Monday, May 13, 2013
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Saturday, May 11, 2013
$59,820 After Incorrect Terminal Illness Diagnosis
By Evan Bleier, Fri, May 10, 2013
A judge in Montana has ordered a hospital to pay almost $60,000 to a man after incorrectly diagnosing him with brain cancer and telling him he had only a few months to live.
U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy ordered the Fort Harrison VA Medical Center to compensate Mark Templin and his family for the distress they suffered because of Dr. Patrick Morrow's "negligent failure to meet the standard of care" in delivering the 2009 diagnosis.
Molloy decided Templin should receive an award of $500 per day for the initial period of severe mental and emotional distress immediately after the diagnosis.
After being told he was going to die, Templin quit his job, sold his pickup truck, celebrated a "last" birthday, contemplated suicide and even bought a prearranged funeral service. His son-in-law also constructed a box to hold his ashes.
As Templin began to feel better, he underwent more testing that eventually revealed that he had suffered several small strokes. The judge ordered that he receive $300 per day for that time period. Including repayment for cost of the birthday party and funeral, Templin was awarded $59,820, CBS Local reported.
"It is difficult to put a price tag on the anguish of a man wrongly convinced of his impending death," Molloy wrote in his decision. "Mr. Templin lived for 148 days ... under the mistaken impression that he was dying of metastatic brain cancer."
He added: “While under the impression that he was afflicted with metastatic brain cancer, Mr. Templin wondered each day whether it would be his last.”
Templin, who's in his 70's, was given two drugs to treat brain cancer. One of those drugs was not supposed to be prescribed to stroke patients.
He also was ordered to undergo hospice care.
Sources: CBS Local, The Independent Record
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Is the US already a complete surveillance state?
Cenk Uygur, journalist David Sirota, The Guardian reporter Glenn Greenwald, and
Buzzfeed’s Michael Hastings debate how seriously Americans should take claims
that every citizen is constantly being recorded by the US government.
‘Doomsday Preppers’ Are Prepared To Take Up Arms Against The Government
By Abby Miller •
It started as a joke. One night, with not much else to watch on television, I turned on “Doomsday Preppers” on the National Geographic channel. Within a few minutes, I was hooked. People aren’t really this paranoid, right? I’d heard of being prepared for things like natural disasters, but these people were extremists. And extremists have always fascinated me.
I started looking into the movement and what I found is unsettling. Speaking, of course, in general (nothing is ever universal except for change), preppers are a very secretive bunch. Estimated to be about 3 million strong (but difficult to get a solid number since they are so well hidden), they actually look down on those who agree to be on the show. They say the Preppers who go on the show only make them all look like paranoid, tinfoil hat-wearing, gun-nut bigots with anti-government ideas.
But that’s not a fair depiction at all, they exclaim. After all, they are just God-fearing, Constitution-loving, traditional marriage-favoring, guns-are-for-keeping-government-tyranny-in-check patriots!
I’ve spent months lurking in their online forums. I am of the belief that the anonymity (or at least perception of it) of the Internet lets people speak more freely than they would in person. This is certainly true in these forums. In the safety of their online community, they show their true colors.
They hate everyone who isn’t white, Christian, and a Prepper. (Because if you aren’t a prepper, you’re going to die when the “SHTF” or “shit hits the fan.”) One of the most popular topics among Preppers is what will trigger TEOTWAWKI (tee-ought-wa-kee), or “the end of the world as we know it.” (Cue R.E.M!) Some think nuclear war, some think economic collapse, others think Obama is going to declare himself dictator and mandate martial law. Whatever they think the cause will be, one thing is agreed upon: the end is near, and societal collapse is inevitable.
But that isn’t the scary part. The scary part is that these people are excited about this. They are waiting for it. They look forward to it. They see the collapse of American society as “pressing the reset button on America.” They can’t wait. Some even see themselves as Noah, warning those around them of the coming flood and telling them to prepare. I call them “Prepper Preachers.” They relish in the idea of being the survivors, the only ones left to rebuild society in their ideal. It’s a romantic notion for them.
It is this anticipation of the end of the world that makes Preppers a dangerous bunch. Combine this with the rampant rumors of Obama banning guns and black powder via executive order, and you have an angry, irrational percentage of the U.S. population that are in a near frenzy. This group is very well armed, and more than willing to use force.
My fear is that this small, well-armed group is so desperately anticipating societal unrest that they will be the ones to bring it on. Yes, I believe that there will be another Civil War in this country, and this time it will be a fight over the 2nd Amendment. There is already talk among the online Prepper community about how they will protect their guns, using phrases and terms such as “NOMI” or “not one more inch,” and “Molon Labe,” a term meaning “come and take.”
Here is the promotional trailer for Doomsday Preppers Season 2:
They are ready. Are we?
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Fat Ass Chris Christie Had Weight Loss Surgery In February
By STEVE PEOPLES, GEOFF MULVIHILL and KATIE ZEZIMA
05/07/13 10:00 PM ET EDT
NEWARK, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie, who once famously called himself "the healthiest fat guy you've ever seen," disclosed Tuesday he had secretly undergone weight-loss surgery, a major new step by the potential Republican presidential contender to address both his health and a political vulnerability.
The stakes are high for Christie, with medical professionals and campaign strategists alike suggesting there is no more serious barrier to his personal well-being and national ambitions than his weight.
It's not about politics, he said. It's about turning 50 and wanting to be around as his children grow up.
"This is a hell of a lot more important to me than running for president," Christie, a father of four, said at a news conference in Newark. "This is about my family's future."
Christie, who appeared thinner than he did earlier this year, said he decided around the time of his birthday in September to have the surgery and initially planned to have it done in November. But Superstorm Sandy's destruction in New Jersey pushed back the procedure until February. In the operation, a band was surgically placed around his stomach to restrict how much food he could eat.
Christie has not previously disclosed his weight, and he didn't on Tuesday. But it has been an issue throughout his political career. Comedians have often made fun of it, and in interviews with David Letterman, Oprah Winfrey, Barbara Walters and others, Christie has both joked about the issue and said solemnly that he was trying to shed pounds.
During a February appearance on "The Late Show with David Letterman," the governor pulled out a doughnut and said his girth was "fair game" for comedians.
Over the next few days, he was asked repeatedly about his weight. At one point, he said he had a plan. "Whether it's successful or not," he said, "you'll all be able to notice."
The next day, he responded angrily to comments from a former White House physician who said she hoped he would run for president but worried about him dying in office. The governor said the doctor should "shut up."
Ten days after that, on Feb. 16, Christie had the surgery. He said the operation lasted 40 minutes and he was home the same afternoon. He was back at work on Feb. 19 for a full day of events.
Christie, who is in the midst of a re-election campaign, said he has been eating less because he hasn't been as hungry. He also has been working out with a personal trainer.
He said he had told only a few top staffers – not his communications office or campaign staff – and his communications director was caught by surprise Monday when a New York Post reporter asked directly if he'd had the procedure. The Post first reported the surgery on Tuesday. Christie said he'd used an alias at the hospital.
Christie said he never intended to make a public announcement and that he was "not going to be the guy who writes a book" about losing weight. The Republican, who has been a fixture in the national media spotlight, said the scrum of reporters at his news conference was "silly" and "ridiculous" at a time when there are other things going on.
He said he tried other ways to lose weight for years, but none seemed to work.
"It's not a career issue for me; it's a long-term health issue for me," he said.
Still, it's a way to confront a significant hurdle in his indisputable quest to emerge as a key leader in the Republican Party. He's in the top tier of those considered potential contenders for the presidential nomination in 2016.
Weeks after the surgery, Christie launched an aggressive national fundraising tour, fueling speculation that he's laying the groundwork for a White House bid.
In a country facing an obesity epidemic, more than 220,000 stomach-reducing procedures of various types are performed each year. Gastric bypass, sometimes called stomach stapling, is the most common, where surgeons shrink the stomach's size and reroute food to the small intestine. Christie had gastric band surgery. It's best known by the brand name Lap-Band, and is a less invasive alternative in which an adjustable ring is placed over the top of the stomach and tightened to restrict how much food can enter.
The adjustable Lap-Band has been available in the U.S. since 2001 for the most obese patients, and in 2011 the Food and Drug Administration expanded approval to somewhat less obese patients.
Candidates for gastric banding must have a body mass index of between 30 and 40 – plus a weight-related medical condition, such as diabetes or high blood pressure – or a BMI of 40 and higher. They also must have previously attempted to lose weight through diet and exercise.
"If you eat appropriately and chew your food, it works nicely," said Dr. Christina Li, a bariatric doctor at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. She said Christie has the resources to have people help him eat right and get exercise. While the band is removable, she said patients are told to adjust to having it for the rest of their lives.
Li said risks include infection, and that it does not work for all patients.
Dr. Jaime Ponce, who practices in Dalton, Ga., and is president of the American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, said people who have the procedure Christie had often lose 1 to 2 pounds per week.
Christie's procedure was performed by Dr. George Fielding, head of NYU Medical Center's Weight Management Program, who did the same procedure for New York Jets coach Rex Ryan three years ago.
"It basically teaches you how to eat like a human," Ryan said of the device in an interview last week with The Associated Press. "The Lap-Band goes: `No, no. You're only going to eat this or that,' and it trains your body how to eat right," said Ryan, who said he has lost 115 pounds from his pre-surgery weight of 348.
Few significantly overweight presidential candidates have succeeded in the modern political era, when television became a major factor in shaping voter attitudes. There are disputed reports that President William Howard Taft couldn't fit in a White House bathtub a century ago, but only a handful of presidents since have been considered obese. President Bill Clinton struggled at times with his weight, but he was substantially slimmer than the New Jersey governor.
"This has nothing to do with politics," said Christie adviser Bill Palatucci. "He said that he's doing this for his family and that's the right reason."
Backers publicly argue that Christie answered any questions about his weight's political impact in 2009, when he beat Gov. Jon Corzine despite the Democrat's reference in an ad to Christie "throwing his weight around" to get out of traffic tickets. Supporters say Christie's openness about his struggle is part of an authenticity people admire in him.
The governor's allies, medical professionals and even history suggest that his weight presents both practical and political problems.
"Gov. Christie's weight is an issue the same way that any candidate or official's health is an issue," said Michael Dennehy, a New Hampshire-based Republican strategist and veteran of presidential politics. "Anyone running for president will need to comfort Americans with an overall healthy picture for their future."
Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, N.J., and Peoples from Providence, R.I. AP Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard in Washington, AP writers Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines, Iowa, and AP Sports Writer Dennis Waszak in New York contributed to this report.
Chris Christie, you donut eating fat tub of lard, no amount of surgery will get rid of that spare tire that you are carrying around your waist. I find your 30 chins terrible to behold. dlevere.
NEWARK, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie, who once famously called himself "the healthiest fat guy you've ever seen," disclosed Tuesday he had secretly undergone weight-loss surgery, a major new step by the potential Republican presidential contender to address both his health and a political vulnerability.
The stakes are high for Christie, with medical professionals and campaign strategists alike suggesting there is no more serious barrier to his personal well-being and national ambitions than his weight.
It's not about politics, he said. It's about turning 50 and wanting to be around as his children grow up.
"This is a hell of a lot more important to me than running for president," Christie, a father of four, said at a news conference in Newark. "This is about my family's future."
Christie, who appeared thinner than he did earlier this year, said he decided around the time of his birthday in September to have the surgery and initially planned to have it done in November. But Superstorm Sandy's destruction in New Jersey pushed back the procedure until February. In the operation, a band was surgically placed around his stomach to restrict how much food he could eat.
Christie has not previously disclosed his weight, and he didn't on Tuesday. But it has been an issue throughout his political career. Comedians have often made fun of it, and in interviews with David Letterman, Oprah Winfrey, Barbara Walters and others, Christie has both joked about the issue and said solemnly that he was trying to shed pounds.
During a February appearance on "The Late Show with David Letterman," the governor pulled out a doughnut and said his girth was "fair game" for comedians.
Over the next few days, he was asked repeatedly about his weight. At one point, he said he had a plan. "Whether it's successful or not," he said, "you'll all be able to notice."
The next day, he responded angrily to comments from a former White House physician who said she hoped he would run for president but worried about him dying in office. The governor said the doctor should "shut up."
Ten days after that, on Feb. 16, Christie had the surgery. He said the operation lasted 40 minutes and he was home the same afternoon. He was back at work on Feb. 19 for a full day of events.
Christie, who is in the midst of a re-election campaign, said he has been eating less because he hasn't been as hungry. He also has been working out with a personal trainer.
He said he had told only a few top staffers – not his communications office or campaign staff – and his communications director was caught by surprise Monday when a New York Post reporter asked directly if he'd had the procedure. The Post first reported the surgery on Tuesday. Christie said he'd used an alias at the hospital.
Christie said he never intended to make a public announcement and that he was "not going to be the guy who writes a book" about losing weight. The Republican, who has been a fixture in the national media spotlight, said the scrum of reporters at his news conference was "silly" and "ridiculous" at a time when there are other things going on.
He said he tried other ways to lose weight for years, but none seemed to work.
"It's not a career issue for me; it's a long-term health issue for me," he said.
Still, it's a way to confront a significant hurdle in his indisputable quest to emerge as a key leader in the Republican Party. He's in the top tier of those considered potential contenders for the presidential nomination in 2016.
Weeks after the surgery, Christie launched an aggressive national fundraising tour, fueling speculation that he's laying the groundwork for a White House bid.
In a country facing an obesity epidemic, more than 220,000 stomach-reducing procedures of various types are performed each year. Gastric bypass, sometimes called stomach stapling, is the most common, where surgeons shrink the stomach's size and reroute food to the small intestine. Christie had gastric band surgery. It's best known by the brand name Lap-Band, and is a less invasive alternative in which an adjustable ring is placed over the top of the stomach and tightened to restrict how much food can enter.
The adjustable Lap-Band has been available in the U.S. since 2001 for the most obese patients, and in 2011 the Food and Drug Administration expanded approval to somewhat less obese patients.
Candidates for gastric banding must have a body mass index of between 30 and 40 – plus a weight-related medical condition, such as diabetes or high blood pressure – or a BMI of 40 and higher. They also must have previously attempted to lose weight through diet and exercise.
"If you eat appropriately and chew your food, it works nicely," said Dr. Christina Li, a bariatric doctor at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. She said Christie has the resources to have people help him eat right and get exercise. While the band is removable, she said patients are told to adjust to having it for the rest of their lives.
Li said risks include infection, and that it does not work for all patients.
Dr. Jaime Ponce, who practices in Dalton, Ga., and is president of the American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, said people who have the procedure Christie had often lose 1 to 2 pounds per week.
Christie's procedure was performed by Dr. George Fielding, head of NYU Medical Center's Weight Management Program, who did the same procedure for New York Jets coach Rex Ryan three years ago.
"It basically teaches you how to eat like a human," Ryan said of the device in an interview last week with The Associated Press. "The Lap-Band goes: `No, no. You're only going to eat this or that,' and it trains your body how to eat right," said Ryan, who said he has lost 115 pounds from his pre-surgery weight of 348.
Few significantly overweight presidential candidates have succeeded in the modern political era, when television became a major factor in shaping voter attitudes. There are disputed reports that President William Howard Taft couldn't fit in a White House bathtub a century ago, but only a handful of presidents since have been considered obese. President Bill Clinton struggled at times with his weight, but he was substantially slimmer than the New Jersey governor.
"This has nothing to do with politics," said Christie adviser Bill Palatucci. "He said that he's doing this for his family and that's the right reason."
Backers publicly argue that Christie answered any questions about his weight's political impact in 2009, when he beat Gov. Jon Corzine despite the Democrat's reference in an ad to Christie "throwing his weight around" to get out of traffic tickets. Supporters say Christie's openness about his struggle is part of an authenticity people admire in him.
The governor's allies, medical professionals and even history suggest that his weight presents both practical and political problems.
"Gov. Christie's weight is an issue the same way that any candidate or official's health is an issue," said Michael Dennehy, a New Hampshire-based Republican strategist and veteran of presidential politics. "Anyone running for president will need to comfort Americans with an overall healthy picture for their future."
Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, N.J., and Peoples from Providence, R.I. AP Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard in Washington, AP writers Thomas Beaumont in Des Moines, Iowa, and AP Sports Writer Dennis Waszak in New York contributed to this report.
Chris Christie, you donut eating fat tub of lard, no amount of surgery will get rid of that spare tire that you are carrying around your waist. I find your 30 chins terrible to behold. dlevere.
Saturday, May 4, 2013
Boycotts Against Rush Limbaugh Thriving – Clear Channel Hit With Millions In Losses
Wall Street Journal, May 3, 2012: CC Clear Channel …reported a loss of $203 million, versus a year-ago loss of $143.6 million. (The Limbaugh boycotts began last year in the first quarter) Revenue fell 1.3% to $1.34 billion. Revenue from media and entertainment, the company’s largest segment, was down 2.2%, Operating expenses dropped 3.5%.This is very bad news for Clear Channel CEO, Bob Pitman, and President, John Sykes. Surely while frolicking among their good will charities, taking in high salaries, and handing out massive Clear Channel employee layoffs, they saw this coming.Yet they allowed blatant racism, sexism, gay-hatred and bigotry to air on their 600 radio stations. I wonder if all the liberal friends of Pittman and Sikes know the two Clear Channel execs oversee right-wing extreme hate radio with not only Rush Limbaugh, but also Glenn Beck and Shaun Hannity. And I wonder if the hundreds of artists like Justin Timerberlake, Elton John, Pink, Taylor Swift, Greeday, Band Perry… know that, through Limgbauh’s ‘all American’ sister company, iheart radio/iheart Festivals, they are indirectly helping to support Limbaugh’s hate and lies? I would bet those artists don’t know.
Clear Channel Media, is the vehicle used by private-equity firms Bain Capital LLC.
Pittman and Sykes would have to be living in another world to miss the massive public outrage against Rush Limbaugh’s show: Especially after Limbaugh called then unknown,college student, Sandra Fluke, a ‘slut’ and ‘prostitute’ when she was advocating for insurance-paid birth control. (See Limbaugh’s attack on Sandra Fluke at the bottom of this story)
(Sandra Fluke/Planned Parenthood)
Since Clear Channel and the FCC, have opted to ignore the general public, as well as Limbaugh’s hate speech, Americans decided to take matters into their own hands, using their greatest weapon of all – the almighty dollar. They would go after Limbaugh and Clear Channel’s main lifeline. The buying consumers went after the sponsors.
Petitions were started by single citizens, as well as large activist organizations. Boycott groups evolved all over Facebook, and a Rush Limbaugh sponsor StopRush Database, was created for the average person to find contact information and air dates of sponsors. Even a ThinkContext browser app/extension is now available to see sponsoring companies, while searching the internet. It’s massive. And it has much to do with the hard work of radio monitors and reporters who track ads on Rush Limbaugh shows throughout the country. Women’s rights organization, UniteWomen.org, and large progressive sites like Daily Kos, AddictingInfo.org, Being Liberal, and Media Matters have fully supported and helped the movement.
At first, about 100 sponsors left after the Sandra Fluke attack. Then a few more left. Some like Angie’s List and Legal Zoom went back to Limbaugh’s show probably thinking the public outcry would die down and people would move on. Instead, the national movement grew and gained in momentum. Everyday citizens, as well as activists, continue to join Facebook groups like Boycott-Rush-Limbaughs-Sponsors-to-SHUT-HIM-DOWN (which now has 54,000+ followers) and Flush Rush. Consumers are taking time to tell sponsors they will not buy from a company that supports Rush Limbaugh.
Sponsors react to that, and over 2,600 companies have pulled their ads due to the boycotts and petitions. Hundreds of more advertisers silently have slipped out. Now we see big losses for Clear Channel. Cumulus Radio has already admitted to losing millions due to the Limbaugh boycotts. It’s doubtful Clear Channel will admit it, but the proof is in the pudding, I mean earnings.
Not only is it clear to Clear Channel and Rush Limbaugh, that the public means business, they are finding out the public IS business.
Thank You, Richard Myers. We Are Finishing This. Rest In Peace.To Get Involved In The Anti-Rush Limbaugh movements (in addition to the links above): http://www.dailykos.com/…
And/or you can sign this Petition To Clear Channel & Limbaugh Sponsors
Video from Think Progress
(The author, Leslie Salzillo, is a political commentator, activist, diarist, and a visual artist. She writes diaries in Daily Kos and began contributing to AddictingInfo.org in March 2013)
Friday, May 3, 2013
Dow Jones Reaches New All Time High, Making Republicans Look Like Fools
By Justin "Filthy Liberal Scum" Rosario •
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose above 15,000 for the first time Friday following a solid US jobs report.
At 1429 GMT, the Dow reached 15,000.54, up 173.96, or 1.17 percent.Normally this would be greeted with parades and confetti by the right wing who has insisted that the only way for the country to recover is for Wall Street and corporate America to make as much money as possible. Remember, the “job creators” will shower jobs on to the poor and middle class when they have all the money they could ever need. Yet there will be crickets from Fox and the right wing media. Why?
Because Obama is trying to destroy the economy.
For real! Unemployment is skyrocketing under his disastrous economic policies! By “skyrocketing,” of course, I mean “lower then they were when he took office.” Today’s job numbers show an unemployment rate of 7.5%. No doubt Fox will make sure to mention that we’re not using the right metrics to determine unemployment and that the “real” number is much MUCH higher. Curiously, they only seem to apply this “unskewed” method to the last four years. Almost as if there’s no data before January 2009.
The United States economy created an estimated 165,000 jobs in April, averting fears of a sharp slowdown and pushing the unemployment rate to its lowest level since the end of 2008.
The latest jobs figures from the Department of Labor paint a brighter picture of the overall economy than other recent data, which had been weaker and prompted economists to warn of a spring swoon for the third year in row. Those worries had been heightened after the March jobs report, which initially showed the economy to have added just 88,000 jobs, much fewer than had been expected.
On Friday, however, the government sharply revised upward its estimates for job creation in February and March, concluding that the economy actually generated 332,000 jobs in February and 138,000 in March. The unemployment rate, which is based on a separate survey, fell by 0.1 percentage point to 7.5 percent, from 7.6 percent in March.
Right now, I imagine President Obama is screaming at his co-conspirators staff,
demanding to know why the economy is still recovering instead of
completely imploding to make way for the Communist Socialist Muslim Nazi
Homosexual revolution.
The reality of it though is that Obama has
built a much more stable recovery than any president in recent history.
Instead of basing it on inflating a new bubble to replace the one that
burst, the Obama administration has focused on rebuilding
our manufacturing base and non-exportable jobs, like green energy
production. It would have gone much quicker had the GOP not resolved to
block any and all infrastructure spending knowing full well that those
jobs also cannot be outsourced and the money goes directly back into the
local economies. In the meantime, who cares if a bridge or two
collapses and kills people? It’s far more important to keep those unemployment numbers as high as possible!
Even as the GOP’s sequestration cuts hurt
millions of Americans (as they designed it to do), the Republican Party
is gearing up for its next round of hostage taking when the debt ceiling
is reached this summer. If the job reports continue to be positive and
the economy continues to recover, what will be their excuse be and will
the public finally have had enough of their obstructionism? I guess
we’ll find out.
Come join me on Facebook, my home blog or just follow me on Twitter @FilthyLbrlScum
Thursday, May 2, 2013
The irony in Bush's dandy new library
By Jim Hightower - Wed., 5/1/13
Gosh, it seems like only yesterday that we saw George W on TV reading The Pet Goat to some second graders – but now he's all grown up and has an entire, super-duper, king-sized library filled with big books and other neat stuff – all dedicated to him.
Bush's pharonic "Presidential Center" is now open, allowing us commoners to dig deep into the shallowness of his achievements. The enormous building itself sets the tone: sharp edges, high brick walls, and the welcoming feel of a fortress. Yet the ex-prez insists that it's a place for public contemplation of his legacy, "a place to lay out facts."
How ironic is that? After all, the Bush-Cheney regime was infamous for its disregard of facts, as well as its constant hiding, twisting, and wholesale manufacturing of facts to fool the people. On everything the regime pushed – from going to war over Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction to its plan to gut and privatize Social Security – "facts" were whatever Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Rove, and Condi imperiously declared them to be.
More ironic (and even insulting) is the centerpiece of the library's attempt to whitewash George's eight awful years: An interactive exhibit called "Decision Points Theater." And theater it is, portraying George heroically as "The Decider" on such Big Moments as Hurricane Katrina and the Wall Street collapse. Visitors to this rigged exhibit can use touch screens to see Bush getting contradictory advice, then taking a bold stand. The whole show is meant to make you feel sympathy for him, then you're asked to "vote" on whether he did the right thing. Again, irony: We the People got no vote on these issues back when it would've mattered.
The only honesty in George's library is that it's as big a fraud as his presidency was.
"Rewinding History, Bush Museum Lets You decide," The New York Times, April 21, 2013.
"Set for center opening, Bush says, "There's no need to defend myself," USA Today, April 22, 2013.
"GWB," Parade Magazine, April 21, 2013.
"Will Visitors to George W. Bush's New Presidential "Lie Bury" Fall for the Gimmicky Game That Helps Him Evade Accountability?" www.alternet.org, April 22, 2013.
"Bush's Legacy of Atrocities Is Nowhere to Be Seen at His New Library -- and the Local Paper Won't Even Run One Ad That Tells the Truth," www.alternet.org, April 23,, 2013.
"George W. Bush says library 'a place to lay out facts,'" www.usatoday, April 21, 2013.
Gosh, it seems like only yesterday that we saw George W on TV reading The Pet Goat to some second graders – but now he's all grown up and has an entire, super-duper, king-sized library filled with big books and other neat stuff – all dedicated to him.
Bush's pharonic "Presidential Center" is now open, allowing us commoners to dig deep into the shallowness of his achievements. The enormous building itself sets the tone: sharp edges, high brick walls, and the welcoming feel of a fortress. Yet the ex-prez insists that it's a place for public contemplation of his legacy, "a place to lay out facts."
How ironic is that? After all, the Bush-Cheney regime was infamous for its disregard of facts, as well as its constant hiding, twisting, and wholesale manufacturing of facts to fool the people. On everything the regime pushed – from going to war over Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction to its plan to gut and privatize Social Security – "facts" were whatever Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Rove, and Condi imperiously declared them to be.
More ironic (and even insulting) is the centerpiece of the library's attempt to whitewash George's eight awful years: An interactive exhibit called "Decision Points Theater." And theater it is, portraying George heroically as "The Decider" on such Big Moments as Hurricane Katrina and the Wall Street collapse. Visitors to this rigged exhibit can use touch screens to see Bush getting contradictory advice, then taking a bold stand. The whole show is meant to make you feel sympathy for him, then you're asked to "vote" on whether he did the right thing. Again, irony: We the People got no vote on these issues back when it would've mattered.
The only honesty in George's library is that it's as big a fraud as his presidency was.
"Rewinding History, Bush Museum Lets You decide," The New York Times, April 21, 2013.
"Set for center opening, Bush says, "There's no need to defend myself," USA Today, April 22, 2013.
"GWB," Parade Magazine, April 21, 2013.
"Will Visitors to George W. Bush's New Presidential "Lie Bury" Fall for the Gimmicky Game That Helps Him Evade Accountability?" www.alternet.org, April 22, 2013.
"Bush's Legacy of Atrocities Is Nowhere to Be Seen at His New Library -- and the Local Paper Won't Even Run One Ad That Tells the Truth," www.alternet.org, April 23,, 2013.
"George W. Bush says library 'a place to lay out facts,'" www.usatoday, April 21, 2013.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
This is why I don’t think we have a strong president
Cenk Uygur, “Edge Show” host Mark Thompson, The Nation’s Lee Fang, and comedian Jimmy
Dore criticize President Obama’s inability to deliver on his first-term promise
to close Guantanamo Bay.
During a White House Press conference, Obama renewed his dedication to closing the prison.
“I think it’s one of the great failed promises of this presidency,” Thompson says. “This is why I don’t think we have a strong president,” Cenk says. “This is an executive decision. Obama shouldn’t have any conversation with Congress about this.”
During a White House Press conference, Obama renewed his dedication to closing the prison.
“I think it’s one of the great failed promises of this presidency,” Thompson says. “This is why I don’t think we have a strong president,” Cenk says. “This is an executive decision. Obama shouldn’t have any conversation with Congress about this.”
Daughter of Newtown victim confronts Kelly Ayotte at town hall
The daughter of Newtown victim Dawn Hochsprung confronted Senator Kelly
Ayotte for voting against expanding background checks at a contentious town hall
meeting in New Hampshire, Tuesday, NBC
News reported.
Erica Lafferty, whose mother was the principal of Sandy Hook, asked Ayotte to clarify her objections to the bill, which was supported by three quarters of New Hampshire voters in a recent poll.
“You had mentioned that day you voted, owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would be harmed. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn’t more important than that,” she asked.
“Erica, I, certainly let me just say—I’m obviously so sorry,” Ayotte responded. “And, um, I think that ultimately when we look at what happened in Sandy Hook, I understand that’s what drove this whole discussion—all of us want to make sure that doesn’t happen again.”
The question came shortly after a shouting match broke out at the packed town hall. A resident from a nearby town demanded the right to ask a question without filling out the standard card, angering Ayotte supporters in the packed room.
More than 100 people on both sides of the debate had assembled for the senator’s first town hall since the controversial background check vote.
That vote has drawn national scrutiny, with the NRA releasing a radio ad this week praising Ayotte for voting against expanding background checks.
New Hampshire voters, however, don’t seem as pleased. Ayotte, along with other senators who voted against the popular background checks expansion, has suffered a drop in popularity since casting her no vote.
NBC News’ Kasie Hunt reported from the town hall meeting in Warren, New Hampshire. Erica Lafferty will join PoliticsNation on Wednesday, May 1, to talk about her interaction with Senator Ayotte and explain why she’s fighting for gun control in her mother’s honor. Be sure to tune in at 6 p.m. E.T..
Erica Lafferty, whose mother was the principal of Sandy Hook, asked Ayotte to clarify her objections to the bill, which was supported by three quarters of New Hampshire voters in a recent poll.
“You had mentioned that day you voted, owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would be harmed. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn’t more important than that,” she asked.
“Erica, I, certainly let me just say—I’m obviously so sorry,” Ayotte responded. “And, um, I think that ultimately when we look at what happened in Sandy Hook, I understand that’s what drove this whole discussion—all of us want to make sure that doesn’t happen again.”
The question came shortly after a shouting match broke out at the packed town hall. A resident from a nearby town demanded the right to ask a question without filling out the standard card, angering Ayotte supporters in the packed room.
More than 100 people on both sides of the debate had assembled for the senator’s first town hall since the controversial background check vote.
That vote has drawn national scrutiny, with the NRA releasing a radio ad this week praising Ayotte for voting against expanding background checks.
New Hampshire voters, however, don’t seem as pleased. Ayotte, along with other senators who voted against the popular background checks expansion, has suffered a drop in popularity since casting her no vote.
NBC News’ Kasie Hunt reported from the town hall meeting in Warren, New Hampshire. Erica Lafferty will join PoliticsNation on Wednesday, May 1, to talk about her interaction with Senator Ayotte and explain why she’s fighting for gun control in her mother’s honor. Be sure to tune in at 6 p.m. E.T..
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Black Voter Turnout Exceeded White Voter Turnout
The Associated Press
Sunday, April 28, 2013 | 5:20 a.m.
America's blacks voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time, reflecting a deeply polarized presidential election in which blacks strongly supported Barack Obama while many whites stayed home.
Had people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly, according to an analysis conducted for The Associated Press.
Census data and exit polling show that whites and blacks will remain the two largest racial groups of eligible voters for the next decade. Last year's heavy black turnout came despite concerns about the effect of new voter-identification laws on minority voting, outweighed by the desire to re-elect the first black president.
William H. Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, analyzed the 2012 elections for the AP using census data on eligible voters and turnout, along with November's exit polling. He estimated total votes for Obama and Romney under a scenario where 2012 turnout rates for all racial groups matched those in 2004. Overall, 2012 voter turnout was roughly 58 percent, down from 62 percent in 2008 and 60 percent in 2004.
The analysis also used population projections to estimate the shares of eligible voters by race group through 2030. The numbers are supplemented with material from the Pew Research Center and George Mason University associate professor Michael McDonald, a leader in the field of voter turnout who separately reviewed aggregate turnout levels across states, as well as AP interviews with the Census Bureau and other experts. The bureau is scheduled to release data on voter turnout in May.
Overall, the findings represent a tipping point for blacks, who for much of America's history were disenfranchised and then effectively barred from voting until passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965.
But the numbers also offer a cautionary note to both Democrats and Republicans after Obama won in November with a historically low percentage of white supporters. While Latinos are now the biggest driver of U.S. population growth, they still trail whites and blacks in turnout and electoral share, because many of the Hispanics in the country are children or non-citizens.
In recent weeks, Republican leaders have urged a "year-round effort" to engage black and other minority voters, describing a grim future if their party does not expand its core support beyond white males.
The 2012 data suggest Romney was a particularly weak GOP candidate, unable to motivate white voters let alone attract significant black or Latino support. Obama's personal appeal and the slowly improving economy helped overcome doubts and spur record levels of minority voters in a way that may not be easily replicated for Democrats soon.
Romney would have erased Obama's nearly 5 million-vote victory margin and narrowly won the popular vote if voters had turned out as they did in 2004, according to Frey's analysis. Then, white turnout was slightly higher and black voting lower.
More significantly, the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same.
"The 2012 turnout is a milestone for blacks and a huge potential turning point," said Andra Gillespie, a political science professor at Emory University who has written extensively on black politicians.
"What it suggests is that there is an `Obama effect' where people were motivated to support Barack Obama. But it also means that black turnout may not always be higher, if future races aren't as salient."
Whit Ayres, a GOP consultant who is advising GOP Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a possible 2016 presidential contender, says the last election reaffirmed that the Republican Party needs "a new message, a new messenger and a new tone." Change within the party need not be "lock, stock and barrel," Ayres said, but policy shifts such as GOP support for broad immigration legislation will be important to woo minority voters over the longer term.
"It remains to be seen how successful Democrats are if you don't have Barack Obama at the top of the ticket," he added.
In Ohio, a battleground state where the share of eligible black voters is more than triple that of other minorities, 27-year-old Lauren Howie of Cleveland didn't start out thrilled with Obama in 2012. She felt he didn't deliver on promises to help students reduce college debt, promote women's rights and address climate change, she said. But she became determined to support Obama as she compared him with Romney.
"I got the feeling Mitt Romney couldn't care less about me and my fellow African-Americans," said Howie, an administrative assistant at Case Western Reserve University's medical school who is paying off college debt.
Howie said she saw some Romney comments as insensitive to the needs of the poor. "A white Mormon swimming in money with offshore accounts buying up companies and laying off their employees just doesn't quite fit my idea of a president," she said. "Bottom line, Romney was not someone I was willing to trust with my future."
The numbers show how population growth will translate into changes in who votes over the coming decade:
_The gap between non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black turnout in 2008 was the smallest on record, with voter turnout at 66.1 percent and 65.2 percent, respectively; turnout for Latinos and non-Hispanic Asians trailed at 50 percent and 47 percent. Rough calculations suggest that in 2012, 2 million to 5 million fewer whites voted compared with 2008, even though the pool of eligible white voters had increased.
_Unlike other minority groups, the rise in voting for the slow-growing black population is due to higher turnout. While blacks make up 12 percent of the share of eligible voters, they represented 13 percent of total 2012 votes cast, according to exit polling. That was a repeat of 2008, when blacks "outperformed" their eligible voter share for the first time on record.
_Latinos now make up 17 percent of the population but 11 percent of eligible voters, due to a younger median age and lower rates of citizenship and voter registration. Because of lower turnout, they represented just 10 percent of total 2012 votes cast. Despite their fast growth, Latinos aren't projected to surpass the share of eligible black voters until 2024, when each group will be roughly 13 percent. By then, 1 in 3 eligible voters will be nonwhite.
_In 2026, the total Latino share of voters could jump to as high as 16 percent, if nearly 11 million immigrants here illegally become eligible for U.S. citizenship. Under a proposed bill in the Senate, those immigrants would have a 13-year path to citizenship. The share of eligible white voters could shrink to less than 64 percent in that scenario. An estimated 80 percent of immigrants here illegally, or 8.8 million, are Latino, although not all will meet the additional requirements to become citizens.
"The 2008 election was the first year when the minority vote was important to electing a U.S. president. By 2024, their vote will be essential to victory," Frey said. "Democrats will be looking at a landslide going into 2028 if the new Hispanic voters continue to favor Democrats."
Even with demographics seeming to favor Democrats in the long term, it's unclear whether Obama's coalition will hold if blacks or younger voters become less motivated to vote or decide to switch parties.
Minority turnout tends to drop in midterm congressional elections, contributing to larger GOP victories as happened in 2010, when House control flipped to Republicans.
The economy and policy matter. Exit polling shows that even with Obama's re-election, voter support for a government that does more to solve problems declined from 51 percent in 2008 to 43 percent last year, bolstering the view among Republicans that their core principles of reducing government are sound.
The party's "Growth and Opportunity Project" report released last month by national leaders suggests that Latinos and Asians could become more receptive to GOP policies once comprehensive immigration legislation is passed.
Whether the economy continues its slow recovery also will shape voter opinion, including among blacks, who have the highest rate of unemployment.
Since the election, optimism among nonwhites about the direction of the country and the economy has waned, although support for Obama has held steady. In an October AP-GfK poll, 63 percent of nonwhites said the nation was heading in the right direction; that's dropped to 52 percent in a new AP-GfK poll. Among non-Hispanic whites, however, the numbers are about the same as in October, at 28 percent.
Democrats in Congress merit far lower approval ratings among nonwhites than does the president, with 49 percent approving of congressional Democrats and 74 percent approving of Obama.
William Galston, a former policy adviser to President Bill Clinton, says that in previous elections where an enduring majority of voters came to support one party, the president winning re-election _ William McKinley in 1900, Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936 and Ronald Reagan in 1984 _ attracted a larger turnout over his original election and also received a higher vote total and a higher share of the popular vote. None of those occurred for Obama in 2012.
Only once in the last 60 years has a political party been successful in holding the presidency more than eight years _ Republicans from 1980-1992.
"This doesn't prove that Obama's presidency won't turn out to be the harbinger of a new political order," Galston says. "But it does warrant some analytical caution."
Early polling suggests that Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton could come close in 2016 to generating the level of support among nonwhites as Obama did in November, when he won 80 percent of their vote. In a Fox News poll in February, 75 percent of nonwhites said they thought Clinton would make a good president, outpacing the 58 percent who said that about Vice President Joe Biden.
Benjamin Todd Jealous, president of the NAACP, predicts closely fought elections in the near term and worries that GOP-controlled state legislatures will step up efforts to pass voter ID and other restrictions to deter blacks and other minorities from voting. In 2012, African-Americans were able to turn out in large numbers only after a very determined get-out-the-vote effort by the Obama campaign and black groups, he said.
Jealous says the 2014 midterm election will be the real bellwether for black turnout. "Black turnout set records this year despite record attempts to suppress the black vote," he said.
AP Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta and News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.
Obama as Daniel Day-Lewis as Obama in Spielberg's Obama
By Jason Kottke
Steven Spielberg is doing a sequel to Lincoln called Obama, and he got Daniel Day-Lewis to play the lead. I knew Day-Lewis was good, but this is bonkers.
Created for the 2013 White House Correspondents Dinner
Steven Spielberg is doing a sequel to Lincoln called Obama, and he got Daniel Day-Lewis to play the lead. I knew Day-Lewis was good, but this is bonkers.
Created for the 2013 White House Correspondents Dinner
Sandra Day O'Connor: 'Maybe' Bush v. Gore Was a Mistake
By Brad Friedman on 4/29/2013, 1:22pm PT
"Maybe"? Ya think?! From Chicago Tribune, on their recent interview with former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor about 2000's infamous Bush v. Gore case...
Looking back, O'Connor said, she isn't sure the high court should have taken the case.
"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"
The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."
"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"
The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."
"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
"Probably"?! Ya think?! The paper goes on to explain that O'Connor's "vote in the 5-4 Bush v. Gore decision effectively gave Republican George W. Bush a victory over his Democratic opponent, then-Vice President Al Gore." That, after the U.S. Supreme Court had stopped the public hand-counting of the votes cast by the people of Florida.
Had O'Connor and friends not stopped the state-wide hand count, they would have found, as a consortium of media and academics did afterwards, that Gore defeated Bush by every conceivable counting standard in the state of Florida.
Contrast O'Connor's thoughtful, if ridiculously-too-late response to the question of the controversial Bush v. Gore, with that of the still-serving U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who was seen over the weekend yucking it up with Bill O'Reilly of Fox "News" at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. When asked, in 2007, about the case which allowed five Supreme Court justices to install a U.S. President over the will of the people, he responded that it was "water over the deck", and Americans just need to "get over it."
Four years after Bush v. Gore, in 2004, Democrats vowed not to let that happen again, of course. Their Presidential nominee that time, then Senator John Kerry, promised he would not concede until every vote was counted. Despite massive reports of fraud, particularly in Ohio, and Exit Polls finding he had won in swingstate-after-swingstate, countering the still-unverified electronic results reporting that he had lost in many of those same states, Kerry flip-flopped and conceded the day after the election.
Remarkably, now that an unverified and unverifiable election in Venezuela has recently resulted in the U.S. Government's favored candidate being announced the loser, Kerry, now serving as Sec. of State, is calling for a full hand-count of "paper receipts" in that country because he claims to be concerned about the "confidence of the Venezuelan people in the quality of the vote," as our own Ernie Canning detailed earlier today. Yes, that's what Kerry really said.
Do you suppose he, like O'Connor, may someday realize that "maybe" he made a mistake too?
Rick Perry can't handle the truth
By Elisabeth Parker
Sure enough, Perry took the bait and fumed in a letter to the editor:
Yep, everything’s cheaper in Texas. Maybe that’s because 33% of people there are uninsured; two of your counties — Cameron and Hidalgo — have the highest poverty rates in the United States (41%); and your legislature cut $5.4 billion from education two years ago (your House’s new budget proposal will barely make a dent in them). Apparently, pro-business folks have forgotten about the old adage, “It takes money to make money.”
Last Thursday, April 25, the president attended a memorial for victims of the explosion, gave a moving speech, and promised that the nation would help the town recover and rebuild. Strange, how you don’t hear Perry and his cohorts howling about government spending now.
Here’s the video:
Perry also spoke, but his eulogy would have felt more convincing, had he — and his Republican cohorts — cared enough to have performed the due diligence that would have prevented the explosion in the first place.
Here’s the video:
Elisabeth Parker is a writer, Web designer, mom, political junkie, and dilettante. Come visit her at ElisabethParker.Com, “like” her on facebook, “friend” her on facebook, follow her on Twitter, or check out her Pinterest boards. For more Addicting Info articles by Elisabeth, click here.
Cartoon by Jack Ohman, from The Sacramento (CA) Bee.
When Jack Ohman, a cartoonist for The Sacramento (CA) Bee and his editor, Stuart Leavenworth, ran the above cartoon
in Sunday’s paper, they must have felt like a couple of kids who’d just
set off a stink bomb on their mean and ornery neighbor’s porch, and run
somewhere to hide, snigger up their sleeves, and wait for the fun to
begin.
The cartoon shows Texas Governor Rick Perry bragging about his
state’s low taxes and lax business regulations (“Business is BOOMING in
Texas!”) while something – presumably the fertilizer plant that exploded in West, TX on April 18 — goes “BOOM!”
Sure enough, Perry took the bait and fumed in a letter to the editor:
It was with extreme disgust and disappointment I viewed your recent cartoon. While I will always welcome healthy policy debate, I won’t stand for someone mocking the tragic deaths of my fellow Texans and our fellow Americans.Leavenworth sharply retorted:
Jack Ohman’s cartoon of April 25 made a strong statement about Gov. Rick Perry’s disregard for worker safety, and his attempts to market Texas as a place where industries can thrive with few regulations. It is unfortunate that Gov. Perry, and some on the blogosphere, have attempted to interpret the cartoon as being disrespectful of the victims of this tragedy. As Ohman has made clear on his blog, he has complete empathy for the victims and people living by the plant. What he finds offensive is a governor who would gamble with the lives of families by not pushing for the strongest safety regulations. Perry’s letter is an attempt to distract people from that message.
Um, HELLO? Nobody’s mocking the 15 people — mostly firefighters and other emergency responders — who died fighting flames from the atom bomb-like blasts.
We’re mocking YOU, Governor Perry, for being a callous, uncaring jerk
who cares more about the well-being of your state’s businesses than
about the people who live there.
When the West Fertilizer Plant exploded, it leveled a four block radius, and witnesses reported that the blast was “like a tornado” or “like a nuclear bomb went off.” Yet, this could have been prevented: The plant was cited for a serious violation back in 2006, after receiving complaints about “a strong ammonia smell.” The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality investigated, but apparently nobody followed up. Furthermore, Theodoric Meyer from Salon reports that plant failed a partial inspection in 2011, and hadn’t had a full inspection by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration since 1985. Nor did anyone from the facility bother to tell the Department of Homeland Security — as required — about all that potentially explosive fertilizer.
When the West Fertilizer Plant exploded, it leveled a four block radius, and witnesses reported that the blast was “like a tornado” or “like a nuclear bomb went off.” Yet, this could have been prevented: The plant was cited for a serious violation back in 2006, after receiving complaints about “a strong ammonia smell.” The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality investigated, but apparently nobody followed up. Furthermore, Theodoric Meyer from Salon reports that plant failed a partial inspection in 2011, and hadn’t had a full inspection by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration since 1985. Nor did anyone from the facility bother to tell the Department of Homeland Security — as required — about all that potentially explosive fertilizer.
Perry loves talking about getting the government off our backs. In
fact, Perry ran a series of radio advertisements throughout California
back in February, sneering at the Golden State’s higher taxes and
regulations, and urging business owners to move to the Lone Star State:
Building a business is tough, but I hear that building a business in California is next to impossible. This is Texas governor Rick Perry, and I’ve got a message for California businesses. Come check out Texas. There are plenty of reasons Texas has been named the best state for doing business for eight years running. Visit TexasWideOpenForBusiness.Com, and see why our low taxes, sensible regulation, and fair legal system are just the thing to get your business moving … to Texas.Yet this hypocrite still has no problem with getting help from the Federal Government when it suits him. After cutting the state’s fire department funding by 75% in 2011 — causing unprecedented levels of fire destruction and loss of life — Perry asked for federal funds to combat wild fires back in 2011.
Yep, everything’s cheaper in Texas. Maybe that’s because 33% of people there are uninsured; two of your counties — Cameron and Hidalgo — have the highest poverty rates in the United States (41%); and your legislature cut $5.4 billion from education two years ago (your House’s new budget proposal will barely make a dent in them). Apparently, pro-business folks have forgotten about the old adage, “It takes money to make money.”
Last Thursday, April 25, the president attended a memorial for victims of the explosion, gave a moving speech, and promised that the nation would help the town recover and rebuild. Strange, how you don’t hear Perry and his cohorts howling about government spending now.
Here’s the video:
Perry also spoke, but his eulogy would have felt more convincing, had he — and his Republican cohorts — cared enough to have performed the due diligence that would have prevented the explosion in the first place.
Here’s the video:
Elisabeth Parker is a writer, Web designer, mom, political junkie, and dilettante. Come visit her at ElisabethParker.Com, “like” her on facebook, “friend” her on facebook, follow her on Twitter, or check out her Pinterest boards. For more Addicting Info articles by Elisabeth, click here.
Monday, April 29, 2013
‘The Ed Show’ returns to MSNBC on May 11
By Steve Frank
ED Show
We are proud to announce The Ed Show hosted by Ed Schultz will return to MSNBC starting Saturday, May 11 at 5 p.m. ET.
The Saturday and Sunday show will debut as a one-hour long program expanding to a two-hour format from 5-7 p.m. ET later this summer.
James Holm who is currently the Executive Producer of The Ed Schultz Radio Show will serve as acting Executive Producer of The Ed Show.
Karen Finney’s new program will also debut on May 11 from 4-5 p.m. ET. More information on that program will be announced in the coming days.
As previously announced, the move is an expansion MSNBC’s live weekend programming.
“MSNBC will be expanding its weekend programming and this opens a big opportunity for The Ed Show and my brand,” says Ed. “I raised my hand for this assignment for a number of personal and professional reasons. My fight on The Ed Show has been for the workers and the middle class. This new time slot will give me the opportunity to produce and focus on stories that I care about and are important to American families and American workers.”
“I’m thrilled for Ed and happy to be expanding our weekend programming,” MSNBC President Phil Griffin said in a statement. “It’s an exciting time for MSNBC and I’m looking forward to having Ed’s powerful voice on our network for a long time.”
On Finney, Griffin said “Karen’s rich background in both education policy and politics will add a unique point of view to our expanding live weekend programming.”
For further updates and announcements, be sure to LIKE The Ed Show on Facebook and FOLLOW us on Twitter!
The Saturday and Sunday show will debut as a one-hour long program expanding to a two-hour format from 5-7 p.m. ET later this summer.
James Holm who is currently the Executive Producer of The Ed Schultz Radio Show will serve as acting Executive Producer of The Ed Show.
Karen Finney’s new program will also debut on May 11 from 4-5 p.m. ET. More information on that program will be announced in the coming days.
As previously announced, the move is an expansion MSNBC’s live weekend programming.
“MSNBC will be expanding its weekend programming and this opens a big opportunity for The Ed Show and my brand,” says Ed. “I raised my hand for this assignment for a number of personal and professional reasons. My fight on The Ed Show has been for the workers and the middle class. This new time slot will give me the opportunity to produce and focus on stories that I care about and are important to American families and American workers.”
“I’m thrilled for Ed and happy to be expanding our weekend programming,” MSNBC President Phil Griffin said in a statement. “It’s an exciting time for MSNBC and I’m looking forward to having Ed’s powerful voice on our network for a long time.”
On Finney, Griffin said “Karen’s rich background in both education policy and politics will add a unique point of view to our expanding live weekend programming.”
For further updates and announcements, be sure to LIKE The Ed Show on Facebook and FOLLOW us on Twitter!
Sunday, April 28, 2013
2013 White House Correspondents Dinner
President Obama addressed journalists and guests at the White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner. Conan O'Brien provided the entertainment for the occasion.
Your Weekly Address
Weekly Address: Time to Replace the Sequester with a Balanced Approach to Deficit Reduction
President Obama says that because Republicans in Congress allowed a series of harmful, automatic budget cuts—called the sequester—to take effect, important programs like Head Start are now forced to reduce their services.After travelers were stuck for hours in airports and on planes this past week, members of Congress passed a temporary band-aid measure to stop the cuts that impact airlines — but they must do more to stop cuts to vital services for the American people.
That’s why it’s time for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that makes smarter cuts and reforms in the tax code, while creating jobs and strengthening the middle class.
Saturday, April 27, 2013
We need an honest conversation about the Bush years
About the stupidest President we ever had, George W. Bush.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)