Original Post:Yahoo
By Joe Pompeo
It seems like reporters can't write anything about hot-button topics these days without someone on the right or left accusing them of harboring a clandestine political agenda. They're either in the tank for Obama, or not properly covering the challenges to his health-care plan. One minute they never have anything nice to say about the Tea Party, the next they're overblowing its clout. And so on.
If you think we're just being sensitive here, take a look at this new Rasmussen poll: Sixty-seven percent of likely U.S. voters believe that reporters try to bolster their preferred candidate when covering an election, while 46 percent believe that the average reporter is more liberal than they are, according to the national telephone survey.
Only 21 percent of respondents, on the other hand, have faith that journalists are fair and balanced in their coverage, and 18 percent find the fourth estate's political leanings to be more conservative than their own.
Among the other findings:
- Forty-eight percent of voters believe most reporters would "hide any damaging information they learned to help the candidate they wanted to win."
- Meanwhile, Republicans (59 percent) and unaffiliated voters (58 percent) "feel much more strongly than Democrats that most reporters ... would hold back news that might hurt a candidate they wanted to win."
- Seventy-eight percent of conservatives think the average reporter is more liberal than they are, while 38 percent of liberals think the average reporter is more conservative than they are.
- Seventy-three percent of Republican voters versus 20 percent of Democrats say the average reporter is more liberal than they are.
- Male voters are more skeptical of reporters' integrity than female voters are.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Man robs bank to get medical care in jail
Original Post:Yahoo
Some people who need medical care but can't afford it go to the emergency room. Others just hope they'll get better. James Richard Verone robbed a bank.
Earlier this month, Verone (pictured), a 59-year-old convenience store clerk, walked into a Gastonia, N.C., bank and handed the cashier a note demanding $1 and medical attention. Then he waited calmly for police to show up.
He's now in jail and has an appointment with a doctor this week.
Verone's problems started when he lost the job he'd held for 17 years as a Coca Cola deliveryman, amid the economic downturn. He found new work driving a truck, but it didn't last. Eventually, he took a part-time position at the convenience store.
But Verone's body wasn't up to it. The bending and lifting made his back ache. He had problems with his left foot, making him limp. He also suffered from carpal tunnel syndrome and arthritis.
Then he noticed a protrusion on his chest. "The pain was beyond the tolerance that I could accept," Verone told the Gaston Gazette. "I kind of hit a brick wall with everything."
Verone knew he needed help--and he didn't want to be a burden on his sister and brothers. He applied for food stamps, but they weren't enough either.
So he hatched a plan. On June 9, he woke up, showered, ironed his shirt. He mailed a letter to the Gazette, listing the return address as the Gaston County Jail.
"When you receive this a bank robbery will have been committed by me," Verone wrote in the letter. "This robbery is being committed by me for one dollar. I am of sound mind but not so much sound body."
Then Verone hailed a cab to take him to the RBC Bank. Inside, he handed the teller his $1 robbery demand.
"I didn't have any fears," said Verone. "I told the teller that I would sit over here and wait for police."
The teller was so frightened that she had to be taken to the hospital to be checked out. Verone, meanwhile, was taken to jail, just as he'd planned it.
Because he only asked for $1, Verone was charged with larceny, not bank robbery. But he said that if his punishment isn't severe enough, he plans to tell the judge that he'll do it again. His $100,000 bond has been reduced to $2,000, but he says he doesn't plan to pay it.
In jail, Verone said he skips dinner to avoid too much contact with the other inmates. He's already seen some nurses and is scheduled to see a doctor on Friday. He said he's hoping to receive back and foot surgery, and get the protrusion on his chest treated. Then he plans to spend a few years in jail, before getting out in time to collect Social Security and move to the beach.
Verone also presented the view that if the United States had a health-care system which offered people more government support, he wouldn't have had to make the choice he did.
"If you don't have your health you don't have anything," Verone said.
The Affordable Care Act, President Obama's health-care overhaul passed by Congress last year, was designed to make it easier for Americans in situations like Verone's to get health insurance. But most of its provisions don't go into effect until 2014.
As it is, Verone said he thinks he chose the best of a bunch of bad options. "I picked jail."
Why is this an option at all? The problem with prisons is that they are way to comfortable. If prison was a place to be feared and avoided, this wouldn't even cross his mind. Prison is clearly not a deterrent if people try to get in for winter shelter or free health care.
Some people who need medical care but can't afford it go to the emergency room. Others just hope they'll get better. James Richard Verone robbed a bank.
Earlier this month, Verone (pictured), a 59-year-old convenience store clerk, walked into a Gastonia, N.C., bank and handed the cashier a note demanding $1 and medical attention. Then he waited calmly for police to show up.
He's now in jail and has an appointment with a doctor this week.
Verone's problems started when he lost the job he'd held for 17 years as a Coca Cola deliveryman, amid the economic downturn. He found new work driving a truck, but it didn't last. Eventually, he took a part-time position at the convenience store.
But Verone's body wasn't up to it. The bending and lifting made his back ache. He had problems with his left foot, making him limp. He also suffered from carpal tunnel syndrome and arthritis.
Then he noticed a protrusion on his chest. "The pain was beyond the tolerance that I could accept," Verone told the Gaston Gazette. "I kind of hit a brick wall with everything."
Verone knew he needed help--and he didn't want to be a burden on his sister and brothers. He applied for food stamps, but they weren't enough either.
So he hatched a plan. On June 9, he woke up, showered, ironed his shirt. He mailed a letter to the Gazette, listing the return address as the Gaston County Jail.
"When you receive this a bank robbery will have been committed by me," Verone wrote in the letter. "This robbery is being committed by me for one dollar. I am of sound mind but not so much sound body."
Then Verone hailed a cab to take him to the RBC Bank. Inside, he handed the teller his $1 robbery demand.
"I didn't have any fears," said Verone. "I told the teller that I would sit over here and wait for police."
The teller was so frightened that she had to be taken to the hospital to be checked out. Verone, meanwhile, was taken to jail, just as he'd planned it.
Because he only asked for $1, Verone was charged with larceny, not bank robbery. But he said that if his punishment isn't severe enough, he plans to tell the judge that he'll do it again. His $100,000 bond has been reduced to $2,000, but he says he doesn't plan to pay it.
In jail, Verone said he skips dinner to avoid too much contact with the other inmates. He's already seen some nurses and is scheduled to see a doctor on Friday. He said he's hoping to receive back and foot surgery, and get the protrusion on his chest treated. Then he plans to spend a few years in jail, before getting out in time to collect Social Security and move to the beach.
Verone also presented the view that if the United States had a health-care system which offered people more government support, he wouldn't have had to make the choice he did.
"If you don't have your health you don't have anything," Verone said.
The Affordable Care Act, President Obama's health-care overhaul passed by Congress last year, was designed to make it easier for Americans in situations like Verone's to get health insurance. But most of its provisions don't go into effect until 2014.
As it is, Verone said he thinks he chose the best of a bunch of bad options. "I picked jail."
Why is this an option at all? The problem with prisons is that they are way to comfortable. If prison was a place to be feared and avoided, this wouldn't even cross his mind. Prison is clearly not a deterrent if people try to get in for winter shelter or free health care.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Remarks by the President at a DNC Event
Original Post: Whitehouse
9:06 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, everybody. Please have a seat, have a seat.
It is wonderful to see all of you. I've got a lot of friends in the room here. People who knew me before anybody could pronounce my name. (Laughter.) People who knew me before I had gray hair. (Laughter.) It is wonderful to see those of you who’ve been friends for a long time, and it’s wonderful to see new friends here as well.
What I'd like to do is to make some very brief remarks at the top and then have a chance to take a few questions, because that will give us a chance to have a dialogue, and you might have some suggestion that we haven’t thought of. And it’s one of the great things about these kinds of events is people here have so much expertise in so many different areas that it’s a wonderful thing for me to be able to pick your brain as well as just you guys hearing me chatter.
We are obviously going through one of the toughest periods in American history. We went through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and immediately after being elected, I had to take a series of very difficult steps to rescue ourselves from the brink. We had lost 4 million jobs in the six months before I was sworn in; lost another 4 million during the period probably six months after I was elected. And so as a consequence, we had to do some things that we didn’t expect we would have to do, just to save the economy -- stabilize the financial system, make sure that states and local governments didn’t have to lay off police officers and cops and firefighters. We had to save an auto industry. I never expected to be a automobile executive. (Laughter.) Then why did you Mr. President? I certainly have a problem with the government having controlling share of a private company using tax payer dollars to do so. To have the ability to fire the CEO and appoint a new one by government fiat. To be able to dictate his salary and then decide he didn't make any money. It's almost as though the government controls the means of production. That's right. I'm calling you a communist. You know, because of your communist rhetoric and policies.
As a consequence of that swift, decisive, and sometimes difficult period, we were able to take an economy that was shrinking by about 6 percent and create an economy that is now growing, and has grown steadily now over many consecutive quarters. Over the last 15 months we’ve created over 2.1 million private sector jobs. Is anyone else aware of these jobs or are they also fictitious?(Applause.) We have an auto industry that, for the first time in a very long time is profitable, and the Big Three automakers actually gaining market share, and not only gaining market share, but also gaining market share in the cars of the future so that they’re actually competing in compact cars and sub-compact cars and electric cars and hybrids.I give it less than five years before GM's legacy costs drown them again. Good thing they weren't allowed to go through bankruptcy and fix their problems.
And so I'm extraordinarily proud of the economic record that we were able to produce over the first two and a half years, Why? I wouldn't be proud. Unless your goal was to suck worse than Carter. If that was your goal then good job. You're the greatest failure. but having said all that, the economy is still so tough for so many people around the country. The hole that was dug was so deep. And most importantly, the reasons that I decided to run for President in the first place still had not been fully addressed so...where you planning on doing that anytime soon?, because the fact is, is that even before this financial crisis, wages and incomes had flat-lined for most Americans. Those at the very top had seen themselves do very well, but the bottom 95 percent, the bottom 90 percent, they were treading water at a time when their cost of health care and cost of college education, cost of groceries, cost of gasoline all were going up. Under Bush I left a job I love because $13/hour wasn't enough for me. Now I'm excited to start my two week $8/hour crummy job. In order to become complaint my health insurance costs have gone up, as have grocery prices and gas has almost doubled. And that was before the crisis hit. And now they’ve got to worry about homes that have lost value and businesses that are just barely getting by.
And so although we’ve made a turn in a positivePositive, that word doesn't mean what you think it means direction, the underlying structural challenges that we face remain. And so the reason that 2012 is important is because I did not just run for President to get us back to where we were; I ran for President originally to move us to where we need to be.
And what that means is that what we’ve begun we had to finish. We’ve begun to reform our education system, and thanks to programs like Race to the Top, we’re not just putting more money into the schools. We are saying to schools and states and local school districts, if you reform, if you get rid of the dogmas of the left or the right and you focus on student achievement and how to get the best possible teachers at the front of the classroom and we’re rewarding excellence and we are holding ourselves accountable, you know what, there’s no reason why we can’t make sure that we have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world and make sure that every single one of our young people are equipped to compete in a 21st-century economy. (Applause.)
We have begun the process of changing how we think about energy in this country –- made the largest investment in clean energy in our history through the Recovery Act; have stood up entire industries like advanced battery manufacturing; invested in making sure that wind power and solar power and biothermal energy, that all of these things are being developed and researched right here in the United States of America. We're just not allowed to use energy, we want it to necessarily skyrocket. Is that tough on Americans, then follow our energy plan. Inflate your tires and just buy a new, more efficient (and highly expensive) car. Ie. let them eat cake.
But the fact of the matter is, is that we are still way too dependent on foreign oil and the fuels of the past. And so part of our unfinished business is making sure that we are getting electric cars on our roads and that we are not only tapping into traditional energy sources here in the United States of America but we're also becoming more energy-efficient. We're at the cutting edge of a clean energy revolution that could not only free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment, but also produce jobs right here in the United States of America. Our job is not finished when it comes to energy policy.
We're not done when it comes to rebuilding our infrastructure. America has always had the best stuff. We had the best roads, we had the best ports, we had the best airports. People would travel from around the world to marvel at the infrastructure we had built. We can't claim to have the best anymore. You go to airports in Beijing or Singapore that put a lot of our airports to shame. High-speed rail networks all through Europe that could be built here in the United States of America.
And so imagine what we could do putting people back to work right now doing the work that America needs to be done. We started. We made the largest investment in infrastructure since Dwight Eisenhower was President through the Recovery Act, but we've still got $2 trillion worth of repairs to be made. And think about all those unemployed construction workers out there that could be working right now rebuilding America for the future -- and not just the old traditional infrastructure, the new infrastructure -- a smart grid that would help us become more energy-efficient and get energy from wind farms or solar panels to the places where it's needed most; making sure that we've got the best broadband and 4G and 5G and -- so that we have the best communication networks in the world. President Obama is apparently under the delusion that all of our roads are still constructed by hand and that we have not built any machines to aid this labor since Eisenhower's presidency. I though we spent a trillion dollars on stimulus that was supposed to fix this problem with our infrastructure. What happened to that?
We started, but we haven't finished. We've started reforming our health care system, and I could not be prouder of the work that we did on the health care act -- but we now have to implement it, because health care costs are still going up too fast for families, for businesses, and for governments, state and federal, that are paying the bills. He's so proud of it. It's so good that Congress had to exempt themselves from it and Democrat backing donors and unions get exemptions from it. I guess he feels that only Republicans and Democrats too poor to heap their wealth on Obama deserve this "magnanimous" health insurance system. How kind.
And so this is a matter not only of making sure that 30 million Americans never again have to go bankrupt because somebody in their family gets sick. It's also making sure that we're getting a better bang for our health care dollar; that instead of taking five tests, you take one test and it's emailed to five doctors; that we make certain that preventive medicine is in place so that people aren't getting amputated because of diabetes -- they're not getting diabetes in the first place. Thanks to the Obamacare plan, in which my insurance is now compliant with. I get my gynecological visits and breast reconstruction is covered by mandate. Of course, I have to pay for this coverage. Me and my penis are so glad that Obama took care of this over site on my part of which I was too stupid to buy on my own. Yup, no waist there.
Those are the changes that we initiated through the Affordable Care Act, but we've got to finish the job. The same is true when it comes to financial reform -- making sure that we never go through the financial meltdown that we went through again. but also, at the same time, that we're looking after consumers and protecting them for the first time in a very long time, whether it's getting a mortgage or taking out a credit card. Our job is not finished. There are still some buildings in America standing.
We've made tremendous progress on a whole host of social issues, from ending "don't ask, don't tell" so that every American can serve their country regardless of who they love, to making sure that we've got equal pay for equal work, to making sure that we've got national service so that our young people can use their talents to help rebuild America.
But our job is not finished. We still have work to do on immigration reform, where we have to once again be a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants and never shall the two meet.; one that welcomes the strength that comes from talented people from all around the world wanting to be here, but also making sure that we're doing it in orderly way.
And we sure have got a lot of work to do on the international front. When I came into office, we had two active wars And now we've got three...er two if it inconveniences the President by the war powers act.. By the end of this year, one war will be done. And we will be transitioning in Afghanistan to turn over more and more security to the Afghan people.
But there's also enormous challenges and opportunities to all that's happening in the Arab world right now. And it requires us to articulate clearly what we stand for, what our values are, to reject isolationism, but it also requires us to recognize that us having influence in these affairs is going to have less to do with our firepower and more to do with our ideas and our example, our economic engagement, the quality of our diplomacy. We've still got more work to do. And throw our allies under the bus as fast as possible.
So the bottom line is this. Back in 2008, on election night, in Grant Park -- it was a nice night in Chicago -- I said to people, this is not the end, this is the beginning. We've got a steep climb ahead of us to get to that summit where we want to be, where every single American knows that if they work hard, if they're doing the right thing, if they're carrying out their responsibilities, they have a chance at the American Dream.
We're just part of the way up that mountain. And the only way we're going to get all the way up that mountain is if we are as engaged, as motivated, as involved, as excited, working as hard as we were in 2008. And that may be a little bit of challenge -- because, let's face it, back in 2008, I was new. (Laughter.) Obama may be historical in that he's the only president in the history of the world to be less experienced and skilled than when he's started. Obama 2008 was a far superior leader than Obama 2011. And he was pure awful in '08.
Now I'm gray. (Laughter.) I've got dings and dents. The old posters are all faded. (Laughter.) People make fun of hope and change. And some folks have said, well, change didn't happen as fast as I wanted, or it's not exactly as I expected, or why can't he just change the minds of all those Republicans. (Laughter.) I suppose he can't change our minds because of: our ability to read, math skills, perception skills, understanding of history, empty bank accounts...
The thing is, change is never easy because we live in a democracy. And that's what's wonderful about this country, is we argue it out and ideas are tested and sometimes we lurch this way or that way and mistakes are made. But our general trajectory has always been to advance prosperity and equality and opportunity.
And so this process, as difficult as it has been, has also been invigorating. And I've never had more confidence in the possibilities of this great American experiment, partly because I get a chance to see and talk to Americans from every walk of life. And we are a good, decent people. And as hard as things have been, we are resilient and we come back.
And so if you're willing to join with me in what will be my last campaign -- (laughter) -- if you're willing to dig deep and talk to your friends and neighbors and coworkers and recognize, yes, we're a little older, we've matured a little bit, but that that fundamental project of delivering the American Dream for that next generation, that's just as urgent and as vital as ever, then I'm confident not only will we win in 2012 -- more importantly, we'll get a little further up that mountain. That's our job. I thought Obama was going to be President for the next 10 to 12 years. What happened to that? He's not going to run for a partial 3rd term anymore? I hope he get's a chance to visit all 59 states this time.
So, thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.)
END 9:23 P.M. EDT
9:06 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, everybody. Please have a seat, have a seat.
It is wonderful to see all of you. I've got a lot of friends in the room here. People who knew me before anybody could pronounce my name. (Laughter.) People who knew me before I had gray hair. (Laughter.) It is wonderful to see those of you who’ve been friends for a long time, and it’s wonderful to see new friends here as well.
What I'd like to do is to make some very brief remarks at the top and then have a chance to take a few questions, because that will give us a chance to have a dialogue, and you might have some suggestion that we haven’t thought of. And it’s one of the great things about these kinds of events is people here have so much expertise in so many different areas that it’s a wonderful thing for me to be able to pick your brain as well as just you guys hearing me chatter.
We are obviously going through one of the toughest periods in American history. We went through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and immediately after being elected, I had to take a series of very difficult steps to rescue ourselves from the brink. We had lost 4 million jobs in the six months before I was sworn in; lost another 4 million during the period probably six months after I was elected. And so as a consequence, we had to do some things that we didn’t expect we would have to do, just to save the economy -- stabilize the financial system, make sure that states and local governments didn’t have to lay off police officers and cops and firefighters. We had to save an auto industry. I never expected to be a automobile executive. (Laughter.) Then why did you Mr. President? I certainly have a problem with the government having controlling share of a private company using tax payer dollars to do so. To have the ability to fire the CEO and appoint a new one by government fiat. To be able to dictate his salary and then decide he didn't make any money. It's almost as though the government controls the means of production. That's right. I'm calling you a communist. You know, because of your communist rhetoric and policies.
As a consequence of that swift, decisive, and sometimes difficult period, we were able to take an economy that was shrinking by about 6 percent and create an economy that is now growing, and has grown steadily now over many consecutive quarters. Over the last 15 months we’ve created over 2.1 million private sector jobs. Is anyone else aware of these jobs or are they also fictitious?(Applause.) We have an auto industry that, for the first time in a very long time is profitable, and the Big Three automakers actually gaining market share, and not only gaining market share, but also gaining market share in the cars of the future so that they’re actually competing in compact cars and sub-compact cars and electric cars and hybrids.I give it less than five years before GM's legacy costs drown them again. Good thing they weren't allowed to go through bankruptcy and fix their problems.
And so I'm extraordinarily proud of the economic record that we were able to produce over the first two and a half years, Why? I wouldn't be proud. Unless your goal was to suck worse than Carter. If that was your goal then good job. You're the greatest failure. but having said all that, the economy is still so tough for so many people around the country. The hole that was dug was so deep. And most importantly, the reasons that I decided to run for President in the first place still had not been fully addressed so...where you planning on doing that anytime soon?, because the fact is, is that even before this financial crisis, wages and incomes had flat-lined for most Americans. Those at the very top had seen themselves do very well, but the bottom 95 percent, the bottom 90 percent, they were treading water at a time when their cost of health care and cost of college education, cost of groceries, cost of gasoline all were going up. Under Bush I left a job I love because $13/hour wasn't enough for me. Now I'm excited to start my two week $8/hour crummy job. In order to become complaint my health insurance costs have gone up, as have grocery prices and gas has almost doubled. And that was before the crisis hit. And now they’ve got to worry about homes that have lost value and businesses that are just barely getting by.
And so although we’ve made a turn in a positivePositive, that word doesn't mean what you think it means direction, the underlying structural challenges that we face remain. And so the reason that 2012 is important is because I did not just run for President to get us back to where we were; I ran for President originally to move us to where we need to be.
And what that means is that what we’ve begun we had to finish. We’ve begun to reform our education system, and thanks to programs like Race to the Top, we’re not just putting more money into the schools. We are saying to schools and states and local school districts, if you reform, if you get rid of the dogmas of the left or the right and you focus on student achievement and how to get the best possible teachers at the front of the classroom and we’re rewarding excellence and we are holding ourselves accountable, you know what, there’s no reason why we can’t make sure that we have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world and make sure that every single one of our young people are equipped to compete in a 21st-century economy. (Applause.)
We have begun the process of changing how we think about energy in this country –- made the largest investment in clean energy in our history through the Recovery Act; have stood up entire industries like advanced battery manufacturing; invested in making sure that wind power and solar power and biothermal energy, that all of these things are being developed and researched right here in the United States of America. We're just not allowed to use energy, we want it to necessarily skyrocket. Is that tough on Americans, then follow our energy plan. Inflate your tires and just buy a new, more efficient (and highly expensive) car. Ie. let them eat cake.
But the fact of the matter is, is that we are still way too dependent on foreign oil and the fuels of the past. And so part of our unfinished business is making sure that we are getting electric cars on our roads and that we are not only tapping into traditional energy sources here in the United States of America but we're also becoming more energy-efficient. We're at the cutting edge of a clean energy revolution that could not only free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil and clean up our environment, but also produce jobs right here in the United States of America. Our job is not finished when it comes to energy policy.
We're not done when it comes to rebuilding our infrastructure. America has always had the best stuff. We had the best roads, we had the best ports, we had the best airports. People would travel from around the world to marvel at the infrastructure we had built. We can't claim to have the best anymore. You go to airports in Beijing or Singapore that put a lot of our airports to shame. High-speed rail networks all through Europe that could be built here in the United States of America.
And so imagine what we could do putting people back to work right now doing the work that America needs to be done. We started. We made the largest investment in infrastructure since Dwight Eisenhower was President through the Recovery Act, but we've still got $2 trillion worth of repairs to be made. And think about all those unemployed construction workers out there that could be working right now rebuilding America for the future -- and not just the old traditional infrastructure, the new infrastructure -- a smart grid that would help us become more energy-efficient and get energy from wind farms or solar panels to the places where it's needed most; making sure that we've got the best broadband and 4G and 5G and -- so that we have the best communication networks in the world. President Obama is apparently under the delusion that all of our roads are still constructed by hand and that we have not built any machines to aid this labor since Eisenhower's presidency. I though we spent a trillion dollars on stimulus that was supposed to fix this problem with our infrastructure. What happened to that?
We started, but we haven't finished. We've started reforming our health care system, and I could not be prouder of the work that we did on the health care act -- but we now have to implement it, because health care costs are still going up too fast for families, for businesses, and for governments, state and federal, that are paying the bills. He's so proud of it. It's so good that Congress had to exempt themselves from it and Democrat backing donors and unions get exemptions from it. I guess he feels that only Republicans and Democrats too poor to heap their wealth on Obama deserve this "magnanimous" health insurance system. How kind.
And so this is a matter not only of making sure that 30 million Americans never again have to go bankrupt because somebody in their family gets sick. It's also making sure that we're getting a better bang for our health care dollar; that instead of taking five tests, you take one test and it's emailed to five doctors; that we make certain that preventive medicine is in place so that people aren't getting amputated because of diabetes -- they're not getting diabetes in the first place. Thanks to the Obamacare plan, in which my insurance is now compliant with. I get my gynecological visits and breast reconstruction is covered by mandate. Of course, I have to pay for this coverage. Me and my penis are so glad that Obama took care of this over site on my part of which I was too stupid to buy on my own. Yup, no waist there.
Those are the changes that we initiated through the Affordable Care Act, but we've got to finish the job. The same is true when it comes to financial reform -- making sure that we never go through the financial meltdown that we went through again. but also, at the same time, that we're looking after consumers and protecting them for the first time in a very long time, whether it's getting a mortgage or taking out a credit card. Our job is not finished. There are still some buildings in America standing.
We've made tremendous progress on a whole host of social issues, from ending "don't ask, don't tell" so that every American can serve their country regardless of who they love, to making sure that we've got equal pay for equal work, to making sure that we've got national service so that our young people can use their talents to help rebuild America.
But our job is not finished. We still have work to do on immigration reform, where we have to once again be a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants and never shall the two meet.; one that welcomes the strength that comes from talented people from all around the world wanting to be here, but also making sure that we're doing it in orderly way.
And we sure have got a lot of work to do on the international front. When I came into office, we had two active wars And now we've got three...er two if it inconveniences the President by the war powers act.. By the end of this year, one war will be done. And we will be transitioning in Afghanistan to turn over more and more security to the Afghan people.
But there's also enormous challenges and opportunities to all that's happening in the Arab world right now. And it requires us to articulate clearly what we stand for, what our values are, to reject isolationism, but it also requires us to recognize that us having influence in these affairs is going to have less to do with our firepower and more to do with our ideas and our example, our economic engagement, the quality of our diplomacy. We've still got more work to do. And throw our allies under the bus as fast as possible.
So the bottom line is this. Back in 2008, on election night, in Grant Park -- it was a nice night in Chicago -- I said to people, this is not the end, this is the beginning. We've got a steep climb ahead of us to get to that summit where we want to be, where every single American knows that if they work hard, if they're doing the right thing, if they're carrying out their responsibilities, they have a chance at the American Dream.
We're just part of the way up that mountain. And the only way we're going to get all the way up that mountain is if we are as engaged, as motivated, as involved, as excited, working as hard as we were in 2008. And that may be a little bit of challenge -- because, let's face it, back in 2008, I was new. (Laughter.) Obama may be historical in that he's the only president in the history of the world to be less experienced and skilled than when he's started. Obama 2008 was a far superior leader than Obama 2011. And he was pure awful in '08.
Now I'm gray. (Laughter.) I've got dings and dents. The old posters are all faded. (Laughter.) People make fun of hope and change. And some folks have said, well, change didn't happen as fast as I wanted, or it's not exactly as I expected, or why can't he just change the minds of all those Republicans. (Laughter.) I suppose he can't change our minds because of: our ability to read, math skills, perception skills, understanding of history, empty bank accounts...
The thing is, change is never easy because we live in a democracy. And that's what's wonderful about this country, is we argue it out and ideas are tested and sometimes we lurch this way or that way and mistakes are made. But our general trajectory has always been to advance prosperity and equality and opportunity.
And so this process, as difficult as it has been, has also been invigorating. And I've never had more confidence in the possibilities of this great American experiment, partly because I get a chance to see and talk to Americans from every walk of life. And we are a good, decent people. And as hard as things have been, we are resilient and we come back.
And so if you're willing to join with me in what will be my last campaign -- (laughter) -- if you're willing to dig deep and talk to your friends and neighbors and coworkers and recognize, yes, we're a little older, we've matured a little bit, but that that fundamental project of delivering the American Dream for that next generation, that's just as urgent and as vital as ever, then I'm confident not only will we win in 2012 -- more importantly, we'll get a little further up that mountain. That's our job. I thought Obama was going to be President for the next 10 to 12 years. What happened to that? He's not going to run for a partial 3rd term anymore? I hope he get's a chance to visit all 59 states this time.
So, thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.)
END 9:23 P.M. EDT
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Obama orders guns sold to Mexican drug dealers
Inside the Scrutiny of the ATF Over Operation 'Fast and Furious'
Original Post: Fox
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," June 15, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: OK, listen carefully to this question. Did the United States government help arm Mexican drug cartels? This question, were those weapons used in murders? Right now the ATF is under extreme scrutiny. Three agents are testifying before Congress. And Congress is demanding answers to what is Operation "Fast and Furious," and why did it backfire allowing thousands of weapons to get into the wrong hands?
ATF supervisory special agent Peter Forcelli joins us. Good evening, sir. Tell me first of all, what is Operation "Fast and Furious"?
PETER FORCELLI, ATF SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Good evening, Greta. Operation "Fast and Furious" was one case initiated in the Phoenix feel division. It's one investigation that targeted several individuals who were trafficking firearms into Mexico.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why are they making the allegation the government was looking the other way to weapons get into the wrong hands?
FORCELLI: What happened is that ATF agents were out in the street, observing persons buying firearms and made no efforts to interdict the firearms. ATF made a mistake. This is a failure in leadership, something that should have been taken ahold of.
VAN SUSTEREN: How high up was this operation authorized?
FORCELLI: Highest levels in the phoenix field division. I don't know who the ultimate decision-makers were. This is a failure in leadership at all levels within ATF. And whoever was briefed at the top. This should have been roped in much sooner than it was.
VAN SUSTEREN: Does the chain of command go up to the attorney general of the United States? I'm not saying he knew anything, but is that ultimately the top one?
FORCELLI: The attorney general of the United States oversees all of the Department of Justice, and ATF is a branch. What he knows about this case, obviously, I can't speak to that.
VAN SUSTEREN: I wasn't suggesting, I was trying to understand the structure. What ended "Fast and Furious"?
FORCELLI: They made arrests in January. I wasn't involved in the investigation. I supervise a group also located in Phoenix. My understanding is there are ongoing prosecutions.
VAN SUSTEREN: There was a death of a border agent. Does that have anything to do with it?
FORCELLI: I know Agent Terry was murdered with a weapon, and two guns traced by operation fast and furious were found in the proximity of the murder scene.
VAN SUSTEREN: These are weapons that we would have been watching?
FORCELLI: I don't know at what point those weapons were purchased.
VAN SUSTEREN: Do you worry that this was a complete botched operation, that these were two weapons that the United States was essentially tracking that ended up at the murder scene of a border agent?
FORCELLI: Absolutely. I'm a career police officer. I was a New York city police officer. I've been with ATF for 10 years. Proud to serve, fine men and women doing great cases everyday this is not how we operate. Our job is to prevent guns from going into the hands of criminals. We are understaffed. And I can make all the excuses as to why this happened. The reality is, we did not do our job if we allowed guns to be sold to be trafficked to individuals that we knew were going to use them in the drug war.
VAN SUSTEREN: Were you told to look the other way?
FORCELLI: I wasn't involved in that operation. My understanding that others were.
VAN SUSTEREN: To let the guns flow?
FORCELLI: Gather intelligence not interdict weapons. You lose the opportunity to do things the old fashioned way, shoe leather police work.
VAN SUSTEREN: I know how hard the ATF does work. Thank you, sir.
FORCELLI: Thank you.
Original Post: Fox
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," June 15, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: OK, listen carefully to this question. Did the United States government help arm Mexican drug cartels? This question, were those weapons used in murders? Right now the ATF is under extreme scrutiny. Three agents are testifying before Congress. And Congress is demanding answers to what is Operation "Fast and Furious," and why did it backfire allowing thousands of weapons to get into the wrong hands?
ATF supervisory special agent Peter Forcelli joins us. Good evening, sir. Tell me first of all, what is Operation "Fast and Furious"?
PETER FORCELLI, ATF SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Good evening, Greta. Operation "Fast and Furious" was one case initiated in the Phoenix feel division. It's one investigation that targeted several individuals who were trafficking firearms into Mexico.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why are they making the allegation the government was looking the other way to weapons get into the wrong hands?
FORCELLI: What happened is that ATF agents were out in the street, observing persons buying firearms and made no efforts to interdict the firearms. ATF made a mistake. This is a failure in leadership, something that should have been taken ahold of.
VAN SUSTEREN: How high up was this operation authorized?
FORCELLI: Highest levels in the phoenix field division. I don't know who the ultimate decision-makers were. This is a failure in leadership at all levels within ATF. And whoever was briefed at the top. This should have been roped in much sooner than it was.
VAN SUSTEREN: Does the chain of command go up to the attorney general of the United States? I'm not saying he knew anything, but is that ultimately the top one?
FORCELLI: The attorney general of the United States oversees all of the Department of Justice, and ATF is a branch. What he knows about this case, obviously, I can't speak to that.
VAN SUSTEREN: I wasn't suggesting, I was trying to understand the structure. What ended "Fast and Furious"?
FORCELLI: They made arrests in January. I wasn't involved in the investigation. I supervise a group also located in Phoenix. My understanding is there are ongoing prosecutions.
VAN SUSTEREN: There was a death of a border agent. Does that have anything to do with it?
FORCELLI: I know Agent Terry was murdered with a weapon, and two guns traced by operation fast and furious were found in the proximity of the murder scene.
VAN SUSTEREN: These are weapons that we would have been watching?
FORCELLI: I don't know at what point those weapons were purchased.
VAN SUSTEREN: Do you worry that this was a complete botched operation, that these were two weapons that the United States was essentially tracking that ended up at the murder scene of a border agent?
FORCELLI: Absolutely. I'm a career police officer. I was a New York city police officer. I've been with ATF for 10 years. Proud to serve, fine men and women doing great cases everyday this is not how we operate. Our job is to prevent guns from going into the hands of criminals. We are understaffed. And I can make all the excuses as to why this happened. The reality is, we did not do our job if we allowed guns to be sold to be trafficked to individuals that we knew were going to use them in the drug war.
VAN SUSTEREN: Were you told to look the other way?
FORCELLI: I wasn't involved in that operation. My understanding that others were.
VAN SUSTEREN: To let the guns flow?
FORCELLI: Gather intelligence not interdict weapons. You lose the opportunity to do things the old fashioned way, shoe leather police work.
VAN SUSTEREN: I know how hard the ATF does work. Thank you, sir.
FORCELLI: Thank you.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Obama Blames ATMs for Unemployment, Rather than Himself
Original Post: Associated Content
Casting around for someone or something to blame other than himself for long-term unemployment, President Barack Obama told NBC News that one culprit is automated telling machines (ATMs), which are taking jobs from bank tellers, according to Fox Nation.
"There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."
People have been blaming technology for taking away people's jobs ever since the luddites attacked mechanized looms in early 19th century England. The notion is fallacious now as it was then. By promoting efficiency and expanding consumer choice, technology like ATMs spur economic growth and thus job creation.
Jonah Goldberg, writing in National Review, makes this very point about ATMs and bank tellers:
"I'm not sure how you can possibly blame ATMs. Aside from the myriad ways in which ATMs boost efficiency, liquidity, consumer spending (and don't forget all of the jobs created for technicians and manufacturers of ATM machines), I'm not sure you can even blame a drop in bank teller jobs on bank machines. This is just a quick take, but just think about it for two seconds. The number of bank branches has soared in recent years. Those branches need human tellers (and bank machines). That's why the BLS predicted that teller jobs would grow about 6% from 2008 to 2018 (it predicted other banking jobs would grow as well)."
Goldberg also notes that both the number of ATMs and bank tellers has grown between 1985 and 2002, thus invalidating President Obama's point.
Obama was obviously making an attempt to shift blame from himself to the growth of automation. However, the disquieting thought occurs that perhaps the president will take this theme to heart and enact regulations restricting the use of automation in favor of human workers.
One would almost laugh at the idea, but it is no more absurd than the stimulus bill, health care reform, or cash for clunkers. Trying to inhibit automation by government fiat is just the sort of social engineering that the president and his people love to engage in.
One suspects that the president, should he run with this, will pretty up the proposal by calling it something like "American Jobs through Technological Restraint." Democrats in Congress will certainly grasp at this as a way to give jobs to angry constituents and thus quiet their unhappiness, making them want to vote for Democrats.
People who point out, as Goldberg does, that automation actually creates jobs in the long run will be accused of being cold and heartless and no doubt in the pay of robotics manufacturers. The unions, who will surely want to organize these retro workers, will certainly be all for the proposal as well.
All kidding aside, President Obama will almost certainly get a pass for this inanity, unlike what would have happened if it had come out of Sarah Palin's mouth. He is, after all, smart and, as his wife suggested, better prepared than the people who brief him on a daily basis. Thus, to paraphrase Orwell, stupidity is intelligence.
Casting around for someone or something to blame other than himself for long-term unemployment, President Barack Obama told NBC News that one culprit is automated telling machines (ATMs), which are taking jobs from bank tellers, according to Fox Nation.
"There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don't go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you're using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate."
People have been blaming technology for taking away people's jobs ever since the luddites attacked mechanized looms in early 19th century England. The notion is fallacious now as it was then. By promoting efficiency and expanding consumer choice, technology like ATMs spur economic growth and thus job creation.
Jonah Goldberg, writing in National Review, makes this very point about ATMs and bank tellers:
"I'm not sure how you can possibly blame ATMs. Aside from the myriad ways in which ATMs boost efficiency, liquidity, consumer spending (and don't forget all of the jobs created for technicians and manufacturers of ATM machines), I'm not sure you can even blame a drop in bank teller jobs on bank machines. This is just a quick take, but just think about it for two seconds. The number of bank branches has soared in recent years. Those branches need human tellers (and bank machines). That's why the BLS predicted that teller jobs would grow about 6% from 2008 to 2018 (it predicted other banking jobs would grow as well)."
Goldberg also notes that both the number of ATMs and bank tellers has grown between 1985 and 2002, thus invalidating President Obama's point.
Obama was obviously making an attempt to shift blame from himself to the growth of automation. However, the disquieting thought occurs that perhaps the president will take this theme to heart and enact regulations restricting the use of automation in favor of human workers.
One would almost laugh at the idea, but it is no more absurd than the stimulus bill, health care reform, or cash for clunkers. Trying to inhibit automation by government fiat is just the sort of social engineering that the president and his people love to engage in.
One suspects that the president, should he run with this, will pretty up the proposal by calling it something like "American Jobs through Technological Restraint." Democrats in Congress will certainly grasp at this as a way to give jobs to angry constituents and thus quiet their unhappiness, making them want to vote for Democrats.
People who point out, as Goldberg does, that automation actually creates jobs in the long run will be accused of being cold and heartless and no doubt in the pay of robotics manufacturers. The unions, who will surely want to organize these retro workers, will certainly be all for the proposal as well.
All kidding aside, President Obama will almost certainly get a pass for this inanity, unlike what would have happened if it had come out of Sarah Palin's mouth. He is, after all, smart and, as his wife suggested, better prepared than the people who brief him on a daily basis. Thus, to paraphrase Orwell, stupidity is intelligence.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
The Lookout Struggling single mom sells Obama letter
Original Post: Yahoo
Destiny Mathis, a young woman in Indiana, reached out to President Obama for a sign of hope in tough economic times, and was initially thrilled to receive a handwritten reply from the president. Now, however, the same economic hardships that prompted her to write to Obama last November have prompted her to put up the letter for sale on an auction website--marking the ninth such sale of an Obama letter that the online auction service has handled.
Mathis, a single mother of three from Indiana, wrote to the president that even though she graduated at the top of her college class and worked for years as a surgical technologist, she had lost her job in January after complications with her pregnancy. "I am so afraid this dreaded economy is going to have my family homeless," she wrote, according to NBC5, the Chicago network affiliate. Mathis is now weeks away from being evicted from her home.
The president wrote back a handwritten note on White House stationery. "Please know that things will get better for you and your family," he said. You can watch the NBC5 report on the letter's sale above.
The 26-year-old is now selling the note to Gary Zimet, who has sold eight other letters from the president so far for up to $20,000 on his site, Moments in Time. He's asking for $11,000.
A Michigan woman sold a letter from Obama in October for $7,000 to help pay for her cancer treatment and for a downpayment on a house. "Thanks for the very kind and inspiring letter," Obama wrote to Jennifer Cline, after she told him in a letter that she was struggling to make ends meet and had lost her health insurance. "I know times are tough, but knowing there are folks out there like you and your husband gives me confidence that things will keep getting better!"
Destiny Mathis, a young woman in Indiana, reached out to President Obama for a sign of hope in tough economic times, and was initially thrilled to receive a handwritten reply from the president. Now, however, the same economic hardships that prompted her to write to Obama last November have prompted her to put up the letter for sale on an auction website--marking the ninth such sale of an Obama letter that the online auction service has handled.
Mathis, a single mother of three from Indiana, wrote to the president that even though she graduated at the top of her college class and worked for years as a surgical technologist, she had lost her job in January after complications with her pregnancy. "I am so afraid this dreaded economy is going to have my family homeless," she wrote, according to NBC5, the Chicago network affiliate. Mathis is now weeks away from being evicted from her home.
The president wrote back a handwritten note on White House stationery. "Please know that things will get better for you and your family," he said. You can watch the NBC5 report on the letter's sale above.
The 26-year-old is now selling the note to Gary Zimet, who has sold eight other letters from the president so far for up to $20,000 on his site, Moments in Time. He's asking for $11,000.
A Michigan woman sold a letter from Obama in October for $7,000 to help pay for her cancer treatment and for a downpayment on a house. "Thanks for the very kind and inspiring letter," Obama wrote to Jennifer Cline, after she told him in a letter that she was struggling to make ends meet and had lost her health insurance. "I know times are tough, but knowing there are folks out there like you and your husband gives me confidence that things will keep getting better!"
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Education Department says it doesn’t send SWAT teams after loan defaulters
Original Post: Yahoo
By Liz Goodwin
A Stockton, Calif., man says a SWAT team broke his door and dragged him out of his house during an unexpected 6 a.m. raid targeting his estranged ex-wife.
Kenneth Wright, who has no criminal record, told ABC News 10 he complained to the local cops about the raid. But according to Wright, the Stockton police denied ordering the raid, saying instead it was the handiwork of the federal Department of Education.
Wright told the station that the Education Department was after unpaid federal loans owed by his ex-wife. "They busted my door for this," Wright says. The claim has been repeated by numerous news outlets who picked up the story, including Fox News, The Huffington Post, and Gawker. (UPDATE: The station has replaced the story with a newer version that does not make the claim the raid was for late loan payments.)
But Education Department Press Secretary Justin Hamilton said in a statement to The Lookout that the department "does not execute search warrants for late loan payments." He said the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) "conducts about 30-35 search warrants a year on issues such as bribery, fraud, and embezzlement of federal student aid funds." Hamilton said the department cannot comment on this particular case until the investigation is over, but did add that the claim the warrant was executed for late loan payment is untrue. The raid was related to a criminal investigation of Wright's wife.
The OIG lists some of its recent investigations on its website, including the case of a Boston man who was sent to prison last month for lying on a federal student aid form.
About 8.9 percent of all federal loan recipients (about 330,000 people) defaulted between 2008 and 2010, the highest percentage in more than a decade. Unlike students who have some types of private student loans, borrowers with federal loans can't declare bankruptcy as a way to get out of repayment, no matter how dire their financial situation.
Still, Wright was not the subject of the agency's investigation, and he is demanding an apology for being treated like a criminal in his own home. He animatedly explains in this video that he was handcuffed while still in his underwear and was made to wait in a police car for several hours with his three young children while the 15 law enforcement officers searched his house.
Wright says he wants an apology and for the Department of Education to fix his door. "Please pay your bills, take care of your credit," he says. "If you don't believe me, this could be you one morning, 6 o'clock in the morning."
By Liz Goodwin
A Stockton, Calif., man says a SWAT team broke his door and dragged him out of his house during an unexpected 6 a.m. raid targeting his estranged ex-wife.
Kenneth Wright, who has no criminal record, told ABC News 10 he complained to the local cops about the raid. But according to Wright, the Stockton police denied ordering the raid, saying instead it was the handiwork of the federal Department of Education.
Wright told the station that the Education Department was after unpaid federal loans owed by his ex-wife. "They busted my door for this," Wright says. The claim has been repeated by numerous news outlets who picked up the story, including Fox News, The Huffington Post, and Gawker. (UPDATE: The station has replaced the story with a newer version that does not make the claim the raid was for late loan payments.)
But Education Department Press Secretary Justin Hamilton said in a statement to The Lookout that the department "does not execute search warrants for late loan payments." He said the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) "conducts about 30-35 search warrants a year on issues such as bribery, fraud, and embezzlement of federal student aid funds." Hamilton said the department cannot comment on this particular case until the investigation is over, but did add that the claim the warrant was executed for late loan payment is untrue. The raid was related to a criminal investigation of Wright's wife.
The OIG lists some of its recent investigations on its website, including the case of a Boston man who was sent to prison last month for lying on a federal student aid form.
About 8.9 percent of all federal loan recipients (about 330,000 people) defaulted between 2008 and 2010, the highest percentage in more than a decade. Unlike students who have some types of private student loans, borrowers with federal loans can't declare bankruptcy as a way to get out of repayment, no matter how dire their financial situation.
Still, Wright was not the subject of the agency's investigation, and he is demanding an apology for being treated like a criminal in his own home. He animatedly explains in this video that he was handcuffed while still in his underwear and was made to wait in a police car for several hours with his three young children while the 15 law enforcement officers searched his house.
Wright says he wants an apology and for the Department of Education to fix his door. "Please pay your bills, take care of your credit," he says. "If you don't believe me, this could be you one morning, 6 o'clock in the morning."
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Chronic unemployment worse than Great Depression
Original Post: CBS
There is an unfortunate adage for the unemployed: The longer folks are out of a job, the longer it takes them to find a new one.
CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy reports that the chronically unemployed face the hardest road back to recovery, and that while the jobs picture may be improving statistically on a national level, it is not for them.
Tinong Nwachan, for example, has far too much time on his hands. When CBS News met the former truck driver he had been out of work for two years.
"I don't really tell too many people this but I'm not ashamed or nothing, I'm homeless," Nwachan said.
Summer job bummer: Teen unemployment 24 percent
Nearly 14 million Americans are looking for work
His day job is looking for work at a jobs center in Hollywood. He has plenty of company, including Fabian Lambrecht, who wonders when the economy's improvement will affect them.
"They're saying there are more jobs. I'm just wondering where those jobs are," Lambrecht said.
About 6.2 million Americans, 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months - a higher percentage than during the Great Depression.
The bigger the gap on someone's resume, the more questions employers have.
"(Employers) think: 'Oh, well, there must be something really wrong with them because they haven't gotten a job in 6 months, a year, 2 years.' But that's not necessarily the case," said Marjorie Gardner-Cruse with the Hollywood Worksource Center.
The problem of course is the economy, but some industries, especially certain manufacturing jobs, are not ever expected to come back. Experts say unemployed workers need to be prepared to change careers.
"That person has to realize that, discover what field they want to work in, become trained and find a job in that field," said Jerry Nickelsburg, Sr., an economist at UCLA.
Here's another problem: more than 1 million of the long-term unemployed have run out of unemployment benefits, leaving them without the money to get new training, buy new clothes, or even get to job interviews.
"If you have been unemployed for 6 months or more, it takes a much deeper toll - not just on your personal finances and your career prospects - but on your emotional well-being," said Paul Taylor, an executive vice president with the Pew Research Center.
Tinong Nwachan said no matter how hard it's been, he isn't giving up on his search.
"I'm taking everything one day at a time. Eventually I know I'm gonna find something," Nwachan said.
All he says he's hoping for is a job that will take more of his time, and take him off the streets.
There is an unfortunate adage for the unemployed: The longer folks are out of a job, the longer it takes them to find a new one.
CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy reports that the chronically unemployed face the hardest road back to recovery, and that while the jobs picture may be improving statistically on a national level, it is not for them.
Tinong Nwachan, for example, has far too much time on his hands. When CBS News met the former truck driver he had been out of work for two years.
"I don't really tell too many people this but I'm not ashamed or nothing, I'm homeless," Nwachan said.
Summer job bummer: Teen unemployment 24 percent
Nearly 14 million Americans are looking for work
His day job is looking for work at a jobs center in Hollywood. He has plenty of company, including Fabian Lambrecht, who wonders when the economy's improvement will affect them.
"They're saying there are more jobs. I'm just wondering where those jobs are," Lambrecht said.
About 6.2 million Americans, 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country, have been jobless for more than six months - a higher percentage than during the Great Depression.
The bigger the gap on someone's resume, the more questions employers have.
"(Employers) think: 'Oh, well, there must be something really wrong with them because they haven't gotten a job in 6 months, a year, 2 years.' But that's not necessarily the case," said Marjorie Gardner-Cruse with the Hollywood Worksource Center.
The problem of course is the economy, but some industries, especially certain manufacturing jobs, are not ever expected to come back. Experts say unemployed workers need to be prepared to change careers.
"That person has to realize that, discover what field they want to work in, become trained and find a job in that field," said Jerry Nickelsburg, Sr., an economist at UCLA.
Here's another problem: more than 1 million of the long-term unemployed have run out of unemployment benefits, leaving them without the money to get new training, buy new clothes, or even get to job interviews.
"If you have been unemployed for 6 months or more, it takes a much deeper toll - not just on your personal finances and your career prospects - but on your emotional well-being," said Paul Taylor, an executive vice president with the Pew Research Center.
Tinong Nwachan said no matter how hard it's been, he isn't giving up on his search.
"I'm taking everything one day at a time. Eventually I know I'm gonna find something," Nwachan said.
All he says he's hoping for is a job that will take more of his time, and take him off the streets.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Obama’s Top Lawyer: If You Don’t Like The Individual Mandate, Earn Less Income
Original Post: Forbes
Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner has been following some of the oral arguments in the constitutional challenges of Obamacare’s individual mandate, which requires all citizens to buy health insurance. Over at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati, Neal Kumar Katyal, the acting Solicitor General, was charged with defending the law. (Generally speaking, the job of the Solicitor General is to represent the federal government in Supreme Court cases.)
Katyal, when asked about the individual mandate, pointed out that the mandate “only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” so what’s the big deal? “Someone doesn’t need to earn that much income.” More from Klein:
During the Sixth Circuit arguments, Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, asked Kaytal if he could name one Supreme Court case which considered the same question as the one posed by the mandate, in which Congress used the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as a tool to compel action.
Kaytal conceded that the Supreme Court had “never been confronted directly” with the question, but cited the Heart of Atlanta Motel case as a relevant example. In that landmark 1964 civil rights case, the Court ruled that Congress could use its Commerce Clause power to bar discrimination by private businesses such as hotels and restaurants.
“They’re in the business,” Sutton pushed back. “They’re told if you’re going to be in the business, this is what you have to do. In response to that law, they could have said, ‘We now exit the business.’ Individuals don’t have that option.”
Kaytal responded by noting that the there’s a provision in the health care law that allows people to avoid the mandate.
“If we’re going to play that game, I think that game can be played here as well, because after all, the minimum coverage provision only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” Kaytal said. “So it’s a penalty on earning a certain amount of income and self insuring. It’s not just on self insuring on its own. So I guess one could say, just as the restaurant owner could depart the market in Heart of Atlanta Motel, someone doesn’t need to earn that much income. I think both are kind of fanciful and I think get at…”
Sutton interjected, “That wasn’t in a single speech given in Congress about this…the idea that the solution if you don’t like it is make a little less money.”
Katyal is more right than he knows. The mandate, combined with Obamacare’s exchange subsidies, will create profound disincentives for individuals to make more money; i.e., become more economically productive. This will crimp tax revenues and slow economic growth, leading to higher unemployment and larger budget deficits. All for a policy that will only exacerbate the free-rider problem.
Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner has been following some of the oral arguments in the constitutional challenges of Obamacare’s individual mandate, which requires all citizens to buy health insurance. Over at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati, Neal Kumar Katyal, the acting Solicitor General, was charged with defending the law. (Generally speaking, the job of the Solicitor General is to represent the federal government in Supreme Court cases.)
Katyal, when asked about the individual mandate, pointed out that the mandate “only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” so what’s the big deal? “Someone doesn’t need to earn that much income.” More from Klein:
During the Sixth Circuit arguments, Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, asked Kaytal if he could name one Supreme Court case which considered the same question as the one posed by the mandate, in which Congress used the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as a tool to compel action.
Kaytal conceded that the Supreme Court had “never been confronted directly” with the question, but cited the Heart of Atlanta Motel case as a relevant example. In that landmark 1964 civil rights case, the Court ruled that Congress could use its Commerce Clause power to bar discrimination by private businesses such as hotels and restaurants.
“They’re in the business,” Sutton pushed back. “They’re told if you’re going to be in the business, this is what you have to do. In response to that law, they could have said, ‘We now exit the business.’ Individuals don’t have that option.”
Kaytal responded by noting that the there’s a provision in the health care law that allows people to avoid the mandate.
“If we’re going to play that game, I think that game can be played here as well, because after all, the minimum coverage provision only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” Kaytal said. “So it’s a penalty on earning a certain amount of income and self insuring. It’s not just on self insuring on its own. So I guess one could say, just as the restaurant owner could depart the market in Heart of Atlanta Motel, someone doesn’t need to earn that much income. I think both are kind of fanciful and I think get at…”
Sutton interjected, “That wasn’t in a single speech given in Congress about this…the idea that the solution if you don’t like it is make a little less money.”
Katyal is more right than he knows. The mandate, combined with Obamacare’s exchange subsidies, will create profound disincentives for individuals to make more money; i.e., become more economically productive. This will crimp tax revenues and slow economic growth, leading to higher unemployment and larger budget deficits. All for a policy that will only exacerbate the free-rider problem.
Queen decorates Nepali for Afghanistan heroics
Original Post: Yahoo
LONDON (AFP) – A Nepalese soldier in the British army has been given a top bravery award by Queen Elizabeth II for his heroics in Afghanistan, where he single-handedly saw off more than 30 Taliban fighters.
Corporal Dipprasad Pun, 31, said he thought he was going to die and so had nothing to lose in taking on the attackers who overran his checkpoint.
He was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross (CGC), which is given in recognition of acts of conspicuous gallantry during active operations against the enemy.
Pun fired more than 400 rounds, launched 17 grenades and detonated a mine to repel the Taliban assault on his checkpoint near Babaji in Helmand Province, southern Afghanistan, last September.
Surrounded, the enemy opened fired from all sides and for 15 minutes Pun remained under continuous attack, including from rocket-propelled grenades and AK47 guns.
At one point, unable to shoot, he used his machine gun tripod to knock down a militant who was climbing the walls of the compound.
Two insurgents were still attacking by the time he ran out of ammunition, but he set off a Claymore mine to repel them.
Pun was given his medal in a ceremony at Buckingham Palace in London on Wednesday.
The CGC is second only to the Victoria Cross -- the highest honour for bravery in the face of the enemy.
"There wasn't any choice but to fight. The Taliban were all around the checkpoint. I was alone," he said.
"I had so many of them around me that I thought I was definitely going to die so I thought I'd kill as many of them as I could before they killed me.
"After that I thought nobody can kill us now -- when we met the enemy I wasn't scared."
Britain's Major General Nicholas Carter, who was commander of allied forces in southern Afghanistan during Pun's deployment, praised his efforts.
"The CGC does not get handed out lightly. It was a most remarkable achievement," he said.
LONDON (AFP) – A Nepalese soldier in the British army has been given a top bravery award by Queen Elizabeth II for his heroics in Afghanistan, where he single-handedly saw off more than 30 Taliban fighters.
Corporal Dipprasad Pun, 31, said he thought he was going to die and so had nothing to lose in taking on the attackers who overran his checkpoint.
He was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross (CGC), which is given in recognition of acts of conspicuous gallantry during active operations against the enemy.
Pun fired more than 400 rounds, launched 17 grenades and detonated a mine to repel the Taliban assault on his checkpoint near Babaji in Helmand Province, southern Afghanistan, last September.
Surrounded, the enemy opened fired from all sides and for 15 minutes Pun remained under continuous attack, including from rocket-propelled grenades and AK47 guns.
At one point, unable to shoot, he used his machine gun tripod to knock down a militant who was climbing the walls of the compound.
Two insurgents were still attacking by the time he ran out of ammunition, but he set off a Claymore mine to repel them.
Pun was given his medal in a ceremony at Buckingham Palace in London on Wednesday.
The CGC is second only to the Victoria Cross -- the highest honour for bravery in the face of the enemy.
"There wasn't any choice but to fight. The Taliban were all around the checkpoint. I was alone," he said.
"I had so many of them around me that I thought I was definitely going to die so I thought I'd kill as many of them as I could before they killed me.
"After that I thought nobody can kill us now -- when we met the enemy I wasn't scared."
Britain's Major General Nicholas Carter, who was commander of allied forces in southern Afghanistan during Pun's deployment, praised his efforts.
"The CGC does not get handed out lightly. It was a most remarkable achievement," he said.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
TV Executives Admit in Taped Interviews That Hollywood Pushes a Liberal Agenda
Original Post: Yahoo
By Paul Bond
Some of TV's top executives from the past four decades may have gotten more than they bargained for when they agreed to be interviewed for a politically charged book that was released Tuesday, because video of their controversial remarks will soon be hitting the Internet.
The book makes the case that TV industry executives, writers and producers use their clout to advance a liberal political agenda. The author bases his thesis on, among other things, 39 taped interviews that he'll roll out piecemeal during the next three weeks.
The Hollywood Reporter obtained several of the not-yet-released clips. Each contains a snippet of an interview, usually some historical footage of the TV shows the interviewee was responsible for and, naturally, a plea to purchase the book, "Primetime Propaganda" by Ben Shapiro and published by Broad Side, an imprint of HarperCollins.
In one video, "Friends" co-creator Marta Kauffman says that when she cast Candace Gingrich-Jones, half-sister of Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as the minister of a lesbian wedding, "There was a bit of [a middle finger] in it to the right wing."
Kauffman also acknowledges she "put together a staff of mostly liberal people," which is another major point of Shapiro's book: that conservatives aren't welcome in Hollywood.
Maybe that's because they're "idiots" and have "medieval minds." At least that's what "Soap" and "Golden Girls" creator Susan Harris thinks of TV's conservative critics.
However, the ranks of dumb right-wingers has dwindled, according to Harris, whose video has her saying: "At least, you know, we put Obama in office, and so people, I think, are getting — have gotten — a little bit smarter."
Some of the videos have executives making rather obvious revelations, like when Larry Gelbart and Gene Reynolds talk about pacifist messages in "M*A*S*H" or when "MacGyver" producer Vin Di Bona says anti-gun messages were a recurring theme in that show.
But an additional video has Di Bona, who also created "America's Funniest Home Videos," becoming remarkably blunt about his approval of a lack of political diversity in Hollywood. When Shapiro asks what he thinks of conservative critics who say everyone in Hollywood is liberal, Di Bona responds: "I think it's probably accurate, and I'm happy about it."
Another video has Leonard Goldberg — who executive produces "Blue Bloods" for CBS and a few decades ago exec produced such hits as "Fantasy Island," "Charlie's Angels" and "Starsky and Hutch" — saying that liberalism in the TV industry is "100 percent dominant, and anyone who denies it is kidding, or not telling the truth."
When Shapiro tells Fred Pierce, the president of ABC in the 1980s who was instrumental in Disney's acquisition of ESPN, that "It's very difficult for people who are politically conservative to break in" to television, he responds: "I can't argue that point." Those who don't lean left, he says, "don't promote it. It stays underground."
Another video rolling out soon has "House" creator David Shore acknowledging that "there is an assumption in this town that everybody is on the left side of the spectrum, and that the few people on the right side, I think people look at them somewhat aghast, and I'm sure it doesn't help them."
In the book, subtitled "The true Hollywood story of how the left took over your TV," Shapiro also tells anecdotes of bias against conservatives. One example is Dwight Schultz, best known for his roles as Murdock in "The A-Team" and Barclay in "Star Trek: The Next Generation."
The late Bruce Paltrow knew that Schultz was a fan of President Ronald Reagan. When Schultz showed up to audition for "St. Elsewhere," a show Paltrow produced, to read for the part of Fiscus, Paltrow told him: "There's not going to be a Reagan [expletive] on this show!" The part went to Howie Mandel.
"Most nepotism in Hollywood isn't familial, it's ideological," Shapiro writes in the book. "Friends hire friends. And those friends just happen to share their politics."
Another video Shapiro will release shortly has producer-director Nicholas Meyer being asked point-blank whether conservatives are discriminated against in Hollywood. "Well, I hope so," he answers. Meyer also admits his political agenda for "The Day After," a TV movie he directed for ABC that was seen by 100 million people when it aired in 1983.
"My private, grandiose notion was that this movie would unseat Ronald Reagan when he ran for re-election," Meyer says.
Even seemingly harmless shows like "Happy Days" and "Sesame Street" have been used to advance a progressive agenda, according to Shapiro.
For example, William Bickley, a writer on "The Partridge Family" and a producer on "Happy Days," says he infused Vietnam War protest messages into the latter. "I was into all that," he says in a soon-to-be-released video.
"Television has been perhaps the most impressive weapon in the left's political arsenal," Shapiro argues in the book.
Other upcoming videos include: "Family Ties" creator Gary David Goldberg explaining how he tried to make Republican character Alex Keaton the bad guy but that actor Michael J. Fox was too darn lovable; and president of MTV Networks Entertainment Group Doug Herzog talking about his network having "superpowers" when it comes to its influence over young people.
The advancement of a gay and lesbian political agenda is mentioned by multiple executives, including Marcy Carsey, a producer of "Soap" and "Roseanne," and "Desperate Housewives" producer Marc Cherry, who is a rarity in Hollywood: a gay Republican.
In her video, Carsey also says she insisted on portraying characters smoking marijuana in "That '70s Show." "If this is a problem for you, we certainly understand, and we just won't do the show," she told executives at Fox.
Shapiro released two videos Tuesday, one featuring "COPS" creator John Langley saying he's partial to segments where white people are the criminals, and the other has Fred Silverman, the former head of ABC and later NBC, saying "there's only one perspective, and it's a very progressive perspective" in TV comedy today.
Shapiro said the executives felt comfortable talking about politics with him because they assumed, incorrectly, that he is on the left.
"Most of them didn't Google me. If they had, they would have realized where I am politically," he said. "I played on their stereotypes. When I showed up for the interviews, I wore my Harvard Law baseball cap — my name is Ben Shapiro and I attended Harvard, so there's a 98.7 percent chance I'm a liberal. Except I happen not to be."
Shapiro said he'll time the debut of certain videos for maximum effect. One that slams Sean Hannity, for example, is reserved for his scheduled appearance on Hannity's show on the Fox News Channel.
And conservative pundit Ann Coulter has a new book out June 7. "I have two people ripping her by name, so I'll release those the day Ann's book is released," Shapiro said.
One of those slamming Coulter is George Schlatter, who directed and produced "Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In" in the 1970s, using the show to knock Republicans and the Vietnam War. "The fact we [ticked] the Pentagon off, that pleased me enormously," he says before calling Coulter a vulgar word.
In his video, Schlatter also goes off on right-wing radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham.
Shapiro says he didn't disclose that he'd be releasing the tapes, but that his subjects have no reason to complain.
"I asked them for permission to tape, and there's no reasonable expectation of privacy when you're being interviewed for a book," he said.
"If they're going to be shocked at something, it should be themselves, not me," Shapiro said. "They should be shocked that opinion is so one-sided in Hollywood that it's OK to say, 'I'm fine with discrimination.'"
"My whole book is a plea for openness in the industry," he added. "Hire people from the other side of the aisle once in a while, or at least stop mocking them."
By Paul Bond
Some of TV's top executives from the past four decades may have gotten more than they bargained for when they agreed to be interviewed for a politically charged book that was released Tuesday, because video of their controversial remarks will soon be hitting the Internet.
The book makes the case that TV industry executives, writers and producers use their clout to advance a liberal political agenda. The author bases his thesis on, among other things, 39 taped interviews that he'll roll out piecemeal during the next three weeks.
The Hollywood Reporter obtained several of the not-yet-released clips. Each contains a snippet of an interview, usually some historical footage of the TV shows the interviewee was responsible for and, naturally, a plea to purchase the book, "Primetime Propaganda" by Ben Shapiro and published by Broad Side, an imprint of HarperCollins.
In one video, "Friends" co-creator Marta Kauffman says that when she cast Candace Gingrich-Jones, half-sister of Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as the minister of a lesbian wedding, "There was a bit of [a middle finger] in it to the right wing."
Kauffman also acknowledges she "put together a staff of mostly liberal people," which is another major point of Shapiro's book: that conservatives aren't welcome in Hollywood.
Maybe that's because they're "idiots" and have "medieval minds." At least that's what "Soap" and "Golden Girls" creator Susan Harris thinks of TV's conservative critics.
However, the ranks of dumb right-wingers has dwindled, according to Harris, whose video has her saying: "At least, you know, we put Obama in office, and so people, I think, are getting — have gotten — a little bit smarter."
Some of the videos have executives making rather obvious revelations, like when Larry Gelbart and Gene Reynolds talk about pacifist messages in "M*A*S*H" or when "MacGyver" producer Vin Di Bona says anti-gun messages were a recurring theme in that show.
But an additional video has Di Bona, who also created "America's Funniest Home Videos," becoming remarkably blunt about his approval of a lack of political diversity in Hollywood. When Shapiro asks what he thinks of conservative critics who say everyone in Hollywood is liberal, Di Bona responds: "I think it's probably accurate, and I'm happy about it."
Another video has Leonard Goldberg — who executive produces "Blue Bloods" for CBS and a few decades ago exec produced such hits as "Fantasy Island," "Charlie's Angels" and "Starsky and Hutch" — saying that liberalism in the TV industry is "100 percent dominant, and anyone who denies it is kidding, or not telling the truth."
When Shapiro tells Fred Pierce, the president of ABC in the 1980s who was instrumental in Disney's acquisition of ESPN, that "It's very difficult for people who are politically conservative to break in" to television, he responds: "I can't argue that point." Those who don't lean left, he says, "don't promote it. It stays underground."
Another video rolling out soon has "House" creator David Shore acknowledging that "there is an assumption in this town that everybody is on the left side of the spectrum, and that the few people on the right side, I think people look at them somewhat aghast, and I'm sure it doesn't help them."
In the book, subtitled "The true Hollywood story of how the left took over your TV," Shapiro also tells anecdotes of bias against conservatives. One example is Dwight Schultz, best known for his roles as Murdock in "The A-Team" and Barclay in "Star Trek: The Next Generation."
The late Bruce Paltrow knew that Schultz was a fan of President Ronald Reagan. When Schultz showed up to audition for "St. Elsewhere," a show Paltrow produced, to read for the part of Fiscus, Paltrow told him: "There's not going to be a Reagan [expletive] on this show!" The part went to Howie Mandel.
"Most nepotism in Hollywood isn't familial, it's ideological," Shapiro writes in the book. "Friends hire friends. And those friends just happen to share their politics."
Another video Shapiro will release shortly has producer-director Nicholas Meyer being asked point-blank whether conservatives are discriminated against in Hollywood. "Well, I hope so," he answers. Meyer also admits his political agenda for "The Day After," a TV movie he directed for ABC that was seen by 100 million people when it aired in 1983.
"My private, grandiose notion was that this movie would unseat Ronald Reagan when he ran for re-election," Meyer says.
Even seemingly harmless shows like "Happy Days" and "Sesame Street" have been used to advance a progressive agenda, according to Shapiro.
For example, William Bickley, a writer on "The Partridge Family" and a producer on "Happy Days," says he infused Vietnam War protest messages into the latter. "I was into all that," he says in a soon-to-be-released video.
"Television has been perhaps the most impressive weapon in the left's political arsenal," Shapiro argues in the book.
Other upcoming videos include: "Family Ties" creator Gary David Goldberg explaining how he tried to make Republican character Alex Keaton the bad guy but that actor Michael J. Fox was too darn lovable; and president of MTV Networks Entertainment Group Doug Herzog talking about his network having "superpowers" when it comes to its influence over young people.
The advancement of a gay and lesbian political agenda is mentioned by multiple executives, including Marcy Carsey, a producer of "Soap" and "Roseanne," and "Desperate Housewives" producer Marc Cherry, who is a rarity in Hollywood: a gay Republican.
In her video, Carsey also says she insisted on portraying characters smoking marijuana in "That '70s Show." "If this is a problem for you, we certainly understand, and we just won't do the show," she told executives at Fox.
Shapiro released two videos Tuesday, one featuring "COPS" creator John Langley saying he's partial to segments where white people are the criminals, and the other has Fred Silverman, the former head of ABC and later NBC, saying "there's only one perspective, and it's a very progressive perspective" in TV comedy today.
Shapiro said the executives felt comfortable talking about politics with him because they assumed, incorrectly, that he is on the left.
"Most of them didn't Google me. If they had, they would have realized where I am politically," he said. "I played on their stereotypes. When I showed up for the interviews, I wore my Harvard Law baseball cap — my name is Ben Shapiro and I attended Harvard, so there's a 98.7 percent chance I'm a liberal. Except I happen not to be."
Shapiro said he'll time the debut of certain videos for maximum effect. One that slams Sean Hannity, for example, is reserved for his scheduled appearance on Hannity's show on the Fox News Channel.
And conservative pundit Ann Coulter has a new book out June 7. "I have two people ripping her by name, so I'll release those the day Ann's book is released," Shapiro said.
One of those slamming Coulter is George Schlatter, who directed and produced "Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In" in the 1970s, using the show to knock Republicans and the Vietnam War. "The fact we [ticked] the Pentagon off, that pleased me enormously," he says before calling Coulter a vulgar word.
In his video, Schlatter also goes off on right-wing radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham.
Shapiro says he didn't disclose that he'd be releasing the tapes, but that his subjects have no reason to complain.
"I asked them for permission to tape, and there's no reasonable expectation of privacy when you're being interviewed for a book," he said.
"If they're going to be shocked at something, it should be themselves, not me," Shapiro said. "They should be shocked that opinion is so one-sided in Hollywood that it's OK to say, 'I'm fine with discrimination.'"
"My whole book is a plea for openness in the industry," he added. "Hire people from the other side of the aisle once in a while, or at least stop mocking them."
Election Panel puts hold only on Democrat recalls
Original Post: Big Government
by Brett Healy
If someone wrote this as fiction, they’d be laughed at. As the liberal special interests adjust noisily to being out of power in Wisconsin, events have now gone beyond parody. The latest from the “You can’t make this stuff up” file:
The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has delayed action regarding the potential recalls of three Democrat State Senators. Since the GAB moved swiftly to certify the recalls of six Republican State Senators, some are reasonably raising the claim that the GAB is showing partisan favoritism.
They had publicly stated a desire to hold all the recall elections on the same day, however, because of the lack of action on the part of the GAB, the Republican Senators are scheduled to face the voters on July 12th. The earliest the Democratic Senators would be on the ballot would be July 19th, if at all.
As it stands now, none of the fleeing 14 are facing a recall. Six Republicans who did their jobs, albeit in a manner not to the liking of Big Labor, are on the ballot next month.
by Brett Healy
If someone wrote this as fiction, they’d be laughed at. As the liberal special interests adjust noisily to being out of power in Wisconsin, events have now gone beyond parody. The latest from the “You can’t make this stuff up” file:
The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has delayed action regarding the potential recalls of three Democrat State Senators. Since the GAB moved swiftly to certify the recalls of six Republican State Senators, some are reasonably raising the claim that the GAB is showing partisan favoritism.
They had publicly stated a desire to hold all the recall elections on the same day, however, because of the lack of action on the part of the GAB, the Republican Senators are scheduled to face the voters on July 12th. The earliest the Democratic Senators would be on the ballot would be July 19th, if at all.
As it stands now, none of the fleeing 14 are facing a recall. Six Republicans who did their jobs, albeit in a manner not to the liking of Big Labor, are on the ballot next month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)