Skip navigation

Tag Archives: current-events


Pat Robertson wants a ‘vomit’ Facebook button for gay pictures

Pat Robertson thinks there should be a “vomit” button on  Facebook so he could “punch it” when same-sex couples post photos.

Read more:  http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/Blog/2013/07/10/Pat-Robertson-wants-a-vomit-Facebook-button-for-gay-pictures/3231373467710/#ixzz2Yg9AsPdi.

Mr. Robertson apparently has a Facebook page and therefore is subject to any public information available therein. I have a Facebook page and I look at what interests me. If there are other events, postings or the like that do not interest me, I just do not seek them out or scan for them. You have to actively look for other content on Facebook to see it , so my question is what was Mr. Robertson looking for?

Please Donate

Please Donate


 

The City Council strikes again , this new expenditure of 50K for murals is at once ludicrous and not well spent. Remember when the city bought benches for downtown at double what they could have been purchased for? It was never made clear that any Illinois or Springfield company bid on these benches at all. If the City council wants to do murals then why not replicate the murals that adorned these buildings in time past not some conceptual or neo Lincolnesque content. The city council is still being cavalier with public funds in spite of all of the rhetoric of doing a better job when they were running for election. This just shows that power gained in attaining elected office corrupts even the best(?) people. Keep this in mind when elections come around again.  This is Springfield, IL. but it could be anywhere in the U.S. The people we elect are only human and subject to errors and lapses in judgment which should keep voters on high alert at all times.
Please Donate

Please Donate

 


The IRS is on the hot seat due to doing its due diligence. There may have been some overstepping but it is not political as the Dupublicans are attempting to portray. This is not to say that the Scamocrats haven’t done their share of “stuff” but the Dupublicans have been involved the last couple of IRS incidents. The IRS has been in need of reform or reorganizing for a number of years yet Congress has been remiss in getting that on the agenda. Now that some of their “contributors and backers” have been on the receiving end of  IRS scrutiny, reorganizing has emerged  as a priority. The IRS has a simple method of examining returns and that is to look at several lines of the many pages  of a return and determine if the “numbers” add up or are in a reasonable range for the income of the business or individual. If the business is a  ” tax exempt entity then that organization has be politically neutral. This was not the case of the groups that were “targeted”, they were active in the past elections and by that activity, they were political. This is the price they paid for their hyper activity. This is not to say that the IRS didn’t overstep but let’s face it when you are publicly politically active then you cannot claim exemption from taxes.

Please Donate

Please Donate


The latest scandal in Washington has at last gotten the attention of the Congress, this has been raised before but allowed to go away with no discussion. I believe it was “ignored” due the connections between “big” money and the legislators. 

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Dave Camp speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington. The storm engulfing the Internal …more  Revenue Service over agents targeting conservative political groups could provide a much-needed boost to members of Congress working to simplify an outdated tax code that is so complicated most Americans hire someone fill out their returns.

 In this April 17, 2013 file …

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative political groups has little if anything to do with most everyday taxpayers, but some lawmakers are hoping attention to the budding scandal will swell public and political support for rewriting and simplifying a federal tax code that has undergone some 5,000 changes in the past dozen years.

“The complexity of the law didn’t require the IRS to target people for their political beliefs,” said Rep. David Camp, the Michigan Republican who chairs the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. But, he added, “I think giving the IRS less discretion is going to be important, and that’s what a simplified code would do.”

Most taxpayers now pay someone to do their taxes or buy commercial software to help them file. In a report earlier this year, national taxpayer advocate Nina E. Olson ranked complexity as the most serious problem facing both taxpayers and the IRS. People simply trying to comply with the rules often make inadvertent errors and overpay or underpay, she said. Others, she added, “often find loopholes that enable them to reduce or eliminate their tax liabilities.”

Camp and his Democratic counterpart in the Senate, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, have been working for months on what would be the first major tax overhaul since 1986. At nearly 4 million words, Camp likes to say the current code is “10 times the size of the Bible with none of the good news.”

Lawmakers in both parties say the current storm buffeting the IRS underscores how overly complex tax provisions have given the agency too much discretion in interpreting and enforcing the law.

“This is the perfect example of why we need tax reform,” said Rep. Tim Griffin, R-Ark., a member of the Ways and Means Committee. “If you want to diminish and limit the power of the IRS, you have got to reduce the complexity of the tax code and take them out of it.”

There are formidable obstacles to completing a major tax overhaul this year or next. Both parties say they want to cut overall tax rates by getting rid of tax breaks but they disagree on whether more revenues should be part of the equation. And for all the work Camp and Baucus have done, they have yet to answer hard questions about which tax breaks to scrap.

Americans like their credits, deductions and exemptions — the provisions that make the tax law so complicated in the first place. In exchange for lower tax rates, would workers be willing to pay taxes on employer-provided health benefits or on contributions to their retirement plans? How would homeowners feel about losing the mortgage interest deduction?

Those are among the three biggest tax breaks in the tax code, according to congressional estimates, together saving taxpayers nearly $300 billion this year.

The IRS scandal erupted a little over two weeks ago when the agency revealed that agents assigned to a special team in Cincinnati had targeted tea party and other conservative groups for additional, often burdensome scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status. The targeting lasted more than 18 months during the 2010 and 2012 election campaigns, hindering the groups’ ability to raise money, according to a report by the agency’s inspector general.

Since then, two top IRS have officials lost their jobs, and a third has been placed on paid administrative leave. Investigations by Congress and the Justice Department are under way.

The IRS was screening the groups’ applications because agents were trying to determine their level of political activity. IRS regulations say tax-exempt social welfare organizations may engage in some political activity but the activity may not be their primary mission. It is a vague standard that agents struggled to apply, according to the inspector general’s report. Lawmakers in both parties have complained for years that overtly political groups on the left and right have taken advantage of the rules to claim tax-exempt status and hide the identities of their donors.

“There are countless political organizations at both ends of the spectrum masquerading as social welfare groups in order to skirt the tax code,” Baucus said. “Once the smoke of the current controversy clears, we need to examine the root of this issue and reform the nation’s vague tax laws pertaining to these groups.”

Some Republicans hope to use an upcoming debate over increasing the federal government’s borrowing authority to trigger action on tax change. The government is expected to reach the borrowing limit by early fall, raising the possibility of another debt standoff like the one in 2011 that brought it to the brink of default.

Details are fluid, but congressional aides have been working on mechanisms to streamline the process of passing a tax package, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, perhaps guaranteeing floor votes on bills approved by the tax-writing committees in the House and Senate.

President Barack Obama, however, has said he won’t negotiate over raising the debt ceiling.

Obama has called for an overhaul of corporate taxes, and he laid some groundwork to accomplish that in his latest budget proposal. He also has said he wants to do comprehensive tax reform as part of a broad budget deal that cuts spending and reformulates entitlement programs. Such a grand bargain has proven elusive.

Camp and Baucus say they are open to a process that links tax reform to the debt ceiling. But Baucus warns: “I don’t want to be part of something that’s political or partisan. But I do want to be part of something that’s practical and pragmatic that looks like it’s going to advance the ball.”

Baucus, who has been in the Senate since 1978, announced in April he won’t run for re-election in 2014. He said he will focus much of his remaining time in the Senate on trying to steer a tax package through Congress.

Camp says he is committed to passing a tax bill out of his committee by the end of the year. There is no guarantee the full House would take up the bill, but Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has signaled his support for the effort by reserving the prestigious bill number HR 1 for a tax overhaul measure.

Lawmakers in both parties are convinced that simpler, easier-to-understand tax laws would spur economic activity. But there are significant partisan differences.

The Republican recipe calls for reducing or eliminating tax breaks that benefit targeted taxpayers, and using all the additional revenue to reduce overall rates for everyone. The tax system would raise about the same amount of money, but businesses could focus on being more efficient instead of trying to take advantage of targeted tax breaks, supporters say.

Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress also want to reduce or eliminate various tax breaks. Overall income tax rates would be lower, but the wealthy would pay more each year because they would lose certain exemptions, deductions and credits.

___

Please Donate

Please Donate


The current Congressional onslaught on the IRS by Congressman Issa is at once ludicrous and too public. This issue requires a closed investigation to determine the facts before airing it in public.  Mr. Issa one of the many Dupublicans who have bucked the President at every turn regardless of the correctness of the Presidential initiatives on anything. Currently the IRS is the target and the push is on to determine if the Whitehouse is involved. These are the same Dupublicans who brought us the “sequester” , who brought us the WMD’s, the Iraqi “incident” and lately a push to go into Syria. Wouldn’t the voters be better served  working with the President and others to do what is proper for the country going forward? The same political party is in the forefront on cutting the farm bill to reduce the assistance to low income folks who have to use food subsidies (SNAP), among those users are senior citizens, unemployed and under employed voters. I am of the opinion and have been for some time that we ALL need to change how Congress works through our votes. All is required from us is not voting for incumbents but for who may be campaigning against them. We cannot  continue to go along with a Congress that has no agenda concerning our well being but continues to reap the benefits set forth by them for them. If Socrates were alive today he could have a hundred lanterns in the Congressional chamber and still be in the dark and searching.

Please Donate

Please Donate


I recently posted similar views but this article states the case much clearer:

 

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • Donna Brazile: Knee-jerk partisanship is worse than ever in politics and public discourse
  • Brazile: Democracy endangered without civil discussion among people who disagree
  • IRS and Justice Department “scandals” have become lynch parties, she says
  • Brazile: Both parties and the public must stay focused on facts, causes and solutions

Editor’s note: Donna Brazile, a CNN contributor and a Democratic strategist, is vice chairwoman for voter registration and participation at the Democratic National Committee. She is a nationally syndicated columnist, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and author of “Cooking with Grease: Stirring the Pot in America.” She was manager for the Gore-Lieberman presidential campaign in 2000.

(CNN) — Our democracy is endangered. Not by the Russians, North Korea, the Iran regime, or even terrorists. To quote Pogo: “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

Inside the beltway, the fingers point and the media tuts and struts in glee, and we, the American public, respond by becoming more rigid and divided ourselves. No more “truth springing from argument amongst friends,” as David Hume said. A recent nonpartisan Pew Research Poll finds our knee-jerk partisanship has increased dramatically.

This road we’re on will lead us step-by-step to an extreme: either an autocratic government that functions, or a dysfunctional anarchy. The petty squabbles, bilge in the name of party or principle, will dissolve our self-government.

Abraham Lincoln felt no foreign power could ever defeat the United States. He said, “From whence shall we expect the approach of danger? Shall some trans-Atlantic military giant step the earth and crush us at a blow? Never…No, if destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we will live forever or die by suicide.”

We’re pointing a pistol at our heads. A government of, by, and for the people requires that people talk to people, that we can agree to disagree but do so in civility. If we let the politicians and those who report dictate our discourse, then our course will be dictated.

Why am I alarmed? Because two “scandals” — the IRS tax-exempt inquiries and the Department of Justice’s tapping of reporters’ phones — have become lynch parties. And the congressional investigation of Benghazi may become a scandal in itself.

The IRS scandal has sparked bipartisan outrage that should require a bipartisan solution. The director who oversaw this was a Bush appointee who was confirmed by a Democratic Congress. Even Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein says he doubts very much that Obama was involved

We, the people, need to stay focused on facts, causes and solutions. Let’s begin with the findings of the Treasury’s inspector general who uncovered it: That it was bureaucratic mismanagement, but that there was no evidence of any political motivation or influence from outside the IRS.

Lawmakers grill ousted IRS boss

Holder: Most serious leaks I’ve ever seen

Abrams: That’s not America at its best

And that, according to acting Commissioner Steven Miller, who just resigned, the problem started because the Supreme Court’s Citizens’ United decision created a surge of requests by political groups for tax-exempt status.

Democrats and Republicans agree there’s a problem. Maybe they should focus on solutions.

Let’s demand an end to partisan sideshows or media witch hunts: It turns out that the leaked White House Benghazi e-mails which allegedly show a cover up of a terrorist attack were themselves altered. Those e-mails are, in a word, bogus

Next up on the playbill: The Department of Justice secretly obtained dozens of reporters’ phone records because of a serious security leak. The double contradictory shell game we’re supposed to believe: Obama is not in charge and he has his finger in every pot.

This bamboozling of the American people obscures the main point: How do we safeguard American lives and respect our freedoms at the same time? Maybe working together — Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals — the Media Shield Law, a solution to the problem, can be passed.

Both the Democrats and Republicans have run roughshod over our separation of powers. Both parties have misused and abused their constitutional powers. Democrats blocked, again and again, President Bush’s nominees for federal judges. Today, Republicans aren’t just blocking Obama’s judicial nominees, they’re blocking the Senate from considering laws and blocking Cabinet appointees necessary for the federal government to run.

Why should we allow any political party or personality to render our government unable to govern?

On 9/11 terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and tried to attack the U.S. Capitol building in order to destroy our institutions, our economic strength, our military and our democratic Congress where “the people rule.”

But in our partisan self-righteousness, we’re destroying our foundations of government more effectively than al Qaeda ever could. Whether it’s the media or the politicians, the churning of partisan passion into anger, indeed hate, has an ulterior purpose: If Obama’s administration is constantly engaged in fighting for its existence, the governing comes to a halt, and his agenda will go nowhere.

Aiming for that and little if nothing else weakens and harms our democratic institutions, both Congress and the presidency. Remember, Obama was elected by a bigger margin than George W. Bush. He deserves to have his appointees, and he deserves to have votes on the issues, to have the government function, and to fight for the policies on which he was elected. By allowing problems to become scandals and scandals to become demagoguery, we’re shooting ourselves in the foot.

If it keeps up, we will all be complicit in weakening our democracy.

Please Donate

Please Donate


Recently the NRA had its annual meeting in Texas . There is nothing wrong in that except the message is completely mixed but it was not so obvious to the attendees. After hours of speeches and rhetoric the consensus was that the government was wrong to try taking guns from law abiding citizens. In the wake of the recent mass shootings no one except possibly some off the path organizations (ala NRA) have advocated taking guns from anyone in the United States. Consider the fact that the current Congress and the President cannot get a budget passed let alone anything else.  The President, some of the Congress and other groups are seeking stronger laws to prevent (we hope) people who should not own or use firearms due to mental deficiencies, criminal records or other afflictions and conditions. The NRA represents about 4 million people out of 300 million yet purports to represent all. The main theme here is that the NRA does not represent all  who own firearms and their theme of the Government taking away firearms is erroneous (yet many believe it to be true). One of the reported lines from Wayne’s  sound bite was : “the  government needs to enforce the existing laws and prevent mentally ill from obtaining and using firearms” This is exactly what the President and other members of Congress have proposed and failed to do due to the powerful NRA lobby and constituents. The question is: Whose side are they on? They (the NRA) have pressured the recipients of their largess with election failure if they went along with any firearm laws reform. I believe the real truth is that we are all on the same page but in different columns. Is the NRA so narrowly focused that the only thing they can do is fan the fires of discontent to support their own (financial) agendas?

Please Donate

Please Donate


The Republic of North Korea has continued to rattle sabers while its people starve, the current leader appears to be seeking a confrontation which as I see it will devastate it’s already shaky economy and kill off many more of its citizens. The Republic of North Korea  while seeking parity on the world stage has failed to gain full acceptance due to its human right record and its aggressive stance towards South Korea. Is it possible that  the North is looking to star a war that it cannot win in order to gain  after conflict reparations? The past allies of North Korea has all but abandoned them in favor of  peace and prosperity, leaving them isolated. The current regime is either looking for a way forward on the backs of their population or just extraordinarily inept. Looking at several other Radical countries where the population is living at poverty subsistence or lower, they all  have similar regimes and leadership. Once this leadership is removed,  its governance altered or completely changed , the fate of the people surges upward. Now to something local, the Dupublicans (commonly known as Republicans). There have been several loud profile Dupublicans have  voiced opinions on what we should do about N. Korea (remember the WMD’s?). This alone is not all that ails the Dupublicans, they have from one side of the spectrum to the other have uttered racially charge statements and vaguely apologized. Rand Paul  went to Howard University and spectacularly failed to win anyone over.  The problem appears to be  the inability to connect with anyone who is not white, rich and out of touch. This is not the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln but the Scamocrats (Democrats) are. To make a further point –  Look at the last 2 National elections, the anger , vitriol and  bigotry (not so closeted) against Americans who were not so “Republican”  (read what you want into this). We have an opportunity to make changes in government but only through the vote as our elected officials will not change until we change them. We need to ignore the high profile pundits who have no good agenda except their own.

Please Donate

Please Donate


Thomas Hobbes, who wrote that legitimate political power must be representative and based on the consent of the people, born in Wiltshire, England. With that being said can anyone tell me what is wrong with Mitch Mcconnell? This member of Congress has for the past 5 years and probably beyond been as obstructionist as possible. I am not sure how one become the leader (?) of the house but this is one leader who  shouldn’t be.  The recent leak from some one on what was said in his office is enough to show what type of person we have representing (?) voters. He has been vocal on some many fronts but only to play to what he thinks his constituents want.  He (McConnell) is asking for a FBI probe to determine how the information  was obtained but did not deny the allegation. The conversation was regarding how to attack a potential candidate for his seat  (Ashley Judd) by using her publicly known bouts of depression. There are many Americans who have and have had bouts of depression yet are still high functioning people. It is about time to relieve our selves of Congressional members who cannot run on their own merits ( which are few in number). Mr. McConnell is just one instance of  our overall Congressional malfeasance. If  a FBI probe is required , it should start with the DXXXV.

Please Donate

Please Donate


I ran across this article by Earl Ofari Hutchinson, this addresses the misinterpretations selective interpretation of biblical passages. The selective use could also apply to how Congress applies the legal mandates of our country.

 

  Earl Ofari Hutchinson

The long standing reason for shoving the courts, the federal government and the states into the private relations between two adult consenting men or women is the Bible. There are those two infamous and interminably cited passages in Leviticus 18:22 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27 that deem it “detestable” a man lying down with another man. Then they castigate men for doing “shameful things” with other men.

The ultimate punishment is that the two offenders must be put to death. The only fair thing about this is that in the modern interpretation the part about putting the two men to death for their alleged detestable act is not cited. This would be murder, and that bumps up against the law. But the first part is read and acted upon literally. It’s after all written in the Bible.

But then why take one passage out of the Bible so literally and not others? Consistency in Biblical citing would do much to shut the critics up who finger point those as hypocrites for cherry picking a passage from the Bible to prop up a personal hatred or a political agenda on gay marriage.

Here is a checklist of Biblical prescriptions that gay marriage opponents must embrace if they want to shed the tag of hypocrite. Gay men aren’t the only ones that must pay the ultimate price for their Biblical prescribed un-godly transgression. Leviticus 20:10 also is stern that a married man that commits adultery with any man’s wife must be immediately dispatched. Girls don’t escape Biblical wrath either. If she has the temerity to have sex before marriage Deuteronomy 22:20-1 demands that she must be stoned to death, by no less than the men of her town, even presumably that could include one of the men that caused her to lose her virginity.

 

Psalm 137:9 has something to say about children when it orders to revel in those that seize children and smash them against a rock. If a man, and presumably it would be warring men that smash the children, the children’s mothers could not raise a peep of protest since Timothy 2:12 absolutely forbids a woman to have any authority over a man. But if for a moment she forgets her place, she runs the risk of being branded a sorceress.  Exodus 22:18 commands that she must not be allowed to live. If she somehow escapes being rapped as a sorceress and simply has a relationship with any of the male child smashers she could be tossed around sexually among many men, and according to Judges 19:25-28 she would just have to meekly accept her lot. The same rule of merciless and pitiless retribution doesn’t spare a man’s daughter either. Judges 11:30-1, 34-5 makes it clear that she must be sacrificed to satisfy the triumph of the Lord. It was not just a daughter who could be slain in sacrifice. A son could also be the designated victim in Genesis 22:2 which commanded Isaac to take his only son to another place and dispose of him “as a holocaust.” But the son or daughter can’t protest their fate since Leviticus 20:9 insists that talking back to a parent is disrespectful and once again the ultimate price that must be paid is death.

The two groups that fare best in the Bible are faithful husbands and slave masters. The word of a faithful husband is law says Ephesians 5:22 and his wife must obey him unquestioningly in whatever he says and does. Then there are the slave masters. The iron rule from 1 Peter 2:13, 2:18 is that their chattel, human that is, must not only serve them faithfully but must serve them in “reverence.” This rule doesn’t apply just to kind and charitable slave masters but the lousy and brutal ones as well. But there is an element of equity here since Leviticus 25:44-45 permits anyone to buy their neighbor if they have only been a neighbor for a temporary period and they can then press them into slavery.

Biblical scholars have written volumes alternately debunking these passages for their errors, misinterpretations, and for being taken out of context, and worst of for being selectively used to make any moral point one wants to make. Yet, the truly scary part of this is that no volume of meticulously researched and documented scholarly assessments of the Bible, let alone rationality, mean little to millions of Americans. A Gallup poll in 2011 found that nearly one out of three Americans is convinced that every word written in the Bible is the literal truth. About half of those polled were more charitable and simply said it was the “inspired word of God.” But inspired or literal, the danger is the same. The Bible is not simply taken on faith but for millions is the basis of moral conduct, and even law. But then that begs the question, whether it calls for the stoning of women, or being a cheerful slave, or slaying sons and daughters in the name of God, why not trumpet these acts too as appropriate conduct just as is routinely and passionately done to condemn gay marriage? But then that’s less a question than the ugly example of the never ending hypocrisy of hiding behind the Bible.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American Urban Radio Network. He is the author of How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KTYM 1460 AM Radio Los Angeles and KPFK-Radio and the Pacifica Network.

Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson

 

Please Donate

Please Donate

Views: 549