That Jeb Bush’s surprise decision in December to explore a 2016 Republican presidential run would complicate the ambitions of his erstwhile Florida protégé Marco Rubio seemed a given.
That Rubio’s now-declared candidacy might also make things a little problematic on a personal level for Bush didn’t become clear until this weekend in New Hampshire.
Mentor and mentee missed each other as they both held meet-and-greet gatherings with voters in Manchester and spoke to GOP activists in Nashua. What they couldn’t avoid were questions at every stop from the news media probing their relationship.
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley said he will decide by the end of May whether he is running for president in 2016 - and that it would be “an extreme poverty indeed if there weren’t more than one person willing to compete for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party.”
“I believe that if you have the executive experience, the ideas that can serve our nation well, and the ability to govern, you should offer your candidacy and then let the people decide. If we do that, then we can be the party that leads our country into the future,” O’Malley said in an interview with CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday. “But we won’t do it unless we offer ideas for the future and break with things like bad trade deals, the systematic deregulation of Wall Street that many Democrats were complicit in and helped get us into this mess.”
O’Malley has made trips to both Iowa and New Hampshire this year and speaks like a politician who is ready to run for the White House.
Marco taking the States Rights route might seem like a standard GOP response, but it’s not. It’s the only path that opposes Hillary Clinton’s recent evolution to full federal rights that stands a miniscule chance of success. Marco’s statement on choice also elevates him to the point position of being the first GOP candidate to break with the hard right FRC stance on SSM. I’ll be getting out the popcorn to watch the response.
Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio says he does not believe sexual orientation is a choice for the “enormous majority of people.”
The Florida senator’s comments came Sunday on CBS’s Face the Nation, where he said that it should be up to states rather than the Supreme Court to define marriage and that he considers marriage to be between a man and a woman.
“I also don’t believe that your sexual preferences are a choice for the vast and enormous majority of people. In fact, the bottom line is, I believe that sexual preference is something people are born with,” Rubio said.
Christian America Is an Invention: Big Business, Right-Wing Politics and the Religious Lie That Still Divides Us
Bush continued to advance his vision of a godly nation. Soon after 9/11, he made a special trip to the Islamic Center of Washington, the very same mosque that had opened its doors to celebrate the Eisenhower inauguration a half century earlier. No sitting president had ever visited an Islamic house of worship, but Bush made clear by his words and deeds there that he considered Muslims part of the nation’s diverse religious community. He denounced recent acts of violence against Muslims and Arab Americans in no uncertain terms. “Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don’t represent the best of America,” he said; “they represent the worst of humankind and they should be ashamed.” Referring to Islam as a “religion of peace” and citing the Koran, he closed his address with the same words of inclusion he would have used before any audience, religious or otherwise: “God bless us all.” The president was not alone in enlisting religious patriotism to demonstrate national unity after the attacks. On September 12, 2001, congressional representatives from both parties joined together on the Capitol steps to sing “God Bless America.”Meanwhile, several states that did not already require recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance in their schools introduced bills to do just that.
But the efforts to use the pledge as a source of unity were soon thrown into disarray. In June 2002, a federal court ruled that the phrase “one nation under God” violated the First Amendment prohibition against the establishment of a state religion. The case Newdow v. Elk Grove Unified School District had been filed in 2000 by Michael Newdow, an emergency room doctor who complained that his daughter’s rights were infringed because she was forced to “watch and listen as her state-employed teacher in her state-run school leads her classmates in a ritual proclaiming that there is a God, and that ours is ‘one nation under God.” In a 2-to-1 decision, the court agreed. It held that the phrase was just as objectionable as a statement that “we are a nation ‘under Jesus,’ a nation ‘under Vishnu,’ a nation ‘under Zeus,’ or a nation ‘under no god,’ because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion.” The reaction from political leaders was as swift as it was predictable. The Senate suspended debate on a pending military spending bill to draft a resolution condemning the ruling, while dozens of House members took to the Capitol steps to recite the pledge and sing “God Bless America” one more time. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer announced that the president thought the decision was “ridiculous” Democratic senator Tom Daschle called it “nuts.” The reaction was so pronounced, in fact, that the appeals court delayed implementation of its ruling until an appeal could be heard.
I never post the videos or view them because that’s what terror groups want. We do need to collect their evil deeds however so that justice can one day be levied.
A video purportedly made by Islamic State and posted on social media sites on Sunday appeared to show militants shooting and beheading about 30 Ethiopian Christians in Libya.
Reuters was not able to verify the authenticity of the video but the killings resemble past violence carried out by Islamic State, an ultra-hardline group which has expanded its reach from strongholds in Iraq and Syria to conflict-ridden Libya.
The video, in which militants call Christians “crusaders” who are out to kill Muslims, showed about 15 men being beheaded on a beach and another group of the same size, in an area of shrubland, being shot in the head.
Hundreds of people gathered on Sunday at the site of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing to remember the 168 men, women and children killed when a truck stuffed with tons of explosives blew up at a downtown federal building.
Former President Bill Clinton was among the dignitaries who addressed the crowd outside the Oklahoma City National Memorial and Museum.
“Oklahoma City, you had to choose to redeem your terrible losses by having to begin again,” said Clinton, who was in his first term in office at the time of the attack, one of the deadliest of its kind ever staged on U.S. soil.
At the turn of the 17th century, an English lawyer named Thomas Helwys had become part of a separatist congregation in Lincolnshire (it is to this congregation that many Baptists trace their roots). They were dissenters from the Church of England, established by King Henry VIII. In what is considered the first written call for religious freedom in the English language, Helwys wrote, “If the King’s people be obedient and true subjects, obeying all humane laws made by the King, our Lord the King can require no more: for men’s religion to God is betwixt God and themselves; the King shall not answer for it, neither may the King be judge between God and man.”
Once upon a time, “religious freedom” was the cry of the oppressed minority when basic human rights were being denied them by their own government because of their religious beliefs. Today, in the United States, “religious freedom” is becoming the cry of the privileged and powerful concerning what they can rightfully deny someone else because of religious beliefs. It has been a radical shift, and it is an embarrassing travesty.
Religious freedom used to be about gaining the protection of the law, not putting oneself above the law. In the late 1700s, Baptist minister John Leland wrote, “Let every man speak freely without fear — maintain the principles that he believes — worship according to his own faith, either one God, three Gods, no God, or twenty Gods; and let government protect him in so doing.”
facebook.com —video from the article below
It takes seven months for a McDonald’s worker to earn what the company’s CEO makes in one hour, according to a 2013 study from Nerdwallet.
Bartolomé Perez, a McDonald’s worker in Los Angeles, proves this point. He’s worked at McDonald’s for 22 years, and his wages have only increased from $4.25 an hour to $10.75 an hour, which means he’s had an average pay increase of 29 cents per year. Still, $10.75 an hour is almost 20 percent more than the wages of the average McDonald’s employee (and it will still be 10 percent more even after McDonald’s increases its wages this year).
“Ten years ago, this was the perfect job,” Perez told ATTN:, discussing how his wages have failed to keep pace with his cost of living.
Remember back in 2013 when McDonalds published it’s budget advice?
If you learned anything from John Scalzi’s excellent article explaining White Male Priviledge to white males, you may also learn something from Alikah Hughes about Intersectionality:
Writer and comedian Akilah Hughes has created a brilliant explanation of intersectionality, using the ever timeless metaphor of pizza. That’s right. Pizza.
Using a creative key of burgers, deluxe pizzas, and cheese pizzas, Akilah breaks down Kimberlé Crenshaw’s theory in an easy to digest video. (That pun was absolutely intended)
“Akilah Hughes: Hi Youtube, it’s @AkilahObviously! Today I wanted to talk about an issue that’s been neglected on Youtube and in pop-culture, specifically when we talk about Patty Arquette and her Oscar’s speech and Nellie Andreeva at Deadline who thinks that diversity is over-taking Hollywood and that there are no roles for white people anymore. …
PHOTO: Bankok Post- Slave-labour fish mixes in with Thai catch ( (c) Post Publishing PCL. All rights reserved.)
A few years ago, a friend promised Asorasak Thama a job in the Thai fishing industry. The job offered good pay for a few weeks of work.
Instead, he wound up trapped at sea for a year, working in terrible conditions for no pay at all. Thama had become a slave.
Authorities rescued Thama and his crewmembers when they stopped the boat he was trapped on for fishing illegally in Indonesian waters. A few years later, however — after a stranger drugged him at a bar in southern Thailand — Thama found himself enslaved again.
When his boat came into shore to get a fishing license from Malaysia, he waited until the captain had had a few drinks, then punched him and fled.
Some of the seafood that winds up in American grocery stores, in restaurants, even in cat food may have been caught by Burmese slaves. That’s the conclusion of a yearlong investigation by The Associated Press.
The AP discovered and interviewed dozens of men being held against their will on Benjina, a remote Indonesian island, which serves as the base for a trawler fleet that fishes in the area.