When Whitehouse first introduced this amendment a couple days ago, he made clear that by “climate change,” he was referring to “what our carbon pollution…is doing to our atmosphere and what it is doing to our oceans.” But the amendment didn’t literally say that, and the Senate’s most outspoken climate science denier saw this as an opportunity. James Inhofe—an Oklahoma Republican who has previously pointed to the Bible as evidence that human-caused global warming is a hoax—urged his fellow senators to support the amendment.
Addressing his Senate colleagues before the vote, Inhofe once again cited the Bible to argue that the climate does indeed change but that humans aren’t the cause. “Climate is changing, and climate has always changed,” said Inhofe, who chairs the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee. “There’s archeological evidence of that. There’s biblical evidence of that. There’s historic evidence of that.” He continued: “The hoax is that there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful, they can change climate. Man can’t change climate.” You can watch the back-and-forth above.
If any candidate could run a rigid campaign of polarization—aimed at winning as many white voters as possible—it’s Walker. His language is already there. In his Iowa speech, he touted voter-identification laws and portrayed disadvantage as a pure product of personal failure. “In America the opportunity is equal for each and every one of us but … the ultimate outcome is up to each and every one of us individually.”
Walker, in other words, represents the other path: The chance to win without broadening your base or changing your priorities. Victory, but at the price of greater racial polarization. It’s a seductive vision—and an inherently divisive one.
I guess Republicans are against state-run enterprises except when they are for it.
Indiana Governor (R) to start up State-Run official mouthpiece news outlet.
Hey- If a nice guy Republican/Tea Party favorite like Putin can have his own state-run mouthpiece, why not us? Now that Republicans are OK to initiate their own taxpayer funded news outlets, and displacing private enterprise in the process, it shouldn’t be an ideological conflict anymore for them to oppose single payer Universal Health Care? Right?
Many who are critical or supportive of Israel in the United States rarely understand that Israeli politics are quite complex, probably even more so than the US. Netanyahu’s planned speech to Congress in March might have ruffled some feathers here, but in Israel Bibi’s opponents and many others are calling foul.
Criticism of Netanyahu’s planned U.S. speech mounts in Israel
By Joel Greenberg, McClatchy Foreign Staff
JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing growing criticism in Israel for a planned speech to the U.S. Congress about Iran, accused by his political rivals of damaging ties with Washington to promote his election campaign.
Netanyahu accepted an invitation from House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to address a joint session of Congress on March 3, two weeks before the Israeli elections.
The invitation was not coordinated with the White House and it was widely seen as a Republican attempt to enlist Netanyahu, who advocates tougher measures against Iran, in the dispute with President Barack Obama over whether to impose new sanctions on Iran.
In Israel, critics have characterized Netanyahu’s trip as an election ploy and a slap in the face of the Obama administration after it’s worked hard to deflect challenges to Israel at the United Nations and most recently at the International Criminal Court.
Israeli media have highlighted the White House announcement that Obama would not meet with Netanyahu during his visit, calling it a sign that Netanyahu’s strained relationship with the president had sunk to a new low.
But the prime minister’s rivals in the election campaign accuse him of alienating Obama and damaging Israel’s strategic alliance with Washington.
“Netanyahu is directly hurting the president of the United States,” Yitzhak Herzog, head of the opposition Labor party, told Army Radio on Sunday. His joint slate with Tzipi Livni, a former justice minister, is running neck-and-neck with Netanyahu’s Likud party, according to recent polls.
“What Netanyahu is doing with this brutish behavior is harming Israel’s security interests,” Herzog added. “The American political system can’t stand this behavior.”
Yair Lapid, a former finance minister who heads Yesh Atid, a centrist party, accused Netanyahu of “destroying our strategic relations with the United States for an election speech.”
Zehava Galon, leader of the leftist Meretz party, filed an appeal to the head of the Israeli election commission, demanding that it bar live broadcasts of Netanyahu’s address to Congress. Under Israeli election laws, campaign messages are prohibited on radio and television starting two weeks before the vote.
Michael Oren, Israel’s previous ambassador to the United States, joined the chorus of criticism Saturday, urging Netanyahu to cancel his planned speech.
Running for Parliament with a new party, Kulanu, Oren said Netanyahu’s conduct had “created the impression that this is a cynical political move, and it could hurt our efforts to act against Iran.”
Gov. Mike Pence is starting a state-run taxpayer-funded news outlet that will make pre-written news stories available to Indiana media, as well as sometimes break news about his administration, according to documents obtained by The Indianapolis Star.
Pence is planning in late February to launch “Just IN,” a website and news outlet that will feature stories and news releases written by state press secretaries and is being overseen by a former Indianapolis Star reporter, Bill McCleery.
“At times, Just IN will break news — publishing information ahead of any other news outlet. Strategies for determining how and when to give priority to such ‘exclusive’ coverage remain under discussion,” according to a question-and-answer sheet distributed last week to communications directors for state agencies.
Moving to exile one of New York’s most powerful and long-serving leaders, Democrats in the State Assembly agreed late on Monday to ask Sheldon Silver to step down as speaker in the wake of his arrest last week on federal corruption charges.
The Democrats reached the decision in a closed-door meeting that stretched for hours, rebuffing a bid by Mr. Silver to keep his post by relinquishing some of his responsibilities while he defended himself against the charges.
“He should understand that he’s lost the confidence of a majority of our conference,” Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh, a Manhattan Democrat, said after the meeting.
Remember, Gowdy was going to have a more respectable investigation than Issa.
It’s back. Actually, it never left. Benghazi. That is, the GOP’s never-ending Benghazi crusade. Last year, after Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) was tapped by House Speaker John Boehner to lead yet another Benghazi probe, he promised to helm an inquiry that would “transcend politics.” But now, eight months into this latest investigation, Democrats on the House Select Committee on Benghazi have hit Gowdy with a sharp charge: that he and his Republican investigators have conducted secret meetings with witnesses without informing their Democratic colleagues on the committee. And they say that some of these interviews have yielded information that undercuts anti-Obama Benghazi allegations promoted by conservatives. In other words, the Democrats are suggesting that Gowdy has been mounting a Benghazi cover-up of his own.
Looks like this is going to get ugly.
Here’s a quick history of Alexander’s case: in her initial trial, she was denied Stand Your Ground immunity (yes, the same Stand Your Ground immunity granted to George Zimmerman when he killed Trayvon Martin), and found guilty of three counts of domestic aggravated assault. She received a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years in prison. Alexander appealed her trial successfully and was granted a re-trial. Florida state prosecutor Angela Corey sought to change the terms of Alexander’s sentence in the retrial to require her to serve three consecutive — rather than concurrent sentences — of 20 years, coming to 60 years in total. Again for the retrial, Alexander was denied Stand Your Ground immunity.
. . .
Ayanna Banks Harris, co-organizer with the Chicago Alliance to Free Marissa Alexander (CAFMA), added,
“Marissa will re-enter the world with a felony conviction, restricted with a 2-year house arrest, shackled with an ankle monitor, unemployed, with undetermined custody of her children and unable to vote for minimally 7 years. It is important to us that we don’t use the language that Marissa’s release from jail is equivalent to her being free. This is not freedom. This is simply a release from jail.”
What [Noam] Scheiber is basically saying is that if you want to unite whites and minority voters, you have to focus on the issues that are a priority to whites. That’s pretty much white supremacy in a nutshell. His big “tell” comes in what he leaves out of that last sentence. The reason racial groups view the issues he places at the bottom differently is because they affect racial groups differently. White people never had to be concerned about “stop-and-frisk” because it almost never happened to a white person. White mothers/fathers, wives, siblings don’t spend much time worrying that their son, husband, brother will be harassed/beaten/killed because some police officer jumped to the conclusion that he was a “dangerous black/brown man.” But that is exactly how police actions become a priority for voters of color. The fear of what can happen becomes a life-and-death issue for them - as we’ve seen lately.