Tuesday Open Thread | Frank Sinatra Week

Good Morning.

We continue with Frank Sinatra.

frank sinatra-7

1935–40: Start of career, work with Harry James and Tommy Dorsey

Sinatra got his first break in 1935 when his mother persuaded a local singing group, The Three Flashes, to let him join. With Sinatra, the group became known as the Hoboken Four,[5] and they sufficiently impressed Edward Bowes. After appearing on his show, Major Bowes Amateur Hour, they attracted 40,000 votes and won the first prize – a six-month contract to perform on stage and radio across the United States.

Sinatra left the Hoboken Four and returned home in late 1935. His mother secured him a job as a singing waiter and MC at the Rustic Cabin in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, for which he was paid $15 a week.[14]

On March 18, 1939, Sinatra made a demo recording of a song called “Our Love”, with the Frank Mane band. The record has “Frank Sinatra” signed on the front. The bandleader kept the original record in a safe for nearly 60 years.[8][page needed] In June, Harry James hired Sinatra on a one-year contract of $75 a week.[15] It was with the James band that Sinatra released his first commercial record “From the Bottom of My Heart” in July 1939[16]— US Brunswick No. 8443 and UK Columbia #DB2150.[17][page needed]

Fewer than 8,000 copies of “From the Bottom of My Heart” (Brunswick No. 8443) were sold, making the record a very rare find that is sought after by record collectors worldwide. Sinatra released ten commercial tracks with James through 1939, including “All or Nothing At All” which had weak sales on its initial release, but then sold millions of copies when re-released by Columbia at the height of Sinatra’s popularity a few years later.[18]

In November 1939, in a meeting at the Palmer House in Chicago, Sinatra was asked by bandleader Tommy Dorsey to join his band as a replacement for Jack Leonard (the vocalist, not to be confused the comedian Jack E. Leonard), who had recently left to launch a solo career. This meeting was a turning point in Sinatra’s career. By signing with Dorsey’s band, one of the hottest at the time, he greatly increased his visibility with the American public. Though Sinatra was still under contract with James, James recognized the opportunity Dorsey offered and graciously released Sinatra from his contract. Sinatra recognized his debt to James throughout his life and upon hearing of James’ death in 1983, stated: “he [James] is the one that made it all possible.”[19][page needed]

On January 26, 1940, Sinatra made his first public appearance with the Dorsey band at the Coronado Theater in Rockford, Illinois.[20][page needed] In his first year with Dorsey, Sinatra released more than forty songs, with “I’ll Never Smile Again” topping the charts for twelve weeks beginning in mid-July.[8]:91

Sinatra’s relationship with Tommy Dorsey was troubled, because of their contract, which awarded Dorsey one-third of Sinatra’s lifetime earnings in the entertainment industry. In January 1942, Sinatra recorded his first solo sessions without the Dorsey band (but with Dorsey’s arranger Axel Stordahl and with Dorsey’s approval). These sessions were released commercially on the Bluebird label. Sinatra left the Dorsey band in late 1942 in an incident that started rumors of Sinatra’s involvement with the Mafia. A story appeared in the Hearst newspapers that mobster Sam Giancana coerced Dorsey to let Sinatra out of his contract for a few thousand dollars, and was fictionalized in the book and movie The Godfather.[13] According to Nancy Sinatra’s biography, the Hearst rumors were started because of Frank’s Democratic politics. In fact, the contract was bought out by MCA founder Jules C. Stein for $75,000.[19]

frank sinatra-6

frank sinatra-5

This entry was posted in Music, Open Thread and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to Tuesday Open Thread | Frank Sinatra Week

  1. rikyrah says:

    Heller, Ayotte, Flake slammed for ‘deception’
    By Steve Benen

    Tue May 28, 2013 4:45 PM EDT

    We talked last week about Republican Sens. Dean Heller (Nev.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), and Jeff Flake (Ariz.), who have something important in common. They were each among the 45 senators who killed a bipartisan bill on expanded background checks, but these are the only three of those 45 who seem eager to pretend they didn’t kill the proposal.

    Over the weekend, the New York Times editorial board blasted their collective “deception.”

    This kind of dissembling by gun control opponents has been rampant for years, but rarely have the National Rifle Association’s most captive lawmakers been so nakedly deceptive as in the weeks since public rage grew over the gun vote. […]

    Rather than admit that they fearfully follow the dictates of the N.R.A., these senators are instead seeking to fool voters by supporting measures with fancy titles and hollow cores.

    The point here isn’t just to criticize poor policy judgment, though that certainly matters. Rather, the point is that these three — and only these three — feel compelled to mislead their constituents in a coordinated way, cynically hoping that public ignorance will allow them to get away with their vote. It’s about putting a smoke screen — emphasizing support for “strengthening” background checks through half-measures that won’t pass, instead of “expanding” background checks in real legislation — that confuses voters just enough to let these three senators off the hook.


  2. rikyrah says:

    Ohio GOP backing off bill to curb college vote
    By Laura Conaway

    Tue May 28, 2013 3:31 PM EDT

    Ohio Senate Republicans appear to have given the heave-ho to the plan to curb student voting. The measure, as passed in the regular budget this spring by the Ohio House, would have required colleges that vouch for students living on campus to give those students the lower in-state tuition, even if the students don’t qualify for that.

    The bill would have cost Ohio colleges and universities as much as $370 million a year. Along the way, Ohio Republicans figured out that their bill to discourage the college vote might have led to more college voting, as students figured out they could get much cheaper tuition for the price of exercising their constitutional rights.

    Just now, Ohio reporter Marc Kovac tweeted from the new version of the budget released by the Ohio Senate:

    Looks like college student tuition/voter registration language has been removed.

    And it’s true. If you dial up the comparison of the two budget versions — old House and new Senate — you’ll see that where the House had the part about tuition and voting, the Senate has “no provision.” It’s on numbered page 554 482, the seventh mention of “letter.” (P.S. Last week Ohio Republicans said they’re still interested in curbing the student vote, just not in the budget.


  3. rikyrah says:

    House GOP could still kill immigration reform

    By Greg Sargent, Published: May 28, 2013 at 11:50 am

    In a sign that immigration reform still faces steep odds in the House, Reuters reports that a significant number of House Republicans are still not convinced that an immigration bill would help GOP outreach to Latino voters. Reuters quotes one representative, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, capturing the mood of many of his colleagues this way: “There is no evidence to support this idea that Republicans will pick up a lot of votes if we give amnesty to 11 million folks.”

    Meanwhile, Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama sees “amnesty” as a slippery slope. “We can’t afford to give amnesty to every person who wants to illegally cross our borders,” he said. “We don’t have enough money in our piggy bank. Amnesty begets more amnesty.”

    In other words, now that the bipartisan Senate gang of eight’s immigration reform compromise has cleared the Judiciary Committee and made its way to the Senate floor, making it more likely that it will pass the Senate, there’s still the very real possibility that reform will die in the House of Representatives. There, the numbers are not in their favor. House Republicans have long voiced their opposition to a comprehensive bill.

    That the immigration bill has a long and difficult path to citizenship — thirteen years, with a sizable list of fees and requirements — doesn’t factor into this opposition. The mere fact that some unauthorized immigrants could receive citizenship at some point in the future is enough to inspire opposition. And among House Republicans, this opposition is fairly broad-based; as we saw with the fights over the debt ceiling, the fiscal cliff, and the sequester, Tea Party Republicans have a tight grip on the direction of the chamber.


  4. Ametia says:

    Peter Sagal, host of NPR’s “Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!” travels across the country to find out where the U.S. Constitution lives, how it works and how it doesn’t… how it unites us as a nation and how it has nearly torn us apart. The four-part series premieres Tuesday, May 7 at 9/8c.

    VIDEOS here: http://video.pbs.org/program/constitution-usa-peter-sagal/

  5. rikyrah says:

    The Morning Plum: Democrats prepare for nuclear war

    By Greg Sargent, Published: May 28, 2013 at 9:15 am

    I’m not sure folks appreciate just how epic a political battle we could be heading for this summer, when a number of current storylines could culminate in Dems opting for the nuclear option to revisit filibuster reform via a simple majority. In the most important story of the morning by far, the New York Times reports:

    President Obama will soon accelerate his efforts to put a lasting imprint on the country’s judiciary by simultaneously nominating three judges to an important federal court, a move that is certain to unleash fierce Republican opposition and could rekindle a broader partisan struggle over Senate rules.

    In trying to fill the three vacancies on the 11-member United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit at once, Mr. Obama will be adopting a more aggressive nomination strategy. He will effectively be daring Republicans to find specific ground to filibuster all the nominees.

    White House officials declined to say who Mr. Obama’s choices will be ahead of an announcement that could come this week, but leading contenders for the spots appear to include Cornelia T. L. Pillard, a law professor at the Georgetown University Law Center; David C. Frederick, who often represents consumers and investors at the Supreme Court; and Patricia Ann Millett, a veteran appeals lawyer in Washington. All three are experienced lawyers who would be unlikely to generate controversy individually.

    This is welcome news, because Obama has been far too lax in pushing judicial nominations. But the larger immediate context is important. Harry Reid is threatening to revisit rules reform by simple majority – i.e., the nuclear option — and the case he is making privately is that if Republicans continue at current levels of obstructionism, he is prepared to move in July to end the filibuster on judicial and executive branch nominations. A senior Senate Democratic aide told me that Obama has privately told Reid that he will support him if he decides to opt for the nuke option.


  6. Ametia says:

    MSNBC beating the Hillary Clinton drum*Tweetybird* Obama won because he was African America, something new….. Hopefully the day will come where Chris Matthews will be off the air and stick his two Bolonia lips between two slices of Wonder Bread.

  7. rikyrah says:

    One Last Chance
    By Charles P. Pierce
    at 5:00PM

    Frankly, it’s about damn time for this, and it’s long past time for the entire Democratic party, its fractious universe of progressive auxiliaries, and the president of the United States to get behind it and give it one mighty shove. It might also be the last chance they have to do anything about what’s going on out in the states.

    The brief amendment would stipulate that “every citizen of the United States, who is of legal voting age, shall have the fundamental right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides.” It would also give Congress “the power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.” After investigating the issue, Pocan said he and Ellison decided this type of amendment was the best way to combat measures to restrict voting access. “Essentially, what it would do is it would put the burden on any of these states that try to make laws that are more restrictive that they would have to prove that they’re not disenfranchising a voter. Rather than, currently, where a voter has to prove they’ve somehow been wronged by a state measure,” said Pocan.

    My money says that the Supreme Court is poised next month to gut the Voting Rights Act. The hair-curling contempt demonstrated by Antonin Scalia toward the franchise — both during the oral arguments about the VRA a few months ago, and in the Bush v. Gore decision — is the clearest indication of the attitude on the other side of this debate. What Citizens United did more than it did anything else was to unleash the habits of oligarchy within our elections to an extent unseen since the last Gilded Age. Unlimited corporate campaign finance is the hammer and a restriction of the franchise is the anvil. (The long Washington Post story this weekend about the newly insane state of North Carolina is a good indication of what results when the hammer hits the anvil.) If the Court goes he way I think it will, this amendment may be the only vehicle left in order to secure voting rights for which people quite literally died, and during the lifetimes of most of the people who are reading this blog. There is no issue more important than this one because there is no issue that does not depend vitally on this one.


  8. rikyrah says:

    COMMENTARY: Tom Joyner’s Opinion on Tavis Smiley’s White House Accusations
    May 27, 2013
    By Michael H. Cottman, BlackAmericaWeb.com

    Tavis Smiley, a persistent critic of President Barack Obama, now claims that the White House is quietly and systematically wrecking his initiatives by pressuring corporate sponsors to drop their support for Smiley’s projects.

    Smiley told the Associated Press that members of the Obama administration, whom he didn’t identify, have successfully convinced sponsors to stop funding Smiley’s ventures, including his anti-poverty initiatives.

    “This administration does not like to be criticized. And the irony of it is, there’s nothing I have tried to hold the president accountable on that my white progressive colleagues have not,” Smiley told the AP. “They’re labeled courageous critics, but if I say it, I’m an ‘Obama critic.’ There’s race at play in the very question.”

    Smiley, who is celebrating his 10th year on the air with PBS television, has also been traveling across the country on his so-called anti-poverty tour where he often criticizes Obama for not talking enough about poverty in America.

    “I don’t have an anti-Barack agenda,” Smiley said, “but this is what I do: My job is to raise questions of accountability.”

    But Tom Joyner, host of “The Tom Joyner Morning Show,” said Tuesday that he doesn’t believe the Obama administration is strong-arming Smiley’s sponsors, adding that Smiley’s ratings are low and advertisers are jumping ship.

    “Tavis, here’s the problem: Your sponsors are pulling out because you don’t have numbers,” Joyner told his listeners on Tuesday’s show. “That’s your problem. You don’t have a platform. You’re losing affiliates; you’re losing sponsors; not because someone is plotting against you.”

    The White House had no comment about Smiley’s allegations, but Smiley’s claims seem especially shaky since he refuses to name the Obama administration officials who he claims are pressuring his sponsors.


  9. Ametia says:


    LOL thank goodness Christie won an actual bear. Michelle certainly wouldn’t want PBO to wrap Christie up and bring him back to the White House as a prize he’d won.


  10. Ametia says:


    Tea Party Labels John McCain An ‘Illegal Immigrant’
    By Esther Yu-Hsi Lee on May 28, 2013 at 1:39 pm

    On Tuesday, the Tea Party website ‘Tea Party Nation’ put out an article that labeled Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) an “illegal immigrant” because he had sneaked into Syria to visit rebels fighting against the Bashar al-Assad regime. Although the White House was aware of McCain’s Syrian visit, the article indicated that his visit was virtually the same as undocumented immigration. It also noted that McCain’s humanitarian support for rebels could be attributed to his lack of intelligence, and Democratic turnout for his unsurprising win in the Arizona Senate race.

    The characterization of McCain is just one incident in a long series of efforts by the group to unjustifiably incite hatred against undocumented immigrants. While the Tea Party is ostensibly meant to represent true American virtues, it’s better known for its outlandish values that border on racism, particularly when it comes to immigration. Tea Partiers have deemed pejorative phrase “illegal immigrant” and “illegal alien” a “fair” phrase, even when it is not applicable in many instances. For example, in the latest gubernatorial race in Virginia, Terry McAuliffe was portrayed as an “undocumented Virginian” even though he had lived twenty years in the sta


  11. rikyrah says:


    Tyler Perry’s

    The Haves and Have Nots begins tonight on OWN- 9pm EST


    • Ametia says:

      LOL I’m checking it out. Looks like a cross between DYNASTY and DALLAS

      It could be titled; BLACK-NASTY- OR BLALLAS! LOL

  12. Papa John’s Pizza Employees (Sanford, FL) Racial Slurs Caught On Voicemail.

    • I won’t dare eat Papa John’s. If employees would call up a customer and hurl racial slurs who’s to say what they won’t do to a person’s food?

      • Ametia says:

        It’s the people Papa Johns hires. They’d better check themselves, before they wreck themselves. Too much foolishness out there for me. I don’t vibe well with that kind of fuckery.

        Hubby & I stay as far away as we can from eating out as much as possible. We grow our own veggies and have a few fruit trees out back.

  13. rikyrah says:

    See….if taxpayer monies weren’t being used to fund these quacks, I would only shake my head at the parents stupid enough to send their children to these lunatics. But, because taxpayer monies are being used by the right-wing to fund this bullshyt, it must be brought to light.


    Hillsboro High sex talk from group is questioned

    Teens don’t need opinions about sexual health issues, a presenter told Hillsboro High freshmen and sophomores last week.

    They need facts.

    Having sex with eight partners would be the equivalent of drinking a whole classroom’s spit, so the presentation goes. There’s a new sexually transmitted disease out there that will become the new AIDS. All medical textbooks say life begins at conception.

    For an hour, Joi Wasill, the founder of nonprofit Decisions, Choices and Options, and Sumner County School Board member Beth Cox provided a captive audience their take on STDs, abortion and adoption. It wasn’t completely accurate, a Vanderbilt University doctor said.

    But neither Tennessee state law nor the class curriculum prohibits what was said, and the nonprofit — with its strong Christian, Republican and pro-life ties — is on a list of approved presenters in Metro Nashville’s public schools.

    The content of Wasill’s presentation came to light after a Hillsboro student recorded it earlier this month. In an interview Thursday, Wasill insisted her beliefs are irrelevant in the classroom setting. “I’m an educator. Just as with any educator, my personal opinions and personal faith do not come out in my presentation,” she said.

    On the recording, Cox takes the first half. One out of four people who start having sex at the students’ age will get an STD, she says.

    “Ladies, that’s especially important for you, because many of those STDs will leave you infertile,” she says. “You can no longer have children later on in life.”

    Condoms break, she said. Birth control pills aren’t 100 percent effective — she has a friend who became pregnant three times while taking them.

    If a girl becomes a single mom to a boy, she says: “Who’s going to do all those things that men like to do with men? Hunting, fishing, playing ball, all those things that teach them how to be a man and setting those boundaries?”

    Pregnant girls could go to the Hope Center, she says, and she’s got cards she can give them. A section of the Nashville Hope Clinic for Women’s website said it is faith-based and was opened “to reach both the abortion minded and pro-life young woman prior to going to an abortion clinic and sooner than she would take to go to an adoption agency.”

    Then Wasill takes over, saying “fetus” means the same thing as “baby” while holding a model of one. She shows ultrasound video and pictures, saying one is of her friend’s now 5-year-old child. She paints a grim picture of the various types of abortion: dismembered fetuses, punctured uterine walls, bleeding for 8-9 weeks, death.

    As for adoption — never discourage it, she tells the class. Don’t even use the term “give up” the baby. If a girl says she’s pregnant, send her to the nurse, and she should start taking prenatal vitamins. The class ends after a “Teen Mom” clip of Catelynn Lowell and Tyler Baltierra — who famously chose open adoption after Catelynn’s teen pregnancy.

    Every bit of the presentation is based on research, Wasill said later. And if students think it portrays one option over another, she can’t help it.

    “Again, we’re getting the medical, factual information that comes straight from the health textbook and other sources,” Wasill said.


  14. CarolMaeWY says:

    Hello everyone. I have a question for those following the Trayvon Martin trial. Do we know the results of Trayvons drug test? I have been confused by the reporting. I understand no drug test was taken of Zimmerman, is that right? Thank you in advance for your help. Is there going to be a local station covering the trial? I don’t want to listen to commentary, just the facts.

    • Hi CarolMae

      Autopsy results say Trayvon had THC in his system. THC is an ingredient found in marijuana. Toxicology tests found a trace of the drug in Trayvon’s blood. It was 1.5 nanograms per milliliter. The amount is so small it amounts to second hand smoke.
      Dr. Michael Policastro, a toxicologist, cautioned against reading too much into the blood THC levels, adding that one cannot make a direct correlation between those findings and a level of intoxication.

      He also noted levels of THC, which can linger in a person’s system for days, can spike after death in certain areas of the body because of redistribution.


      • Ametia says:

        So what if Trayvon had THC in his system. He didn’t stalk and murder anyone. He was minding his own business, right up until he was stalked, begged, hollered, and cried for mercy, and shot and killed like an animal by Zimmerman. We don’t have this twisted. This ain’t got jack to do with Mary Jane.

      • Ametia says:

        THANK YOU! It’s a distraction, to take the focus off Zimmerman, the REAL CRIMINAL & MURDERER. THE END!

      • CarolMaeWY says:

        Thank you SouthernGirl. That’s what I thought, but I don’t trust memory. Have not heard of anyone who is high on weed to start fights anyway. I will be glad when the trial starts and we hear evidence. I do not trust reporters or commentators making a buck. Trayvons parents have been extremely patient.

  15. rikyrah says:

    Burger King Employee Foils Robbery by Stealing Thieves’ Getaway Car
    By ABC News
    May 27, 2013 11:50am

    A fast food employee is being lauded by police for his fast thinking after foiling a robbery at a Burger King in Stockton, Calif.

    As two hamburlgars stormed the restaurant brandishing guns and demanding cash, an employee snuck out a back door, according to KOVR-TV in Sacramento.

    The employee found the thieves’ idling getaway vehicle in the parking lot, hopped in and drove off, stashing the car around the block.

    “I haven’t heard of any employee actually leaving a business, getting inside the suspect vehicle and trying to hide it,” Stockton officer Joe Silva told reporters.

    When the thieves realized their car had been taken, then took off on foot and hid in a nearby field.

    Police soon found the two suspects, Gabriel Gonzalez and Jeremy Lovitt, and arrested them. They’ve been charged with armed robbery.


  16. rikyrah says:

    Obamacare is More Popular Than CNN Thinks

    —By Kevin Drum
    | Tue May. 28, 2013 9:00 AM PDT

    From CNN:

    A majority of Americans still oppose the nation’s new health care measure, three years after it became law, according to a new survey.

    According to the poll, 43% of the public says it supports the health care law….Fifty-four percent of those questioned say they oppose the law, also relatively unchanged since 2010. The survey indicates that 35% oppose the health care law because it’s too liberal, with 16% saying they oppose the measure because it isn’t liberal enough.

    Right. Let me rephrase this:

    According to a recent poll, 59 percent of Americans support Obamacare, while 35 percent oppose it. Among supporters, 43 percent support the law as is, while 16 percent think it doesn’t go far enough.

    The way CNN words the question in this poll, they almost have no choice but to say that 54 percent of the public opposes Obamacare. But that’s wildly misleading. If you oppose Obamacare solely because you think it should be more generous, then you’re not part of the group that’s commonly thought of as the opposition: tea partiers, conservatives, Republicans, and so forth. These are the folks who want to repeal Obamacare completely and leave it a smoking husk, and they’re the ones most of us think of as the “opposition.” If your main problem with Obamacare is that it’s not the NHS, you aren’t part of that group.

    This has been a problem with Obamacare polls since the beginning. It’s also been a problem with CNN polls since the beginning. Why do they refuse to fix it and describe things more accurately?


  17. rikyrah says:

    Tony Katz On NRA’s Radio Show: Hurricane Katrina Victims Should Not Have Expected To Be Rescued

    Katz On Katrina Victims: “If You Don’t Know How To Get To Dry Land Or How To Move Before The Storm Comes, This Is What You Get”


  18. Hey Chics!

    Haley celebrated her birthday at a theme park in Dallas and Jay got his face painted like Spider Man. He loves Spider Man. Well, after a they got back to the hotel Jay was soo tired and sleepy. His mom washed his face and he then suddenly realized the Spider Man face paint was gone. He started crying and asked his mom…”why did you do that”? bwa ha ha ha ha. Jay wanted to keep a dirty face.

  19. Rikyrah, I swear you and Ametia find the best photos! Love them!

  20. Ametia says:

    Thisarticle is why the Negroes railed against PBO’s Morehouse commencement address:

    Can Obama’s policies only be passed under a white president?
    by Dr. Jason Johnson | May 28, 2013 at 10:10 AM


    Obama, always the racial optimist, will tell his supporters to not give up hope just yet, that he can still close Guantanamo Bay, restore civil liberties and fine tune Obamacare — but I wouldn’t hold my breath. None of the wheels of power available to previous presidents seem to turn as easily for Obama and he cannot magically change bigots and conservatives into good-faith negotiators while America suffers.

    So in the end, Hillary was right; she has as good a chance as anybody in 2016 to be the LBJ to Obama’s Martin Luther King (or Kennedy). She can become president and fulfill the unrealized dreams of Obama whose skin color, but not ideals, were way ahead of their time. The changes he promised in 2008 will come, it just won’t be Obama behind them, it’ll be a white person.

    Snip http://thegrio.com/2013/05/28/can-obamas-policies-only-be-passed-under-a-white-president/

  21. Ametia says:

    PBO speaks press in Jersey today at 1:30 pm EDT today



  22. Ametia says:

    Extensive List of Politicians Paid Off by Monsanto

    By Anthony Gucciardi

    Democrat, Republican, it doesn’t matter. As long as you can help Monsanto slide its icy tentacles into the food chain, then there’s some financial tip available to you. Thankfully, many such ties can be exposed through some data digging, and thanks to diligent readers who send comprehensive news tips and other researchers out there, we now have an extensive list of politicians getting paid cold hard cash from GMO juggernaut Monsanto.

    Keep in mind these are the figures we know, which means that behind the scenes expect these numbers to multiply extensively. But what is most amazing is that these politicians just don’t care that you know they’re receiving thousands of dollars from Monsanto! They sweep it under the carpet, but they are openly taking money from this corporation that has been caught running ‘slave-like’ rings and disregarding public health. We’re talking about a corporation that primarily aided in the creation of Agent Orange — the Vietnam-era chemical weapon that killed over 400,000 people and led to 500,000 plus birth defects.


    Politicians Paid By Monsanto

    House of Representatives:

    Total paid by Monsanto to Democrats: $72,000
    Total paid by Monsanto to Republicans: $190,500

    Barrow, John (D-GA) $2,500

    Bishop, Sanford (D-GA) $5,000

    Boehner, John (R-OH) $10,000

    Braley, Bruce (D-IA) $5,000

    Camp, Dave (R-MI) $5,000

    Cantor, Eric (R-VA) $10,000

    Clay, William L Jr (D-MO)$10,000

    Cleaver, Emanuel (D-MO) $5,000

    Keep reading the list here: http://www.nationofchange.org/print/38261

  23. Ametia says:

    Justice Sotomayor Takes Swing At Famed Baseball Case
    by Nina Totenberg

    May 23, 2013 5:23 PM

    Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s wicked, waggish sense of humor — and knowledge of baseball — were on full display Wednesday, when she presided over a re-enactment of Flood v. Kuhn, the 1972 case that unsuccessfully challenged baseball’s antitrust exemption.

    The event, put on by the Supreme Court Historical Society, took place in the court chamber, and as Sotomayor took her place at the center of the bench, normally the chief justice’s chair, she remarked puckishly, “This is the first time I’ve sat here. It feels pretty good.”

    For those who don’t remember, the case was brought by St. Louis Cardinals great Curt Flood, who challenged baseball’s reserve clause — the provision that allowed teams to virtually own players, set salaries and conduct trades, with the players for all practical purposes never able to negotiate freely with other teams. That meant that at the time Flood brought his challenge in 1970, he was earning what was then considered a top salary of $90,000. This, for a player who had signed with the Cards at age 18, with no agent or lawyer, and who in six of the next 12 seasons batted .300 and won seven Gold Glove awards. So, when he was traded to the Philadelphia Phillies, a definitely lesser team at the time, he refused to go, and could not play for any team.


  24. Ametia says:

    Circling the media wagons

    Walter Pincus

    FINE PRINT | When will journalists take responsibility for what they do without circling the wagons and shouting that the First Amendment is under attack? In Rosen case, and too many others, media cry foul too quickly.


  25. Ametia says:


    • CarolMaeWY says:

      A shit stirrer with the shit coming out out of mouth. Never liked him or his morals. He’s a masochist and worse.

    • CarolMaeWY says:

      I’m reminded of the Iraq war and how W only listened to one source. I forget his name, but he was only out for himself and not Iraq. He was not reliable and all. It is very sad the innocent Syrians and the refugee countries are suffering, but I do not want another war in ME.

  26. rikyrah says:

    Does anyone watch Revolution?

    • Ametia says:

      No; not yet. Is this a show I’d be interested in viewing?

    • CarolMaeWY says:

      No, I haven’t heard of it. What’s it about? Is it network or cable?

      • rikyrah says:

        Revolution is a tv show on NBC based upon the premise of what would happen if electricity went out and couldn’t be turned back on.

        The show opens right before the blackout.

        Then, it goes to 15 years down the road.

        The United States is no more. It’s been divided up into different regional parts.

        We focus mostly on the Monroe Republic, which is the NorthEast United States.

        There is a husband/wife team of scientists who were on the project that turned out the lights.

        When we come 15 years into the future – the husband is alone, with his son and daughter. They are in a farm settlement when men from the ‘Monroe Militia’ come to find the scientist. He is killed and his son his kidnapped. The father dies, but not before giving a pendant to a scientist friend of his – a former megamillionaire from Google.

        The scientist, and the dead man’s daughter were given instructions by the dying father- go find his brother, Miles.

        Miles is an outlaw…Miles is a former General of the Monroe Republic – he and Monroe founded the Monroe Republic through brutal military power, but somewhere along the way, he and Monroe fell out …he tried to kill him..failed…and has been on the run ever since.

        The daughter finds her uncle and convinces him to help her find her brother. She thinks that he’s the only family she has left….but what she doesn’t know is that her mother – who she thinks is dead – is alive. She’s been held prisoner by Monroe for about 10 years…because he thinks she knows how to turn the power back on.

        She does…but that’s way later in the season.

        I would suggest to anyone to review the episodes at NBC.com. I’m surprised by how much I like the show.

  27. rikyrah says:

    Obama Plans 3 Nominations for Key Court
    Published: May 27, 2013

    President Obama will soon accelerate his efforts to put a lasting imprint on the country’s judiciary by simultaneously nominating three judges to an important federal court, a move that is certain to unleash fierce Republican opposition and could rekindle a broader partisan struggle over Senate rules.

    In trying to fill the three vacancies on the 11-member United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit at once, Mr. Obama will be adopting a more aggressive nomination strategy. He will effectively be daring Republicans to find specific ground to filibuster all the nominees.

    White House officials declined to say who Mr. Obama’s choices will be ahead of an announcement that could come this week, but leading contenders for the spots appear to include Cornelia T. L. Pillard, a law professor at the Georgetown University Law Center; David C. Frederick, who often represents consumers and investors at the Supreme Court; and Patricia Ann Millett, a veteran appeals lawyer in Washington. All three are experienced lawyers who would be unlikely to generate controversy individually.

    Several legal advocates who have been in communication with the West Wing said officials had repeatedly discussed those names in recent months.

    Often called the second most important court in the country, the Washington court has overturned major parts of the president’s agenda in the last four years, on regulations covering Wall Street, the environment, tobacco, labor unions and workers’ rights.


  28. rikyrah says:

    Al Franken Would Crush Michele Bachmann 55%-38% In Senate Race

    By: Jason Easley
    May. 24th, 2013

    Things would go very badly for Rep. Michele Bachmann if she dared to challenge Al Franken for his Senate seat. The latest PPP poll found that Franken would defeat Bachmann 55%-38%.

    Al Franken is turning out to be a very popular senator. Sen. Franken has an overall approval rating of 51%. Franken’s approval is 87% with those who are very liberal, 83% with somewhat liberals, 66% with moderates, 15% with somewhat conservatives, and 5% with very conservatives. Franken’s approval rating with Minnesota’s Obama voters is 88%. Sen. Franken leads every single one of his potential Republican challengers by at least 15 points. His biggest lead (18 points) comes against Rep. Michele Bachmann.

    Bachmann’s unpopularity statewide nearly equals Franken’s popularity. Bachmann’s statewide unfavorable rating is a huge 60%. Only 34% of the those polled expressed a favorable opinion of her. Bachmann had a 90% disapproval rating with Obama voters, and only a 65% favorable rating with Romney voters. Bachmann has a 15% approval rating with very liberals, a 10% approval rating with somewhat liberals, a 15% approval rating with moderates, a 63% approval rating with somewhat conservatives, and a 76% approval rating with very conservative respondents.


  29. rikyrah says:

    Senate Republicans Attempt to Sink the Economy by Blocking Their Own Appointees

    By: Rmuse
    May. 25th, 2013

    Any business understands that sound economic policy is crucial to success, and few business owners would put a child in charge of a company’s finances. America is different in that when a Republican is in the White House and the GOP holds majorities in both houses of Congress, their childish economic policy generally leaves a fiscal mess Democrats have to clean up when they are in power. Republicans have complained that the Senate has not passed a budget for four years, and now that they finally acted, several senate teabaggers are blocking progress on the federal budget and creating a minor rebellion in the Senate between old-guard Republicans and idiots representing the tea party.

    In normal times, the Senate appoints members to serve on a conference committee to negotiate with the House to work out the differences between the two budgets each side has passed, but teabaggers Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee are blocking appointees to a conference committee and efforts to craft a federal budget unless the Senate meets demand that prospective conference members refuse to engage in any negotiations that might raise the federal debt limit. Senators John McCain and Susan Collins, both Republicans, lambasted the teabaggers this past week for their unprecedented demands with McCain accusing the teabaggers of not understanding “how business has been done” in Congress, and asserted that most GOP senators agree it is time to stop stalling and go to conference. McCain’s warmonger buddy, Senator Lindsey Graham, backed up the Arizona senator’s claim and said, “I think it’s a good idea to get a commitment not to raise the debt limit, but I trust the normal course of business — that we’re not going to use reconciliation to raise the debt limit, we can have a motion to instruct our conferees not to raise the debt limit so I’m fine with going to conference.”

    Inter-party bickering aside, it is Graham, and most Republicans’ comment that a commitment to “not raising the debt limit” informs Republicans are Hell bent on economic terrorism as well as shunning their duty to support the U.S. Constitution. Graham is not a freshman teabagger, and he knows full well that demanding that America defaults on its debts is a violation of Article 4 of the 14th Amendment that clearly says, “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, shall not be questioned.” When Bush and Republicans were piling up debt for two unfunded wars, tax cuts for the rich, and an unfunded Medicare prescription plan to enrich the pharmaceutical industry, Republicans never questioned the debt and raised the limit 19 times to cover their wild spending. Those debts are still adding to the national deficit and did not stop when Barack Obama was sworn in as President because except for the Bush tax cuts for the rich that ended in the waning days of 2012, the wars’ costs and prescription plan are still adding to the deficit.

    The idea of not raising the debt limit implies that Republicans want America to default on its debt and go bankrupt, and that is precisely what Boehner and Republicans proposed nearly three weeks ago with an insane debt prioritization bill. The bill was sold as a means of avoiding an American default, but by prioritizing paying certain debt obligations held by the public as well as Social Security benefits and defaulting on the rest is the definition of a bankruptcy sans a bankruptcy court judge. President Obama railed on the Republican plan and said, “No one should threaten the default of the United States for any reason, no one should use the default of the United States as a budget path or negotiating tool, American families do not get to choose which bills to pass and which ones not to pay, and the United States Congress cannot either without putting the Nation into default for the first time in its history.” The President also reminded Republicans that “This bill would threaten the full faith and credit of the United States and do damage to the economy. This legislation is unwise, unworkable and unacceptably risky.” It is also childish and economic treason, and yet Republicans are “committed to not raising the debt limit.”


  30. rikyrah says:

    Bill Maher Slams Republicans For Their Racist Obama Birth Certificate Hypocrisy

    By: Jason Easley
    May. 25th, 2013
    Bill Maher took to his blog to slam Republicans for their racist hypocrisy concerning Ted Cruz and President Obama’s birth certificates.

    Bill Maher wrote on his blog that,

    The Constitution says, “No Person except a natural born Citizen… shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Cruz says he’s eligible to run because his mom was a U.S. citizen, and therefore he’s a U.S. citizen who didn’t need to be naturalized. Great, but then what the hell was that whole Obama “birther” thing about?

    Over half of Republican primary voters thought President Obama was illegitimate because they claimed he wasn’t born here. They didn’t give a damn that his mother was. If they don’t have a problem with Cruz running, it’s just an admission that they only care when it involves one of the black countries.

    Can you imagine if it’d turned out President Obama wasn’t born in America and had lived the first four years of his life in Kenya? They’d be drawing up the articles of impeachment. Donald Trump would take a victory lap. Then again, he took a victory lap when it turned out he was wrong, which everyone already knew, so maybe he’s just a douche.

    But here’s the thing: Ted Cruz is perfectly American enough to be president. His mom was an American citizen. His father became an American citizen. And every memory Ted probably has is from the years he spent in America. Except for when he was at Harvard, which he considers the Soviet Union.


  31. rikyrah says:

    Republicans Move Closer to Impeachment With Claim that Obama Is Losing Moral Authority

    By: Jason Easley\
    May. 26th, 2013

    Rand Paul’s claim that Obama is losing the moral authority to lead is similar to what Republicans said about Bill Clinton in 1998, and another sign that Republicans are eyeing up impeachment.


    On ABC’s This Week, Sen. Paul said, “I think the constellation of these three scandals ongoing really takes away from the president’s moral authority to lead the nation. Nobody questions his legal authority, but I really think he is losing the moral authority to lead the nation, and he really needs to put a stop to this. I don’t care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat. Nobody likes to see the opposite party punishing you for your political beliefs.”

    When asked if he saw any evidence that a crime was committed so far, Paul gave the standard conspiracy theory answer of, “I don’t think we know so far.” After talking about Lois Lerner, Paul repeated his moral authority talking point, “I think there needs to be a speedy resolution to this, and I think the president is in danger of losing his moral authority to lead the nation if we don’t get to a resolution.”

    If this whole losing moral authority argument sounds familiar, it should. In 1998, then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich used the moral authority argument against President Clinton. According to a 1998 Washington Post article, “Gingrich also tied the rise in drug use and teen smoking to the Clinton/Gore administration, which he said has “less moral authority” than any other in American history.”

    Despite the fact that Obama’s increasing job approval ratings defy Rand Paul’s claim that the president is losing moral authority, Republicans are incrementally trying to make the case for Obama impeachment. Republicans are interested in the IRS scandal for two reasons. They think it will motivate their base to turn out in 2014, and they believe they can use it to impeach Obama. It doesn’t appear to have entered into the Republican mind that 61% of Americans think Obama is telling the truth about the IRS scandal, and the president’s job approval rating is going up.

    From the moment that Republicans took back control of the House, they have been endlessly investigating a series of half baked allegations and conspiracy theories for the purpose of trying to find something on President Obama. Republicans have been stacking conspiracies on top of one another since the IRS broke. Last Sunday, Paul Ryan claimed the Obama administration was involved in the IRS scandal. RNC chair Reince Priebus tried to claim that Lois Lerner taking the fifth was evidence of Obama criminal activity, and today Rand Paul is claiming that President Obama is losing the moral authority to lead the country.

    It all adds up to Republicans working their way towards trumping up a charge in order to attempt to impeach President Obama. I not sure that congressional Republicans will have the guts to follow through and try to impeach the president, but it is clear that those on the far right are ready to wreck the Republican Party by pursuing Obama impeachment.


  32. rikyrah says:

    Arizona’s Brewer plays hardball on Medicaid expansion
    By Steve Benen
    Tue May 28, 2013 9:05 AM EDT

    When it comes to governors embracing Affordable Care Act implementation and expanding Medicaid to help low-income families, we tend to think of progressive blue-state governors. There are several Republicans who’ve followed suit, but they’ve done so with great reluctance.

    But in an unexpected twist, it seems no governor is more enthusiastic about Medicaid expansion than Arizona’s Jan Brewer.

    Gov. Jan Brewer sent five bills to the scrap heap Thursday in a pointed gesture intended to prod lawmakers into a deal on the budget and her plan to expand Medicaid.

    The five vetoes, follow-through on Brewer’s promise to block legislation until her top priorities move forward, capped a tense day that saw some lawmakers receive threats over their support for the plan to provide health care for more of the state’s poor.
    In letters explaining her actions, Brewer revealed a growing impatience with the Legislature, which she noted has been in session for 130 days and has only five weeks until the constitutional deadline for a fiscal 2014 budget.

    It was surprising enough when Brewer endorsed “Obamacare” expansion in January. Indeed, it caught much of the political world off-guard — the Arizona Republican has earned a reputation for being a very conservative opponent of President Obama and the White House’s agenda. But on Medicaid, Brewer apparently did the math and concluded she’d be a fool to reject the Obama administration’s offer.

    State House Republicans, at least so far, don’t see it that way and have been willing to ignore her demands. Brewer, in turn, is playing hardball, telling the state legislature — where there are Republican majorities in both chambers — that she’ll veto literally every bill that passes until lawmakers get Medicaid expansion done.

    GOP lawmakers apparently thought she was bluffing, and approved unrelated measures. As promised, Brewer vetoed the bills and reiterated her threat. The state Senate is already on board with the governor’s position, but the state House remains opposed.

    And so arguably the biggest “Obamacare” implementation fight in the nation is underway in Arizona, where a conservative Republican governor is fighting her own allies. It’s a dynamic would have been hard to predict six months ago.


  33. rikyrah says:

    Putting the ‘train wreck’ on hold
    By Steve Benen
    Fri May 24, 2013 4:55 PM EDT.

    The Affordable Care Act, like every landmark piece of legislation in modern times, has faced its share of trials. Getting it through Congress was nearly impossible, and the law was very nearly killed by the Republican appointees on the U.S. Supreme Court.

    But with the law now secure and President Obama re-elected, there’s one more major challenge for “Obamacare” to overcome: the implementation hurdle. As we discussed several weeks ago, this is at least as big a hurdle as the others, and more than a few observers have raised the prospect of a “train wreck.” Even those who generally defend the law are worried.

    They are, however, a little less worried today. As Matt Yglesias explained, implementation of the law is “fundamentally” going quite well.

    The latest evidence comes to us today from California, America’s largest state and one of the states that’s tried the hardest to actually implement Obamacare. As Sarah Kliff explains, their exchanges are getting set up, and it looks like premiums for “silver” and “bronze” plans are both going to be lower than was previously expected. Far from a “train wreck,” in other words, the biggest single set of clients for the program is getting something like a nice, smooth high-speed train ride.

    There was also good news from Oregon recently, where insurers that had initially come in with high premium bids are now asking to resubmit with cheaper offerings in the face of competition. And the Affordable Care Act’s goal of slowing the growth in aggregate health expenditures is also coming true.

    Yep, at least for now, everything anti-ACA Republicans predicted — on premiums, on competition, on exchanges, on escalating costs — is proving to be the opposite of reality.


  34. rikyrah says:

    Wanker of the Day: Steve Rose

    by BooMan
    Mon May 27th, 2013 at 08:37:39 PM EST

    Let’s take a look at this Steve Rose piece in the Kansas City Star. Here’s how he begins:

    Barack Obama just had his worst week in a deeply flawed presidency.
    It’s not as bad as Jimmy Carter’s presidency, but it’s still one that can make even the most right-wing conservative long for Democrat Bill Clinton.

    Okay, so we know where this guy stands. Obama is better than Jimmy Carter but way worse than Bill Clinton. As long as we’re bringing Carter into this, here’s what Time was writing about him on March 24, 1980.

    As Jimmy Carter stepped before the television cameras in the East Room of the White House last Friday, his task was not just to proclaim another new anti-inflation program but to calm a national alarm that had begun to border on panic. Inflation and interest rates, both topping 18%, are so far beyond anything that Americans have experienced in peacetime—and so far beyond anything that U.S. financial markets are set up to handle—as to inspire a contagion of fear.

    The current 15-year fixed mortgage rate is 2.97%. The current inflation rate is 1.1%. I don’t even know why Jimmy Carter is part of this conversation.

    So, why is Obama such a lousy president? More Steve Rose:

    What Barack Obama has lacked from the beginning is humility, and what he has displayed consistently is arrogance.

    Oh, that, again.


  35. rikyrah says:

    Obama faces pushback on national security shift
    By Steve Benen
    Tue May 28, 2013 8:00 AM EDT

    It’s been nearly a week since President Obama announced his vision for ending the nation’s post-9/11 war footing and rejecting the notion of perpetual war, and while the pushback from the right was immediate, Republican opposition to the shift appears to be hardening.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for example, complained a change in posture would show a “lack of resolve” and signal “retreat.” Neither complaint make much sense for those who actually heard or read the president’s remarks, but as is too often the case, the politics is trumping the substance.

    Similarly, Fox’s Chris Wallace complained that the so-called “war on terror” shouldn’t end too quickly since “the Cold War lasted for 40 years.” This, too, is hard to take seriously — in the Cold War, the U.S. and its allies were dealing with a nuclear-armed global superpower, not a tactic.

    But of particular interest were Republican complaints about the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, which President Obama, like George W. Bush, John McCain, Colin Powell, and David Petraeus, wants to close. The GOP line is woefully incoherent.

    Rep. Peter King, one of the loudest terrorism hawks in Congress, said Sunday he was “offended” by the President Barack Obama’s “moralizing” on Guantanamo Bay.

    “I’m offended by the moralizing,” King (R-N.Y.) said on ABC’s “This Week.” “The fact is, whether you agree or disagree with Guantanamo, many experts believe that it did work. It was something that had to be done at the time. The president had five years to end this if he really wanted to. He could’ve moved most of those prisoners out of the country.”


  36. rikyrah says:

    Democrat Levels Fox News By Explaining Why Karl Rove Should Be Investigated By IRS

    By: Jason Easley
    May. 26th, 2013

    Fox News had a gotcha moment go wrong, when Sen. Dick Durbin explained why Karl Rove deserves to be investigated by the IRS.

    Transcript via Fox News Sunday:

    WALLACE: Senator Durbin, I want to pick up on this culture. Starting in 2010, a number of Democratic senators — Democrat senators — sent letters to the IRS asking them to investigate various groups that they said were seeking tax-exempt status, but were improperly involved in politics. Now, in October 2010, you sent a letter to the IRS in which you talked about going after groups.

    But you only mentioned one specifically by name and I want to put this up from the October 2010 letter that you wrote to the IRS, “One organization whose activities appear to be inconsistent with the tax status is Crossroads GPS.” That, of course, a group co-founded by Karl Rove.

    Question, Senator — why single out Crossroads when you did not mention one single liberal group, and there were a bunch that were applying for that exempt-status exactly that point, with the name “progress” in their names?

    DURBIN: I can just tell you flat out why I did it, because that Crossroads organization was boasting about the money they were raising as a 501(c)(4).

    Let’s get back to the basics. Citizens United really unleashed hundreds, if not thousands, of organizations seeking tax-exempt statuses to play in political campaigns. The law we wrote as Congress said that they had to exclusively be engaged in social welfare and not politics and campaigning.

    And so, here is the IRS trying to decide whether or not these organizations really comply with the law. Crossroads was exhibit A. They were boastful about how much the money they were going to raise and beat Democrats.

    WALLACE: Senator Durbin, just briefly, why not, because we’re now in the mess that we are in because of political targeting, why not send a letter that says, go after any group of any political persuasion? Why not refrain from mentioning a conservative group and never mentioned any liberal groups?

    DURBIN: Well, I explained that once, Chris. But, you know, Karl Rove was making — he’s boasting, saying he’s going to raise so much money, millions of dollars. And I knew that if they went into investigate this group, every other group would be put on notice.

    I’ve also said from the beginning, Chris, there’s no basis for targeting within the IRS, what we basically need to say is all groups need to have the law applied to them equally. And in this situation, Karl Rove was front and center and proud of it. And that’s why I mentioned his organization.

    Sen. Durbin did a great job laying it out. Karl Rove deserved, and continues to deserve IRS scrutiny because his dark money Crossroads groups are violating the rules for tax exempt organizations. Rove has regularly boasted about how much money Crossroads is spending to defeat Democrats, when tax exempt nonprofits aren’t supposed to be engaging in partisan political activity.


  37. rikyrah says:

    Representative Trey Gowdy is Darrell Issa’s Henchman and Big Part of the Problem

    By: Dennis S
    May. 27th, 2013

    A friend of mine recently asked me about South Carolina 4th District House Representative, Trey Gowdy’s vote on a Storm Relief measure in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. The $9.7 billion dollar bill would cover insurance claims of owners whose homes were either destroyed or damaged. Gowdy’s vote was “eff ‘em.” The bill passed overwhelmingly (354-67). He also opposed the HR 152 $50.5 billion emergency aid and future preventative measures legislation for 3 Eastern states.

    Thanks to published weekly roll call legislator voting records, we can examine other votes cast by Gowdy, the arrogant “L’enfant terrible” of Darrell Issa’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

    Trey Gowdy’s votes define him. Here we go! In March of 2011, he voted against a measure that would have assured that a stopgap budget wouldn’t be used to privatize Social Security and either cut Medicare benefits or switch Medicare to a voucher plan. Of course he supported defunding National Public Radio. He worked to pass HR 2560 that barred Congress from raising the national debt ceiling until the states passed a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget. The sequester was born out of negotiations based on this bill.

    Around Christmas, 2011, he voted yes on a comprehensive bill that included speeding up construction of environmental monster, the Keystone XL oil pipeline and reducing the maximum number of weeks for jobless checks from 99 to 59. You are aware that the majority of Keystone’s output will be for export aren’t you?

    While on the subject of oil, in early 2012, Gowdy voted to pass HR 3408 tripling America’s offshore oil and gas production by 2027 and authorizing Keystone once again.


    For such a fierce defender of the 1st Amendment, Gowdy’s vote to substantially weaken the FCC and expose it to continuous judicial review makes little sense unless he’s terrified of a revival of the Fairness Doctrine. On another front, Gowdy voted his eagerness to exempt a broad spectrum of (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) “smaller banks, credit unions et al” from having to abide by Dodd-Frank derivative transactions regulations. “TIMBER!!!”

    Gowdy voted against a Democratic motion seeking to prevent health care spending cuts that would reduce benefits and raise the cost of private medical insurance for women and children. The House negated Gowdy’s vote with a later tradeoff associated with a student loan bill to avoid mammoth increases in student loan rates.

    In May, Gowdy voted to severely cut such programs as food stamps, school lunches, and subsidies for poor families to buy health insurance and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program for the next decade. This was part of the sequester “deal.”

    Gowdy voted in favor of the Violence Against Women Act. Sounds good, but Trey’s VAWA House version, unlike the Senate bill, leaves out expanded protection for battered women who are illegal immigrants, Native American women who are assaulted on reservations by non-Indians (WT*?) and, of course, gays, lesbians and transsexuals wouldn’t get the full benefits of the bill either. At least homophobes like Gowdy are consistent.


  38. rikyrah says:

    The Latest Lie: IRS Targeted Conservatives
    By Dave Johnson | May 20, 2013

    Remember the video of the guy in the “pimp costume” who got advice from ACORN employees on how to run his prostitution ring? Turns out the whole story was just a lie, a doctored-video smear job on an important organization. The guy never wore a “pimp costume” and the real, undoctored videos showed that ACORN employees did nothing wrong. But a lie travels around the world before the corporate media bothers to check the facts. The “news” media blasted the story everywhere, and Congress was so outraged they forced ACORN to close its doors. And here we are again.

    The corporate media is blasting out the story that the IRS “targeted conservative groups.” Some in the media say there was “IRS harassment of conservative groups.” Some of the media are going so far as claiming that conservative groups were “audited.”

    This story that is being repeated and treated as “true” is just not what happened at all. It is one more right-wing victimization fable, repeated endlessly until the public has no choice except to believe it.

    Conservative Groups Were Not “Targeted,” “Singled Out” Or Anything Else

    You are hearing that conservative groups were “targeted.” What you are not hearing is that progressive groups were also “targeted.” So were groups that are not progressive or conservative.

    All that happened here is that groups applying to the IRS for special tax status were checked to see if they were engaged in political activity. They were checked, not targeted. Only one-third of the groups checked were conservative groups.

    Once again: Only one-third of the groups checked were conservative groups.

    Conservative groups were not “singled out,” were not “targeted” and in the end none were denied special tax status – even though many obviously should have been.


  39. rikyrah says:

    Honest Toddler ‏@HonestToddler
    Seems strange to call some of my friends “imaginary” when I see them more often than you do yours.

  40. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone at 3CHICS!

Leave a Reply