the man was a mf prophet
GOP foreign policy is the ‘W’orst.
accurate
nailed it
</EndRant>
How many times now has the GOP gotten away with taking the American economy hostage? What is this, the 5th or 6th time in four years?
The biggest domestic threat to the American way of life is the GOP-Republican-TeaParty
PROOF OF THE REPUBLICAN WAR ON WOMEN:
Conservatives like to pretend there is no war on women, so PoliticusUSA developed a running list of legislation to prove that there is indeed a war on women. The proof is in the policy, and policy trumps words.
Included in Hrafnkell Haraldsson’s monthly updates to the “Dirty Thirty” (a list of egregious legislation proposed or passed) is a surreal list of legislation that proves the war on women is very real.
Updated list through August 3rd, 2012 Read More
And that doesn’t even include
1) the fact that the GOP, until yesterday, repeatedly blocked the Violence Against Women Act
2) This (you will not believe what the Gang of 30 tried to do to a gang rape survivor)
3) nor does the list include Paul Ryan’s Fetus Rights Bill (aka Your Rapist’s Parental Right’s Bill, but still, it’s a pretty comprehensive list.
The Republican party is like that one pot bellied ex-jock who shows up to the 10 year high school reunion still wearing their football jacket and trying to relive the good ole glory days. They reached their peak in 12th grade and won’t move on.
Washington, D.C. — Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and former congressional candidate Dr. David Gill filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for flouting a federal law barring 501(c)(4) organizations from engaging in political activity. Groups such as the American Action Network (AAN) have relied on an IRS-created tax loophole to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on electioneering activity without disclosing their donors.
CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan stated, “Disgracefully, the IRS has sat on its hands for the last two election cycles while
501(c)(4) groups have been formed expressly to run negative attack ads funded by anonymous donors. When called out, the IRS has said only that it is ‘aware’ of the public’s concern. Now the IRS can explain its deplorable inaction in federal court.”
[…]
In its 2010 application to the IRS, AAN stated it expected to spend less than 20 percent of its resources on political activities. Within days of receiving IRS approval of its 501(c)(4) status, AAN acknowledged it planned far greater political activity than it had represented. Previously, CREW has filed two complaints with the IRS and one with the Federal Election Commission, alleging AAN violated tax and campaign finance laws.
Chuck Grassley’s racist reason for voting against the VAWA.
Republicans have offered a number of reasons why they oppose the Violence Against Women Act. Some think it’s unconstitutional. Others argue that it’s just a meaningless bill with a patriotic title.
On Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) added a new one: Native Americans supposedly aren’t capable of holding fair trials.
Last week, Grassley was one of just 22 senators—all Republican men—who voted against reauthorizing VAWA. During a town hall meeting in Indianola on Wednesday, a woman asked him to explain his vote. Grassley responded that the legislation is unconstitutional, a belief shared by at least five of his colleagues.
Since the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to a trial among a jury of peers, Grassley reasoned that white men would be deprived of their rights if those who were accused of violence against Native American women had to appear in a tribal court. “On an Indian reservation, it’s going to be made up of Indians, right?” Grassley said. “So the non-Indian doesn’t get a fair trial.”
Since “peer” is a synonym of “equal,” Grassley isn’t just suggesting that Native Americans would be racist toward white, he’s suggesting that Native Americans aren’t the equals of whites. Besides, even if he’s just having a problem understanding plain English, his reasoning is flawed — he assumes that non-whites can’t judge whites fairly, but that the opposite isn’t true.
“A person who is tried in Vermont is likely to have an all-white jury because over 95 percent of Vermont is white,” TP’s Scott Keyes points out. “Similarly, a person who commits a crime in the Navajo Nation will face a jury of Native Americans because the population of the local community is made up of Navajo people. There is no reason to believe that Navajo jurors are any less impartial than white Vermonters, and Grassley is wrong to suggest otherwise.”
Dead wrong, if you ask me. Offensively wrong.
Proving my lifelong hypothesis yet again: all the “isms” and “phobias” (racism, sexism, xenophobia, so-called homophobia, etc) are pretty much just branches on the same tree. Hatred.
Oh, that and Republicans sUck
BEFORE MARCO RUBIO’S WATERGATE, BEFORE BOBBY JINDAL’S WOODEN “HAPPY MARDI GRAS” AND BEFORE MICHELE BACHMANN’S CRAZY EYES, THERE WAS DAN QUAYLE AND A POTATO(e)
Then: A 12-year-old boy from New Jersey, William Figueroa, correctly spelled “potato” in a mock spelling bee in 1992 — only to have Vice President Dan Quayle urge him via flash card to add an “e” to the end of the word. The rest is late-night talk show monologue history.
Now: William enjoyed a brief burst of celebrity — appearing on David Letterman, endorsing a spelling video game, leading the Pledge of Allegiance at the 1992 Democratic National Convention — but has since receded into ordinary life: In 2005, the Newark Star-Ledger reported that he was a Wal-Mart department manager and father of two.
Quotable (I): “It was more than a gaffe,” Mr. Quayle later wrote in his memoir. “It was a defining moment of the worst imaginable kind. I can’t overstate how discouraging and exasperating the whole event was.”
Quotable (II): Said William about what was going through his head following Mr. Quayle’s assistance: “I kept thinking, ‘How the hell did I spell potato wrong?’ “
[x]
★ video here ★
➤ @W1F1
![Washington, D.C. — Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and former congressional candidate Dr. David Gill filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for flouting a federal law barring 501(c)(4) organizations from engaging in political activity. Groups such as the American Action Network (AAN) have relied on an IRS-created tax loophole to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on electioneering activity without disclosing their donors.
CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan stated, “Disgracefully, the IRS has sat on its hands for the last two election cycles while 501(c)(4) groups have been formed expressly to run negative attack ads funded by anonymous donors. When called out, the IRS has said only that it is ‘aware’ of the public’s concern. Now the IRS can explain its deplorable inaction in federal court.”
[…]
In its 2010 application to the IRS, AAN stated it expected to spend less than 20 percent of its resources on political activities. Within days of receiving IRS approval of its 501(c)(4) status, AAN acknowledged it planned far greater political activity than it had represented. Previously, CREW has filed two complaints with the IRS and one with the Federal Election Commission, alleging AAN violated tax and campaign finance laws.
Read More](http://25.media.tumblr.com/8a85bb5ec7162af6031f58dd264a9cab/tumblr_mipecnCTHL1rncbh7o1_500.jpg)
![quickhits:
Chuck Grassley’s racist reason for voting against the VAWA.
ThinkProgress:
Republicans have offered a number of reasons why they oppose the Violence Against Women Act. Some think it’s unconstitutional. Others argue that it’s just a meaningless bill with a patriotic title.
On Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) added a new one: Native Americans supposedly aren’t capable of holding fair trials.
Last week, Grassley was one of just 22 senators—all Republican men—who voted against reauthorizing VAWA. During a town hall meeting in Indianola on Wednesday, a woman asked him to explain his vote. Grassley responded that the legislation is unconstitutional, a belief shared by at least five of his colleagues.
Since the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to a trial among a jury of peers, Grassley reasoned that white men would be deprived of their rights if those who were accused of violence against Native American women had to appear in a tribal court. “On an Indian reservation, it’s going to be made up of Indians, right?” Grassley said. “So the non-Indian doesn’t get a fair trial.”
Since “peer” is a synonym of “equal,” Grassley isn’t just suggesting that Native Americans would be racist toward white, he’s suggesting that Native Americans aren’t the equals of whites. Besides, even if he’s just having a problem understanding plain English, his reasoning is flawed — he assumes that non-whites can’t judge whites fairly, but that the opposite isn’t true.
“A person who is tried in Vermont is likely to have an all-white jury because over 95 percent of Vermont is white,” TP’s Scott Keyes points out. “Similarly, a person who commits a crime in the Navajo Nation will face a jury of Native Americans because the population of the local community is made up of Navajo people. There is no reason to believe that Navajo jurors are any less impartial than white Vermonters, and Grassley is wrong to suggest otherwise.”
Dead wrong, if you ask me. Offensively wrong.
[image source]
Proving my lifelong hypothesis yet again: all the “isms” and “phobias” (racism, sexism, xenophobia, so-called homophobia, etc) are pretty much just branches on the same tree. Hatred.
Oh, that and Republicans sUck](http://25.media.tumblr.com/60119e98af92ab79e72ca537d3d5c612/tumblr_mil66u9GLe1qfengno1_500.jpg)
