Featured Stories
An interesting charter-voucher connection
August 28, 2012
by
by David Safier In one sense, the push for charter schools was a necessary middle step by the conservative "education reform" movement in the push for private school vouchers. First privatize a bit with charter schools to get people used to the idea of using taxpayer dollars to fund privately run schools (It was hoped … Read more
D.C. Circuit Court rules unanimously that Texas redistricting intentionally discriminates against Latinos
August 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
In a major victory for the Obama administration's Justice Department, voting rights advocates, and for the rule of law, a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court ruled unanimously today that the Texas redistricting plan crafted by the Tea-Publican dominated Texas legislature intentionally discriminates against Latinos in violation of the Voting Rights Act. You're shocked, I'm sure. Federal Court: GOP’s Texas Redistricting Plan Intentionally Discriminated Against Hispanics | TPMMuckraker:
A redistricting plan signed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) intentionally discriminated against Hispanic voters, a three-judge panel unanimously ruled Tuesday. The judges found that seats belonging to white incumbent members of Congress were protected under the plan while districts belonging to incumbent minorities were targeted for changes.
The court was “persuaded by the totality of the evidence that the plan was enacted with discriminatory intent,” according to the ruling. There was “sufficient evidence to conclude that the Congressional Plan was motivated, at least in part, by discriminatory intent,” the court found.
All three judges said they were overwhelmed with the amount of evidence showing the law was intentionally discriminatory, writing in a footnote that parties “have provided more evidence of discriminatory intent than we have space, or need, to address here.”
All three redistricting plans — for Texas’ congressional delegation, its state House of Representatives and the state Senate — were blocked by the federal court. The Supreme Court had earlier ruled that interim maps drawn by a federal court were invalid.
The panel of three judges found that “surgery” had been performed on congressional districts belonging to minority members of Congress while no such alterations were made to districts belonging to incumbent white members of Congress.
“Anglo district boundaries were redrawn to include particular country clubs and, in one case, the school belonging to the incumbent’s grandchildren,” the judges wrote.
That country club reference is tied to Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), who chairs the House Oversight Committee that oversees the Justice Department.
You can read the opinion here (there was a partial dissent by Judge Griffith as to one district, who wrote most of the majority opinion as well).
Dr. Richard Carmona’s first TV ad
August 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Dr. Richard Carmona will air his first TV ad on Wednesday, a biographical piece titled "Problem Solving." This is a 30 second edit of the longer online introduction web video from earlier this year.
Join Rich at http://carmonaforarizona.com.
Video below the fold.
‘Galt – Gekko 2012’ campaign abandons any pretense to caring about facts
August 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Truthiness is a quality characterizing a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or because it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts. – Stephen Colbert
Real life imitates art. "Truthiness" is the business model for the fact-free world of FAUX News Fraudcasting and its "FAUX Nation."
Steve Benen writs today, Abandoning the pretense of caring about facts:
Nearly three weeks ago, Mitt Romney suggested attack ads rejected by "the various fact-checkers" shouldn't be on the air. Candidates exposed by the fact-checkers should feel "embarrassed" and pull the falsehoods from the air.
Last week, Romney switched gears. Told that "the various fact-checkers" consider his ridiculous welfare smear to be a blatant lie, the Republican said fact-checkers are fine, so long as they agree with him. If not, they must be biased.
Today, Team Romney abandoned the pretense of caring about honesty altogether.
Mitt Romney's aides explained with unusual political bluntness today why they are spending heavily — and ignoring media criticism — to air an add accusing President Barack Obama of "gutting" the work requirement for welfare, a marginal political issue since the mid-1990s that Romney pushed back to center stage.
"Our most effective ad is our welfare ad," a top television advertising strategist for Romney, Ashley O'Connor, said at a forum Tuesday hosted by ABCNews and Yahoo! News. "It's new information."
The claims are "new," of course, because the Romney campaign made them up. Sure, it's "new information," in the same way it would be "new information" if Obama said Mitt Romney sold heroin to children — when one invents a lie, its "newness" is self-evident.
Romney pollster Neil Newhouse added, "[W]e're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers."
Right. So, in early August, Team Romney believed "the various fact-checkers" should be the arbiters of rhetorical propriety, but in late August, Team Romney believes they're irrelevant.
It's important to realize there is no modern precedent for a presidential candidate rejecting the premise that facts matter. Mitt Romney is trying something no one has ever seen — he's deemed the truth to be an inconvenient nuisance, which Romney will ignore, without shame, to advance his ambitions for vast power.
If you don't find this outrageously offensive and frightening, there is something seriously wrong with you. This is what Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Communist China, and every other totalitarian regime has done. This is America, Americans do not do this.
WaPo Editorial: GOP incoherence on immigration
August 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie: When the Neocon editorial board of the Washington Post says the GOP platform on immigration is too extreme, maybe Tea-Publicans ought to listen. The GOP’s muddled message on illegal immigration – The Washington Post: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY’S incoherence on illegal immigration was on vivid display last week in Tampa, where delegates gathered … Read more
Mi Familia Vota working to get out the Latino vote
August 28, 2012
by
by David Safier KGUN-9 did a story about the efforts of Mi Familia Vota to get Latino voters registered, on the early voting list and, most important, voting. At at time Republicans are doing everything they can to suppress voting across the country, it's a vital effort, and a difficult one, both to stay even … Read more
(Updated) Fact Check: Romney-Ryan ‘pants on fire’ – the $700 billion lie that will not die
August 28, 2012
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
I previously posted the fact checks by CNN, ABC News and PolitiFact in Fact Check: Romney-Ryan 'pants on fire' – the $700 billion lie that will not die.
Today the Washington Post's fact checker Glenn Kessler weighs in on the GOP's $700 billion lie that will not die. Answering readers’ questions about Medicare – The Washington Post:
Did Obama cut $700 billion from Medicare?
The current Medicare system, in place since the mid-1960s, is essentially a government-run health-care program [that's "sociaism" to you teabaggers], with hospital and doctors’ fees paid by the government, though beneficiaries also pay premiums for some services as well as deductibles and co-insurance.
During the primaries, Republicans used to claim that Obama funded his health care plan with $500 billion in cuts.
So how did it balloon to a $700 billion figure? There is a simple explanation. The Congressional Budget Office last month issued a new estimate based on a different — and later — 10-year time frame (2013-2022). Of course, Republicans decided to pick the biggest number possible.
But, as we have repeatedly explained, Medicare spending is not being reduced. It still goes up year after year.
The $700 billion figure (technically, $716 billion) comes from the difference over 10 years between anticipated Medicare spending (what is known as “the baseline”) and the changes the law makes to reduce spending. Moreover, the savings mostly are wrung from health-care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. (It is worth noting that, given past practices, the Medicare actuary has doubted whether such cuts will ever come to pass.)
The proposed reduction in spending actually strengthens the long-term health of the Medicare program, according to Medicare trustees reports. And spending on Medicare over that 10-year period would still be $7.8 trillion.
In fact, House Republicans adopted many of these same cuts in their own budget. (They argue they devote the savings to reforming Medicare, not funding a new entitlement.) Both parties agree that controls are needed on Medicare spending — that is the only way that the Medicare trust funds last longer — but they disagree over the best path forward. We have generally given Republicans Two Pinocchios for such claims.
