Serendipity SOUL | Saturday Open Thread |

Martin Luther King on Self-Determination and Self-Love

About these ads

About Ametia

I am a Spiritual traveler, a devoted wife, mother, sister, lover of dream study, reading, theater, music, dance, and thought-provoking discussions on love, life, humor and service.
This entry was posted in Media, Music, Open Thread, Politics and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Serendipity SOUL | Saturday Open Thread |

  1. rikyrah says:

    Gabe Ortíz @TUSK81
    Fun fact: President Obama would need to take off every day for the next three years in order to match President Bush’s vacation record.
    4:52 PM – 06 Apr 13

    Like

  2. rikyrah says:

    For the Ideologue Left, Social Security Concern Trolling is a Racket

    Dejavu. Once again, both the Republican right and the inconsolable whiny Left have found common ground over just how much they hate President Obama. Neither like the president’s upcoming budget – or at least the reporting on the upcoming budget. Why not? Well, because it looks like the President is going to propose a compromise that neither side’s ideologues are going to like (surprise!).

    The president’s budget, it’s being reported, will include both revenue increases by closing tax loopholes for the rich and the use of Chained CPI to calculate the cost of living adjustments under Social Security. John Boehner seems to be grasping for a drink and complaining loudly that the president is being a meanie by asking the super rich and the corporate behemoths to pay their fair share. And the Left? They can barely contain the traitor-drum:

    “Evidently the president either does not understand or does not care how critically important Social Security and Medicare are, not just to seniors but to middle-aged and younger workers for whom these programs are likely to be even more crucial,” said Eric Kingson, co-chair of the Strengthen Social Security Coalition.[…]

    “President Obama’s plan to cut Social Security would harm seniors who worked hard all their lives,” said Anna Galland, the executive director of Moveon.org.

    What’s actually more evident is that Eric Kingson and Anna Galland are talking out of their posteriors, as is anyone hounding about how Barack Obama is the enemy of Social Security. Eric Kingson or his organization are not concerned about those who most need Social Security, neither are any of the loudmouths on the Lefty blogosphere. The only thing they are concerned about is fundraising off of the status quo. If that weren’t the case, one of these concern trolls would have at least mentioned the following in passing.

    Besides the tax increases that most Republicans continue to oppose, Mr. Obama’s budget will propose a new inflation formula that would have the effect of reducing cost-of-living payments for Social Security benefits, though with financial protections for low-income and very old beneficiaries, administration officials said.
    I have explained this before. The President’s proposal would create a minimum baseline for Social Security benefits so that no one who works their whole life has to live in poverty in retirement. The minimum benefit would be above the poverty line, for the first time fulfilling the promise of Social Security to end elderly poverty and actually boosting benefits for the lowest wage workers, which the protectors of the Entitlement Status Quo are effectively against. The president’s proposal would also boost benefits at age 85, making sure the people most at risk of running out of their savings are taken care of. Let me say that again: for those in the greatest need, the president’s proposal would increase benefits.

    When it comes to Medicare savings, the President is focusing on savings from providers and drug companies, as well as on having wealthy seniors pay a higher premium. There is nothing controversial about that – at least there shouldn’t be any controversy about that on the Left. Not unless while I wasn’t looking, the Left suddenly moved into the tent of lining the pockets big pharma and giving “relief” to the wealthy.

    So why do we suppose the venerable organizations on the Left charging at the White House with torches and pitchforks over the president’s yet-to-be-released budget fail to mention all of this? Why do they fail to mention that this president has expanded the social safety net through a massive expansion of Medicaid, increase in Medicare benefits by taking the copay out of checkups and preventive care, and by other provisions of the Affordable Care Act as well as the biggest expansion of SCHIP since its creation? Why would MoveOn.org, founded to defend a far more centrist president from the attacks of a far less Right wing Congress turn on a far more progressive president facing attacks from a far more retrograde Congress?

    Why? Because politics is a racket; that’s why. It is categorically obvious that none of the torch-and-pitchforks folks on the ideologue Left has the slightest interest in protecting Social Security, Medicare, or the social safety net in general. If they did, they would have the common sense to understand that first, without reforms, all Social Security beneficiaries will get an automatic 25% cut in 20 years’ time, and when the Medicare trust fund runs out in 10 years, beneficiaries will face an immediate 13% cut. Further, if they would take their heads out of their asses for a split moment, they would also understand that the president is proposing a budget deal to increase not just government revenue but expand the social safety net further by funding universal early childhood education. With friends like these…

    So let’s recap. The Left’s reactionaries would rather defend the failing status quo on the social safety net than:

    •Add life to the Social Security and Medicare trust funds.
    •Wipe out poverty forever for the poorest when they retire after a lifetime of backbreaking, minimum wage work.
    •Force pharmaceutical companies to stop raiding our treasury for seniors’ medications.
    •Ask the wealthiest seniors to pay a higher Medicare premium.
    •Close tax loopholes for the rich.
    •Institute universal preschool.

    That’s right. The so-called “defenders” of Social Security would rather protect the privilege of the wealthy and of the drug companies than accept modest adjustments in the calculation of how much benefits increase by. They would rather steal from every disadvantaged child in America the opportunity to get an early start. They would rather tell the lowest wage workers to go to hell when they retire.

    I get it. The hounders will be coming out of the woodworks to say how they support all those things but that those need to be done without affecting the COLA formula. And they will take umbrage at me for accusing them of being willing to sell poor children’s futures down the river in order to protect a shaky status quo. But that is only further proof that these people do not live in the real world. It’s great to arm-chair legislate from the cheap seats, but “none of the above” is not a choice in politics or public policy.

    It is time for those who actually care about the social safety net as something other than a racket or a click-magnet to come together and stand up to the fearmongerers. In my judgment, that necessity on our side is no less crucial than the need for gun owners to come together and stand up to the fearmongering of the NRA. We cannot let ourselves be governed by the follies of reactionary groups who cannot think a mere two steps ahead of their immediate pet pony. It’s time for citizens to skip the ideologue middleman and get the facts ourselves. And it’s time to let our president lead on a path that we voted for: pragmatic government to move our country forward.

    http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/04/for-ideologue-left-social-security.html

    Like

  3. rikyrah says:

    Tracye McQuirter on “Healthy Food Happy You” TV show.

    Like

  4. rikyrah says:

    Jeff Gauvin@JeffersonObama
    The pro-left Emos are Dems for 2 weeks
    prior to the election and for a few more days afterwards….after
    that….FREELANCING RAND PAULITES

    Like

  5. rikyrah says:

    From MonieTalks

    The truth is Black “feminists” co-signing this mess aren’t really feminist in a true empowerment type of way. Because if they were they would have not sat by and was silent in the defense of UN Ambassador Susan Rice, or let other white women pretend like the closest political adviser and trusted friend to both POTUS and FLOTUS is Valerie Jarrett. Or gloss over the attacks daily against FLOTUS, the first daughters. How come when the GOP and the sycophant media spread fair and wide memes about the mythical welfare queens (Michelle, Malia, Sasha, and Grandma Marian) that live in the WHite House, these same righteous feminist don’t demand apologies and retractions for that. All you get is a quick article, that probably does not even stay up a full day. Disparage Quevenzhane with cunt and suddenly the word is not all that bad. PBO compliments AG Kamala Harris and you would have thought PBO had sent her a dildo with naked pics to her doorstep.

    Just this morning, on Facebook there are the usual posts from Occupy Wall Street and The Other 98% touting more petitions and outrage against the PBO.

    Yet this week, in FL , state republicans passed a bill preempting the local governments from enacting living wages and sick time, with no logical explanation for it. People could see almost a 40% drop in pay with no sick time benefits. Yet these so-called “activists” have not said a damn thing about it, but will like clockwork next week put up the latest statistics about poverty and income equality. Kinda like how Gov. Snyder defecated on the unions with the right to work law that all these “informed” folks happened to miss. As long as white folks, of any political party are fucking people over, the MoveOns, Occupy Wall St, and fauxgressive brigades ain’t got shit to say. They are actually giving out awards and teaming up with the Tea Party.

    There is nothing even sincerely political about any of these people. It’s a game for ad dollars, publicity and who can shame that Black man next. That is why so many of the fauxgressives slurped up every bit of Rand Paul’s bullshit filibuster…he is the mirror image of them.

    Like

  6. Ametia says:

    Former South African President Nelson Mandela was discharged from the hospital Saturday, the country’s presidential office said, “following a sustained and gradual improvement in his general condition.”

    Mandela “will now receive home-based high care,” the statement said.

    The 94-year-old former president was admitted to the hospital on March 27. He has received treatment for a recurring lung infection and pneumonia.

    Like

  7. Ametia says:

    MHP’s got Joy Reid and a panel of sistas on talking about SCANDA!!!

    Like

  8. rikyrah says:

    Deep in the Red of Texas, Republicans Fight the Blues
    By NEIL KING JR.
    AUSTIN, Texas—Soon after Texas Republicans notched another round of lopsided wins last November, the state GOP sent notice to its local chapters: Please stop holding party meetings in country clubs.

    Other advice followed. Please consider hosting Republican recruiting tables at naturalization ceremonies. Word spread among state GOP lawmakers to back off on bills targeting illegal immigrants in the legislative session.

    In no state is the Republican grip at once so firm, and under such challenge from Democrats, as it is in Texas. And nowhere is that grip of more consequence to the fortunes of the national GOP.

    Other advice followed. Please consider hosting Republican recruiting tables at naturalization ceremonies. Word spread among state GOP lawmakers to back off on bills targeting illegal immigrants in the legislative session.

    In no state is the Republican grip at once so firm, and under such challenge from Democrats, as it is in Texas. And nowhere is that grip of more consequence to the fortunes of the national GOP.

    No one questions the enormity of the stakes. If the country’s second-largest state turns blue—a possibility Democrats say is at most a decade away—Republicans could find their most viable path to the White House blocked.

    Some Republicans scoff at the thought of Texas ever tipping back to the Democrats. Gov. Perry, in a recent interview, dismissed the idea as “a pipe dream” more far-fetched than the University of Texas adopting the colors of archrival Texas A&M.

    “We are not despairing. Far from it,” said Steve Munisteri, the feisty chairman of the Texas GOP, who is girding for the fight ahead. “But nor are we taking anything for granted.” Among other things, Republicans say that many Hispanics are drawn to the party’s more-conservative social stands.

    Other party leaders are more cautious. “To call the last national election anything but a wake-up call would be remiss,” said Carolyn Hodges, president of the Texas Federation of Republican Women, which has 163 chapters and more than 11,000 members. “If we Republicans don’t find a way to remake and repackage ourselves, this state could go from being bright red to blue really fast.”

    As both parties dig in, neither side disputes the basic facts.

    Texas is one of just four states—California, New Mexico and Hawaii are the others—where non-Hispanic whites, at 45%, are in the minority. Hispanics, who went heavily Democratic in the 2012 national vote, now represent 38% of the Texas population. By 2016, nearly a million more Hispanics will be eligible to vote in Texas, more than quadruple the number of eligible new Anglo voters, according to several forecasts. Other new residents continue to pour in from an array of traditionally Democratic states, particularly California.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324883604578397021579876246.html

    Like

  9. rikyrah says:

    April 05, 2013

    Pondering the tactics

    About President Obama’s “dangerous,” “confusing,” “risky” strategy, Matthew Yglesias writes:

    There’s a lot that’s murky in American politics, but it’s incredibly clear that the reason we don’t have a grand bargain on the budget is that Republicans don’t want one….

    The risk here now is twofold. Inside the Beltway, Republicans can say “well, look, we disagree about taxes but why don’t we just do these entitlement reforms that even the president thinks we should do.” Meanwhile, outside the Beltway Republican candidates can run ads castigating Democrats for bankrupting the country so badly that they want to add Social Security cuts to the dastardly Medicare cuts they already implemented.

    As to the first point, the reason we don’t have a grand bargain is perhaps incredibly clear to bloggers at Slate, but the average voter doesn’t know, and worse, doesn’t much care, who, exactly, is responsible for precisely what. Most voters just want to cast their vote and then consider matters duly re-dumped into the powerful laps that be, which, according to voters’ recollection of junior high civics, will then “roll up their sleeves,” make nice, and fix stuff. If such governance fails to materialize–which it has like democratic clockwork since ancient Greece–then that immortal question is inevitably heard: Why oh why can’t they just get along?

    And that’s why Obama’s numbers have been slipping of late. Voters still don’t quite understand who’s on first.

    As to Yglesias’ second point–that single-toothed, Mortimer Snerdish Republicans might advocate passing one half of a two-part compromise proposal–certain bloggers at Slate have evidently missed all the incredibly amusing videotape from the last few months of Republicans arguing that Congress should do just that.

    Third point? That Republicans can now “run ads castigating Democrats for bankrupting the country” and cutting Medicare and now Social Security yada yada? OK, Mr. Yglesias, you got me. Obama’s budget opens the door to farcical tactics and squalid insincerities that *we never suspected the GOP capable of–but yes, they just might go that route. They just might.

    http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2013/04/pondering-the-tactics.html

    Like

  10. rikyrah says:

    The evolution of Ben Carson’s apology

    By Steve Benen
    Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:39 PM EDT

    Just to close the circle on an odd story I’ve been following, it’s been about a week since Ben Carson, quickly making the transition from physician to political personality, compared gay people to “NAMBLA [and] people who believe in bestiality.” And since then, it’s been remarkable to watch the evolution of his reaction to the ensuing controversy.

    Step One: The pseudo apology: Last Friday, Carson told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell he was sorry “if anybody was offended” by his anti-gay comments. No one seemed especially impressed by the quintessential non-apology apology.

    Step Two: Lashing out at critics: When the criticism continued, Carson appeared on a right-wing radio show to blame his detractors, insisting that white liberals are “the most racist people there are.” He added that his critics are outraged because he dared to “come off the plantation.”

    Step Three: Contrition: Dr. Paul Rothman, the dean of the medical faculty at Johns Hopkins and the CEO of Johns Hopkins Medicine, where Carson has been a celebrated colleague, condemned Carson’s “hurtful, offensive language” that was “inconsistent with the culture of our institution.” Immediately thereafter, Carson published an apology to “the Hopkins Community.”

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/04/05/17619856-the-evolution-of-ben-carsons-apology?lite

    Like

  11. rikyrah says:

    Boehner rejects Obama budget, sight unseen

    By Steve Benen
    Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:00 PM EDT

    President Obama will formally unveil his budget plan next week, just as Congress returns from its spring recess, and it will include a familiar offer: the White House is still ready to trade entitlement “reforms” for tax revenue from closed loopholes and deductions.

    And if you’re a progressive who strongly opposes changes to Social Security and Medicare, I have good news for you: House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) hasn’t seen Obama’s new budget, but he’s already rejecting it out of hand.

    House Speaker John Boehner immediately dismissed President Barack Obama’s package of significant new entitlement cuts tied to new tax revenues, calling them “no way to lead and move the country forward.” […]

    “The president got his tax hikes on the wealthy with no corresponding spending cuts,” Boehner said. “At some point we need to solve our spending problem….”

    And the Speaker got his $1.5 trillion in spending cut with no corresponding revenue in August 2011. I wonder why Boehner continues to struggle with the basics of the fiscal debate, as if he just weren’t paying attention to the details. Presumably, the nation’s most powerful Republican lawmaker would have an easier time keeping up on current events.

    In any case, I found it especially interesting that Boehner told reporters this morning, “If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there’s no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes,”

    That’s actually an amusing, albeit familiar, trick. Boehner has effectively told the president, “You need to put Medicare and Social Security cuts on the table.” So Obama is now responding, “Fine, I’ll accept Medicare and Social Security cuts if you accept revenue.” To which Boehner is now responding, “Now that we agree on Medicare and Social Security cuts, there’s no need for revenue.”

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/04/05/17619397-boehner-rejects-obama-budget-sight-unseen?lite

    Like

    • Ametia says:

      Of course Boehner and the GOP are stuck on fucking stupid. They’re beholden to big oil and the rich. PBO know these mofos aren’t going to give on tax increases.

      I’m not trying to hear the lefties screeching about how PBO’s selling them out. If they channeled all that fake outrage at the GOP’s obstruction and unwillingness to COMPROMISE, then they can talk to me.

      Like

  12. rikyrah says:

    from the comments at POU:

    Alma98

    The hate, jealousy and double standard for this first family from the left & the right is off the charts. It’s like we’re living in an alternate universe where they aren’t allowed to be human. They’re not allowed to express opinions or show love of any kind. They’re not allowed to be handsome, beautiful or take vacations or have money. They are attacked relentlessly day in and day out. I don’t want to hear anyone saying yeah but they did the same thing to the Clintons. Because there is no comparison, absolutely none. This shit is crazy!

    Like

  13. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone :)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s