Twitter Smacks Down Promoted Tweets By Notorious White Supremacist Troll

Infamous iPad hacker and white power troll Andrew ‘weev’ Auernheimer is having a hard time spreading his bigoted, offensive views on Twitter –...

Twitter Smacks Down Wingnut Troll

*** 

As you can see it is not only this blog tat is coming down hard on wingnut trolls.

America’s richest congressman says poor in the US are ‘envy of the world’

America’s richest congressman says poor in the US are ‘envy of the world’

Louie Gohmert: It’s Obama’s Fault We’re all Idiots

I paraphrase, but not by much. Gohmert uses nuns, the Posse Comitatus Act, and Waco 1993 to prove Obama is to blame…

Oh sweet little six-and-a-half-pound rifle-totin’ government hatin’ baby Jesus. Florida Governor Rick Scott has taken the “Thanks, Obama!” meme to a whole ‘nother level by blaming President Obama and hospitals for his massive suckage factor.

As an editorial in the Tampa Bay Times tells us, “Rick Scott is all about avoiding responsibility and blaming others.”

But that’s not the craziest news recently, believe it or not. And whatever Scott’s got, it’s not limited to Florida. In fact, to judge by recent outbursts from people like Greg Abbott and Ted Cruz and Louie Gohmert, it may have come to Florida by way of Texas.

We saw Tuesday how Texas Republican Louie Gohmert jumped on the Jade Helm 15 conspiracy bandwagon. But it turns out it’s not Gohmert’s fault he’s an idiot. It’s Obama’s.

He said it’s all because Obama picked on nuns.

Gohmert’s “logic” began with the Little Sisters of the Poor not wanting to sign a Obamacare birth control waiver because dog doesn’t allow Obamacare waiver signing, apparently (I missed that passage in the Bible). At least, that is what he told wingnut hate group leader Tony Perkins on Washington Watch Wednesday:

From this administration’s standpoint, if you’re a saintly nun that has dedicated your life to helping the helpless, well, we’ve got to sue you and force you into our program, forget your religious beliefs, we’re coming after you. This is the kind of thing this administration does, they help make people concerned about their government.

Apparently, a bunch of deranged nuns saying “God tells them not to” sign a waiver makes people distrust the federal government.

I think it’s more likely that a bunch of racist white folks with AR-15s distrust the government because a black man is living in a white house:

If you’re still not connecting the dots here, Gohmert then takes you to the Posse Comitatus Act, which led him to the 1993 Waco incident.

The Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) of 1878, you might remember, placed limits on the use of federal troops to keep law and order, unless directed by the President or by Congress. This ultimately made it easier for white folks to terrorize blacks without interference.

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

-Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1385

The Waco incident centered on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms raid on the Branch Davidian compound on February 28, 1993, which resulted in four dead ATF agents, six dead Branch Davidians, and a 51-day siege followed by an all-out assault that killed 76 people.

So to review this exercise in Gohmertian Logic:

Little Sisters of the Poor –> Posse Comitatus Act –> Waco –> Jade Helm 15.

Got that yet?

Now there is a common thread here: the Little Sisters of the Poor is a Catholic organization and Spanish people tend to be Catholics and a lot of Spanish people emigrated to Central America and a lot of Central Americans have emigrated to Texas, a place where white folks benefitted immensely from Yankee troops going home so they could beat up, lynch, and otherwise terrorize helpless black folks, and where lunatic David Koresh stockpiled an arsenal that allowed him to face down the ATF and the federal government, all of which seems to somehow inspire other lunatics like Louie Gohmert to think the federal government maybe wants some payback from Texas?

Hey, don’t blame me. I’m just trying to make sense of it all, because frankly, this is some kooky sh*t. If you’ve got a better explanation, roll it out in the comments below.

We shamelessly tease these people because they are idiots:

But they are so serious about it:

And,

As just two examples.

Which only makes it all that much funnier – and embarrassing. In fact, Texas is such an embarrassment at this point that I doubt we could give it away. After all, what advanced nation would want a big chunk of 13th century dragging them down?

What Texas needs, as I’m sure President Obama understands, is not federal intervention, but psychiatric intervention on a large scale, something that would make the Berlin Airlift look like child’s play by comparison.

Unfortunately, though the government has apparently figured out how to turn people gay, it hasn’t figured out how to turn people smart.

Scott Walker’s Corporate Tax Breaks Come Back To Haunt Him

"This is a manufactured deficit crisis," said University of Wisconsin student organizer Amanda McGovern, blasting Governor Walker for trying to cut $300 million from the public schools.

The Truth Be Told

Judge Gives Republican Mega-Donor Sheldon Adelson Epic ‘Judge Judy’ Treatment

by Marc Belisle

Sheldon Adelson’s day in court on Friday perfectly symbolizes everything wrong with our political system today.

The billionaire casino magnate of Las Vegas Sands is one of the richest men in the world. In 2012, he became the biggest single political donor in American history after propping up Newt Gingrich in the primaries and then supporting Mitt Romney with over $100 million.
On Friday, he argued with a judge in Las Vegas, and the judge put him in his place. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal,

“’Sir, you need to answer the question,’ District Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez told Adelson, the billionaire chairman and CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corp.
Adelson argued that the question was abusive, but Gonzalez disagreed. He continued to protest, prompting the judge to tell him, ‘Sir, you don’t get to argue with me. You understand that?’
The question centered on a February 2009 email and whether Adelson’s secretary had sent it on his behalf.
His final answer: ‘I don’t know.’

Adelson is in court defending himself against a wrongful termination lawsuit brought by a former executive, Steven Jacobs, at one of Adelson’s casinos in Macau. This may seem mundane, but the alleged reasons why Adelson fired Jacobs, if true, indicate frightening depths of corruption that motivate Adelson’s donations to major Republican politicians.
While he was visiting China in 2001 to investigate the possibilities of building hotels in Macau, Adelson was allegedly told by the mayor of Beijing that he was worried about a bill pending in Congress. The bill would have announced Congress’ opposition to Beijing as a host for the 2008 Olympic Games due to China’s human rights record. Adelson allegedly called Tom Delay — who was later convicted of money laundering for moving corporate money to political candidates — and Delay allegedly called back a few hours later and told Adelson,

“you tell your mayor that he can be assured that this bill will never see the light of day.”

The bill stalled in Congress, China was appointed to host the 2008 Olympics, and shortly thereafter, Adelson was awarded a massive contract worth $12 billion for four casinos in Macao, becoming

“likely the largest foreign investor in China—ever.”

The Justice Department, the Securities Exchange Commission and the Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated whether Adelson violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The 1977 Act stipulates that American businesses operating overseas must adhere to American anti-corruption regulations, and it particularly bars them from bribing foreign officials.
According to Media Matters,

“In 2012, Adelson’s corporation came under three different investigations from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), an anti-bribery statute. Additionally, the Times reported at the time that several of the company’s subsidiaries also ‘came under investigation by Chinese regulators.’
Adelson allegedly attempted to bribe the Chief Executive of Macau, where a substantial portion of his casino business was located, and reportedly instructed Sands Corp. to bribe a Macau legislator with about $700,000 in ‘legal fees.’ (ProPublica reported that ‘several Las Vegas Sands executives resigned or were fired after expressing concerns’ about the fee.) A former Sands Corp. executive also alleged that Adelson fired him after he refused to engage in illegal activity and protested the presence of Chinese organized crime syndicates in Sands’ Macau casinos.
Adelson initially insisted that he was being unfairly targeted, but Sands Corp.’s own audit committee ultimately admitted there were ‘likely violations’ of the anti-bribery law. And in August 2013, Sands Corp. agreed to pay the federal government more than $47 million in a settlement to resolve a separate money-laundering investigation, in which the casinos were accused of ‘accepting millions from high-rolling gamblers accused of drug trafficking and embezzlement.'”

The DOJ, SEC and FBI investigations centered around the testimony of former Sands Macao executive Steve Jacobs, who says that he was wrongfully terminated because, he:

“has alleged that Adelson ordered him to keep quiet about sensitive issues at the Sands casinos on the Chinese island of Macau, including the casinos’ alleged ‘involvement with Chinese organized crime groups, known as Triads, connected to the junket business.’”

According to Matt Isaacs’s extensive report on Reuters, Jacobs has testified

“that he was repeatedly threatened with termination if he ‘objected to and/or refused to carry out Adelson’s illegal demands.’”

Isaacs reports that:

“U.S. diplomats and the Chinese government share the concerns raised by Jacobs about Macau’s booming junkets industry, which they describe as rife with organized crime.”

The Chinese government is becoming increasingly worried about the alleged Triads’ connections to junket operators in Macao and their high-roller mainland clients who:

“are betting with embezzled state money or proceeds from official corruption, and substantial portions of these funds are flowing on to organized crimes groups in mainland China, if not Macau itself.”

Isaacs reports that Jacobs also alleged that Adelson ordered him to look into possibilities for blackmailing local officials,

“Adelson, Jacobs charged, instructed him to secretly investigate senior Macau government officials. ‘Any negative information could be used to exert ‘leverage’ in order to thwart government regulations/initiatives,’ the lawsuit claims.”

Isaacs also reports that the casino employed a highly placed local manager who was an alleged crime boss and an alleged murder conspiracy ringleader:

“Last year, Reuters published a report on a man named Cheung Chi-tai, described in court testimony as the mastermind behind a plot to murder a dealer suspected of cheating.
At trial a witness identified Cheung as a leader of the Wo Hop To — one of the largest triads in Hong Kong.
Cheung was also, according to witness testimony, ‘the person in charge’ of a VIP room at the Sands Macao, and Hong Kong stock exchange filings showed him to be a ‘substantial shareholder’ in a junket company with ties to the cloistered room.
The allegations emerged in a routine trial, barely noted beyond the crime pages of Hong Kong newspapers. Yet the revelations were historic: this was one of the first documented examples of an alleged criminal figure financially linked to a U.S.-based, publicly traded casino.”

Jacobs’ testimony paints a picture of Adelson aggressively doing absolutely whatever it took, regardless of any law or ethical norm in any country, to make his casinos more profitable.
Adelson responded to Jacobs’ allegations, telling a reporter,

“We will go after him in a way that he won’t forget…”

So, that is why Adelson is in court in Las Vegas this week. His former executive alleges that he was marched out the door, not even being allowed to collect his things, because he refused to fulfill Adelson’s highly illegal demands.
This man — who allegedly relied on bribery, corruption, organized crime, embezzlement, threats, intimidation, blackmail and even the help of murder conspirators to turn a profit — is the Republican party’s most generous donor. His alleged corruption is so extreme that it raised red flags even for the Chinese government. Yet, every Republican who wants to be president also wants to woo Sheldon Adelson for his unlimited money, which flows from the Chinese Triads. He is quickly becoming one of the most influential men in Washington, a sort of puppet master, frequently just behind the scenes on many issues, and influencing decisions on the right.
This is how out of control our campaign finance system is. This man should not have anywhere near the influence that he wields in our political system. If we had a truly functioning democracy, he would not be the godfather of the American right; he would be wearing an orange jumpsuit. He clearly believes that he is above the law, so it was a much needed reminder on Friday when the judge reminded him that she is the boss in her courtroom.

Bewildered Florida Woman Sues State For Marking ‘Sexual Predator’ On Her Driver’s License

Tammy Masters couldn’t figure out why she kept getting all these weird looks every time she showed her new Florida driver’s license.

Read full story

Arkansas pastor’s wife turns him in after finding ‘tens of thousands’ of child porn files

An Arkansas youth pastor is facing child pornography charges after his wife reportedly found images of underage girls on his computer and turned them over to police.

Arkansas preacher and child porn: The story writes itself

Faith healer sues atheist video blogger for using science to expose him on YouTube as a ‘swindler’

 

'Faith healer' exposed as the fraud and swindler he is and he doesn't like it

Surprisingly, Lawsuit Against ‘All Homosexuals’ Summarily Dismissed

by Joe Patrice 

Sylvia Ann Driskell’s dream of returning America to an era of glorious bigotry is over. The bright flame that was the “Ambassador to dog, and his, son, jesus christ” [sic] burned brightly before a federal judge unceremoniously snuffed it out. Cue Sir Elton for another remake of Candle In The Wind. Or… on second thought Driskell may not be a fan.
No sooner did we learn about “boastful” gays turning America into New Sodom, than Judge John Gerrard (who replaced the inimitable Judge Kopf as an active status judge… we were so close!) consigned us all to our fate.
“And you will know my name is the JUDGE when I lay my 12(h)(3) upon thee.” I think that’s Ezekiel 25:17.

Here, the plaintiff does not set forth any factual or legal basis for a federal claim under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. Even construing the complaint liberally, it does not contain allegations reasonably suggesting federal question jurisdiction exists in this matter. Nor can the plaintiff plausibly allege that her citizenship is different from the citizenship of each defendant. And she has not asked for any money damages, much less enough to satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Therefore, the Court finds subject-matter jurisdiction is not proper in this action pursuant to either 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 or 1332.

Judge Gerrard could have sent Driskell packing with that alone, but he couldn’t help but take a few detours into issues he didn’t even reach. Like her flagrant whiff on the basics of Rule 8, her woeful lack of standing, her inability to come close to effecting service, and the general impropriety of seeking religious answers from a federal court, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Ballard: “‘[t]he law knows no heresy, and is committed to the support of no dogma, the establishment of no sect.'”
And lest you’re getting your hopes up for Driskell v. Homosexuals II: Electric Boogaloo, Judge Gerrard is having none of that noise.

The Court will not give the plaintiff an opportunity to amend her complaint in this matter because it is obvious that amendment would be futile. Even liberally construed, the plaintiff does not set forth any discernible claim for relief over which this Court has jurisdiction. This Court is not the place to seek opinions regarding theological matters; this particular forum is closed and the case will be dismissed.

Emphasis in original. So that’s not coming back any time soon.
As we turn the page from this latest episode of “pro sanity,” it’s important to remember that poor Ambassador Driskell may have lost, but through her efforts, the rest of us all won. Let’s throw a rave to celebrate.

The Daily Drift

Hey, wingnuts, yeah we're talking to you ...!  

 

The Truth Be Told is read in 203 countries around the world.

 
Do Republicans even have mothers? ... !

Today is - Mother's Day
 

Don't forget to visit our sister blog Carolina Naturally

Some of our readers today have been in:

The Americas

Buenos Aires, Argentina

La Paz, Bolivia

Maraba, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, Brazil

Beauharnois, Chelsea, Montreal, Ottawa, Sorel-Tracy, Vancouver and Victoria, Canada

Santiago, Chile

Bogota and Medellin, Colombia

San Jose, Costa Rica

Boaco, Nicaragua

Asuncion, Paraguay

Trujillo, Peru

Pajaros and San Juan, Puerto Rico

Barquisimeto, Venezuela

Europe

Minsk, Belarus

Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina

Glavinitsa, Ruse and Sofia, Bulgaria

Bestovje and Zagreb, Croatia

Limassol, Cyprus

London, England

Calais, Laval, Lyon, Nice, Paris, Rouen, Saint-Julien and Salon-de-Provence, France

Meria, Georgia

Berlin and Giessen, Germany

Athens and Marousi, Greece

Reykjavik, Iceland

Dublin, Ireland

Milan, Prato, Rome and Venice, Italy

Riga, Latvia

Amsterdam, Den Haag and Rotterdam, Netherlands

Oslo, Norway

Katowice and Warsaw, Poland

Costa de Caparica and Lisbon, Portugal

Bucharest, Romania

Moscow, Ryazan and Vladivostok, Russia

Edinburgh, Scotland

Belgrade, Serbia

Ljubljana, Slovenia

Barcelona, Madrid, Reus and Valencia, Spain

Lulea, Sweden

Ankara and Mercin, Turkey

Dnipropetrovsk, Kiev and Odessa, Ukraine

Hook, Wales

Asia

Beijing and Guangzhou, China

Bangalore, Calicut, Chennai, Coimbatore, Delhi, Kolkata, Mumbai, New Delhi, Patna, Pune, Raipur,

Shivaji Nagar and Trichur, India

Denpasar and Jakarta, Indonesia

Tehran, Iran

As Samawah, Iraq

Seoul, Korea

Bandar Labuan, Kota Kinabalu, Kuala Lumpur and Sibu, Malaysia

Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

Kathmandu, Nepal

Islamabad and Karachi, Pakistan

Gaza, Palestine

Al Wakrah, Qatar

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Bua Yai, Mae Chan and Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand

Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Africa

Cairo, Egypt

Rabat, Morocco

Cape Town, Johannesburg, Pretoria and Secunda, South Africa

Carthage, Tunisia

The Pacific

Brisbane, Homebush, Strathfield, Sydney and Woolloongabba, Australia

Makati, Philippines

Federal Appeals Court Rules That The NSA’s Massive Surveillance Program Is Illegal

The database, which the public learned about after Edward Snowden leaked a court order concerning the NSA's surveillance activities in 2013, is truly breathtaking in its scope.

More Americans Are Comfortable With A Gay Presidential Candidate Than With An Evangelical One

Oh, Snap ... Take That All You Religio-Wingnuts 

by Janie Velencia

More Americans feel comfortable with a presidential candidate who identifies as gay or lesbian than with one who identifies as an evangelical Christian, according to a new poll.
The latest WSJ/NBC poll listed a series of qualities in a potential presidential candidate and asked respondents whether they'd "be enthusiastic," "be comfortable with," "have some reservations about" or "be very uncomfortable with" a candidate with each of those qualities.
The results revealed that Americans are actually quite open to having a gay presidential candidate. Sixty-one percent said they would be either enthusiastic about or comfortable with a gay or lesbian candidate, while only 37 percent said they would have reservations or be uncomfortable.
By comparison, respondents were a little less comfortable with the prospect of a candidate who is an evangelical Christian. Fifty-two percent said they'd be enthusiastic about or comfortable with an evangelical Christian running for president, while 44 percent expressed some degree of hesitancy about the idea. (Two percent of respondents said they were not sure about a gay or lesbian candidate, while four percent were not sure about an evangelical.)
The results point to a cultural shift in perceptions of gay people in recent years. While perspectives on evangelicals remain largely the same, the same survey found in 2006 that only 43 percent of Americans fully accepted the idea of a gay or lesbian presidential candidate, while 53 percent had reservations or were uncomfortable.
Other qualities that made more respondents uncomfortable than comfortable included not having a college degree, being a leader in the tea party, and lacking previous elected experience.
The WSJ/NBC poll surveyed 1,000 adults via live interviews on landlines and cell phones between April 26-30.

Bernie Sanders Drops A Liberal Bomb On CNN’s Republican Shrieking Points

CNN tried to slow-down Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) with a slew of Republican shrieking points, but all they got for their efforts was heavy dose of the liberal policies that reflect the leftward shift of the country.

Transcript via CNN’s New Day:

CUOMO: So you’re saying you’re not going to be about the big money, but you have that big Supreme Court case, Citizens United. I mean that – that says that money is speech and they can play the game and it seems like everybody takes money in politics these days. You’ll never change it.

SANDERS: No, Chris, we – look, Chris, let’s be very clear. When you have a handful of billionaires able to spend as much money as they want, supporting their candidates, so people like the Koch who are extreme right wing, what you are looking – and let’s be clear – is the undermining of American democracy and moving our nation to an oligarchic form of society – and I mean that very seriously – where a handful of billionaires will determine who are elected officials are. We’re not going to do that. I’m not going to take – establish a super PAC. We’re getting small contributions from working people. I think we can raise the kinds of money we need, not to outspend our opponents, that won’t happen, but to run a credible and, in fact, winning campaign.

….

CUOMO: How do you get them out on the polls?

SANDERS: Ah.

CUOMO: Because when you say things about expanding entitlements and giving more to the have nots, that’s unpopular. It sounds like it’s expensive. And the people who vote may not like it.

SANDERS: I disagree with you, Chris. First of all, it is not expensive in the sense that if you say to people all over this country, should large profitable multinational corporations, who today are not paying a nickel in federal taxes because they’re stashing their money in Cayman Islands and other tax havens, start paying their fair share? The American people, across the political spectrum, say, yes, they should.

We’re losing well over $100 billion every single year because of those taxes. I’ve introduced legislation that would end that. Talk to Warren Buffett, one of the richest guys in the world. He says, you know, it’s absurd. My effective tax rate is lower than my secretaries. The American people understand that. So what we have got to do is spend money intelligently.

We have got to make college affordable for our young people if we’re going to compete in the global economy. I’ll tell you what else we need to do. Real unemployment in this country is not 5.5 percent, it’s 11 percent. We need to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. And when we do that, in terms of roads, bridges, water systems, rail, airports, we can put some 13 million people back to work. And that’s the kind of agenda that I’m going to be fighting for.

Chris Cuomo’s questions were completely detached from reality. There is no polling anywhere that shows that expanding entitlements is unpopular. A September 2014 poll revealed that 73% of Republicans support expanding Social Security benefits. The idea that the American people would hate it because it would be “expensive” is straight out of the Republican talking points.

The attitude that Citizens United money can’t be removed from politics is exactly what Sanders and everyone who is trying to prevent the conservative billionaire purchase of the government is fighting against. There was a time when elections were publicly funded. The idea that the dark money can’t be removed from the system is absurd.

Anytime a Democrat or a liberal is on national television, the anchor feels compelled to “balance out” the program by asking questions that are based on Republican shrieking points.

One of the benefits of Hillary Clinton’s move to the left and also of the Sanders presidential campaign is that the corporate media is being forced to give airtime to popular Democratic positions. CNN tried their best to knock down any momentum for liberal ideas that are popular with the American people, but the truth did shine through.

The reality that the media hasn’t caught up to yet is that Republicans are claiming that America is a conservative nation while the ground is moving left beneath their feet.

Bernie Sanders Delivers A Body Blow To Wall St With New Bill To Break Up The Big Banks

Senator. Bernie Sanders is taking on Wall Street directly with a new bill that would break up the nation’s “too big to fail” banks.

At a press conference announcing the bill, Senator Sanders said:

No single financial institution should be so large that its failure would cause catastrophic risk to millions of Americans or to our nation’s economic well-being. No single financial institution should have holdings so extensive that its failure would send the world economy into crisis. If an institution is too big to fail, it is too big to exist and that is the bottom line.

…..

If the American people are wondering why tens of millions of Americans are being charged interest rates of more than 20 percent on their credit cards, while big banks can receive virtually zero interest loans from the Federal Reserve, the lack of competition in the banking industry is a major reason for that.

If Teddy Roosevelt were alive today, do you know what he would say? He would say break ’em up. And he would be right.

And that’s exactly why we are here today.

The bill that I am introducing today with Congressman Brad Sherman would require regulators at the Financial Stability Oversight Council to establish “Too Big To Fail” list of financial institutions and other huge entities whose failure would pose a catastrophic risk on the United States economy without a taxpayer bailout.

This list must include, but is not limited to JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and Morgan Stanley.

….

Importantly, under this bill, none of the institutions on the “Too Big to Fail list” would be able to receive a taxpayer bailout from the Federal Reserve; nor could they gamble with the federally insured bank deposits of the American people while they are on this list.

….

The function of banking should be to provide affordable loans to small businesses to create jobs in the productive economy. The function of banking should be to provide affordable loans to Americans to purchase homes and cars. Wall Street cannot be an island onto itself.

It is an exciting time on the left. Hillary Clinton has taken a bold and very liberal position on immigration reform while her opponent for the Democratic nomination, Senator Bernie Sanders, has filed legislation that will break up the Big Banks. While Republicans are trying to avoid any of the discussions that matter to a vast majority of Americans, the candidates for the Democratic nomination are making it clear what they think the future of the country should look like.

Senator Sanders has already taken on the Koch brothers; now he is going after Congress’s other sacred big fish, Wall Street.

The left is on the march, and the billionaires and corporations are in for a fight.

Hillary Clinton Silences Terrified Republicans With Aggressive Stance On Immigration

The Republican response to Hillary Clinton’s call for a path to citizenship for immigrants who are in the United States illegally has been met with an awkward air of terrified silence from the Republican presidential candidates.

During a roundtable in Nevada, former Sec. of State Clinton said:

If we claim that we are for families, we have to pull together and solve the outstanding issues around our broken immigration system. We can’t wait any longer for a path to full and equal citizenship.

….

Make no mistakes, not a single Republican candidate announced or potential is clearly and consistently supporting a path to citizenship. Not one. When they talk about legal status that is code for second class status.

….

I don’t understand how anyone can look at these young people and think that we should break up more families, or turn away more hard workers with talent to help us build the kind of country we all want to see. So I will fight for comprehensive immigration reform and a path to citizenship for you and for your families across our country. I will fight to stop partisan attacks on the executive actions that would put Dreamers, including those with us today, at risk of deportation, and if Congress continues to act, as president, I would do everything possible under the law to go even further.

Clinton directly called out Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush with her line about legal status being code for second class status, but the response from the Republican candidates has been silence. The only Republican response was a weak salvo from rnc chairwimp Reince Priebus, who said, “Obviously she’s pretty good at pandering and flipping and flopping and doing and saying anything she needs to say.” The Clinton campaign was practically daring Jeb Bush to say something about immigration, but he can’t because he is already on shaky ground with Republican primary voters.

The reality for those who care about immigration reform is that Hillary Clinton’s statements were right in line with the feelings of a large majority of the Democratic Party. Immigration reform is an issue that offers a clear choice to voters. Democrats are discussing pathways to citizenship while Republicans are pushing deportation of 11 million people.

Republicans have fooled themselves into believing that they can attract Hispanic votes by having Jeb Bush speak a little Spanish, and Marco Rubio discuss his Cuban heritage. The surface appeals aren’t going to work with voters because it’s about the policies.

Former Sec. Clinton has Republicans running scared on immigration.

Immigration reform is the one issue that the Republican presidential candidates don’t want to talk about, but Hillary Clinton just forced them into the conversation.

Obama is a step closer to expanding overtime, but for how many American workers?

by Laura Clawson

The Labor Department is moving ahead with President Obama's eagerly awaited overtime pay expansion. That's good news, but we don't know yet how good. Currently, workers who make as little as $24,000 a year can be denied time-and-a-half if they're considered managers—even if most of the work they do isn't managerial. Obama has promised to raise that threshold to cover more salaried workers, but hasn't said how high it will go, and the fact that the Labor Department has finalized a plan doesn't change that. Yet:

The full proposal is now under review by OMB officials and won't be made public for at least several weeks. After it is published, there will be a review period during which interested parties can comment on the proposed rule. The details of the rule are eagerly awaited by employers and worker advocates -- not to mention overworked Americans -- since they will ultimately determine who receives time-and-a-half pay when they work more than 40 hours in a week.

Just 11 percent of salaried workers qualify for overtime under the current rules. To cover the same proportion of workers who were eligible for overtime in 1975, the threshold would have to be raised from $23,660 to $69,004 ($58,344 if you adjust for increased education). To adjust for inflation since 1975, the number would be $51,168. Any increase will be an improvement that means overtime eligibility for millions more workers—meaning employers can't save on wages by hiring salaried "managers" and expecting them to stock shelves 10 hours a day—but here's hoping the Obama administration has chosen a number that will get us back to 1975 by one measure or another.

Everything Republicans Have Said About President Obama Has Been Absolutely Wrong

by Allen Clifton

I’ve often joked that I would like to live inside the mind of a wingnut for a day just to see what the world is like from the perspective of someone who doesn’t live in reality. The sad truth is wingnuts are impervious to the facts when dealing with all sorts of topics.
This is how debating facts with wingnuts generally goes. If the fact is indisputable (low gas prices, Osama bin Ladin’s death, stock levels, job creation) it’s never because of something President Obama did or didn’t do. And in the case of gas prices, they would be right. Presidents have little or no control over the price of oil or gas. Though that’s not the message you’ll see wingnuts regurgitating whenever gas prices rise. According to Republicans, only when they’re high do they have anything to do with the president.
And if some facts happen to leave the debate open for some individuals to skew the data how they’d like (unemployment rate, effectiveness of the Affordable Care Act), then it’s typically some wild conspiracy theory based on absolutely no factual information. These “facts” are essentially nothing more than right-wing propaganda passed off as “facts” by the wingnut media.
That’s how conspiracy theorists work. If there’s information that indisputably debunks their conspiracy, then that information is obviously “part of the coverup.” It’s why you can never really “win” with these people. If you prove them wrong, whatever you’re using to shred their nonsense is “part of the lie.” And if the data you present can be twisted in another way – then they’ll twist it to suit their narrative.
But when it comes to wingnuts and all the absurd lies they’ve told about President Obama, it’s astonishing how so many of them haven’t come true. And now matter how many of these lies get disproven, rarely do you see wingnuts sit there and say to themselves, “Wow, so pretty much everything Fox News and the Republican party told me would happen, hasn’t happened. Perhaps they’ve been lying to me the whole time.”
Then again, that would require someone to have the ability to think for themselves, which isn’t a trait valued by many wingnut voters.
When I think of the lies Republicans have pushed about President Obama, and how many of them didn’t even come close to happening, it’s astonishing that anyone still believes these serial liars.
After all, where are those death panels? This lie wouldn’t be that big of a deal if it was just something pushed on wingnut blogs and conspiracy sites. But this was something brought up by members of Congress and often pushed by pundits on Fox News. Hell, there are still quite a few wingnuts out there right now who honestly believe that “Obamacare” contains death panels.
Speaking of “Obamacare,” remember when it was going to “destroy job creation”? Hell, we just saw the best year for job creation since Bill Clinton was president with no signs of job creation slowing down. Our unemployment rate is below 6 percent for the first time in years and we’re currently in the middle of the longest uninterrupted streak of private sector job growth in our country’s history.
You really couldn’t come up with better irony than that. The first year where the Affordable Care Act was really enacted we saw the best year for job growth since the Clinton era – despite the fact that for six years Republicans have been telling the American people what a “job killer” the health care law is.
And I know most of us remember the constant fear-mongering about how Obama’s policies would “cause gas prices to skyrocket.” I remember this kind of rhetoric vividly from the 2012 presidential election. It’s also a narrative that’s almost always pushed by wingnuts the moment gas prices inch even slightly higher than most Americans are comfortable with. I remember Newt Gingrich saying if he were elected president he would give Americans $2.50 per gallon gas. Well, under President Obama, many states are seeing gas prices below $2. Though it’s unlikely you’ll be seeing the president praised for these low gas prices anytime soon on Fox News.
Then there’s the always popular “Obama is a socialist” based on, well… nothing. There’s absolutely no evidence that the president is a socialist.
Or that he’s a Muslim.
Then, sadly, there are still millions of wingnuts who don’t even believe he’s an American citizen. Yet another lie that’s been debunked numerous times and is completely absurd on several levels.
And I’m still waiting for this massive gun confiscation wingnuts have been promising the American people he was going to implement. Though I’m sure when he’s out of office, and nobody’s guns have been confiscated, then they’ll say, “See, we fought Obama’s attempt to walk all over the Second Amendment and won!” Meanwhile, wingnuts never seem to put two and two together to realize that this fear-mongering by the NRA and the Republicans, despite the fact that there’s no evidence to support it, almost always leads to record gun and ammo sales.
The biggest “lie” Republicans have on President Obama is when he told Americans they would be able to keep their health insurance plan under the Affordable Care Act. And for the overwhelming number of Americans with health care that statement was correct. But for around 5 million it wasn’t, and there’s no denying Obama was wrong. But even at the core of that “lie,” it’s based upon the fact that most of these plans that were cancelled were plans Americans were paying for that weren’t really providing comprehensive health coverage. Most of those plans just offered the illusion of having health insurance instead of actually having it.
Then remember when Fox News, and many Republicans, pushed the idea that President Obama and the CDC were lying to the American people about Ebola when they said an outbreak was almost next to impossible and the disease was extremely difficult to spread? Remind me again, who turned out to be right about that – the president, medical experts and the CDC, or Fox News?
It’s just laughable to me how often these lies Republicans have pushed against the president have been soundly debunked and defeated, yet it never seems to deter wingnut voters when it comes to believing the nonsense pushed by the Republicans and the wingnut media.
Then again, facts and reality are two things many wingnuts rarely care much about.

Rush Limbaugh Thinks The Republican Cabal Is More Diverse – And He Couldn’t Be More Wrong

On Monday, May 4 Rush Limbaugh was in great spirits. He thought he finally had the ultimate “gotcha” for his liberal foes. Rush heard that the GOP was going to have both a woman AND an African-American candidate for the GOP nomination. This on top of two Hispanics and a white guy that speaks Spanish.Boy oh boy. . . Diversity!!!
Yes, the GOP would have a new battle cry and Rush would lead the “diverse” charge. Forget that the Republican party is made up of 90 percent non-Hispanic whites. Forget that every picture of a GOP rally, speech, or convention is made up of white people in the background, and therefore need to go get stock photos out of virtual bins to manufacture it in the rank and file.
They are diverse, by golly. . . can’t you see the skin colors?
By the way, this is exactly how Rush celebrated his new-found best friend, namely “diversity.”
RUSH:

So the Republicans running for president now include a woman, Carly Fiorina. I tell you what, too, Carly Fiorina is rocking. She has undergone a change like I can’t believe.  Back in 2008, it might have been 2012, I forget which, she was with McCain along with Meg Whitman in 2008. Then in 2012 she kind of went solo. My memory, anyway, is that she was a McCain establishment type Republican.
Carly Fiorina now has crossed over and there’s nothing establishment centrist about her, particularly in the way she is describing Hillary and liberalism in general. It’s quite refreshing actually. So we have a woman.  Dr. Benjamin Carson announced today, who, by the way, worked in Baltimore at Johns Hopkins. He’s from Detroit. He’s African-American. And we have two Latinos in the Republican roster.
I guess we could start calling ourselves the Rainbow Party. We’ve got Rubio and Cruz. We’ve got a woman. We have an African-American. We have two Latinos. And it doesn’t count, it doesn’t matter, it may as well not be the case because none of that matters to the Drive-By Media. I mean, folks, if they were consistent, we would all have to now vote for Ben Carson. He’s black, he has worked and lived in Baltimore. Voting for anybody else would be racist, at least according to the media and the rest of the Democrat Party.

Before we get back to why Rush is wrong, I just gotta point out one little trick Rush played up there in his dialogue. And, it doesn’t have anything to do with diversity but rather the tension between the “establishment” GOP (the still sane part, in most people’s view) and the radical-right-wing-tea people in the party. Of course Rush sides with the tea people. Rush loves Carly Fiorina but, he knows he can’t sell her as the legacy of the now defrocked Michelle Bachmann or more accurately Sarah Palin. He throws in a “Meg Whitman” as a Sarah substitute because Meg is an “acceptable” woman in the radical right-wing mind. They don’t really like Meg, but she’s good enough to use as ammunition against those awful liberals. So he sells her as a conservative, but one who was “part of the McCain crowd.” That is Rush code for “moderate” and now she has “crossed over.” He totally neglects any mention of Sarah who actually endorsed Fiorina in 2010.
The farce and willful ignorance make her palatable as a “convert” to conservatism without all the messy Palin and Bachmann baggage along with any other past tea party errors they would like to sweep under the rug.
But in 2010, when Fiorina ran, the tea people had her back. And she had theirs. Remember 2010? That was when the Tea Party really came to life, the midterm elections. And, Fiorina was one of their people. She was gonna make California ruby-red and all of that.
I just wanted to point how Rush is a very subtle manipulator and one must pay attention in order to beat him at his game. Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
There’s a popular meme that floats around. It’s the main character from the Princess Bride and the quote “You keep using that word yet I do not think you know what it means” or some variation of that. Well, the meme is very appropriate for Rush, and the rest of the GOP that think that they have actually surpassed the Democratic party in terms of being more “diverse.”
Here’s Why;

1. Yes, the GOP has some racially diverse candidates. Yet on policy, especially major policy there isn’t much diversity at all as they all cling to a very right-wing ideology.
2. The Democratic party by a country mile is more diverse in its membership. All day long, every day, and twice on Sundays. And the trend lines are going in almost opposite directions. While the GOP fails to get more diverse in its membership, the Democratic party, since the 60s, has seen continuous growth in the area. Meanwhile the GOP touts an ever-aging Caucasian base.
3. I guess the GOP didn’t notice, but we already elected a minority President. The Democrats also nominated a woman for VP back in 1984. They have had minority candidates in every non-incumbent Presidential primary election since 1988. So essentially the Republican party isn’t ahead of the Democratic party by this measure, it is about 27 years behind.
4. And, let’s be serious. Carly, Ben, and Teddy don’t have a chance. They are at lest token candidates that will be well out of the race by Super Tuesday. Marco Rubio is said to have a legitimate shot at the VP nomination, so I can give them that. That makes the score about 100-1 on this measure.
5. Oh yeah, one more thing. . . Not only is the first candidate to declare this year a woman, she wins every poll out there by leaps and bounds over any other competition. The GOP minority candidates usually only garner a few points and battle with “margin of error” and “none of the above” for votes.

Furthermore, the Democratic base has been clamoring for another woman to enter the race. Because to them, they want the right candidate, not just some token superficial appearance while business remains as usual behind the scenes candidate. That’s actual diversity and the Democratic party doesn’t have to try to be diverse, because it already is. The GOP is only playing catch up and still has a couple of decades and change to go.
They simply either don’t get it, or more likely this is the only way to sell something that might make them look like anything other than a bunch of old white people, which they are.

Scott Walker Wrecks Wisconsin And Proves That Tax Cuts For The Rich Don’t Work

Job-creating tax cuts. This was the big promise. It is the big promise. Republicans sell this to Americans who believe in hard, honest work and in rewarding success.…

Scott Walker (R-WI) promised Wisconsinites that he could jump start the economy with tax cuts for big business, even though this Republican economic model was partially responsible for the recession from which the state — and indeed the nation — was suffering.

Just days ago, the Republican Governor trolled President Obama, claiming the country needed Walker’s “pro-growth economic policies”.

Enter crazy Republican math, stage right. Things are not adding up for Walker’s budget.

When the first troubling revenue numbers came out, Walker and Wisconsin Republicans, who make up the legislative majority, said oh, they will be revised. Well, that time has come and guess what, no new revenue is coming from the Reagan trickle down skies to save them.

A new memo from the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) broke down the crazy math and wishful but dashed hopes of Wisconsin Republicans that the revenue to cover their tax cuts for big business would just magically appear (a charge made by Wisconsin Democrats, but with which logic concurs).

Bob Lang, Director of the nonpartisan LFB, revealed in a memo issued May 6th that Wisconsin will see no additional revenue growth in the next two years and indeed, any additional revenue in the current fiscal year will likely be offset by reduced growth in 2015-16 and 2016-17. Any adjustments would be offset by the fact that “recent forecasts of the U.S. economy have been downgraded from the January forecast.”

In other words, the national economy isn’t going to save Walker from his bad math and the fact that within the region (and actually nationally), his state is performing poorly. In fact, the state’s GDP growth and personal income growth have trailed the national rate. Republicans have tried to blame Democrats for the economic failure of their policies by saying they were in charge “for many years”, but PolitiFact threw water on that false notion.

Lang killed the trickle down dream with, “On balance, we believe that the current estimates for the three year period are still reasonable and should not be adjusted.”

This means that Walker’s budget is officially a real mess.

Jessie Opoien, writing for the Capital Times in an article entitled “Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo: No new revenue growth for Wisconsin,” explained:

That means no adjustments will be made to the agency’s January estimates, and lawmakers will have no additional revenue to work with as they work through revisions to Gov. Scott Walker’s two-year budget.
Republican lawmakers had hoped to use new revenue growth to cover a proposed $127 million cut to K-12 public schools and to lessen a $300 million cut to the University of Wisconsin System.

So logically at this point, sane people who can add would be thinking maybe we won’t roll out our additional tax cuts to manufacturing and farm businesses that started in 2011, especially because it turns out that the tax credits are going to cost “at least $275 million in additional lost tax collections over the next biennium, or more than double what was originally estimated.”

So, let’s see: Less revenue than expected, so Republicans figure why not take away even more revenue with tax credits that are going to cost twice as much as estimated. These tax cuts were sold as being “job-creating.” Reality disagrees.

Job-creating tax cuts. This was the big promise. It is the big promise. Republicans sell this to Americans who believe in hard, honest work and in rewarding success. It appeals to the idea of giving something to get something. But this bad math doesn’t work. Any reasonable person can see that tax cuts for the rich do not create jobs and do create deficits, but there are also studies that prove it. In fact, long term studies show that Republican governors are associated with lower growth rates.

A little recap of Walker’s disastrous experiment in servile compliance to the Koch brothers: “In 2013 he took take Wisconsin to 49th in the nation, leading in economic contraction with negative numbers — Wisconsin was second to last with an index of -.74%. Forbes named Walker’s Wisconsin one of the worst states for business in 2012.”

Walker promised trickle down and common sense and it all sounded so great. Midwesterners understand the value of hard work, so when Walker told them it was their fault, and they must tighten their belts even more, many agreed.

Wisconsin Republicans can’t draft behind the big truck of the U.S. economy. They’re going to have to make Republican math work on their own. No doubt this will mean more cuts to the needy and more sneaky tax increases on the people.

CA Attorney General Kamala Harris’ aide busted over ‘3,000-year-old’ Knights Templar police force

One of California Attorney Gen. Kamala Harris’ staffers has been arrested in connection to a bizarre “Masonic” police force that was apparently operating as a rogue department — and claims to have existed for thousands of years.

Knights Templar police force

In Challenging the Supreme Court, Republicans Challenge the Constitution

The upcoming SCOTUS marriage equality ruling is just another opportunity for Republicans to challenge the constitutionality of the Constitution…

Time and again we have seen Republican pretender hopefuls display their ignorance of the United States Constitution – or of even how our system of government works. Heck, some of them, like Ted Cruz, can’t even figure out how the Senate works.

Or take Ben Carson the other day:

First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works, the president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch. So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It does not say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.

And who does he think determines the constitutionality of those laws? That’s right: the Supreme Court.

So he’s right about one thing: We do have to understand how the Constitution works.

Carson, lamentably, does not. But then, of course, neither does any Republican in Congress, seemingly.

I’ve been thinking about what Mike Huckabee said to a group of Evangelicals at the National Hispanic christian Leadership Conference on April 30. Everyone made a big deal about how he says he “speaks jesus” but that was not the important bit.

The mainstream media probably did not want you to notice it, but this was the part that mattered:

I respect the courts, but the Supreme Court is only that — the supreme of the courts. It is not the supreme being. It cannot overrule dog. When it comes to prayer, when it comes to life, and when it comes to the sanctity of marriage, the court cannot change what dog has created.

Obviously, the Supreme Court can overrule dog. As should be obvious to Huckabee, the United States Constitution, and not the bible, is the law of the land.

Just as obviously, Huckabee does not respect the courts. Or he would not have said such a thing to begin with. It’s like when people say, “With all due respect…” No, no respect is intended. You think the other person is an idiot.

Mike Huckabee thinks the courts are meaningless if they don’t rule the way he wants them to rule. That they have somehow de-legitimized themselves as though modern wingnut ideology is the litmus test for every law passed since March 4, 1789, when the 1st United States Congress convened.

If that were not absurdity enough, he issued a direct challenge to the Supreme Court:

“Somebody’s got to be willing to take on the institutions that challenge and threaten our ability to believe as we believe, because when religious liberty is lost, all liberty is lost.”

Here, he is echoing Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, who said in 2013, “The cult and people of faith and values need to rise up” if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality. “We just simply cannot allow this to become the law of the land.”

Can’t allow?

In fact, it is Staver who, earlier this spring co-authored a pledge not to obey any Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality, and he told a gathering that he expected every wingnut candidate for pretender to sign it.

Mike Huckabee has already done so. So has Rick Santorum, another perennial White House hopeful. The list of key signers is a literal hate group who’s who.

According to Staver, “We’re going to ask every presidential candidate — Republican and Democrat — to sign on to this pledge and it’s going to be very telling if they don’t.”

It will certainly be very telling. It will tell us who respects the United States Constitution and intends to obey the laws of the land – until now allegedly a pre-requisite for every Republican (or so they have told us) – and who does not.

And consequently, who is ineligible to be President of the United States. After all, that is part of the presidential oath of office, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

And according to Article 3, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court’s “judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States.”

All these men are members of the political party that has been calling President Obama “lawless.” These same figures who are now lining up to proclaim they will refuse to obey a pro-marriage equality ruling from the Supreme Court.

Obama has to obey the laws of the land, but they do not?

Apparently not. James Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family, said recently, “Talk about a Civil War, we could have another one over this.”

Well hey, they didn’t want to give up their slaves either, and we fought a war over that one as well. Guess what? They gave up their slaves, even though dog told them they could have them.

The Supreme Court overruled dog then, too.

Because talk is cheap, and because there is absolutely no risk at all to their well-being, these people who don’t understand how the Constitution works are talking martyrdom, like the Martin Bormann-like David Lane, and Sandy Rios of the American Family Association.

This sort of talk is like a porn addiction to them. It no doubt makes pissant little bigots feel important as well.

Yet even Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee have joined the martyr chorus. Rand Paul, as is well known by now, has neo-Confederate associations, so you can hardly expect him to pay much respect to the Constitution (unless it’s the Confederate Constitution).

Right Wing Watch has observed that “Some activists are calling for an anti-gay version of Rosa Parks.” A fascist Rosa Parks is as much a logical impossibility as a conservative revolution or a constitutional wingnut. Rosa Parks fought for freedom from bigotry, after all, not freedom for bigotry.

Wingnuts have never been comfortable with the Constitution. It is, after all, a liberal document. It doesn’t preserve the status quo. Rather, in proclaiming that political power derives from the will of the people, it shatters it.

So none of these excuses to attack the Constitution are all that surprising. They’re not the first and they won’t be the last. But you would think all these attacks would draw some attention at least from the mainstream media.

Even so, there might be some awkward moments when the eventual Democrat and Republican candidates debate, and the question comes up: Which of you has vowed to violate the rulings of the Supreme Court, and therefore, the United States Constitution?

Anti-Choice cabals vow to ignore DC law and fire women for using birth control anyway

Anti-Choice cabals vow to ignore DC law and fire women for using birth control anyway

Republican hints at endless Clinton investigations

 

‘We need to hire a whole department to investigate them’ 

New Jersey’s High Court Hears Christie’s Last Ditch Effort To Avoid Pension Payouts He Promised

As Christie considers a presidential campaign, his troubles at home are heating up.

Wisconsin Republican’s Latest Attack On Food Stamp Recipients Would Cost The State Millions

A week after Wisconsin Republicans unveiled a plan to restrict poor families' access to shellfish and pasta sauce, the other shoe is dropping.

Texas Republican Proposes Bill That Allows Discrimination Against His Gay Son

And the Worst Father of the Year Award goes to….
Read more 

Predictably Shameless Wingnut Media Tries Blaming Muslim Congressman For Texas Shooting

I guess we should have seen this coming.
Read more 

Koch brothers clash with Republicans as their lobbyists turn Tennessee into a ‘horror movie’

The billionaire libertarians pour cash into Republican campaigns and steer pro-business policies through their Americans for Prosperity organization — which attacks Republicans who are insufficiently supportive.

Horror in Tennessee

Alberta's Election: Win For The People, Huge Loss For The Kochs

That election was a complete repudiation of Charles and David Koch's meddling ways in Canadian politics.  

Alberta's Election: Win For The People, Huge Loss For The Kochs