The modern Republican party, and the conservative movement that gives the party its only real energy, never has been down with this whole right-to-vote business — except, of course, as an equal-protection dodge in Bush v. Gore. The current Chief Justice, John Roberts, kick-started his rise in conservative politics by working to undermine the Voting Rights Act as a lawyer in Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department.
You really have to admire how they’ve done it. First, they turn our elections into a plutocrat’s playground (Citizens United, McCutcheon). Then they uphold in the main voter-suppression tactics designed by the candidates the newly corrupt system produces out in the states (Crawford). Then, they gut any remedy that the people against whom these new laws discriminate have in federal court (Shelby County.) And now, it appears, the day of Jubilee having been declared, the circle may be closing for good.
The court’s ruling, expected in 2016, could be immensely consequential. Should the court agree with the two Texas voters who brought the case, its ruling would shift political power from cities to rural areas, a move that would benefit Republicans. The court has never resolved whether voting districts should have the same number of people, or the same number of eligible voters. Counting all people amplifies the voting power of places with large numbers of residents who cannot vote legally, including immigrants who are here legally but are not citizens, illegal immigrants, children and prisoners. Those places tend to be urban and to vote Democratic. A ruling that districts must be based on equal numbers of voters would move political power away from cities, with their many immigrants and children, and toward older and more homogeneous rural areas.
When people say the two parties are exactly alike, don’t you believe them. Here are some highlights from their 2012 platforms. These quotes are pulled from
An independent web developer named Amit Asaravala combed both documents and made a side-by-side comparison of the stances of each party.
Commerce: Women [W]e are committed to passing the Paycheck Fairness Act…. [p.10]
Education: Sex Education
Democrats support evidence-based and age-appropriate sex education. [p.18]
We renew our call for replacing “family planning” programs for teens with abstinence education….[p.36]
President Obama has encouraged innovation to reach his goal of generating 80 percent of our electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. Democrats support making America the world’s leader in building a clean energy economy by extending clean energy incentives…. [p.7]
We support more infrastructure investment to speed the transition to cleaner fuels in the transportation sector. [p.7]
We will end the EPA’s war on coal…. Further, we oppose any and all cap and trade legislation. [p.16]
We call for timely processing of new reactor applications currently pending at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [p.16]
As soon as possible, we will reverse the current Administration’s blocking of the Keystone XL Pipeline…. [p.47]
Environment: Climate Change
We affirm the science of climate change, commit to significantly reducing the pollution that causes climate change…. [p.20]
Democrats pledge to continue showing international leadership on climate change, working toward an agreement to set emission limits in unison with other emerging powers. [p.21]
We also call on Congress to take quick action to prohibit the EPA from moving forward with new greenhouse gas regulations….[p.19]
Foreign Policy: Foreign Aid [W]e will continue to respond to humanitarian crises around the globe. [p.29]
Limiting foreign aid spending helps keep taxes lower, which frees more resources in the private and charitable sectors, whose giving tends to be more effective and efficient.[p.46]
Gay Marriage & Rights
We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.[p.18]
We reaffirm our support for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. [p.10]
And on and on—tell me again why any sane person would vote for Republicans?
(And that’s the comparison of the 2012 platforms—with the inmates running the asylum, I’m sure 2016 will see the right-wing additions to their platform going all the way over the cliff.
All around great dude - enjoy!
(maybe he did not get the memo on toning it down a bit?)
@marchaig Its because most Feminists are ugly.
@MarshallFSmith not my town, and don't call me cupcake. ma'am will do just fine - i certainly earned it.
So,obama is rushing to let his friends out of Gitmo. We need to put obama inside Gitmo. Damn Bastard Traitor.
obama is a walking Compost. Happy #EarthDay2015
on ‘bagheads’ oops sorry - we call them Muslims….
@DrMartyFox Dead Whitey does not matter to the Left.
on not understanding the difference between climate and weather….
and he really likes guns….
but as long as they don’t cost too much - it’s a rough economic world for bigots these days….
but really - he just likes guns….
@heavyhokie Money is tight so I'm going with a Bersa Thunder .380 or a Kel Tec PF9,both less than 300 bucks.
and moar guns!!….
on nonsense conspiracy theories….
retweeting super racist - Pat Dollard…..
@PatDollard obama once again using BigGov. as his Personal Louisville Slugger.
on Valerie Jarrett….
And that is just the last five days…. peruse on your own. (at your own risk, obviously, it may be catching)
I have reached out to Hampton Roads Tea Party for comment, but as of publication, none has been proffered,
All of these are based on actual proposals and incidents…
Do you support the laws in Arkansas and Arizona that require doctors to inform women that drug-induced abortions can be “reversed” mid-procedure even though this is not supported by scientific evidence?
Do you believe evolution is just a theory and support those lawsuits like the one in Kansas that argue teaching evolution in schools functions as an endorsement of atheism?
Do you support the order Florida Department of Environmental Protection officials received to not use the term “climate change” or “global warming” in any official communications, e-mails or reports?
Would you have used state funds to oppose Michael Schiavo’s, Terri Schiavo’s husband, wishes that his wife be removed from life support?
Do you think pizza places should be able to deny their product to gay couples who want to have pizza at their weddings?
Do you support the Oklahoma bill that proposes to ban Advanced Placement U.S. History in public schools because it is unpatriotic in teaching our nation’s not-so finest moments?
Do you think your state deserves to be first to name the Bible its official state book as bills introduced in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee propose?
If answer yes to:
0: might be sane
2-4: very nutty
5-6: really nutty
7: living with the squirrels
Young looks like an elder of the Afrikaner Broederbond, which may not be coincidence.
Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young offered an innovative proposal for addressing the problem of homelessness in America on Thursday: Release the wolves.
According to the Washington Post, Young made the comments during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on the Interior Department’s budget.
“How many of you have got wolves in your district?” he asked his colleagues “None. None. Not one.”
“They haven’t got a damn wolf in their whole district,” Young added. “I’d like to introduce them in your district. If I introduced them in your district, you wouldn’t have a homeless problem anymore.”
Young was reportedly trying to make the point that the Interior Department makes budgetary decisions without consulting with the states those decisions would affect. He believes gray wolves should be removed from the endangered species list, and was ridiculing his colleagues’ efforts to protect the wolves.
I clipped in the last paragraph. It’s pretty frightening. Ten to one? Or worse? Look at this exact point the only check against this imbalance is the middle and the left raise about the same amount of money. Long term we must have legislative relief on this. That means a President steps up and presses hard. Probably not Pres. Obama but the next one. Link I said above think 2016.
The Democratic operative guessed that at this point, Republicans may be taking in 100 corporate dollars for every one that reaches Democrats. “We don’t really know — it’s at least 10-to-1.” She added, “The truth is Democrats don’t get much [501(c)(4)] corporate money, and that’s because their interests often aren’t aligned. I’d gladly have c4s shut down — that would be a huge boon for us.”
While the U.S.-led coalition to defeat the so-called Islamic State has launched around 5,000 airstrikes against the extremist group, with Central Command posting daily updates on new airstrikes targeting the organization also known as ISIS or ISIL, several Republican politicians appear to believe that the U.S. is not at all engaging in a fight against group.
The same politicians will readily praise the leaders of Egypt and Jordan for launching airstrikes against the terrorist group, while then criticizing President Obama for not following in their footsteps, even though the U.S. is responsible for the vast majority of the airstrikes carried out by the anti-ISIS coalition. Of course, many Republicans and Democrats have expressed legitimate criticisms of the administration’s strategy to defeat ISIS, but some Republicans are acting as if the administration is not at all engaged in fighting the group, whose momentum has been blunted since the airstrikes began.
Republicans had better divert some of their campaign cash toward finding a cure for Obama Derangement Syndrome. If they don’t, their nemesis will beat them in a third consecutive presidential contest — without, of course, actually being on the ballot.
GOP power brokers and potential candidates surely realize that President Obama is ineligible to run in 2016. Yet they seem unable to get over the fact that he won in 2008 and 2012. It’s as if they are more interested in vainly trying to rewrite history than attempting to lay out a vision for the future.
Obama Derangement Syndrome is characterized by feverish delirium. The Republican Party suffered an episode last week when former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani began speaking in tongues about Obama’s patriotism.
“I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America,” Giuliani said. “He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up, through love of this country.”
This is obviously a nonsensical thing to say about a man who was elected president twice and has served as commander in chief for more than six years. Pressed to explain himself, Giuliani ranted and raved for several days about Obama’s upbringing, made demonstrably false claims about the president’s supposed denial of American exceptionalism, insisted that “I said exactly what I wanted to say” — and then finally issued a non-retraction retraction in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
“My blunt language suggesting that the president doesn’t love America notwithstanding, I didn’t intend to question President Obama’s motives or the content of his heart,” Giuliani wrote. But of course he did intend to question Obama’s motives, heart, patriotism and legitimacy, albeit in a self-destructive, laughingstock kind of way.
I speak as a sufferer from Bush Derangement Syndrome eight years ago who recovered by facing reality.
Giuliani can perhaps be dismissed; his future in presidential politics is as bleak as his past, which consists of one spectacularly unsuccessful run for the GOP nomination. But if he was speaking as the party’s id, surely Republicans who consider themselves in the mix for 2016 would play the role of superego and tamp down such baser instincts. Right?
Wrong. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — a guest at the dinner where Giuliani had his eruption — refused to repudiate the offending remarks. “The mayor can speak for himself,” he said. “I’m not going to comment on whether, what the president thinks or not. . . . I’ll tell you I love America, and I think there are plenty of people, Democrat, Republican, independent and everyone in between, who love this country.”
WASHINGTON — The only Congressional response to this summer’s brutal police crackdown in Ferguson, Missouri appears to be dead, with the House GOP leadership blocking a vote on a bipartisan bill introduced by Reps. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Raul Labrador (R-Idaho).
The legislation seeks to curb controversial transfers of military weapons and equipment to local police forces. It would ban the Pentagon from granting local police free automatic weapons, armored vehicles, weaponized drones, combat helicopters, grenades, silencers, sound cannons and other equipment, although police could still purchase such gear with local budgets or through grants from the Department of Homeland Security.
It would also impose more stringent safeguards to account for the equipment that does get transferred. Collectively, more than $4 billion in military weaponry and equipment has been distributed to police forces across the U.S. since the inception of the initiative, known as the 1033 Program.
I’m becoming more convinced every day that what the Republicans want is an apartheid state to ensure permanent white minority rule. If that isn’t what they want, they’re doing a damned good job at faking it.