Showing posts with label Government Out of Control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government Out of Control. Show all posts

August 4, 2018

Trump Really Wants To Shut The Government Down Due to His Deep Love To This Country? Except He Won't Be Able To!





 A Younger Trump with an Older Cohn who was Lawyer to both Trump and Rep McCarthy (1952),who was on a mission to find homosexuals and commies to drag them to his committee on unamerican activities. Many well known people in Hollywood commited suicide others were jail to latter be released but no one will hire them now. Trump at times, particularly when he went for the families applying for assylum (or crossing the border). No need for that, a decission made from the bottom of his seat after having some Colonel Chicken nuggets.
There is no evidence that Mcarthy hated the "Reds" his  fight was against certain people which  if succesful, will make him move up politicly. He was heading a committee which really had no purpose. If people working in any field happened to like the communism it didn't mean they were spyes. Compare it it now the President of The US saying how much he likes the head of that systema and How he admires him. No one has dragged him to jail yet and they won't uunless there is more proof he is exchanging information for favors, either personal forloans or national for secrets (coliusion).
🦊Adam



Donald Trump is a man conflicted. All around him, people counsel caution, particularly when it comes to the midterm elections just three months away. Things are already bad enough, they say, so let’s not make them worse with something foolish like a government shutdown, in yet another attempt to get something (a wall along the southern border) that most Americans don’t want anyway.
Trump listens, but he does not believe. To him, what matters are not the American people, but hispeople — the ones who put him in office, the ones who come to his rallies, the ones whose faith in him only grows stronger, no matter what the polls say.
So when he’s in a friendly place and has the chance to ruminate on his dilemma, the conflict comes out. That’s what happened when he went on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show yesterday. Here are some excerpts of their conversation:
Limbaugh: Here you are suggesting that you’d be willing to maybe — you’d talk about — shutting down the government if that’s what it took to get this wall built.
Trump: Yeah.
Limbaugh: Now the traditional Republican says, “Oh, no! No! Don’t say that!” There you are saying, “Oh, yeah. I’ll be glad to do it if that’s what it takes.”
Trump: Yeah, I actually think it would be positive.
Limbaugh: People don’t understand your voters rally to you for that.
[. . .]
Trump: I have to say that I have heard this theory. I happen to think it’s a good thing politically. I’m not doing it for politics. I’m doing it because it’s the right thing to do. So I’m not looking at politics. But I happen to think that border security would be a good thing before the election, but there are many people within our party that are good people that are like you that agree with you on everything you say. But they’d rather do it after. They don’t agree on doing it before, and I accept their opinion, but I happen to think it would be a good thing to do before.
You can almost hear his aides, and every Republican running in a swing district, cringing in fear. A Republican president shutting down the government by refusing to sign temporary spending bills passed by his own party would be a disaster. But as Trump tells Limbaugh, “My polls are great, but the question is, is it transferable?” He then goes on to list some Republicans running in primaries who won with his endorsement. Of course, when it comes to the electorate as a whole, his polls are the opposite of great, and it’s his unpopularity that is transferable to Republicans. 
The fact that Trump is saying these things to Limbaugh isn’t evidence that he’s going to ignore what everyone is telling him and force a shutdown. But it does show his state of mind. When he’s faced with this kind of conflict — he wants to do one thing while his advisers and allies are begging him to do something else — two things usually happen. First, he backs down when it comes to the policy. And second, he’s so mad about it that he either lashes out on Twitter, to little real effect, or he goes on radio shows to complain.
But you have to understand that, from where he sits, it makes perfect sense to ignore what other people tell him and to trust his own instincts. After all, didn’t all the people who supposedly knew what they were talking about say he had no chance of becoming the Republican presidential nominee in 2016, and then said he’d surely lose the general election? He knew something they didn’t back then, so why can’t it be that he knows something they don’t right now?
The truth is that what he knew then and what he knows now are the same thing: Xenophobia works, anger works, fear works, hate works. If you stir them all together into the most toxic brew you can manage, the political effect can be dramatic. He also believes that conflict and controversy are things to be sought out, not avoided.
But the fact that his white-nationalist campaign succeeded in the particular circumstances of 2016 doesn’t mean that forcing a government shutdown over a border wall is the way to win a midterm election in 2018. It would certainly thrill a certain kind of hardcore Trumpite, but those people aren’t going to be the determining factor in this November’s elections.
If Republicans do indeed lose big on Election Day, as now seems almost inevitable, Trump will know just what to say: It was because the party was too timid, because it didn’t cater enough to his people, and because it didn’t shut down the government and get the wall built. And he’ll be more sure than ever that he should trust his instincts and ignore what everyone tells him. 

February 21, 2018

Peru's Fujimori 10 Years of Jailing and Deaths in the Name of Law and Order



Since the pardoning, four major street protests have taken place, lamenting the decision to give Fujimori a pardon. This has reduced confidence in the current political order of Peru. This affair has raised grave concerns about who now can continue Peru’s path. For businesses, there is no answer and the worst enemy of business in uncertainty. This act of apparent selfishness by Kuczynski in releasing a convicted human rights abuser so that he can remain in government runs the risk of jeopardising the until now certain path of growth and prosperity for Peru. 

To his supporters, Alberto Fujimori was the president who saved Peru from the twin evils of terrorism and economic collapse. To his opponents, he was an authoritarian strongman who rode roughshod over the country's democratic institutions in order to preserve his hold on power.
The son of Japanese immigrants, Mr Fujimori's decade in power from 1990 to 2000 in which he ruled with an iron fist was marked by a series of dramatic twists and turns.
His authoritarian government's crackdown on two violent insurgencies during his tenure resulted in the deaths of an estimated 69,000 people.
Several years after his presidency ended, Mr Fujimori was found guilty of bribery and abuse of power and was sentenced to 25 years in prison for human rights abuses during his time in office - including authorising a number of killings carried out by death squads.

Health issues lead to pardon

Sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2009 at the age of 70, most Peruvians assumed the former leader would spend the rest of his life in jail. 
But in December 2017, the 79-year-old was taken from prison to a hospital in the capital, Lima, because of health concerns; he was suffering from low blood pressure and abnormal heart rhythm.
That same month, Mr Fujimori was granted a pardon by President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski after doctors said his illness was incurable, adding that prison represented a "grave risk to his life".

In response, Mr Fujimori said he was "deeply grateful" and that while his leadership was well received by some, he recognised that he had "let down others", adding: "Those I ask for forgiveness from the bottom of my heart."
Alberto Fujimori, accompanied by his son Kenji Fujimori, leaves the hospital in Lima, 5 January 2018He also called for the country to unite against crime and violence. "We'll be in a country in which security is regained and violence eliminated," he tweeted.


Image copMr Fujimori, 79, leaves the hospital in Lima with his son,i

The news of his pardon was both celebrated and demonstrated against with thousands taking to the streets of Lima. The minister of culture and the defence minister resigned over the pardon.
Within days Mr Fujimori was released from hospital a free man, waving at media from his wheelchair accompanied by his son, Kenji Fujimori.

President's iron fist

One of the key moments of his presidency was the hostage siege by Marxist rebels belonging to the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), which occurred at the Japanese ambassador's residence in Lima in 1996-97.
After a four-month stand-off, commandos were sent in to take the building.
All 14 rebels were killed and nearly all the 72 hostages were rescued in an operation that at the time cemented Mr Fujimori's talking and acting tough.

Bribery scandal

The president's reputation was later tarnished by a bribery scandal involving former intelligence chief Vladimiro Montesinos, which led to him fleeing to his parents' native Japan in November 2000, where he lived for five years in self-imposed exile.
In an effort to resurrect his political career and launch a new bid for the presidency, he flew to Chile in November 2005, only to be arrested at the request of the Peruvian authorities.

Mr Fujimori then spent two years fighting to block his extradition to face a series of charges, a battle he lost in September 2007.
He was convicted and sentenced to six years in jail in December 2007 on charges of abuse of power, over the removal of sensitive video and audio tapes from Mr Montesinos's home.
In April 2009, judges found him guilty of authorising death-squad killings in two incidents known as La Cantuta and Barrios Altos, and the kidnapping of a journalist and a businessman.
Mr Fujimori repeatedly denied the charges, saying they were politically motivated.



Alberto Fujimori waving as he leaves the residence of the Japanese ambassador in Lima, 22 April 1997Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES

Alberto Fujimori: Key dates

  • 1990: Wins a surprise victory at polls
  • 1992: Dissolves Peru's congress with military backing, assuming greater control 
  • 1995: Restores congress and overwhelmingly wins a second term 
  • 2000: Re-elected for a third term amid allegations of ballot rigging
  • 2000: Flees to Japan after Montesinos scandal breaks
  • 2005: Detained in Chile at the Peruvian authorities' request 
  • 2007: Extradited from Chile to face trial in Peru
  • 2007: Jailed for six years for abuse of power
  • 2009: Convicted of human rights abuses, jailed for 25 years
  • 2013: Request for pardon on humanitarian grounds is rejected by President Humala
  • 2017: Pardoned on health grounds, prompting protests
  • 2018: Ordered to stand trial for the 1992 killings of six farmers

A country in ruins

Mr Fujimori's 15-month trial and the divisions in public opinion it generated echoed the controversy that accompanied him throughout his political career.
When he won the presidential elections in 1990, few Peruvians knew what to expect.
An agricultural engineer born of Japanese parents, Mr Fujimori was a political unknown until weeks before the vote.
He inherited a country on the verge of economic collapse and racked by political violence.
He implemented a radical programme of free-market reforms, removing subsidies, privatising state-owned companies and reducing the role of the state in almost all spheres of the economy.
Though this shock therapy brought great hardship for ordinary Peruvians, it ended rampant hyperinflation and paved the way for sustained economic growth in the second half of the 1990s. 


Alberto Fujimori attending the opening of a meeting of Latin American presidents in Lima, 9 June 2000Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionMr Fujimori's radical reforms led to sustained economic growth in Peru

Mr Fujimori also tackled the left-wing rebels whose 10-year insurgency had caused thousands of deaths. But he says he never approved a dirty war against the rebels.
In 1992, with the support of the military, the president dissolved the Peruvian congress and courts and seized dictatorial powers.
He justified the measure by arguing that the legislative and judiciary had been hindering the security forces in their fight against the rebels.
Opposition politicians said he was really seeking to escape any democratic checks on his power.
But he was soon vindicated in the eyes of most Peruvians by the capture of the leader of the main rebel group, the Shining Path.

Spying scandal

In 1995, Mr Fujimori stood for re-election and won an overwhelming victory. Most voters cited his victories over left-wing insurgents and hyperinflation as the reason for giving him their support.
But a growing number of Peruvians began to voice concern that the methods used against the insurgency were also being employed against the president's democratic opponents.
His critics accused him of using the intelligence service led by Mr Montesinos to intimidate and spy on rivals.
They said he exerted unfair control on the media and the judiciary, and used government resources to support his own campaigns.
This criticism increased when he announced he was to stand for an unprecedented third successive term.
Although he won the May 2000 elections, amid further allegations of vote-rigging, the prized third term began the start of his downfall.
After the Montesinos scandal broke, the opposition gained control of Congress for the first time in eight years and dismissed Mr Fujimori on grounds of "moral incapacity".
BBC

http://www.laffcharity.org.uk/newsroom/news-archive/ {for More information and reading about Peru's then and now conditions on human rights)

Adamfoxie🦊 Celebrating 10 years of keeping an eye on the world for You.           [There will be final changes soon]

adamfoxie.blogspot.com brings you the important LGBT news others ignore. Does not repost from gay sites [except out.sports.com only when a well known athlete comes out]. Will post popular items with a different angle or to contribute to our readers tastes🦊

March 29, 2017

The Government of Cameroon Has Cut Off The Internet to All Since 01/17/17





Wednesday marks 73 days since people in northwest and southwest Cameroon have had no access to the internet — at all. And it doesn’t look like it's coming back anytime soon. 


On Jan. 17, the government of Cameroon shut down the internet in two regions of the central African country. Courts and schools in the two regions have also been on strike for the duration.
The blackout has affected everything: ATM machines no longer work; students can't gossip on Whatsapp; and businesses have folded up as they're no longer able to operate online.

The shutdown has targeted Bamenda and Buea, two regions which are home to most of the country's English-speaking minority. Citizens there have long said theyre marginalised by the central government in Yaoundé, the French-speaking capital. 


“The Anglophone problem" dates back to the end of colonialism in the 1960s. 


What's known as Cameroon today was once under control of both British and French colonialists. After independence, a series of referendums were held and the country went from being a two-state federation to having a centralized government with 10 semi-autonomous administrative regions. 
But Anglophone Cameroonians say it's far from a case of being separate but equal. Although English and French are both official languages, language remains a barrier in getting often lucrative state jobs, state funding is skewed towards Francophone regions and official documents and activities that should be bilingual are frequently in French alone. 
Over the decades, several civil organizations and caucuses have formed amid calls for the state makeup to be reviewed. Some activists are campaigning for a return to a two-state federation; in recent years though others have gone further, calling for the anglophone-phone regions to splinter and form independent states.

The internet shutdown came after a surge in protests by English-speaking Cameroonians against the government last year. Throughout the last three months of 2016, the government faced a series of protests from lawyers, teachers and students. The marches were triggered by the presidential appointment of French-speaking judges to courts in the Anglophone region. Aside from operating in a different language, English-speaking regions still operate under the English common law, as opposed to French civil law which the appointees were trained in. 


Judges went on strike. Teachers soon joined them, saying the prevalence of French-speaking teachers in classrooms — who spoke limited English — was hampering students' progress.
While discontent has simmered in the background for decades, by December they bubbled over into violence. The government responded brutally. Incidents of soldiers brutally assaulting students flooded Cameroonian Twitter. Several prominent government critics were arrested, including a senior judge. They have yet to be released. 
Paul Biya, the autocratic ruler who has held power for 35 years, soon after claimed the internet needed to be shutdown for "security reasons."

Cameroonians have responded creatively by setting up internet “refugee camps" where the data is always flowing. 


To get online, residents in the affected areas have been forced to travel for tens of kilometers to get to Francophone areas where there's still connectivity.
But in Buea, known as "Silicon Mountain" for its booming tech start-ups, a group of techies have come together to set up a "refuge," Quartz reports. They’ve rented a room in Bonako, a village bordering the French region, bought portable modems and hooked them up to generators, creating an oasis for struggling start ups. 

But there are also fears such repression can cross borders.

US watchdog Freedom House found last year that governments curbed social media communications in 24 countries last year, up from 15 the previous year. 
African governments been increasingly using blackouts as a tool to crush dissenting voices. This week a Tanzanian rapper was arrested after a song criticising the government went viral. And partial or complete internet blackouts were order in Gambia, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo and Gabon in 2016. Officials in Zimbabwe also hiked the cost of internet cell data after protests jumped from social media to the streets. 

For now, most Cameroonians are calling on the government to begin implementing three simple measures. 

1. Bring back the internet
2. Free all the arrested
3. National Dialogue

March 7, 2017

Is Trump’s ICE After Father of American Fallen Hero Khizr Khan?




Khizr Khan at the Dem. National Convention. He told Trump He(Trump) did not know the Constitution




The father of a fallen Iraqi American soldier who became a household name due to a spat with Donald Trump has been forced to cancel a trip to Canada, owing to his “travel privileges bring reviewed”. 

Khizr Khan spoke at the Democratic National Convention about his son, army Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed during the Iraq war. 

A supporter of Hillary Clinton, he used his July speech to ask Mr Trump if he had ever read the US Constitution, and said that he would gladly lend him his copy. Mr Trump, enraged, then attacked the family – beginning a row that overshadowed the presidential campaign for several days.
  
Mr Khan, an American citizen born in Pakistan, had planned to speak at a lunch in Toronto on Tuesday in a discussion about Mr Trump's administration.
 
A US citizen for more than 30 years, Mr Khan, a lawyer, was notified on Sunday evening that his “travel privileges had been reviewed,” according to Ramsay Talks, the company behind the talks, based in Toronto and hosted by Bob Ramsay.

On Monday afternoon Mr Ramsay confirmed on Twitter that Mr Khan would not be speaking.

“Cancelled - Tuesday, March 7 Khizr Kahn talk. Tickets will be refunded,” he said.


Mr Khan, in a statement on Ramsay Talks’ Facebook page, said he had not been given a reason as to why his travel privileges were being reviewed and apologised to ticket-holders for the cancellation. 

"This turn of events is not just of deep concern to me but to all my fellow Americans who cherish our freedom to travel abroad," he said. "I am grateful for your support and look forward to visiting Toronto in the near future."

He told The Telegraph he had no additional comment to make.

It remained unclear why a US citizen would have his travel privileges reviewed – even one born abroad. Pakistan is not one of the six countries listed on Mr Trump’s travel ban, which was instigated on Monday.


US Customs & Border Protection told Reuters that it does not contact travellers in advance of their travel out of the United States. CBP would not comment specifically on the Khan case, citing privacy protections.

February 7, 2017

A Decree is Like an Exec.Order But in Romania the President Has to Rescind





A pro-government protester holds up a baby owl and an image of Romanian President Klaus Iohannis depicted as a Nazi soldier of Hitler's paramilitary SS Schutzstaffel organisation in front of the presidential office in Bucharest, Romania February 6, 2017. Inquam Photos/Octav... REUTERS





Romania’s president on Tuesday tore into the Social Democrat-led government over a corruption decree that has sparked the biggest protests since the 1989 fall of communism, but he backed it to remain in power in a potential reprieve for Prime Minister Sorin Grindeanu.
The government on Sunday rescinded the decree, which critics said would have turned back the clock on the fight against corruption in the European Union member state, but some protesters have pledged to keep up the pressure until Grindeanu resigns.

In a speech to parliament, centrist President Klaus Iohannis admonished the government for issuing the decree a week ago "at night, in secret" without consulting parliament.
But he said the ruling Social Democrat Party (PSD) had won the right to govern in a December election and should continue to do so, a message that may take the sting out of the protests.
Hundreds of thousands of Romanians have taken to the streets for the past week in cities across the country, thronging Bucharest’s broad boulevards in scenes that will not have gone unnoticed elsewhere across Eastern Europe, blighted by corruption and cosy ties between business and politics since the end of communism.

"The prosperity of the Romanian people was not your first priority. Your first concern was to look after the penal files, and thats why Romanians are indignant and revolted," Iohannis told lawmakers.

Despite the crisis, he said new elections were not the answer.
"You have been saying in public that I would like to overthrow the legitimate government. That's false. You won, now you govern and legislate, but not at any price," Iohannis said.
"The resignation of a single minister is too little and early elections would at this stage be too much. This is the available room for manoeuvre."

JUSTICE MINISTER UNDER FIRE

Though his role is largely ceremonial, the president’s powers include nominating the prime minister after elections and returning legislation to parliament for reconsideration.
PSD lawmakers walked out of the assembly around half-way through the president’s speech. They later returned to approve the government’s 2017 spending plan, setting a shortfall of 2.99 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).

The Romanian leu firmed to a four-month high of 4.4800 per euro, before retreating to trade 0.3 percent up on the day at 4.4910.

Romania, a country of 20 million people and host to a U.S. ballistic missile defence station, remains one of the poorest and most corruption-ridden members of the EU.
The decree would have decriminalized a number of graft offences and shielded many public officials from corruption allegations.

Even after the U-turn, 250,000 protesters turned out in Bucharest on Sunday evening, with some saying they would not be satisfied until the government resigned. 
Around 25,000 rallied again in the capital on Monday evening. It was unclear how many might turn out on Tuesday night, but some protesters have said they will continue until parliament votes on whether to endorse the government’s repeal of the decree, likely by the end of the week.

One minister has already quit over the decree, saying he could not support it, and the Social Democrats have said they expect Grindeanu to decide whether or not to keep Justice Minister Florin Iordache, the architect of the measure.

The government, which holds a big majority, faces a no-confidence motion in parliament on Wednesday, when several PSD sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, have told Reuters they also expect Iordache to submit his resignation.

"For sure, some resignations would be needed and probably inevitable from the government," said political commentator Cristian Patrasconiu. "This is what the street would like to see."
PSD leader Liviu Dragnea said he agreed with the president that an early election would solve nothing.

The governing programme is good," said Dragnea, whose current trial on abuse-of-office charges would have been halted by the decree.  f we let the government govern then the entire country stands to gain."


By Radu-Sorin Marinas and Luiza Ilie | BUCHAREST

(Additional reporting by Luiza Ilie; Writing by Matt Robinson)

October 29, 2013

When Are The Democrats Going to Learn from Ted Cruz?

Senator Ted Cruz (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senator Ted Cruz (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

In the same manner that Susan Sontag once acknowledged that the 9/11 terrorists were not, in fact, cowards, it is time to admit that Ted Cruz is not as craven as he seems. A fraud, a wacko bird, a fool, an amateur, Jim DeMint without the charm—yes, all the names his fellow Republicans are calling the senator from Texas bear the sting of truth. But you have to give the man this: he has the courage of his convictions and the nerve to use a diversity of tactics to advance them.
Cruz, who keeps a sign once favored by Ronald Reagan that says It Can Be Done in his office, is best understood not as a statesman seeking to build a legislative record but as a right-wing ideological activist working to change the terms of debate. “I’m convinced there is a new paradigm in politics—the rise of the grassroots,” he told National Review’s Robert Costa. “And on Obamacare, I’ve said from the start, that if typical Washington rules apply, we can’t win this fight…. The only way this fight will be won is if the American people rise up and hold our elected officials accountable.”
In the short-term calculation, Cruz was disastrously wrong; no populist revolt against Obamacare was in the making. In fact, his theatrics cost the Republicans a chance to score easy points against the bungled rollout of HealthCare.gov, as John McCain testily pointed out on CNN. In the medium view, his insurrection escalated a long-simmering feud between theTea Party and the GOP establishment into an all-out civil war that will convulse the party through at least the midterm elections. But in the largest sense, his strategy is working. AsGeorge Packer pointed out in The New Yorker, the government that emerged from sixteen days of a shutdown was dealt a thousand paper cuts, as already overloaded and underfunded agencies became even less efficient, less responsive to the needs of ordinary citizens. Meanwhile, another round of budget cuts and another debt ceiling showdown loom, and Cruz, for one, has already pledged to shut down the government again.
This is bad news for the Democratic Party, whose response to the Tea Party’s histrionics has been to seek the sensible center, playing the soporific role of pragmatic, compromise-seeking adult technocrats. As long as a majority of the GOP is hell-bent on breaking bad, this identity positions the Democrats as contrast winners. But put in the context of historic and rising inequality, shrinking government budgets, unabated unemployment and foreclosure crises, and crumbling schools and roads, Democrats start to look like management consultants in cheap suits brought in to wind down the American empire.
And here’s where Cruz has two things right: the ordinary Washington rules no longer apply, and it will take a people’s insurrection—not Beltway business as usual—to fix what’s broke. But in contrast to Cruz, President Obama has consistently used the shutdown to draw unnecessary distinctions between governance and activism of any sort. At a press conference one day after the shutdown ended, he advised the political class to “stop focusing on the lobbyists and the bloggers and the talking heads on radio and the professional activists who profit from conflict,” as if activists and bloggers from both sides of the aisle were equally responsible for the fiasco. And on October 8, he drew a clumsy analogy between the Tea Party and striking workers:
“When you’re at the plant and you’re in the middle of your job, do you ever say to your boss, ‘You know what, unless I get a raise right now and more vacation pay, I’m going to just shut down the plant’…. How do you think that would go?… There’s nothing wrong with asking for a raise or asking for more time off. But you can’t burn down the plant or your office if you don’t get your way.”
Um, how exactly does the president think the American working class shrank inequality and got a bigger share of the economy, pensions, healthcare and job security during the postwar boom? By asking their bosses really, really nicely? No—they shut it down. From 1947 to 1974, years of unprecedented shared prosperity, more than 41 million American workersengaged in over 8,000 work stoppages to improve their labor conditions. They used tactics like boycotts, working-to-rule, slowdowns and other withdrawals of efficiency; although, notwithstanding Obama’s equation of striking with arson, they did not light any actual factory fires.
That reference was one of the president’s few mentions of workers in recent weeks, which is, frankly, disturbing. Obama now says he wants to focus on things that Republicans and Democrats can find common ground on: immigration (laudable), deficit reduction (deplorable) and a farm bill (uh, OK). But jobs and the economy? That case has been left to be made of late by the party’s bête noire, Ralph Nader, who in a recent column excoriated the Democrats for inaction on raising the federal minimum wage. And it’s another Green Party politician, Mayor Gayle McLaughlin of Richmond, California, who is using the government power of eminent domain to seize underwater mortgages of local citizens in danger of losing their homes.
Meanwhile, the political spectrum has shifted such that the president’s legacy rests on the fate of a Heritage Foundation–conceived, Mitt Romney–tested healthcare plan. Maybe the administration will resurrect Steve Jobs in time to engineer a flawless exchange website, but the damage to its brand—based as it is on technocratic efficiency—has been done. When Republicans aren’t busy bickering among themselves, they’re hatching plans to further discredit Obamacare, including a potential congressional hearing on the website’s failures. Democrats should, of course, push back against the GOP’s lies and sabotage, but is it too much to ask that at least one Democrat in Congress use this occasion to make the obvious point that a single-payer system would have been simpler and better? I know what a left-wing version of Ted Cruz would do.
George Zornick broke down Ted Cruz's various fabrications about the Affordable Care Plan the earlier this month.

Featured Posts

TV Personality in Egypt Get One Yr Hard labor for Interviewing Gay Man

BBC   An Egyptian TV presenter has been sentenced to one year of hard labour for interviewing a gay man last year. ...