Tuesday Open Thread | African Music & Dance

African Music & Dance3The different regions and nations of Africa have distinct musical traditions, given the vastness of the continent. The music of North Africa for the most part has a distinct history from sub-Saharan African music traditions.[1]

The music and dance of the African diaspora, formed to varying degrees on African musical traditions, include African-American music and many Caribbean genres, such as soca, calypso and zouk. Latin American music genres such as the flamenco, samba, rumba, salsa, and other clave (rhythm)-based genres, were also founded to varying degrees on the music of enslaved Africans, and have in turn influenced African popular music.

Mother AFRICA! There is no other continent on the planet that music and culture has not been derived from it. From chants, drumming, acapella, and tribal dance, join 3 ChicsPolitico as we explore the beauty, wonder, richness and SOUL of African music and dance.

About SouthernGirl2

A Native Texan who adores baby kittens, loves horses, rodeos, pomegranates, & collect Eagles. Enjoys politics, games shows, & dancing to all types of music. Loves discussing and learning about different cultures. A Phi Theta Kappa lifetime member with a passion for Social & Civil Justice.
This entry was posted in Africans, Current Events, Music, News, Open Thread, Politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Tuesday Open Thread | African Music & Dance

  1. rikyrah says:

    How the Professional Left’s Blind Obama Hatred Got them Played by a Far-Right Nutjob
    Tuesday, July 02, 2013 | Posted by Spandan C at 2:23 PM

    Some outlets reported last week that NSA leaker and fugitive Edward Snowden was caught into a bit of hypocrisy: public chat records indicate that back in the ancient times of 2009, he wanted leakers “shot in the balls.” Yeah, he said that. But that’s not all he said. Oh, no. The Technology site Ars Technica posted extensive public chat logs from Snowden, then using the monkier TheTrueHOOHA, that confirms what I had suspected since finding his campaign contributions to Glenn Greenwald’s straight crush Ron Paul.

    So let’s talk about this man that has been granted hero status by the Left’s loudest prognosticators and provocateurs. The transcripts released by Ars Technica are about a lot more than Snowden’s previous contempt for leakers. He hated social security, loved Ron Paul and his ideas, and peddled the NRA’s garbage about fighting the government with guns. He suggested punishing both leakers and publications that publish the leaks. All in all, Edward Snowden is a right wing, anti-government nutjob who has managed to become the hero of so many on the reactionary Left.

    Ars Technica reports that Ed Snowden is not much more than your typical, teabagging, cookie-cutter right wing nutjob who hates Obama. He complained about everything from the president’s appointment to the CIA to gun control to how Social Security has turned old people into lazy moochers.

    Once Obama took office, Snowden groaned about his policies with increasing frequency. Fears that Obama might revive an assault weapons ban didn’t sit well with him as a defender of the Second Amendment. Another sticking point was social security. Snowden was an individualist, even when it was unpopular; he saw little need for a safety net


  2. rikyrah says:

    ‘It costs too much to get my money’
    By Steve Benen
    Tue Jul 2, 2013 4:48 PM EDT

    Imagine you get a new job, work hard, and look forward to pay day, only to discover that you won’t actually get a paycheck. Instead, your employer has decided to give you a prepaid debit card, which has your compensation on it.

    Why might this be a problem? Because it puts you in a position in which you actually have to pay money to receive your own money.

    A growing number of American workers are confronting a frustrating predicament on payday: to get their wages, they must first pay a fee.

    For these largely hourly workers, paper paychecks and even direct deposit have been replaced by prepaid cards issued by their employers. Employees can use these cards, which work like debit cards, at an A.T.M. to withdraw their pay.

    But in the overwhelming majority of cases, using the card involves a fee. And those fees can quickly add up: one provider, for example, charges $1.75 to make a withdrawal from most A.T.M.’s, $2.95 for a paper statement and $6 to replace a card. Some users even have to pay $7 inactivity fees for not using their cards.


  3. rikyrah says:

    Margaret & Helen just posted

    If my Vagina shot bullets, could I conceal it from Rick Perry and John Kasich?

    Margaret, if my vagina could shoot bullets it would have fewer regulations on it. Plus, it would be easier to conceal from idiot politicians like Rick Perry and John Kasich. And while that might be a bit graphic for even me, it’s a sad but very true statement. We women in Texas (I can’t speak for the women of Ohio) are madder than hell and I think it’s time again for another Ann Richards to come make things right – God rest her soul. Years ago she said that government should “open the doors and let the people in.” Well ready or not, here we come. And this time, we’re bringing a Harvard grad named Senator Wendy Davis.

    For years now, Governor Perry has waged a war on women based on conversations he has with God and his pastor. It’s a given that Rick’s god speaks to him in a male voice. I am sure he has never considered the alternative. According to his god, women can’t be trusted to make healthcare decisions. As a result Perry has decided to make it hard for poor women (and soon almost any woman) to even have access to healthcare at all – problem solved. When you gut funding for family planning, force doctors to perform unnecessary procedures on women (and only women) and then shut down dozens of women’s health clinics… well let’s just say it’s not a stretch to suggest that Rick Perry hates women. But as far as his desire to end abortion, he doesn’t have a clue. All of his efforts will simply decrease the number of safe, legal abortions and increase the number of unsafe, illegal abortions.

    I am old enough to remember what happens to women who don’t have access to safe, legal abortions. I lost a few friends in those days. But, I guess if you don’t like women, killing a few is of no concern. Can you imagine the outrage if we were legislating a penis? Would the out-crying of voters be called an unruly mob then? Not a chance. It would be called the Texas Legislature.


  4. rikyrah says:

    Jeff Gauvin @JeffersonObama

    Snowden tried to sneak out on a Bolivian Air Force, Falcon 900EX from Moscow but was forced to land by Euro fighters. pic.twitter.com/XiFiDiJjMd
    5:02 PM – 2 Jul 2013

  5. rikyrah says:

    Will immigration reform be the core GOP divide in 2016?

    By Jamelle Bouie, Published: July 2, 2013 at 10:30 am

    Yesterday, the New York Times reported on a new push from conservative activists and donors to give cover to pro-immigration reform Republicans like Florida Senator Marco Rubio. The American Action Network, led by former Minnesota senator Norm Coleman, is running ads in Florida thanking Rubio for “keeping his promise, and fighting to secure the border,” while Americans for a Conservative Direction—led by former Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi—has been running ads in Iowa that implore those watching to “stand with Marco Rubio to end de facto amnesty.”

    That ads are running in Iowa says at least one thing about the current Republican landscape (besides Rubio’s likely run for the White House): If there is anything that’s clear from the last six months of GOP fighting, arguing and dealing over comprehensive immigration reform, it’s that this bill will loom large in the 2016 Republican primaries, regardless of its fate in Congress.

    But it’s not a matter of “establishment” Republicans running afoul of the GOP base. Since the 2010 term midterm elections, the divide between the “base” of the Republican Party and its elites has dwindled. Yes, some lawmakers are closer to the party’s core voters than others — hence the dynamic between House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor — but, on the whole, Republican elites have adopted the priorities and policies of GOP voters. Stylistically, there’s a difference between Paul Ryan and Jim DeMint, but their policy and ideological commitments are almost identical.

    Since the base of the Republican Party is closely tied to its establishment, this is really a divide between two different sets of elites, both drawing from a similar set of voters, but each having a different view of what the GOP needs to win elections for the next decade, or longer. On one end you have Republicans like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and the Heritage Foundation’s Jim DeMint, whose opposition to comprehensive immigration reform is rooted in “limited government” — we don’t want new low-income residents who may use social services — and a belief, best articulated by Sean Trende of Real Clear Politics, that the GOP doesn’t need Latino voters to win the White House in 2016, or maintain its House majority. Instead, it can boost its vote share by increasing turnout among working and middle-class white voters, who tend to favor Republicans by double-digit margins. This strategy depends on several things going right for the GOP — lower African American turnout, lower Hispanic immigration to the country and migration within — but it’s not outlandish.


  6. Ametia says:

    National News Alert
    Obama administration to delay health law’s employer mandate

    The Obama administration will not penalize businesses that do not provide health insurance in 2014, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday. Instead, it will delay a major Affordable Care Act requirement that all employers with more than 50 employees provide coverage to their workers.

    Read more at:

  7. Ametia says:


  8. rikyrah says:

    Virginia Dem calls for McDonnell’s resignation
    By Steve Benen
    Tue Jul 2, 2013 1:18 PM EDT.

    Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has been the subject of quite a few news stories lately, but all of the developments have been discouraging — the growing scandal surrounding the governor’s ties to Star Scientific’s Jonnie R. Williams Sr. isn’t just humiliating for McDonnell, it also raises the prospect of criminal charges.

    This morning, the story reached a new level, with a Democratic lawmaker calling for the governor’s ouster.

    An elected Virginia Democrat is publicly calling on Gov. Bob McDonnell to resign as a gift controversy mushrooms around the Republican.

    Fairfax City Sen. John Chapman “Chap” Petersen makes the appeal in a letter sent today to McDonnell that urges the governor to return gifts he has received or step down. He is the first sitting member of the General Assembly to take that step.

    Citing media reports about the growing gift issue, Petersen urges McDonnell to “come clean” about gifts received from Jonnie Williams Sr., the head of troubled health supplement maker Star Scientific Inc.


  9. rikyrah says:

    Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 07:07 AM PST.

    Democrats will do ok with white voters as long as White Racist Evangelicals Keep Dying


    We all know by now that Obama won 39% of the white vote to Romney’s 59%. See CNN’s vote results. Make sure you click on the “Exit Polls” tab and scroll down a bit to see results by race. And as that graphic shows, whites made up about 72% of all voters. But just to the right of that is a graphic for “Vote by Age and Race”. There you can see that among white voters age 18-29 Obama got 44% of the vote; that among white voters age 39 to 64 he got 38%, and among white voters 65 and older he got 39%.

    Next, take a look at this Wikipedia analysis of the dempgraphics. If you scroll down a bit you’ll see the heading “White evangelical or born-again Christian?”, President Obama got 21% of that vote and 60% of all other voters. Let me repeat, if you exclude white evangelical born again Christians, Obama goes from 51% of the total vote to 60% of the total vote!

    So how did Obama do among white voters by state? Here a list of the white vote by state. In some states there was not enough exit polling data to show 2012 results so for those states this site used 2008 results. Those results are marked by asterisks. The list goes from states where Romney got the highest white votes/Obama got the least white votes, to states where Obama got the most white votes/Romney got the least. Is it any surprise that Mississippi and Alabama top the list with Romney getting 89% and 84% of the white vote respectively? Obama hit 44% of the white vote with states like Colorado and Michigan; got around 50% of the white vote in states like New York, Connecticut, Iowa and New Hampshire; and substantially exceeded 50% in Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia.

    Finally, here is a map showing religious affiliation by state. Go to the drop-down list above the map and click on “Evangelical Protestant Tradition”. The states in black and dark blue have a high concentration of evangelicals, the states in light blue and grey have a low concentration. Although this map doesn’t distinguish between white/non-white evangelicals, you can see a high correlation between the states with a high percentage of protestant evangelicals and states where Obama won less than 40% of the white vote.

    So, does the Democratic party have a problem with white voters? No. It has a problem with old, white, racist evangelical voters. It may seem to some that my inclusion of “racist” in defining this demographic is gratuitous. Maybe my northern liberal bias is showing. But I would assert that white evangelicals make up a large chunk of the Tea Party movement, a large chunk of the Birther movement, and a large chunk of Fox News viewers. And I would assert that racism plays a huge roll in their participation in those groups. I would assert that Obama and the Democratic party generally have done poorly with older white evangelicals because racism is a defining characteristic of that demographic. I’d be happy to see someone prove me wrong.

    The reality is that this “problem” is not in fact a problem for Democrats. This demographic is dying out. Even young white evangelicals aren’t voting the same way as their parents and grandparents. And this dying demographic is being replaced by Hispanics and blacks – two demographics that are growing substantially and that strongly support the Democratic party. The reality is that this isn’t a Democratic problem, this is a Republican problem. The Republican base is dying. Democrats do not need to chase them. Democrats need to keep being an inclusive party. Yes, we need a state-by-state strategy to regain statehouses and state legislatures, but that doesn’t mean we need to focus on the white vote. We need to keep being a party that attracts voters of all races and backgrounds.


  10. rikyrah says:

    Flagrant Foul: The GOP’s Latest Obamacare Attack


    Millions of Americans who are too poor or too sick to buy health insurance today will finally have a chance to get coverage next year. And if the Republican congressional leadership has its way, many of these people will never find out about it.

    As you have read in a few places, perhaps even here, the federal government is starting a public education campaign about Obamacare—not to promote the law, mind you, but simply to inform the public about the new insurance options that will be available once the law takes full effect. In 2005, the Bush Administration ran a similar campaign to let seniors know about the Medicare drug benefit. A year later, Massachusetts officials launched their own effort to educate residents about insurance options that the state’s new health law was making available. In that campaign, Massachusetts authorities famously enlisted the Boston Red Sox as partners.

    Sounds innocuous, right? Not to the Republicans. Last week, as word spread that the Obama Administration had approached professional sports leagues about forging a similar partnership, GOP leaders warned the leagues to stay away. “It is difficult for us to remember another occasion when [a] major sports league took public sides in such a highly polarized public debate,” Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn, the highest ranking Republicans in the Senate, wrote in a letter on Friday. Among other things, they noted, Democrats had used “legislative gimmicks” to enact the law—an apparent reference to the Democrats’ use of budget reconciliation process in order to overcome a Republican filibuster in the Senate.

    The letter came one day after Congressman Steve Scalise, head of the Republican Study Committee, sent a similar letter of his own. That missive, sent to the NBA and NFL, predicted that Obamacare would have a “devastating impact on your fans and business partners across the country” and warned the leagues not to do the administration’s “dirty work for them.”

    I know: Republican opposition to the law hardly qualifies as news and neither does the effort to undermine it. But the language of the letters reveals a great deal about GOP values. When did publicizing insurance options become “dirty work”? How is helping people to access public services “politically charged”? And if it sounds naïve to expect more cooperation from an opposition party, contrast this Republican behavior with the way Democrats responded to the Medicare drug benefiit as the Bush Administration prepared for its launch eight years ago.


  11. rikyrah says:

    The GOP is Moving in the Wrong Direction

    by BooMan
    Tue Jul 2nd, 2013 at 11:18:43 AM EST

    I think Benjy Sarlin’s piece for MSNBC on the Republicans’ changing attitudes about immigration is excellent. In particular, his observations about Brit Hume and Sean Hannity are very interesting.

    At the moment, the anti-immigration argument appears to be gaining converts fast. On election night, Fox News anchor Brit Hume called the “demographic” threat posed by Latino voters “absolutely real” and suggested Mitt Romney’s “hardline position on immigration” may be to blame for election losses. On Monday, Hume declared that argument “baloney.” The Hispanic vote, he said, “is not nearly as important, still, as the white vote.”
    Sean Hannity, a reliable bellwether on the right, has been on a similar journey since the fall. He announced the day after President Obama’s re-election that he had “evolved” on immigration reform and now supported a “path to citizenship” in order to improve relations with Hispanic voters. Hannity has now flipped hard against the Senate’s bill.

    “Not only do I doubt the current legislation will solve the immigration problem,” he wrote in a June column, “but it also won’t help the GOP in future elections.”

    It appears that most Republicans are dropping the idea that they need to do better with Latinos and adopting the idea that they need to do even better with white voters. Mr. Sarlin’s documents this very well, but he doesn’t come out and say what it means.

    A new view on the right is taking hold: Romney lost because he didn’t go after whites hard enough…
    …conservative commentators are convincing themselves they can find a few million more whites tucked between the couch cushions–at least enough for one more election. Two columnists have been particularly influential in this regard. Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics has argued that census data shows about 5 million mostly poor and rural white voters were “projected” to vote in 2012 based on population growth and past turnout but didn’t show up to the polls. Byron York, a columnist at the Washington Examiner, published a related piece noting that Romney would have lost even if he had racked up a majority of Latino voters.

    “Recent reports suggest as many as 5 million white voters simply stayed home on Election Day,” York wrote in May. “If they had voted at the same rate they did in 2004, even with the demographic changes since then, Romney would have won.”

    What Mr. Sarlin doesn’t broach is the subject of how conservatives might be able to grab a higher percentage of whites and how they might go about driving up white turnout. The most obvious way is to pursue an us vs. them approach that alternatively praises whites as the true, patriotic Americans, and that demonizes non-whites as a drain on the nation’s resources. This is basically the exact strategy pursued by McCain and especially Romney. It’s what Palin was all about, and it’s what that 47% speech was all about.

    An added element was introduced by Barack Obama, whose controversial pastor and Kenyan ancestry opened up avenues for both veiled and nakedly racist appeals to the white voter. A white Democratic nominee would be less of an easy target for talk about secret Islamic sympathies and fraudulent birth certificates, but that would only make other racially polarizing arguments more necessary.

    The problem is that these attacks have already been made, and they failed in even near-optimal circumstances. Accusing the Democrats of socialism, which is a race-neutral way of accusing the party of being beholden to the racial underclasses, has been proven insufficient. The only hope for a racial-polarization strategy is to get the races to segregate their votes much more thoroughly, and that requires that more and more whites come to conclude that the Democratic Party is the party for blacks, Asians, and Latinos.

    That is, indeed, how the party is perceived in the Deep South, but it would be criminal to expand those racial attitudes to the country at large.

    The Republicans are coalescing around a strategy that will, by necessity, be more overtly racist than anything we’ve seen since segregation was outlawed.


  12. rikyrah says:

    This is so sweet.

    Who’s the Red Tie Guy?


    Obama and the red tie guy


  13. rikyrah says:

    Published on Jul 1, 2013

    Actor LeVar Burton and author Tim Wise explain the differences in their interactions with police.


  14. rikyrah says:

    Unsportsmanlike conduct on health care policy
    By Steve Benen
    Tue Jul 2, 2013 10:01 AM EDT.

    We talked yesterday about Senate Republican leaders contacting the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, PGA, and NASCAR, urging them not to partner with Washington on informing the public about health care benefits Americans are legally entitled to. The point is simple: the Republican senators still hope to sabotage the Affordable Care Act, and if people don’t participate in the system because they’re unfamiliar with what’s available, “Obamacare” could fail.

    Following up, Jonathan Cohn raised a good point about the larger context.

    As you have read in a few places, perhaps even here, the federal government is starting a public education campaign about Obamacare — not to promote the law, mind you, but simply to inform the public about the new insurance options that will be available once the law takes full effect. In 2005, the Bush Administration ran a similar campaign to let seniors know about the Medicare drug benefit. A year later, Massachusetts officials launched their own effort to educate residents about insurance options that the state’s new health law was making available. In that campaign, Massachusetts authorities famously enlisted the Boston Red Sox as partners

    This latter point, about “Romneycare” in Massachusetts, offers a perfect parallel. When a Republican governor created a system practically identical to President Obama’s health care model, he needed to get the word out so residents of the Bay State would sign up. It made sense to partner with the Red Sox, and it worked beautifully — the team played “a central role” in getting the word out to the public.

    Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn are likely aware of this, and desperately hope to avoid similar circumstances. As a result, they’re using their power to pressure sports leagues to help keep Americans in the dark, even if that means (especially if that means) undercutting federal law and families going without benefits to which they’re entitled.

    But the 2005 campaign with the Bush/Cheney administration’s Medicare Part D offers another important reminder from the recent past — Democrats didn’t like anything about this legislation, but they didn’t try to sabotage the American system after it passed.


    When Medicare Part D was considered in Congress, the Bush White House lied about its cost, while Republicans used ugly tactics to force through legislation that gave unnecessary funds to insurance companies. For Dems, the bill was a disaster — it’d be easier, more efficient, and more cost effective, they said, to cover prescription drug costs through the public program, rather than relying on private insurers. Making matters worse, the GOP demanded that literally every penny of the cost of the program be added to the deficit — Bush didn’t want any of it paid for at all.


  15. rikyrah says:

    A tale of two parties in Texas
    By Steve Benen

    Tue Jul 2, 2013 8:00 AM EDT

    The fight over reproductive rights in Texas has reinvigorated progressive voices in the Lone Star State in ways unseen in many years, as evidenced by yesterday’s large, mid-day rally in Austin. The effort to turn back the Republican effort has also drawn the interest of Democrats at the national level — during state Sen. Wendy Davis’ (D) filibuster last week, none other than the president of the United States weighed in to offer his support.

    But as David Nather reported, there’s a bit of a mismatch: while national Democrats are eager to use Texas as a rallying cry for activism, even for those nowhere near the state, national Republicans have sat on their hands.

    The liberal side of the Texas abortion showdown has the two most powerful Democrats in Washington squarely in its corner: Barack Obama and Harry Reid — not to mention a Dixie Chick.

    On the right: Rick Perry’s holding down the fort without much obvious help from national Republicans.

    The DNC is involved in Texas; the RNC is not. Democratic congressional leaders have weighed in; Republican congressional leaders have not. And as Politico’s report added, a key party official in Texas “acknowledged there’s no behind-the-scenes help coming.”

    Some of this is simply a matter of need, or in this case, the lack thereof — Republican policymakers in the state hold the reins of power, including majorities in both chambers of the state legislature and the governor’s office. Davis and her allies took advantage of procedural tactics to win a temporary reprieve, but GOP officials believe it’s only a matter of time before they approve the sweeping new restrictions that Gov. Rick Perry (R) wants.

    But that’s not the only reason Republicans in D.C. are letting this story go by without comment. After all, it’s a national story and there’s nothing stopping prominent GOP leaders and/or the Republican National Committee from, at a minimum, offering Perry words of support and encouragement.

    And yet, the party is biting its tongue, probably because it sees this as a political loser for Republicans at the national level.


  16. rikyrah says:

    Dr. Kasich, paging Dr. Kasich

    Posted by Kay at 8:16 am .


    We’ve talked about this before, but I think it’s important, so I wanted to raise it again. From Plunderbund:

    John Kasich is just optimistic that you’ll pull through

    Until yesterday, Ohio law allowed exceptions to the informed consent rigamarole in the event of “an immediate threat of serious risk to the… physical health of the woman from the continuation of the pregnancy.” While this verbiage wasn’t necessarily ideal, it was broad enough that doctors could practice appropriately.
    With Kasich’s signature of the budget, physicians can only avoid the mandatory ultrasound “in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to avoid a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman that delay in the performance or inducement of the abortion would create.”

    Section 2919.16(K) spells out that the conditions allowing for immediate abortion:
    includes pre-eclampsia, inevitable abortion, and premature rupture of the membranes, may include, but is not limited to, diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and does not include a condition related to the woman’s mental health.

    These rules are incredibly narrow.

    The list of possible complications that can maim or kill goes on and on: anemia, arrhythmia, brainstem infarction, broken tailbone or ribs, cardiopulmonary arrest, diastasis recti, eclampsia, embolism, exacerbation of epilepsy, immunosuppression, infection, gestational diabetes, gestational trophoblastic disease, hemorrhage, hypoxemia, increased intracranial pressure, mitral valve stenosis, obstetric fistula,placental abruption, postpartum depression, prolapsed uterus, severe scarring, increased spousal abuse, third or fourth degree laceration, thrombocytopenic purpura, peripartum cardiomyopathy, and more.

    Before the passage of the budget, a number of OB-GYNs protested this provision. In the past, they’ve testified that it would make them hesitate before treating women. This is consciously modeled after the Irish law that resulted in the death of Savita Halappanavar.

    This should be debated. Conservatives and media limit the scope of discussion on abortion restrictions to an unwanted pregnancy, a woman seeking an abortion, but that isn’t how these laws read. Who wrote the specific medical exceptions? The lobbyists who introduced these laws all over the country? Did they even bother to consult a physician?

    Conservatives at the state and national level should have to respond to specific questions on how these laws apply to women in a medical emergency. They had this debate in Ireland, too late.


  17. rikyrah says:

    Fox News analyst on immigration reform: ‘Baloney,’ just focus on white people
    Monday, July 1, 2013 12:23 EDT

    Fox News analyst Brit Hume said Monday that the Republican Party’s tepid embrace of immigration reform is part of a “baloney” political strategy to curry favor with Latinos, who Hume said are unimportant to future presidential elections, hence his conclusion that Republicans should just keep the party’s focus on white people instead.

    Hume’s comments came in response to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who suggested recently that America’s quickly changing demographics will pose a real challenge to Republicans in future presidential elections.

    “Look, I’ve read all kinds of analysis of this… I am absolutely convinced that this troupe that you’re hearing, that says if the Republicans don’t go for immigration reform much as the Senate has done, they’re never gonna win another presidential election,” Hume said. “Oh, baloney.”

    “If you look at the statistics, you’ll find that there was one significant bloc of voters that turned out in smaller numbers this time in a major, major way, way below expectations, below even their ’08 turnout, and that was white voters,” he added. “Now, that doesn’t mean if they turned out Romney would have gotten them all. But it shows you that this Hispanic vote — which I think now is about 8.5 percent of the U.S. electorate or something like that — is not nearly as important, still, as the white vote, which is above 70 percent.”

    “So, if you look at it from an ethnic point of view, that addresses the question of whether you need to get right with the Hispanics,” he concluded.

    “A fascinating analysis,” host Bill Hemmer replied. “Something to watch. Brit, well done!”


  18. rikyrah says:

    Nina Turner announces bid for Ohio secretary of state; Democrat hopes to unseat Jon Husted
    on July 01, 2013 at 10:38 AM

    CLEVELAND, Ohio — State Sen. Nina Turner has spent months wooing Democratic activists at chicken dinners and raising her profile on national cable news.

    Now Turner is prepared to take her message directly to Ohio voters.

    On Monday the Cleveland lawmaker declared herself a candidate for secretary of state. Barring the unlikelihood of a successful primary challenge next spring, Turner will face Republican incumbent Jon Husted in the November 2014 election.

    “I am running for secretary of state because I believe Ohio needs to be the gold standard for elections,” Turner said during an event at the Harvard Community Services Center, which sits in her southeast side neighborhood.


  19. rikyrah says:

    Give Me a Break With That Crap

    by BooMan
    Tue Jul 2nd, 2013 at 08:48:17 AM EST

    Maggie Haberman goes all Politico on us while discussing the possibility that Hillary Clinton will not run for the presidency in 2016.

    For Democrats, there is no fallback: It’s Hillary Clinton or probably a long bout of depression ahead of 2016.
    With expectations hitting a fever pitch three-and-a-half years out that Clinton is running for president again, every move she makes – a video endorsing gay marriage, a coy line about supporting a woman president – moves the excitement a notch higher. So too do endorsements from former critics – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, among others.

    Democrats openly describe their surprise at seeing such consensus around a candidate so early. The hope of retaining the White House in an open-seat election is very real — and the letdown that will set in among Democratic activists and operatives will be very deep if Clinton takes a pass on a campaign, as she may well do.

    I have my problems with Hillary Clinton, and I have my problems with most of the likely alternatives to Hillary Clinton, but the idea that there are no alternative is idiotic.

    For starters, we have Vice-President Joe Biden. He might not be able to beat Clinton in a primary, but the premise here is that Clinton won’t be running. I’d argue that Biden is in a stronger position both with the base of the party and with the country at large than the Iran-Contra-embroiled Poppy Bush was at the outset of the 1988 campaign. Obama’s coalition is still bigger than Clinton’s, and Biden’s loyalty will be rewarded.

    Whatever you think about him, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo would be a formidable and well-funded candidate. I can’t think of any sitting Republican governors from the last two cycles who were as well-situated as Cuomo will be if Clinton doesn’t run.

    Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley would be a serious candidate who could easily hold together the Obama coalition in the event he secured the nomination.

    Progressives would probably rally behind Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who might be a sitting U.S. Senator by 2016. That makes it unlikely that he will run for president, but one never knows. He has the potential to expand the Democrats’ appeal in the West and among some of the more libertarian-minded folks, while simultaneously invigorating the base of the party.

    I don’t think Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick should be underestimated. Nor should Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York or Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. While I’m now getting down into long-shot territory, all of these candidates make a mockery of the 2012 Republican field, and they seem superior to flawed candidates like Bobby Jindal, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, or Marco Rubio who are currently being discussed as 2016 candidates.


  20. rikyrah says:

    India rejects NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s request for political asylum – @AP

  21. rikyrah says:


    By the time this is all over, Edward Snowden will wish he’d just said no–

    He’ll especially get to understand that Putin is nobody’s friend-

    And Putin will dispose of his sorry and inconvenient butt eventually —

    There’s still plenty of polonium 210 left where they stashed it after the teeny speck that did Litvinenko in — and Putin will have absolutely no qualms dipping into it again sooner or later– except that Snowden mightn’t even warrant that level of sophisticated poisoning –

    Russia and specifically Putin: that’s the last place and person Snowden wants to get into any sort of “understanding” or “agreement” with–

    I think sadly, Edward Snowden will in the end become only another sad cautionary tale for what not to do or be when it comes to stealing and spilling State secrets at the prompting of narcissists like Glen Greenwald and Julius Assange — or wheeling and dealing with America’s “allies and enemies” alike–

    • Ametia says:

      Tell.IT. That fool had wikileaks put out some bullshit statement yesterday, blaming OBAMA for all his ILLS. The punk ass bitch. You made your bed, now lie in it.

  22. rikyrah says:

    Glenn Greenwald and Fox ….. a match made in heaven.

  23. Ametia says:

    Good Morning, Everyone! :-)

Leave a Reply