Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
wow
I still put beer in my chili, but that's it.
Midas98 is nominated for sainthood!
What comes around... LOL!
In other words, the reps are left sitting on their swords wondering how they got there.
Good speech tonite...
Pres. Obama appeared to be finally losing patience with the No Party. About time.
ROFLMAO!!!
fade suckered AGAIN? I'm disappointed...I thought he was just playing games for schits'n jiggles. Oh well, I guess ya never know...
Sad.
Might I suggest you investigate that 'issue' a bit more? As in, who gains from spreading such slanted BS...& who loses? Before you ask...no, I'm neither your teacher or researcher.
Yeah - same'ol, same'ol.
Judge Refuses To Toss Rick Perry Case
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A Texas judge refused on Tuesday to quash on technicalities two criminal felony indictments for abuse of power against Gov. Rick Perry, ruling that the potentially embarrassing case against the possible 2016 presidential hopeful should proceed.
The governor's defense team had sought to have the matter thrown out, arguing that the special prosecutor, Michael McCrum, wasn't properly sworn in and some paperwork wasn't correctly filed. But a written ruling from District Judge Bert Richardson, who like Perry is a Republican, sided with McCrum.
"This court concludes that Mr. McCrum's authority was not voided by procedural irregularities," Richardson wrote. MORE...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/rick-perry-indictment_n_6181690.html
Another one bites the dust...
Federalist Society Legal Scholars Begrudgingly Accept Obama's Immigration Powers
...Charles Krauthammer appeared on Fox News and floated the idea that an executive action would be “an impeachable offense.” When Boehner and Krauthammer, arguably the top political and intellectual leaders of the GOP, suggest lawsuits and impeachment, it comes with more than a dollop of significance.
...There is a history, dating back to the '70s, of presidents using prosecutorial discretion when it comes to deportations. That those prior actions were smaller in scope doesn’t change the legal foundation upon which they and future ones rest.
...“Sometimes Congress will pass resolutions when they don’t want to do anything, but they want to tell voters they’ve done something,” Baker said. “So i don’t think much of resolutions. It is about power, and the power is in the money, and [Rep. Paul] Ryan and others have said, 'We are going to stop you from implementing this through the power of the purse.' That’s about the only thing they have at this point.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/federalist-society-obama-immigration_n_6182350.html
Boehner and Krauthammer are the top political and intellectual leaders of the GOP?
wow
Stupes - Reps Block Their Own Judicial Nominees
Senate Republicans Use Lame Duck To Block Their Own Judicial Nominees
WASHINGTON -- A week into the lame-duck session, Senate Republicans are finding all kinds of ways to block President Barack Obama's judicial nominees -- even if that means obstructing their own nominees in the process.
Last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) delayed Senate Judiciary Committee action by a week on nine judicial nominees for no evident reason. That group includes three Texas nominees with strong support from Texas Sens. John Cornyn (R) and Ted Cruz (R). Meanwhile, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) is refusing to submit his so-called "blue slip" to advance a Utah judicial nominee he's previously praised as "well known and highly regarded." And Republicans are forcing four Georgia judicial nominees with strong support from Georgia's GOP senators to each wait an extra day before they can get confirmed. MORE...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/republicans-judicial-nominees_n_6172552.html
Makes ya PROUD to be an American, don't it?
Oklahoma's 'Largest Oil And Gas Drilling Spill Of Its Kind'
KINGFISHER COUNTY, Oklahoma - This summer Oklahoma experienced what regulators think is the largest oil and gas drilling spill of its kind, when more than 21,000 gallons of hydrochloric acid spilled into a farmer's alfalfa field. In a hearing later this week, state regulators will hear from the companies they believe are responsible for the pollution. MORE...
http://www.newson6.com/story/27421166/6-investigates-oklahomas-largest-oil-and-gas-drilling-spill-of-its-kind
Multiple Earthquakes Ruining Payne County Man's Home
PAYNE COUNTY, Oklahoma - Oklahoma is on track to hit more than 5,000 earthquakes before the end of 2014 and Pawnee and surrounding communities have been at the epicenter of close to 500 of them. One man said he lives directly on a fault line and the quakes are ruining his home. MORE...
http://www.newson6.com/story/27422650/multiple-earthquakes-ruining-payne-county-mans-home
3.1 Magnitude Earthquake Recorded Near Medford
Posted: Nov 19, 2014 8:15 AM CST Updated: Nov 19, 2014 8:15 AM CST
Current USGS map: (scary)
http://www.newson6.com/story/27425922/31-magnitude-earthquake-recorded-near-medford
h2, What do you expect? You're having a blast trolling good people w/ truly outlandish crap even you know is BS...all for shitz'n giggles. Would you rather be ignored for the twit you pretend to be?
re;
why the personal attacks ?
h2/Still trolling serious discussions for lulz? Grow up.
Hey stupes: America's Disastrous History of Pipeline Accidents Shows Why the Keystone Vote Matters
It'd be easy to discount the Senate vote over the Keystone XL pipeline as mere political theater but that'd be a mistake.
Build Keystone XL and you build on a long and disastrous history of pipelines in America. A new analysis of federal records reveals that in just the past year and four months, there have been 372 oil and gas pipeline leaks, spills and other incidents, leading to 20 deaths, 117 injuries and more than $256 million in damages.
The new data adds to a June 1, 2013 independent analysis of federal records revealing that since 1986, oil and gas pipeline incidents have resulted in 532 deaths, more than 2,400 injuries and more than $7.5 billion in damages.
...One difference between Keystone XL and the vast majority of other pipelines that have spilled is that it will be carrying tar sands oil, which has proven very difficult, if not impossible, to clean up. A 2010 spill of tar sands oil in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan, for example, has yet to be cleaned up despite four years of effort. Another tar sands spill in 2013 fouled an entire neighborhood in Arkansas. Federal regulators have acknowledged that Keystone XL, too, will spill.
TransCanada's existing Keystone I tar sands pipeline has reportedly leaked at least 14 times since it went into operation in June 2010, including one spill of 24,000 gallons. The State Department's environmental reviews have pointed out that spills from Keystone XL are likely. The pipeline will cross a number of important rivers, including the Yellowstone and Platte, as well as thousands of smaller rivers and streams.
MUCH MORE: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noah-greenwald/pipeline-accidents_b_6174082.html
F6 - Told ya so.
Here's What Big Oil Has In The Pipes If Keystone Fails
WASHINGTON –- TransCanada Corp., the company seeking to build the Keystone XL pipeline, has teamed up with the world's largest public relations firm to promote a proposed alternative pipeline that's entirely in Canada. Greenpeace Canada obtained documents that the U.S. public relations firm Edelman drafted for TransCanada that outline a campaign to promote Energy East, the company's proposed 2,858-mile pipeline that would transport crude oil from the Alberta tar sands to the east coast of Canada. The company filed an application to build the Energy East pipeline last month -- a project that has been described as an "oil route around Obama" amid political wrangling over Keystone XL in the United States.
Greenpeace says the documents show a company increasingly concerned about the fate of Keystone XL, which would connect the tar sands with Gulf Coast refineries. TransCanada's Energy East also faces increasing opposition, as does a proposed pipeline to the west, Enbridge's Northern Gateway. Enbridge got approval from the Canadian government to build Nothern Gateway, but work has been delayed, in large part because of opposition from First Nation communities along the pipeline route.
"TransCanada has been saying, 'If you don't let us build Keystone, we will build to the east,'" said Keith Stewart, the climate and energy campaign coordinator for Greenpeace Canada. "These documents show that they're clearly worried about the Energy East pipeline as well. It's going to face just as rough a ride as Keystone or Northern Gateway."
The Energy East documents outline plans to create a "grassroots" advocacy campaign on behalf of TransCanada, recruit outside voices backing the company, and investigate environmental groups seen as threats to the project. Stewart said the documents show Edelman and TransCanada "systematically organizing what we'd call a dirty tricks campaign" typical in the U.S., but not in Canada. "We're nice, we don't do things like that," Stewart said.
A campaign organization document, dated Aug. 5, details what it calls a "Promote, Respond, Pressure approach" to "respond to allegations and protect the company." The plan includes typical public relations work, such as promoting the "positive message" on the project and responding to "unfavorable coverage, charges, or negative attacks." It also includes a plan to "work with third parties" to pressure opponents (emphasis theirs):
Add layers of difficulty for our opponents, distracting them from their mission and causing them to redirect their resources. We cannot allow our opponents to have a free pass. They will use any piece of information they can find to attack TransCanada and this project—attacks are part of a larger, modern oppositional effort to silence those on the other side … This point should particularly be made in communication to supportive third parties, who can in turn put the pressure on, especially when TransCanada can't.
The campaign organization document proposes a "research profile" of Canadian environmental groups, like the Council of Canadians, Equiterre, Ecology Ottawa, and David Suzuki Foundation, as well as the international group Avaaz. Another document on digital advocacy describes campaigns targeting labor groups, farmers, landowners, and people interested in national security in order to recruit "grassroots" supporters.
Many of the documents appear to be part of a pitch to get TransCanada to hire Edelman for the project, while others are action plans. TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline awaits a final decision in the U.S. after years of delays and strong pushback from environmental opponents. Edelman spokesman Michael Bush declined to respond to questions about the firm's work for TransCanada. "We do not talk about the work we do for clients," he said via email.
Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, confirmed that the documents Greenpeace obtained were recommendations Edelman had prepared for TransCanada on Energy East. He said Edelman has not done work for TransCanada on Keystone XL. "While the versions you have are not the latest, we have moved forward with implementing certain components of the strategy," said Howard. He pointed to the site EnergyEastPipeline.com and a pro-Energy East petition as part of that campaign (both of which are clearly labeled as TransCanada-sponsored).
"We have been working with Edelman for several months now and appreciate the support they have provided in helping us better engage in the public conversation, both in Quebec and the rest of Canada," said Howard. "Edelman was chosen because of their presence in Quebec and their ability to understand the culture. This is an important component for TransCanada’s communications outreach as we move forward with this project." Howard said the company has not implemented all of the recommendations in the documents, but is "focused on the pieces that support a coordinated and organized communications program to ensure communities, landowners, First Nations and all Canadians have the facts to make an informed decision about Energy East."
This type of campaign work is not new for Edelman. A "Grassroots Advocacy Vision Document" dated May 15, 2014, describes Edelman's previous work on "mobilization" for energy interests. It includes the "Energy Citizens" campaign that Edelman ran on behalf of the American Petroleum Institute -- a campaign designed to look like it came from ordinary citizens, but was in fact run by oil lobbyists. "Companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and Haliburton (and many more) have all made key investments in building permanent advocacy assets and programs to support their lobbying, outreach, and policy efforts," Edelman wrote. "In launching a program like this, TransCanada will be in good company with a strong roadmap to follow."
In a document focusing on its plan for the province of Quebec, Edelman outlines identifying and recruiting "third-party voices" that can help "build an echo chamber of aligned voices." That document notes that Edelman's general manager for digital public affairs, Mike Krempasky, would serve as the senior counsel for the TransCanada work. Krempasky, co-founder of the conservative blog Red State, was also involved in a previous Edelman campaign that enlisted bloggers to promote WalMart without disclosing that the company was paying them.
Edelman faced pushback earlier this year after The Guardian and Motherboard published stories pointing out that the company had done work for interests that deny climate change. In a blog post responding to those stories, CEO Richard Edelman wrote, "We do not work with astroturf groups and we have never created a website for a client with the intent to deny climate change."
While the TransCanada documents predate Edelman's August blog post, they include descriptions of work that some may consider "astroturf" work. "If astroturf is using artificial grassroots to support a corporate agenda, this is clearly it," said Kert Davies, executive director of the Climate Investigations Center, which has been investigating the role of public relations firms in energy and climate campaigns.
Davies said the documents aren't that surprising, but it's not often you see the "full battle plan" for an industry PR effort. "This is a small window into the type of campaigns that oil companies and the American Petroleum Institute have been running for many years to try to affect the political arena."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/17/transcanada-pipeline-oil_n_6174570.html
I'd love to hear how they're gonna deal with the Québécois.
LOL!
I wonder if rooster, et al even realize those pointy hats they wear are actually called 'dunce caps'.
C'mon xtel, you could at least TRY to conceal your ignorant wonderment until noon or so, okay?
ROFLMAO!
GOP's Impeachment Insanity Exposed at the Slightest Mention of the Word "Immigration"
Obstructing, denouncing and demonizing Barack Obama are so central to the existence of the Republican Party today that its leaders simply ignore the real purposes of the president's proposed immigration orders. So someone should point out that his imminent decision will advance priorities to which the Republican right offers routine lip service: promoting family values, assisting law enforcement, ensuring efficient government and guarding national security.
Much of the argument for immigration reform -- and, in particular, the president's proposed executive orders -- revolves around the imperative of compassion for immigrant families. That is a powerful claim -- or should be, at least, for the self-styled Christians of the Republican right. If they aren't moved by empathy for struggling, aspiring, hardworking people, however, then maybe they should consider the practicalities.
America is not going to deport millions upon millions of Latino immigrants and their families to satisfy tea party prejudices, even if that were possible. Attempting to do so would be a gigantic waste of taxpayers' money, an unwelcome burden on thousands of major employers and an inhumane disgrace with international consequences, none of them good. It might or might not be "legal," but it would surely be stupid.
Instead, the Obama administration aims to relieve the terrible pressure on immigrant laborers and their children and to direct resources where they will best accomplish national objectives, by deporting serious felons who came here illegally and other entrants who may endanger security. By insisting on those broad yet clear distinctions, the president will protect the innocent and prosecute the not-so-innocent -- exactly what he should be doing with the support of Congress.
Those wise objectives don't interest legislators in the congressional majority, compared with the chance to rile their base by muttering threats against Obama. Just the other day, a tweet appeared under the name of Chuck Grassley, long among the dimmer members of the Senate, warning that the president is "flagrantly violating his oath" and "getting dangerously close to assuming a Nixonian posture." For the Iowa Republican, that's subtlety. In case you missed it, he was blustering about impeachment, and he isn't alone.
Like so many of the familiar accusations against the president, complaints that his executive orders on immigration are "Nixonian" or "lawless" lack merit. Such orders are well within the recognized authority of his office and considerably more conservative than the official conduct of some of his predecessors, such as George W. Bush -- who issued about 100 more executive orders than Obama has done so far.
With respect to constitutional principle -- the camouflage favored by Obama's antagonists -- their flexibility is telling. The separation of powers only matters when they say so. They say nothing when the president uses executive orders to tighten immigration and deport more people than all his predecessors combined. Indeed, when the outcome pleases Republicans, then nobody needs to worry about executive overreach, let alone high crimes and misdemeanors.
Nor does a presidential executive order -- even one granting "amnesty" to immigrant children -- trouble the Republicans when a Republican president implements that kind of reform. When President Ronald Reagan and then George H.W. Bush took action to keep immigrant families together during their respective administrations, refusing to wait for Congress to move, there was no barking from the likes of Grassley. (The two GOP presidents made those adjustments after the passage of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which created a "path to citizenship" for about 3 million undocumented workers. It was signed by the sainted Reagan.)
Republicans in the Senate and House have rejected every legislative opportunity on immigration, including measures to strengthen border security. That's because they prefer partisan confrontation -- and that is what they will get. The consequences for their party promise to be politically devastating -- and still worse if they are foolish enough to believe their own rhetoric about impeachment.
http://www.alternet.org/immigration/gops-impeachment-insanity-exposed-slightest-mention-word-immigration?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
6 Ways Religion Does More Bad Than Good
What if harming society is part of religion’s survival strategy?
Most British people think religion causes more harm than good, according to a survey commissioned by the Huffington Post. Surprisingly, even among those who describe themselves as “very religious” 20 percent say that religion is harmful to society. For that we can probably thank the internet, which broadcasts everything from Isis beheadings, to stories about Catholic hospitals denying care to miscarrying women, to lists of wild and weird religious beliefs, to articles about psychological harms from Bible-believing Christianity.
In 2010, sociologist Phil Zuckerman published Society Without God: What the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us About Contentment. Zuckerman lined up evidence that the least religious societies also tend to be the most peaceful, prosperous and equitable, with public policies that help people to flourish while decreasing both desperation and economic gluttony. We can debate whether prosperity and peace lead people to be less religious or vice versa. Indeed evidence supports the view that religion thrives on existential anxiety. But even if this is the case, there’s good reason to suspect that the connection between religion and malfunctioning societies goes both ways.
Here are six ways religions make peaceful prosperity harder to achieve:
1. Religion promotes tribalism. Infidel, heathen, heretic. Religion divides insiders from outsiders. Rather than assuming good intentions, adherents often are taught to treat outsiders with suspicion. “Be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers,” says the Christian Bible. “They wish that you disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them,” says the Koran (Sura 4:91).
At best, teachings like these discourage or even forbid the kinds of friendship and intermarriage that help clans and tribes become part of a larger whole. At worst, outsiders are seen as enemies of God and goodness, potential agents of Satan, lacking in morality and not to be trusted. Believers might huddle together, anticipating martyrdom. When simmering tensions erupt, societies fracture along sectarian fault lines.
2. Religion anchors believers to the Iron Age. Concubines, magical incantations, chosen people, stonings....The Iron Age was a time of rampant superstition, ignorance, inequality, racism, misogyny, and violence. Slavery had God’s sanction. Women and children were literally possessions of men. Warlords practiced scorched-earth warfare. Desperate people sacrificed living animals, agricultural products and enemy soldiers as burnt offerings intended to appease dangerous gods.
Sacred texts including the Bible, Torah and Koran all preserve and protect fragments of Iron Age culture, putting a god’s name and endorsement on some of the very worst human impulses. Any believer looking to excuse his own temper, sense of superiority, warmongering, bigotry, or planetary destruction can find validation in writings that claim to be authored by God.
Today, humanity’s moral consciousness is evolving, grounded in an ever deeper and broader understanding of the Golden Rule. But many conservative believers can’t move forward. They are anchored to the Iron Age. This pits them against change in a never-ending battle that consumes public energy and slows creative problem solving.
3. Religion makes a virtue out of faith. Trust and obey for there’s no other way to be happy in Jesus.So sing children in Sunday schools across America. The Lord works in mysterious ways,pastors tell believers who have been shaken by horrors like brain cancer or a tsunami. Faith is a virtue.
As science eats away at territory once held by religion, traditional religious beliefs require greater and greater mental defenses against threatening information. To stay strong, religion trains believers to practice self-deception, shut out contradictory evidence, and trust authorities rather than their own capacity to think. This approach seeps into other parts of life. Government, in particular, becomes a fight between competing ideologies rather than a quest to figure out practical, evidence-based solutions that promote wellbeing.
4.Religion diverts generous impulses and good intentions. Feeling sad about Haiti? Give to our mega-church. Crass financial appeals during times of crisis thankfully are not the norm, but religion does routinely redirect generosity in order to perpetuate religion itself. Generous people are encouraged to give till it hurts to promote the church itself rather than the general welfare. Each year, thousands of missionaries throw themselves into the hard work of saving souls rather than saving lives or saving our planetary life support system. Their work, tax free, gobbles up financial and human capital.
Besides exploiting positive moral energy like kindness or generosity, religion often redirects moral disgust and indignation, attaching these emotions to arbitrary religious rules rather than questions of real harm. Orthodox Jews spend money on wigs for women and double dishwashers. Evangelical parents, forced to choose between righteousness and love, kick queer teens out onto the street. Catholic bishops impose righteous rules on operating rooms.
5. Religion teaches helplessness. Que sera, sera—what will be will be. Let go and let God.We’ve all heard these phrases, but sometimes we don’t recognize the deep relationship between religiosity and resignation. In the most conservative sects of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, women are seen as more virtuous if they let God manage their family planning. Droughts, poverty and cancer get attributed to the will of God rather than bad decisions or bad systems; believers wait for God to solve problems they could solve themselves.
This attitude harms society at large as well as individuals. When today’s largest religions came into existence, ordinary people had little power to change social structures either through technological innovation or advocacy. Living well and doing good were largely personal matters. When this mentality persists, religion inspires personal piety without social responsibility. Structural problems can be ignored as long as the believer is kind to friends and family and generous to the tribal community of believers.
6. Religions seek power. Think corporate personhood. Religions are man-made institutions, just like for-profit corporations are. And like any corporation, to survive and grow a religion must find a way to build power and wealth and compete for market share. Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity—any large enduring religious institution is as expert at this as Coca-Cola or Chevron. And just like for-profit behemoths, they are willing to wield their power and wealth in the service of self-perpetuation, even it harms society at large.
In fact, unbeknown to religious practitioners, harming society may actually be part of religion’s survival strategy. In the words of sociologist Phil Zuckerman and researcher Gregory Paul, “Not a single advanced democracy that enjoys benign, progressive socio-economic conditions retains a high level of popular religiosity.” When people feel prosperous and secure, the hold of religion weakens.
http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-ways-religion-does-more-bad-good?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
If Presidential Action on Immigration Is Impeachable, Reagan and Bush Should Have Been Axed
As Republicans in Congress and right-wing columnists bellow that President Obama should be impeached if he issues an executive order to overhaul the nation’s immigration policies, it’s important to note that a long line of Republican presidents have done exactly the same thing for decades. In fact, more undocumented immigrants have been granted reprieves from prosecution and deportation protection by Republican presidents than Democrats, according to an American Immigration Council summary of dozens of White House-ordered reforms since 1956.
Today’s right-wingers don’t want to mention that their Republican hero, President Ronald Reagan, signed the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which gave up to 3 million unauthorized immigrants a path to legalization if they continuously had been in the U.S. since January 1982. The Reagan White House also issued executive orders that deferred deportation of children of non-citizens in more than 100,000 familes, and also told immigration authorities not to deport up to 200,000 Nicaruaguan war refugees.
In contrast, President Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals initiative (DACA), which provided a two-year renewable reprieve from deportation and granted work permits, affected up to 1.8 million immigrants, according to the American Immigration Council.
Another Republican president whose immigration policies could be an “impeachable” offense, according to Republican congressmen like Texas’ Joe Barton or Washington Post columinist Charles Krauthammer, would be President George Herbert Walker Bush, who in 1990 announced a blanket deferral of deportations for 1.5 million spouses and children of unauthorized people, which accounted for 40 percent of the nation’s undocumented population. That step was very similar to President Obama’s DACA executive order in 2012. Both presidents, a Republican and a Democrat, acted when Congress did not.
What fuming right-wingers fear is that the Obama White House might go big—ordering federal immigration authorities to refocus their activities and allowing several million undocumented households to breathe easy and lead more normal lives. The New York Times reported that there are as many as 3.3 million undocumented parents of children who are American citizens who have been in the U.S. for at least five years. The 1986 immigration reform law signed by President Reagan did not try to keep similar families together. It was slammed as inhumane then—and is still sharply criticized.
If Obama also includes children who were undocumented when they came to the U.S. in his expected executive orders, that could add another million or more people, the Times said. If the White House includes undocumented farm workers who have been here for years, that could add hundreds of thousands more.
While it is possible that Obama’s executive orders could be the largest-ever immigration reforms by any White House administration since World War Two, it is important to note that previous presidents issued large-scale immigration executive orders as part of a push to get Congress to act. President Bush’s 1990 reforms were based on a Senate-passed bill that was rejected by the House. However, after Bush issued those orders affecting 1.5 million spouses and chuldren, the House then passed the legislation. What you will probably not hear as Republicans complain loudly about Obama’s next steps, is that Republicans presidents—more so than Democrats—have granted amnesty to undocumented people.
What follows are 14 executive orders granting immigration relief by Republican presidents, starting in 1956, as compiled by the American Immigration Council. Before Obama, the Democratic president who used his office to allow the most immigrants to stay was Jimmy Carter, whose policies allowed more than 676,000 people to stay—not counting the 360,000 Vietnamese refugees who came during his and the presidency of his predecessor, Republican Gerald Ford.
Here are the 14 executive orders on immigration policy by Republican presidents:
• 1956. President Dwight Eisenhower allows 923 orphans to settle in the U.S.
• 1956-58. Eisenhower allows 31,915 Hungarian refugees to stay after Soviet invasion.
• 1959-72. Presidents Eisenhower through Richard Nixon let 621,403 Cuban exiles stay.
• 1977-82. Presidents Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and Reagan, let 15,000 Ethiopians stay.
• 1981-87. President Reagan allow 7,000 Polish refugees stay after Soviet-led crackdown.
• 1987. President Reagan stops deportations for 200,000 Nicaraguan war refugees.
• 1987. President Reagan allows 100,000 children of non-citizens to stay who were not affected by the 1986 law he signed granting amnesty to 3 million immigrants.
• 1989. President Bush allows 80,000 Chinese students stay after Tianenmen Square, which he formalized a year later suspending deportations and granting work permits.
• 1989. President Bush allows 2,225 Indochinese and 5,000 Soviet refugees to stay.
• 1990. President Bush defers deportation of 1.5 million unauthorized spouses and children of people legalized under 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act.
• 1991. President Bush allows 2,227 Kuwaiti refugees to stay after invasion by Iraq.
• 1992. Presidents Bush and Bill Clinton, a Democrat, allow 190,000 Salvadorans stay.
• 2006. President George W. Bush allows 1,574 Cuban doctors into the country.
• 2006. President George W. Bush allows 3,600 Liberians stay in the country.
http://www.alternet.org/immigration/if-presidential-action-immigration-impeachable-reagan-and-bush-should-have-been-axed?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
Why Won't Major Media Report on Muslims Combatting Terrorism?
There exist two scenarios where no one can hear you scream. The first is of course, in space because there's no oxygen. And the second is on Earth, but only if you're a global Muslim leader condemning ISIS and promoting universal religious freedom. Such was the result of the landmark address His Holiness the Khalifa of Islam, Mirza Masroor Ahmad, delivered last week in London before 1000 dignitaries, politicians, faith and thought leaders, and academics at the 2014 Ahmadiyya Muslim Peace Symposium.
As British journalist Sunny Hundal tweeted, "Ahmadiyya Muslim community Caliph devotes his speech to condemning ISIS in strongest terms tonight." Conservative British Parliamentary candidate Dan Watkins called it an "Inspiring speech on working for world peace." Justine Greening, UK's Secretary of State for Internal Development exclaimed, "His Holiness gave a speech that was incredibly powerful that set out all the claims violent groups like ISIS make and then totally demolished them in terms of what the Qur'an actually says. [His Holiness] helped [us] truly understand what true Islam is actually about, and that peace is at the heart of it."
So what did His Holiness declare that moved these individuals to offer such profuse praise for him and for Islam? And why didn't it get the attention of major media, major newspapers, or major news anchors. Why didn't anti-Islam critics breath a massive sigh of relief? While the picture seems hazy for the second and third questions above, I can clearly answer the first. At the 2014 Ahmadiyya Muslim Peace Symposium His Holiness continued his intellectual Jihad of the pen against extremism and intolerance, declaring,
It is never permissible, in any circumstance, to force another person to accept Islam or indeed any religion... All people are free to believe or not to believe. And so when the Holy Prophet was permitted only to convey the message of Islam and nothing further - how then can the so called Muslim leaders of today go beyond this and think they have more power, authority or rights than the Prophet of Islam?
His Holiness additionally looked deeper than the obvious ISIS atrocity, and called out the groups funding ISIS, demanding they be brought to justice,
I would also hereby like to question those people or organizations who claim that Islam is a religion of violence on the basis of the atrocities of the extremist groups. I would ask them to consider how these groups are able to acquire such funds that allow them to continue their extremist activities and warfare for so long? How do they acquire such sophisticated weapons? Do they have arms industries or factories? It is quite obvious that they are receiving the help and support of certain powers. This could be direct support from very oil-rich states or it could be other major powers covertly providing assistance.
And lest anyone think His Holiness is speaking in reactionary terms, on the contrary, His Holiness and his Caliph predecessors have relentlessly championed absolute justice in a long line of peaceful Islamic worldwide Caliphate spanning over a century. His Holiness has specifically lectured on U.S. Capitol Hill, before the British House of Lords, in front of European Parliament, and with countless heads of state. His Holiness has enacted international humanitarian relief efforts in Syria, Gaza, Pakistan, Kashmir, Liberia, Nigeria, and in hundreds of other nations and war-torn lands. His Holiness leads the world's single largest Muslim community -- spanning 206 countries -- that has existed for over 125 years while abhorring all forms of religious violence and terrorism.
Yet, while His Holiness accomplishes far above and beyond what critics and media alike ask when they complain, "Why aren't Muslims combatting extremism," it appears they have not heard him scream during his decade plus in office. Meanwhile, ISIS leader al-baghdadi makes one virulent unsubstantiated statement about Islam and violence and he garners 24/7 media coverage for the past six months.
The double standard is sickening.
So I suppose maybe I've been looking at this all wrong. It appears major media and critics can in fact hear Muslims scream -- but only when they scream threats and vitriol. Words and acts of altruism, compassion, love, tolerance, and pluralism fall on deaf ears.
The picture should appear clearly now. Muslims for peace threaten not only ISIS, but also the critics and media who make a living off promoting fear of ISIS and other extremist groups ascribing to Islam. The problem, therefore, isn't that Muslim leaders aren't speaking out. It is that critics know their future rests on drowning out Muslims for peace. So the next time you ask why peaceful Muslims aren't speaking out -- know that it's a slanted question. Know that we are speaking and acting out against all terrorism, but unfortunately that's not the narrative your media wants you to hear.
And if you're sick of this slanted narrative, then do something about it. Let the world hear you scream.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/qasim-rashid/why-wont-major-media-report_b_6162592.html
Truth is meaningless unless it benefits the powerful. ...Any Republican can tell you that.
DesertDrifter - Don't do that. Keyboard, desk, screen...ALLL...over-caffinated now.
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!
MORE po' lil' stupes: CEO of TransCanada Concedes just 50 permanent jobs from Keystone XL Pipeline
Seeming overlooked during yesterday's (11/16/14) interview on ABC's "ThisWeek", Russ Girling, current CEO of "TransCanada"... the company behind the Keystone XL Pipeline... conceded a claim by Reuters last year that, once constructed, the Keystone XL would produce as few as "FIFTY permanent jobs." But, he went on to argue, that the number did not take into account the nearly "9,000 temporary construction jobs" or the estimated "42,000 'indirect' jobs (from new businesses along the construction route)."
Seriously? These are the “jobs, jobs, jobs” Republicans have been promising? The very thought that this country may risk certain environmental disaster to create fewer jobs over TWO years than it needs every TWO weeks just to keep up with population growth, is unfathomable. Tell me we’re not being ruled by people THAT dumb!
Remember when supporters of the pipeline were claiming as many as "one MILLION new jobs?"
Worse, construction of the pipeline will produce an economic dead zone along it's 1.200 mile route... half of which has ALREADY BEEN BUILT. Steel pipe for the pipeline has ALREADY BEEN PURCHASED FROM INDIA, so there are no jobs to be gained there either.
I've been reporting on the nonsense surrounding the Keystone XL Pipeline for years now and see looming disaster on the horizon as Congress foolishly considers approving this White Elephant all in the name of possibly helping out one DINO Democratic Senator (Mary Landrieu) who... two weeks after Democrats suffered huge losses by conceding their opponent positions on the issues... still thinks agreeing with her opponent on the #KXL is her path to victory.
Have we learned NOTHING?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/17/1345441/-CEO-of-TransCanada-Concedes-just-50-permanent-jobs-from-Keystone-XL-Pipeline
Keystone has NEVER been about jobs.
Po' lil' stupes: Kansas Must Cut $279M from Budget By July To Avoid Bouncing Checks
...Now Kansas is about to learn some harsh realities.
http://www.kansas.com/...
Republican legislators have already begun dividing into two camps about how to solve the state’s budget woes, foretelling a fight that’ll play out within the party that controls both the Kansas House and Senate.
Kansas must cut $279 million from its budget before July just to be dead broke with a balance of zero in its checking account.
Gov. Sam Brownback can choose to make allotments, automatic spending cuts that don’t require the Legislature’s approval. He can also enact administrative policy changes at state agencies to save money. The governor has yet to make a public comment on the budget since the revised revenue numbers were released Monday evening.
Democrats in the State House face an uphill battle with Republicans, who have said that they will not consider raising revenues.
Republicans hold supermajorities in both the House and Senate, so it’ll be up to the GOP leaders to find a solution and get their members to pass it. Public statements from Senate President Susan Wagle, R-Wichita, and House Speaker Ray Merrick, R-Stilwell, have signaled a potential conflict within the party on how that will play out in the coming months. Wagle has said that lawmakers have a duty to balance the budget and that they would look at both taxes and spending to come up with a solution.
Merrick, on the other hand, borrowing a line from President Ronald Reagan, has said the state does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. “My opinion is, Susan left the door open on both sides of the equation. And Ray didn’t,” said Rep. Mark Hutton, R-Wichita. “Ray slammed the door.”
http://www.kansas.com/...
House Republicans, who will present a super majority for the now outnumbered Democrats are making the argument that no means of income growth will be considered, it is cuts all the way.
Speaker Merrick continues:
Merrick called delaying or reversing income tax cuts a nonstarter in an interview before the election. He argued the tax cuts would spur economic growth, while government spending would not. He said that former Gov. Kathleen Sebelius “spent money like a drunken sailor” and argued that government jobs do not contribute to the health of the state’s economy.
“Government employees produce nothing. They’re a net consumer. And you got that cost forever and ever and ever because they’re on the KPERS (pension) plan, they’re on all the government insurance and everything,” Merrick said. “That is employment to Democrats. Hire more (government employees). And that was Kathleen; she’d brag about her employment number, ‘Oh, I got a lot of people employed.’ Yeah, you got a lot more government employees employed. That doesn’t stimulate the economy.”
Merrick, who currently receives at least some of his income through his position as speaker of the house (admittedly, not a lot, by my math, income in the Kansas legislature is paltry, sub $20k a year), seems to be at odds with himself over what good government employees are to the community. I suppose he's never had to deal with crime, firefighters, etc. Or, as Gail Finney, Democrat from Wichita points out:
http://www.kansas.com/...
“I’m just really concerned about what might happen (to social services),” said Rep. Gail Finney, D-Wichita. “You know we’re going to be up there advocating, trying to maintain at least what we have, but it’s going to be a difficult session.”
The Kansas City Star has taken to referring to this problem as a "Kansas Black Hole"
http://www.kansascity.com/...
Kansas must cut $280M from the upcoming budget. It will need to cut another $436M from the 2016 budget. The question most Democrats in this state face is a serious one: without any legislative power (super majority R in both houses) do you scream and make noise? Or do you quietly let this happen?
We may find out the answer to that question soon enough.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/16/1345408/-Kansas-Must-Cut-279M-from-Budget-By-July-To-Avoid-Bouncing-Checks
Maybe the Kochs will donate the needed $279 million...as good neighbors, of course.
LOL!
Just think - what woulda happened if they'd really WANTED it?
WHO is "Paloozer"?
Re:
Lotto123 Member Level Saturday, 11/15/14 09:15:14 PM
Re: FadeMeToWin post# 99605
Post #99606 of 99608
If the world is lucky Paloozer will get her vocal chords Botox'd next...
Let us hope the gradient between Judge and Emperor remains steep.
Agreed. I do think Justice Roberts may well end up painting himself into a corner down the road a bit.
'Nuff said.
I am - you're not. Retailers...and pols...were just as greedy 60 years ago as they are today. The difference is our values are very different now. 'Nuff said.
Snow's a-coming...enjoy.
I remember when "Black Friday" was the day when city employees everywhere busted serious ass putting up Xmas street decorations to complement the unveiling of retailer's holiday windows on Saturday morning.
i.e; A lexicographic illustration of the law of diminishing returns thru compounding variables.
Damn...more coffee.
Being a dumb ol' hillbilly, I gotsa question...
I just received an email advert re; a "Pre-Savings Event" from Walmart. Does anybody have a clue what the hell that is? Is it preferable to a Post-Savings Event?
rooster, the Blaze??? ROFLMAO!!!
The dance begins...
John Boehner Keeps Immigration Showdown On The Table
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) kept the threat of a government shutdown alive on Thursday when asked about President Barack Obama's plans for executive action on immigration. The speaker was asked at a press conference whether he believes that a government funding bill should include language to block the president from making sweeping changes to immigration policy, which Obama may do as soon as next week.
"We're going to fight the president tooth and nail if he continues down this path. This is the wrong way to govern," Boehner said. Later, he added, "All of the options are on the table. We're having discussions with our members, and no decisions have been made as to how we will fight this if he proceeds."
Obama's planned executive action could lead to millions of undocumented immigrants being allowed to stay and work legally on a provisional basis, something Republicans have decried as "amnesty" and called unconstitutional. Fifty-nine House Republican members have signed on to a letter from Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) urging the head of the Appropriations Committee to include language in funding bills to block Obama's executive action on immigration. "As you know, the Congress has the power of the purse and should use it as a tool to prevent the President from implementing policies that are contrary to our laws and the desire of the American people," the letter reads.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) issued a statement on Thursday also calling for the House to use its "power of the purse" to block "Obama’s anticipated, unconstitutional act to be implemented, for if it is it will destroy the pillars of American Exceptionalism". "The audacity of this President to think he can completely destroy the Rule of Law with the stroke of a pen is unfathomable to me," he said. "It is unconstitutional, it is cynical, and it violates the will of the American people. Our Republic will not stand if we tolerate a President who is set upon the complete destruction of the Rule of Law."
Boehner said in his press conference that their goal "is to stop the president from violating his own oath of office and violating the Constitution. It's not to shut down the government." He said House Republicans can find other ways, even beyond the government funding measures, to respond if Obama makes immigration changes without Congressional approval. "If he wants to go off on his own, there are things he's just not going to get," Boehner said.
A similar fight over immigration is brewing in the Senate, where Republican members have similarly promised to do anything they can to keep Obama's executive action from being implemented. "If the president illegally tries to grant amnesty to millions of more people, I believe Congress should use every available tool to stop that amnesty and to defend the rule of law," Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told The Huffington Post on Thursday.
But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said at a Thursday press conference that Republicans "will not be shutting the government down or threatening to default on the national debt."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/13/john-boehner-government-shutdown_n_6154770.html
Rooster, here's your problem...
American Researchers Discover 'Stupidity Virus'
American scientists have located a virus that attacks human DNA, which may cause those infected to be less intelligent, impairing brain activity, learning and memory. Researchers from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and the University of Nebraska have identified traces of an algal virus, known as ATCV-1, in throat swabs drawn from healthy volunteers which appeared to lessen their mental capacity. The researchers had originally been working on an unrelated study into throat microbes when they unexpectedly located traces of ATCV-1 in human DNA samples. At first the research team, led by Dr Robert Yolken of Johns Hopkins, didn’t know what ATCV-1 was, and had to carry out a database search to find out more about the unknown virus.
ATCV-1 typically infects a species of green algae found in lakes and rivers, and has not previously been known to infect humans. However, when Yolken’s team screened a group of 92 healthy volunteers who were taking part in a study on cognitive function, the virus was found to be present in 43.5% of them. According to the study, those infected with the virus performed around 10% worse on tests analysing visual processing speeds. In one test, infected volunteers were slower to draw a line connecting a sequence of numbers randomly distributed on a page than their uninfected counterparts.
The researchers found that the presence of the virus was linked to lower attention spans and decreased spatial awareness, and a “statistically significant decrease in the performance on cognitive assessments of visual processing and visual motor speed”. Researchers found no connection between slower brain function and variables such as differences in sex, education level, income, race, and even cigarette smoking.
The team carried out further tests, in which they injected uninfected and infected green algae into the mouths of mice and put them through a series of lab tests. The results revealed that infected animals took 10% longer to find their way out of mazes and spent 20% less time exploring new objects than uninfected mice, conforming to the findings amongst human volunteers. According to the study, the virus appeared to impair the “learning, memory formation, and the immune response to viral exposure” of the mice.
Professor James L. Van Etten of the University of Nebraska, who was a member of the research team, told Newsweek that little is currently known about how the virus could be transmitted to humans in such abundance, but that they had “no reason to believe that [the viruses] are contagious among people or animals”. Van Etten said that the team has yet to identify any potential indicators of the virus’s presence in humans. “My best guess is that these viruses may infect another microorganism besides the algae that we have been studying... This other microorganism may be the way that the virus gets into the throat,” he added.
http://www.newsweek.com/american-researchers-discover-stupidity-virus-283319