to make E-Verify mandatory, to empower states and localities to enforce immigration laws, and to eliminate funding for states and cities that knowingly house illegal immigrants.
Additionally, states must not be ostracized for trying to protect their borders nor should they face reprisal from a federal government that has failed in its responsibility to enforce immigration laws.
Here's the FAIR:
Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality.
Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.
And here's Dinsdale:
Illegal immigration costs United States taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. State and local governments absorb the bulk of the costs — some $84 billion —.
The annual outlay that an illegal alien cost United States taxpayers is an annual amount per native-headed household of nearly $1,000 after accounting for estimated tax collections.
Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. State and local governments absorb nearly all of those costs.
At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.
↧
These Are The Members Of The Benghazi Select Committee
House Speaker John Boehner announced Friday the names of the seven Republicans chosen to serve on the select committee on Benghazi. Democrats have yet to announce which, if any, members will serve on the committee investigating the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)
Via jordan.house.gov
Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Illinois)
Rep. Martha Roby (R-Alabama)
Via roby.house.gov
Rep. Trey Gowdy (Chairman) (R-South Carolina)
↧
Gun Rights Letter Signed By Rand Paul Takes Obama Insanely Out Of Context
“[To ban guns]”
This is a mailer from the National Association for Gun Rights. Inside is a fundraising letter sent by Sen. Rand Paul:
Via Facebook: CoalitiontoStopGunViolence
This is the full quote:
"In the coming weeks, I'll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens — from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators — in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We can't accept events like this as routine."
This is the text of Rand Paul's letter from the NAGR's website:
Via nagr.org
↧
Federal Court Considers Whether To Stop Texas Execution Set For Next Week
“When our system tolerates secrecy, constitutional abuses — such as the tortured death of Mr. [Clayton] Lockett — occur,” lawyers for Texas death row inmate Robert James Campbell argue about last week’s botched execution in Oklahoma. Lawyers for Texas say their state’s process is different. [ Update : The judge ruled against stopping the upcoming execution.]
The death chamber is seen at the federal penitentiary in Huntsville, Texas, Sept. 29, 2010.
Handout / Reuters
WASHINGTON — A federal judge is considering Friday whether to stop an execution scheduled for May 13 in Texas because lawyers for the man, Robert James Campbell, say Texas' "failure to disclose" information about the drug it plans to use could lead to a situation like last week's botched execution in Oklahoma.
The state, however, responded earlier this week that Campbell's claims are "foreclosed by Fifth Circuit precedent, and recent problems in another state following an entirely different execution procedure do nothing to change this fact."
As for Texas' procedures, the lawyers for the state noted, the state's single-drug protocol using phenobarbital has been approved by the courts and used as recently as April 16 with the execution of Jose Villegas.
In contrast to Oklahoma, the lawyers noted, Texas "has carried out three executions with the same drug from the same supplier, which is vastly different from the situation in Oklahoma in which an admittedly new protocol was used."
Regarding Texas's protocol, they write:
Defendants now intend to use pentobarbital from a licensed compounding pharmacy within the United States, and the pentobarbital to be used was independently tested at 108% potency. Any concerns about the drug's origin and reliability are alleviated once the drug has been tested and its potency confirmed, both which have been done here.
In a reply filed Thursday, Campbell's lawyers countered that "what is precisely the same in Oklahoma and Texas is the states' insistence on shrouding the process in secrecy."
The state has refused to say where it obtained the latest batch of phenobarbital from, beyond stating that it is from "a licensed compounding pharmacy within the United States." Campbell's lawyers go on:
It is transparency that holds government accountable, and permits death sentenced inmates to protect their constitutional rights. When our system tolerates secrecy, constitutional abuses – such as the tortured death of Mr. Lockett – occur.
The Friday morning hearing on the request for a temporary restraining order to halt the execution is due to continue Friday afternoon.
↧
↧
Tea Party Candidate From Tennessee Plagiarizes Obama And Romney
Non-partisan plagiarism.
Via facebook.com
Brenda Lenard, a Republican candidate for Senate in Tennessee, appears to have plagiarized from a number of sources on her issues page including Senator John Boozman of Arkansas, former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, and even the official White House page.
Here's Lenard:
American private sector job creation is essential to our nations economic growth and the revitalization of the American spirit. As the former CEO of a mid-size construction firm, I am committed to supporting legislation that will ensure that American businesses once again thrive. This begins with a broad range of market-based solutions that will help turn the economy around by encouraging private sector job creation and economic growth.
Entrepreneurs are the heart beat of our nation's economy, and we need to equip investors and entrepreneurs with the necessary resources that are required to ensure they make sound financial decisions. In order to make this a reality we must reduce regulatory burdens imposed by government agencies, reform our tax code, curb spending, increase exports by passing pending free trade agreements and create a new energy policy that permits America to utilize the resources already in place which will reduce our nation's dependency on foreign oil.
And here's Boozman:
American private sector job creation is needed and I am committed to supporting legislation that will help Arkansas businesses succeed. This begins with a broad range of market-based solutions that will help turn the economy around by encouraging private sector job creation and economic growth.
To encourage investment in small business, the heart of our nation's economy, we need to provide business owners and investors with the predictability they need to make sound investment decisions. In order to accomplish this we need to rein in spending, reform our tax code, reduce regulatory burdens imposed by government agencies, increase exports by passing pending free trade agreements and create a new energy policy that allows us to use American resources and make us less dependent on foreign oil.
↧
This Is The Weirdest New Thing In Modern Politics
Anyone got the soundtrack to chariots of fire?
#mcconnelling is a fun game started by John Stewart, mocking Mitch McConnell's release of an awkward b-roll video.
Putting hilarious music over McConnell's campaign b-roll became an internet sensation.
And thanks to Mitch, we now have days of Youtube mockery to enjoy.
↧
Arkansas Judge Strikes Down State Ban On Same-Sex Marriage
“THIS COURT HEREBY FINDS the Arkansas constitutional and legislative ban on same-sex marriage through Act 144 of 1997 and Amendment 83 is unconstitutional.” [ Update : The state is seeking an immediate stay.]
Attorney General Dustin McDaniel
Arkansas Circuit Court Judge Christopher Piazza
WASHINGTON — A state judge in Arkansas declared his state's ban on marriages between same-sex couples to be unconstitutional, the latest of several judges to have done so since the Supreme Court struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act last June.
Circuit Court Judge Christopher Piazza issued the decision — finding both a state statute and constitutional amendment to violate the U.S. Constitution — following a hearing in the case last month.
The ruling, posted to the court's docket at 4:51 p.m. Friday, did not include a stay. As such, if no stay is granted by Monday morning, when clerks' offices re-open, it is expected that — as happened in Utah and Michigan — same-sex couples will seek to marry at that time.
Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, a Democrat who last week said he supports same-sex couples' marriage rights but would continue defending the state's ban on such marriages, will appeal the ruling.
"We respect the Court's decision, but, in keeping with the Attorney General's obligation to defend the state constitution, we will appeal. We will request that Judge Piazza issue a stay of his ruling so as not to create confusion or uncertainty about the law while the Supreme Court considers the matter," per a statement McDaniel's spokesman provided to the Arkansas Times.
Piazza is running unopposed for re-election on May 20 for his judgeship, to which he was first elected in 1990. The circumstances make his ruling different from the federal judges — who have lifetime tenure — to have ruled in favor of marriage equality.
Under the U.S. Constitution, Piazza ruled, "The Arkansas marriage laws implicate both a fundamental right and the rights of a suspect or quasi-suspect class." The fundamental right at issue is the right to marry and the class at issue is same-sex couples, per Piazza's ruling.
Although he believed such heightened or strict scrutiny could be applied to the challenge — making it more likely the ban would be struck down — he did not believe the level of scrutiny ultimately mattered:
↧
Gay St. Louis And City's Mayor Welcome Michael Sam With "Open Arms"
“Michael Sam scoring a touchdown, see Michael Sam tearing through an offensive line…. That will help take Missouri into the 21st century,” says the state’s only out gay legislator.
Michael Sam playing for the Missouri Tigers.
Kevin Jairaj/Usa Today Sports
ST. LOUIS — St. Louis' city leaders were already gathered last night for an LGBT equality fundraiser, which turned suddenly into a celebration of the hometown Rams' decision to draft the out gay defensive star Michael Sam in Saturday night's NFL draft.
Sam will be "received with open arms by the city of St. Louis, no question about it," Mayor Francis Slay, among those gathered for the fundraiser, told BuzzFeed.
"He's a football player, and a very talented football player," Slay said. "With the Rams – everyone is part of the team, regardless of your sexual orientation, regardless of your political views, regardless of your ethnic background or race."
The mayor was at City Hall Saturday night for Urbanaire, the annual fundraising gala of PROMO, Missouri's statewide LGBT equality organization. Most every queer politico, activist, and ally from around the city and state were gathered under one roof, from P-FLAG families of the suburbs to the urban health workers of St. Louis Effort for AIDS.
And when A.J. Bockelman, PROMO's Executive Director, took the mic, he had some surprisingly well-timed and historic breaking news to share: Michael Sam had not only just been drafted, but he had been picked up by the Rams.
Meaning their home team has the first "openly gay player in the NFL."
And the crowd went wild.
Cheering with particular glee were Slay and his lesbian sister, Monietta Slay, co-hosts of the party. (The Slay siblings, intimately involved in LGBT politics here, also have two gay brothers.) When Mayor Slay took the mic, he had his own gay sports news to be proud about, as he shared that "In 2016, St. Louis will be the first US city to host the Out Games."
Missouri is a conservative state, Mayor Slay granted. But "St. Louis is a very gay-friendly city. It received a 100 score, a perfect score, from HRC, the Human Rights Campaign, for cities relative to LGBT services and issues," he told BuzzFeed. St. Louis was also the only part of the state to vote against a ban on same-sex marriages.
State Representative Mike Colona, the first and only openly gay member of Missouri's House of Representatives, said that Sam will be welcomed in St. Louis, and that he hoped his reputation as a college star would help him in the rest of the state.
"There are a lot of folks in the state of Missouri, whether they live in a metro or rural area, that are up to speed with the University of Missouri football program," Colona said. Those people, he thinks, will know what an excellent player Sam is regardless of his sexuality, and won't think much of it.
"But a lot of folks," he concedes, haven't followed Sam's college career, and they may "scratch their head and say, 'Hey, we've got this guy who is a gay player, playing for us." He thinks Sam may have "a learning curve where he will have to prove to some people who are not familiar with his collegiate statistics" what he's about, "but he'll do it [because] he's a great football player and he's going to help the Rams increase their record!"
"When my friends who are still in rural Missouri see Michael Sam scoring a touchdown, see Michael Sam tearing through an offensive line, see Michael Sam excelling at whatever they have him do? All of a sudden, that will change hearts and minds. That will help take Missouri into the 21st century," he said.
Across town from City Hall on the edge of The Grove, St. Louis' gayborhood, the TVs at The Rehab were tuned to the draft since Kyle Hanten, the bar manager arrived in the afternoon.
"They aired it on ESPN, and he got the news that he was drafted, and he kissed his boyfriend, and that's a huge deal!" Hanten recalled, thinking it was a "historic" moment a lot of people will remember as clearly as news of "the first same-sex marriages."
"Never did I ever expect to see two men kissing on ESPN," he said.
When the Rehab crowd saw the now-famous video, "Everyone cheered and clapped for their initial kiss," Hanten said, touched. But "then they showed them feeding cake to each other, which obviously was, like, egged on by the camera crew," which he thought was a bit much.
The gay St. Louis crowd, their bartender said, "Was like, 'All right, we get it, don't ruin the moment!" he laughs. "It was almost overbearing, like rubbing it in [viewers] faces." (Not that Hanten is opposed to romance. He and his fiancé will get legally married in Iowa later this year and have a wedding in Missouri.)
When it comes to Rams fans, Hanten predicted that, "Honestly, at the end of the day, the fans will care more whether [Sam] performs well, not whether he's sleeping with a woman or with a man. They want to see the Rams go to the Superbowl! They won't care if the MVP was a homosexual man."
"I haven't heard any negative reaction," he said before pausing and adding, "However, I am at a gay bar and everyone is gay."
↧
↧
25 Pics Politicians Posted Of Their Moms On Mothers Day
Politicians have moms, too.
John Boehner
Nancy Pelosi
Harry Reid
Steny Hoyer
↧
In 2004, Obama Judicial Nominee Tried To Protect The "Sanctity Of Marriage" From "Activist Judges"
The president’s controversial pick for the federal bench gave a speech on the floor of the Georgia state legislature to fight against judges expanding marriage rights to same-sex couples.
WASHINGTON — Georgia state Judge Michael Boggs, whom President Obama hopes to elevate to the federal bench, railed against "activist judges" intent on expanding marriage rights to same-sex couples in a speech on the floor of the Georgia legislature in 2004.
"I think it's important to recognize the dangers that we face with respect to activist judges," Boggs, then a Democratic state legislator, said in the speech supporting an amendment to the Georgia constitution banning marriage equality. Boggs said the amendment would give Georgia "an additional safe card" to guard against marriage equality in the years after the state passed a defense of marriage act.
Boggs warned that a vote against a bill allowing for a referendum on the state constitutional amendment would endanger biblical values.
"I tell you that and I submit to you that whether you're a Democrat or whether you're a Republican, whether you're rural, from a rural area, like myself, or whether you represent an urban area, we have opportunities seldom in my short tenure in the legislature to stand up for things that are commonsensical, things that are premised on good conservative Christian values, and in this instance in particular, to support the sanctity of marriage," Boggs said. "I'm going to ask all of you, like me, to support this proposition."
The Obama administration has defended the Boggs pick in the past. A White House aide told BuzzFeed in February that critics of the nomination ignore that Boggs has "proven that he can set aside personal views and follow the law" during his 10 years on the Georgia state bench. BuzzFeed was unable to contact anyone at the Georgia state appeals court for comment Sunday.
The White House has been under fire from progressives over the Boggs nomination in recent weeks, with usual allies in the women's rights, LGBT rights, and African-American communities condemning the president for the selection.
Boggs tenure in the Georgia legislature has fueled most of the criticisms. While a state lawmaker, Boggs publicly supported abortion restrictions and the Confederate flag. He opposed legalizing marriage for same-sex couples. The 2004 video shows he also opposed the kind of judicial action expanding marriage rights that has been a hallmark of Obama's time in office.
The Obama administration has mounted a strong defense of Boggs, who was nominated as part of a deal with Georgia's Republican senators to prevent them from blocking the president from filling empty slots on the Georgia federal district court.
In February, White House counsel Kathy Reummler dismissed Boggs' critics in an interview with the Huffington Post.
"Do we work with Republican senators to find a compromise, or should we leave the seats vacant?" she said. "We believe it would be grossly irresponsible for the president to leave these seats vacant."
Boggs' nomination goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, setting up a battle between the president and powerful figures in his base in a Democratically-controlled committee chamber. So far, few Democratic members of the committee beyond Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal have commented on the progressive criticisms of Boggs. Blumenthal told BuzzFeed in March he thought there were "legitimate and important questions" about Boggs' record.
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentleman of the House, many of you, like me, earlier today were wondering if we would have an opportunity to vote on Senate Resolution 595.
I want tell you that uh, that obviously it is a simple proposition, albeit one that is not without controversy and I understand that and can respect differing opinions.
But I want to stand before you today and tell you that it's my opinion that, both as a Christian and as a lawyer and as a member of this House, that it's our opportunity to stand up in support of this resolution. I think it's important to recognize the dangers that we face with respect to activist judges, with respect to mayors who are operating in derogation of current state law.Many folks have asked, well why do we need this particular proposed constitutional amendment in light of the Defense of Marriage Act, which is codified in 19-3-3.1? Many of you know that in 1998, the Georgia Supreme Court struck down Georgia's sodomy laws and I found it interesting that the lone dissent in that case by Justice Carley, speaking with respect to the state regulating the private sexual conduct of consenting adults, that Justice Carley indicated that quote, "Just because, that because, this right is not in the context, or in the text of the Constitution, its boundaries are necessarily unclear."
Other states have similar prohibitions against same-sex marriages. In Hawaii, for example, um, the state Supreme Court has struck down a statute similar to that that is codified in Georgia law. Same has been done in Alaska.
I submit to you that proposing a constitutional amendment that in fact mirrors the language, for the most part, that is codified in Georgia's Defense of Marriage Act, will give us an additional safe card. It will, in fact, prohibit state constitutional challenges to the proposition that is outlined in Georgia law already. That's important, it will not affect federal challenges, but it will affect state challenges.
I tell you that and I submit to you that whether you're a Democrat or whether you're a Republican, whether you're rural, from a rural area, like myself, or whether you represent an urban area, we have opportunities seldom in my short tenure in the legislature to stand up for things that are commonsensical, things that are premised on good conservative Christian values, and in this instance in particular, to support the sanctity of marriage.
I'm gonna ask all of you, like me, to support this proposition and I ask for your favorable consideration.
Thank you.
↧
Iowa Republican Senate Candidate Still Thinks Iraq Had WMDs
Rising Iowa senate candidate Joni Ernst told the Des Moines Register board in a meeting last Friday she still believes Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
"I do have reason to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," Ernst said.
Here's the full video:
"We don't know that there were weapons on the ground when we went in, however, I do have reason to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That was the intelligence that was operated on. I have reason to believe there was weapons of mass destruction. My husband served in Saudi Arabia as an Army Central Command sergeant major for a year and that's a hot-button topic in that area."
↧
CNN International Doesn't Know Where Ukraine Is
↧
↧
Key Republican: "Burden" On GOP To Keep Benghazi Committee From Becoming "Kangaroo Court"
“I do think there’s a special burden on the Republicans,” Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole, the deputy whip of the House, said on NewsmaxTV . “If this becomes what appears to be a kangaroo court then I think that will backfire; that will hurt us. If it looks like we’re trying to exploit a nation tragedy instead of get to the bottom of it, learn lessons, hold people accountable if necessary. That will hurt.”
↧
NYPD To Stop Seizing Condoms From Suspects As Evidence Of Prostitution
At a press conference Monday, New York Mayor Bill De Blasio said changing the policy is “the right thing to do.”
AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews
The New York City Police Department announced Monday it will no longer seize condoms as evidence of prostitution against suspected sex workers, a policy for which the department has long received criticism from community activists, HIV/AIDS health advocates, and civil rights organizations.
Police Commissioner William J. Bratton said the NYPD will instruct officers to instead hold unused condoms with other personal items and will return them when the individual is released from police custody in cases of suspected prostitution. However, police will continue to confiscate condoms and use them as evidence in other prostitution-related cases, such as sex trafficking and promoting prostitution.
Community health and sex workers' advocates said the previous policy was at odds with other public health initiatives, such as distributing free condoms throughout the city. And civil rights groups say the policy unfairly targeted transgender women, who they say are profiled as sex workers by police, leading some to fear carrying multiple condoms or any condoms at all.
Legislation that would ban police from seizing condoms finally passed in the New York State Assembly last year after being introduced for over a decade, but the measure has since been stalled.
"The NYPD heard from community health advocates and took a serious look at making changes to our current policy as it relates to our broader public safety mission," Bratton said in a statement Monday. "This is a reasonable approach to targeting the most at risk community as it relates to safer sex practices and continuing to build strong cases against the vast criminal enterprise associated with prostitution."
The policy shift reflects how prosecutors across the city view the issue — with top prosecutors across the city's five boroughs saying that while they either do not use condoms as evidence when prosecuting cases involving prostitution or rarely see prostitution cases go to trial, using condoms as evidence in cases involving sex trafficking, rape, and other situations is important.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., said his office hasn't used condoms in prostitution cases for over a year and welcome the new police policy.
"I have long believed that it is possible to address the use of condoms as evidence in misdemeanor prostitution-related cases without weakening our ability to prosecute serious crimes, like sex trafficking," Vance said.
Mayor Bill De Blasio, at an unrelated press conference, echoed that sentiment, saying in part, "[T]here's a number of ways that you go about putting together evidence. And I have absolute faith in Commissioner Bratton and his team, and they felt that this was not the right way to go, that the previous policy was not the right way to go and that they could be effective in gathering evidence without it. So I think it's the right thing to do."
"A policy that actually inhibits people from safe sex is a mistake and is dangerous," De Blasio said.
Sonia Ossorio, president of the National Organization for Women, too, commended the decision. "This policy opens the door for individuals in prostitution to stop risking their health for fear of carrying condoms," she said. "It's every individual's right to be able to protect their health and this policy shift under the new NYPD leadership goes a long way in furthering sound public health policy."
The Nassau County district attorney on Long Island in New York has also announced that its prosecutors would not use condoms as evidence in prostitution cases. The issue, however, is not unique to New York. The San Francisco district attorney's office announced last year it would cease using condoms as evidence in prostitution cases.
The policy change was first reported by the Associated Press.
↧
Fox Host Doesn't Think Any Muslim Clerics Or Imams Condemn Terrorism
“I’m waiting for the first cleric or imam who has the guts to say this not what Muhammed meant and if you don’t I’ll just assume it’s what he did mean,” said Bob Beckel, the liberal co-host of The Five Islamist militant group Boko Haram kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls in Nigeria. Boko Harmam’s actions have been pretty widely condemned by Muslim leaders.
Protesters march in support of the girls kidnapped by members of Boko Haram in front of the Nigerian Embassy in Washington May 6, 2014.
Gary Cameron / Reuters
↧
Clay Aiken Wins Democratic Primary Day After Congressional Opponent's Sudden Death
Update: Clay Aiken has won his primary in North Carolina a day after the death of Keith Crisco, 71, who was challenging the former American Idol runner-up for the Democratic nomination in the 2nd Congressional District.
Clay Aiken (left) and Keith Crisco.
Steve Mack / Contributor; AP Photo/Crisco for Congress, File
Aiken won more than 40% of the vote necessary in order to win the three-candidate race, according to the county-by-county tally posted by the state today.
The state elections board will review the results before they become official, with the meeting tentatively scheduled for May 22, the AP reported.
It is unclear whether Aiken will accept the nomination, having said yesterday he was suspending his campaign following Crisco's death.
A representative for Clay Aiken declined to comment to BuzzFeed, saying they are not issuing statements because the campaign is still suspended.
Crisco was reportedly dead when emergency officials arrived at the scene after a fall that occurred around 1 p.m. His death was confirmed by officials with Asheboro Elastics Corp., the textiles company the candidate founded in 1986.
The 71-year-old was trailing Aiken, 35, by 369 votes in last Tuesday's primary for the 2nd Congressional District nomination, according to unofficial totals. The race was ultimately considered too close to call, and the candidates were waiting from word on an official canvass before deciding whether to request a recount or go to a July runoff, Crisco said in a statement last week.
Crisco allegedly planned to concede the election, Raleigh political consultant Brad Crone told WBTV.
"At his instruction, I had called Gary Pearce to convey that Keith was going to concede the election tomorrow morning and would be calling Mr. Aiken to congratulate him," Crone said in an email.
Though the State Board of Elections released a statement expressing sadness at Crisco's passing, they did not specify what will happen next in the election.
Crisco served as a City Council member in the town from 2003 to 2009, and was then asked to serve as state Commerce Department secretary by then-Gov. Bev Perdue.
I am stunned and deeply saddened by Keith Crisco's death. Keith came from humble beginnings. No matter how high he rose — to Harvard, to the White House and to the Governor's Cabinet — he never forgot where he came from.
He was a gentleman, a good and honorable man and an extraordinary public servant. I was honored to know him.
I am suspending all campaign activities as we pray for his family and friends.
↧
↧
The Battle Between Obama And Progressives Over A Judicial Nominee Goes Public
On Tuesday, the fight over a pick for the federal bench goes before the TV cameras. The White House isn’t backing down.
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta
WASHINGTON — The prolonged battle between progressives and the White House over a federal judicial nominee will come to a head Tuesday at the confirmation hearing of Michael Boggs, the Georgia state judge President Obama wants to put on the federal bench.
One thing is clear: The White House is not budging in its support for the nominee, and is taking a sharp tone with the progressives trying to slow him down. That's set the stage for the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday that could force Democratic senators to choose between some of the most powerful voices in their base and the president.
Several months into a campaign that's seen a rare linking of abortion rights, gay rights, and African-American rights advocates, progressives will be watching closely as Boggs takes questions from senators at the hearing. He's expected to face tough questions from Obama allies over his past support for abortion restrictions, the Confederate flag, and fervent opposition to marriage equality while serving as a Democratic member of the Georgia legislature.
The progressives say they're fighting the White House at every turn, claiming the administration is putting its weight behind pushing the Boggs nomination through. Boggs was nominated as part of a deal with the Georgia's Republican senators designed to get a slate of judicial nominees past the "blue slip" process.
"I do," one source close to the progressive lobbying effort against Boggs said when asked if the White House was pushing Democratic senators to ignore the liberals. "I really don't know why. It can't just be stand by your man. He's not even their man."
In the eyes of the progressives, the White House's blue slip deal with the GOP meant Boggs had to get a nomination and fair hearing before the Senate. Now that he's getting his day before the Judiciary Committee, the progressives are frustrated about continuing to square off with Obama over the nomination.
"They already did their job getting the package through nomination," the progressive said. "Now he needs to stand on his own two feet like a big boy."
The White House response to this is threefold. First, the administration says Boggs has changed since his days as a conservative Democratic lawmaker. Second, officials emphasize that nominating him was not Obama's idea. Third, they argue that without Boggs getting a seat on the Georgia federal bench none of Obama's other nominees — including what could be the first African-American woman ever to get a seat — will get seated, either.
The language from the White House to Democrats on the Judiciary committee is not vague: The progressive critics of Boggs need to be defeated, the administration says.
"We have been trying to fill these judicial vacancies for more than three years, but two of the president's nominees were blocked for nearly 11 months and returned at the end of 2011," said Eric Schultz, a White House spokesperson. "Our choice is clear: Do we work with Republican senators to find a compromise or should we leave the seats vacant? Four of these vacancies are judicial emergencies, and we believe it would be grossly irresponsible for the president to leave these seats vacant."
Schultz noted that Boggs "was recommended to the president by Sens. [Johnny] Isakson and [Saxby] Chambliss, as part of a compromise to fill six judicial vacancies has been a state judge in Georgia for a decade."
But Schultz also referred to Boggs' decade as a state judge in Georgia, saying Obama "believes he is qualified for the federal bench."
"Of all the recent criticisms offered against Michael Boggs, not one is based on his record as a judge for the past 10 years," he said. "What has distinguished him as a state court judge at the trial level as well as on the court of appeals is that he has taken a keen interest and leading role in criminal justice reform."
Not all progressive are leaders calling for Boggs' nomination to be defeated. Georgia Rep. John Lewis, who condemned Boggs' nomination when it was announced, softened his view in an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week.
"I'm just letting the process take place," he told the paper.
Still, the coalition of Obama allies fighting Boggs is sizable. It's not often that NARAL Pro Choice America and African-American rights groups like the Leadership Conference join forces to take on Obama.
And more groups usually allied with the president are taking him on over the Boggs nomination. After a 2004 video of Boggs denouncing "activist judges" who ruled in favor of same sex marriage surfaced Monday, the Human Rights Campaign expressed concern.
"Through this clear and unapologetic record Boggs has signaled his hostility towards issues of equality in his home state as an elected official," read an HRC statement. "If confirmed, Boggs' could entrench these destructive, anti-equality values on the federal bench for generations to come. These values are categorically inconsistent with those of the Human Rights Campaign and the judicial nominees that we support."
The progressive source said the video and other past statements from Boggs legislative tenure are rattling some Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.
"At least a couple of them are truly worried about what else might be out there," the progressive said. "Can you imagine voting to confirm this guy and then having something like that, or even worse, come out after you voted for him? I think that's a genuine concern."
Democratic senators on the committee have for the most part been tight-lipped about Boggs, with only Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal going on record saying Boggs' past as a lawmaker "raises legitimate and important questions about Judge Boggs' record."
Blumenthal will chair Tuesday's hearing on Obama's judicial nominees, a move that worries the progressives.
The move potentially "disarms our staunchest advocate because the chair has to act differently than the rest," the progressive said.
Still, progressives expect some tough questioning of Boggs. With Democrats on the committee keeping so quiet about the nomination, however, it's not clear where that questioning will lead in the end. It's a big test for a vocal progressive coalition that has continued to fight Obama over Boggs.
"I will tell you whether I think it worked as well as it could have after this guy's not sitting in judgement of my personal decisions," said the source close to the progressive lobbying effort. "If he's not, it worked well. If he is, we didn't do good enough."
↧
Stop The War On Drugs, Says Top Republican
Rob Portman will call President Obama’s clemency plan “a Band-Aid on a deep wound” in a speech Tuesday. Can conservatives end the war on drugs?
Jonathan Ernst / Reuters
WASHINGTON — Ohio Republican Rob Portman, a leading figure in his party who is sometimes mentioned as a candidate for president in 2016, will call for a reevaluation of the "war on drugs" and the massive prison population it has created in a speech set for Tuesday and shared exclusively with BuzzFeed.
But Portman is also expected to warn that President Obama's plan to use executive power to make reforms to drug sentencing could prevent larger, lasting changes from coming to pass.
"President Obama recently announced that he would grant clemency to hundreds of non-violent drug offenders," Portman is set to say Tuesday in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute. "That may be within his power, but it's like placing a Band-Aid on a deep wound. It may cover up the problem of prison overcrowding today, but it doesn't address the deeper problem that drives recidivism."
Portman's words come as crime, punishment, and drugs emerge as a rare and unlikely point on which Democrats and Republicans in Washington are finding common ground. Conservatives like Portman, troubled by the vast federal spending on jails and seeking a distinctly conservative approach to crime and poverty, have found allies in Democrats and civil libertarians who have long argued for a less punitive approach to illegal drugs.
Portman's speech lays out a plan to fight poverty using what he calls "constructive conservatism." In the speech, the Republican senator describes that as a "bottom up" approach that lets communities develop plans to fight poverty, prove their results and then spread those ideas across the country with the help of federal grants and other assistance.
The possibility of bipartisan action on criminal justice reform drives the sections of Portman's speech related to the war on drugs and the prison population. In the prepared remarks, the Ohio Republican calls for a reauthorization of the Second Chance Act, aimed at reducing the recidivism rate with job training, drug counseling and other programs he first wrote with a Democrat 10 years ago. Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy is co-sponsoring the bill this time around, and Portman will highlight in the speech a second bill called the Recidivism Reduction and Public Safety Act (co-sponsored by Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse) that aims to bring the Second Chance act reforms to the federal prison system.
The reform talk in Portman's speech puts the Ohio Republican in a leading role in the growing conservative push for prison and criminal justice reform. Portman and other Republican reformers are calling on conservatives to embrace spending on efforts like the recidivism reduction programs in the hopes that in the long run they'll reduce prison populations and save billions in incarceration costs.
In the AEI speech, Portman will become one of the most prominent elected Republicans to criticize the "war on drugs," a metaphor dating back to the Nixon Administration, and a phrase the Obama Administration refuses to use. Portman said the effort has spent a lot of money but done little to solve the problems of drugs and poverty.
"After more than a trillion dollars spent in the war on drugs and thousands of lives lost, we are starting to understand that arrest, prosecution, and incarceration are not enough," he will say in the prepared speech.
"You cannot talk about poverty without talking about addiction, and addiction is something that a war on drugs is never going to solve," Portman is set to say.
Portman will say Obama could play a part in these reforms, but warns the president's emphasis on executive action is problematic when it comes to bipartisan reform efforts.
"Instead of taking the easy path of executive action, I would ask the president to come to Congress and work with us to pass our legislation to reform federal prisons, leveraging our criminal justice system to incentivize long-term solutions based on what we know works to help people get out of prison and stay out, things like diversion programs and drug courts, job training, and treatment for addiction and mental services," Portman will say.
↧
Karl Rove: I Didn't Say Hillary Clinton Had Brain Damage
The Fox News contributor attempts to explain comments he made about former Secretary of State’s health.
After reports surfaced that Karl Rove suggested that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suffered from brain damage as a result of a fall in 2012, the Republican strategist appeared on Fox News to clarify his statements.
"I didn't say she had brain damage. My point was, is that Hillary Clinton wants to run for president, but she would not be human if this didn't enter in as a consideration. And my other point is, this will be an issue in the 2016 race, whether she likes it or not."
Rove is a paid contributor to Fox News.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
