Thursday Open Thread | Black Oscar Nominees

We continue our look at Black Oscar Nominees.

Today, we’ll look at Best Actress in a Supporting Role.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Year Name Film Role Status
1939 Hattie McDaniel Gone with the Wind Mammy Won
1949 Ethel Waters Pinky Mrs. Dicey Johnson (Pinky’s Granny) Nominated
1959 Juanita Moore Imitation of Life Annie Johnson Nominated
1967 Beah Richards Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner Mrs. Prentice Nominated
1983 Alfre Woodard Cross Creek Geechee Nominated
1985 Margaret Avery The Color Purple Shug Avery Nominated
Oprah Winfrey The Color Purple Sofia Nominated
1990 Whoopi Goldberg Ghost Oda Mae Brown Won
1996 Marianne Jean-Baptiste Secrets & Lies Hortense Cumberbatch Nominated
2002 Queen Latifah Chicago Matron Mama Morton Nominated
2004 Sophie Okonedo Hotel Rwanda Tatiana Rusesabagina . Nominated
2006 Jennifer Hudson Dreamgirls Effie White Won
2007 Ruby Dee American Gangster Mama Lucas Nominated
2008 Viola Davis Doubt Mrs. Miller Nominated
Taraji P. Henson The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Queenie Nominated
2009 Mo’Nique Precious Mary Lee Johnston Won
2011 Octavia Spencer The Help Minny Jackson Won

This entry was posted in Black History, Movies, Open Thread, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Thursday Open Thread | Black Oscar Nominees

  1. rikyrah says:

    Rep. Grimm might have more trouble to worry about. It seems the reporter he threatened the other day, Michael Scotto, is the nephew of a former Gambino boss:

  2. rikyrah says:

    sorry for this late Media Alert:

    James Earl Jones on tonight’s Big Bang Theory.

    I’ve never seen the show, but I’m watching tonight.

  3. Cheerios to the haters about their commercial with the interracial family..

  4. Ametia says:

    Bieber Drug Test Shows Xanax, Pot
    January 30, 2014 12:21 PM

    While the test results have not been formally released, law enforcement sources say that the toxicology report for Justin Bieber’s arrest in Miami Beach had him testing positive for marijuana and Xanax. The pop star pleaded not guilty to the DUI charges on Wednesday, as well as resisting arrest and driving with an expired license. An arraignment is set for February 14, but Bieber’s presence is not required.

    Read it at NBC Miami:

  5. rikyrah says:

    Black Twitter has some folks SHOOK


    Twitter Users’ Diversity Becomes an Ad Selling Point – Posted on January 20, 2014

    For most of its rather short life, Twitter Inc.rarely mentioned that its user base is more racially diverse than U.S. Internet users as a whole.[….] Now, as a newly minted public company needing to generate revenue, it is moving to capitalize on its demographics.[….] In November, Twitter hired marketing veteran Nuria Santamaria to a new position as multicultural strategist, leading its effort to target black, Hispanic and Asian-American users.[….]

    Together, those groups account for 41% of Twitter’s 54 million U.S. users, compared with 34% of the users of rival Facebook and 33% of all U.S. Internet users, according to Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project.[….] Marla Skiko, executive vice president and director of digital advertising at Starcom Media-vest Group’s multicultural division, says some advertisers are surprised to learn the demographics of Twitter users.[….]

    Twitter has long been known for its popularity among blacks, giving rise to a cultural phenomenon known as “Black Twitter.” Racially tinged hashtags such as #IfSantaWasBlack and #PaulasBestDishes have risen to the top of Twitter’s trending lists.[….] Genie Lauren, a 29-year-old New Yorker who works in higher education, organized a Twitter protest last July against a book planned by a juror in the George Zimmerman trial.[….]

  6. rikyrah says:

    These are some evil ass mofos.


    Lunches seized from kids in debt at Salt Lake City elementary

    Education » School officials cite unpaid balances on students’ meal accounts.

    By lisa schencker
    The Salt Lake Tribune
    First Published Jan 29 2014 05:29 pm • Last Updated Jan 29 2014 11:06 pm

    Up to 40 kids at Uintah Elementary in Salt Lake City picked up their lunches Tuesday, then watched as the meals were taken and thrown away because of outstanding balances on their accounts — a move that shocked and angered parents.

    “It was pretty traumatic and humiliating,” said Erica Lukes, whose 11-year-old daughter had her cafeteria lunch taken from her as she stood in line Tuesday at Uintah Elementary School, 1571 E. 1300 South.

    Lukes said as far as she knew, she was all paid up. “I think it’s despicable,” she said. “These are young children that shouldn’t be punished or humiliated for something the parents obviously need to clear up.”

    Jason Olsen, a Salt Lake City District spokesman, said the district’s child-nutrition department became aware that Uintah had a large number of students who owed money for lunches.

    As a result, the child-nutrition manager visited the school and decided to withhold lunches to deal with the issue, he said.

    But cafeteria workers weren’t able to see which children owed money until they had already received lunches, Olsen explained.

    • Liza says:

      The child nutrition manager needs his/her ass fired and should never be allowed to work again in any occupation related to food, nutrition, or children.

  7. rikyrah says:

    White House Seeks Drug Clemency Candidates

    By MATT APUZZOJAN. 30, 2014

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, in its effort to curtail severe penalties in low-level drug cases, is taking the unprecedented step of encouraging defense lawyers to suggest inmates whom the president might let out of prison early.

    Speaking at a New York State Bar Association event Thursday, Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole said the Justice Department wanted to send more names to White House for clemency consideration.

    “This is where you can help,” he said, in remarks the Justice Department circulated in advance.

    Prison officials will also spread the word among inmates that low-level, nonviolent drug offenders might be eligible to apply for clemency.

    Related Coverage


    Video: A Sentence for a FamilyDEC. 21, 2013

    The clemency drive is part of the administration’s effort to undo sentencing discrepancies that began during the crack epidemic decades ago. Offenses involving crack, which was disproportionately used in black communities, carried more severe penalties than crimes involving powder cocaine, which was usually favored by affluent white users.

    In some cases, crack crimes resulted in a 100-to-1 sentencing disparity. The tough sentencing laws led to an 800 percent increase in the number of prisoners in the United States.

    Congress reduced the sentencing disparity in 2010. In December, President Obama commuted the sentences of eight federal inmates who were convicted of crack sentences under the old rules.

    “There are more low-level, nonviolent drug offenders who remain in prison, and who would likely have received a substantially lower sentence if convicted of precisely the same offenses today,” Mr. Cole said. “This is not fair, and it harms our criminal justice system.”

  8. Ametia says:

    The Justice Department will seek the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the 20-year-old man accused of bombing the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring more than two hundred others in April, according to a former U.S official briefed on the decision.

    U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.’s decision ends months of speculation in the case. If Holder had instead sought life in prison instead, it might have fueled Republicans attacks that the administration and the attorney general were soft on terrorism.

    Read more at:

  9. Ametia says:

    Molly, girl you in danger.

  10. rikyrah says:

    Another White feminist whining about Black Twitter.

    As folks would say:
    1. don’t start none
    won’t be none.

    2. Don’t come for Black Twitter unless it sends for you.


    Feminism’s Toxic Twitter Wars

    Empowered by social media, feminists are calling one another out for ideological offenses. Is it good for the movement? And whose movement is it?
    Michelle Goldberg
    January 29, 2014

    In the summer of 2012, twenty-one feminist bloggers and online activists gathered at Barnard College for a meeting that would soon become infamous. Convened by activists Courtney Martin and Vanessa Valenti, the women came together to talk about ways to leverage institutional and philanthropic support for online feminism. Afterward, Martin and Valenti used the discussion as the basis for a report, “#Femfuture: Online Revolution,” which called on funders to support the largely unpaid work that feminists do on the Internet. “An unfunded online feminist movement isn’t merely a threat to the livelihood of these hard-working activists, but a threat to the larger feminist movement itself,” they wrote.

    #Femfuture was earnest and studiously politically correct. An important reason to put resources into online feminism, Martin and Valenti wrote, was to bolster the voices of writers from marginalized communities. “Women of color and other groups are already overlooked for adequate media attention and already struggle disproportionately in this culture of scarcity,” they noted. The pair discussed the way online activism has highlighted the particular injustices suffered by transgender women of color and celebrated the ability of the Internet to hold white feminists accountable for their unwitting displays of racial privilege. “A lot of feminist dialogue online has focused on recognizing the complex ways that privilege shapes our approach to work and community,” they wrote.

    The women involved with #Femfuture knew that many would contest at least some of their conclusions. They weren’t prepared, though, for the wave of coruscating anger and contempt that greeted their work. Online, the Barnard group—nine of whom were women of color—was savaged as a cabal of white opportunists. People were upset that the meeting had excluded those who don’t live in New York (Martin and Valenti had no travel budget). There was fury expressed on behalf of everyone—indigenous women, feminist mothers, veterans—whose concerns were not explicitly addressed. Some were outraged that tweets were quoted without the explicit permission of the tweeters. Others were incensed that a report about online feminism left out women who aren’t online. “Where is the space in all of these #femfuture movements for people who don’t have internet access?” tweeted Mikki Kendall, a feminist writer who, months later, would come up with the influential hashtag #solidarityisforwhitewomen.

    Martin was floored. She’s long believed that it’s incumbent on feminists to be open to critique—but the response was so vitriolic, so full of bad faith and stubborn misinformation, that it felt like some sort of Maoist hazing. Kendall, for example, compared #Femfuture to Rebecca Latimer Felton, a viciously racist Southern suffragist who supported lynching because she said it protected white women from rape. “It was really hard to engage in processing real critique because so much of it was couched in an absolute disavowal of my intentions and my person,” Martin says.

    Beyond bruised feelings, the reaction made it harder to use the paper to garner support for online feminist efforts. The controversy was all most people knew of the project, and it left a lasting taint. “Almost anyone who asks us about it wants to know what happened, including editors that I’ve worked with,” says Samhita Mukhopadhyay, an activist and freelance writer who was then the editor of “It’s like you’ve been backed into a corner.”

    Though Mukhopadhyay continues to believe in the empowering potential of online feminism, she sees that much of it is becoming dysfunctional, even unhealthy. “Everyone is so scared to speak right now,” she says.

  11. rikyrah says:

    Paul targets ‘Post Office Gun Ban’
    01/30/14 10:44 AM
    By Steve Benen

    The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee met yesterday to tackle an important bill that probably won’t get too much attention: a wide-ranging postal reform package. It’ll tackle several key areas of postal policy, including postage rates, post-office banking, pensions for USPS employees, etc.

    But during the hearing, Sen. Rand Paul had a new postal provision he’s apparently excited about. The Kentucky Republican wants to include a provision in postal reform that would “remove a federal ban on guns in post offices.”

    Paul said his gun rights amendment would allow licensed gun owners to carry weapons inside post offices, rather than having to unholster them and keep them in the car. Guns are banned in federal buildings, including post offices.

    Yep, when it comes to postal reform, Paul’s priority is allowing more guns in post offices.

    As Lisa Rein’s Washington Post report noted, the senator’s provision wasn’t added to the legislation – committee members said the idea “would require more study” – but some on the far-right nevertheless seem quite excited about the possibility.

  12. rikyrah says:

    Why the rich are freaking out

    The nation’s wealthiest 1 percent appear to be having a collective meltdown
    By BEN WHITE | 1/30/14 5:02 AM EST

    NEW YORK — The co-founder of one the nation’s oldest venture capital firms fears a possible genocide against the wealthy. Residents of Manhattan’s tony Upper East Side say the progressive mayor didn’t plow their streets as a form of frosty revenge. And the co-founder of Home Depot recently warned the Pope to pipe down about economic inequality.

    The nation’s wealthiest, denizens of the loftiest slice of the 1 percent, appear to be having a collective meltdown.

    Economists, advisers to the wealthy and the wealthy themselves describe a deep-seated anxiety that the national — and even global — mood is turning against the super-rich in ways that ultimately could prove dangerous and hard to control.

    President Barack Obama and the Democrats have pivoted to income inequality ahead of the midterm elections. Pope Francis has strongly warned against the dangers of wealth concentration. And all of this follows the rise of the Occupy movement in 2011 and a bout of bank-bashing populism in the tea party.

  13. rikyrah says:


    slowly, but surely…it’s coming out.


    How Pressure Mounted for Development in Hoboken
    JAN. 29, 2014

    HOBOKEN, N.J. — Last May 8, a severe rainstorm left the streets of this city flooded once again, causing the mayor, Dawn Zimmer, to recall the inundation from Hurricane Sandy.

    So she dashed off a letter to Gov. Chris Christie, imploring him to help with Hoboken’s “ongoing flooding emergency,” and attached photos of cars in water up to their hoods. She was due to meet the next day with officials of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, when she hoped to talk about protecting Hoboken from the next catastrophic deluge to come.

    But according to newly obtained emails sent among the participants, the first topic of discussion on the agenda was “review of concepts for flood control measures at Rockefeller property,” a reference to a billion-dollar office complex proposed at the north end of town. The developer, the Rockefeller Group, which had long been trying to gain approval from local officials, sent two executives, two lobbyists and an engineer to the meeting

    Mayor Zimmer, through a spokesman, said on Wednesday that she went to the meeting but refused to discuss the project, feeling it was premature to do so.

  14. rikyrah says:

    GOP preps debt-ceiling surrender
    01/29/14 03:57 PM—Updated 01/29/14 07:28 PM
    By Steve Benen

    As recently as three days ago, some of the leading Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill were eager to rattle their sword: it’s time for another debt-ceiling crisis, they said, and if Democrats fail to meet GOP demands, Republicans are prepared to start hurting the country on purpose.

    Away from the cameras, though, the party is quietly putting that sword back in its sheath.

    House Republicans are getting ready to surrender: There will be no serious fight over the debt limit.

    The most senior figures in the House Republican Conference are privately acknowledging that they will almost certainly have to pass what’s called a clean debt ceiling increase in the next few months, abandoning the central fight that has defined their three-year majority.

    This doesn’t come as a surprise. The notion that GOP lawmakers would deliberately crash the economy in an election year – in advance of a cycle about which they’re feeling quite optimistic – has always been far-fetched. Of course they’re getting ready to surrender; the catastrophic alternative was never credible in the first place.

  15. rikyrah says:

    ‘I’m not sure I’m saying that’
    01/29/14 04:53 PM—Updated 01/30/14 08:09 AM
    By Steve Benen

    For the last generation or so, the political fight over the minimum wage has been fairly narrow. Both parties broadly supported the concept a minimum wage, but argued over the details: how much it should be, when to increase it, whether to index it to inflation, etc.

    Just over the last few years, as the radicalization of Republican politics has intensified, the nature of the debate itself changed. Prominent GOP lawmakers – Marco Rubio, Lamar Alexander, Joe Barton – have been willing to admit they not only reject Democratic calls for a wage increase, they believe the minimum wage should be lowered to zero. The law itself, they argue, is a mistake.

    It’s a fairly risky posture for a politician take. The minimum wage is very popular with the American mainstream, as are Democratic calls for an increase. Republicans generally feel like they can get away with blocking wage increases – though even that’s a dodgy move in an election year – but usually hedge before calling for the law’s destruction.

    Which brings us to an interesting interview last night between Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Wolf Blitzer, shortly after President Obama’s State of the Union address.

    BLITZER: He announced on increasing the minimum wage, the federal contractors would get an increase immediately to $10.10 an hour, which is not a huge amount of money by any means, but it’s a little bit more than the current minimum wage. Are you with him on that?

    PAUL: If you increase the price of something, you’ll get less of it. So, all of the studies, virtually all of the studies show that if you increase the minimum wage, you get higher unemployment, particularly teenage unemployment, particularly black teenagers –

    BLITZER: Do you believe in a minimum wage?

    PAUL: Well, I think when you look at raising it, all of the studies show that if you raise it, you get more unemployment. So, really, the market place does a better job at determining what….


    BLITZER: So, there shouldn’t be any federal minimum wage?

    PAUL: I’m not sure I’m saying that. But I think what I am – I’m not sure I have an answer as far as whether there is a right or wrong –

    BLITZER: You’re a United States senator. You thought about whether or not there should be a federal –

    PAUL: Not necessarily

    As a Senate candidate four years ago, Rand Paul, at the time a self-accredited ophthalmologist, was asked about the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Pressed for his position, the Kentucky Republican eventually conceded he opposed the civil-rights law because it prohibited discrimination in the private sector – and he has an ideological objection to government intervening in the free market, even to prevent a system of white supremacy.

    Paul seems to have learned a lesson from this: hide controversial positions from the public. The senator has given countless speeches about government and the economy; he claims to be deeply familiar with economic studies on the relationship between wages and the labor market; and he has firm, unshakable positions on the economic effects of a minimum wage increase.

    But should the minimum wage be eliminated altogether? Paul would have us believe he’s never given the question a moment’s thought. Heaven forbid.

  16. rikyrah says:

    The GOP case against pay equity
    01/30/14 08:00 AM
    By Steve Benen

    President Obama received a fair amount of applause on Tuesday night when he spoke up in support of pay equity. “Today, women make up about half our workforce, but they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns,” he said in the State of the Union. “That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment. A woman deserves equal pay for equal work.”

    It seemed like the kind of sentiment that would enjoy broad, bipartisan support. The truth is more complicated.

    For example, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), the House Republican Conference chair, was asked yesterday whether she agrees with the president’s position on laws mandating equal pay for equal work. “Yes, absolutely,” she responded. “Republicans and I support equal pay for equal work.”

    McMorris Rodgers neglected to mention that she, like nearly every other congressional Republican, voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act.

    Or consider this exchange on Fox News yesterday between Martha MacCallum and Alan Colmes about Obama’s comments on the issue.

    MacCallum: I think most women do not want to be treated as sort of a special class of citizens. They want to go to work every day, they want to get paid for being a professional, for doing their job really well. And they don’t want to be treated like some group of people who have to be, you know, given a little special handout just to make sure that they’re okay.

    Colmes: It’s not a special handout. It’s equality. It’s equal pay for equal work.

    MacCallum: Many women get paid exactly what they’re worth, Alan.

  17. rikyrah says:

    Mayor Kasim Reed was on The Today Show this morning, and he was not having Matt Lauer’s gotcha bitchassness!

  18. Yahtc says:

    Good Morning, rikyrah and Everyone :)

  19. rikyrah says:

    These two tweets tell you all you need to know about the politics of health reform
    January 29, 2014 at 12:30 pm
    Austin Frakt

    Two of Avik Roy’s tweets yesterday, pertaining to the recently released Senate GOP health reform plan (the Patient CARE Act) and discussion thereof, are very revealing.


    Matthew Herper ✔ @matthewherper

    @Avik it still seems to me that this is going to hit a lot of voters harder. Even if it makes economic sense.

    Avik Roy @Avik
    .@matthewherper By repealing and replacing Ocare, the plan is more disruptive than it needs to be. But repeal needed for Right viability.

    4:33 PM – 28 Jan 2014

    Avik Roy @Avik
    Good faith policymaking incompatible with political systems. RT @yeselson: @afrakt When to do we finally get to good faith policy making?

    5:08 PM – 28 Jan 2014


    I do not mean “revealing” in a gotcha or gaffe sense. In fact, I largely agree with Avik. Repealing the ACA is not necessary to further a conservative health policy agenda. Therefore, as Avik correctly points out, it’s unnecessarily disruptive to do so. Yet this is what the Patient CARE Act does. And then it, in some ways, replicates some of the structure of the ACA, though in other ways it departs from it. (See Don Taylor’s summary.)

    This is precisely why I’ve responded to journalists’ inquiries about the Patient CARE Act by pointing out, among other things, that it’s clearly designed to serve the objectives of the campaign(s)—2014 and then, perhaps, 2016—not as an effort to engage in good faith negotiation with Democrats on health policy.

  20. rikyrah says:

    January 29, 2014, 01:30 pm
    Pete Wilson syndrome: Boehner and the GOP’s last chance on immigration reform
    By Fernando Espuelas

    Tick, tock, the clock has run out on John Boehner and his GOP cohort to present a credible immigration reform plan to the nation. And that doesn’t mean just any set of “principles,” but a coherent, comprehensive bill that will pass the House, reconcile with the Senate’s bill and win the president’s signature.

    The face of the clock is clearly saying failure is not an option for the Republican Party.

    While conservative pooh-bahs are discouraging Speaker Boehner (R-Ohio) from action, saying that immigration reform will damage the GOP, the view from outside the right-wing bubble is quite different. Boehner undoubtedly gets it, but many Republicans on the Hill and their enablers in the media, especially Tea Partyers who are rabidly opposed to reform, continue to live trapped in a time capsule somewhere in the past when Cokes sold for a nickel, new Chevys for $800 bucks and minorities could not vote.
    Invisible to these time travelers is the daily damage that Republicans are suffering as American Latino voters — the fastest growing part of the electorate and the margin of victory or defeat in several big states — are increasingly disgusted with the GOP’s immigration blockade.

    The reality is now upon us: Since President Bush’s immigration reform was killed by his own Republican Party in 2007 and the latest GOP presidential candidate ran on a political suicide strategy of “self-deportation,” Hispanics in this country see Republicans as the immovable object that must be dislodged from power.

    The national GOP is going through a scaled-up version of the Pete Wilson syndrome. Back in the 1990s, Republican rising star Gov. Pete Wilson of California launched a crusade attacking undocumented workers. He campaigned for a ballot proposition that would, among many other vindictive measures, keep undocumented kids from attending public schools.

    Read more:

  21. rikyrah says:

    GA GOPers Meet Unemployment Debate Question With Awkward Pause (VIDEO)

    Daniel Strauss – January 29, 2014, 4:26 PM EST

    When a moderator for a recent Georgia Republican primary debate asked candidates by a show of hands whether they would vote to extend benefits for the thousands of American workers who have been stuck with long-term unemployment, the question was met with an awkward pause.

    At the Mayor’s Day Senate Forum in Atlanta earlier in the week, none of the six candidates raised their hands in favor of extending benefits, but when the opposite question was asked — who would vote against such a proposal — all six candidates raised their hands. Rep. Paul Broun’s (R-GA) arm shot up the fastest.

    The candidates’ reaction could indicate that the extension of unemployment benefits could become an issue in Republican primaries.

  22. rikyrah says:

    Obama the confidence-builder

    By E.J. Dionne Jr., Published: January 29

    When President Obama spoke to the nation Tuesday evening, his way was that of a politically moderate, temperamentally optimistic Democratic governor. He offered a long list of relatively modest but helpful programs that many voters will warm to and Republicans ought to have a hard time opposing.

    Obama took a State of the Union address that began as a critique of economic inequality and turned it into a case for restoring opportunity. Anyone who saw class warfare here is spending too much time with Rush Limbaugh or Fox News.

    Yes, mention of a moderate Democratic governor kindles memories of Bill Clinton. His State of the Union productions consisted of thick catalogues of proposals that the pundits often panned but listeners usually liked. Most voters do not have an ideological view of government. They simply want it to solve some problems. Most Americans also reject a theological faith in the market. They think it’s a fine system until it acts unfairly.

    So consider Obama’s latest effort as a set of confidence-building measures. It’s a bid to move the national conversation back to economic basics: to “opportunity for everybody,” as he said in a follow-up speech Wednesday at a Costco store in Lanham, and to the idea that “treating workers well is not just the right thing to do, it’s an investment.”

  23. rikyrah says:

    You mean healthcare isn’t a socialist plot?

    I love it when Republicans get bitchslapped by REALITY.

    ‘Wary’…what utter bullshyt.

    The rubber meets the road, and they’re like, ‘ of course, I want healthcare.’

    it’s at these moments that I wish everything healthcare-related in this country had stamped at the top..


    They should have had to put OBAMACARE on every Medical Insurance Card.


    Wary of Obamacare, some Republicans sign up anyway
    By Sharon Bernstein
    SACRAMENTO, California Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:15pm EST

    Julie Davis has every reason to be skeptical of Obamacare: She’s a Republican, her father is a physician who is wary of socialized medicine and her insurance was canceled because of new requirements imposed by the healthcare law this year.

    But the 44-year-old filmmaker says her decision to seek coverage under President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform was a practical one, made with little political angst but plenty of doubt over whether the program will really benefit her family.

    “I did approach it with a skeptical eye,” said Davis, who lives in Los Angeles with her husband and son. “But it’s not political. We have no choice.”

    After several weeks researching the new health plans, Davis signed up for a mid-tier “silver” plan for the three family members at $930 a month, slightly more than their previous policy purchased on the individual market, but with a far lower deductible.

    Davis’s choice underscores the disconnect between Washington politics – particularly the Republican Party’s push to kill Obama’s Affordable Care Act and portray the law as an ill-devised social program bound to fail – and the experiences of at least some rank-and-file party members who are finding practical reasons to sign up. The discrepancy may complicate GOP efforts to use voter dissatisfaction over Obamacare’s troubled launch to win control of the Senate in November.

  24. rikyrah says:

    HuffPo reports that three Dem Senators who co-sponsored the Iran sanctions bill, Joe Manchin, Kirstin Gillibrand and Chris Coons, are retreating and saying a vote now could imperil diplomacy, the latest sign that the momentum for a vote has dissipated entirely. Note this from Manchin:

    “I did not sign it with the intention that it would ever be voted upon or used upon while we were negotiating,” Manchin said on MSNBC. “I signed it because I wanted to make sure the president had a hammer if he needed it and showed them how determined we were to do it and use it if we had to.”

    He added that it’s better to “give peace a chance.”

  25. rikyrah says:

    The Morning Plum: Obama’s big gamble
    By Greg Sargent
    January 29 at 9:30 am

    In his State of the Union speech, President Obama mostly avoided direct assaults on Republicans and made the somewhat conciliatory suggestion that “most” Congressional Republicans want to rebuild the American people’s “trust” in Washington, inviting them to join him in doing just that.

    But he then doubled down on precisely the argument that is the main point of contention with Republicans, arguing that the primary challenge we face is stagnating economic mobility and widening inequality, and crucially, that only an agenda of robust government intervention can reverse the larger trends underlying those problems and restore economic mobility and the American dream.

    The current political tug of war breaks down as follows. Republicans want the Obama era to be seen as one of excess liberal governance thwarting our economic potential, leading to widespread misery. The primary vehicle for this argument is Obamacare — government interference is only leading to lost coverage, higher premiums, and crushed jobs. Only electing Republicans to Congress can act as a check on unbridled liberal governance and restore market-powered prosperity.

    Democrats want to persuade Americans that only they have an actual policy program to deal with our primary problems — that the gains from the recovery are not broadly shared, that wages have stagnated, and that there aren’t enough jobs. The Dem case is that the Republican arguments against Obama’s signature domestic achievement are really a proxy for the same old GOP trickle down ideology, that only getting government out of the way — and keeping taxes and regulations low on rich people and job creators — can unleash the market potential that will miraculously lift up everyone below them.

  26. rikyrah says:

    Hitting Mitch McConnell over health care in Kentucky

    By Greg Sargent

    January 29 at 4:53 pm

    In yesterday’s speech, President Obama gave a shout-out to Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear, citing his tireless efforts to expand Obamacare coverage to his own constituents in a deep red state. As enrollment mounts, Mitch McConnell has refused to directly answer questions about Kentuckians befitting from the law.

    Counter-intuitively, some Kentucky Dems believe McConnell will ultimately face a reckoning on this issue. There is no more experienced McConnell watcher and antagonist then Dem Rep. John Yarmuth, so when he says McConnell is cornered, it’s worth listening.

    “Who knows how many hundreds of thousands will eventually have coverage who didn’t before — and Mitch would take it away from them,” Yarmuth, of the Third District in Louisville, told me. “I think it opens up some pretty strong vulnerabilities.”

    McConnell’s ads feature an energy worker who benefitted from his efforts to bring him health care, but Yarmuth says Dems can counter: what about all those who’d lose coverage if Obamacare were repealed?

    “I would suggest Alison attack Mitch for wanting to take health coverage away when he is boasting about having gotten health care to one guy,” Yarmuth said. (Alison Lundergan Grimes has been cautious on the ACA, standing up for its expansion of coverage but generally avoiding the topic.)

  27. rikyrah says:

    Dear Professional Left, Attacking the NSA While Giving Corporate Big Data a Pass is NOT Progressive

    Wednesday, January 29, 2014 | Posted by Spandan Chakrabarti at 4:58 PM

    I am a pretty regular listener to Stephanie Miller’s radio talk show. Miller herself is quite on point on Edward Snowden and the NSA, but her cohorts on the show, affectionately referred to as “the mooks” often set their everloving hair on fire based on NSA’s intelligence gathering activities. We have discussed the essential nature of signals intelligence on this blog before, and we will do so again, but for the purposes of this post, I want to focus on a rather dumbfounding notion that the Left keeps convincing itself is true: that it is more dangerous for the government to have metadata than for private companies to have it because only the government is empowered to strip one of one’s liberty.

    Not only is this patently and provably false in today’s interconnected world, the reverse is closer to the truth. Let me explain.

    In today’s world, government’s power to strip liberties is far from exclusive.

    Few things astound me more than liberals’ inability – or in cases, unwillingness – to connect different parts of the world around us. The same liberals who argue that Google having your information and the NSA having your information isn’t the same because Google doesn’t have the ability to physically harm you will turn right around and and walk picket lines against coal mines owned by private corporations that do physically harm people. And by people, we aren’t even talking about just their employees but communities.

    Liberals protest fracking because of the possibility of corporations harming people, not the government. Liberals stand up for Americans’ right to be able to sue corporations for physical harm they have caused – whether through medical malpractice, unsafe food or water, mistreatment of employees or even mistreatment of prisoners.

  28. rikyrah says:

    Farm Bill Screws The Poor In Order to Provide More Corporate Welfare
    By: Rmuse
    Wednesday, January, 29th, 2014, 8:01 pm

    On Monday there was an expressed feeling of pleasure and pride in Washington as a result of negotiations that produced another bicameral agreement that does not bode well for millions of Americans. It is one more sign that Washington politics have devolved into Democrats fighting a losing battle to prevent Republicans from stealing from the poor to enrich corporations when the parties are proud of an agreement that hurts Americans less than Republicans intended. The announcement on Monday that House and Senate negotiators reached a bipartisan agreement on a massive farm bill may put an end to a more than two-year fight likely because this is an election year. However, just because House and Senate negotiators came to an agreement, it is questionable if the bill will garner enough Republican votes to pass in the House.

    The new five-year farm bill is supposed to eliminate or consolidate dozens of agriculture subsidy programs, expand government-subsidized crop insurance, and cut $9 billion from the food stamp program over the next decade. The proposed agreement is slated to reduce spending by about $23 billion over 10 years; the House is expected to vote on it today. It is unclear when the Senate will take up the legislation and its passage is not guaranteed to be easy because many Senate Democrats are likely unhappy with the food stamp measure that cuts more than twice as much as the bipartisan agreement they reached last May.

    However, while Senate Democrats are unhappy the food stamp cuts are twice as deep as their effort last year, they are not nearly as drastic as House teabaggers called for last year or will likely demand this year. Last June Republican hunger mongers defeated a farm bill supported by Speaker John Boehner because the $20 billion in food stamp cuts were not Draconian enough. The House eventually passed a separate bill that dealt with nutrition programs and cut $40 billion from SNAP that was a far cry from Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity that called for $133.5 billion in cuts that effectively ended nutrition assistance to 48 million Americans.

  29. rikyrah says:

    Some Republicans See Racism As a Factor in Immigration Stalemate

    “I hate to say this, because these are my people — but I hate to say it, but it’s racial,” says a Republican congressman.
    posted on January 29, 2014 at 11:54pm EST

    WASHINGTON — For more than a year House Republican leaders have insisted the chamber would act on new immigration laws. And for more than a year, Republicans have done virtually nothing on the issue — despite intense pressure from activists, business groups, and the nation’s changing demographics.

    And although there are a variety of reasons for inaction, one Republican lawmaker recently offered a frank acknowledgement for many members, there’s one issue at play not often discussed: race.

    “Part of it, I think — and I hate to say this, because these are my people — but I hate to say it, but it’s racial,” said the Southern Republican lawmaker, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “If you go to town halls people say things like, ‘These people have different cultural customs than we do.’ And that’s code for race.”

  30. rikyrah says:

    Chuck Schumer Introduces ‘Avonte’s Law’ To Help Track Autistic Kids
    Jan 29, 2014
    By Hannington Dia

    N.Y. Senator Chuck Schumer (pictured left of center) has introduced a new law named after Avonte Oquendo (pictured below left), the New York Daily News reports.

    The law would assist parents in finding their autistic children who have gone missing.

    “Thousands of families face the awful reality each and every day that their child with autism may run away,” Schumer said during a press conference Sunday. “Making voluntary tracking devices available will help put parents at ease, and most importantly, help prevent future tragedies like Avonte’s.”

    Watch a news report about the law here:

  31. rikyrah says:

    Published on Jan 29, 2014

    Conservatives are taking a stand! 5 years ago Native American tribes applied for land that is now the town of Riverton, Wyoming and Conservatives are outraged that the EPA has given the land to them…

  32. rikyrah says:

    Surprising mom with Super Bowl Tickets! Go Seahawks!

  33. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone :)

    • Good morning!

    • Ametia says:

      Good Morning, Rikryah & Everyone!

      1. OUTSTANDING SERIES this week, Rikyrah!

      2. These fine Black women in these diverse roles should have won these Oscars. Notice what roles they played that won. Slaves, Mammys, housekeepers. Thank God for BET Awards today.

      3 I’m going to have to watch this movie again and soon
      .Marianne Jean-Baptiste Secrets & Lies Hortense Cumberbatch Nominated

Leave a Reply