Arizona Violent Crime Down, Except Under Tough Anti-Immigration Sheriff

First Posted: 07/14/10 03:34 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:05 PM ET 

A chart circulated by a leading immigration reform organization makes a basic, but compelling case that the new law passed -- though not implemented -- in Arizona could cause an increase rather than a drop in crime.
The non-profit group America's Voice sent out a chart on Wednesday, documenting the change in violent crime levels in various Arizona police jurisdictions from 2002 through 2009. The numbers tell two interesting stories.
The first is that, by and large, crime is down across the board. In Arizona as a whole, it has dropped 12 percent in the past seven years. But in major Maricopa County cities with their own police forces -- Phoenix, Mesa, Scottsdale and Tempe -- the rate has dropped even faster. (The group measured within Maricopa County because it is the epicenter of the immigration debate. But in Tuscon, which is not in the county, there has also been a drop in the crime rate since 2002, according to law enforcement statistics).


ArizonaCrime


Those findings alone suggest that the systemic violence often cited as the compelling argument for stricter border laws may be overblown.
But the more telling number may be the crime statistics for the portion of Maricopa County that is under the purview of controversial Sheriff Joe Arpaio. According to data compiled by America's Voice, crime in that area has actually increased 58 percent since 2002.
Arpaio is considered something of a visionary among conservatives with respect to his approach to immigration. Many of his reforms, indeed, have served as a basis for the law that Gov. Jan Brewer tried to implement statewide. But he has clashed with other sheriffs over his methods, with some complaining that such broad anti-immigration policies put an overwhelming burden on law enforcement officials while producing social friction rather than safety.

America's Voice's chart isn't perfect. For one, Arpaio's domain is much smaller than those of the major cities within the county. Crime as a whole remains lower under his watch than, say, in Phoenix (only it's increasing as opposed to decreasing over time). Moreover, not every factor responsible for the violent crime level can or should be tied to immigration.
But the group's underlying point is that the discussion around immigration policy both in Arizona and the United States at large needs to be reoriented. And the raw percentages of violent crime statistics shown in the chart have that effect.

 

Sam Stein stein@huffingtonpost.com

Read More

Michigan about to require women to buy "rape insurance" based on petition signed by 4.2% of voters

Michigan about to require women to buy "rape insurance" based on petition signed by 4.2% of voters

by EclectablogFollow

The War on Women continues...

Graphic by Anne C. SavageCross-posted from Eclectablog.
Thanks to a petition drive that resulted in 4.2% of Michiganders voicing their minority opinion, Michigan is about to become a place where women have to plan ahead for their abortions. If you become pregnant accidentally or if you are raped and become pregnant and haven't purchased a separate abortion coverage rider on your health insurance, you won't be covered. This isn't just for state government insurance plans or those purchased on the health insurance exchange. It's for EVERY insurance plan available in the state.

Apparently no government is too small to get between you, your doctor, and your health insurer.

A controversial initiative that would require women to buy an additional rider on their health insurance if they wanted abortion coverage is one short step away from going to the Legislature, where it is likely to easily become law. Because no one filed a challenge by Monday’s deadline to the more than 315,000 signatures turned in to the Secretary of State, an initiative that would prohibit abortion coverage from being included in standard insurance policies will go forward.
And the Secretary of State certified Monday that Michigan Right to Life, which spearheaded the petition drive, has more than enough valid signatures to start the ball rolling on the new state law. A minimum of 258,088 valid signatures were needed. The anti-abortion activists turned in 315,477 signatures. And the Secretary of State’s elections division estimated that 299,941 of the signatures are valid.
The state Board of Canvassers will meet at 9:30 a.m. Dec. 2 to certify the signatures and then the petition moves to the state Legislature, which has 40 days to approve, reject or do nothing with the legislative ballot initiative.

If Republicans vote it down or fail to act on it, it will be a ballot iniatitive in the next general election. Neither of these is likely given their ideologically extreme views. If they pass it, it becomes law. The other 95.8% of us won’t have a say and neither will Governor Snyder. Don't tell me there isn't a War on Women in Michigan being waged by religious conservatives in our state. The evidence is right before you.
If you want chime in, Planned Parenthood has a petition going asking legislators to allow ALL Michigan voters to have a say in this. You can sign the petition HERE.

Originally posted to Eclectablog - eclectic blogging for a better tomorrow on Wed Nov 27, 2013 at 09:24 AM PST.

Also republished by Motor City Kossacks, Your Government at Work, State & Local ACTION Group, and Michigan, My Michigan.

Read More

Conversations With A Tea Party Patriot: Is Obama Bisexual Or Homosexual?

Conversations With A Tea Party Patriot: Is Obama Bisexual Or Homosexual? (VIDEO)

 
June 16, 2013 | Filed under: Right wing hatred,Videos | Posted by: Kimberley Johnson

Are you a liberal? Well, according to this
scholarTea Party person, you are brainwashed. That “Jewish guy,” what’s his name, is funding liberalism and we are all sheep.
But the burning question, the real debate, is whether or not President Obama is homosexual or bisexual. Yes. They are seriously discussing this. Aside from calling him a Muslim, a Kenyan, a pot smoking Socialist, a Communist and a terrorist, he wants to take away your guns and he beats seven-month old fetus babies over the head.
 Her news sources? Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and “informative” Tea Party meetings.
Seriously, these people are scary and they vote. These are the folks complaining that Sarah Palin isn’t president.
Watch and weep.

---

Kimberley A. Johnson (BIO) – A.K.A. The Anti Coulter is the author of The Virgin Diaries and an activist for women’s rights. Like her on Facebook, Twitter or friend her on FB HERE.

Read More

10 Headlines Fox News Might Have Written Had They Existed During Key Points in U.S. History

November 27, 2013 By Allen Clifton 

I’m sure I’m not the only one who’s noticed the tendency for conservatives to have what can best be described as a foggy recollection of history.  While modern day right-wing media outlets like Fox News mostly paint the Republican party in a positive light, anyone with any kind of common sense knows that, while political parties might have shifted over time, the beliefs of the “conservative” have not.
Hell, these people now try to claim that President Kennedy was actually a conservative and if MLK were alive today he would be a Republican.  And while many conservatives today love programs like Social Security and Medicare, their rabid opposition to anything “socialized” leads me to believe with great certainty that had Fox News been around during the time when Social Security and Medicare were created, conservatives would fiercely oppose both programs as well.
So while this idea has been explored by others, I decided I would give my own take on the type of headline I believe Fox News would write about certain issues that have happened throughout our history.
I figure, let’s have a little fun.
In no particular chronological order, here we go:
1) Watergate:
Liberal Witch Hunt Continues: Mainstream Media’s Relentless Attack on President Nixon Proves Their True Liberal Bias


2) MLK’s “I Have a Dream” Speech:
Racist Martin Luther King Descends on Washington D.C., Continues to Try to Make Race an Issue
3) Social Security:
FDR the Socialist? President Signs Largest Redistribution of Wealth Legislation in United States History
4) Medicare:
Following Kennedy’s Assassination, President Johnson Signs Communist-like Law Forcing Younger Americans to Pay for Free-Loading Seniors 
5) Truman’s Election:
Rampant Voter Fraud Leads to Unexpected Truman Victory
6) Pear Harbor Bombing:
FDR’s Nazi Sympathizing Backfires: German Ally Empire of Japan Attacks United States Naval Base 
7) Custer’s Last Stand:
American Hero General Custer Slaughtered by Pack of Illegal Immigrants
8) Lincoln’s Push to Free Slaves:
“King” Lincoln Wants the Federal Government to be Able to Seize Your Personal Property, Destroy United States Economy
9) University of Alabama Integration:
Police State in Alabama: President Kennedy Attacks States Rights, Sends Military to Protect Inferior Negros Trying to Mix with Whites 
10) Building of the Interstate Highway System:
Government Spending is Out of Control as President Eisenhower Plans Socialist Takeover of Interstate Travel 
Alright, I’m going to stop there.  Honestly, I could do this all day.
Did I exaggerate a bit on some of them?  I’m really not so sure.  Considering the radical nature of the Republican party — tea party Republicans in particular — and Fox News being the mouthpiece for the GOP, I think most of them would be fairly accurate.


But of course Republicans won’t agree with any of these.  Then again, most conservatives are in complete denial about the sad reality of their own party.
I hope those reading this will share this around and see if others agree with what these “headlines” from Fox News might have been.
Image via “If Fox News Was Around” on Facebook

Read More

Cartoon Claims Obamacare Means Men Will Get STDs From Women Who Can Now Afford Birth Control

The Huffington Post  |  By Paige Lavender

 

A cartoon is claiming men can thank Obamacare for getting sexually transmitted diseases from "women who now get free birth control."
The cartoon depicts an angry man next to a woman holding a pack of birth control pills, both with sores on their mouths. Under the words "thanks Obamacare!" are the hashtags #gotbrokencondom, #gotherpes, #gotpregnant and #gotchildsupport.
The cartoon was done by A.F. Branco, whose work is published at a website called Comically Incorrect.
The cartoon is a parody of an ad for Obamacare from DoYouGotInsurance.com called "Let's Get Physical," showing characters named "Susie" and "Nate" described as "hot to trot." In the ad, Susie gives a thumbs up while holding a pack of birth control pills.
See the cartoon below:

UPDATE -- 12:26 p.m.: Branco gave the following statement on the cartoon to HuffPost:

I'm not against birth control or nor do I feel that it is any of my business what people do sexually. However, I do feel that contraceptives are inexpensive and accessible enough that I shouldn't have to pay for them through my taxes. I also feel that my government shouldn't be promoting promiscuous sex as though condoms are the answer to all STDs and promiscuous behavior.

This post has been updated with a version of the cartoon sent to HuffPost by Branco.

Read More

Why the Christian Right Believes It Has Once-in-a-Decade Chance to Impose Its Radical Worldview on America

Why the Christian Right Believes It Has Once-in-a-Decade Chance to Impose Its Radical Worldview on America

A change to obscure procedural rules in the U.S. Senate and the upcoming 2014 elections could be a dangerous window of opportunity.

November 26, 2013  

 

AlterNet / By CJ Werleman

Elections have consequences. The Senate Democrats’ detonation of the “nuclear option” has dramatically raised the stakes for secular progressives in 2014, because if there are two issues that juice the Christian Right the most, it’s women’s reproductive rights and judicial activism. On the latter, the Religious Right senses a once-in-a-decade opportunity to impose its radical worldview on America.
Last week, the Senate voted 52-48 to eliminate the ability of the minority party in the Senate to filibuster executive branch nominees and any judgeship below the Supreme Court by changing the requirements for passage to a simple majority vote. It was a historic move made because there was no other alternative, given the GOP’s unprecedented abuse of the filibuster. In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered. Half occurred under all presidents from Washington through to Bush. Remarkably, the other half has taken place under just one president: Obama.
Why such aggressive judicial obstructionism by the GOP?
Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. writes, “This era’s conservatives will use any means at their disposal to win control of the courts. Their goal is to do all they can to limit Congress’s ability to enact social reforms.”
The Christian Right, which is the GOP’s most reliable and agitated voting bloc, is obsessed with the courts, and the Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit is the nation’s second most important judicial body, which is why Republicans “gave the game away when all but a few of them opposed Obama’s three most recent appointments.”
Now that Democrats were forced into limiting the filibuster, the Christian Right has its incentive to mobilize for 2014. A simple majority control of the Senate gives it an opportunity to pack the courts with judges straight out of the Justice Scalia mold, who once said that separation of church and state would come under scrutiny under a Supreme Court with a Scalia majority. If the Christian Right sweeps Republicans to control the Senate in next year’s midterms, the anti-secularists will take a big step forward toward their stated ideological goals.
The recent Values Voter Summit demonstrated that the likely 2016 GOP frontrunners have a base wish to transform America’s secular state into a tyrannical theocracy — a nirvana absent gays, liberals, immigrants, Muslims and science books. The right-wing media elites are already doing their bit to gin up the far right’s judicial activists with Rush Limbaugh comparing filibuster reform to rape.
Truth in Action Ministries recently released a film titled Freedom on Trial, which features Robert Bork, the failed Reagan Supreme Court nominee, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, and Heritage Foundation vice president Genevieve Wood. The general theme of the documentary is that Christianity is under attack thanks to liberal "activist judges." Bork warns that courts are “teaching the people that religion is evil,” while another conservative attorney claims decisions that go against the Ten Commandments will “destroy the country.”
President Obama’s judicial nominees were being filibustered because they threaten to alter the circuit court’s philosophical balance. The Republican Party has again demonstrated that nullification and obstruction are ready-made weapons to ensure the courts remain dominated by conservatives.

Cass R. Sunstein, author of Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Bad for America, writes, “Our courts now represents the most extreme elements of the Republican Party. These reformers include a number of federal judges—radicals in robes, fundamentalists on the bench….some of these judges do not hesitate to depart radically from longstanding understandings of constitutional meaning.” Political analyst James Fallows writes, “Add that to the simply unprecedented abuse of the filibuster in the years since the Democrats won control of the Senate and then took the White House, you have what we’d identify as a kind of long-term coup if we saw it happening anywhere else.”

The end of the filibuster threatens the far right’s stranglehold on our courts. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell warned, “The solution to this problem is at the ballot box. We look forward to having a great election in November 2014.” John McCain warned, “Democrats will regret this.”
For Republicans to take back the Senate, they’ll need to win six seats. Given Democrats will need to defend 21 seats, compared to just 14 for the GOP, and that seven of those 21 Democratic seats are in states that lean Republican, expect the Christian Right to be the party’s primary water carrier in the midterms.
Former Speaker Tip O’Neill liked to say that all politics is local. He was wrong. It’s tribal. The detonation of the nuclear option ensures the always-mobilized theological tribe will turn out in high numbers in 2014. This means America’s secular state will remain in the balance should the secular left tribe do no better than its impotency in 2010.
CJ Werleman is the author of Crucifying America and God Hates You, Hate Him Back. Follow him on Twitter @cjwerleman.

Read More

Rick Perry Is Quietly Encouraging Texans to Sign Up for Obamacare

Rick Perry Is Quietly Encouraging Texans to Sign Up for Obamacare 

Published October 23, 2013 - 3:30pm

Katie Singh
Burnt Orange Report

Governor Rick Perry has always been one of the Affordable Care Act's most vocal opponents. He's called it a "monstrosity," a "stomach punch to the economy," and a "felony." But that hasn't stopped him from telling Texans to sign up for health coverage from the law.

That's right — Rick Perry's administration is encouraging Texans to enroll in the ACA's health insurance exchanges.

As the Texas Tribune reported last week, Texas will soon be shutting down its high-risk insurance pool for residents with pre-existing conditions, pushing them to seek coverage in the federal insurance marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act. According to the Tribune, "the state has deemed the high-risk pool obsolete, as the Affordable Care Act prohibits insurance companies participating in the federal marketplace...from denying coverage to Texans with pre-existing conditions." Governor Perry signed the bill abolishing the high-risk pool into law in June, and it will be shut down by the end of the year.

This is just the latest in a series of hypocritical moves by Governor Perry regarding the Affordable Care Act. Though he's called the law a "criminal act," Perry certainly has no problem accepting money from it. As we reported last month, Perry has accepted over $100 million in ACA grants, and was asking for even more to help expand a state program providing insurance to those with disabilities.

Perry's actions make it utterly impossible to take his position on the ACA seriously. The crux of his argument against the Affordable Care Act has been that it's better for states to control health policy than the federal government. But by accepting ACA grant money, and now by encouraging high-risk patients to enroll in insurance exchanges, Perry's actions have totally undermined his words. In accepting these parts of the ACA, he's essentially acknowledged that federal grants will enhance the state's existing health programs, and that the health exchanges will provide better coverage for people with pre-existing conditions than what the state has now.

Perry's actions confirm what policy experts have known since the law was passed — it's a step forward for Texans. Stacey Pogue of the Center for Public Policy Priorities told the Texas Tribune she "think[s] that people are going to have many more options and many better options in the marketplace than they do in the health pool today."

Texans in the high-risk pool currently pay twice the market rate for health coverage, but they will be able to find much cheaper options in the health insurance exchanges. The ACA's tax subsidies will also make coverage more affordable. In addition, the insurance plans available in the exchanges will expand the level of care people with pre-existing conditions can receive, "as they must cover 'essential health benefits,' some of which, such as maternity care, aren't [currently] covered in the pool."

So, the next time you hear Rick Perry call the Affordable Care Act an "attack on freedom" or some other hyperbole, remember that even he doesn't really think that. Perry's presidential ambitions mean he'll never admit it, but he's repeatedly accepted parts of the Affordable Care Act as good for Texas. In doing so, he's not only recognized that federal assistance can strengthen state programs, but he's also proven himself to be a Texas-sized hypocrite.

Read More

Right vs. Left in the Midwest

The Heads of State

By LAWRENCE R. JACOBS

Published: November 23, 2013

MINNESOTA and Wisconsin share much more than bone-chilling winters: German and Northern European roots; farming; and, until recently, a populist progressive tradition stretching back a century to Wisconsin’s Fighting Bob La Follette and the birth of Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.

But in 2010 these cousin states diverged. By doing so they began a natural experiment that compares the agendas of modern progressivism and the new right. Wisconsin elected Republicans to majorities in the Legislature and selected a bold and vigorous Republican governor, Scott Walker. Minnesotans elected one of the most progressive candidates for governor in the country, Mark Dayton of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.

A month after Mr. Walker’s inauguration in January 2011, he catapulted himself to the front ranks of national conservative leaders with attacks on the collective bargaining rights of Civil Service unions and sharp reductions in taxes and spending. Once Mr. Dayton teamed up with a Democratic Legislature in 2012, Minnesota adopted some of the most progressive policies in the country.

Minnesota raised taxes by $2.1 billion, the largest increase in recent state history. Democrats introduced the fourth highest income tax bracket in the country and targeted the top 1 percent of earners to pay 62 percent of the new taxes, according to the Department of Revenue.

Which side of the experiment — the new right or modern progressivism — has been most effective in increasing jobs and improving business opportunities, not to mention living conditions?

Obviously, firm answers will require more time and more data, but the first round of evidence gives the edge to Minnesota’s model of increased services, higher costs (mostly for the affluent) and reduced payments to entrenched interests like the insurers who cover the Medicaid population.

Three years into Mr. Walker’s term, Wisconsin lags behind Minnesota in job creation and economic growth. As a candidate, Mr. Walker promised to produce 250,000 private-sector jobs in his first term, but a year before the next election that number is less than 90,000. Wisconsin ranks 34th for job growth. Mr. Walker’s defenders blame the higher spending and taxes of his Democratic predecessor for these disappointments, but according to Forbes’s annual list of best states for business, Wisconsin continues to rank in the bottom half.

Along with California, Minnesota is the fifth fastest growing state economy, with private-sector job growth exceeding pre-recession levels. Forbes rates Minnesota as the eighth best state for business. Republicans deserve some of the credit, particularly for their commitment to education reform. They also argue that Minnesota’s new growth stems from the low taxes and reduced spending under Mr. Dayton’s Republican predecessor, Tim Pawlenty. But Minnesota’s job growth was subpar during Mr. Pawlenty’s eight-year tenure and recovered only under Mr. Dayton.

Higher taxes and economic growth in Minnesota have attracted a surprisingly broad coalition. Businesses complain about taxes, but many cheered Mr. Dayton’s investments in the Mayo Clinic, the new Vikings stadium, the Mall of America and 3M headquarters.

The lion’s share of Minnesota’s new tax revenue was sunk into human capital. While the state’s Constitution required that half of the new revenue balance the budget in 2013, Mr. Dayton invested 71 percent of the remaining funds in K-12 schools and higher education as well as a pair of firsts: all-day kindergarten and wider access to early childhood education. Minnesota was one of the few states that raised education spending under the cloud of the Great Recession. 

By contrast, Mr. Walker’s strategy limited Wisconsin’s ability to invest in infrastructure that would have catalyzed private-sector expansion, and he cut state funding of K-12 schools by more than 15 percent. Per student, this was the seventh sharpest decline in the country.

Health care presents another difference.  When Mr. Walker refused to establish a state health insurance exchange or to expand Medicaid, even though the federal government covered all costs for three years and most costs after that, ideology trumped pragmatism. The uninsured and the ill bear the burden. Many of the 10 percent of uninsured Wisconsinites were denied new Medicaid benefits and were shunted off to the federal exchange’s stumbling website.

Mr. Dayton is on course to improve Minnesota’s already low uninsured rate. He expanded Medicaid to cover an additional 35,000 people and accepted Washington’s offer to pick up the cost — as half the states, including a growing number with Republican governors, have. Mr. Dayton also created a state insurance exchange, which enrolled more than 90 percent of its first month’s target. Meanwhile, Minnesota’s tradition of innovative medical care and nonprofit insurers produced premiums in its insurance exchange that are, on average, the lowest in the country, well below premiums in Wisconsin. 

Mr. Dayton’s embrace of progressive fiscal policy is matched by a fierce crackdown on lenient payments to insiders. Cuts in payments to managed care organizations serving Medicaid saved $175 million and produced lower rates in 2013 than in 2010, despite higher costs over all.

Of course, liberal aspirations contend with stubborn realities. Minnesota is a health reform pioneer, but it is dogged by entrenched problems in rural areas, where medical costs and premiums remain relatively high and the capacity of medical care providers may be overstretched by new demand.  As for fiscal policy, Mr. Dayton would have applied sales taxes more broadly, while lowering their rates, but faced intense protests from a broad section of businesses and Democratic legislators who blocked him.

Even after tempering their initial plans, Democrats face a backlash. According to a recent Minnesota Chamber of Commerce survey, a quarter of Minnesota companies — a 10-year high — describe the state’s business climate as worse than elsewhere. Mr. Dayton and his colleagues got the message and are likely to roll back new sales taxes on farm equipment and warehousing facilities that had threatened to leave.

Evidence and common sense should matter more in our overheated political debates. The lesson from the upper Midwest is that rigid anti-tax dogma fails to deliver a convincing optimistic vision that widens economic opportunity and security. The excesses of liberalism may lurk, but Minnesota is building a modern progressivism that plows a hopeful path.

Lawrence R. Jacobs is a professor of political science at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota and the author, with Theda Skocpol, of “Health Care Reform and American Politics.”

A version of this op-ed appears in print on November 24, 2013, on page SR4 of the New York edition with the headline: Right vs. Left in the Midwest.

Read More

Local News Station Busts Darrell Issa for Silencing Supporters During ACA Investigation

Local News Station Busts Darrell Issa for Silencing Supporters During ACA Investigation

By: Sarah Jones
Tuesday, November, 26th, 2013

The mainstream media might be letting the public down, but some local media outlets are still diligently reporting the news instead of chasing after Beltway Cool Kids with a GOP playbook in their front pocket.
Melissa Hankins at Charlotte, North Carolina’s WBTV 3 reported that Darrell Issa’s ObamaCare “hearings” in Gastonia called “Obamacare Implementation: Sticker Shock of Increased Premiums for Health Care Coverage” weren’t exactly unbiased.
In fact, people who had positive things to say about the ACA were not only told they couldn’t speak, but they were told that if they spoke “out of turn” they’d have to leave.

 Watch here:

WBTV 3 News, Weather, Sports, and Traffic for Charlotte, NC

 

The meeting got off to a contentious start on Friday, with people complaining that they won’t get a chance to be heard. People were told they would be removed from the meeting if they spoke out of turn. Residents were angry because Issa picked the five witnesses that we will hear from, all residents of North Carolina.

The piece goes on to list several supporters of the ACA whom Issa refused to let speak.
Allison Ward, who says the ACA offers her insurance she can afford for the first time ever, wanted to be heard. If she had been chosen to “testify” (is it really a hearing if it’s all staged? Not so much), she would have said, “My president has said I hear you, I’m going to help you and frankly the way I see it is that other people are getting in the way.”
You can see why Issa wouldn’t let Ms. Ward speak.
Another Charlotte resident wanted to speak about how no one would give her insurance because she was diagnosed with MS. Dana Wilson said the ACA changed the fact that no one would insure her. Ms. Wilson thinks if it’s a real hearing, then all sides should be heard. “I think if it’s a true hearing than all sides should be heard and they don’t want to hear us,” she told WBTV 3.
The reported explained that the area has seen some of the highest increases in premiums in the country, and that’s why Issa was there. Fair enough. But that’s no reason not to hear from supporters of the law.
Issa claims that no Democrats picked any witnesses and that is how he justifies not using supporters of the law. But see, that’s an admission that Issa is not trying to get at the truth, as he claims he is. He’s got a show to put on, and he can only use haters in this script. It’s called propaganda, and it’s following the GOP playbook exactly. The main messages of the GOP attack ACA playbook are: “Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance”, “Obamacare Increases Health Care Costs” and “The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk”. ”
Good old Issa is up to his usual tricks, where he only lets the people who he knows will say what he needs them to say in front of the cameras, and then he blames Democrats when he’s busted Issa got busted doing this on Benghazi as well. Issa refused to let the experts on the Benghazi attacks speak in front of the cameras, and then blamed the White House for not inviting them:

While the rest of the media is reporting that the co-chairmen of the independent review on the Benghazi attacks, Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, have finally agreed to testify, in truth Pickering was not invited by Darell Issa (R-CA) to testify at the televised hearing. When called out on his lies on national TV, Issa finally tried to blame the White House for not inviting Pickering.

Darrell Issa wants you to believe that he is wasting all of this money just to get the truth, but the truth involves refusing to let anyone with a dissenting point of view be heard. It’s just like the founders envisioned…
Only not.
h/t Diane Sweet at Crooks and Liars

Local News Station Busts Darrell Issa for Silencing Supporters During ACA Investigation was written by Sarah Jones for PoliticusUSA.

© PoliticusUSA, Tue, Nov 26th, 2013 — All Rights Reserve

Read More

Ted Cruz Quite Possibly Just Made His Most Ridiculous Statement — Ever

November 26, 2013

By Allen Clifton


It’s no secret that I absolutely cannot stand Texas Senator Ted Cruz.  I still go back and forth between him and Sarah Palin when trying to figure out who I loathe more.  Currently the edge goes to Cruz simply because he’s actually a senator, whereas Sarah Palin is nothing more than a failed vice presidential candidate and the Alaska governor who quit before her first term was up.
That being said, it’s not difficult at all to find ample quotes from Ted Cruz that are completely absurd.
But while there are plenty of quotes proving Ted Cruz is an idiot, the context of his recent comments about Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid using the “nuclear option” to change the rules of the Senate might just be his most ridiculous ever.
During an exchange with Bloomberg News’ Al Hunt, Hunt asked Cruz about the change in the rules made by Senator Reid:

Hunt: Will it complicate passing budgets or debt ceilings or anything?
Cruz: Of course it will. I mean, it will poison the atmosphere of the Senate.

Yes, that’s Ted Cruz accusing Harry Reid and Democrats of poisoning the atmosphere of the Senate.  The guy who many within his own party can’t stand.  The man who staged a fake 21-hour filibuster where he tried to compare “Obamacare” to Darth Vader and misconstrued the meaning of Green Eggs and Ham on the Senate floor.  The same Senator who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to force a government shutdown, knowing that it stood absolutely zero chance at accomplishing his ridiculous “goal.”
The same Senator Cruz who, in his very brief time in the United States Senate, has done absolutely nothing except use his position as senator to set himself up for a 2016 presidential bid – at the cost of the taxpayers, of course.
Ted Cruz epitomizes “poison” in the Senate.  It’s clear to anyone with any kind of common sense that Cruz only ran for the Senate because he had presidential ambitions for 2016 and needed a way to get his name known to voters.  And since his election he’s taken up the strategy that the only thing he’ll do is pander to the tea party, hoping that if he builds enough support with far-right Republicans, he’ll set himself up to claim the GOP nomination in 2016.
But like I said, you don’t have to believe me – many within his own party can’t even stand him.  Look at how quickly many leading Republicans emphatically denounced the idea of shutting down the government again once another vote on the budget will have to be held in a couple of months.
So while what he said wasn’t the most asinine thing he’s ever said, the context behind what he expressed might just be the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard him say.
Of all people, for Ted Cruz to accuse anyone of introducing poisonous behavior in the Senate could be a definition for hypocrisy.  And while this just might rank at the top of my list for ridiculous comments from the Texas senator, I’m sure it won’t be long before he says something else outrageous to trump its stupidity.

Read More

20 Clues that you not a Progressive

by Grace Kelly on November 26, 2013 

 

Just like “Jesus” has become a label to pin on without bothering to help the poor, “progressive” has also become a label to pin on for popularity. These personal thoughts would be clues that you not a Progressive candidate.

1) When I run for office, I will have a focus group decide my stances on issues.
2) I am a nice person, why would I want to disagree with someone?
3) Education on issues is for lobbyists not elected officials.
4) Do I look good?
5) I won. Now my job is keeping my job.
6) In public I recycle, in private I won’t bother.
7) I think climate change will not significantly impact my personal life.
8) On issues, I will look for big media win possibilities and ignore incremental media-invisible win possibilities.
9) Smiling and smoozing are my important assets.
9) Hanging out with the 1% is proving one has made it in life.
10) What’s all the hype about people having to work on Thanksgiving?
11) Those long documents on issues that everyone sends are so boring.
12) I will let my assistant handle the correspondence on all the non-important people.
13) Republicans get to drive the more fun cars.
14) I wonder what office I could run for next?
15) I love that audience when I speak. It is good to be loved back.
16) I wonder if I can get one of those free nifty trips.
17) Isn’t great how neat and clean my desk is?
18) Enough on issues, can we talk about the Vikings now?
19) I have wait to the end of the vote, to see what is my best strategic move.
20) Someone at my door, another opportunity to get something.

Feel free to add in the comments, what you have heard from non-progressive candidates.

Read More

Palin: Half-Term Half-Wit God ‘blessed’ with me a platform on Fox News to defend myself

Palin: God ‘blessed’ with me a platform on Fox News to defend myself (via Raw Story )

Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday defended colleague Sarah Palin said that he found comparisons between federal debt to human slavery to be “fairly unobjectionable.” Earlier this month, MSNBC host Martin Bashir had blasted Palin after a speech…

---

---

Read More

Three of the Biggest Lies Republicans Tell About Themselves

Three of the Biggest Lies Republicans Tell About Themselves

November 25, 2013 By Allen Clifton  

 

When I talk with Republicans, I often feel like I’m speaking with someone who lives inside of a bubble where the outside world and all of its realities are simply unable to penetrate.  It’s the school teacher who votes Republican despite Republicans stripping teachers unions of collective bargaining power.  It’s the individual who’s soon to rely on Medicare and Social Security, claiming they don’t need the federal government.  The person on welfare who voted for the politician who just voted to cut their benefits.
But one area where Republicans excel at is propaganda.  They’re really good at it.  They’ve successfully convinced millions of people to be absolute hypocrites, vote against their own interests and believe that giving rich people more money benefits the rest of us.
Basically, they’ve convinced people to lie to themselves.
So I decided I would give a quick rundown of three of the bigger lies Republicans perpetuate about themselves (though there are far more than three).
1) They’re fiscally conservative 
This is probably the biggest joke of them all.  It’s amazing to me that this is real platform they actually run on, yet haven’t had a Republican president who’s actually balanced the budget since President Eisenhower in the 1950′s.  Hell, their “conservative hero” Ronald Reagan came close to quadrupling the national debt during his eight years.  How exactly is someone a “beacon for fiscal responsibility” when they almost quadrupled the national debt?
And I know some conservatives will do what they always do and blame Democrats for Reagan running up our national debt.  I love reading the asinine conclusion that the near quadrupling of our debt was the fault of Tip O’Neill, not Reagan.  I hate to break it to these people, but Reagan signed off on every single piece of legislation during his eight years in office that led to the massive growth of our national debt.  Congressional Democrats couldn’t simply enact legislation without Reagan’s approval.
Then again, conservatives who make this argument clearly don’t understand how government works.  They’re also the ones who give all of the credit for our balanced  budget in the 90′s to congressional Republicans.
Then look at George W. Bush.  He took a balanced budget and completely wrecked it.  It took him one year to send us back into deficits after President Clinton gave us a surplus.  And don’t even tell me that our budget surplus should be credited to the Republicans in Congress.  If they were the primary reason why we had a balanced budget, it would have continued after Clinton left the White House, when they were still in charge of Congress — but guess what?  It didn’t.
What Bush did was cut taxes, then started two wars.  That’s like buying an $80,000 sports car just after taking a massive pay cut at work.  He reduced our revenue then increased our spending.  How again is that being “fiscally conservative”?
The only area Republicans point to for this claim of “fiscal responsibility” is their opposition to tax hikes.  But guess what?  Cutting taxes has nothing to do with being smart with money.
Oh, but they’ll cut programs that help the poor and the needy, that’ll balance our budget, right?  But you damn sure better not mention cutting oil subsidies or closing tax loopholes for the rich — Republicans will have no part in eliminating either of those.
The only place Republicans are fiscally conservative is in their minds.
2) Small government 
This is another joke.  I love how the party which actively campaigns for president on the pretense of passing Constitutional Amendments that would define traditional marriage is somehow the party of “small government.”
Or the party that continues to pass laws in Republican-controlled states attacking the right for a woman to have an abortion, requiring ultrasounds or transvaginal probes before an abortion can be performed.  That’s small government? 
Hell, if they had their way there would still be a ban on homosexuals in the military.
The fact is, Republicans love government.  Well, as long as that government is supporting something they want.  The only time they’re advocates for “small government” is when the government forces them to do things like — give people civil rights.
I live in Texas, a highly Republican state, where you can’t even buy liquor on Sunday due to outdated laws passed decades ago.  Hell, there are some counties in Texas where you still can’t buy alcohol at all.  How “small government” of them.  Isn’t Texas supposed to be a beacon for “small government values”?  Right.
The truth is, Republicans love government when they can use it to try to enforce their bigotry and ignorance, but hate government when it prevents them from enforcing their bigotry and ignorance.
3) Pro-life 
Being anti-abortion doesn’t make you “pro-life.”  Just like supporting the right for a woman to have an abortion doesn’t make you “pro-abortion.”
Republicans constantly prove that they don’t give a crap about life the moment it’s out of the womb.  Sure, they’ll use a fetus to stir up anger within people to get votes, but the fact of the matter is once that baby is born — they couldn’t care less.
The GOP has consistently cut funding for programs that help the poor and the needy.  They’ve strongly stood against access to health care for all Americans.  There’s even a push now by many to privatize Medicare and Social Security so that these programs are handed over to greedy corporations that can gamble with the future of millions of Americans.
There are tens of millions of children who will have less to eat this holiday because of the Republican cuts to our nation’s SNAP program.  And if Republicans get their way, tens of billions more will be cut from the program.
In a state like Texas — where millions of its citizens go without health care — Rick Perry refused to expand Medicaid coverage so that millions of Texans could receive health care, some for the very first time.  This is a practice we’ve seen all over the country in many Republican-controlled states.
How “pro-life” of these Republicans to deny access to health care for millions of Americans who desperately need it.
And the sad fact is, Republicans only really “care” about a fetus because it helps them get votes.  Otherwise they wouldn’t oppose — and cut — funding to programs that would help millions of poor children all across the United States.
When Republicans say they’re “pro-life” all they really mean is they’re anti-abortion — that’s it.  To call Republicans “pro-life” is an absolute joke.  Because once that baby is born, they couldn’t care less what happens to it, as long as it votes Republican in 18 years.
Now of course these aren’t the only ways Republicans lie to themselves.  These are just three of the bigger “labels” they give themselves that I find completely absurd.
But I’m sure to any Republican reading this, I’m absolutely wrong.  Sure I am.  Of course, they’ve most likely never voted for a Republican president who’s balanced the budget, they probably support a Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage, and you can bet they support massive cuts to welfare programs that feed millions of poor children.
Like I said, it’s like they live in a delusional bubble that reality is simply unable to penetrate.

Read More

5 reasons why the American people can't stand the Republican party 

Robert SobelOrlando Liberal Examiner

February 28, 2013

 

The Republican party often has people scratching their heads and it's not just "liberals" who are doing it. With The Republican party splitting into multiple factions, the once proud political party has been thrown into disarray Here are five reasons why the American people can't stand the Grand Old Party.
1. Bush wastes money and American lives-
After the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001, everyone throughout the country felt a variety of emotions. Some were upset, others scared or just plain angry. There isn't a right or wrong answer in how people felt because what happened was so horrific. It's natural to want revenge and that is how George W. Bush and the Republican party were able to get the country into a huge mess while lining their own pockets. Preying on the fear that came with the attacks on 9/11, the Bush administration decided to wage war, but with the wrong country. With his father, George H.W Bush, unable to capture Saddam Hussein in the early 1990s, George W. Bush wanted to finish the job that his father couldn't.
Knowing that Iraq was run by an evil dictator, had plenty of oil and could be a goldmine for companies to rebuild, Bush used the fear that overcame the United States to wage war with a country that had nothing to do with the attacks on that September day. Saddam Hussein was captured less than a year into the invasion of Iraq, but nearly a decade later the United States was still there.
The reason given to the American people for the invasion was that Iraq possessed "weapons of mass destruction," but later Americans were told that Iraq didn't have these weapons and that the United States had received "bad intelligence." Many believe that there were never any weapons in Iraq and that it was an excuse to invade the country. Many companies, such as Dick Cheney's Halliburton, made billions rebuilding in Iraq while others ran off to the bank as well. According to a 2007 report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the war in Iraq would cost $1.9 trillion dollars, or about $6,300 for each U.S citizen. Mix that with the thousands of courageous soldiers who lost their lives or became injured and you have a mess that every American should be mad about.
2. GOP Depression-
Today's economic climate is a scary one. Though the unemployment rate has dropped to 7.9%, there is still only one job opening for every four Americans looking for work. As Ronald Reagan dropped the top tax rate from 70% to 28% during his eight years in office and deregulated big business and the financial sector, the United States was placed on a path of economic destruction. President Clinton stabilized the economy enough that he was able to hand a surplus to George W. Bush in 2001, but all the reckless actions by Wall Street drove the United States to the brink until a taxpayer bailout of the banks was needed in 2008. They say history repeats itself and that is true in this case.
When the economy took a hard down turn in the 1980s and in 2008, if was because the same economic policies were repeated that caused the Stock Market to crash in 1929. The Great Depression was caused by deregulation and bad tax policies, put in place by three consecutive Republican presidents. Starting with Warren Harding in 1921, through Calvin Coolidge and then Herbert Hoover, the United States fell into an economic depression. It took President Franklin D. Roosevelt, his New Deal and World War 2 to help get the United States back on track. Roosevelt had to deal with Republican opposition in congress and a new war, but after years in office, was able to get the job done.
3. Medicare Part D-
Republicans today seem to hate anything that the government does until they need it. Conservatives scream about programs like Social Security and unemployment benefits, but once they enter retirement or lose their jobs, they're quick to hold on to government assistance. Republicans want to privatize programs like Social Security and Medicare by taking them out of the government and putting them into greedy hands on Wall Street. While conservatives are opposed to these programs now, you don't need to go back too far to find Republicans supporting parts of programs like Medicare.
George Bush signed into law the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Part D) which went into effect on January 1, 2006. The program was supposed to subsidize the costs of prescription drugs for those who receive Medicare, but it was never paid for. In the long run, Medicare Part D raised prices, cost taxpayers billions of dollars and while the cost of Medicare Part D has been projected to be less than originally thought, much of the declining cost is due to President Obama's new health care law that was passed in 2010.
4. Sexual Morality?-
The Republican party pounds their chest as the voice of morality, clutching their Bible, fighting back against the LGBT community and abortion and love to bring up that President Clinton cheated on his wife. If people make certain claims, they should learn to look in the mirror first. Former Republican Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich has been married three times and has a dark history of infidelity. While Gingrich was one of the leading voices against President Clinton in the 1990s, he was actually cheating on his own wife. In fact, while his wife was in remission with cancer, Gingrich served her divorce papers.
The list of Republicans who have engaged in sexual affairs is endless. Former Republican mayor of Waterbury, Connecticut, Philip Giordano, is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing two underage girls. Republican congressman and anti-gay activist, Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar while Republican legislator, Richard Gardner, admitted to molesting his two daughters. This doesn't mean that Democrats haven't done anything like this in the past, they have, but there's an old saying - "those who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones."
5. Unions aren't the problem!-
Just the word "union" seems to have a negative connotation these days. Conservatives point their finger at unions for every fiscal issue that the country has closing their eyes to the fact that unions are fighting for the middle class. Whether you're a member of a union of not, you must understand what a union is there for. Unions are a collective voice for workers to make sure that their rights are protected. These rights are not limited to, but include safe working conditions, fair pay, health care and other benefits. As executive pay has risen to an all-time high, wages for workers remain stagnant and are at an all-time low. Unions are put together to make sure that those at the top don't hold back the average middle class worker, but Republicans have tried to destroy the voice of the middle class for decades.
From the time Ronald Reagan fired the Air Traffic Controllers on August 5, 1981 to Republicans trying to push for "right-to-work" laws across the country, the voice of the middle class is starting to become silent. Republicans claim union workers are "lazy" and "greedy," but that is not the case. Are there workers who take advantage of the benefits of being in a union? Of course there are, every system has issues, but the majority are grateful and work hard. If Republicans want to truly be patriotic they should start supporting the middle class, not just the wealthy.

Read More

Heart of Darkness: Criminal Investigation of WI Recall $

Heart of Darkness: Criminal Investigation of WI Recall $

Posted by Mary Bottari on November 25, 2013

 

 

The post-Citizens United dark money showdown is underway in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin makes sense. In November 2010, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker swept to power at a time of economic turmoil with a promise to create 250,000 jobs. Instead, with Republican control of both houses, he passed a bill knee-capping public-sector unions, sparking an 18-day occupation of the Capitol and weeks of mass protests, regularly topping 100,000.
The controversy immediately kicked off a struggle for control of the Wisconsin Senate. Between 2011 and 2012 Wisconsin voters across the state knocked on doors, circulated recall petitions, and put an unprecedented number of state officials up for recall. Thirteen state senators eventually faced recall elections. Close to one million people signed recall petitions for the Governor and Lt. Governor, and even before an election was certified, outside money began to saturate the state.  $137.5 million is estimated to have been spent on the recalls in total, the vast majority from out-of-state players.
The source of much of that spending remains unknown. Millions were spent in by "dark money" nonprofits -- most of them organized under 501(c)(4) of the tax code -- that allow deep pocketed donors to hide their identity. These groups spent boatloads, but attempted to evaded state disclosure laws by running phony issue ads that do not expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a candidate. These nonprofits are supposed to be social welfare groups, and cannot exist for the "primary purpose" of participating in political activity. Many have interpreted this to mean that no more than 49 percent of their funds can be spent on "issue" advertising.
Dozens of 501(c)(4)s spent huge sums in defense of Team Walker. Not only did they not disclose their donors, they engaged in a dizzying array of fund transfers, spelled out by my colleague Brendan Fischer at the Center for Media and Democracy/PRWatch, perhaps in an effort to stay under the 49 percent line.
These groups played big in the election along with Walker's own campaign committee and the Republican Governors Association, which dropped $9 million on what are called "independent expenditures." Independent expenditure groups are required to register with the state and swear an oath not to coordinate with candidates under Wisconsin law 11.06 (7).
As the funds flooded the state, no one was checking to see if the diversity of groups were playing by the rules. But now someone may be doing just that. In the past few months, a special prosecutor with Republican credentials has issued dozens of subpoenas reportedly related to the recall spending. Because of Wisconsin's unusual "John Doe" statute and its secrecy rules, little is known about the grounds of the investigation, although some reports say prosecutors are looking at illegal coordination between candidates and purportedly "independent" groups.

News Breaks of Criminal Probe into Recall Spending

A John Doe investigation is Wisconsin's version of a grand jury, where subpoenas can be issued and testimony can be compelled behind closed doors. There is no jury, just a judge overseeing proceedings under strict secrecy rules. According to news reports, a high-powered special prosecutor Francis Schmitz (who spent many years as a counter terrorism investigator) is in charge. The right-wing press fails to admit it, but Schmitz has bona fide Republican credentials having once been a finalist for appointment as the U.S. Attorney in Milwaukee during President George W. Bush's administration.
News reports indicate that Schmitz could be delving into "illegal coordination" between the groups based on evidence that came out of an earlier John Doe probe into Scott Walker 2010 race for governor. But because of the secrecy of the proceedings few know the exact nature of the probe and other laws, outside of campaign finance laws could be implicated.
Although the right-wing media likes to portray the previous John Doe probe as a witch hunt that came to naught, in fact six people were found guilty of felony and misdemeanor crimes and many -- including two top aides of then-County Executive Scott Walker -- will be spending quite a bit of time in the pokey. The convictions included various charges, but the allegation that county employees set up and operated a secret Wi-Fi system to raise campaign funds while on the taxpayer payroll, netted two convictions. (See our history of the case, revelatory Walker emails, and the stunning charging documents.) This aspect of the investigation closed in March with no charges against Walker himself or his political campaign committee.
While rumors of a new John Doe had been circulating for weeks, Dan Bice of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel nailed it on October 24, breaking the story and confirming a five-county investigation. Why five counties? Bice cites a new Wisconsin law that allows legislators to be tried in their own counties, away from "liberal" Madison judges. The law was passed after the last Speaker of the Assembly, Scott Jensen, was charged with felony crimes and wanted to be tried in conservative Waukesha, a move that ultimately worked out well for him.
The right-wing site the Wisconsin Reporter, quickly picked up the story, citing unnamed sources to report that three groups were implicated in the investigation, including the Republican Governors Association, the Club for Growth, and David Koch's Americans for Prosperity. But the Wall Street Journal editorial board later expanded that list, naming some 29 groups (all Republican, mostly 501(c)(4)s), and the Walker campaign itself.
The Wall Street Journal put Wisconsin's Eric O'Keefe on the record as saying he received a subpoena in the John Doe. O'Keefe is an old Koch buddy going back to the days when David Koch ran for Vice President of the United States, bankrolling the Libertarian ticket in 1980. He helped create the Sam Adams Alliance, which trains Tea Party activists, and he is a co-founder of the SuperPac called the Campaign for Primary Accountability and is on the board of directors of Wisconsin's Club for Growth. He was spotted jetting around with Walker as the governor traveled the country raising funds for his recall fight.
O'Keefe's comments put Wisconsin Club for Growth at the center of the controversy. RJ Johnson, a longtime Republican operative, often cited in the press as "an official" at Wisconsin Club for Growth, is a close friend of Walker's -- named as his "chief political strategist" in Walker's new book Unintimidated. Club for Growth also spent an estimated $9 million on the recalls, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. Just days after Walker "dropped the bomb" and unveiled his union-busting budget repair bill, Club for Growth was up on air with TV and radio ads praising Walker and attacking public employees. When Walker's popularity plummeted, RJ Johnson advised Walker to get the bill passed "as soon as possible," Walker writes in Unintimidated.
The Wall Street Journal has spun the John Doe as an attack on free speech, a line that was immediately picked up by the echo-chamber on the right. Wall Street Journal board member and political operative Stephen Moore is a founder of Club for Growth and also served on the board of Donors Capital's dark money machine. He is also an ALEC "scholar" who helps to write and produce ALEC's debunked "Rich States, Poor States" report.
O'Keefe's move to break the story with friends at the Journal seemed foolish to some, as he could face sanctions under the John Doe, but he no doubt has the confidence of a man with a lot of money and quite a few lawyers ready to go to the wall on the all "money is free speech" theory.

Dark Money Hires Powerhouse Lawyers

The whole John Doe became much more interesting when the roster of high-powered defense attorneys moved to kill it. Madison's Dean Strang asked the Court of Appeals to halt the investigation on a number of grounds, but the appellate court rejected some of his claims out of hand and asked for more information on others. The Court of Appeals made the unusual decision to unseal its ruling in the case, bringing a welcome degree of transparency to the proceedings.
Strang is a highly respected criminal defense attorney. His most recent high-profile client was Steven Avery, who was jailed for murdering a young photographer shortly after being released from prison and declared innocent in another crime. Strang is also credited with setting up Wisconsin's Federal Defenders program. This is not his first foray into the world of campaign finance, he also represented railroad magnate William Gardner, who was convicted of making illegal campaign contributions to Walker in the first John Doe case. Gardner hid his identity by funneling funds to friends and employees asking them to hand over fat checks to Walker, thereby exceeding the state's campaign contribution limits. It's possible that more of this type of activity has been uncovered in the John Doe.
Joining Strang in representing the posse of groups under investigation are Todd P. Graves and Edward D. Greim, Tea Party attorneys from Kansas (home of Koch Industries). Grime and Graves are representing Tea Party groups and the Texas Public Policy Institute that are angry at the IRS for their clunky targeting of groups with political sounding names during their application process for tax-free status in the 2012 election cycle. Todd Graves was one of the six U.S. Attorneys improperly fired by the Bush White House in 2006 in order to pave the way for more political appointees.
Another prominent attorney with clients in the case is Michael Bresnick, a Washington, DC, lawyer who was the head of President Barack Obama's Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force that netted the $13 billion dollar settlement against JP Morgan Chase.
James Bopp, Jr., the Dean of Darkness who has spent 30 years challenging federal and state campaign finance laws, has joined the fray. Bopp is the mastermind behind the Citizens United case, which likened non-profit group spending on issues ads to free speech and opened the flood gates for undisclosed corporate spending in elections. He is also behind the latest Supreme Court case on election spending, McCutcheon, which could erase limits on individual campaign donations. As the primary proponent of the "money is speech theory" to challenging clean election laws, Bopp thinks that anyone should be able to spend any amount they want in any election and that there is no reason for disclosure because "the vast majority of people don't care," he says.
Bopp may think he has his finger on the pulse, but he neglects to mention that every time the issue is put on the ballot, citizen's vote overwhelmingly for disclosure, for an end to big money politics and even for overturning his Citizens United case. So far, more than 16 states and more than 500 communities have taken a stand against Bopp's "money is speech" theory.

Dark Money Press Ramps Up the Intimidation

Dan Bice, the 20-year veteran of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel who broke the news of both John Does, is being slammed by right-wing media spinning the probe as a "witch hunt" and a "vendetta." His report of a major investigation underway in the state was called as "low point in the history of modern journalism," on the Journal's right-wing news site called RightWisconsin. Notably, RightWisconsin was launched with a handout from Club for Growth. Fortunately, the Journal Sentinel is unlikely to toss overboard the award-winning reporter who is one of the only people left in the state who actually breaks news.
Initially led by Milwaukee County prosecutors, the investigation is now being headed up by another big gun, former federal prosecutor Schmitz. Because he prosecuted terrorists for a living, Schmitz snapshot is not easily available online, prompting one reporter to hand draw a goofy portrait of him. Schmidt should be ready to have his house staked out and photos of him picking up the newspaper in his jammies published. During the last John Doe, the right-wing press made a big deal of the yard signs posted by one of the prosecutor's wives.
So far there have been no reports of any Democratic groups being investigated, which is not conclusive. The Democrats had a number of independent expenditure groups on their side, but spent very little through any of the controversial 501(c)(4)s. This chart by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign shows the players and how much they spent or were estimated to have spent.
Illegal coordination is rarely charged in Wisconsin. Common Cause state director Jay Heck points to a 1997 case that netted big fines for the players. In 1997, former state Supreme Court Justice John Wilcox settled a suit that charged that his campaign had illegally coordinated with an independent expenditure group. He and his campaign manager, Mark Block, were fined and Block was barred from working on any state campaigns for seven years. Block went on to work for David Koch's Americans for Prosperity and run the Herman Cain presidential campaign in 2011 (the Center for Media and Democracy initiated a request with the IRS to investigate Block's use of a separate charity to help fund Cain campaign trips).
With regard to Bopp, Heck has this to say. In all of his years as an advocate for clean and open government, Heck says he has "never come across a Wisconsinite who said they wanted to know less about money in politics, they always want to know more" about the forces shaping their democracy.
For his part, Walker is staying mum. This week Walker told Bice, "To me, I'm leaving it up to the people who are authorized to talk about it." Walker said: "If you know anything about it, then you are legally prohibited from talking about it. If you don't know anything about it, you shouldn't be talking about it."
"So either way, I'm not going to talk about it."

Read More

Just How Stupid, Mean and Spiteful is the Evangelical-Controlled GOP/Tea Party South? Here’s How Stupid

November 22, 2013 By Frank Schaeffer

“What we could see, 10 years from now, is a Mason-Dixon line of health care… And [the GOP South] is doing it out of spite. Elsewhere, the expansion of Medicaid, the health care program for the poor, has been one of the few success stories of Obamacare… One side (with exceptions for conservative Midwest and mountain states) would be the insured North, a place where health care coverage was affordable and available to most people…
“On the other side would be the uninsured South, where health care for the poor would amount to treating charity cases in hospital emergency rooms. The South, already the poorest region in the country, with all the attendant problems, would acquire another distinction — a place where, if you were sick and earned just enough money that you didn’t qualify for traditional Medicare, you might face the current system’s version of a death panel.”  By TIMOTHY EGAN ( The South’s New Lost Cause, NY Times)

Read More

Fox News host: Obamacare ‘touches so many people’s lives’ unlike ‘Katrina or the Iraq war’

Fox News host: Obamacare ‘touches so many people’s lives’ unlike ‘Katrina or the Iraq war’ (via Raw Story )

Fox News host Martha MacCallum on Monday suggested that President Barack Obama’s health care law was even worse than devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina or the Iraq War because it “touches so many people’s lives.” In a segment on America…

---

---

Read More