Paying employees fair wages

Bar Marco in Pittsburgh sets a golden standard for paying their employees a fair wage, along with giving benefits rarely granted to food service staff. Ed Schultz, co-owner Justin Steel, and employee Andrew Heffner discuss these incredible steps for worker’s rights.

If You Think Selma’s Snubbing Is a Fluke, Think Again. The Oscars Have Stiffed Lots of Black Films

Movies like The Help, with white protagonists, get lots of recognition, while cinematic classics like Do the Right Thing and Lumumba don’t get their due.

By Peniel E. Joseph

David Oyelowo as Selma’s Martin Luther King Jr. talks to director Ava DuVernay. Courtesy of Paramout Pictures

Social media is abuzz with news that Ava DuVernay’s towering film Selma received only two Academy Award nominations, for best picture and best song. The best film ever made about the civil rights movement, Selma was shut out of nominations for best director and actor that seemed inevitable just weeks ago. And the popular Twitter hashtag #OscarSoWhite, which is trending now, tells us only part of the story.

This is not the first time the Oscars have snubbed a black filmmaker whose artistic achievements seem to be overwhelmed by a storm of political controversy.

Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing is rightly regarded as the director’s masterpiece, a scintillating meditation on American race relations that turned the summer of 1989 into a national conversation about racial conflicts simmering across the nation. Many in Hollywood, including actress Kim Basinger, who said as much during the 1990 Academy Award show, felt that Lee should have received a best director nomination, and the film nominated for best picture. Instead Lee was nominated, but did not win, for best original screenplay.

Three years later, Lee’s searing three-hour biopic, Malcolm X, was again shut out from the best picture and best director categories, although Denzel Washington did receive (but did not win) a best actor nomination.

A less-recognized and more recent slighting of a seminal black film is Raoul Peck’s woefully unrecognized Lumumba, which tells the story of Congolese prime minister and Pan-African icon Patrice Émery Lumumba, whose fight against colonialism influenced African-American leaders from Malcolm X to Amiri Baraka. Independently produced and helmed by a Haitian director, Lumumba features an electrifying performance by actor Eriq Ebouaney.

Selma is simply the latest black-directed masterpiece whose artistic integrity confronted the unapologetic racism of a film industry more comfortable with white fantasies of black life than the genuine article.

We live in a world where the 2012 film The Help, a fictionalized account of the civil rights era featuring actress Emma Stone as the Jackson, Miss., black community’s white savior, not only was nominated for four Oscars but also became a box office sensation, grossing $216 million worldwide.

Unfortunately for the brilliant and bold Ava DuVernay, many academy voters didn’t get the message that The Help was a work of fiction. Instead, as they watched Selma’s provocative and inspired blend of history and artistic integrity unfold, they waited. And waited. And waited. For the kind of white protagonist (read: hero) that enables white voters to identify with films presenting black subject matter. Even 12 Years a Slave provided white characters that allowed contemporary mainstream audiences to relate, even if simply through an act of personal revulsion that allowed 21st-century liberals a measure of moral superiority.

Selma offers no such embellishments.

Just the humbling experience of witnessing a period in American history when black folks stood at the cutting edge of a movement that was both morally specific and expansively universal. DuVernay’s camera does not avert its gaze from white violence or black resistance. Most important, she embraces, even takes as a given, the transcendent glory of African-American intelligence and self-determination. Black women and men, young and old, are portrayed as leaders, not victims; as strategists and tacticians, and not simply obedient followers of Martin Luther King Jr.

Selma’s purposely unglamorous depiction of a warts-and-all King offered a heartbreaking entree into the story of an icon and his wife whose images have become calcified to the point of being disfigured in our own time.

But it’s arguably the depiction of President Lyndon B. Johnson that sealed Selma’s Oscar fate.

DuVernay’s LBJ is presented as a wary ally of the movement; a man pulled by competing political interests who only grudgingly supported the voting-rights movement. This contrasts with the historical Johnson’s more robust support for civil rights, but did little to diminish the film’s artistic power and achievement. Yet the controversy over historical accuracy—one that largely escaped other prestige pictures, like American Sniper, Foxcatcher, The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything, all also based on historical events, and that have been accused of taking literary license with history—focused squarely on Selma, the awards season’s lone film directed by a black woman.

If there’s a silver lining to all this talk of Oscar snubs, disrespect, sexism and racism, it’s that it will both inspire more people to see the film and inspire more black women and men to—following in DuVernay’s footsteps—dare to make films of such power and grace that they defy conventional standards of artistic and commercial success, even as they take black culture to new cinematic heights.

Peniel E. Joseph, a contributing editor at The Root, is founding director of the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy and a professor of history at Tufts University. He is the author of Waiting ’Til the Midnight Hour: A Narrative History of Black Power in America, Dark Days, Bright Nights: From Black Power to Barack Obama and Stokely: A Life. Follow him on Twitter.

Like The Root on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.

Ron Paul Institute Publishes 'False Flag' Conspiracy About Paris Attacks

By John Amato



We've written for years on C&L of how much of a crackpot Ron Paul was while he served in Congress -- and still is. His rise to pseudo-political prominence came after he was a frequent guest and peddler of the 9/11 inside job conspiracy theories led by Alex Jones and his ilk. Yesterday The Ron Paul Institute published a piece called : Charlie Hebdo Shootings: False Flag?

The Charlie Hebdo affair has many of the characteristics of a false flag operation. The attack on the cartoonists’ office was a disciplined professional attack of the kind associated with highly trained special forces; yet the suspects who were later corralled and killed seemed bumbling and unprofessional. It is like two different sets of people.

If you read the whole thing you'll be sickened by it and it has caused quite a stir today from some of his libertarian allies like Matt Welsh at Reason Magazine. The Weekly Standard was equally horrified by this screed too.

It shouldn't surprise anyone who has covered Ron Paul in the past, but most of the media only focused on Paul's popularity rise during the 2008 Republican presidential primaries and never bothered to ask why he was able to raise so much money with his "money bombs.' Being a right wing extremist or a conspiracy theory nut pays good dollars and Ron Paul capitalized on it big time.

Senator Rand Paul, (his son) is no slouch when it comes to conspiracy theories either, but I do wonder if the media will ever ask Rand about his father's nutty proclivities? Don't hold your breath.

The Political Win That Could Make Elizabeth Warren the Next President of The United States

By Miles Mogulescu

Led by Elizabeth Warren, this week progressive Democrats and the American people scored an unusual victory over Wall Street, Too Big To Fail Banks, and corporate Democrats.

Wall Street investment banker Antonio Weiss -- President Obama's nominee for the third ranking position in the Treasury Department, who had helped Burger King merge with a Canadian company to avoid U.S. taxes and stood to receive a $20 million payout from his bank for taking the Treasury job - withdrew his nomination rather than face questioning on his Wall Street ties in a Senate confirmation hearing.

On its face, Weiss's withdrawal might seem like a relatively small thing. But in politics, this is the equivalent of a large earthquake, and a big boost to Elizabeth Warren's political influence.

A presidential appointee is almost never withdrawn because of opposition from the president's own party. The last case I can remember is in 2005 when George W. Bush withdrew the Supreme Court nomination of his friend Harriet Miers after she was opposed by Republican Senators and activists.

As Joe Biden is known to say, "This is a big deal".

This political earthquake is a barometer of the growing influence of Sen. Warren, without whose outspoken opposition - joined by a grassroots campaign which generated over tens of thousands of signatures -- the nomination would have sailed through.

Four weeks ago, I wrote a piece on The Huffington Post entitled The Speech That Could Make Elizabeth Warren the Next President of the United States. Much to my surprise the piece went totally viral. Over the next few days, the piece was "Liked" by 243,000 readers, reposted by over 37,000 people on their own Facebook pages, and Tweeted by thousands more (including by Mark Ruffalo to his 1.2 million followers). The piece seemed to have touched a nerve in the political zeitgeist. The response indicated that there's a hunger for new leadership which is not bought and sold by corporate America, whether it's another Bush or another Clinton.

Even as Jeb Bush is staring to lock up Republican donors in the money primary that hugely influences who wins the actual voter primary, and Hillary adds top Clinton and Obama advisor John Podesta to her potential campaign staff, there's a growing grassroots outcry for a Warren candidacy.

MoveOn has raised $1m for a Draft Warren campaign, has opened staffed offices in Iowa, and has gathered over 200,000 signatures (sign here) which are growing daily. Democracy for America is launching an on-the-ground grassroots campaign this Saturday in New Hampshire. 300 former Obama campaign staffers have signed a letter urging Warren to run.

It's clear that if Warren runs, she'll have an army of experienced grassroots campaign organizers and donors. And unlike with Barack Obama, they're the type of grassroots organizers who would stay organized if she won to be sure that she and a reluctant Congress lived up to her campaign promises.

Even though it's early to put much stock in polls, a Colorado focus group of Republicans, Democrats and Independent organized by the Annenberg Center expressed widespread distaste for both Clinton and Bush and strong positive interest in Warren. A Republican-leaning independent, supported by half the participants, said "I wouldn't be opposed to Congress saying, 'If your last name is Clinton or Bush, you don't even get to run'". Words used by participants to describe Clinton were "Hopeful." "Crazy." "Strong." "Spitfire." "Untrustworthy." "More of the same." "Next candidate, please."

Comments on Jeb Bush were even worse.

But many participants responded positively when Elizabeth Warren's name was mentioned. Words used to describe her included "Passionate." "Smart." "Sincere." "Knowledgeable." "Intelligent." "Capable. Half of the participants said they'd pick Warren as their next door neighbor, including the most conservative member of the group. A Republican-leaning independent said, "She's personable and knowledgeable, and I think she's got a good handle on what's going on in the country". The Washington Post reported the pollster's takeaway:

"'One is [that] the political classes told us it's going to be Bush against Clinton. But these people are hundreds of miles away from that choice. Essentially what they're telling us is, 'I don't trust these people. They're part of an establishment that I don't like.'

That was one turning point, he said. The other was Warren. 'Elizabeth Warren, from every part of the compass, had a level of support," he said. "She's not invisible. She's not unknown. She's not undefined.' And, he added, she reached them on the issues so many people spoke about, which is their own economic concerns.

'You couldn't leave this without feeling how hard-pressed these people are and how they're looking for someone who will be a force for their cause. And Elizabeth Warren has broken through.'"

Given that Elizabeth Warren is the only national politician who addresses the economic concerns of the American people without the corporate ties of Bush, Inc. or Clinton, Inc., as an Atlantic Magazine" column put it, if Warren doesn't run, "she'll do a tremendous disservice to her principles and her party."

"Warren is the only person standing between the Democrats and an uncontested Hillary Clinton nomination. She has already made clear what she thinks of the Clintons.

Warren has suggested that President Bill Clinton's administration served the same "trickle down" economics as its Republicans and predecessors.

Warren has denounced the Clinton administration's senior economic appointees as servitors of the big banks.

Warren has blasted Bill Clinton's 1996 claim that the era of big government is over and his repeal of Glass-Steagall and other financial regulations...

Lead a fight for America's working people? Hillary Clinton wouldn't lead a fight for motherhood and apple pie if motherhood and apple pie were polling below 70 percent."

In contrast, Warren lays out a concrete program for giving average Americans a fighting chance in an increasingly unequal economy. As she told the National Summit on Raising Wages last week,

"We need to talk about what we believe:

• We believe that no one should work full time and still live in poverty - and that means raising the minimum wage.

• We believe workers have a right to come together, to bargain together and to rebuild America's middle class.

• We believe in enforcing labor laws, so that workers get overtime pay and pensions that are fully funded.

• We believe in equal pay for equal work.

• We believe that after a lifetime of work, people are entitled to retire with dignity, and that means protecting Social Security, Medicare, and pensions.

We also need a hard conversation about how we create jobs here in America. We need to talk about how to build a future. So let's say what we believe:

• We believe in making investments - in roads and bridges and power grids, in education, in research - investments that create good jobs in the short run and help us build new opportunities over the long run.

• And we believe in paying for them-not with magical accounting scams that pretend to cut taxes and raise revenue, but with real, honest-to-goodness changes that make sure that we pay-and corporations pay-a fair share to build a future for all of us.

• We believe in trade policies and tax codes that will strengthen our economy, raise our living standards, and create American jobs - and we will never give up on those three words: Made in America.

And one more point. If we're ever going to un-rig the system, then we need to make some important political changes. And here's where we start:

• We know that democracy doesn't work when congressmen and regulators bow down to Wall Street's political power - and that means it's time to break up the Wall Street banks and remind politicians that they don't work for the big banks, they work for US!"

Given the stark contrasts between Clinton's corporate bromides and Warren's specific plans to make the economy work for the 99%, how can Warren cede the Democratic nomination to Hillary Clinton without a contest?

Moreover, Warren's current political influence derives, in no small part, from her potential as a Presidential candidate. If she wins the Democratic nomination, she will become the most influential Democrat in the country, and if she wins the Presidency, she has a chance of effecting some of the transformational changes she proposes. Even if she loses a close nomination battle with Hillary, she will have established herself as a defining national figure and might force Hillary to move in a more populist direction.

But if, after all the fiery rhetoric, Warren sits out the presidential race, her political influence will quickly wane. She will become one more backbench Senator with little political influence. She'd be something like Bernie Sanders (whom I personally like) who's little more than a political gadfly but is unable to achieve much in the way of concrete accomplishments. And Elizabeth Warren doesn't strike me as the type of person who would be satisfied with talking big and accomplishing little.

So, Run Warren, Run. Anything less would be a disservice to yourself, your principles, your millions of supporters, and the American people.

FBI: John Boehner's Bartender Indicted For Plotting To Poison His Wine

By Karoli

It makes me sad that people feel so desperate and are so ill they would even consider attacking a public official. But the most shocking part of this sad story is how many times Michael Hoyt, former bartender at John Boehner's club, made threats before he was actually arrested.

WCPO Cincinnati:

“Hoyt told the officer he was Jesus Christ and he was going to kill Boehner because Boehner was mean to him at the country club and because Boehner is responsible for Ebola,” United States Capitol Police (USCP) Special Agent Christopher M. Desrosiers said. “Hoyt advised he had a loaded Beretta .380 automatic and he was going to shoot Boehner and take off.”

Officers said Hoyt told them he regretted not having enough time to put something in Boehner’s drink. It was also discovered Hoyt emailed Boehner’s wife about the plot a day before he called police, Desrosiers said.

Boy, is that email a doozy, too. Here's his reply to Mrs. Boehner after she emailed him back asking what the first one was all about.

Mrs. Boehner, I was fired. I could not email Mr. Boehner directly because of the zip code block on his email. It doesn’t matter anyway. If he took a real interest in anything he would insure his Club was better than the Country, but they are exactly the same and life goes on SSDD. Sincerely, Mike. Mike, your former bartender.

In addition to the emails and erratic behavior, Hoyt also posted his thoughts online. The Ebola crisis in particular was stressing him.

Authorities said Hoyt also typed an 11-page blog detailing his thoughts about Boehner being the devil and emailed it to his father, ex-girlfriend and neighbor.

Hoyt said he used to pour wine for Boehner often and could have easily poisoned his drink, but didn’t, special agents said.

He said no one checked the drinks he poured for Boehner, and it would have been “very easy to slip something in,” according to Desrosiers.

Hoyt also told agents he imagined a scenario where he confronted Boehner about Ebola in front of one of the sports stadiums in downtown Cincinnati. He said he wanted large crowds to be present.

Obviously Mr. Hoyt has serious psychiatric problems, which is why this find in his apartment is that much more disturbing:

Police searched Hoyt’s home on Oct. 31 and seized an SKS assault rifle magazine, two boxes of 7.62 ammo, 35 loose rounds, a speed loader and a box of .380 rounds. A notebook containing “John Boehner” and “Ebola” were among other writings found during the search, as well as two envelopes with lists of country club members, authorities said.

Agents said they also found a bullet hole in the upper wall of Hoyt’s first-floor bedroom.

When he voluntarily agreed to a 72-hour hold, police took his .380 handgun from him for safekeeping.

Officers said they later recovered Hoyt's SKS assault rifle at his mother’s home in Hebron, Ky. She told investigators she removed it from his home while he wasn’t there because she noticed he was not eating or sleeping and becoming increasingly agitated, Desrosiers said.

People so desperately ill should worry John Boehner and everyone else, too. I'm sure his mother was concerned, since he had suffered a previous psychotic episode but had discontinued his medications. But there wasn't a thing she could do, because the laws in this country are so incredibly draconian when it comes to dealing with the mentally ill. Family members have no rights without extensive and lengthy court proceedings.

I'm glad he didn't shoot John Boehner -- or poison him. But I do wish it would give Boehner pause about the ACA, which covers mental health issues as well as physical health.

Update: Please note: This response came from the right, not the left:

Marvel's Avengers: Age of Ultron Trailer #2

Ultron returns to cause even more trouble for our heroes in another trailer for Marvel's "Avengers: Age of Ultron," in theaters May 1!

► Subscribe to Marvel: http://bit.ly/WeO3YJ

Follow Marvel on Twitter: https://twitter.com/marvel
Like Marvel on FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/Marvel

For even more news, stay tuned to:
Tumblr: http://marvelentertainment.tumblr.com/
Instagram: http://instagram.com/marvel
Google+: https://plus.google.com/+marvel/
Pintrest: http://pinterest.com/marvelofficial/

First on the list: Cut the disabled people

Posted by stbalbach

On the first day of the new Congress, a Texas Republican is leading an effort to make deep cuts in Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) to take effect within about a year. Democrats appear to have little recourse due to the recent election results. Fraud in SSDI is not a major problem despite Republican claims and mythmaking by NPR and 60 Minutes. The inspector general found only about 0.4 percent of cases were approved by fraudulent judges.

More and more people are on disability. This reflects an aging and sick population, not fraudulent activity. Demographics explains most of the increase. See Just The Facts on Disability.

Republicans fought against SSDI throughout the 50s its passage was a dramatic story that few know or remember today. The current "crisis" is a manufactured one, part of the long-view Republican strategy to eliminate SSDI and a broader attack on Social Security. In 1983, a Republican effort moved funds that had been allocated for the disabled into the Social Security Retirement program, artificially creating an imbalance that is coming due today.

The New Republican Attack on Social Security Starts Now.

Why Defending Social Security Needs to Be Next on Obama’s To-Do List

“[People in power] use the word ‘reform’ when they mean ‘privatize,’ and they use ‘strengthen’ when they really mean ‘dismantle.’ They tell us there’s a crisis to get us all riled up so we’ll sit down and listen to their plan to privatize … Democrats are absolutely united in the need to strengthen Social Security and make it solvent for future generations. We know that, and we want that.” (Senator Barack Obama, 2005)

Ted Cruz to oversee Nasa in Congress

Appointment to the space, science and competitiveness subcommittee raises fears Cruz will cut funding to US science programs

By Alan Yuhas

Senator Ted Cruz will chair the committee that oversees science and Nasa in the new Republican-controlled Congress, raising fears that the conservative Texan will cut funding to the space agency and science programs.

Cruz’s appointment to the space, science and competitiveness subcommittee comes amid a broad shift of power in the Senate, where the GOP won a majority in the 2014 midterm elections. Cruz was the top Republican on the subcommittee before the elections.

He has publicly stated support for Nasa but has also attempted at least once to cut the agency’s funding, arguing that larger government cuts necessitated changes to the space program’s budget. In 2013, Cruz both tried to reduce Nasa’s budget and said: “It’s critical that the United States ensure its continued leadership in space.”

Cruz has constituents invested in the space agency’s future – for instance, Nasa employees and contractors at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.

Cruz has also spoken out against decades of science that indicate climate change, telling CNN last year that in “the last 15 years, there has been no recorded warming” to support “a so-called scientific theory”. His vociferous opposition to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and his support of extreme budget cuts could spell trouble for Nasa’s less prominent programs, such as its own climate research and sophisticated supercomputers.

His role on the front lines of the 2013 government shutdown, which critics say had lasting negative effects on public safety, Nasa research and EPA scientists’ ability to visit contaminated sites, also suggests at best a narrow focus on Nasa’s largest projects and at worst a disregard for agencies that require science funding.

Senator Marco Rubio, Republican from Florida, was named chair to the subcommittee on oceans, atmosphere, fisheries and coast guard, which oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Nooa) and the protection of oceans and marine life in US jurisdiction. Rubio has said he does not “believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate”, which is a more lenient position than the new chair of the environment committee, Jim Inhofe, who denies climate science outright.

In December, Congress gave Nasa a boost to its 2015 budget, setting aside hundreds of millions of dollars for its planetary science program and new Space Launch System rocket, which aims to revolutionize advanced rocketry.

Due to budget cuts and programs that the government has allowed to lapse, Nasa has increasingly relied on private space companies in recent years, including Elon Musk’s SpaceX. On Saturday SpaceX tested its own experimental rocket system, delivering supplies to the International Space Station before failing to land its reusable rocket on a floating platform.

The Invasion of America

By Jason Kottke

From eHistory, a time lapse view from 1776 to the present day of how the US government systematically took land from Native Americans through treaties and executive orders that were rarely honored for long.



There's a companion piece at Aeon by Claudio Saunt as well as an interactive version of the map featured in the video.

The final assault on indigenous land tenure, lasting roughly from the mid-19th century to 1890, was rapid and murderous. (In the 20th century, the fight moved from the battlefield to the courts, where it continues to this day.) After John Sutter discovered gold in California's Central Valley in 1848, colonists launched slaving expeditions against native peoples in the region. 'That a war of extermination will continue to be waged between races, until the Indian race becomes extinct, must be expected,' the state's first governor instructed the legislature in 1851.

In the Great Plains, the US Army conducted a war of attrition, with success measured in the quantity of tipis burned, food supplies destroyed, and horse herds slaughtered. The result was a series of massacres: the Bear River Massacre in southern Idaho (1863), the Sand Creek Massacre in eastern Colorado (1864), the Washita Massacre in western Oklahoma (1868), and a host of others. In Florida in the 1850s, US troops waded through the Everglades in pursuit of the last holdouts among the Seminole peoples, who had once controlled much of the Florida peninsula. In short, in the mid-19th century, Americans were still fighting to reduce if not to eliminate the continent's original residents.

FYI, it's always a good rule of thumb to not read comments on YouTube, but in this case you really really shouldn't read the comments on this video unless you want a bunch of reasons why it was ok for Europeans to drive Native Americans to the brink of total genocide.

Tina Fey & Amy Poehler Burn the Fuck Out Of Bill Cosby at Golden Globes

Who Laughed at Tina Fey's Bill Cosby Joke? The Crowd Reaction Shot

By Max Read

Here's a high-res shot of the crowd just after Tina Fey's first Cosby joke. That's Jessica Chastain in the front with her mouth open. Check out Clooney cracking up way in the back, and then, two seats over, a stone silent Bill Murray (?).

David Brooks Only Enjoys the Farts of His Equals

Posted By Rude One

Everyone loves the parties thrown at the home of New York Times columnist David Brooks. Having downsized from an opulent house to an opulent apartment in the Cleveland Park neighborhood in Washington, DC, Brooks delights in inviting over only the most intelligent of the intellgentsia, only the most cognizant of the cogniscenti, all of whom must have degrees Ivy League and careers as thinking thinkers. Then he has the caterers serve dinner, a menu he has chosen to his particular purposes: a vegetarian meal, sometimes South Asian, sometimes East African, exotic sections of exotic continents, lentils and kale and broccoli and apricots and brown rice, rich in sauces that are filled with yogurts and creams, and only champagne to drink.

Once the meal is complete, Brooks looks from face to face around the table, seeing the growing intestinal discomfort in his guests, and then, Brooks farts, loudly, elegantly, even, a rotund, bassoonish sound. He closes his eyes and smells the air, using his hand like a conductor to waft the odors towards his nose. At first, people look at him oddly. Brooks knows the answer to their questioning faces. "Everything that emanates from you is worthier than that which emanates from others," he declares grandly. "Allow yourself to fart. Your farts are, indeed, more valuable than the finest perfumes. They are sublime for they are considered and educated farts."

Slowly, one guest accepts this obvious truth and farts, laughing, tickled by this liberation. Others follow suit until all around the table wealthy people in fine garments are making a flatulent symphony. Their smells commingle, creating new and never-before-sniffed fragrances. "Yes, yes, fart more," Brooks, the master of the moment, commands among the anal oboes and rectal trombones and a chorus of inhalations and moans. More than anyone, he is delirious, as if the musky clouds have formed a magic carpet that allows him to float away.

Once, only once, a waiter on the side, watching this exhibition, shrugged his shoulders and let out a fart that was immediately heard as a flat note in the orchestra. Brooks turned and fired him on the spot for allowing his pedestrian gas to dare to rise with the redolence of the respectable. Luckily, the party wasn't ruined for guests moved quickly to the spot and farted prodigiously in order to dilute the invading scent.

Today, in his "column" (if by "column," you mean "word farts"), Brooks uses the murder of the cartoonists at the French publication Charlie Hebdo to delineate what separates "us" (the Brooksites) from the "them" (the twaddling satirists) in what are two of the most smugly elitist paragraphs you're gonna read:

"In most societies, there’s the adults’ table and there’s the kids’ table. The people who read Le Monde or the establishment organs are at the adults’ table. The jesters, the holy fools and people like Ann Coulter and Bill Maher are at the kids’ table. They’re not granted complete respectability, but they are heard because in their unguided missile manner, they sometimes say necessary things that no one else is saying.

"Healthy societies, in other words, don’t suppress speech, but they do grant different standing to different sorts of people. Wise and considerate scholars are heard with high respect. Satirists are heard with bemused semi-respect. Racists and anti-Semites are heard through a filter of opprobrium and disrespect. People who want to be heard attentively have to earn it through their conduct."

Yes, ahh, the delightful tang of the farts of your equals, those are all that should be smelled. Dare not breathe in the farts of the fools for they can only eat cotton candy and popcorn. They are just one level above racists.

We let the "wise and considerate scholars" who Brooks supports lead this country for a long, long time, using their "establishment organs" to penetrate our politics and economy.  They are far more foolish, far more ignorant, far less connected to reality than the satirists and the crude humorists who have to work in practice, not just theory. And let's remember that, for years, Brooks's party took its marching orders from Rush Limbaugh, who is not generally noted for either his wisdom, his consideration, or his scholarship. Also, his farts smell like cigars and Dominican boy semen.

What Brooks sets up is a world where those who get to be part of the discourse of power have to be approved by those who are already part of the discourse. What are the chances of that group allowing their air to be poisoned by the farts of the outsiders? It's an ideological daisy chain that most of us just get to watch. You can spend your time wondering where you can fit in or you can say, "Fuck that" and walk away.

One huge thing that Brooks misses is that it's often the "jesters" who are the initiators of change. See, you can build towers with your peas and potatoes at the kids' table. You have freedom to play.

In Tremendous Display of Incompetence, GOP FAILS to pass first major bill of 114th Congress

By Daniel Strauss

Something surprising happened in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives Wednesday afternoon: the chamber, with a large Republican majority, failed to pass a GOP-backed jobs regulation and reform bill.

The bill was expected to pass handily but since it was being treated as a "suspension" Democrats were able to defeat it.

Unforced error for House GOP. House unexpectedly defeats job creation & regulation reform bill. Comms dir's had press releases ready to go. — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) January 7, 2015

Jobs/regs bill got 276 yeas, 146 nays. But was treated as a "suspension" which needs 2/3 to pass. With 422 ballots, needed 282. — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) January 7, 2015

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) quickly released a statement hailing the unexpected victory and highlighted aspects of the legislation that would have undercut parts of Dodd-Frank and the Volcker rule in particular.

"I’m proud House Democrats stood together today to protect critical Wall Street reforms," Ellison said in a statement. "Families are only now starting to recover from the devastating financial crisis. Congress must strengthen and fully enforce the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act."

The surprising defeat is reminiscent of a surprise rejection of a farm bill House Republicans brought to a vote June 2013 even though they controlled the chamber.

Other Democrats said the entire skirmish showed the level of Wall Street's infestation in Congress.

"Bringing this bill to the floor just two days into a new session of Congress is more evidence of the stranglehold that Wall Street has on Washington," Rep. John Sarbanes (D-MD) said. "Do we represent all Americans, or just the wealthy and well-connected who would benefit from this legislation?"

GOP's Sneak Attack on Social Security

Thom Hartmann talks with Senator Sherrod Brown (OH) about the GOP's sneak attack on social security.

Obama to Propose 2 Year Tuition Free Community College Program

The president released a preview message saying that he plans to propose a program to make community college “free for everybody who is willing to work for it.” 

By Breanna Edwards

Forget about making education simply “affordable.”

President Barack Obama is planning to announce a program to make the first two years of community college free “for those willing to work for it,” as he revealed in a recent video message made while he was aboard Air Force One, which was posted to the White House’s Facebook page Thursday.

The president is expected to formally announce the plans on Friday at Pellissippi State Community College in Knoxville, Tenn.

According to the White House, the proposed plan, for which more details are to come, will be in partnership with states and is inspired by programs in Tennessee and Chicago. The administration predicts that if all states participate, approximately 9 million students could benefit, saving a full-time community college student an average of $3,800 in yearly tuition.

“I think everybody understands [education] is the key to success for our kids in the 21st century,” the president said in his video message. “But what we also understand is that it’s not just for kids. We also have to make sure that everybody has the opportunity to constantly train themselves for better jobs, better wages, better benefits.”

The conditions for students to have their tuition eliminated include being enrolled at least half-time, maintaining a 2.5 GPA and making “steady progress toward completing their program.”

The budget needed to undertake the ambitious endeavor was not made immediately clear. However, the proposal is for federal funding to cover about 75 percent of the cost, while states pick up the remainder.

The only other question is whether the Republican-led Congress will agree to the proposal. The initial announcement drew criticism from House Speaker John Boehner’s spokesman Cory Fritz, who said in a statement, “With no details or information on the cost, this seems more like a talking point than a plan,” ABC News reported.

Read more at ABC News.

Romney to GOP donors: ‘I want to be President.’

By Philip Rucker, Robert Costa and Matea Gold

In this July 2, 2014, file photo, former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney addresses a crowd of supporters in New Hampshire. Romney told a small group of donors that he's considering a third run at the White House. (Charles Krupa/AP)

Mitt Romney forcefully declared his interest in a third presidential run to a room full of powerful Republican donors Friday, disrupting the fluid 2016 GOP field as would-be rival Jeb Bush was moving swiftly to consolidate establishment support.

Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee, has been mulling another campaign for several months, but his comments Friday marked a clear step forward in his thinking and come amid mounting tensions between the Romney and Bush camps.

“I want to be president,” Romney told about 30 donors in New York. He said that his wife, Ann — who last fall said she was emphatically against a run — had changed her mind and was now “very encouraging,” although their five sons remain split, according to multiple attendees.

Advisers said Romney discussed the race with his family over the holidays, when they spent time skiing in Park City, Utah, but he insisted that he has not made up his mind whether to run. Advisers said he recognizes that he would not be able to waltz into the nomination and that the intra-party competition is shaping up to be stiffer in next year’s primaries than it was in 2012.

Bush’s sudden focus on the race in recent weeks has put pressure on Romney to decide soon.

Romney has been in regular conversations with major donors, some of whom are pushing him to run again, but confidants have also warned him that his window of opportunity could shut if he does not declare his intentions within 30 to 60 days.

Romney’s comments at Friday’s meeting, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, electrified the world of Republican financiers, who are being courted aggressively by Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and other hopefuls. Romney’s dalliance could freeze enough donors to spoil Bush’s plan to post an intimidatingly huge first-quarter fundraising haul this spring.

“What he has said to me before is, ‘I am preserving my options.’ What he is now saying is, ‘I am seriously considering a run,’ ” said Bobbie Kilberg, a top donor from Virginia who raised millions of dollars for Romney’s 2012 bid. She was briefed by attendees on Romney’s Friday comments. “And he said that in a room with 30 people. That is a different degree of intensity.”

Striving to keep his network intact, Romney on Friday also e-mailed his donors with invitations to his fourth annual policy summit in Park City, scheduled for June 11-13. Called the E2 Summit, the event is billed as an “intimate” gathering of Wall Street titans, politicos and former government officials.

Romney’s associates said that he has become restless since conceding to President Obama on a cold night in Boston two years ago. Romney’s motivation to run again stems from a lingering dissatisfaction with Obama’s policies, both economic and foreign, and a belief that he would have set the country on a better course.

Romney also harbors doubts that Bush and other Republican contenders can defeat likely Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, advisers said, and is wary in particular about Bush’s political skills.

“I believe Mitt Romney is too much of a patriot to sit on the sidelines and concede the presidency to Hillary Clinton or [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren when he knows that he can fix the country,” said Spencer Zwick, Romney’s 2012 national finance chairman, who accompanied Romney to Friday’s New York meeting.

“I think, at the end of the day, he believes he could actually make a difference,” Zwick said. “He won’t make a decision to run for president based on who else is in the race. He will make a decision based on his own desire and his own abilities.”

Romney’s advisers said he is approaching the decision pragmatically. “He does not go into things looking through rose-colored glasses,” said one Romney adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity to talk candidly.

This adviser said Romney is far from having his mind made up: “He knows he’ll have to earn it, and he believes in that; that the presidency is too important to hand it over to somebody. He doesn’t talk like that at all. He wants to go out and make his case to the American people and see what happens. But he’s not that far.”

One immediate hurdle Romney would face is that many of the prominent donors that backed his last campaign, as well as some senior operatives who worked for him before, have already been scooped up by Bush or other candidates. GOP lawyer Charlie Spies, who co-founded the pro-Romney super PAC Restore our Future, is now representing Bush’s leadership committee, the Right to Rise PAC, as well as a pro-Bush super PAC of the same name.

Some Republicans have sharply criticized him since 2012 over his missteps on the campaign trail and his final performance — he lost every swing state except North Carolina and finished with 206 electoral votes to Obama’s 332. Democrats successfully cast him as out of touch with the middle class after he was caught on video telling wealthy donors that 47 percent of Americans do not take personal responsibility for their lives.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R), a 2016 presidential hopeful, assailed Romney shortly after the 2012 election: “We have to stop dividing the American voters. We need to go after 100 percent of the votes, not 53 percent.” Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), also eyeing a 2016 run, wrote in his 2013 book that Romney did a “lousy job” talking about the economy “in a way that is relevant to people’s lives.”

Friday’s declaration of interest by Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and businessman, was not welcomed by all of his former allies — especially those close to the Bush family.

“Frankly, he has been bypassed by Jeb,” said Doug Gross, Romney’s 2008 Iowa campaign chairman and longtime Bush ally. “The time for Governor Romney has probably passed. He has already lost twice. The jury is very much out on whether Republican voters would go with him again.”

Romney’s relationship with Bush’s orbit has evolved from warm to strained in recent months.

Bush’s chief political strategist is Mike Murphy, who also is close to Romney and advised his successful 2002 gubernatorial campaign. Last year, Murphy helped Romney on TV ads for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, shooting on a California set that bore more than a passing resemblance to the Oval Office.

But as Bush has ramped up his own efforts, Romney’s coziness with Murphy has dissipated. They last met shortly before Christmas, when Romney asked Murphy about preparations for Bush’s campaign and told Murphy he had not ruled out a bid of his own, according to Romney backers with knowledge of the conversation.

Romney has been talking frequently with Stuart Stevens, his top 2012 strategist and a Murphy rival, while keeping a watchful eye on Bush’s moves to woo Romney’s former supporters. On Friday, Bush was in Boston, Romney’s home base where he headquartered his past campaigns, trying to persuade Romney donors to get behind his effort.

Veteran GOP consultant Ed Rollins said, “Romney knows that he can block donors from going to Bush if he sends a clear enough message.”
 
“If you put Romney and Bush head to head, I think Romney probably wins that fight,” Rollins said. “Nobody is wholesale walking away from him. The donor base and operatives are still there. Bush thought he’d have an open field to easily beat Christie. Romney, if he gets in, changes that plan.”

On Wednesday, Romney lectured at Stanford University in a class titled “Understanding the 2016 Campaign from Start to Finish,” which is taught by his former policy director, Lanhee Chen.

Romney later had dinner in Menlo Park, Calif., with Chen, former spokeswoman Andrea Saul and former campaign lawyers Ben Ginsberg and Katie Biber Chen.

Romney has remained close to such power brokers as New York Jets owner Woody Johnson, a Republican fundraiser who co-chaired Romney’s 2012 campaign and who attended Friday’s meeting.

“When I walked into Woody’s box a few weeks ago, Romney was sitting there in a turtleneck,” recalled former New Jersey governor Tom Kean. “He was in good spirits.”

Dan Balz contributed to this report.

 

Robert Costa is a national political reporter at The Washington Post.

 

Matea Gold covers money in politics for The Washington Post.

France Must Be Careful Not To Repeat The Bush Blunders

By LeftOfCenter

Thom Hartmann masterfully explains the historical events that created the latest nightmare in Paris. The Bush Crime Family has been involved every step of the way. 



Beginning with John Maynard Keynes' prediction that the sanctions put on Germany after World War I would lead to a second world war, through the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, Thom Hartmann clearly explains the blunders of the Bush Administration(s) and their associates that created the powder keg in the middle east. That powder keg cannot be contained to the middle east as Muslims will never lack motivation to avenge the brutality of Western powers.

Why the Bushes?  

Prescott Bush, the Connecticut senator and grandfather of the current president, had some German corporate ties at the outbreak of World War II, but the better yardstick of his connections was his directorships of companies involved in U.S. war production. Dresser Industries, for example, produced the incendiary bombs dropped on Tokyo and made gaseous diffusion pumps for the atomic bomb project. George H.W. Bush later worked for Dresser's oil-services businesses. Then, as CIA director, vice president and president, one of his priorities was the U.S. weapons trade and secret arms deals with Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the mujaheddin in Afghanistan.

What are the events that led to Charlie Hebdo? It began more recently with "Charlie Wilson's War," where Reagan helped a Wahabbist named Osama Bin Laden and funded him so well, the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan and America appeared to win the Cold War. His hatred of Saddam Hussein for being too secular led to Saudi involvement in the first Gulf War and the establishment of an American Air Base in his home country. This in turn led to the rise of this Saudi extremist who developed an intense hatred for all things secular and Western, especially the United States. During the Clinton Presidency, Neo-conservatives saw an opening to create a culture of perpetual war. This led to the creation of The Project for the New American Century.

(PNAC) is a Washington-based neo-conservative think-tank founded in 1997 to "rally support for American global leadership." PNAC's agenda runs far deeper than regime change in Iraq. Its statement of principles begins with the assertion that "American foreign and defense policy is adrift" and calls for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."

While their tone is high-minded, their proposal is unilateral military intervention to protect against threats to America's status as the lone global superpower. The statement is signed by such influential figures as Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Dan Quayle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.

PNAC is not alone, nor did it arise from new wells of power. Most of the founding members of PNAC held posts in the Reagan or elder Bush administration and other neo-conservative think-tanks, publications, and advocacy groups.

Hartmann explains that Jeb Bush's PNAC recommended an invasion, a "small war" like Reagan's Grenada, Bush 41's Kuwait, and this led to the Iraq ($2 trillion) War. This conflict created more hatred for the U.S. by the world's Muslims. European Muslims have been highly motivated, ever since, to train with Jihadist Extremists and inflict terror on the Western World.

The Bush family, in one way or another, has been involved with Middle Eastern hegemony.  

Armaments and arms deals seem to have been in the Bushes' blood for nearly a century, and their bellicose dealings have dire consequences that will continue to plague us for decades to come. France must not overreact and feed the beast that is the Military Industrial Complex, or they'll end up with a perpetually un-winnable War on Terror.

Top 10 things that happened to PlayStation and the scene in 2014

By LoverboySimer

Well check out what you may have missed and Happy New Year. We wish you love, peace and health and along with that a true cfw for PS3, PS4 and PSVita. That will do it right?



1.PS2 ISO’s on non backwards compatiable PS3′s by Habib  (January)
Developer Habib for the first time managed to run PS2 iso’s on non- backword compatible PS3′s
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/01/ps2-isos-for-non-bc-ps3-cobra-4-53-by-habib/

2. Last Rogero  CFW released (February)
The last known  Rogero CFW got released.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/02/release-rogero-cex-4-55-v1-00/

3. PS3Hax went past 300,000 members mark (April)
That was a golden day, wasn’t it? PS3Hax now have over 338,535 member, a few trolls, over  732,988 posts and hellsing9
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/04/300000-members-d/

4. ODE killer also known as 4.60 released by Sony (June)
Changelog was System software stability during use of some features has been improved. but no, this update disabled ODE’s almost forever and now no one was able to run backups without Swap Discs and DMC modules , it was hard for normal users to deal with thus 2 out of 3 ODE makers shut their doors including 3key and E3 ODE.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/06/update-4-60-ofw-is-now-live/

5.  4k Model Dumped for CFW (August)
After so many years someone was finally able to make some progress on a project that may had lead to CFW for newer ps3 models.
The project is still WIP and only time will tell where this will go
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/08/wipps3-4k-model-dumped-by-modrobert-for-cfw/

6.  PS4 Webkit Exploit Discovered  (October)
The first major breakthrough that enabled devs to look closely how PS4 really works.  You can call this as first step towards hacking PS4.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/10/webkit-exploit-confirmed-to-work-on-ps4-firmware-1-76/

7.  Lizard Squad Hacked XBox Live and PSN (December)
Lizard squad promised to hack XBox live on christmas. some considered it as a joke but to prove their power they took one step forward and also took PSN down. while you may call it just a ddos attack but they were able to successfully ruin christmas for gamers all across the world.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/12/lizard-squad-getting-ready-to-shut-down-xbox-live-forever-on-christmas/

8. idpsStealer by flatz (December)
With this tool, for the  first time users were able to get ConsoleID from any original PS3 which was impossible before.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/12/release-idpstealer-by-flatz/

 9. PS3xport released by Kakaroto. (December)
Well second last but not the least, Developer Kakaroto  finally released something that can make the PS3 scene running again and will have a great impact on PS3 scene in 2015. PS3xport, a tool that can can let u edit your PS3 backup and manipulate it.
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/12/ps3xportlong-awaited-and-much-anticipated-tool-by-kakaroto-released/

10. PeXploit. The first tool that will let you install packages on OFW with the help of PS3xport.(December)
While this is still a WIP and it was just released but will still counted as one of the biggest releases . Anyone can now finally install anything with so much ease on any PS3
http://www.ps3hax.net/2014/12/pexploit-beta-by-darkprogramer/

Sherrod Brown Condemns Dangerous Move by the House That Would Undermine Social Security by Attacking Disability Insurance

More than a Third of Social Security Beneficiaries are Disabled Americans and Other Non-Retirees. House Rule Released Today Would Prevent Clean Reallocations of Social Security to Fund Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)

Tuesday, January 6, 2015
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) condemned a dangerous new rule in the House of Representatives that would undermine Social Security by attacking Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). The unprecedented rule change would prevent the House of Representatives from passing clean reallocations of the Social Security Trust Fund.

“Today, House Republicans are trying to change rules that have been in place for decades as a way to attack social insurance,” Brown said. “Rather than solve the short-term problems facing the Social Security Disability program as we have in the past, Republicans want to set the stage to cut benefits for seniors and disabled Americans.”

Reallocation is a simple procedure used by Congress to rebalance how Social Security payroll tax revenues are apportioned between the two trust funds - the equivalent of transferring money from a checking to a savings account.  Reallocation is commonsense, bipartisan policy that has been utilized by both parties 11 times since 1957– most recently in 1994. At that time, it was projected that reallocation would keep the trust fund solvent until 2016.

“Reallocation has never been controversial, but detractors working to privatize Social Security will do anything to manufacture a crisis out of a routine administrative function,” Brown continued.

“Reallocation is a routine housekeeping matter that has been used 11 times, including four times under Ronald Reagan. Modest reallocation of payroll taxes would ensure solvency of both trust funds until 2033. But if House Republicans block reallocation, insurance for disabled Americans, veterans, and children could face severe cuts once the trust fund is exhausted in 2016.”

In July, Brown attended a Senate Finance Committee hearing to examine SSDI and its importance to the entire Social Security system. The hearing was entitled “Social Security: A Fresh Look at Workers’ Disability Insurance.” That same month, Brown delivered a keynote speech on SSDI at the Center for American Progress (CAP) where he outlined future threats that Social Security faces from those who seek to privatize and cut the program. Brown warned how undermining SSDI represents an effort to siphon public support from the entire Social Security program and urged Social Security advocates to organize to prevent detractors from “dividing and conquering” the program.

With more than a third of Social Security beneficiaries being non-retirees, SSDI now more than ever needs to be protected. SSDI is one of our nation’s most successful insurance programs and helps millions of disabled Americans, children, and veterans. Further, SSDI is the sole source of income for one in every three beneficiaries. Without SSDI, half of all beneficiaries would be below the poverty line.

In December, Brown announced that he will introduce the Strengthening Social Security Act – championed by retired U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA). The bill would extend the solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund, which nearly two in three Americans rely on for at least half of their income in old age.

Brown’s prepared opening remarks from the July hearing on SSDI can be found below.

Senator Brown Prepared Opening Remarks for Finance Subcommittee Hearing on “Social Security Disability Insurance”

Thursday, July 24, 2014

I want to begin today’s hearing on Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) by talking about 52-year-old Sheila in Youngstown.

Sheila works in a steel factory along the Mahoning River. She punches a time clock each day on her way into the factory and again on her way out – the same routine every day for the last 18 years.

Sheila has no union strong enough to demand a defined pension, retirement savings account, or even a fair wage, and it’s a grueling job – standing on her feet all day.

But in a town that’s seen far too many factory gates closed and more plants shuttered than most will ever see in a lifetime, Sheila knows that she is fortunate.

One day before heading out the door to work, Sheila decides to throw a load of laundry in the washer before her shift.

She hoists the laundry basket onto her hip and opens the basement door with the other hand. But as she reaches to turn on the lights, Sheila loses her footing and falls down the hard, wooden steps to the concrete floor.

The accident leaves her permanently paralyzed.

Sheila can no longer work.

She doesn’t know how she is going to pay her mounting medical bills, let alone her regular bills now that she has lost her income. Then, Sheila finds out that she has been paying into Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) her entire working life.

This insurance is now Sheila’s lifeline.

She always thought Social Security would be there for her once she retired, but now – Social Security is all she has.

She is now one of the nearly one-third of Social Security beneficiaries who are not retirees.

Nearly nine million disabled workers are SSDI beneficiaries – and 4.4 million children also receive assistance.

One in five SSDI beneficiaries lives in poverty, and nearly half of disabled workers younger than 50 are poor or near poor.

Social Security – as a whole – is a plan that offers working families a bundle of insurance products: retirement, life, and disability insurance – social insurance that most working families couldn’t afford to buy on their own.

That’s why most Americans do not support making cuts to Social Security. In fact, overwhelming majorities are willing to pay more to preserve this program.

Detractors of Social Security know this so they seek backdoor ways to dismantle the program.

That backdoor?

SSDI.

Detractors divide Social Security into “good Social Security” and “bad Social Security.”

They say “bad Social Security” is disability insurance and that the program is bankrupt and rife with fraud, which in turn, undermines Social Security as a whole.

We will address these claims in today’s hearing.

Disability insurance is not bankrupt. The disability trust fund simply needs to be reallocated.

Reallocation is commonsense, bipartisan policy. Since 1957, it has been done 11 times– most recently in 1994.

At that time, it was projected that reallocation would keep the trust fund solvent until 2016 – which it did.

Rebalancing the fund ensures there is adequate funding so that SSDI is there for all of us, if the worst should happen.

Many in this town claim to sympathize with low-income workers.

But when it comes to supporting disability insurance – a program that provides a modest safety-net to the most vulnerable Americans – they dismiss beneficiaries as lazy scammers looking to game the system.

They’re wrong.

Keep in mind, the average SSDI check is about $300 a week.

In my home state of Ohio, the typical annual SSDI benefit for a disabled worker was $11,988 in 2012.

That’s barely over the federal poverty level for an individual.

Go back to Sheila. She worked 18 years in a factory, standing on her feet all day.

More than half of disability insurance beneficiaries are like her – they too worked in jobs that demanded physical labor.

To call people like Sheila lazy – to prey upon the most vulnerable in society – is wrong and unacceptable.

Where fraud exists, we can address it to maintain the protections that SSDI affords us all.

But to divide Social Security into good parts and bad parts is not how we will solve this issue.

I want to share a letter with you from the grandfather of one of my staff.

He received this letter from his employer, the Pennsylvania Gas and Electric Company, on December 24, 1936.

The letter reads:

“On August 14, 1935, Congress passed the Social Security Act. Under the provision of this Act, the company is required to deduct 1% of your wage beginning on January 1, 1937. These deductions, which are matched by your company, are designed to provide for a retirement at age 65.”

Imagine receiving this letter and being told your wages would start being taken away, and that you would get it back when you reached the age of 65.

This was a time when most people didn’t know anyone who lived to 65, so to receive a letter telling you this was controversial to say the least.

When Social Security began, it was an untested idea that was met with a great deal of misunderstanding and resistance.

Today, it is woven into the fabric of our country.

A few years ago, the idea that we would expand Social Security seemed unlikely. All of the conventional Washington wisdom was that we would have to cut the program.

Today, not only are cuts to Social Security deeply unpopular, we are now debating how much we need to expand Social Security to make sure the program continues to be there for all of us.

In today’s hearing, we will examine ways to strengthen Social Security by protecting disability insurance.

We will examine why reallocation is a simple and commonsense administrative function.

And, we will examine the need to cut fraud so the program continues to safeguard against fraud.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

###

Press Contact

Meghan Dubyak/Lauren Kulik
(202) 224-3978

'Mercy' for Bob McDonnell

The Virginia Republican will serve two years in prison for corruption, capping his journey from the governor's mansion to the big house.

By David A. Graham Jan 6 2015, 4:30 PM ET

 

Bob McDonnell arrives at a courthouse in Richmond for sentencing on Tuesday. (Jay Westcott/Reuters)

It's not often that two years in prison is a win. Then again, it's not often that a former Virginia governor is found guilty of corruption. Bob McDonnell is the first holder of that office to be convicted on such charges, and he'll pay for it with 24 months in prison and then another 24 months of supervised release.

That's far short of what prosecutors had hoped for. Citing the gravity of the crimes and charging McDonnell with remorselessness since his conviction, they sought 10 to 12 years, in line with their construal of federal recommendations. (Defense attorneys successfully persuaded Judge James Spencer that the upper limit should be more like eight years.) But it's also way more than what McDonnell's team had asked for: a breathtaking 6,000 hours of community service, with no jail time.

(It's hard to find an example of any sentence like that. Junk-bond king Michael Milken had to serve 5,400 hours, but only after a decade in lockup; the captain of the Exxon Valdez got 1,000.) McDonnell is expected to appeal the ruling.

One lament about this case—aired in this space by Amitai Etzioni, but also elsewhere—is that the real scandal is what's legal, and that we should be dismayed but not too rattled by McDonnell's case since there's far worse bribery that's sanctioned under law. The Republican was convicted of 11 counts of corruption for accepting $165,000 in gifts and loans from businessman Johnnie Williams, in exchange for official government favors.

Related Story

Bob McDonnell's Corruption: The Real Scandal Is What's Legal

But it's possible to be worried about the corrupting effects of legal money on politics and still view this as a triumph for justice. McDonnell was caught, tried, and convicted, and now he'll do his time. The justice system worked—and with a healthy assist from the Fourth Estate, and especially The Washington Post's Rosalind Helderman, which dug into McDonnell's transgressions. That's how American democracy is supposed to function.

The case was always surprising. First, McDonnell seemed squeaky-clean right up to the moment when it was clear he wasn't, and he was on list after list of Republican rising stars. He was destined for the national spotlight, perhaps as a vice-presidential candidate. Second, Virginia has for many years had relatively loose ethics rules, trusting (anachronistically, it's now clear) that its elected officials were gentlemen in the mold of Jefferson who would never sully themselves. As a result, the prosecution was a shock to the Old Dominion's old establishment.

Spencer in part agreed in his comments during sentencing. “No one wants to see a former governor of this great commonwealth in this kind of trouble,” he said, according to The Post. And he acknowledged the outpouring of support on McDonnell's behalf, even while imposing the sentence. 

“The jury by its verdict found an intent to defraud. That is a serious offense that all the grace and mercy that I can muster, it can’t cover it all.” Spencer also said that the longer jail term sought by the prosecution "would be unfair, it would be ridiculous, under these facts.”

 

"While Mrs. McDonnell may have allowed the serpent into the mansion, the governor knowingly let him into his personal and business affairs."

The two-year term is on the short end of the sentences given to some politicians in recent corruption cases, though apples-to-apples comparisons are tricky. The flamboyantly unapologetic Louisiana Democrat Edwin Edwards served a decade in jail. Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, a Democrat, was convicted of more serious offenses including trying to sell a Senate seat and received 14 years in federal prison. His predecessor, Republican George Ryan, went to jail for more than six years on corruption charges. Former Connecticut Governor John Rowland, a Republican, was convicted of a single corruption count and served 10 months.

Much of McDonnell's defense hinged on blaming his wife Maureen, who was close with Williams. The strategy turned the trial into a painful can't-watch-can't-look-away spectacle, as the McDonnells laid bare their clearly troubled marriage in a court of law, under oath. Before sentencing, one of their daughters wrote to the judge, asking for leniency for her father and blaming her mother for the trouble. (Prosecutors, in turn, said this proved he was not contrite.) Spencer seemed to buy this, but only in part: "While Mrs. McDonnell may have allowed the serpent into the mansion, the governor knowingly let him into his personal and business affairs," he said.

Maureen McDonnell, however, will not be sentenced until February 20. The former governor asked on Tuesday the judge to be merciful with her—and perhaps this late gesture on her behalf, after the rather sordid trial, will be better than none at all.

Hapless TV 'News' Hosts Refuse To Call Out Republicans False Equivalency Game With The Rev. Wright

By Heather

If there's one thing you can count on from our cable "news" hosts, it's that Republicans will never be called out for their false equivalencies and endless game of 'bothsiderism.' 



We expect this over at Fox "news" where they've been reflexively repeating the false equivalence that somehow the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is somehow the same or even worse than former Grand Wizard of the KKK David Duke and that President Obama sitting in Wright's church for years is supposedly more offensive than Rep. Steve Scalise paling around with some white supremacists since the day the Scalise scandal broke.

If anyone thought this was confined only to Faux "news" they'd be sadly mistaken. As our friend Driftglass pointed out, we've got former Cheney sycophant Ron Christie polluting his corner over at The Daily Beast with this same nonsense. And then there's Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer, who sat there like a potted plant this Sunday while one disgraced former House Speaker Newton Leroy Gingrich pulled the same stunt: Gingrich on Steve Scalise: Obama Got a Pass on Reverend Wright:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich defended embattled House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) by bringing up President Barack Obama‘s association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and questioning why Obama got a “pass.”

“The president explained he didn’t hear any of [Wright's controversial remarks about America], and we all gave him a pass,” Gingrich told Bob Scieffer on Face the Nation, adding Obama made a “great speech” in Philadelphia as a candidate when he attempted to distance himself from Wright.

Gingrich also invoked former Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat who was a former member of the Ku Klux Klan. He also brought up words of support from Rep.-Elect Mia Love (R-Utah), who stood by Scalise, and Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.), who said Scalise does not have a “racist bone” in his body.

“For a 12-year-old speech to be blown up into a national story, I think, is frankly one more example of a one-sided view of reality,” he added.

Yes, it's so one-sided alright. One sided that there's no one on that set to call you out for pretending that you can remotely compare the two.

And here's more from your supposedly "liberal" MSNBC, with host Steve Kornacki allowing former Rep. Nan Hayworth to do the same thing. Kornacki didn't so much as blink an eye and was just ready to move onto the next segment and more useless handicapping of the next presidential race.



I would like for one of these talking heads to please explain to me just what it is that Rev. Wright supposedly said that is "hateful" about America, or not true for that matter. Roland Martin did a very nice job back in 2008 of putting Wright's speech in context and it's worth a read again today. It would be nice if a few of these hosts took the time to read it as well before they allow another Republican to appear on one of their shows and claim that black liberation theology is exactly the same as white supremacy.

The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright's 9/11 sermon:

As this whole sordid episode regarding the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has played out over the last week, I wanted to understand what he ACTUALLY said in this speech. I've been saying all week on CNN that context is important, and I just wanted to know what the heck is going on.

I have now actually listened to the sermon Rev. Wright gave after September 11 titled, "The Day of Jerusalem's Fall." It was delivered on Sept. 16, 2001.

One of the most controversial statements in this sermon was when he mentioned "chickens coming home to roost." He was actually quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan's terrorism task force, who was speaking on FOX News. That's what he told the congregation.

He was quoting Peck as saying that America's foreign policy has put the nation in peril:

"I heard Ambassador Peck on an interview yesterday did anybody else see or hear him? He was on FOX News, this is a white man, and he was upsetting the FOX News commentators to no end, he pointed out, a white man, an ambassador, he pointed out that what Malcolm X said when he was silenced by Elijah Mohammad was in fact true, he said Americas chickens, are coming home to roost.”

"We took this country by terror away from the Sioux, the Apache, Arikara, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism. "We took Africans away from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism.

"We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel.

"We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenage and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard working fathers.

"We bombed Qaddafi's home, and killed his child. Blessed are they who bash your children's head against the rock.

"We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to pay back for the attack on our embassy, killed hundreds of hard working people, mothers and fathers who left home to go that day not knowing that they'd never get back home.

"We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.

"Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day.

"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff that we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost.

"Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y'all, not a black militant. Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said the people we have wounded don't have the military capability we have. But they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them. And we need to come to grips with that."

He went on to describe seeing the photos of the aftermath of 9/11 because he was in Newark, N.J., when the planes struck. After turning on the TV and seeing the second plane slam into one of the twin towers, he spoke passionately about what if you never got a chance to say hello to your family again.

"What is the state of your family?" he asked.

And then he told his congregation that he loved them and asked the church to tell each other they loved themselves.

His sermon thesis:

1. This is a time for self-examination of ourselves and our families.
2. This is a time for social transformation (then he went on to say they won't put me on PBS or national cable for what I'm about to say. Talk about prophetic!)

"We have got to change the way we have been doing things as a society," he said.
Wright then said we can't stop messing over people and thinking they can't touch us. He said we may need to declare war on racism, injustice, and greed, instead of war on other countries.