Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Barriers to Access (Via Randi Rhodes)


North Carolina has passed a harsh new law on voting... or more correctly, on not voting. This law is being described as the most draconian yet passed. For those of you who were home-schooled, that means “worse than Texas.” It imposes strict voted picture ID, curtails early voting, and repeals same day registration. It’s got everything except a poll tax and literacy test.

North Carolina Governor Patrick McCrory described the measure as a “common sense law.” That is true—common sense tells you that if you want Republicans to win, you’ve got to stop black people and young people from voting. Governor McCrory said we need ID to board a plane, why not to vote? He wants voting to be like boarding a plane! If he had his way, there would be a separate line and early boarding for first class voters.

If you’ve ever wondered how Ted Cruz turned out so slimy and reptilian, check out his father. It’s a real testament to the power of heredity. Ted’s father became a US citizen... 48 years after leaving Cuba. His path to citizenship was blocked by the fact that he evidently didn’t give a crap until his son wanted to run for high office. When asked why he took so long, Rafael Cruz said “I don’t know. I guess laziness or—I don’t know.” Just beautiful! Isn’t that inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty?

Rick Santorum says the term “middle class” is “Marxism talk” since America doesn’t have any classes. No classes? Are you talking about society, or the public school systems in red states. If the term “middle class” is “Marxism talk,” then every politician in America for the past century has been a communist… including Rick Santorum.

Finally, the Missouri State Fair this year featured a rodeo clown wearing an Obama mask being chased around the ring by a bull. I’m pretty sure that local fire ordinances are the only reason they didn’t burn a cross as well. The announcer asked if anyone wanted to see Obama get run down by a bull, and the crowd went crazy. Check that—they were obviously already crazy.

At one point, another clown ran up to the Obama clown and started bobbling his lips, to the delight of the crowd. In one sense, that second clown was a genius. He looked at the most tasteless situation imaginable... and found a way to make it even more disgusting. The second clown was like the guy during the torture and murder of Emmitt Till who came up with the idea to gouge his eye out—always finding a way to take it to the next level.

Today’s Homework | Discuss | Blog Archive

Read more: http://www.randirhodes.com/articles/daily-blog-380723/on-todays-show-tue-aug-13-11569284/#ixzz2bt30Qin9

Religious people are less intelligent than atheists, study finds (Via Yahoo News)

Yahoo! News
Religious people are less intelligent than non-believers, according to a new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades.

A team led by Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester found “a reliable negative relation between intelligence and religiosity” in 53 out of 63 studies. Even in extreme old age, intelligent people are less likely to believe, the researchers found - and the reasons why people with high IQs shun religion may not be as simple as previously thought.
[Backlash after Dawkins' Muslim jibe]
Previous studies have tended to assume that intelligent people simply “know better”, the researchers write - but the reasons may be more complex.

Famous atheist Richard Dawkins (ZUMA / Rex Features)

For instance, intelligent people are more likely to be married, and more likely to be successful in life - and this may mean they “need” religion less.

The studies used in Zuckerman's paper included a life-long analysis of the beliefs of a group of 1,500 gifted children - those with IQs over 135 - in a study which began in 1921 and continues today.

Even at 75 to 91 years of age, the children from Lewis Terman’s study scored lower for religiosity than the general population - contrary to the widely held belief that people turn to God as they age. The researchers noted that data was lacking about religious attitudes in old age and say, “Additional research is needed to resolve this issue.”

As early as 1958, Michael Argyle concluded, “Although intelligent children grasp religious concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion, and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox beliefs, and rather less likely to have pro-religious attitudes.”

A 1916 study quoted in Zuckerman’s paper (Leuba) found that, “58% of randomly selected scientists in the United States expressed disbelief in, or doubt regarding the existence of God; this proportion rose to nearly 70% for the most eminent scientists.”
[Did Archaeologists Find a Piece of Jesus' Cross?]
The paper, published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review, said “Most extant explanations (of a negative relation) share one central theme—the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable and, therefore, unappealing to intelligent people who “know better.” 
The answer may, however, be more complex. Intelligent people may simply be able to provide themselves with the psychological benefits offered by religion - such as “self-regulation and self-enhancement,” because they are more likely to be successful, and have stable lives.

“Intelligent people typically spend more time in school—a form of self-regulation that may yield long-term benefits,” the researchers write. “More intelligent people get higher level jobs (and better employment (and higher salary) may lead to higher self-esteem, and encourage personal control beliefs.”

“Last, more intelligent people are more likely to get and stay married (greater attachment), though for intelligent people, that too comes later in life. We therefore suggest that as intelligent people move from young adulthood to adulthood and then to middle age, the benefits of intelligence may continue to accrue.”

The researchers suggest that further research on the “function” of religion may reveal more.

“People possessing the functions that religion provides are likely to adopt atheism, people lacking these very functions (e.g., the poor, the helpless) are likely to adopt theism,” the researchers wrote.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

GULITY! Via RandiRhodes.com


Well, the verdict is in—and Trayvon Martin has been found guilty. And every black teenager in America has now been implicated for the same crime that he was executed for. That’s justice Florida-style—the lawyers for the defense managed to get a conviction of the victim. After this verdict, I actually agree with one thing that George Zimmerman said—These punks! They always get away!

Zimmerman’s legal team portrayed a murdered teenager as a dangerous thug in order to get his killer off. There is no defense for that kind of defense. This was the murder case equivalent of defending a rapist by attacking the rape victim as being the one responsible for what happened. Heck, they even brought in the old “what was she wearing” way of blaming the victim. Trayvon was wearing a hoodie—he was asking for it!

Mark O’Mara says that George Zimmerman would not have been charged if he was black. So in O’Mara’s mind, his legal expertise saved George Zimmerman from a justice system that is biased in favor of black people! Don West said “The prosecution of George Zimmerman was a disgrace.” Yes, but only in the sense that it didn’t result in a conviction. West said “I am thrilled that this jury kept this tragedy from becoming a travesty.” No, they only made it a worse tragedy. You’re the one who pushed it into travesty territory with that comment. Prosecutors may not have been able to convince the jurors that George Zimmerman had a “depraved mind” when he shot Trayvon, but Zimmerman’s lawyers seem to have clearly depraved minds.

George Zimmerman’s brother Robert went on TV to say he wants to know what makes people “attack someone the way Trayvon Martin did”! Robert! The lies and slanders worked. They got your brother off. You don’t have to keep repeating them. I guess if you start attacking somebody after they’re dead, it’s hard to figure out exactly when to stop.

Now that he’s been acquitted, George Zimmerman will get his gun back. I’m sure he’ll be more pleased than ever with it. After all, now he knows that it “works.” There are only two reasons they make guns like the one George Zimmerman carries—to make a little man feel big, and to kill other people. This gun proved it works like a charm for both of those purposes.

George Zimmerman may have been acquitted, but this may not be over. Hopefully he will be pursued through the legal system with the same obsessive tenacity that he pursued Trayvon with. The Department of Justice can still charge Zimmerman with violating Trayvon’s civil rights by killing him. That may be necessary, since just killing him doesn’t seem to be a crime in Florida.
Today’s Homework | Discuss | Blog Archive

Melissa Harris-Perry: “I live in a country that makes me wish my sons away...”

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

My thoughts on the Guilty Zimmerman

Help! What's the proper procedure when you're followed by a random armed nutbag returning home from getting candy & iced tea?

 l guess if l walk thru an alley in Florida and a guy comes at me with a gun and l fight him off - he can shoot me and claim self-defense!

Wait.....what??? Isn`t this what got us here in the 1st place??  To bad his brother didn`t follow this advice.



Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Supreme Court struck the heart out of the Voting Rights Act - Via: Randi Rhodes


Today the Supreme Court struck the heart out of the Voting Rights Act. The only voting right that this Supreme Court recognizes it the right of big corporations to vote with their money. The Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act that singles out certain areas that have a history of discrimination. Getting rid of Section 4 is like denying that history. Yes, they passed a law against voter discrimination and concentrated on areas where that happened. Hello! If you pass a law against speeding, you should probably concentrate enforcement on the areas with roads. The history of racial discrimination in the South was one of the main reasons that we needed the Voting Rights Act. Singling out the areas where the problems were the worst was common sense. Today the Supreme Court ruled that common sense no longer applies.

The Court said that Congress can impose new oversight on areas that are at risk, based on new data. But John Roberts knows full well that Congress can’t do anything. Congress is frozen by extremist members from totally gerrymandered districts. Today’s Congress is not the solution to voter discrimination—today’s Congress is the result of voter discrimination. There are still provisions in the Voting Rights Act that can be used to safeguard voting rights. Conservatives are taking away voting rights the same way they’re taking away reproductive rights—gradually. This is not the end of voting rights, but if we don’t fight back, it’s the beginning of the end.

How is Edward Snowden travelling without a passport? You don’t need a passport if you’re carrying four computers full of US intelligence secrets. The secrets on those computers will open more borders than any passport ever issued. But they’re especially helpful when your travel is through nations in competition with us like Russia and China. You know how you have to show your passport when you land? Ed Snowden has to show the contents of those computers. The problem is that that takes a lot longer. They need to make copies, after all. The only good part of the Snowden itinerary is that his supposed last stop can’t do a lot of harm with the information. When people talk about secrets falling into the wrong hands, they aren’t usually thinking of Ecuador.

Meanwhile in Texas, Republican lawmakers are trying to force through a bill that would virtually outlaw abortion in Texas. Why is all of this stuff taking place in the middle of a sweltering June? Isn’t a little hot for things to get this heated?

Texas Representative Jodie Laubenberg made a statement about rape kits that would have made Todd Akin gasp at its stupidity. Laubenberg said that no abortion ban exception for rape was necessary because “In the emergency room they have what’s called rape kits where a woman can get cleaned out.” It’s a variation on Todd Akin! Todd thought that a woman’s body has a way to “shut that whole thing down.” Jodie Laubenberg thinks that hospitals have a magic kit that does the same thing.
Today’s Homework | Discuss | Blog Archive

Attorney General Eric Holder expressed deep disappointment in today’s Supreme Court ruling, but vowed to continue fighting voting discrimination using every legal tool available...

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

The Privateers - Via Randi Rhodes


We need to have a debate over surveillance. Even more, we need to have a debate over exactly who is doing the surveilling. Government surveillance can be worrisome, but it’s much more worrisome when the surveillance is being done by private contractors. Ultimately, we are willing to accept a certain level of surveillance if the final goal is to keep us safer. But the final goal of a private company is not to keep us safer—the final goal of a private company is always to make money. We have to make a difficult tradeoff between our privacy and our safety, but by leaving surveillance in the hands of private contractors we’re risking both of them.

Outsourcing intelligence work is risky—it will cost us much more in the long run. That’s almost a moot point though, since it costs us much more in the short run too! A private contractor doing intelligence work costs twice as much as a government employee. That pretty much takes the “intelligence” out of the equation right at the start. A report to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said that a private contractor in intelligence costs $250,000 per year, while a government employee costs $126,500. Contractors are supposed to keep us safe from attack? They can’t even keep us safe from being overcharged.

There are hundreds of thousands of private contractors with the kind of Top Secret clearance that Edward Snowden had. If Snowden alerted us to nothing else, he alerted us to all the potential Snowdens out there. A report this year to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said that a total of 483,263 contractors held Top Secret clearances in 2012. It’s almost as easy to get Top Secret clearance in this country as it is to get a gun! 483,263 private contractors! That’s 483,263 potential leakers. I certainly wouldn’t buy a boat if there was that much of a possibility of damaging leaks.

His employer Booz Allen has announced that they have fired Ed Snowden. That’s a step forward—the next step should be to fire Booz Allen. In their statement, Booz Allen said that Snowden “was an employee of our firm for less than 3 months.” Right. Guys, that doesn’t make it sound any better. “Less than three months”? What are you saying, Booz Allen—that you hardly knew this Snowden guy? That’s not a good thing to be saying about somebody that you got top secret security clearance for!

It turns out that Edward Snowden had a live-in girlfriend who is a pole dancer. She is described in news reports as “an acrobatic pole performer.” If you look at the video from her YouTube channel, you’ll realize that it ain’t Cirque du Soleil. So Edward Snowden had a cushy job in Hawaii with a poll-dancing girlfriend! In his interview with the Guardian, Snowden asked “What would it take to make you leave everything behind?” How about “terrible decision-making skills”?
Today’s Homework | Discuss | Blog Archive

As jury selection continues in the George Zimmerman murder trial, Fox News wonders if getting fat is punishment enough for killing Trayvon...

Monday, June 3, 2013

FREE PUSSY RIOT |

FREE PUSSY RIOT |


Pussy Riot is an anonymous Russian feminist performance art group formed in October 2011. Through a series of peaceful public performances that voiced how basic rights under threat in Russia today, while expressing the values and principles of gender equality, democracy and freedom of expression that are contained in the Russian constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the CEDAW Convention.

Imprisoned members of the art group Pussy Riot (from left to right):

Maria Alekhina, age 24. Poet and student at the Institute of Journalism and Creative Writing. Mother of a 5 year-old son.  Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, age 23. Visual artist and 4th year Philosophy student. Mother of a 5 year-old daughter

Nadia and Masha are serving 2 years on charges of “hooliganism” for their 1-minute performance on February 21, 2012 in a priests-only section of Moscow's Cathedral of Christ the Savior. The investigator’s report claims the performance was an act of religious hatred. The specific intention of the performance was to draw attention to the special relationship between President Putin and the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church,  as well a prayer to the Madonna to drive Putin away. Masha and Nadya’s release date as it stands now is March 3, 2014. 

Freepussyriot.org advocates for the release of Masha and Nadya, supports the family members and works with the group.

Supporting Organizations: 

The Voice Project
Amnesty International

Austrian Green Party
European Women’s Lobby
Free Muse
Human Rights Watch
Index of Censorship
PEN International
Russia’s Human Rights Council
Russie-Libertés
Riot Grrrl Berlin
ShatterJapan

 

 

Stop Telling Lies About Liberals: My Story Was No Accident

Stop Telling Lies About Liberals: My Story Was No Accident: This past week, the president of Right to Life of Michigan stated that women should have to buy extra insurance for abortions, even in cases...

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

4 Tea Party myths about the Founders (Via: samuel-warde.com)

Tea Party Founders Myths
The Tea Party is always raving on about the similarities between themselves and the Founding Fathers, which is interesting as in most ways they could not be any different. Below are 4 examples of how the Tea Party puts out false information in regards to the Founders and their intentions.
MYTH 1:  The American Revolution was a rebellion against “Taxation without representation”, similar to the modern day Tea Party tax revolts.
THE TRUTH: Actually, the Boston Tea Party was ultimately a protest against a corporate tax cut, whereas the modern Tea Party movement is in favor of tax cuts.
The original Boston Tea Party was a protest against the British East India Company (BEIC) for receiving huge corporate tax cuts.  By the 1760s BEIC was dominating trade from India to China as well as in the Caribbean.  They controlled nearly all commerce to and from North America with the help of those tax cuts along with subsidies and special dispensation from the British crown.
MYTH 2: The founding fathers wanted limited federal government
THE TRUTH: Actually the Founders were a diverse group, often times with opposing viewpoints. For instance Hamilton and his Federalist Party believed in a strong federal government and a powerful executive branch.  George Washington supported this view as well.
At the same time Jefferson and his Republican Party (which bears no relation to the modern GOP) supported strong states’ rights and a weak federal government.  Madison supported this viewpoint as well.
MYTH 3: The Constitution demands strict and literal interpretation
THE TRUTH: As was the case with the issue of federal government, there was much dispute over how to interpret and apply the Constitution and one cannot overlook the fact that the Constitution was only ratified in the first place with the understanding the Bill of Rights would be added later.
Jefferson and his Republicans promoted a strict interpretation of the Constitution while Hamilton and the Federalists endorsed a liberal reading of the Constitution.
Hamilton and his Federalist Party espoused a strong federal government, led by a powerful executive branch, and endorsed a liberal reading of the Constitution; although he resisted the label at first, Washington clearly belonged to this camp.  Indeed Washington and Hamilton’s embrace an expansive view of the interpretation of the Constitution runs diametrically opposed to that of the Tea Party who tend to embrace the theory of originalism, the viewpoint that any interpretation of the Constitution must take into account and abide by the original intent of the Founders.
MYTH 4:  created a “Christian Nation” founded upon “Christian Principles”.
THE TRUTH:  One need look no further than to Thomas Jefferson to understand the false nature of this claim.
“Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. “
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
And one cannot forget that Jefferson strongly advocated the separation of church and state:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State. “
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802
Another founder, John Adams, was a Congregationalist who later became a Unitarian. However, he deliberately avoided creed-based dogmatic religion.
The Treaty of Tripoli, introduced to the Senate by John Adams and ratified by unanimous decree, was signed by Adams in 1797 and includes the following passage for any doubters out there:
“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”
- The Treaty of Tripoli, signed Nov. 4, 1796, effective Jun. 10, 1797

IN-DEPTH: The Real IRS Scandal (Via: Randi Rhodes)

After all the confusion & lies in the media, the real IRS scandal is the same one it's always been - at least since 1959.


Since nearly the beginning of the IRS controversy, Randi's been saying the same thing on the radio that Lawrence O'Donnell has been saying on the television: That there is a real scandal at the IRS, but it's not the one most people in the media and politics - especially those like Speaker John Boehner - want you to believe it is.

In under two minutes, Lawrence lays out where the real scandal is - something any English teacher in the world can see.


Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


That's the difference - one word!

In case you missed the key details, here they are again, written out:
The official 501(c)4 statutory law, created by Congress, says the designation was to apply only to: "Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare."
The IRS interpretation guideline of the 501(c)4 rules, written by the IRS in 1959, says: "To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare…"

So it should be obvious - the scandal isn't that the IRS went after tea party organizations. It's that they should have gone after ALL 501(c)4s. What would be even better is if they simply eliminated the designation altogether.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Mazda Scandal Booth - The IRS - Trevor Potter

Stephen's lawyer explains that Colbert Super PAC SHH!'s tax-exempt status was never granted because he never filed for it.

SNL - VIDEO: Really!?! IRS Scandal (via: Randi Rhodes)

In case you missed the last live episode of Saturday Night Live this spring, Bill Hader, Fred Armisen, and Seth Meyers are all leaving.

As a sort of pre-send off send-off, Myers' former 'Weekend Update' partner, Amy Poehler joined Seth for one last blast of outrage at the IRS - and everyone that's been swept into that media mess.

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Gun Owner Holsters Her Weapon, Challenges NRA (via: The Big Slice)


It just occurred to me that I have been watching hunting shows, gun marksmanship shows, gunsmithing shows and even game warden reality shows with my husband for almost thirteen years. I can honestly tell you that I have not seen a gun sale that didn’t seem worthy of a short background check, nor have I seen a sale impeded by that process. I have never seen any form of wild game hunted with one of the guns that was once banned under the previous assault weapons ban. I have never seen a sportsman with a magazine on his gun and I have never seen a competition shooter loaded down with more than a few bullets either.
My grandfather has a gun hung for easy access that he uses to shoot coyotes from his heard of sheep. I have a .22 that I have used for target practice with my children. My freezer is stocked with venison procured by sportsmen who pay top dollar to hunt the family farm.
I have never seen a gun law that would impede any lawful or sane individual from any of the rational or common uses for guns  – and I come from a gun-toting Wyoming family.
Let me make it clear, for my second amendment loving cousins and all those who take the time to read this : Nobody wants Grampy’s coyote shooter. Nobody wants my twenty-two. Nobody is coming for old west sharpshooters, skeet shooters, the weapons of honorable veterans, the pearl handled revolver sold on Pawn Stars or the guns I have personally observed Ted Nugent use in his pursuit of wild game on shows aired on the OutDoor Channel.
I have not seen a regulation that would stop me or anybody I personally know, or even any responsible gun owner I have ever observed, from procuring game, from practicing gun sportsman and marksmanship, or from use on the family farm or in the family home.
None.
Not one liberal gun control law would harm any of those people or their second amendment rights.
On the flip side, I can think of women I know, women I will never meet, women I’ve known and women I love dearly who are now and will be further impacted by the 694 new proposed laws infringing on our 14th amendment right to health and privacy which include a right to an abortion and other private health choices.
In listening to the sound bites of today, one would think there was a War on Guns instead of a War on Women.
Former VP wannabe, Paul Ryan, may dream of a country where abortion is never considered. I dream of one where the constitutionally protected right to life and the pursuit of happiness that the GOP is so concerned about when they think it applies to zygotes, is never threatened by a gun toting intruder in a first grade classroom.
I dream of an America where lock downs in elementary schools aren’t even considered.
When living, breathing, first graders can learn to read, safe from lunatics and gunfire… Then I propose that we can stop and go out to the shooting range and blow some shit up just to let off steam in our oh so destructive patriotism.
Until then, this gun owner is abstaining from the scent of sulfur and burnt gun powder.
I wonder, how many gun owners are there, like me, who are willing to respond, not by hoarding bullets but by hanging their gun up until this is solved?
I betcha that if enough of us told the gun industry that we aren’t spending more money until they drop the fallacious propaganda storm and start contributing to a meaningful gun responsibility conversation, that good, meaningful laws might come pouring out of the woodwork.
I am tired of going to the local ammo supplier and finding out that every bullet they had sold out as quickly as they put them on the shelves. I am tired of listening to hateful rhetoric about how the President is coming to take everything down to our pea shooter away. It’s ridiculous. We know that the only people who stand to profit from this are the ones who sell guns and bullets. They have motive, means and opportunity. All they want is our money.
I am a gun owner. I like my venison chicken fried. I like to shoot. My husband works as a dealer of hunting and fishing equipment. I understand what it means to know and love a lifestyle that includes guns.
I am also a mother of a first grader and I cannot look myself in the eye and believe with 100% certainty that my child will never die in a mass shooting. I cannot tell myself that simply locking up my own guns and doing what I can as a responsible gun owner is enough. We need to sit down, and make common sense gun regulations that protect all of us before we are forced to lay another classroom of seven-year-olds to eternal rest. Until the NRA, and the gun industry that pays them decides to tell the American public the truth, lay down their greed, and join the conversation, this gun owner is holstering her weapon. I won’t spend a single dollar to give them profit. I will not contribute to the death of innocents under the auspices of patriotism.
To join me, sign my petition here.