Anything & Everything that I think is important!
Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Why I'm Voting For Mitt Romney Video Breakdown
This video is a depressing yet pretty accurate description of the republican party and as a whole our current political discourse! It's sot of funny, yet very sad at the same time. Do yourself a favor and be informed!
Below is the link to the original video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzvm7zd4Z-s
Monday, December 10, 2012
White Supremacists Get Trolled By Clown Protestors
http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/White-supermacist-rally-drowned-out-by-counter-protestors-178461471.html
Posted on November 10, 2012 at 5:49 PM
Updated Monday, Nov 12 at 9:10 AM
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police say no one was arrested during a loud – and very colorful – KKK rally and counter-protest in uptown Charlotte Saturday afternoon.
Members of the National Socialist Movement joined the Ku Klux Klan for an anti-immigration rally at Old City Hall on West Trade Street, but the counter-protesters outnumbered them at least five to one.
Instead of shouting, the protesters used squeaky toys, whistles, and noisemakers to drown out the amplified speeches. Many dressed as clowns.
When the speakers talked about “White Power,” the protesters sprinkled white flour. Another held a sign reading “Wife Power.”
They said they wanted to make a point that racism is ridiculous.
“The message from us is, you look silly,” said Lacey Williams, the youth coordinator for Charlotte’s Latin American Coalition. “We're dressed like clowns and you're the ones that look funny.”
Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi group based in Detroit, said his organization wants to be an alternative third party to the country’s two-party system. Its platform is based on white supremacy.
Protester Tom Strini donned his red nose and rainbow wig to take an opposing point of view.
“Instead of meeting hate with hate, they were going to meet hate with love,” said Strini of the protestors.
“I think it’s really important to have a sense of humor,” added Williams. “What they want is for us to fight them. They want us to hit them with hate. We can't become them.”
City council member John Autry, who represents east Charlotte’s District 5, also wore a red nose to show his support of the counter-protesters.
“We're just a great big happy melting pot,” said Autry. “I just wanted to come out here and make sure people understood that I did not support the views of the people behind up here with the microphones.”
More than 75 police officers ringed the grassy front lawn during the speeches. Metal barricades separated the speakers from the protesters. Police rarely needed to move from their positions.
After two hours, the Klan and neo-Nazis put down their microphone and left with a police escort. Police followed them back to a parking garage on Fourth Street near the county courthouse, while protesters filled the street behind them.
Strini said it shows the white supremacists are actually the minority, because so many people showed up to protest.
“It just shows that more people in this country are in favor of equal and human rights than there are people who want to kick all dark-skinned people out of the country,” he said.
Members of the National Socialist Movement joined the Ku Klux Klan for an anti-immigration rally at Old City Hall on West Trade Street, but the counter-protesters outnumbered them at least five to one.
Instead of shouting, the protesters used squeaky toys, whistles, and noisemakers to drown out the amplified speeches. Many dressed as clowns.
When the speakers talked about “White Power,” the protesters sprinkled white flour. Another held a sign reading “Wife Power.”
They said they wanted to make a point that racism is ridiculous.
“The message from us is, you look silly,” said Lacey Williams, the youth coordinator for Charlotte’s Latin American Coalition. “We're dressed like clowns and you're the ones that look funny.”
Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement, a neo-Nazi group based in Detroit, said his organization wants to be an alternative third party to the country’s two-party system. Its platform is based on white supremacy.
Protester Tom Strini donned his red nose and rainbow wig to take an opposing point of view.
“Instead of meeting hate with hate, they were going to meet hate with love,” said Strini of the protestors.
“I think it’s really important to have a sense of humor,” added Williams. “What they want is for us to fight them. They want us to hit them with hate. We can't become them.”
City council member John Autry, who represents east Charlotte’s District 5, also wore a red nose to show his support of the counter-protesters.
“We're just a great big happy melting pot,” said Autry. “I just wanted to come out here and make sure people understood that I did not support the views of the people behind up here with the microphones.”
More than 75 police officers ringed the grassy front lawn during the speeches. Metal barricades separated the speakers from the protesters. Police rarely needed to move from their positions.
After two hours, the Klan and neo-Nazis put down their microphone and left with a police escort. Police followed them back to a parking garage on Fourth Street near the county courthouse, while protesters filled the street behind them.
Strini said it shows the white supremacists are actually the minority, because so many people showed up to protest.
“It just shows that more people in this country are in favor of equal and human rights than there are people who want to kick all dark-skinned people out of the country,” he said.
Are We Winning The War on Drugs?
WASHINGTON -- Americans believe overwhelmingly that the U.S. is losing the war on drugs and are unenthusiastic about spending more money to win it, according to aRasmussen poll released Tuesday.
The national telephone survey found only 7 percent of American adults think the United States is winning the war on drugs, while 82 percent say the country is losing and 12 percent aren't sure. That's a marked decrease in support since AngusReid Public Opinion last posed the question in June, when two-thirds of Americans considered it a failure.
The U.S. government's war on drugs, officially launched in 1971, costs an estimated $20 billion to $25 billion annually in anti-drug policy efforts alone, according toreporting from The New York Times. That doesn't include the tremendous costs associated with prosecuting and incarcerating drug offenders. Meanwhile, hard drug use in America remains steady.
Only 23 percent of survey responders felt the U.S. doesn't spend enough on the war on drugs, while 34 percent think it spends too much. Other poll findings:
-- 51 percent of respondents said alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana, while 24 percent said pot is more dangerous and 24 percent aren't sure.
-- 60 percent said marijuana laws should be left to the states, while 27 percent said enforcement should be done by the federal government.-- 88 percent of respondents said they hadn't smoked pot in the last year.-- Recent pot users are twice as likely as non-users -- 60 percent to 30 percent -- to think the government spends too much money on the war on drugs.
The survey, which sampled 1,000 adults on Nov. 9 and Nov. 10, comes after residents of Colorado and Washington voted last week to approve legalization of recreational marijuana, a historic move that puts them at odds with the federal Controlled Substances Act.
The survey had a sampling error of +/- three percentage points with a confidence level of 95 percent.
'Sentenced to Church' Judge vs. ACLU
An Oklahoma teen convicted of manslaughter has sentenced to 10 years of probation, with requirements that include regularly attending church.
Tyler Alred, now 17, had been drinking when he crashed a pickup truck at around 4 a.m. on Dec. 3, 2011, Tulsa World reports. The accident killed Alred's friend, 16-year-old John Luke Dum, who was a passenger in the vehicle.
Alred was not legally drunk, but because he was below the legal drinking age, he was still considered to be driving under the influence of alcohol. The high school student pleaded guilty in August to a charge of manslaughter as a youthful offender.
"I did not want to do what I did," Alred told the court prior to his sentencing. "I want to change my life."
Members of Dum's family did not want to see Alred behind bars, the Muskogee Phoenix reported. "We don't need to see two lives wasted for a mistake," Dum's sister, Caitlin, wrote in a statement.
Instead of sentencing the teen to prison time, Judge Mike Norman gave him a 10-year deferred sentence. In order to stay out of prison, Alred must graduate from high school; graduate from welding school; take drug, alcohol and nicotine tests for a year; wear a drug and alcohol bracelet, take part in victim's impact panels, and attend church for the next 10 years.
This last requirement "raises legal issues because of (the separation of) church and state," University of Oklahoma law professor Randall Coyne told the Tulsa World.
University of Tulsa law professor Gary Allison told KTUL that the church requirement "speaks to maybe forcing people to do religious activities that they would otherwise not do on their own free will … I don't know why a church would want to have someone come to it under the force of government,"
This apparently isn't the case for Alred, though. "My client goes to church every Sunday," defense attorney Donn Baker told the court. "That isn't going to be a problem for him."
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Why 'Mitt Romney' Lost!
Mitt Romney happens to be an extreme example of our current political discourse. But, I would like to argue that Mitt Romney does not change positions so consistently due to the voters. Rather, Mitt "Money" Romney "Flip Flops" for "political" reasons. In today's climate political superiority is simple, being the financially dominant candidate. During this election many of Mitt Romney's turnabouts in position were largely contradictory to most of the electorate. Mitt and his advisers knew something that many in the public seemed unaware of, which is the candidate who raises more money, statistically speaking, overwhelming will emerge as the victor. Why cater to the electorate, when a few wealthy donors will decide the outcome? Within the last few decades Citizens United and the general convergence of money into our political system is destroying what many Americans including our founding fathers fought and died for. The PEOPLE should decide who represents them regardless of religion, sex, race or financial affluence. According to OpenSecrets.org Romney and Obama combined to spend an eyebrow raising $2,326,060,340 in this election cycle alone. Furthermore, the 2012 election will make history as being the most expensive. Are we as a nation comfortable in allowing money to decide who we will elect? My opinion is an emphatic NO! We must get money and it's corrosive influence out of politics and we must do it now!
If you would like to help, consider supporting Wolf-Pac.com/
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Woman Fired For Racist Obama Facebook Post
Turlock Woman Loses Job over Facebook Post
TURLOCK-
A woman who made a post, using a racial slur and referencing assassination, about President Obama on Facebook has been fired from her job.
Cold Stone Creamery spent much of Thursday responding to angry tweets about the woman’s post.
“This employee is no longer w/the (sic) company & her disgraceful and completely unacceptable comments do not reflect our views,” one such tweet read.
Denise Helms had already removed her post and has since deactivated her Facebook account.
In and interview with FOX40 News Thursday, she said that what she posted was wrong. She also maintained that she is not a racist.
“I think I was just really upset, and (the post) just kind of came out,” Helms said.
Since initially speaking with FOX40 Wednesday evening, the story has inspired a strong and emotional reaction from both sides of the issue.
Bayside of South Sacramento’s Bishop Sherwood Carthen said that while race is a touchy subject, it needs to be discussed.
“In America, we want to believe that we’ve healed the race issue. We haven’t touched it. So, we’ve got to do something about it,” Bishop Carthen told FOX40. “Unfortunately, we don’t like seeing it, we don’t want to hear about it but it still exists and we’ve got to be willing to confront it.”
Friday, November 9, 2012
Supreme Court decision to hear Shelby Voting Rights challenge met with praise, worry | al.com
Supreme Court decision to hear Shelby Voting Rights challenge met with praise, worry | al.com
Shelby County's challenge to a provision of the Voting Rights Act that requires certain states with a history of racial discrimination to get federal approval before changing their election procedures.
Shelby County's challenge to a provision of the Voting Rights Act that requires certain states with a history of racial discrimination to get federal approval before changing their election procedures.
The decision was greeted with cheers from Shelby County's attorney, who said Southern communities have changed and no longer need such burdensome 1960s-style oversight from Washington. However, it was met with concern by others who argued that things haven't changed that much and the protection for minorities remains merited.
"We're extremely pleased. Section 5 pre-clearance is a burden on local governments and 16 states," said Shelby County attorney Frank "Butch" Ellis.
Ellis said the pre-clearance requirement served a critical function for 40 years, but is no longer justified. Eighty-five percent of Shelby County's residents are white. But Ellis said black residents have been elected as mayor and to other political positions.
"The South is not the same old South that it was," Ellis said.
Section 5 of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires all or parts of 16 states with a history of racial discrimination in voting to get federal approval before making any elections-related change such as redrawing lines or implementing voter identification requirements.
The justices said they will examine whether the formula determining which states are covered is outdated because it relies on data that is now 40 years old.
Alabama was part of a coalition of states that supported Shelby County's challenge.
"Section 5 served a critical and laudable function 40 years ago, and the court held that it was constitutional then. But Section 5 is not justified now, and its re-authorization in 2006 was not constitutional. Section 5 currently serves only to allow federal bureaucrats to block good-faith and nondiscriminatory changes in state law and to impose unjustified costs on state and local governments," said a statement issued by the office of Alabama's attorney general.
The South is not the same old South that it was," said Shelby County lawyer Frank Ellis.
However others took a different view.
Ryan Haygood, of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, which represents black residents in Shelby County, said the court's decision to hear the case provides the court an opportunity to review a "very substantial record."
"Congress considered Section 5's utility in 2006 and found discrimination in voting persists and the Act was needed for another 25 years, and Alabama is a very good example of why Section 5 is still needed," Haywood said.
Haygood said Section 5 was used in this election to stop discriminatory redistricting and voter photo identification efforts in Texas, and also in Florida to stop early voting days from being cut in half.
Birmingham's Rep. Demetrius Newton, who served as the first African-American Speaker Pro-Tem of the Alabama House of Representatives, said he was not surprised the high court agreed to hear the Shelby case, but he is concerned about what it could mean.
Newton said he believes there are still efforts to try to limit the voting power of minorities.
"I still see a lot of problems that I believe need to be addressed," Newton said.
Staff writer Brian Lawson and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
Conservative Politics, 'Low-Effort' Thinking Linked In New Study
Conservative Politics, 'Low-Effort' Thinking Linked In New
Conservatives and liberals don't seem to agree about much, and they might not agree about recent studies linking conservatism to low intelligence and "low-effort" thinking.
As The Huffington Post reported in February, a study published in the journal "Psychological Science" showed that children who score low on intelligence tests gravitate toward socially conservative political views in adulthood--perhaps because conservative ideologies stress "structure and order" that make it easier to understand a complicated world.
Ouch.
And now there's the new study linking conservative ideologies to "low-effort" thinking.
"People endorse conservative ideology more when they have to give a first or fast response," the study's lead author, University of Arkansas psychologist Dr. Scott Eidelman, said in a written statement released by the university.
Does the finding suggest that conservatives are lazy thinkers?
"Not quite," Dr. Eidelman told The Huffington Post in an email. "Our research shows that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking."
For the study, a team of psychologists led by Dr. Eidelman asked people about their political viewpoints in a bar and in a laboratory setting.
Bar patrons were asked about social issues before blowing into a Breathalyzer. As it turned out, the political viewpoints of patrons with high blood alcohol levels were more likely to be conservative than were those of patrons whose blood alcohol levels were low.
But it wasn't just the alcohol talking, according to the statement. When the researchers conducted similar interviews in the lab, they found that people who were asked to evaluate political ideas quickly or while distracted were more likely to express conservative viewpoints.
"Keeping people from thinking too much...or just asking them to deliberate or consider information in a cursory manner can impact people's political attitudes, and in a way that consistently promotes political conservatism," Dr. Eidelman said in the email.
The study was published online in the journal "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin."
Friday, October 26, 2012
Wal-Mart Walkout: A Game-Changer?
Wal-Mart Walkout: A Game-Changer?
For the second time in five days -- and also the second time in Wal-Mart's five decades -- workers at multiple U.S. Wal-Mart stores are on strike, Salon reports. They say their walkout, spearheaded by a year-old organization called OUR Wal-Mart, is calling for improved staffing and benefits and an end to what they say is retaliation against their efforts to organize.
Salon's Josh Edilson predicts that the unprecedented demonstration will be a "game changer" for the retail giant:
This morning, workers walked off the job in Dallas, Texas and Laurel, Maryland; Walmart store workers in additional cities are expected to join the strike in the coming hours. No end date has been announced; some plan to remain on strike at least through tomorrow, when they'll join other Walmart workers for a demonstration outside the company's annual investor meeting in Bentonville, Arkansas. Today's is the latest in a unprecedented wave of Walmart supply chain strikes: From shrimp workers in Louisiana, to warehouse workers in California and Illinois, to Walmart store employees in three states -- and counting ...On Thursday, as first reported at Salon, southern California Walmart store workers staged a day-long walkout of their own. Organizers say over sixty workers from nine stores signed in as on strike. About thirty of them were from the same store in Pico Rivera, where strikers and supporters rallied with labor leaders, clergy, politicians. "I'm still thrilled about what happened," said Harris, who flew in for last week's walkout. "And it's given me a lot more energy and a lot more drive." Other workers were visiting from further away than Texas: When the striking workers returned to work Friday morning, international Walmart workers marched into their nine stores with them, carrying their own countries' flags.
The War On Drugs & Why We Aren't Winning!
The term war is used very broadly especially inside of the United States. Wikipedia declares war as [an openly declared state of organized violent conflict,[1][2] typified by extreme aggression, societal disruption, and high mortality.[1] ] In reality there are quite a few ways that we as a society use the term war, for example during football season my Baltimore Ravens go to "war" with the much hated Pittsburgh Steelers twice during the season, and hopefully once more during the post season. Now that I live in Baltimore, it's hard for me to say that people living in the city do not see this sporting event as a war. Here's my point the term war has various meanings especially today. Yet, despite the various definitions there remains characteristics of war that remain. One being that there is an enemy and two there is a winner and a loser.
I would like to argue that the war on drugs has neither and that calling it a war is incorrect because it truly isn't a war with winners or an identifiable enemy. Though there are no winners there are plenty of losers, with that being U.S. the citizens. Whether you do illegal drugs or not, you pay the price for this war.
Homeless Former Crip Saves Officer in Fight (Video) - YouTube
Homeless Former Crip Saves Officer in Fight (Video) - YouTube
Pretty interesting video! Check it out!
Pretty interesting video! Check it out!
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Poll: MTA audio recordings - baltimoresun.com
Poll: MTA audio recordings - baltimoresun.com
The Baltimore Sun is conducting a poll on whether the MTA is infringing on rider's Civil Rights by recording audio in addition to video of MTA riders.
I think so, but feel free to express your opinion by clicking on the link above.
The Baltimore Sun is conducting a poll on whether the MTA is infringing on rider's Civil Rights by recording audio in addition to video of MTA riders.
I think so, but feel free to express your opinion by clicking on the link above.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia | Politics News | Rolling Stone
June 21, 2012 11:20 AM ET
Illustration by Victor Juhasz
Someday, it will go down in history as the first trial of the modern American mafia. Of course, you won't hear the recent financial corruption case, United States of America v. Carollo, Goldberg and Grimm, called anything like that. If you heard about it at all, you're probably either in the municipal bond business or married to an antitrust lawyer. Even then, all you probably heard was that a threesome of bit players on Wall Street got convicted of obscure antitrust violations in one of the most inscrutable, jargon-packed legal snoozefests since the government's massive case against Microsoft in the Nineties – not exactly the thrilling courtroom drama offered by the famed trials of old-school mobsters like Al Capone or Anthony "Tony Ducks" Corallo.
But this just-completed trial in downtown New York against three faceless financial executives really was historic. Over 10 years in the making, the case allowed federal prosecutors to make public for the first time the astonishing inner workings of the reigning American crime syndicate, which now operates not out of Little Italy and Las Vegas, but out of Wall Street.
The defendants in the case – Dominick Carollo, Steven Goldberg and Peter Grimm – worked for GE Capital, the finance arm of General Electric. Along with virtually every major bank and finance company on Wall Street – not just GE, but J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Wachovia and more – these three Wall Street wiseguys spent the past decade taking part in a breathtakingly broad scheme to skim billions of dollars from the coffers of cities and small towns across America. The banks achieved this gigantic rip-off by secretly colluding to rig the public bids on municipal bonds, a business worth $3.7 trillion. By conspiring to lower the interest rates that towns earn on these investments, the banks systematically stole from schools, hospitals, libraries and nursing homes – from "virtually every state, district and territory in the United States," according to one settlement. And they did it so cleverly that the victims never even knew they were being cheated. No thumbs were broken, and nobody ended up in a landfill in New Jersey, but money disappeared, lots and lots of it, and its manner of disappearance had a familiar name: organized crime.
In fact, stripped of all the camouflaging financial verbiage, the crimes the defendants and their co-conspirators committed were virtually indistinguishable from the kind of thuggery practiced for decades by the Mafia, which has long made manipulation of public bids for things like garbage collection and construction contracts a cornerstone of its business. What's more, in the manner of old mob trials, Wall Street's secret machinations were revealed during the Carollo trial through crackling wiretap recordings and the lurid testimony of cooperating witnesses, who came into court with bowed heads, pointing fingers at their accomplices. The new-age gangsters even invented an elaborate code to hide their crimes. Like Elizabethan highway robbers who spoke in thieves' cant, or Italian mobsters who talked about "getting a button man to clip the capo," on tape after tape these Wall Street crooks coughed up phrases like "pull a nickel out" or "get to the right level" or "you're hanging out there" – all code words used to manipulate the interest rates on municipal bonds. The only thing that made this trial different from a typical mob trial was the scale of the crime.
USA v. Carollo involved classic cartel activity: not just one corrupt bank, but many, all acting in careful concert against the public interest. In the years since the economic crash of 2008, we've seen numerous hints that such orchestrated corruption exists. The collapses of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, for instance, both pointed to coordinated attacks by powerful banks and hedge funds determined to speed the demise of those firms. In the bankruptcy of Jefferson County, Alabama, we learned that Goldman Sachs accepted a $3 million bribe from J.P. Morgan Chase to permit Chase to serve as the sole provider of toxic swap deals to the rubes running metropolitan Birmingham – "an open-and-shut case of anti-competitive behavior," as one former regulator described it.
More recently, a major international investigation has been launched into the manipulation of Libor, the interbank lending index that is used to calculate global interest rates for products worth more than $3 trillion a year. If and when that case is presented to the public at trial – there are several major civil suits in the works here in the States – we may yet find out that the world's most powerful banks have, for years, been fixing the prices of almost every adjustable-rate vehicle on earth, from mortgages and credit cards to interest-rate swaps and even currencies.
But USA v. Carollo marks the first time we actually got incontrovertible evidence that Wall Street has moved into this cartel-type brand of criminality. It also offered a disgusting glimpse into the enabling and grossly cynical role played by politicians, who took Super Bowl tickets and bribe-stuffed envelopes to look the other way while gangsters raided the public kitty. And though the punishments that were ultimately handed down in the trial – minor convictions of three bit players – felt deeply unsatisfying, it was still a watershed moment in the ongoing story of America's gradual awakening to the realities of financial corruption. In a post-crash era where Wall Street trials almost never make it into court, and even the harshest settlements end with the evidence buried by the government and the offending banks permitted to escape with no admission of wrongdoing, this case finally dragged the whole ugly truth of American finance out into the open – and it was a hell of a show.
1. THE SCAM
This was no trial scene from popular lore, no Inherit the Wind or State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson. No gallery packed with rapt spectators, no ceiling fans set whirring to beat back the tension and the heat, no defense counsel's resting a sympathetic hand on the defendant's shoulder as opening statements commence. No, the setting for USA v. Carollo reflected the bizarre alternate universe that exists on Wall Street. Like so many court cases involving big banks, the proceeding looked more like a roomful of expensive lawyers negotiating a major corporate merger than a public search for justice.
This was no trial scene from popular lore, no Inherit the Wind or State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson. No gallery packed with rapt spectators, no ceiling fans set whirring to beat back the tension and the heat, no defense counsel's resting a sympathetic hand on the defendant's shoulder as opening statements commence. No, the setting for USA v. Carollo reflected the bizarre alternate universe that exists on Wall Street. Like so many court cases involving big banks, the proceeding looked more like a roomful of expensive lawyers negotiating a major corporate merger than a public search for justice.
The trial began on April 16th in a federal court in Lower Manhattan. The courtroom, an aerielike setting 23 stories up, offered a panoramic view of the city and the East River. Though the gallery was usually full throughout the three-plus weeks of testimony, the spectators were not average citizens come to witness how they had been robbed blind by America's biggest banks. Instead, there were row after row of suits – other lawyers eager to observe a long-awaited case, one that could influence the outcome in a handful of civil suits pending across the country. In fact, the defendants themselves, whom the trial would reveal as easily replaceable cogs in a much larger machine of corruption, were barely visible from the gallery, obscured by the great chattering congress of prosecution and defense attorneys.
Only the presence of the mostly nonwhite and elderly jury, which resembled the front pew of a Harlem church, served as a reminder that the case had any connection to the real world. Even reporters from most of the major news outlets didn't bother to attend. The judge in the trial, the right honorable and amusingly cantankerous Harold Baer, acknowledged that the case was not likely to set the public's pulse racing. "It is unlikely, I think, that this will generate a lot of media publicity," Baer sighed to the jury in his preliminary instructions.
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-scam-wall-street-learned-from-the-mafia-20120620#ixzz1yeOlLSre
The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia | Politics News | Rolling Stone
Friday, May 18, 2012
Obama a 'Metrosexual Abe Lincoln'? Absurd GOP Attack Plan Exposed - YouTube
Obama a 'Metrosexual Abe Lincoln'? Absurd GOP Attack Plan Exposed - YouTube
WASHINGTON — A group of high-profile Republican strategists is working with a conservative billionaire on a proposal to mount one of the most provocative campaigns of the “super PAC” era and attack President Obama in ways that Republicans have so far shied away from.
WASHINGTON — A group of high-profile Republican strategists is working with a conservative billionaire on a proposal to mount one of the most provocative campaigns of the “super PAC” era and attack President Obama in ways that Republicans have so far shied away from.
Timed to upend the Democratic National Convention in September, the plan
would “do exactly what John McCain would not let us do,” the
strategists wrote.
The plan,
which is awaiting approval, calls for running commercials linking Mr.
Obama to incendiary comments by his former spiritual adviser, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., whose race-related sermons made him a highly charged figure in the 2008 campaign.
“The world is about to see Jeremiah Wright and understand his influence on Barack Obama
for the first time in a big, attention-arresting way,” says the
proposal, which was overseen by Fred Davis and commissioned by Joe
Ricketts, the founder of the brokerage firm TD Ameritrade. Mr. Ricketts
is increasingly putting his fortune to work in conservative politics.
The $10 million plan, one of several being studied by Mr. Ricketts,
includes preparations for how to respond to the charges of race-baiting
it envisions if it highlights Mr. Obama’s former ties to Mr. Wright, who
espouses what is known as “black liberation theology.”
The group suggested hiring as a spokesman an “extremely literate
conservative African-American” who can argue that Mr. Obama misled the
nation by presenting himself as what the proposal calls a “metrosexual,
black Abe Lincoln.”
A copy of a detailed advertising plan was obtained by The New York Times
through a person not connected to the proposal who was alarmed by its
tone. It is titled “The Defeat of Barack Hussein Obama: The Ricketts
Plan to End His Spending for Good.”
The proposal was presented last week in Chicago to associates and family
members of Mr. Ricketts, who is also the patriarch of the family that
owns the Chicago Cubs.
Brian Baker, president and general counsel of a super PAC called the
Ending Spending Action Fund, said Mr. Ricketts had studied several
advertising proposals in recent months and had not signed off on a
specific approach to taking on Mr. Obama.
“Joe Ricketts is prepared to spend significant resources in the 2012
election in both the presidential race and Congressional races,” Mr.
Baker said in an interview Wednesday. “He is very concerned about the
future direction of the country and plans to take a stand.”
The document makes clear that the effort is only in the planning stages
and awaiting full approval from Mr. Ricketts. People involved in the
planning said the publicity now certain to surround it could send the
strategists back to the drawing board.
But it serves as a rare, detailed look at the birth of the sort of
political sneak attack that has traditionally been hatched in the
shadows and has become a staple of presidential politics.
It also shows how a single individual can create his own movement and
spend unlimited sums to have major influence on a presidential election
in a campaign finance environment in which groups operating
independently of candidates are flourishing.
Should the plan proceed, it would run counter to the strategy being
employed by Mitt Romney’s team, which has so far avoided such attacks.
The Romney campaign has sought to focus attention on the economy, and
has concluded that personal attacks on Mr. Obama, who is still well
liked personally by most independent voters surveyed for polls, could
backfire.
Mr. Ricketts has become an increasingly active player in Republican
politics through several political action committees, including Ending
Spending. He has a son, Pete, who is a member of the Republican National
Committee from Nebraska and a daughter, Laura, who is a top contributor
to Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign. She has not been involved in her
father’s political efforts.
The 54-page proposal was professionally bound and illustrated with color
photographs, indicating that it is far beyond a mere discussion. The
strategists have already contacted Larry Elder, a black conservative
radio host in Los Angeles, about serving as a spokesman, and the plan
calls for a group of black business leaders to endorse the effort. The
strategists have also registered a domain name, Character Matters.
Read the Rest of the article at the NEW YORK TIMES here - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us/politics/gop-super-pac-weighs-hard-line-attack-on-obama.html?_r=1
Monday, May 7, 2012
Job Interview: Should You Lie? - YouTube
Job Interview: Should You Lie? - YouTube
Very prudent advice about potential interview questions that many current job seekers might face.
Here is the link to the article discussed on TYT. http://www.savvysugar.com/Can-I-Lie-Interviewer-22943027
Feel free to comment on how would you handle these tough interview questions!
Here is the link to the article discussed on TYT. http://www.savvysugar.com/Can-I-Lie-Interviewer-22943027
Feel free to comment on how would you handle these tough interview questions!
Trayvon Martin Smear Campaign - YouTube
The Trayvon Martin Smear Campaign/ Victim Misinformation!
Here is the link to the original YouTube discussion. Please feel free to leave any comments!
Trayvon Martin Smear Campaign - YouTube
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
What Happens AFTER You Refuse a Police Search?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iXNhL2pkb0s
Some very good information to know!
Remember you're not guilty until a judge and or jury convicts you, so be smart & most importantly know your rights!
May-Day & The Occupy Movement!
A Debate by the RT Team on the perceptions of the Occupy movement & It's long term goals & objectives!
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
National Database Planned to Combat Cellphone Theft - NYTimes.com
National Database Planned to Combat Cellphone Theft
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: April 9, 2012
WASHINGTON — The soaring popularity of smartphones has produced an unwelcome, if predictable, side effect: an epidemic of smartphone thefts.
Now, police departments, the Federal Communications Commission and the wireless phone industry have devised a plan to fight back: the creation of a central database to track stolen phones and prevent them from being used again.
On Tuesday, Julius Genachowski, the chairman of the F.C.C., is scheduled to join police chiefs from New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland and representatives of a wireless industry trade group to announce the new plan, which will allow wireless providers to disable and block further use of a device once it is reported stolen.
The groups are also working with members of Congress to write legislation that would make it a federal crime to tamper with a phone’s unique identifiers in an attempt to evade the blocking process.
“It’s just too easy for a thief to steal a phone and sell it on the black market,” Mr. Genachowski said. “This program will make it a lot harder to do that. And the police departments we are working with tell us that it will significantly deter this kind of theft.”
Over the last year, roughly one out of three robberies nationwide have involved the theft of a cellphone, according to an F.C.C. summary of the new plan. The thefts have grown most rapidly in urban areas; cellphones are stolen in more than 40 percent of all robberies in New York City and 38 percent of robberies in the District of Columbia, according to the groups.
Read More At The New York Times Here
National Database Planned to Combat Cellphone Theft - NYTimes.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)