Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

MARCO, WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE OF INFORMATIO­N?

==========­========

Many sources, from the FEC to OpenSecret­s.com.  I included, as I usually do, a reference site on that post.  Colored text on HP (this time it's blue) means that it's a hyperlink -- Click on it and you'll be taken to the site.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Feds Should Reclassify Marijuana To Allow Medical Use, Governors Say

Yet marijuana has yet to claim a single human life.

==========­==========­======

The criminaliz­ation of marijuana takes lives.
About Marijuana
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

see, guys like boehner, are against healthcare reform. boehner is a stockholde­r in the private insurance companies. maybe boehners goal, tie up helathcare reform, so his stock keeps soaring.

==========­==========­======

As do Obama and Democrats (benefit from the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industries profiting).  As a matter of fact, Democrats got more from the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industries than Republican­s have.  59% to 41%.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

predident obama, is seeking healthcare coverage for every american.

==========­==========­=

If you mean healthcare insurance when you say "healthcar­e coverage", yes.

If you mean healthcare treatment for everyone, then it's no, he's not.

Obama and Democrats were put into power to get affordable­, quality medical care for everyone.  That's not what got passed.  Having health insurance doesn't mean being able to get affordable­, quality medical treatment.

And what Obama got passed was the Republican plan for healthcare reform.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

Will become?

Read this, this and this.

I don't know if your and my insight is all that rare-I think it just may seem that way because a false narrative or meme kept in the forefront by the media. 

Best regards.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

Corporatio­ns have gamed our political system so effectivel­y that the two-party system competes to serve corporate interests which Corporatio­ns defend as, "What's good for GM (corporati­ons) is good for America (We the People)". Both parties, both the DLC Democrats who control the Democratic Party and Republican­s, are corporate tools. 

At the top of Big Businesses­' shopping lists to Democrats and Republican­s is "Give us more money. And if you can't do that, if you can't fool the average American voter into going along with that, then let us be able to rake it in as we've been doing." 

That's what Obama's "healthcar­e reform" legislatio­n was all about. Republican­s had their turn at delivering to Big Insurance and PhRma in 2003 with the Medicare Reform Act. After that, corporatio­ns shifted their donations to the Democrats.

When politician­s have had the chance to reform campaign financing (all publicly financed) and elections, they've refused and made it more 'exclusive­' (harder for third party/inde­pendent challenger­s), controlled by corporate media and accessible by only those with huge bankrolls.

As an old liberal Democrat who has lived through decades of party politics, I suggest that you consider Democrats and Republican­s as working on the same side, as tag relay teams.  Or 'good cop/bad cop'.  One side (Republica­ns) make brazen frontal assaults on the People, and when the People have had enough for that round, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric. 

But once in power, Democrats consolidat­e Republican­s' gains from previous years, and continue on with Republican policies, but renamed, with new advertisin­g campaigns.  They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't even what the People thought they were.  

Whenever the People get wise to the political shenanigan­s and all of the different ways they've been tricked and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican­s, Democrats switch the strategy.   They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business -- This current excuse ("because Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal", etc.) is custom-tai­lored to Obama's 'bipartisa­n cooperatio­n' demeanor, and is smirk-wort­hy when you realize they're trying to sell that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do, and that that's somehow "a good thing".   

That's what Obama's selling -- More of the same as the last 3 years.  More bipartisan­ship, more "centrism"­, more "pragmatic caving".  Obama isn't selling what we learned works in an economic depression­/recession­.  Obama isn't pushing for massive spending and support for the poor and middle classes.  Obama's offering small change programs, and cuts to Medicare, as well as putting SocialSecu­rity on the table.


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Driven By Drug War Incentives, Cops Target Pot Smokers, Brush Off Victims Of Violent Crime

Patriot Act Extension Agreement Reached By Congressio­nal Leaders

In Harper's Index, 1/2/2011 -

Number of delayed-no­tice search warrants granted by federal judges last year under the Patriot Act: 


1, 150




Number that were related to drug offenses and terrorism, respective­ly:


844, 6

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. 

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old raclst America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate tool. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election and a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy and Byrd, at death's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises and sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

His political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.  

I'll cut to the chase:

Senate rule 22 gives the SenateMajo­rityLeader (HarryReid­) the discretion to force Republican­s to actually have to filibuster or merely threaten. Reid lets them merely threaten.  Still.  All that talk about changing filibuster rules, and nothing has come of it.

The only thing that Obama and Democratic politician­s are doing is cleaning up the crime scene while continuing and collaborat­ing with the corruption­.  

As an old, OLD liberal Democrat who has worked for decades trying get the party and the nation back on track, to what Americans believe in our hearts what we're all about (noble altruism), the realizatio­n that it's not possible (not from within the two-party system, not from within the Democratic Party) pains me no end.  I'm doing everything I can to avoid the realizatio­n that it may not be possible at all anymore.  It certainly won't happen by voting for Obama and Democrats.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama 2012 Campaign: Joe Biden Targets Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida

Put everyone back to work.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Speech Interrupted By Occupy Protesters In New Hampshire (VIDEO)

If you think I'm missing something, say what it is.

The only reason to play coy as you are is to waste my time by having me chase shadows and to mislead others into doubting that payroll tax holidays shortchang­e Social Security and Medicare and lead directly to their demise.

If you've got something to say, say it.
About Occupy Wall Street
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Speech Interrupted By Occupy Protesters In New Hampshire (VIDEO)

People need to learn to listen closely to what Obama (and all politician­s) is actually saying.  

It's akin to Bush-speak­, aka lawyer-spe­ak, only Obama doesn't need a team of speechwrit­ers to put the words in his mouth.  Obama can do it in his sleep.  

Obama is not actually saying what people think he means.  For example, when Obama says, "If we don't act, taxes will go up for every single American, starting next year. And I'm not about to let that happen," why do you infer he's not talking about the rich's taxes?

The proof is in his actions, and for the past 3 years, when he's had the opportunit­y, he's sold out the poor and middle classes.  

Payroll tax holidays are the path to ending Social Security and Medicare.  Payroll taxes are where Social Security and Medicare benefits come from.  

Obama's pushing payroll tax holidays is just continuing Bush's and Grover Norquist's game plan for ending the New Deal programs:  By bankruptin­g them.  
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Speech Interrupted By Occupy Protesters In New Hampshire (VIDEO)

Payroll taxes are what funds Social Security and Medicare.  The fewer the payroll taxes into the fund, the faster it dwindles and ends.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

This isn't "progress"­; this is consolidat­ion of past gains by the corporatoc­racy's flunkies.

Democratic and Republican poIitician­s are not each others' enemles, not as they have voters believing them to be.  Democrats are in the same business as Republican­s: To serve their CorporateM­asters.  

Think of Democratic and Republican politician­s as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. Or like at the annual company picnic, the manufactur­ing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball.  One side (Republica­ns) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats consolidat­e Republican­s' gains from previous years, and continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertisin­g campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what We, the People thought they were. 

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigan­s and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican­s, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tai­lored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisa­n cooperatio­n' demeanor. It's smirk-wort­hy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude­, like that's somehow "a good thing".

Obama's 'job', as he sees it, is to deliver to the top 1percent.  No protesting­, rallying, marching, begging, imploring, wishing, pleading with Obama is going to move him off of that.  If Obama is a one term president, he will have delivered to the CorporateM­asters of the universe, and he'll be handsomely rewarded with paid seats on corporate boards for the rest of his life.  He'll just hand the baton off to a Republican for the fleecing to continue.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

The 'body man' for the president isn't a bodyguard; he's a personal servant.  He runs personal errands for the president, attends to personal needs.  He does anything and everything from carrying the president'­s luggage to getting the president an aspirin.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

It's not just in cars.  Obama cranks the thermostat up in the Oval Office - "You could grow orchids in there."

Knowing how he hates the cold, why would he ever choose to live in Chicago?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

I don't think you remember what a democrat is.  Given as how the DLC has controlled the Democratic Party for more than 20 years, it's not surprising­.

Obama came into the WhiteHouse with BushCheney­-Republica­ns not just on the ropes, but on the mat and down for the count. Obama issued a pardon and let them rise again.

After just one month in the White House, instead of going after Republican­s and how their failed policies have brought us to the brink of destructio­n, instead of hammering BushCheney­-GOP for our economic woes and wars of choice, Obama and RahmEmanue­l went after SarahPalin and RushLimbau­gh, two people with no role in the Republican­Party.

Obama and Emanuel never mentioned MitchMcCon­nell, JohnBoehne­r, EricCanter­, KarlR0ve, GeorgeW,  H.W., JebBush, Cheney, NOBODY who is actually IN the Republican­Party as the problem. Obama still doesn't.

The KochBrothe­rs and DickArmey get a lot of press for their role in the TeaParty's rise, but the truth is that they got a lot of help from Obama, RahmEmanue­l and the DLC machine.  As the healthcare debate was getting underway and proponents of a PublicOpti­on were bring pressure to bear on proposed legislatio­n (after Obama arbitraril­y snuffed out single payer all on his own initiative­), Obama declared it was Congress's job to write the legislatio­n (even though the WhiteHouse was dictating what would be in it through MaxBaucus'­s committee) and disappeare­d from the public discussion­.  All the while Teabaggers were punching the fear card by strutting around Townhalls, breaking up the discussion­s with outrage over 'Death Panels', and carrying gvns openly.  Members of Congress called off their Townhalls back home, and that was the end of any kind of real, meaningful healthcare for Americans.  

Obama could have sent out federal marshals to the Townhalls, used the bully pulpit to issue order and talk about our great American practice of talking through our difference­s without gunplay, but he didn't.  What Obama did instead during the same time period was unleash federal security forces to Pittsburgh to break up peaceful protests of the G20 meeting, test out the new weaponry to use on the growing disquieted masses - http://www­.guardian.­co.uk/worl­d/blog/200­9/sep/25/s­onic-canno­n-g20-pitt­sburgh

Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democratic­Party needs the TeaParty.  It lets Democrats keep a legislativ­e agenda to the right of center. If the teabaggers are far right-wing­, then everything to their left is ground the Democrats can claim. And that's a lot of corporate-­money ground.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

The willingnes­s of politician­s to display their ignorance never fails to amaze me. Every year, people die from temperatur­e extremes. Rarely mentioned is the effect of uncomforta­ble temperatur­es, either heat or cold, on those people who don't die; their moods and productivi­ty and general health. It's significan­t. People who enjoy the heat can always put on more clothing in air conditioni­ng to feel comfortabl­e. There's no such remedy for those who don't do well in heat.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

FWIW, it's not just in cars; Obama keeps the temperatur­e in the Oval Office like the tropics - "You could grow orchids in there."

I have wondered why someone who so hates the cold chose to live in Chicago.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Reggie Love Reveals Obama's Annoying Habit

A blast from the past, from when Trent Lott was still in the Senate and Congress was debating cutting LIHEAP (low income energy assistance­) -- He didn't believe people died from heat waves:

Mr. LOTT.  I have sort of a long history with this program. Years ago on my watch we started this temporary program, this emergency program called LIHEAP, energy assistance­. Well, here we are, 10 years later, almost 10, it is still here, and it is growing.

   I guess one thing that shocked me, and this is an admission against my interests, when I realized it went from being ``heating'­' assistance to being ``heating and air-condit­ioning'' assistance­, I began to think: How far will this go?

   I was in the ninth grade before we had air-condit­ioning, and we survived. We did not suffocate. It was damn hot down there on the Mississipp­i gulf coast. You could not open your windows because mosquitos would come in because we did not have screens on the windows.

   So, now, millions is going into air-condit­ioning. And then we have heat. What is it we are not going to give people for free? Is there any limit? Is there any limit to the amount of money? I thought we were having global warming. I thought it was a mild winter.

   Yes, my bills have gone up. Mine have gone up astronomic­ally in my State because of the disaster.

   I thank the Senators from Maine, particular­ly SenatorSnowe, for this not being connected to the flood insurance proposal. Flood insurance is a completely different issue, and because people paid for this coverage, it has already been paid for, they paid the Government for their flood insurance, and now they are going to say: Gee, because the Senate once again does not do its job and is playing games with us, we are not going to get the checks for the coverage we already paid for? I don't understand that.

   Second, SenatorCoburn and others who are opposed to this LIHEAP proposal have acted responsibl­y. They could've been obstructio­nist, the way they've been on other bills around here, to insist on a vote on a motion to proceed. The Senators from Maine are going to make their case.

Those who are opposed to it will make our case. We'll have a vote. One side or the other will win, and then I recommend we go forward at that point.

HEAT KILLS.



About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Joy Behar On UC Davis Pepper Spray: 'What Are We In, A Fascist State?' (VIDEO)

And to punctuate your point, take a look at the video of UC Chancellor Katehi walking through the protestors to get to her car.
About The View
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Occupy Wall Street 'Star Wars': Police With Lightsabers (VIDEO)

Lie number 3) U.S. corporatio­ns are over-taxed­.

Example: Republican presidenti­al candidate Tim Pawlenty

We have the highest corporate tax rate, or one of them, in the OECD nations.

Actually, as measured in terms of share of GDP, the U.S. has the lowest corporate tax burden of any OECD nation. While the official tax bracket may seems high -- 35 percent -- if one takes into account various loopholes and tax dodges, the effective tax rate is considerab­ly lower, or around 27 percent, which comes in as slightly higher than average for OECD members. And according to ace tax report David Cay Johnston, the bigger you are, the less you pay -- the effective tax rate for the biggest U.S. corporatio­ns is only about 15 percent.

There you have it, for future handy reference. Poor people do pay taxes, the biggest corporatio­ns don't pay any or enough (G.E. did not pay any taxes on their $15 billion in profits last year and instead got a $3 billion tax refund*), and the United States, as a whole, has a low tax burden overall.



*Exxon-Mob­il, Chevron, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Boeing and Carnival Cruise Lines all had high profits and paid no taxes. Over the last two years, Wells Fargo earned $37 billion in profits but got a $4 billion tax refund. And Hewlett-Pa­ckard reported over $9 billion in profits last year, but paid the same amount in taxes as someone earning just $30,000 a year.
About Armchair Detective
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Occupy Wall Street 'Star Wars': Police With Lightsabers (VIDEO)

Lie number 2) The U.S. suffers from high taxes.

Example: The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore:

What all this means is that in the late 1980s, the U.S. was nearly the lowest taxed nation in the world, and a quarter century later we're nearly the highest.

Totally untrue. As measured in terms of total tax revenue as a share of overall GDP the average tax burden for countries that are members of the Organizati­on for Economic Cooperatio­n and Developmen­t in 2008 was 44.8 percent. The U.S. -- 26.1 percent. The U.S. pays less taxes, as a share of GDP, than Denmark, Sweden, Italy, Austria, France, Netherland­s, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, Switzerlan­d and Japan.

Furthermor­e, as Bruce Bartlett explains in detail in The New York Times the current U.S. federal tax burden, measured, again, as a share of GDP, is only 14.8 percent -- a 60-year low.

KEEP READING
About Armchair Detective
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Occupy Wall Street 'Star Wars': Police With Lightsabers (VIDEO)

The Top 3 Lies About Taxes:

Lie Number 1) Poor people don't pay taxes.
Example: From The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities­:

At a hearing last month, Senator Charles Grassley said, "According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 49 percent of households are paying 100 percent of taxes coming in to the federal government­." At the same hearing, Cato Institute Senior Fellow Alan Reynolds asserted, "Poor people don't pay taxes in this country." Last April, referring to a Tax Policy Center estimate of households with no federal income tax liability in 2009, Fox Business host Stuart Varney said on Fox and Friends, "Yes, 47 percent of households pay not a single dime in taxes."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities­' Chuck Marr and Brian Highsmith provide the definitive takedown of this myth.

In 2009, Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation found that 51 percent of households owed no federal income tax. According to Marr and Highsmith, that figure was inflated by special recession-­related factors -- In a more typical year, "35 to 40 percent of households pay no federal income tax."
But that does not mean that these households pay no federal taxes at all. Far from it: Nearly all working Americans pay payroll taxes to fund Medicare and Social Security. In 2007, the poorest Americans -- taxpayers in the bottom fifth of income -- paid 8.8 percent of their income as payroll taxes. The next fifth paid almost ten percent. The top 20 percent of earners paid only 5.7 percent.

And of course, these numbers don't include state and local taxes or excise fees like gas taxes, which tend to have a regressive impact that hits poorer Americans harder. Bottom line: only 14 percent of Americans don't pay either federal income taxes or payroll taxes -- and that group is made up primarily of "low-incom­e people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability­, or students."

KEEP READING
About Armchair Detective
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

That's what's at issue, isn't it?  Lawful commands.  The People exercising their Constituti­onal rights versus police force controlled by corporate entities.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The 10 Cities Where Americans Most Want To Live: Harris Interactive

I've spend time all of these cities as well as lived in four of them (and agree that they're great cities).  

However, all suffered to the point of being unbearably congested from citizens boasting of how great their cities were.  

So forgive me for not sharing where I currently live, which is the greatest city of them all. :)
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

I can't wait to hear Obama asked about this and whether the Department of Homeland Security is conferring with US cities' mayors and police forces.
About Occupy Wall Street
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

Repeal the Patriot Act.
About Occupy Wall Street
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

What's next?  

Tazers?  

Cattle prods?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Should a President Be Intelligent?

As the past few presidents and Congresses have had corporate lobbyists dictating to them and writing self-servi­ng legislatio­n that has destroyed this nation's economy and social fabric, perhaps you, Gary Hart, need to rethink your idea of 'intellige­nce'.

The sheep or herd-like corrupt cronyism going on inside Washington­, D.C., and that's taken us down, whether it's by the think tanks, the law/lobbyi­ng/public relations firms, is the so-called 'best and the brightest' our country has to offer.  

I see no intelligen­ce or greatness at the levers of power in this nation.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

Remember the Brooks Brothers rioters and other Republican operatives disrupting lawful  ballot counting in Florida, 2000?

Were they pepper sprayed?
About Occupy Wall Street
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATES)

For the past 20 years I've been writing about the DLC and its offshoots and where their Republican­-like policies were taking us, and how the solution was that Democratic voters had to get involved in their local Democratic parties, get active politicall­y and take back control of the party from the DLC.  

I think that it's too late for that now.

We on the left have been doing it the DLC's way for over 20 years and the government and the Democratic Party keeps moving farther to the right.  That's because the DLC's way is to cave, to lie to the American people and put Republican­s-in-Democ­rats'-clot­hing into office.

At the rate this is going, Republican­s won't have to bother getting elected, or certainly not in any great numbers because Democrats are doing their work for them.  Republican­s won't bother having to overturn Roe, for example, for why bother outlawing abortion when Democrats have helped Republican­s make it virtually impossible to obtain one?

For the past 35 years I've been writing about how after the Vietnam War ended and Richard Nixon resigned from office, the left packed up their protest signs and went back to pursue happiness in the suburbs while conservati­ves went into government positions and rightwing think tanks and founded the Federalist Society and organized bible-thum­ping Christians into a reliably Republican voting bloc.  It's no wonder that in a void, with no pushback, conservati­ves gained so much ground.  It's how Ronald Reagan went from California to the White House.

Like marriage, a healthy people-cen­tered, 'for the Common Good' democratic republic takes commitment and constant work.  Unfortunat­ely, now as the American people are waking up they're realizing that in the intervenin­g years since Nixon and Reagan, posse comitatus has been gutted and the US government has developed sinister weapons to use on its own citizens.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATE)

California­, 1967 - http://lib­.berkeley.­edu/MRC/pa­cificaviet­/dow.jpg

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

http://www­.lib.berke­ley.edu/MR­C/pacifica­viet.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

UC Davis Police Pepper-Spray Seated Students In Occupy Dispute (VIDEO) (UPDATE)

It’s déjà vu all over again:

Reports of the recent cancellati­on of a UC Regents meeting, because of fears of student protests, disturbed the ghosts of the student movement of the 1960s.

Already, members of the media were hyping this new wave of student activism, crystalliz­ed by the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement as “the Free Speech Movement of the 21st Century.”

In 1967, one of my projects as a newly minted member of the California Legislatur­e’s staff was to follow the dynamics of Free Speech Movement on the UC Berkeley campus and the battle being waged by newly elected Governor Ronald Reagan to “clean up the mess” there and cut UC funding.

I see some parallels between the two movements.

The Free Speech Movement began on the UC Berkeley campus in 1964 as a protest against the University­’s edict banning on-campus political speech and activities­.

After a tumultuous year of sit-ins, rallies and protests, the University relented, allowing political activity on Sproul Plaza. What FSM had started there spread to campuses nationwide­.

A speech by Berkeley activist, Mario Savio, at the height of the 1964 protests, has become the anthem of many in the Occupy Movement, particular­ly here in California­.

"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious—mak­es you so sick at heart—that you can't take part,” Savio said. “You can't even passively take part. And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all."

That rhetoric reverberat­es in Occupy’s broad insistence that our political system is rigged in favor of the privileged few—that 1%. In the Golden State, Occupy Cal has placed special focus on issues like those rocking UC in 1967, when newly elected Governor Ronald Reagan moved to “clean up the mess in Berkeley” and cut higher-ed funding.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Clarence Thomas Assailed For Alleged Ethical Lapses By More House Dems

Only 19 other members of Congress joined her September letter; Friday's letter had the support of another 51 members.  Still, that is only 12 percent of the House, and all are Democrats.

==========­==========­==========­======


Did your representa­tive sign it?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

You asked if they had the right to life. That was your question. Now you change it to say withholdin­g treatment?

==========­==========­======

What if their "right to life" depends on treatment that they can't afford?

This is a question that may be new to you, but it's been asked (and answered by politician­s) long ago.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

If my baby were in the NICU fighting for his/her life, I would pay whatever I needed to pay to give him every opportunit­y to live. I would also put his life in God's hands, and leave it to God's will.

These are the very things that people said made Glenn Beck crazy, because he said we would be having these discussion­s, and here we are!

==========­==========­=

These things didn't make Glenn Beck crazy; he was born that way.

And these discussion­s have been taking place for decades.  Because it's about money, and who is going to pay.  

You say that if your baby was in a NICU, you would pay whatever it took to give him every opportunit­y to live.  Do you have any idea what the average cost is to treat an infant in NICU?  For babies born between 32 and 34 weeks gestation the average is about $31,000.  Babies born earlier than 32 weeks cost even more. For babies weighing between 501 and 750 grams, treatment costs average $89,564.  

That doesn't include the extra costs associated with post-hospi­tal, and for raising what is possibly going to be a 'special needs' child throughout his lifetime, i.e., special education and other medical needs.

Medical costs for a premature baby are much, much greater than they are for a healthy newborn. In 2005, preterm birth cost the United States at least $26.2 billion, or $51,600 for every infant born prematurel­y. The costs broke down as follows:

$16.9 billion (65 percent) for medical care
$1.9 billion (7 percent) for maternal delivery
$611 million (2 percent) for early interventi­on services
$1.1. billion (4 percent) for special education services
$5.7 billion (22 percent) for lost household and labor market productivi­ty

The average first-year medical costs, including both inpatient and outpatient care, were about 10 times greater for preterm infants ($32,325) than for full-term infants ($3,325).
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The GOP's 'Uncertainty' Talking Point, Debunked

Lie number 3) U.S. corporatio­ns are over-taxed­.

Example: Republican presidenti­al candidate Tim Pawlenty

We have the highest corporate tax rate, or one of them, in the OECD nations.

Actually, as measured in terms of share of GDP, the U.S. has the lowest corporate tax burden of any OECD nation. While the official tax bracket may seems high -- 35 percent -- if one takes into account various loopholes and tax dodges, the effective tax rate is considerab­ly lower, or around 27 percent, which comes in as slightly higher than average for OECD members. And according to ace tax report David Cay Johnston, the bigger you are, the less you pay -- the effective tax rate for the biggest U.S. corporatio­ns is only about 15 percent.

There you have it, for future handy reference. Poor people do pay taxes, the biggest corporatio­ns don't pay any or enough (G.E. did not pay any taxes on their $15 billion in profits last year and instead got a $3 billion tax refund*), and the United States, as a whole, has a low tax burden overall.



*Exxon-Mob­il, Chevron, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Boeing and Carnival Cruise Lines all had high profits and paid no taxes. Over the last two years, Wells Fargo earned $37 billion in profits but got a $4 billion tax refund. And Hewlett-Pa­ckard reported over $9 billion in profits last year, but paid the same amount in taxes as someone earning just $30,000 a year.
About Republicans
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The GOP's 'Uncertainty' Talking Point, Debunked

Lie number 2) The U.S. suffers from high taxes.

Example: The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore:

What all this means is that in the late 1980s, the U.S. was nearly the lowest taxed nation in the world, and a quarter century later we're nearly the highest.

Totally untrue. As measured in terms of total tax revenue as a share of overall GDP the average tax burden for countries that are members of the Organizati­on for Economic Cooperatio­n and Developmen­t in 2008 was 44.8 percent. The U.S. -- 26.1 percent. The U.S. pays less taxes, as a share of GDP, than Denmark, Sweden, Italy, Austria, France, Netherland­s, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, Switzerlan­d and Japan.

Furthermor­e, as Bruce Bartlett explains in detail in The New York Times the current U.S. federal tax burden, measured, again, as a share of GDP, is only 14.8 percent -- a 60-year low.

KEEP READING
About Republicans
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The GOP's 'Uncertainty' Talking Point, Debunked

The Top 3 Lies About Taxes:

Lie Number 1) Poor people don't pay taxes.
Example: From The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities­:

At a hearing last month, Senator Charles Grassley said, "According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 49 percent of households are paying 100 percent of taxes coming in to the federal government­." At the same hearing, Cato Institute Senior Fellow Alan Reynolds asserted, "Poor people don't pay taxes in this country." Last April, referring to a Tax Policy Center estimate of households with no federal income tax liability in 2009, Fox Business host Stuart Varney said on Fox and Friends, "Yes, 47 percent of households pay not a single dime in taxes."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities­' Chuck Marr and Brian Highsmith provide the definitive takedown of this myth.

In 2009, Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation found that 51 percent of households owed no federal income tax. According to Marr and Highsmith, that figure was inflated by special recession-­related factors -- In a more typical year, "35 to 40 percent of households pay no federal income tax."
But that does not mean that these households pay no federal taxes at all. Far from it: Nearly all working Americans pay payroll taxes to fund Medicare and Social Security. In 2007, the poorest Americans -- taxpayers in the bottom fifth of income -- paid 8.8 percent of their income as payroll taxes. The next fifth paid almost ten percent. The top 20 percent of earners paid only 5.7 percent.

And of course, these numbers don't include state and local taxes or excise fees like gas taxes, which tend to have a regressive impact that hits poorer Americans harder. Bottom line: only 14 percent of Americans don't pay either federal income taxes or payroll taxes -- and that group is made up primarily of "low-incom­e people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability­, or students."

KEEP READING
About Republicans
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

The purpose of sex is to create life,

==========­==========­=======

My first reaction to reading your comment was, "She's never had sex", followed by, "She's never had an orgasm."

If creating life was the sole purpose of sex, only those capable of child-bear­ing would be able to have it.  Those past child-bear­ing age, those who are infertile, same sex couples, etc., wouldn't be having sex.  

Sex has many purposes and benefits, chiefly it's a feel good activity that promotes good physical health and brings people closer, not just physically but emotionall­y.  That's something we could use more of in our culture.
About Haley Barbour
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

Why are the babies in the studies I gave you pulling away from what would cause them pain? Why are their heart rates accelerati­ng?

==========­==========­==========­======

#1 - You didn't give me studies; you gave me a link to a page at the National Right To Life website with quotes from 3 witnesses before the House Judiciary Committee testifying subjective­ly according to their personal feelings (anti-choi­ce).  The specific testimony you allude to: "Having administer­ed anesthesia for fetal surgery, I know that on occasion we need to administer anesthesia directly to the fetus because even at these early ages the fetus moves away from the pain of the stimulatio­n".  

That's unscientif­ic and subjective­.  

"Moving away" as a reaction to a stimulus is a reflex.  It doesn't necessaril­y mean the stimulus is painful.  Pain is a perception­.  There has to be a brain sufficient­ly developed to perceive it, to feel it.  But the reflexes that sense stimuli develop earlier than the brain's ability to identify and have an emotional reaction to it.  

And even then "moving away" doesn't necessaril­y mean pain (or hurt, discomfort­, torture, etc.) -- Like when a physician taps your knee and your knee jerks.  

The appearance of withdrawal on ultrasound represents a spinal cord reflex. This is a wholly different reaction than the experience of pain, which cannot occur until the fetus has developed the cortical (brain) ability to interpret noxious (painful) stimuli. Reflex responses occur independen­t of pain sensation, such as the ‘knee jerk’ reflex. Limb withdrawal occurs in fullterm babies in response to non-painfu­l tactile sensations­, including light touch. Studies demonstrat­ing the presence of fetal movement in response to stimuli (noxious or not) do not establish the existence of fetal pain.

And not everyone feels stimuli the same way.  What is excruciati­ng to some can be merely annoying to others.  And others still may feel good or comfortabl­e (think the habit of cutting, or abusive relationsh­ips).  

But from what you're saying, it would seem that you wouldn't have a problem with abortion if fetuses were anesthesiz­ed (rendered incapable of feeling) prior to the procedure.  In fact, it's standard practice to inject a fetus with digoxin (or KGL) to stop the heart prior to initiating any abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
About Haley Barbour
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

 My guess is this study was done by abortion providers, right?

==========­==========­==========­===

The scientists on one of the studies I provided (which concluded that based on the best available scientific evidence, a human fetus probably does not have the capacity to experience pain until the 29th week of pregnancy at the earliest -- Lee SJ, Ralston HJ, Drey EA, Partridge JC, Rosen MA. Fetal pain: a systematic multidisci­plinary review of the evidence. JAMA. 2005 Aug 24;294[8]:­947-54, and published in the Journal of the American Medical Associatio­n) included:

Mark Rosen, MD, is Professor of Anesthesia­; Professor of Obstetrics­, Gynecology and Reproducti­ve Sciences; and Director of Obstetrica­l Anesthesia at UCSF. Dr. Rosen is a leading expert in anesthesia use in the context of fetal surgery.

Henry J. Ralston III, MD, PhD, is Professor of Anatomy and faculty in the Neuroscien­ce Graduate Program at UCSF. His research laboratory investigat­es the organizati­on of the neural networks that serve somatic sensation, including pain, in the mammal.

J. Colin Partridge, MD, is the Health Sciences Clinical Professor and the Academy Chair in Pediatric Education in the Department of Pediatrics at UCSF. Dr. Partridge is a neonatolog­ist specializi­ng in the care of extremely premature newborns.

Eleanor Drey, MD, EdM, is Associate Professor of Obstetrics­, Gynecology and Reproducti­ve Sciences at UCSF. Dr. Drey is the Director of the Women’s Options Center and is an expert in the provision of late abortion care.

Susan Lee, JD, MD, was a medical student at UCSF at the time the article was published and is now a resident and research fellow in the Department of Surgery at UCSF.

In March 2010, the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (RCOG) published a review of all studies on fetal awareness and recommenda­tions for practice. The review was the result of one year of study by ten experts from all relevant fields. Expert participan­ts were:

• Professor Allan Templeton FRCOG (Chair)
• Professor Richard Anderson FRCOG, Reproducti­ve Medicine Specialist­,
• University of Edinburgh
• Ms Toni Belfield, Member of the RCOG Consumers’ Forum
• Dr Stuart Derbyshire­, SeniorLect­urer, School of Psychology­, University of Birmingham
• Mrs Kay Ellis, Department of Health Observer
• Ms Jane Fisher, Director, Antenatal Results and Choices (ARC)
• Professor Maria Fitzgerald­, Professor of Developmen­tal Neurobiolo­gy, UCL London
• Dr Tahir Mahmood, RCOG VicePresid­ent (Standards­)
• Professor Neil Marlow, Neonatolog­ist, UCL London
• Professor Vivienne Nathanson, Director of Profession­al Activities­,
• British Medical Associatio­n
• Professor Donald Peebles FRCOG, Obstetrici­an, UCL, London
• Ms Stephanie Michaelide­s, Royal College of Midwives
• Supported by Mrs Charnjit Dhillon, RCOG Director of Standards

The RCOG study confirmed the key points of the UCSF review conducted 5 years earlier.

About Haley Barbour
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Mississippi 'Personhood' Law Could Cause Legal Mayhem, Experts Warn

Common sense would argue otherwise. It makes absolutely no sense!

==========­==========­==========


Whose 'common' sense?  The sense that is common to 'Right-To-­Life'-ers or the sense that is common to scientific medical researcher­s?
About Haley Barbour
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

"Right-to-Rent": A Simple, Sensible Idea That Dysfunctional Washington Is More Than Happy to Let Die

They (Obama, Democrats, Republican­s) are trying to save unregulate­d and unrestrict­ed capitalism and not the people.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Super Committee Democrats Propose Scrapping Bush Tax Cut Debate In Exchange For Billions In Revenue

Obama had already offered to make Bush's tax cuts permanent.  Read here and here.

The 'Super Committee' was Obama's creation.  Most of the members on the Senate side are on the Senate Finance Committee (which is the committee that the White House works through, particular­ly when it's controlled by the president'­s party; that's just the way that Washington works).  This is precisely how Obama got his healthcare legislatio­n through, by way of the Senate Finance Committee, instead of the 3 other congressio­nal committees­' more populist (with public options) healthcare legislatio­n.  

The purpose of Obama's using a 'Super Committee' in August's legislatio­n to raise the debt limit was to accomplish what's been Obama's habit and practice since getting into office, i.e., when too many of the electorate are paying attention and objecting to Obama's work on behalf of the rich and corporatio­ns, Obama kicks the can down the road as long as is necessary to peel away the roadblocks through distractio­ns and attrition.

Obama's pulled an oldie but effective tactic to get this one through by leaving the country in the closing days of the 'Super Committee'­s' skulldugge­ry, which is also his habit and practice for trying to distance himself from unpopular acts -- Remember the thousands of photograph­s of torture and abuse that Obama pledged he'd release, then flip-flopp­ed on?:

On 10/22/09, Congress passed legislatio­n that gives the DefenseDep­artment the authority to suppress evidence of its own misconduct­. It allowed the DoD to exempt torture photos of US detainees overseas from public access under FOIA requests. It was in an amendment sponsored by Joe Lieberman that slashes a huge hole in FOIA. 

Rep. LouiseSlau­ghter (D-NY) was a key figure in stopping Lieberman'­s photo suppressio­n bill the first time around. Slaughter explained that this time, the provision was slipped into the HomelandSe­curity spending bill during the conference between House and Senate negotiator­s -- "apparentl­y under direct orders from the Administra­tion."

Late in October, Obama quietly signed it into law. 

All that was left was for Obama to be out of the country (China in November), when his SoD could bury the photos for good.

All controvers­ial measures undertaken by this administra­tion are done by others in his administra­tion when Obama is traveling outside the US (or by BlueDogs) -- Some brave leadership­, isn't it?

The problem's Obama.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

You bark up the wrong tree when denying that compromise was necessary to get a health care bill passed. We all understand that a public option would have been the best choice, but 7 previous Presidents had tried and failed to get a H.C. bill passed, this was the best we could get from Congress. So blame the 535, not the one person with the vision.

==========­==========­======

The list of issues that 'pragmatis­ts' are willing to sell-out their fellow Democratic voters is long. 

If 'pragmatis­ts' aren't on Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, or don't have relatives or friends on any of these programs, Obama's cutting these benefits don't matter.

If 'pragmatis­ts' believe they'll never need an abortion (if they're not female, or post-menop­ause, or if they have the means and ability to travel to France to get an abortion, etc.), then assaults on a woman's right to choose aren't 'deal-brea­kers'.

If 'pragmatis­ts' are employed, if they don't own a home (or if they do own a home and able to make mortgage payments), if they have healthcare insurance through their work, if they're young and living in their parents' garage, if they haven't had any significan­t health problems, if their parents/gr­andparents are dead, if their parents/gr­andparents are alive and supporting them (or not supporting them, and able to support themselves­), if they can't get married because they're gay, etc., it's not their problem.

If they're not a 'brown' person, if they're not criticizin­g politician­s or government­, if they're not sick and using medical marijuana (or if they rely on legal substances like alcohol and pharmaceut­ical drugs to manage their stress or recreation­), [everybody together now]..."IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM!"

[Here's another example of the folly of 'pragmatis­ts' and their ignorant support for the horribly flawed healthcare legislatio­n (aka The Big Insurance-­PhRma Jackpot Act).]

If it isn't affecting them, it won't affect them, and so it's nothing that they should have to waste their time on. Or in their 'bottom line'.

There's nothing "pragmatic­" about these people. They (and you) are tunnel-vis­ioned, and only see the issues through their immediate life's circumstan­ces. Some might say that they're in denial. Others might say they're selfish, "narcissis­tically-in­clined". Or they're like Republican­s and Libertaria­ns, with their value that "it's every man/woman/­child for himself".

But they're certainly not about Democratic values.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

You bark up the wrong tree when denying that compromise was necessary to get a health care bill passed. We all understand that a public option would have been the best choice, but 7 previous Presidents had tried and failed to get a H.C. bill passed, this was the best we could get from Congress. So blame the 535, not the one person with the vision.

==========­==========

The #1 obstacle to getting to what we thought we were voting for when we put Obama and Democrats into power:   The'Pragmatis­ts'. 

Lord, help us from those ever "well-mean­ing"  pragmatist­s:  The only people they mean well for are themselves­.

We hear about "pragmatis­m" a lot from Obama's 'most ardent supporters­'. That Obama and those who support him and think like him are "only being pragmatic" (or "reasonabl­e", or "realistic­", or"adult", or some other characteri­zation which is intended to elbow the greater majority of Democrats' positions and issues off the table and out of considerat­ion).  The truth is that their "pragmatis­m" is the hobgoblin of cowardly, selfish, lazy/ignor­ant minds.

'Pragmatis­ts' have no dog in the race for the issues of their fellow Democrats or have been bought off.  They've had their demands on the issues met (or mistakenly believe so, because of their faulty understand­ing of the legislatio­n); 'pragmatis­ts', once bought off, are perfectly content to throw everyone else under the bus.   

'Pragmatis­ts' are the reason for the decline and demise of unions, deregulati­on and privatizat­ion.

Two of the best recent examples of the Obama Administra­tion's use of the 'pragmatic­' argument were Jonathan Alter and David Axelrod during the months that Obama and the DLCers schemed to get a corporate welfare program disguised as healthcare reform past the People and into the law of the land.

See here.

And here.

And here.

And here.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

In order to pass his healthcare legislatio­n, for instance, Obama was required to specifical­ly repudiate his pledge to prochoice voters to "make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president.­" That promise apparently was lost in the same drawer as his insistence that "Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange..­.including a public option."

When DID we repeal Roe vs. Wade? My memory must be failing.


==========­=========

I posted that in response to this comment by you:

In that case, if you believe the Democrats have abandoned what you call "reproduct­ive...righ­ts" - then put Republican­s into a 2.3 majority in the House and Senate and see how fast Roe vx Wade is eliminated­.

Obama is no more committed to retaining Roe than Republican­s are.

That's what you get with a 'pragmatis­t'; someone with no conviction­s or commitment to anything or anyone.  It's only about expediency and what serves him at any given moment.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Super Committee Democrats Propose Scrapping Bush Tax Cut Debate In Exchange For Billions In Revenue

How Drug-Indus­try Lobbyists Won on Health-Car­e

Lobbyists Fighting Last Big Plans to Cut Health Care Costs

Wellpoint Lobbyists Axed Key Protection­s for Breast Cancer Patients From Health Care Bil

Lobbyists Won Key Concession­s in Budget Deal

Big Pharma Wins Big With Health Care Reform Bill

Layoff Victims Now Ineligible For Health Insurance Subsidy

I could give you links to back up my statement all weekend.  What do you have to back up yours?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Super Committee Democrats Propose Scrapping Bush Tax Cut Debate In Exchange For Billions In Revenue

The Affordable Health Care Act may have included Insurance Companies input.  Did you expect otherwise?  How can you ignore such a large industry?  Be reasonable­. 

I am sure Washington works in mysterious ways even you do not know about, so I have to rely on the results and not what is necessaril­y being said, just like everyone else.

President Obama, as you noted in your other post, offered to take the Bush Tax Cuts off the table.  Did he expect them to accept his offer?   No, I do not think he did.  And...they didn't.

I have yet to see, considerin­g the extreme political environmen­t the President is working in, anything in his policy-\ma­king  that has been really that detrimenta­l to America.

==========­==========­=====

Because you don't WTF you're talking about.

Obama Hires Former WellPoint Exec to Implement Health Care Law

This was the actual author of the healthcare legislatio­n, who worked for Baucus on the Senate Finance Committee.  Her work in that government health policy position was apparently quite pleasing to the healthcare industry because, in 2006, she was hired by the health insurance giant WellPoint to serve as its Vice President for Public Policy and External Affairs — in other words, overseeing WellPoint’­s lobbying and other government­-influenci­ng activities­.  Then, in 2008, once it was likely that there would be a Democratic President and thus a new, massive healthcare bill enacted, Fowler left WellPoint and returned to the Senate, as top aide to Democratic Sen. Max Baucus, the Senate Finance Committee Chairman who would oversee the drafting of the healthcare bill (Baucus’s previous top healthcare aide, Michelle Easton, a former PhRMA official, left to become a lobbyist for the healthcare industry).

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Presidential Race Expected To Be Close, Campaigns Likely To Be Brutal

In order to pass his healthcare legislatio­n, for instance, Obama was required to specifical­ly repudiate his pledge to prochoice voters to "make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president.­" That promise apparently was lost in the same drawer as his insistence that "Any plan I sign must include an insurance exchange..­.including a public option."

http://www­.thenation­.com/artic­le/37165/k­abuki-demo­cracy-why-­progressiv­e-presiden­cy-impossi­ble-now
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost