Monday, April 28, 2014

Snoop Dogg’s Incredible Response To Sterling’s Racist Rant

By Alan J. McStravick

By now, you have no doubt seen the name ‘Donald Sterling’ trending across your social media platforms. If you are coming to the game late, be sure to catch Addicting Info’s own Randa Morris’ take on the obscenely racist rant of an obviously intoxicated NBA team owner.

After the 9 plus minute audio recording of the drunken Los Angeles Clippers owner was released by TMZ, the internet came together in condemnation of Sterling. From legendary sportscaster Keith Olbermann advising the Clippers to refuse to take the court to calls for newly crowned Commissioner of the NBA Adam Silver to act against the team owner, the anger has been swift and decisive.
But it was hip-hop superstar Snoop Dogg who shared his disdain for Donald Sterling in the most erudite and civil manner possible. Well actually, Snoop Dogg’s message for “the motherfucker that own the Clippers” was delivered by Instagram and is most certainly NSFW.



Snoop Dogg is nothing if not a masterful wordsmith, and I couldn’t agree with him more.

Saturday, April 26, 2014

The Daily Show: 'The Broads Must Be Crazy'


Jon Stewart and The Daily Show's fantastic --- MUST-WATCH (just for the crying clips!) --- take on the outrageously absurd and demeaning media-enforced double-standard faced by female politicians over their male counterparts...
 
PART 1


PART 2

Swatting Hoax: Is Online Gamers' Revenge Turning Deadly?

"Police swarmed a Long Island home Tuesday, responding to what they thought was a hostage situation and possible murder scene only to learn the call was a hoax targeting a teenage boy.

"About 60 officers and emergency responders went to the home on Laurelton Boulevard in Long Beach after receiving a 911 call from someone claiming to have killed his mother and brother there.

"When they arrived, they found no evidence of a shooting and learned no one at the home had called 911. Instead, a 17 year old boy believed to be the target of a hoax was in the shower, and his family was fine."

Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian discuss the "Swatting" trend and its potentially deadly consequences during this segment of The Young Turks.

GOP attempt to regulate your micro-beer

Serious "buzz-kill" in Florida, as Republicans find their latest target to attack, the craft brewing industry. Ed Schultz and Joey Redner discuss the impact of conservative policies on your beer.

Friday, April 25, 2014

NYPD's Twitter Outreach Backfires as People Expose Their Brutality

By Ryan Denson

The New York Police Department, in the last couple years facing harsh criticism for their controversial and unconstitutional ‘Stop and Frisk’ took to twitter and launched their own advertisement, using the hashtag #myNYPD with the picture, saying “Do you have a photo w/ a member of the NYPD? Tweet us & tag it . It may be featured on our Facebook:”
nypd 1

This was in April. Within two days, just two days, Twitter would ignite with pictures of police brutality from all across New York City, exposing the NYPD for brutality, inappropriate conduct, and sheer stupidity, all while using the force’s #myNYPD.

Some of these images are NSFW, and some will make your blood boil. Thanks to social media like Twitter, images, words and actual people are able to expose the often overlooked and dark side of the ones who are here to protect us.

This woman, Molly Crabapple, was arrested at an Occupy Wall Street demonstration.
molly crabapple
 This is a woman being dragged away by police forces at a protest demonstration, while her shirt is pulled up, exposing her bra.
police brutality 1 nypd
       This man has his leg run over by an officer on his bike.
man run over nypdman run over nypd
              After 16-year-old Kimani Gray was killed by police, and the community took the streets to protest, this is how the officers responded.
police brutality 2 nypd
   This was posted from Occupy Wall Street.
occupy nypd
           And apparently, doggies are just as bad as criminals and should be promptly subdued.
animal cruelty nypd
Hey, I’ve got a great idea! Instead of using the NYPD to violently break up Occupy Wall Street protesters and people fighting for justice, let’s send them down to Nevada to deal with Cliven Bundy and his ilk!

Jon Stewart’s Takedown Of Sean Hannity Has To Be Seen To Be Appreciated

By T. Steelman

Jon Stewart's Takedown Of Sean Hannity Has To Be Seen To Be Appreciated
The feud between Jon Stewart and Sean Hannity goes into high gear as Hannity tries to attack Stewart’s program, only to be mocked in return.

Jon Stewart did a report on Sean Hannity’s support of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy on Monday’s edition of The Daily Show. Little did he know that he started a feud that is now in its fourth day. The report on Monday called Hannity out on his hypocrisy, demonstrating — with video proof — that Hannity is selective about his support of the law:
“Apparently Sean Hannity thinks laws are served buffet-style in that you can pick and choose the ones that you like best. The ones that you don’t like, you don’t have to abide. Well that’s not going to sit well with Fox’s immigration/healthcare law expert pundit, a Mr… Sean Hannity!” (from the video)
That report didn’t sit too well with Mr. Hannity, either. On his Tuesday night show, Sean decided to strike back. Calling Stewart “a comedic hack” and declaring The Daily Show “apologists for the Obama administration,” Hannity chose not to simply ignore the TDS segment. Against all common sense, Hannity went to to make the claim that Stewart was “obsessed” with him and insisted that TDS writers were “struggling.”

Hannity also wondered what Stewart’s “true feelings” on the Bundy situation were. Did he watch the same video we did? Isn’t it clear what Stewart thinks of Bundy and his ridiculous claims? Pretty sure it does. He also brought up Bill Ayers — using that name is one of the symptoms of Teabagger Tourette’s — and Cat Stevens, who appeared at Stewart’s Rally to Restore Sanity. Stevens, who was at the event to sing “Peace Train,” is a convert to Islam who supported the fatwa against Salman Rushdie.

It’s possible that Stewart and the TDS staff could have let that go. But Hannity just had to get one more dig in:
“They just can’t give their viewers the facts. They have to spin the story.”
You know that Stewart and the TDS staff couldn’t let that go. They don’t need to “spin” a story; they let the story spin itself. The clips of Hannity are proof that he is being selective when it comes to Americans breaking the law. Hannity’s complaint that the clips go back several years is nonsensical.

Why shouldn’t everything he said on this subject be open to review? He tapes and airs it. If he doesn’t want that to happen, he probably should find another line of work.

Which leads us to Wednesday night’s edition of The Daily Show. For the show’s “vulgar and extensive audience” (according to Hannity’s guest Kevin Williamson) the team had a real treat. Containing possibly one of the funniest jokes in the show’s history, it was truly an epic pwning.

See for yourself:



If you don’t know what “bukake” means, Google it. But, be warned… it’s very NSFW. If you do know (and after the rest find out), perhaps you will agree upon the brilliance of that joke.
Stewart allows that, yes, he is obsessed with Hannity’s show, much as he is with…
“… antibiotic resistant super-bugs, the Pacific garbage patch or the KFC Double Down. Because I just can’t believe in this day and age, with all that we know, this shit is out there. That… humanity… that our society is still weighed down by these burdens of a seemingly more medieval time. Like your show. To see it night after night, serving up the same shit… my god, you’re the Arby’s of news.” (from the video)
The video of Hannity calling Ted Nugent a “friend of the show” after seeing Nugent’s horrible remarks about then-candidates Obama and Clinton, is particularly effective. Whereas Stewart didn’t know about Stevens and the fatwa — as most don’t — Hannity actually showed the video of Nugent.

He can’t claim that he didn’t know what the man said.

Stewart calls out Hannity’s paradoxical love of America and support of Bundy (whom he calls a “USAtheist”). How can Hannity claim to love this country, its founders and Constitution yet be so partisan in his application? And George Washington, Hannity’s self-proclaimed favorite Founding Father? What would he do when “an armed group of federal government rejectionists” refused to pay their taxes? It was called the Whiskey Rebellion and the Founding Fathers made sure that the federal government could put that rebellion down legally. Just like they can do with Bundy and his camo-wearin’, gun wavin’ supporters.

All-in-all, this was one of the best skewerings in The Daily Show‘s history; absolute proof that you don’t want to play the Dozens with Jon Stewart and crew. But if Hannity wants to escalate again, he would do well to remember that TDS doesn’t air on Friday. That will give the writers 4 days in which to compose a retaliatory reply. If I were Hannity, I’d stop right here.

Radical racist context missed in rancher hype

Rachel Maddow points out that Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s racist remarks are unsurprising in the context of his apparent adherence to the philosophy of the Posse Comitatus and Sovereign Citizen movements, rooted in post-Civil War reconstruction.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Be Skeptical Of Walmart’s Cheap Organic Food


Cartoon: Rancher Bundy

Ranchers, Racists, and Sean Hannity

By GoLeft TV

Ring of Fire’s Mike Papantonio appears on The Ed Schultz radio show to discuss racist remarks that were recently made by Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, and how right wing talking heads like Sean Hannity are still on Bundy’s side. 

Cliven Bundy denies making pro-slavery comments, then repeats them

By Travis Gettys

Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy denied he was a racist Thursday after The New York Times quoted him unfavorably comparing social programs to slavery.

“I didn’t say nothing about picking cotton,” Bundy told Alex Jones on his radio program.

Jones said this was a bombshell revelation, and Bundy repeats his claim.

But video of Bundy making the comments, including remarks about picking cotton, was posted online Thursday by Media Matters after the rancher’s supporters questioned the accuracy of the reports.



Bundy’s supporters claimed in a Facebook post that the media had taken the comments out of context to twist their meaning and promote rumors.

The rancher told Jones he would appreciate a correction by the Times.

“I think they should do that,” Bundy said. “They make it a racist-type thing. I’m not racist.”

As proof, Bundy claimed he personally knew a black man.

“He’s been in and out of my home,” Bundy said. “I think he feels welcome as anybody else.”

Video evidence supports the Times’ reporting, and Bundy’s own remarks made in another radio appearance Thursday suggest the rancher hadn’t misspoken.

“I’m wondering are they happier now under this government subsidy system than they were they were slaves, when they were able to have a family structure together and the chickens and the garden and the people have something to do,” Bundy said Thursday on The Peter Schiff Show.

Then he asked whether black people had gained much since slavery was ended.

“Are they better off being slaves in that sense or are they better off being slaves of the United States government in the sense of a subsidy?” Bundy said.

It does not appear that Bundy posed his question to his black acquaintance, but The Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates published a column Thursday that addresses his concerns.

Coates quotes several anecdotal accounts from Thavolia Glymph’s 2003 book, “Out of the House of Bondage,” to illustrate how brutal treatment of slaves was used to enforce white supremacy.

“Enslaved black people were, with some regularity, beat with cowhide whips, tongs, pokers, chairs, and wooden boards,” Coates writes. “Nails were driven through their palms, pins through their tongues. Eyes were gouged out for the smallest offense.”

“When people like Cliven Bundy assert the primacy of the past it is important that we do not recount it selectively,” he continues. “American enslavement is the destruction of the black body for profit.

That is the past that Cliven Bundy believes ‘the Negro’ to have been better off in. He is, regrettably, not alone.”

Listen to Bundy’s appearance on The Peter Schiff Show posted online by DooDooVideos:

Jon Bon Jovi Helps Open Low Income Housing in Philly

By Kathy Matheson

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jon Bon Jovi's hit tune "Who Says You Can't Go Home?" took on new meaning Tuesday as the rock star cut the ribbon on a namesake housing development for low-income residents and the formerly homeless in Philadelphia.

The 55 unit JBJ Soul Homes opened in the Francisville neighborhood after about 18 months of construction. Bon Jovi's Soul Foundation provided the lead gift for the $16.6 million complex, which he hopes will offer tenants the support they need to get back on their feet.

"This is not a handout, it's just a hand up," Bon Jovi said in an interview before the official ceremony.

"This opportunity for them is special and it's not easy to come by."

The four-story building, which was financed by public and private funds, also includes retail and office space. Residents will receive social services from Project HOME, a nonprofit dedicated to ending homelessness in Philadelphia. HOME stands for Housing, Opportunities, Medical and Education.

JBJ Soul Homes is "taking our work to a whole new level," said Project HOME co-founder Sister Mary Scullion.

The grand opening of the facility, which coincides with the agency's 25th anniversary, is part of an initiative to build 500 such units across the city, Scullion said. Two developments totaling nearly 200 units are scheduled for groundbreaking over the coming year, she said.

Residents of JBJ Soul Homes will have access to basic medical care, employment training and educational classes; they are required to contribute part of their income toward rent. Several units have been set aside for young adults to help them transition out of programs for homeless teens.

One new resident, 53-year-old Anthony Gulley, said he had been sleeping in a local park when outreach workers from Project HOME began talking to him. Although resistant at first, Gulley said he eventually agreed to come in from the cold.

He stayed at a couple of shelters and attended regular counseling sessions before qualifying for JBJ Soul Homes. He now hopes to get a barber's license.

"I'm getting myself back together, and this is a big, big step," Gulley said. "When they give you the help, you have to be willing to do what they ask you to do. It's beautiful."

Bon Jovi has previously shown brotherly love to the city's less fortunate, supporting the Covenant House for homeless youths and helping to rebuild dilapidated row houses in gritty north Philadelphia.

JBJ Soul Homes functions as a small but crucial safety net "by providing shelter and an integrated array of services to so many of Philadelphia's most vulnerable youth and adults," he said.

The first JBJ Soul Home was built in Newark, N.J. Bon Jovi's foundation has also worked in Detroit, Los Angeles and Louisiana.

The New Jersey native once co-owned the Philadelphia Soul arena football team.
___
Follow Kathy Matheson at www.twitter.com/kmatheson

Guess What, Cliven Bundy? Your Nevada Ranch Is Also Getting a ‘Government Subsidy’

How about leaving “the Negro” out of your half-baked manifesto, Mr. Bundy? If you refuse to pay for your herd to graze on government land, you’re the one on welfare.

By



screen_shot_20140424_at_10.10.56_am
Nowadays, we get treated to someone’s half-baked revisionist take on slavery so regularly that it’s hard to get worked up anymore when, let’s say, Arizona Republican congressional candidate Jim Brown writes on his Facebook page that “Basically slave owners took pretty good care of their slaves,” or when potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson calls Obamacare “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

Politicians and pundits, you see, have really played the slavery card out.

So after reading Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s ranging soliloquy on “the Negro,” you’ll have to forgive me for thinking, this time around, that when he opted to play the slavery card, it was actually only the second most ludicrous thing that he said.

And here—reports the New York Times’ Adam Nagourney—is some of what he said:

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”


Put aside, for a moment, the fact that he’s apparently weighing the relative merits of human bondage.

What’s also galling is that Bundy’s a guy currently involved in an armed standoff with law enforcement over his unpaid use of federal land to graze his cattle, and he’s the one referring to “the Negro” being “on government subsidy.”

To say the least, it’s an ill-considered riff that puts the vintage, now almost quaint, Tea Party rallying cry, “keep your government hands off my Medicare,” to shame.

Bundy, of course, is the beneficiary of a huge subsidy—making a living, in part, off of cattle ranching on federal land, while refusing to pay over a million dollars in grazing fees, being in arrears, and then threatening to shoot federal agents after they first took him to court, then couldn’t collect and then tried to repo the cattle, which, I’ll just add one more time, were on federal land.

Even the most stalwart defenders of the rancher’s cause, like Powerline’s John Hinderaker, have conceded that “legally, Bundy doesn’t have a leg to stand on.” And even the most ardent opponents of government assistance would concede—whether it’s the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s SNAP program, providing food stamps that help families make ends meet, or the USDA’s MILC program, which creates price supports that let dairy farmers keep the price of milk artificially high—that at least most government beneficiaries are getting their benefits legally.

By contrast, Bundy took his at the point of a gun.

In light of that, Republicans, like Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, who initially defended Bundy’s cause, and Nevada Sen. Dean Heller, who initially described Bundy and his armed supporters as “patriots,” might want to reconsider their public support for the rancher. Not just because of his views about slavery, but also because Bundy’s rant about “subsidies”—while he simultaneously pockets a tidy sum that every other rancher on government land has to pay—makes a farce of the GOP’s basic argument that the social safety net is too big.

Compared to most folks getting benefits, his safety net is a pretty comfy hammock.

David Swerdlick is an associate editor for The Root. Follow him on Twitter.
Like The Root on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Historical Records Show Cliven Bundy's Ancestral Claims Are Lies

By

At the beginning of April tea party terrorists began flocking the residence of a Nevada rancher, Cliven Bundy. The stand off began after right wing media outlets like Fox News began pushing a narrative of the federal government encroaching on Bundy’s rights to graze cattle on land managed by  the federal Bureau of Land Management. Bundy claimed his family established the land in 1877, before the BLM ever existed. Property records show that the ranch was purchased by the Bundy family in 1948, several years after the creation of the BLM.

Bundy’s story doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

In an interview with KLAS – TV, Las Vegas, Bundy said:
“I’ve lived my lifetime here. My forefathers have been up and down the Virgin Valley here ever since 1877.  All these rights that I claim, have been created through pre-emptive rights and beneficial use of the forage and the water and the access and range improvements.”
While it may come as no surprise that Fox news, along with all of the other right wing media outlets that pushed Bundy’s narrative, never bothered to fact check these claims, local reporters from KLAS -TV decided to check the historical records. What they discovered is that the Bundy family purchased the land on which Cliven Bundy’s ranch is located in 1948, from Raoul and Ruth Levin. The record also shows that prior to 1948, the Bundy family resided in the state of Arizona.

Bundy’s claim that his rights predate the BLM also turned out to be bogus.

Bundy also claimed that his ‘ancestral rights’ predate the creation of the BLM. However, the BLM was created in 1946, 2 years before Cliven Bundy’s family moved to the Nevada ranch.
“My rights are before the BLM even existed, but my rights are created by beneficial use. Beneficial use means we created the forage and the water from the time the very first pioneers come here,”
Bundy told KLAS-TV.

Records show that the Bundy family was never granted water rights for land that borders the 160 acre ranch. The BLM also began managing the land in question two years before the Bundy’s moved from the state of Arizona to Nevada.

What’s more, the Bundy family didn’t begin to graze cattle on the federal land in question until 1954, a full ten years after the BLM was formed.

In an interview on the Pete Santilli Show, Bundy explained his real position. He simply denies the right of the federal government to own land. He believes he’s entitled to do whatever he wants and his ‘tea party patriot’ defenders were all too happy to be used as pawns in a phony, Koch backed war on the federal government.

How the oil and gas industry is using the tea party to further their agenda.

Far from being American patriots, the tea party militia members who flocked to Cliven Bundy’s ranch in April are nothing more than a group of pawns who are being used to further the agenda of the fossil fuel industry.

In the wake of the standoff between armed militia members and the federal government, Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva, is calling on the Department of Interior to investigate the connection between ALEC and the incidents that took place at the Bundy ranch earlier this month.

Congressman Grajalva’s letter highlights the connection between ALEC backed legislation, which seeks to remove control of federal land from the US government, giving it to the states, and the Bundy standoff. The ALEC/Koch backed agenda seeks to remove the US government’s control of federal land. It would allow the fossil fuel industry to exploit land that is currently protected by the federal government. Grajalva is the ranking member of the House Resource Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
“The ALEC vision of state sovereignty trumping long-standing federal government efforts to manage public lands has already had tangible effects on Bureau of Land Management and other agency employees’ efforts to do their jobs.”
Grajalva wrote in his letter to Acting Inspector General, Mary Kelly.
“Examining how severe that impact has been, and whether ALEC is exerting undue influence on federal land management efforts, is well within the scope of your office. I believe a timely examination of these issues would serve the public interest.”
While Cliven Bundy has never had the legal right to graze his cattle on land that he does not own, his fake plight has been hyped by conservative media outlets across the country. The single reason the right wing media jumped on this story is because it furthers the narrative of the big, bad evil government encroaching on the ‘little guy.’ As it turns out, everything Bundy has said about his ‘ancestral rights’ is just another bold faced lie, being told by another right wing ‘patriot’ con artist.

This time the lies perpetuated by the right wing put the lives of private citizens and law enforcement professionals at risk, including women and children. Bundy and his terrorist buddies have backed the federal government into a corner, creating a situation in which the feds will have to take action against both Bundy and the militia members that rushed to defend him. Doing anything less would be to encourage armed tea party fanatics to repeat the behavior in other areas of the country. Next stop Yellowstone? Why not? They’ve got guns and they are entitled to use them to take what they want from the evil government.

By the way, the US government is us. It’s we the people. Federal land is land that belongs to all citizens of the United States. It includes our national parks, national forests, national monuments, scenic highways, protected wetlands and wilderness, historic landmarks and many other areas of country that the fossil fuel industry is currently not able to plunder and destroy.

Most people understand why they aren’t supposed to let their dogs poop on the public beach. They understand why they can’t just cut down trees in a national forest. They get why their kids can’t throw their trash all over a public park. That’s because they understand that they aren’t the only people with rights.

In Bundy’s case the BLM never said that Bundy couldn’t let his cows trample the land, eat the grass or leave big old cow patties all over the place. They just asked that he contribute a small fee, to help ensure that the land is preserved for the rest of the American taxpayers. But the idea of simple, basic respect for the rights of others is beyond  the comprehension of most tea party members. The idea that a person who owns livestock should carry the burden of the cost of feeding that livestock, is ‘tyranny,’ to tea-publicans. How dare the evil government expect Bundy to contribute to the cost of caring for his own livestock?

Will the right wing media outlets that pushed Bundy as a conservative hero report on the historical facts, now that they’ve been made public? Can we assume that sources like Fox News and Breitbart just failed to fact check Bundy, but didn’t purposely set out to mislead anyone? I highly doubt it.

Remember the conservative mantra, the ends justify the means. If they can rile up enough tea party fanatics to provoke a violent confrontation with the government and ultimately start a civil war, they will accomplish what they set out to do a long time ago.

Here’s the full report on Bundy’s family history from KLAS-TV.

8 News NOW

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

The rise of the precariat promises a renewal of the left

In sociology and economics, the precariat is a social class formed by people suffering from precarity, which is a condition of existence without predictability or security, affecting material or psychological welfare as well as being a member of a Proletariat class of industrial workers who lack their own means of production and hence sell their labour to live. Specifically, it is applied to the condition of lack of job security, in other words intermittent employment or underemployment and the resultant precarious existence.

By Guy Standing, The Guardian

Next year is the 800th anniversary of one of the greatest political documents of all time. The Magna Carta was the first class-based charter, enforced on the monarchy by the rising class. Today’s political establishment seems to have forgotten both it and the emancipatory, ecological Charter of the Forest of 1217. The rising mass class of today, which I call the precariat, will not let them forget for much longer.

Today we need a precariat charter, a consolidated declaration that will respect the Magna Carta’s 63 articles by encapsulating the needs and aspirations of the precariat, which consists of millions of people living insecurely, without occupational identity, doing a vast amount of work that is not counted, relying on volatile wages without benefits, being supplicants, dependent on charity, and denizens not citizens, in losing all forms of rights.

The precariat is today’s mass class, which is both dangerous, in rejecting old political party agendas, and transformative, in wanting to become strong enough to be able to abolish itself, to abolish the conditions of insecurity and inequality that define it. A precariat charter is a way of rescuing the future.

Every charter has been a class-based set of demands that constitute a progressive agenda or vision of a good society. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. A radical charter restructures, being both emancipatory, in demanding a fresh enhancement of rights as freedoms, and egalitarian, in showing how to reduce the vital inequalities of the time. Since the crash of 2008 and during the neoliberal retrenchment known as austerity, many commentators have muttered that the left is dead, watching social democrats in their timidity lose elections and respond by becoming ever more timid and neoliberal.

They deserve their defeats.

As long as they orient their posturing to the “squeezed middle”, appealing to their perception of a middle class while placating the elite, they will depend on the mistakes of the right for occasional victories, giving them office but not power.

This retreat of the laborist left does not mean progressive politics is dying. Costas Lapavitsas and Alex Politaki, who wrote for this site earlier this month asking why Europe’s young are not rioting now, are too pessimistic. Appearances deceive. The reason for the lack of conventional political activity reflects a lack of vision from the left.

This is changing, and quickly by historical standards. Let us not forget that the objectives and policies that emerged in the great forward march a century ago were not defined in advance but took shape during and because of social struggles.

I have been fortunate to witness the phenomenal energies within the precariat while traveling in 30 countries over the past two years. But a transformative movement takes time to crystallize. It was ever thus.

To make sense of what is happening, one must appreciate that we are in the middle of a global transformation. The disembedded phase dominated by the neoliberal Washington consensus led to the crisis of 2008 – fiscal, existential, ecological and distributional crises rolled into one. By then, the precariat had taken shape. Its growth has accelerated since.

What Jeremiahs overlook is that a new forward march towards a revival of a future with more emancipation and equality rests on three principles that help define a new progressive agenda.

The first principle is that every forward march is inspired by the emerging mass class, with progress defined in terms of its insecurities and aspirations. Today that class is the precariat, with its distinctive relations of production, relations of distribution and relations to the state. Its consciousness is a mix of deprivation, insecurity, frustration and anxiety. But most in it do not yearn for a retreat to the past. It says to the old left: “My dreams are not in your ballot box.”

The second principle is that a forward march requires new forms of collective action. Quietly, these are taking shape all over the world. No progressive moves can succeed without forms of collective voice, and the new forms will include a synthesis of unions and the guilds that for two millennia promoted occupational citizenship.

The third principle is that every forward march involves three overlapping struggles, which take time to spring into effective life. The first struggle is for recognition. Here, contrary to the Jeremiahs on the left, there has been fantastic progress since 2008.

Recognition has been forged in networks boosted by a string of collective sparks, through the Arab spring, the Occupy movement, the indignados, the upheavals in the squares of great cities, the London riots of 2011, the spontaneous actions in Istanbul and across dozens of Brazilian cities in 2013, the sudden rise of Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement in Italy’s elections last year, the riots around Stockholm, the brave, prolonged occupation of the streets in Sofia, Bulgaria, until usurped by an oligarch’s thugs, and the even braver outrage of the precariat in Kiev in recent months. These events are messy, loosely linked at best. But the energy out there is vivid, if one wants to see and feel it.

What has been achieved is a collective sense of recognition, by millions of people – and not just young people. A growing part of the precariat perceives a common predicament, realising that this is a collective experience due to structural features of the economic and political system. We see others in the mirror in the morning, not just our failing selves. The precariat is becoming a class for itself, whether one uses that word or another to describe a common humanity. There is a far greater sense of recognition than in 2008.

That was necessary before the next struggle could evolve into a unifying call for solidarity. That is a struggle for representation, inside every element of the state. It is just beginning, as the precariat realises that anti-politics is the wrong answer. Again, there are encouraging signs that the energy is being channelled into action. We demand to be subjects, not objects to be nudged and sanctioned, fleeced and ignored in turn.

The precariat must be involved in regulating flexible labour, social security institutions, unions and so on. The disabled, unemployed, homeless, migrants, ethnic minorities – all are denizens stirring with anger and collective identity. We are many, they are few. The years of slumber are over.

The third struggle is for redistribution. Here, too, there is progress. The social democratic, lukewarm left has no clothes, and neither does the atavistic left harrying at its heels with empty threats, wanting to turn the clock back to some illusionary golden age. They would not understand the subversive piece of precariat graffiti: “The worst thing would be to return to the old normal.”

Unstable labor will persist; flexibility will increase; wages will stagnate. Now what? The struggle for redistribution is in its infancy, but it has evolved into an understanding of class fragmentation, of how the plutocracy seduces the salariat and placates the proletariat. The struggle will show that with globalization a new distribution system must be constructed, far more radical than that offered by a living wage, however desirable that might be.

A precariat charter should revive a rights-based path towards redistribution of the key assets denied to the precariat, including security, control over time, a reinvigorated commons, assets essential for its reproduction and eventual abolition. This vision is taking shape, messily but perceptibly.

In 1215, the class of barons forced a powerful monarchy to concede to demands for recognition, representation and redistribution. Throughout history, emerging classes have done much the same, from the French Revolution with its radical Enlightenment and the wonderful achievements of Thomas Paine and others to the Chartists of the 19th century and the spate of human rights charters after the second world war. The progressives of the era have always reinvented the future. They are doing it now. Cheer up.

Glenn Beck The Target Of Paranoid Anger He Helped Create

Now that Beck has condemned violence at a Nevada ranch, his own followers have turned on him - with the same violent talk he used to direct at others.
Now that Beck has condemned violence at a Nevada ranch, his own followers have turned on him - with the same violent talk he used to direct at others.

By Ellen Brodsky

Glenn Beck has spent years exploiting violent rhetoric and blowing extremist dog whistles about the U.S. government. But now that his followers have begun acting out his fantasy at the Cliven Bundy ranch conflict in Nevada, Beck has suddenly gone all Prince of Peace. In response, his audience has turned against him with just the kind of rhetoric Beck has directed at others.

Apparently, Beck feels that those armed militia types who have rushed to scofflaw Bundy’s ranch in Nevada are not following God as closely as he does. Or something.
On Monday, Beck wanted them to know he’s really one of them. He said, “I do fully believe that the federal government does want to put ranchers out of business. … I am fully clear on what the federal government wants to do.”

But then Beck started lecturing his listeners about how to respond. He said:
You get down on your knees and you pray. Which way, Lord? Which way? Do I follow the teachings of Jesus vis-a-vis Martin Luther King? Do I follow those rules or do I get into a crowd stirred up by the media on both sides?
Only God is in control and so I will stand exactly where He wants me to stand and I can tell you right now, it is not standing in front of people with guns.
Unfortunately for Beck, all those folks he has stirred up don’t want to hear that. Not only that, they’re thinking he might be some kind of fraud for jumping out of the frying pan, so to speak, just as things are beginning to heat up.

Raw Story caught some of the outcry against Beck on his Facebook page and Twitter:
“When the possibility of bloody conflict exists does Beck simply roll over and side with the oppressor, the tyrannical State?” one Facebook user wrote on the Glenn Beck fan page.
Another person commented: “Glenn, you are no longer a friend of the Patriots fighting for FREEDOM. Go away and sell some books and your false ‘Bravado’ to other traitors. How about you yourself said this Tyranny was coming and did not stand up. Re-read Article 1 Bundy is a hero. Oh, thats why you are mad, they didn’t invite you to speak?”
… “Get a grip Glenn. My vote didn’t keep Obama out of office. Our country is being destroyed and you and Obama think talk will fix it all. I am not for violence but you can’t use a sign against a fed sniper.”
On both Monday and Tuesday, Beck expressed shock and outrage that people should respond to him with such venom. He instructed those who support violence to unfriend him, unsubscribe from his newsletter and Blaze TV.

In truth, Beck is merely reaping what he has sowed. This is the same Beck who has repeatedly suggested that viewers need to use violence against the crooked Obama administration. For example:
“This administration…they model themselves…after Al Capone. You take these guys on, and they will bash your brains out. …That’s what they do to everyone who stands in their way. So, you have to ask yourself, …what are you prepared to do. If you’re going to get into a fight with these guys, you better be able to battle all the way to the end.”
So maybe Beck has replaced “Al Capone” with “Martin Luther King” in his spiels. But now, nobody’s buying it.

Couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow.

Right Winger Proves Bundy And His Nevada Clown Posse Benefit From White Privilege

By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario

white privilege card

This article was originally posted on ProudToBeAFilthyLiberalScum.com

If there’s one thing right wingers despise more than anything else, it’s when someone points out their White Privilege. They’re so invested in their “I’m a persecuted victim” narrative that any suggestion of white people, specifically white conservatives, getting away with behavior that would land black people in jail or the morgue is met with howls of outrage.
Aside from denying privilege even exists, the favorite anti-privilege tactic of the poor, oppressed white conservative when discussing white privilege is to find a vaguely similar incident involving black people. This proves, PROVES! that black people aren’t treated any differently, liberals are hypocrites, and blablabla.

Curiously, many of these “similar” incidents are only superficially in nature and usually prove the original point that white people do get special treatment. For example, here’s Chris Ayarza, one the genius libertarians I regularly encounter, trying to debunk my claim that if Cliven Bundy and his cosplay cowboy posse had been black, they’d all be dead right now:
The Black Panther Party invade the State Assembly…:http://youtu.be/OUQIYLQ2rbk


Oh noes! He got me! The Black Panthers terrorized the state legislature! That’s just like hundreds of armed militiamen threatening to shoot officers of the law for doing their jobs! Liberal hypocrisy! (There’s a good chance Chris will claim he wasn’t really comparing the two. Good luck with that!)

But what, exactly, were the Black Panthers doing at the California State Assembly and why did they have their guns?

Well, you’ll be shocked to learn that, in the 60's, black people in California had a tendency to be targeted, beaten and/or killed by the police with appalling regularity. Unlike today where that never happens. Ahem.

Apparently, the Black Panthers thought this was not a good thing so they decided to follow the police around in minority neighborhoods to keep an eye on them. Whenever a cop would get out of their car, so would the Panthers. You know, just to let the cops know that someone was watching.

Oh, and they all had guns which was perfectly legal for them to carry out in the open according to California law.

You’ll also be shocked to learn that this sent white people into a complete panic. The idea of openly armed black people was so horrifying that California suddenly thought it might be a good idea to make open carry illegal. The resulting Mulford Act was the very bill under discussion the day the Black Panthers showed up at the State Assembly.

Side note, the NRA was quite an enthusiastic supporter of the Mulford Act and then-Governor Ronald Reagan happily signed it into law. Funny how no one on the right seems to remember this…

Anyway, the end result was that the Black Panthers were arrested, unlike Bundy and his “freedom fighters.” Oh, and the Black Panthers are still regularly referred to as terrorists despite the fact that their community had been (and still is, frankly) terrorized by the police for decades. By way of comparison, Bundy is just a freeloader.

So on the one hand, you have a group of legitimately armed and legitimately angry black men protesting a law being passed specifically to strip away their constitutional rights. Their protest got them arrested and demonized by the right wing. On the other hand, you have a group of white privileged cosplayers playing cowboy, threatening officers of the law and strategizing to use women as human shields all so one man can continue to steal from the taxpayers.

I can’t think of a better example of how white conservatives are afforded special treatment than this.

Angry and armed black men standing up for their constitutional rights are terrorists that need to be arrested. Angry and armed white men standing up for a freeloader that spits on the Constitution are “heroes” that need to be lionized.

Got it. Thanks for clearing that up Chris!

Monday, April 21, 2014

Rush Limbaugh Is Going Down, And It Can't Come Soon Enough

By Ryan Denson

Rush Limbaugh has been around for over twenty years. For twenty years, the misogynistic pig has plagued our airways with outrageous speech, offensive rhetoric, and sheer stupidity to a mass of equally stupid people. However, just two years ago, grassroots groups like BoycottRush and StopRush put their feet down and said enough is enough, and began a massive national boycott movement which took storm to expose Limbaugh for his truly offensive ways, with the goal of destroying his hateful career. Conservatives can pipe up about Limbaugh’s “freedom of speech,” for it is his sponsors who can choose what to do with their money.

Facing possible probes of illegal funding based on political agenda, right-wing think tank The Heritage Foundation ended its five-year sponsorship of Limbaugh’s circus act show after paying a total of $9.5 million over the course of the partnership. If someone receives money from an organization like The Heritage Foundation, who pays you to promote their product (in this case a slanted political opinion), without directly telling the audience the source of funding, it may be considered ‘payola,’ which is illegal. It’s like a business paying for positive reviews. So they paid $9,5 million, and when they realized it might be illegal, they pulled out.
So for 25 years Limbaugh has gotten away with his bigotry and wacky conspiracy theories. However, after his grotesque attack on Sandra Fluke, Americans woke up and realized that he was nothing but a fame-seeking moron. Also realizing that neither his radio affiliates, nor the FCC planned to do anything about his hate speech, citing his “first amendment rights,” American consumers decided band together for the common good of the people and their dignity, and organized boycotts via petitions in order to bring Limbaugh down by way of his sponsors. The grassroots organizations prevailed, and it is now reported that 3,100 companies have pulled their ads from Limbaugh’s show.

Rick Ungar, the senior political contributor for the conservative Forbes and regular attendee on Fox, has some tough words when it comes to Limbaugh’s relevance in the conservative movement while being interviewed by MSNBC host Ed Schultz:

“At long last, it appears that Rush Limbaugh has run out of steam. I have to acknowledge that I have sensed Rush getting by on fumes for some time now (yes, I tune into his show from time to time to enjoy his broadcasting skills if not his message). However, it was only recently that the world of Limbaugh crossed that thin red line from partially serious to total self-parody and audience deception—a line crossed from which there is often no return.”



Rush Limbaugh also seems to have a hard time holding onto his sponsors, because as of April 12, 2014, some of the sponsors that haven’t been heard of in months include: Sodastream, Club Glove, Fin Electric Cigarettes, Mannheim Steamroller, Kars4Kids, Sears, Taco Bell, Jewelry Exchange, National Association of Realtors, SweetJack, New Vitality, Greenlight Financial Services, Stanley Steamer, Midas, Income At Home, Verengo Solar, Taste Of Home, Gold Bond, NFL Monday Night Football, Reagan.com, University of Iowa, and Blue Bell Ice Cream.

Things have gotten so bad for Rush Limbaugh, that Cumulus Radio Network also complains of losing millions of dollars due to Limbaugh’s insane and erratic behavior on the air. A representative from the company even said that many companies are reluctant to invest because of Rush, and say that 49 out of 50 advertisers have ‘No-Rush’ clauses when buying air time.

However, some of the more prominent sponsors still remain: U.S. Marine Corps, Advance Auto Parts, Cox, Allegra, Quicken Loans, Menards, ProFlowers, Insperity, Power Swabs, and Lifelock, among others.

Grassroots organizations have the power to shut down hate, and there is nothing Rush Limbaugh can do about it.

If you want to join in on the fight to end the Pig’s career, sign on here:
Boycott Rush Facebook Page
Limbaugh Sponsor-Cumulus Petition
Flush Rush Facebook Page

Sunday, April 20, 2014

5 Unemulated Computer Experiences

By Jason Scott

While I and many others work to turn the experience of emulation into one as smooth and ubiquitous as possible, inevitably the corners and back alleys of discussions about this process present people claiming that there are unemulated aspects and therefore the entire project is domed.

I thought I would stoke that sad little fire by giving you five examples of entirely unemulated but perfectly valid vintage computer experiences.

Disk Drive Spin Vibration

Some games on home computers would feature permanent player death and the requirement to start over in the event of a catastrophic loss. To ensure the death was permanent, the player status would have to be recorded on a floppy disk drive with a floppy disk in it. Therefore, a trick could be implemented: by putting your finger underneath the latch of a floppy disk drive, you could feel the vibration of the disk beginning to spin, and you could flip up the drive door, disengaging the magnetic head and ensuring that the death was not recorded.

Computer Fans

There are currently no attempts to emulate the sound of a computer fan or have it speed up and slow down slightly over time, eventually reflecting the decay of the fan and the steadily noisier experience as time goes on. In a tangential relation, there are currently no emulations of system failure due to overheating.

Chip Unseating

One common cause of machine issues in older systems would be the slow working out of seated chips on motherboards and other circuits. The resulting glitches and behavior would be noticed by experienced owners, resulting in a reseating of the chips, either by full-board pressure or by pressing down on individual chips and experiencing the clicking into place.

Damaged Floppy Noise

One of the most terrifying and disheartening sounds was the sound of a distraught grinding across a damaged or demagnetized portion of a floppy disk. The noise told you that it was going to be a crapshoot whether the data would ever be heard from again. Variations in the sound also told you how close you were to total data loss, and whether you were at the beginning of a slow decline for that sector.

Power Outage

Emulators do not have an option for sudden and dramatic loss of power. Is not possible to indicate a lightning strike, a brownout, a black out, or the yanked out power cord. This is a central and fundamental aspect of the Atari 2600, where careful glitching of a system including yanking and replacing cartridges could allow you to access game options and experiences that would otherwise never be reached.

minimac

The point of me bringing all these up is not to be particularly weird, but to point out that emulation is not a binary experience – it is a continuum, a spectrum. For some people, the mere reappearance of older computing information is a miracle. For others, it is a endless opportunity to point out flaws, complain about glitches, and otherwise drag the conversation into a Xeno’s paradox of unfulfilled promises and impossibly high hurdles.

As time goes on, I expect some experiences to fall by the wayside, and to live only in lore and stories. Unfortunately, that is the nature of history, and computers don’t get a pass, just because the material involved gets re-created with such fidelity.

So, let’s focus on what’s been done and refine that, instead of a mystical set of experiences that may never see the light of day again except in our stories.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Armed Mob Descends On Nevada To Steal Land From Federal Government

By Nathaniel Downes
Armed Mob Descends On Nevada To Steal Land From Federal Government
Gun-toting ‘Patriots’ attempt to start a new civil war over a Nevada land dispute. Apparently stealing from taxpayers is ‘patriotic’ somehow.

Here go the right-wing lunatic fringe once again. For the past week they have been proclaiming that the federal government is attempting to steal land from a Nevada rancher. Groups have organized with the goal of travelling to Nevada in order to kill federal agents attempting to enforce the law. What would gather this group up with the goal of unloading as many bullets as possible in what they call the “next Ruby Ridge?”

Why, it is this man, Clive Bundy. Here’s the video:


Land Use At Root Of Disagreement

Bundy has been failing to pay the fee for the use of federal land now for over 20 years. After numerous warnings, the federal government began impounding Clive Bundy’s cattle. Of course this caused an outcry of support by anti-government protesters, many of which began arming themselves in anticipation of a wild-west like stand-off.

But why did Clive Bundy stop paying his rent? In an interview with Pete Santilli he came out and said it.



He simply denies that the federal government can own the land, so he refuses to pay for the right to use it. The reality is that the state of Nevada was created out of the merging of the Washoe, Utah and New Mexico territories, three pieces of land owned by the federal government. Why does the federal government own over 80 percent of the land? Because they never sold it in the first place, and still maintain ownership in trust of the land as part of the commons. The US gained the territory after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1849. The portions which were allocated originally were done, initially, under mining and farming claims, but greatly expanded later by the Enlarged Homestead Act of 1909.

If and until the United States agrees to sell the land in question, it is the property of the United States. To claim otherwise and win would not succeed in enabling access to the land, but would instead revert the land to its previous registered owner. Incidentally, that is Mexico. If that happens, adios la gente estúpida!

Bundy Summons Gun-Loving Psychopaths To Cause.

Mr. Bundy is inventing terms and conditions in his head, qualifications to defend his defrauding of the US Government of over a million dollars. To defend his fiction, he has called upon armed goons with the idea of murdering people who are there to do their job. This is intimidation of the highest order. But facts do not matter to these ammosexuals. Their fear of some bogeyman monstrous “Govn’t” and their romanticized ideal as to what an armed standoff is so grand, that they would sooner bring war against the United States than pay their own rent. They are just that eager for a war which they cannot win, believing in the fiction one sees in cinema.

Wisely, the Bureau of Land Management backed off of their impounding of illegal cattle. This is not the end of the matter, but the government now will turn to tactics that will make Mr. Bundy wish that they had just impounded his cattle. Things they do can include having his auctioning license and sales permits voided. They can lein his property. They can even legally take snipers and shoot all of his cattle from a safe distance. They can make his life a living hell in ways none of us can fathom.
But hey, he got to play cowboy for a few minutes.

Saturday, April 12, 2014

Will Wal-Mart eat up organic supply?

By Jenny Hopkinson

 An organic market is pictured. | AP Photo
Recent announced moves by big retailers could make matters worse. | AP Photo

Big box retailers are attempting to bring organic foods to the masses, but there might not be enough to go around.

Wal-Mart — the country’s largest grocer — announced Thursday that over the next few months, about half of its more than 4,000 U.S. stores will start carrying almost 100 new products from natural food distributor Wild Oats at prices about 25 percent less, on average, than other national brands.

The news from Bentonville, Ark., comes just a day after Target announced it is partnering with 17 natural, organic and sustainable brands, including Annie’s Homegrown, Burt’s Bees, Clif Bar & Co. and Horizon Organic, to make available more than 120 products exclusive to the retailer under its new “Made to Matter – Handpicked by Target” program.

Now the question is, how will organic production keep up with all of this new demand?

The expansion of organic offerings by both companies are “a validation of what we know, which is that organic foods are attractive to consumers and they are attractive to young consumers and consumers from all walks of life,” said Laura Batcha, CEO and executive director of the Organic Trade Association, the industry’s leading lobbying organization.

However, “there are issues with supply currently in the U.S. — we see it particularly in the livestock and dairy production” side, though there also are problems in other commodities as well, she said.

“The growth in the demand is outpacing the acreage.”

If that’s a problem now, the recent announced moves by Wal-Mart and Target look to make matters worse.

Sales of organic food and beverages totaled more than $28 billion in 2012, the most recent year available, accounting for 4 percent of total grocery food sales, OTA reports. In October 2013, the Department of Agriculture estimated that the organic sector would total more than $35 billion in sales in 2014 and grow about 10 percent.

However, production acreage and facilities are growing at a much slower rate. Between 2008 and 2011, organic pasture and croplands grew 12 percent, USDA reports. The total number of certified organic livestock only grew about 3 percent during the same period.

One of the problems is the high barrier that needs to be surmounted to gain USDA organic certification. Under the program, any land used to produce organic commodities must not be treated with non-organic substances for three years before it can be certified. Livestock must be treated organically from before birth.

Farming without chemicals and other synthetic materials is expensive, which is why organic products are sold at a premium, but producers in transition cannot take advantage of that higher price tag at market. The industry has taken steps to address this problem, working with suppliers and producers to ease the burden and gaining a provision in the just-passed farm bill that sets up a cost-share program for transitioning farmers, Batcha noted.

Meanwhile, from Wal-Mart’s perspective, the proposition of adding more organic products to its existing offerings and at a lower price than other stores is hard to resist. The company reports that internal research found 91 percent of its consumers would consider purchasing affordable organic products.

“We know our customers are interested in purchasing organic products and, traditionally, those customers have had to pay more,” Jack Sinclair, executive vice president of grocery at Wal-Mart U.S., said in a statement. “We are changing that and creating a new price position for organic groceries that increases access. This is part of our ongoing effort to use our scale to deliver quality, affordable groceries to our customers.”

Wal-Mart insists that it can keep prices low by using its large scale and supply chain. It’s a theory that a number of organic industry experts believe could work.

“My hope is that this will encourage and increase [organic] acreage in the United States because that’s been the weak link,” said Bill Wolf, president of Wolf DiMatteo & Associates, a consulting firm that specializes in serving the organic industry.

“Their approach to the rollout, with taking a few products, a few more easily produced items that are available, like canned beans and others and limiting how many stores they can go with,” is probably manageable by the sector in the short term, he added.

“Price points can be achieved in a number of ways, and one of the main ways is through efficiency in the supply chain that is not necessarily the same things as paid price to farmers,” Batcha said. “The actual cost of a raw ingredient is just a small percentage” of the price on the shelf.

However, she added, maintaining a good price for organic commodities is key for the survival of the industry.

“Organic farming is difficult to do and there are increased costs going in for production, and it’s important for the long-term viability for farming that at the production level there be sustainable incomes.”

But even if the industry can keep Wal-Mart’s shelves stocked, it’s unclear whether they can do it in the long run at the low prices the company is calling for.

“It depends on the individual brands and how they partner with Wild Oats, but if its private label that usually drives down prices for everyone in the supply chain,” said Mark Kastel, co-founder of the Cornucopia Institute, an organic policy research group. “That premium is what enables people to do organic farming. Farmers can’t produce commodities at the same price as conventional. They can’t do it.”

Friday, April 11, 2014

Hank Aaron compares Republicans and other Obama opponents to KKK


Hank Aaron compares Republicans and other Obama opponents to KKK 

The baseball Hall of Famer, who was honored at the Braves' home opener on Tuesday night, said the only difference between the type of racism he faced as a player and the kind that exists today is 'now they have neckties and starched shirts.'

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Wednesday, April 9, 2014, 4:41 PM
Hall of Famer Hank Aaron, asked about race relations in 2014, says the only thing that’s changed since his days as a player is ‘back then they had hoods. Now they have neckties and starched shirts.’  Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images Hall of Famer Hank Aaron, asked about race relations in 2014, says the only thing that’s changed since his days as a player is ‘back then they had hoods. Now they have neckties and starched shirts.’
Hammerin' Hank can still swing for the fences.

Hank Aaron, who was celebrated Tuesday night in Atlanta on the 40th anniversary of breaking Babe Ruth's all-time home run record, compared Obama critics to the KKK as he opened up about the state of race relations in an interview with USA Today.

The Braves legend, who told the newspaper he still has the bigoted letters and death threats he received during his pursuit of one of baseball's most cherished records, said that little has changed despite the decades that have passed.

"The biggest difference is that back then they had hoods," Aaron said. "Now they have neckties and starched shirts."

Aaron said he keeps the hate mail to remind himself that not everything has changed.
Hank Aaron of the Milwaukee Braves poses with his bat in this undated handout photo. National Hall of Fame via Bloomberg News Hank Aaron in a Milwaukee Braves uniform in this undated photo. On Tuesday, the baseball legend compared President Obama's critics to the KKK.
"We can talk about baseball. Talk about politics," said the Hall of Famer who finished with 755 career homers. "Sure, this country has a black president, but when you look at a black president, President Obama is left with his foot stuck in the mud from all of the Republicans with the way he's treated."

"We still have a long ways to go in the country," Aaron added.

On the 40th anniversary of Aaron's record-breaking 715th career home run, the Braves held a pregame ceremony before the start of Tuesday night's game against the Mets at Turner Field.

Aaron was called baseball's "true home run king" by the hometown Braves, while MLB commissioner Bud Selig said he was the "embodiment of the American spirit."

Thursday, April 10, 2014

MSNBC silent on Joe Scarborough keynote speech


Back in February, MSNBC host Ed Schultz was forced to cancel his keynote address at a Democratic fundraising event in Florida due to a network policy prohibiting hosts from participating in political fundraisers.

But now that MSNBC host Joe Scarborough is scheduled to give a keynote address at a Republican fundraising event in New Hampshire, MSNBC has gone silent. Lauren Skowronski, the network's vice president of media relations, did not respond to four emails requesting comment on Scarborough's attendance at the event. (She did respond to an email wishing her a happy birthday.)

Scarborough is slated to speak at the Cheshire County Republican Lincoln Day Dinner in May, and a source close to MSNBC's "Morning Joe" said he plans to speak at the event. As Huffington Post's Michael Calderone reported earlier, tickets range from $35 to $50 and go directly to the the Cheshire County Republicans.

When MSNBC pulled the plug on Schultz's Florida fundraiser, Skowronski said Schultz had not realized the event was a fundraiser when he agreed to deliver the keynote. Scarborough's role at the Cheshire County event is certain; his appearance was reportedly secured by State Republican Party Chair Jennifer Horn.

In March, Scarborough appeared at New Hampshire's Northeast Republican Leadership Conference. MSNBC said he was a "discussion moderator," but one attendee - Jazz Shaw, an editor at the conservative Hot Air website - noted that he delivered a "speech" which earned "a standing ovation." Republican New Hampshire state Rep. Joseph Sweeney said Scarborough "energized the crowd" and was hailed as "a rock star." Tickets for that event ran from $50 to $199, with sponsorship options ranging from $500 to $10,000. All proceeds went to the New Hampshire Republicans.

Scarborough declined to comment on the appearance, though in a new blog post for POLITICO (where he is a contributor) he wrote about his desire to address conservatives when discussing his new book about the Republican party.

"Chances are good that on this book tour, I will get a lot more invitations to Lincoln Day dinners and Republican events than Democratic club meetings on New York’s Upper West Side," he wrote. The people I want to infleunce "don't live in Manhattan, Georgetown, or Beverly Hills. Instead, the voters who will have a big say in shaping the future of the Republican Party live in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. So I will take any opportunity to share my thoughts with these and other influencers on how Republicans can start winning presidential elections again."

If MSNBC lets him, that is. And if they do, it will be hard to justify why they didn't let Ed Schultz speak to Florida Democrats.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Bachmann And Gohmert Lower The Bar On Stupid

By Randa Morris


Gohmert And Bachmann Outdo Each Other On Stupid During House Floor Speech

Michelle Bachmann And Louie Gohmert Embarrass Themselves On An Entirely New Level During House Floor Speech On The ‘Killer Drug’ – Birth Control. – From Dummidumwit

It’s not every day that you get to watch Tea Party conservatives embarrass themselves on the House floor. Or wait, yes it is. Be that as it may, Michelle Bachmann and Louie Gohmert may actually have outdone themselves on March 26, 2014.

Bachmann and Gohmert speak on the “unprecedented killer drugs” that are killing America.

There are certain things you can count on, any time Bachmann or Gohmert open their mouths. Both are well known for over the top theatrics and absurd bits of hysteria. On the other hand, neither is known for their great intelligence or habit of making sense when they talk. You can count on half truths and sometimes, like on this occasion, no truths at all.
Gohmert starts off speaking about how ‘an agency,’ made up of unelected officials will be able to determine what medications are covered and not covered under the ACA. Dire warnings and prophecies aside, Bachmann keeps voicing her agreement, the entire time Gohmert is speaking.

It’s as if she believes she’s attending some Pentecostal church revival, and not standing on the floor of the House of Representatives. “That’s right!” She keeps interjecting, “Yes it is.” Not that anyone really wanted to hear what Gohmert was saying, but Bachmann’s repeated interruptions took annoying to an entirely new level.

Bachman finally cuts Gohmert off entirely. She goes off on this nonsensical tangent, before accusing the President of wielding the power to decide who gets medicine and who doesn’t.
“If you looked at the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, you knew with certainty when you woke up tomorrow morning that your religious liberties were intact. Now, apparently today, the gentlemen was in the chamber and heard that, according to at least one Supreme Court justice, in her opinion, they aren’t so much certain anymore.”
“It is not at only the election of the court, but at the election of the unnamed bureaucrat that decides, today we will have these killer drugs that we mandate. Tomorrow, what drugs will they take off the list? Will I not get life-saving drugs that I need to get?”

Bachmann goes on to tell us what all of this means.

“That means that the president and his administration wins their religious liberty, and the right to force their religious views down the throats of the American people… It’s unlike anything we have ever seen before in the history of the United States of America.”
“The American people better wake up quick because we are living in a country we no longer recognize.”
If you don’t think one word of it makes sense, in spite of Bachmann telling us what it means, you’re not alone.

Would anyone like some some facts with their word salad?

The entire display is beyond ridiculous. First, the government and ‘agencies made up of unelected officials’ already decide which drugs people can and cannot use in this country. That agency is called the FDA. It approves medications for use in the United States. The ACA merely mandates that insurance companies cover medications approved by the FDA.

Second, the only people trying to deny anyone medication, life saving or not, are members of the Tea Party. They want to be the ones to pick and choose which medications will be covered under your health insurance plan, rather than mandating that all drugs are covered, regardless of your employers personal (and misguided) beliefs about them.

Third, this is not ‘unlike anything we’ve ever seen before in the history of the United States of America.’ Not even close. If you get healthcare through the Veteran’s administration, for example, some unelected official dictates which medicines are covered. If you are insured through Medicare or Medicaid, it’s the same thing. Medicaid has covered birth control since Americans first figured out that it’s less expensive than covering a child’s food, housing and medical needs for 18 years or longer. That realization occurred in mainstream America decades ago, but will the Tea Party ever catch up?

Here’s the video of Bachmann and Gohmert’s embarrassing speech on the House floor.