Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
February 3, 2014
As we prepare for this afternoon's Super Bowl, regardless of whether you're cheering for the Denver Broncos or Seattle Seahawks, here's some food for thought.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, legendary Broncos quarterback—and current executive VP of football operations for the Denver Broncos—John Elway explained that he's a Republican because he "doesn't believe in safety nets."
So, is John Elway gonna support revoking the NFL's tax exempt status? As Laura Clawson reported this week, Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz has proposed legislation that would strip the National Football League's tax-exempt status.
With fellow Republican John Elway saying he doesn't believe in safety nets, isn't it time that the NFL get off its government dole and pay taxes like the rest of us?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/02/1274497/-The-Broncos-John-Elway-doesn-t-believe-in-safety-net-Like-the-NFL-s-tax-exempt-status
The Broncos' John Elway DOESN'T Believe In Safety Nets. Like the NFL's TAX-EXEMPT STATUS?
As we prepare for this afternoon's Super Bowl, regardless of whether you're cheering for the Denver Broncos or Seattle Seahawks, here's some food for thought.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, legendary Broncos quarterback—and current executive VP of football operations for the Denver Broncos—John Elway explained that he's a Republican because he "doesn't believe in safety nets."
"..I believe that we’re giving the opportunity to succeed or not succeed. Obviously, we’ve got to have some kind of safety nets. But I think my philosophy is when given the opportunity to go take advantage of that, I think that’s when you get the best out of people..."
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/02/john-elway-to-fox-news-im-republican-because-i-dont-believe-in-safety-nets/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/02/john-elway-to-fox-news-im-republican-because-i-dont-believe-in-safety-nets/
So, is John Elway gonna support revoking the NFL's tax exempt status? As Laura Clawson reported this week, Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz has proposed legislation that would strip the National Football League's tax-exempt status.
With fellow Republican John Elway saying he doesn't believe in safety nets, isn't it time that the NFL get off its government dole and pay taxes like the rest of us?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/02/1274497/-The-Broncos-John-Elway-doesn-t-believe-in-safety-net-Like-the-NFL-s-tax-exempt-status
February 3, 2014
On 31 January 2014, Gallup issued their latest report on the "Liberal" and "Conservative" affiliations of residents within the 50 states plus D.C., and these ideological rankings of the states plus D.C. were almost identical to the rankings of the states plus D.C. along the high "Per Capita Personal Income" versus low "Per Capita Personal Income" from the U.S. Census Bureau (see page 26 of that document, p. 44 of the .pdf). The most liberal was D.C.; the richest was also D.C. The second-most conservative was Mississippi; the poorest was also Mississippi.
Here are the ten most liberal states, in order:
D.C., Vermont, Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, California, Maine.
Here are the ten richest (PCPI) states (also in order):
D.C., Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Wyoming, Virginia, New Hampshire, Alaska.
5 states are on both of those top-10 lists.
And here are the ten most conservative states:
Wyoming, Mississippi, Idaho, Utah, Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, North Dakota, South Carolina.
Here are the ten poorest (lowest PCPI) states:
Mississippi, Idaho, West Virginia, Utah, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kentucky, New Mexico, Alabama, Arizona.
6 states are on both of those top-10 lists.
The liberal states are the rich states, and the conservative states are the poor states.
How can one explain the exceptions, such as Wyoming's being (and it is by far) the most conservative state, and also being the 7th-highest on per capita personal income? My theory to explain this is that conservatism has actually two components: aristocratic, and theocratic. Both the aristocracy, and the clergy, tend to be strongly conservative; aristocrats love the status-quo because they've got most of the wealth -- the status-quo is good for them; clergy love the status-quo because they're committed to worshipping the very personification of power -- The All-Powerful One, the All-Mighty, the Creator-God -- the supposed person who made things the way they are. Clergy believe: Might makes right. Aristocrats believe: A person's wealth is a measure of his worth. Both beliefs are conservative. In Wyoming, the aristocracy are more in control; in Mississippi, the clergy are more in control. They're conservative for different reasons: greed in rich states, faith in poor states. In liberal states, neither the aristocracy nor the clergy are in control (though both always try to be). On 13 February 2013, Gallup headlined "Mississippi Maintains Hold as Most Religious State; Vermont is the least religious," and reported a states-ranking that was, yet again, very close to the one for poverty.
cont'
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Poor-States-Are-Conservati-by-Eric-Zuesse-Congress-Republican-GOP_Conservatism_Conservatives_Liberalism-140201-427.html
POOR STATES Are Conservative; RICH STATES Are Liberal. Why, and Where?
On 31 January 2014, Gallup issued their latest report on the "Liberal" and "Conservative" affiliations of residents within the 50 states plus D.C., and these ideological rankings of the states plus D.C. were almost identical to the rankings of the states plus D.C. along the high "Per Capita Personal Income" versus low "Per Capita Personal Income" from the U.S. Census Bureau (see page 26 of that document, p. 44 of the .pdf). The most liberal was D.C.; the richest was also D.C. The second-most conservative was Mississippi; the poorest was also Mississippi.
Here are the ten most liberal states, in order:
D.C., Vermont, Massachusetts, Hawaii, New York, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, California, Maine.
Here are the ten richest (PCPI) states (also in order):
D.C., Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Wyoming, Virginia, New Hampshire, Alaska.
5 states are on both of those top-10 lists.
And here are the ten most conservative states:
Wyoming, Mississippi, Idaho, Utah, Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, North Dakota, South Carolina.
Here are the ten poorest (lowest PCPI) states:
Mississippi, Idaho, West Virginia, Utah, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kentucky, New Mexico, Alabama, Arizona.
6 states are on both of those top-10 lists.
The liberal states are the rich states, and the conservative states are the poor states.
How can one explain the exceptions, such as Wyoming's being (and it is by far) the most conservative state, and also being the 7th-highest on per capita personal income? My theory to explain this is that conservatism has actually two components: aristocratic, and theocratic. Both the aristocracy, and the clergy, tend to be strongly conservative; aristocrats love the status-quo because they've got most of the wealth -- the status-quo is good for them; clergy love the status-quo because they're committed to worshipping the very personification of power -- The All-Powerful One, the All-Mighty, the Creator-God -- the supposed person who made things the way they are. Clergy believe: Might makes right. Aristocrats believe: A person's wealth is a measure of his worth. Both beliefs are conservative. In Wyoming, the aristocracy are more in control; in Mississippi, the clergy are more in control. They're conservative for different reasons: greed in rich states, faith in poor states. In liberal states, neither the aristocracy nor the clergy are in control (though both always try to be). On 13 February 2013, Gallup headlined "Mississippi Maintains Hold as Most Religious State; Vermont is the least religious," and reported a states-ranking that was, yet again, very close to the one for poverty.
The ten most-religious states were:
Mississippi, Utah, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma.
5 of those 10 are also among the 10 poorest states.
The ten least religious states are:
Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, D.C., Washington (state), Connecticut, Alaska.
5 of those 10 are also among the highest PCPI states.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160415/mississippi-maintains-hold-religious-state.aspx?version=print
Mississippi, Utah, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, Georgia, Oklahoma.
5 of those 10 are also among the 10 poorest states.
The ten least religious states are:
Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, D.C., Washington (state), Connecticut, Alaska.
5 of those 10 are also among the highest PCPI states.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160415/mississippi-maintains-hold-religious-state.aspx?version=print
cont'
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Poor-States-Are-Conservati-by-Eric-Zuesse-Congress-Republican-GOP_Conservatism_Conservatives_Liberalism-140201-427.html
February 3, 2014
The editorial board of the Newark Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, is calling on Governor Chris Christie to resign or be impeached if allegations made on Friday are true. The allegations were made by an old friend of the governor’s, David Wildstein. Weinstein works for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Wildstein claimed, through his lawyer, that he has proof that Christie knew about the closure of lanes on the George Washington Bridge when it was happening. If true, the evidence would directly contradict two hours of public denials Christie made on January 13th. A statement from his press conference on that date is quoted in the editorial:
The Christie administration is ‘dangerously out of control’. The editorial board said that, if the charges are true, the governor must resign or be impeached:
And fire Christie did, as he sought to assign blame. Specifically, his deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelley, was given the axe. At the time, he said that there was no excuse for “lying to a governor” in her handling of the scandal. The Star-Ledger, of course, raises the question of what excuse can there be for a governor to lie to the citizens of an entire state? The editorial cites the bridge scandal, even before the latest revelations, as evidence that the Christie administration is “dangerously” out of control. However, “if the governor himself was involved, this moves to a new level.”
The editors already called on Gov to quit Republican Governors Association.
It’s been less than a week since the paper called on Christie to step down as head of the Republican Governors Association. Their reasoning was that he promised in his inaugural address to put all his energy into making New Jersey “all it could be”. That promise was almost immediately followed by his entanglement in two major investigations. The first is Bridgegate. The second stems from charges by the mayor of Hoboken. She claimed that her city was denied a fair share of Hurricane Sandy relief funds, as an act of political revenge.
When Christie was running for re-election last fall, the Star-Ledger gave him a tepid endorsement. Their support was given in spite of what the editors called his “measurable failures” and the conclusion that “he is much better at politics than he is at governing.” They reasoned that his opponent, Democratic state Sen. Barbara Buono, was even more “deeply flawed”. Their main objection seemed to be that Buono defended teachers’ unions and chose to uphold traditional schools over charters. In what might be seen as an unfortunate choice of words, the paper described Buono as lacking “the strategic savvy to be a successful governor.”
cont'
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/02/01/newspaper-calls-christie-resign/
NJ’s Largest Newspaper CALLS For CHRISTIE TO RESIGN Or Be IMPEACHED
The editorial board of the Newark Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, is calling on Governor Chris Christie to resign or be impeached if allegations made on Friday are true. The allegations were made by an old friend of the governor’s, David Wildstein. Weinstein works for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Wildstein claimed, through his lawyer, that he has proof that Christie knew about the closure of lanes on the George Washington Bridge when it was happening. If true, the evidence would directly contradict two hours of public denials Christie made on January 13th. A statement from his press conference on that date is quoted in the editorial:
"...I had no knowledge of this — of the planning, the execution or anything about it… I first found out about it after it was over..."
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2014/01/chris_christie_should_resign_i.html
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2014/01/chris_christie_should_resign_i.html
The Christie administration is ‘dangerously out of control’. The editorial board said that, if the charges are true, the governor must resign or be impeached:
Because that would leave him so drained of credibility that he could not possibly govern effectively. He would owe it to the people of New Jersey to stop the bleeding and quit. And if he should refuse, then the Legislature should open impeachment hearings. By the governor’s own standard, lying is a firing offense.
And fire Christie did, as he sought to assign blame. Specifically, his deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelley, was given the axe. At the time, he said that there was no excuse for “lying to a governor” in her handling of the scandal. The Star-Ledger, of course, raises the question of what excuse can there be for a governor to lie to the citizens of an entire state? The editorial cites the bridge scandal, even before the latest revelations, as evidence that the Christie administration is “dangerously” out of control. However, “if the governor himself was involved, this moves to a new level.”
The editors already called on Gov to quit Republican Governors Association.
It’s been less than a week since the paper called on Christie to step down as head of the Republican Governors Association. Their reasoning was that he promised in his inaugural address to put all his energy into making New Jersey “all it could be”. That promise was almost immediately followed by his entanglement in two major investigations. The first is Bridgegate. The second stems from charges by the mayor of Hoboken. She claimed that her city was denied a fair share of Hurricane Sandy relief funds, as an act of political revenge.
When Christie was running for re-election last fall, the Star-Ledger gave him a tepid endorsement. Their support was given in spite of what the editors called his “measurable failures” and the conclusion that “he is much better at politics than he is at governing.” They reasoned that his opponent, Democratic state Sen. Barbara Buono, was even more “deeply flawed”. Their main objection seemed to be that Buono defended teachers’ unions and chose to uphold traditional schools over charters. In what might be seen as an unfortunate choice of words, the paper described Buono as lacking “the strategic savvy to be a successful governor.”
cont'
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/02/01/newspaper-calls-christie-resign/
February 3, 2014
President Barack Obama took a shot at Fox News in an interview with the network's Bill O’Reilly ahead of the Super Bowl XLVIII matchup between the Denver Broncos and the Seattle Seahawks. O'Reilly brought up the Benghazi and IRS scandals that have, in many ways, plagued Obama's presidency. The Fox News host accused Obama of distracting from the scandals to protect his image and campaign.
“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world [Benghazi] was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly said. “That’s what they believe.”
“And they believe it because folks like you tell them that,” Obama said. "These kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because you and your TV station will promote them."
Prior to the interview, O’Reilly told Fox’s Megyn Kelly that he was “not nervous.” “He is not a bad guy, I think people misread him,” he said. “However, my interview this time is going to be very precise.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/02/bill-oreilly-obama-interview_n_4702120.html
Obama SLAMS FOX NEWS In Bill O'Reilly Interview
This particular exchange between President Obama & O'Reilly occurs at 6:20 and 8:13 of the video.
President Barack Obama took a shot at Fox News in an interview with the network's Bill O’Reilly ahead of the Super Bowl XLVIII matchup between the Denver Broncos and the Seattle Seahawks. O'Reilly brought up the Benghazi and IRS scandals that have, in many ways, plagued Obama's presidency. The Fox News host accused Obama of distracting from the scandals to protect his image and campaign.
“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world [Benghazi] was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly said. “That’s what they believe.”
“And they believe it because folks like you tell them that,” Obama said. "These kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because you and your TV station will promote them."
Prior to the interview, O’Reilly told Fox’s Megyn Kelly that he was “not nervous.” “He is not a bad guy, I think people misread him,” he said. “However, my interview this time is going to be very precise.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/02/bill-oreilly-obama-interview_n_4702120.html
February 2, 2014
FUGETABOUTIT??............HELL NO!!...........
(CNN) -- Less than three months after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie cruised to an overwhelming reelection win, the main political question he faces isn't whether he can make a transition to the national stage and run for president -- it's whether he can continue to govern the state at all. Negative press about the so-called Bridgegate scandal -- an apparent decision by top Christie aides to close lanes on the George Washington Bridge and snarl traffic for days on end, allegedly out of petty political spite toward local officials -- has taken a severe toll on Christie's national prospects: A recent poll confirms that he has tumbled from first to third place as a potential 2016 presidential candidate.
But that could prove to be the least of Christie's headaches. A more pressing matter is raised by a short, devastating letter penned by Alan Zegas, the lawyer for a former top aide to Christie, David Wildstein, and published on the New York Times website. The immediate point of the letter was to press the Port Authority, the agency that operates the George Washington Bridge, to pay Wildstein's legal expenses. But it's not just a financial dispute. If Wildstein, who personally oversaw the lane closures, was following orders requested or approved from on high, he can demand legal protection by the agency. But by refusing to cover his costs, the Port Authority is saying, in effect, that Wildstein was acting on his own.
The letter by Wildstein's attorney bluntly suggests otherwise: "It has also come to light that a person within the Christie administration communicated the Christie administration's order that certain lanes on the George Washington Bridge were to be closed, and evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the Governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference." Ouch. The Christie administration hastily responded with a statement that the governor "had absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened and whatever Mr. Wildstein's motivations were for closing them to begin with. But the damage was done: The scandal now has the potential to be carried directly into the inner circle of the Governor's office, and undermine his credibility.
Until now, Christie has employed a blunt but effective two-step strategy for containing the scandal. Step One: Summarily fire and publicly condemn deputies who were linked to the scandal. Step Two: Plead utter ignorance as to how or why these top aides would engage in unethical or illegal behavior. The strategy was never quite plausible -- Christie, a former prosecutor, has a reputation as a hands-on manager whose aides don't stray far without permission -- and it's a risky gambit: By publicly denigrating fired members of his inner circle, Christie opens himself to the possibility of disgruntled ex-employees going public with information that is embarrassing, or even incriminating. One can only imagine what Wildstein was thinking during Christie's two-hour press conference, in which he blasted Wilstein and another fired ex-aide, Bridget Ann Kelly, for "abject stupidity." "What did I do wrong to have these folks think it was OK to lie to me?" he said during the press conference. Adding insult to injury, Christie went so far as to say that Wildstein, often described in the press as a high school friend, wasn't really a Christie pal.
cont'
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/01/opinion/louis-christie-letter/index.html
Is The END NEAR For Chris Christie?
"..New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is embroiled in unfolding controversies over alleged political payback. The primary scandal involves suggestions key aides and supporters orchestrated traffic gridlock around the George Washington Bridge in Fort Lee last year to punish that town's mayor for not endorsing Christie's reelection. A separate controversy involves a federal watchdog's review of whether Christie improperly used Superstorm Sandy funds to produce tourism ads starring him and his family...."
FUGETABOUTIT??............HELL NO!!...........
(CNN) -- Less than three months after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie cruised to an overwhelming reelection win, the main political question he faces isn't whether he can make a transition to the national stage and run for president -- it's whether he can continue to govern the state at all. Negative press about the so-called Bridgegate scandal -- an apparent decision by top Christie aides to close lanes on the George Washington Bridge and snarl traffic for days on end, allegedly out of petty political spite toward local officials -- has taken a severe toll on Christie's national prospects: A recent poll confirms that he has tumbled from first to third place as a potential 2016 presidential candidate.
But that could prove to be the least of Christie's headaches. A more pressing matter is raised by a short, devastating letter penned by Alan Zegas, the lawyer for a former top aide to Christie, David Wildstein, and published on the New York Times website. The immediate point of the letter was to press the Port Authority, the agency that operates the George Washington Bridge, to pay Wildstein's legal expenses. But it's not just a financial dispute. If Wildstein, who personally oversaw the lane closures, was following orders requested or approved from on high, he can demand legal protection by the agency. But by refusing to cover his costs, the Port Authority is saying, in effect, that Wildstein was acting on his own.
The letter by Wildstein's attorney bluntly suggests otherwise: "It has also come to light that a person within the Christie administration communicated the Christie administration's order that certain lanes on the George Washington Bridge were to be closed, and evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the Governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference." Ouch. The Christie administration hastily responded with a statement that the governor "had absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened and whatever Mr. Wildstein's motivations were for closing them to begin with. But the damage was done: The scandal now has the potential to be carried directly into the inner circle of the Governor's office, and undermine his credibility.
Until now, Christie has employed a blunt but effective two-step strategy for containing the scandal. Step One: Summarily fire and publicly condemn deputies who were linked to the scandal. Step Two: Plead utter ignorance as to how or why these top aides would engage in unethical or illegal behavior. The strategy was never quite plausible -- Christie, a former prosecutor, has a reputation as a hands-on manager whose aides don't stray far without permission -- and it's a risky gambit: By publicly denigrating fired members of his inner circle, Christie opens himself to the possibility of disgruntled ex-employees going public with information that is embarrassing, or even incriminating. One can only imagine what Wildstein was thinking during Christie's two-hour press conference, in which he blasted Wilstein and another fired ex-aide, Bridget Ann Kelly, for "abject stupidity." "What did I do wrong to have these folks think it was OK to lie to me?" he said during the press conference. Adding insult to injury, Christie went so far as to say that Wildstein, often described in the press as a high school friend, wasn't really a Christie pal.
cont'
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/01/opinion/louis-christie-letter/index.html
February 1, 2014
Maher said,
Maher was right. If Beyonce, or any other supporter of the president showed up wearing the Stars and Stripes to the SOTU like Robertson did, Fox News would be screaming for days about how they hate America. They would be indignant over the disrespect that the Obama showed both for the flag, and for those who have fought and died for what it means.
The tirades would be endless. Rush Limbaugh would claim that the act of wearing the flag at the State Of The Union was proof that Barack Obama isn’t really an American. The name Alinsky would tossed around endlessly, and many conservative news cycles would be consumed by faux outrage. None of this happened because the Duck Dynasty guy is a Republican.
Paul Ryan happily looked the other way while posing for a picture with the reality TV star, because what could be more appealing to homophobic 2016 Republican primary voters than a pic with America’s First Family of racial intolerance and homophobia? This the same political party that threw a hissy fit when then candidate Obama wasn’t wearing his flag lapel pin, but they are totally cool with some D-list reality TV star disrespecting the flag because he is one of them.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/01/bill-maher-turns-tables-rips-duck-dynasty-disrespecting-u-s-flag.html
NEW RULE: Bill Maher Turns The Tables and RIPS Duck Dynasty For DISRESPECTING The U.S. FLAG
Bill Maher shredded both Duck Dynasty’s Willie Robertson for disrespecting the American flag at the State Of The Union, and Republican hypocrites for not saying a word about it.
Maher said,
“New rule, when you’re invited to the president’s State Of The Union address wear your good bandana. Nice to see you observing the dress code, Cletus. But you know if Beyonce wore that, they would say she was bringing down America from within. But somehow everybody is cool with this 1840s gold prospector sweating goose grease into the Stars and Stripes. All because his homophobic daddy invented a whistle that makes ducks horny.”
Maher was right. If Beyonce, or any other supporter of the president showed up wearing the Stars and Stripes to the SOTU like Robertson did, Fox News would be screaming for days about how they hate America. They would be indignant over the disrespect that the Obama showed both for the flag, and for those who have fought and died for what it means.
The tirades would be endless. Rush Limbaugh would claim that the act of wearing the flag at the State Of The Union was proof that Barack Obama isn’t really an American. The name Alinsky would tossed around endlessly, and many conservative news cycles would be consumed by faux outrage. None of this happened because the Duck Dynasty guy is a Republican.
Paul Ryan happily looked the other way while posing for a picture with the reality TV star, because what could be more appealing to homophobic 2016 Republican primary voters than a pic with America’s First Family of racial intolerance and homophobia? This the same political party that threw a hissy fit when then candidate Obama wasn’t wearing his flag lapel pin, but they are totally cool with some D-list reality TV star disrespecting the flag because he is one of them.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/01/bill-maher-turns-tables-rips-duck-dynasty-disrespecting-u-s-flag.html
February 1, 2014
BOOM!!......................................
TRENTON — State Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union) said today that if a claim by a former Port Authority official who oversaw the lane closings at the George Washington Bridge is true — that "evidence exists" Gov. Chris Christie knew about the closings when they were happening — then the state Assembly should take steps to start impeachment proceedings. In a letter released by his attorney, the former official, David Wildstein, said the order to close the lanes in Fort Lee came from the Christie administration and that "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures ... contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour news conference" three weeks ago.
The Assembly would have to investigate the allegation that the governor had abused his governmental power for political gain, and put people on the bridge in danger, he said. If at the end of the Assembly's investigation it concludes the accusations are true, it would draft articles for impeachment, and the Senate would hold a trial, Lesniak said.
"More information has to be gathered," he said.
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/01/sen-ray-lesniak-chris-christie-should-go
Sen. Ray Lesniak: Chris Christie SHOULD RESIGN If Accusations Are TRUE
Senator Ray Lesniak, (D-Union), seen in the 2013 file photo, said if former Port Authority official David Wildstein can prove Gov. Chris Christie lied, the governor should resign.
BOOM!!......................................
TRENTON — State Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union) said today that if a claim by a former Port Authority official who oversaw the lane closings at the George Washington Bridge is true — that "evidence exists" Gov. Chris Christie knew about the closings when they were happening — then the state Assembly should take steps to start impeachment proceedings. In a letter released by his attorney, the former official, David Wildstein, said the order to close the lanes in Fort Lee came from the Christie administration and that "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures ... contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour news conference" three weeks ago.
"If Wildstein's statement is sustained, I would hope the governor would do the right thing and not put the state through a trial, and he would resign," Lesniak said.
The Assembly would have to investigate the allegation that the governor had abused his governmental power for political gain, and put people on the bridge in danger, he said. If at the end of the Assembly's investigation it concludes the accusations are true, it would draft articles for impeachment, and the Senate would hold a trial, Lesniak said.
"More information has to be gathered," he said.
cont'
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/01/sen-ray-lesniak-chris-christie-should-go
February 1, 2014
Michelle Obama made a speech on Friday during the DNCC Women’s Luncheon held in San Francisco at the Fairmont Hotel. Prior to the First Lady speaking, folk legend Joan Baez performed to the delight of the entire audience. But, as is usually the case when she is there, the First Lady rocked the house and warmed the hearts like only she can. In her typically gracious manner, she made sure to give some real props to a true living legend of the Democratic Party, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who was also in attendance.
Almost immediately into her speech, Mrs. Obama had this to say about Nancy Pelosi:
And speaking of fabulous women, I want to start by thanking Leader Nancy Pelosi not just for that kind introduction but for her outstanding and historic leadership in Congress. She is a fighter. She has courage. She’s willing to take the risks, and she has been behind our President every step of the way. We love you. We love your family. You are amazing. Thank you so much.
And I also just want to mention that, as you know, Nancy was inducted into the Women’s Hall of Fame, and Barack and I could not be more proud. It is the right thing. That’s where you need to be. So keep it up, Nancy, we need you. Let’s give her another big round of applause. We love you.
This was a completely heartfelt gesture by the First Lady towards a true friend of the Obamas. Nancy Pelosi is one of the main reasons why Barack Obama is President today. As Michelle Obama rightly pointed out, Pelosi has been behind the President every single step of the way. She has always had his back. On top of her early support for him when he was running, if it wasn’t for her leadership as Speaker in 2009 and 2010, the Affordable Care Act would have never passed.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/01/31/lady-michelle-obama-shows-love-admiration-nancy-pelosi.html
FIRST LADY Michelle Obama SHOWS Her Love And Admiration For Nancy Pelosi
Michelle Obama made a speech on Friday during the DNCC Women’s Luncheon held in San Francisco at the Fairmont Hotel. Prior to the First Lady speaking, folk legend Joan Baez performed to the delight of the entire audience. But, as is usually the case when she is there, the First Lady rocked the house and warmed the hearts like only she can. In her typically gracious manner, she made sure to give some real props to a true living legend of the Democratic Party, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who was also in attendance.
Almost immediately into her speech, Mrs. Obama had this to say about Nancy Pelosi:
And speaking of fabulous women, I want to start by thanking Leader Nancy Pelosi not just for that kind introduction but for her outstanding and historic leadership in Congress. She is a fighter. She has courage. She’s willing to take the risks, and she has been behind our President every step of the way. We love you. We love your family. You are amazing. Thank you so much.
And I also just want to mention that, as you know, Nancy was inducted into the Women’s Hall of Fame, and Barack and I could not be more proud. It is the right thing. That’s where you need to be. So keep it up, Nancy, we need you. Let’s give her another big round of applause. We love you.
This was a completely heartfelt gesture by the First Lady towards a true friend of the Obamas. Nancy Pelosi is one of the main reasons why Barack Obama is President today. As Michelle Obama rightly pointed out, Pelosi has been behind the President every single step of the way. She has always had his back. On top of her early support for him when he was running, if it wasn’t for her leadership as Speaker in 2009 and 2010, the Affordable Care Act would have never passed.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/01/31/lady-michelle-obama-shows-love-admiration-nancy-pelosi.html
January 31, 2014
TOAST,...TOAST,...TOAST,...TOAST............ .... ......
Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., knew about the lane closings on the George Washington Bridge as they were happening, the former Port Authority official who oversaw the closings said Friday, adding that he has the evidence to prove it, the New York Times reports.
David Wildstein, who was appointed by Christie to the Port Authority and later resigned after the scandal broke, said in a letter released by his lawyer that "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference." “Mr. Wildstein contests the accuracy of various statements that the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some,” the letter added, according to the Times.
Christie explicitly said during the Jan. 9 news conference that he had "no knowledge or involvement in this issue, in its planning or its execution" and said he didn't know that anyone on his staff was involved in the closings until the day before.
What seemed to be a poorly planned lane closure to conduct a traffic study exploded into a full-blown scandal earlier this month after a series of communications between a Christie aide and two of his political appointees to the Port Authority became public. The email and text messages suggested that Bridget Anne Kelly, one of Christie’s three deputy chiefs of staff, ordered the lane closures.
"Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," Kelly wrote in an Aug. 13 message to Wildstein, a top executive at the Port Authority who was appointed by Christie. "Got it," replied Wildstein, who later resigned as a result of the outburst of anger surrounding the lane closings.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chris-christie-knew-about-bridge-closings-ex-official-says-report/
CHRIS CHRISTIE KNEW About Bridge Closings, EX-Official Says: Report
TOAST,...TOAST,...TOAST,...TOAST............
.... ......
Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., knew about the lane closings on the George Washington Bridge as they were happening, the former Port Authority official who oversaw the closings said Friday, adding that he has the evidence to prove it, the New York Times reports.
David Wildstein, who was appointed by Christie to the Port Authority and later resigned after the scandal broke, said in a letter released by his lawyer that "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference." “Mr. Wildstein contests the accuracy of various statements that the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some,” the letter added, according to the Times.
Christie explicitly said during the Jan. 9 news conference that he had "no knowledge or involvement in this issue, in its planning or its execution" and said he didn't know that anyone on his staff was involved in the closings until the day before.
What seemed to be a poorly planned lane closure to conduct a traffic study exploded into a full-blown scandal earlier this month after a series of communications between a Christie aide and two of his political appointees to the Port Authority became public. The email and text messages suggested that Bridget Anne Kelly, one of Christie’s three deputy chiefs of staff, ordered the lane closures.
"Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," Kelly wrote in an Aug. 13 message to Wildstein, a top executive at the Port Authority who was appointed by Christie. "Got it," replied Wildstein, who later resigned as a result of the outburst of anger surrounding the lane closings.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chris-christie-knew-about-bridge-closings-ex-official-says-report/
January 31, 2014
President has called you weasels out by saying:
" Well, I don’t think that’s very serious.....I am not particularly worried about it..."
Your move punks.........
During his CNN interview President Obama not only shrugged off Republican claims of an imperial presidency, but he appeared to challenge the Republicans who are talking lawsuits and impeachment to bring it on.
TAPPER: And let’s talk about House Republicans, because – and – and Senate Republicans. There has been a large contingency of Republicans critical of your new approach. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who might run for president, calls this the imperial presidency. And in the House, there is this thing, as you know, called The Stop Act. They want to rein in what you’re trying to do.
How do you respond to that?
OBAMA: Well, I don’t think that’s very serious. I mean, the truth of the matter is, is that every president engages in executive actions. In fact, we’ve been very disciplined and sparing in terms of the executive actions that we have taken. We make sure that we’re doing it within the authority that we have under statute. But I am not going to make an apology for saying that if I can help middle class families and folks who are working hard to try to get in the middle class do a little bit better, then I’m going to do it.
And, you know, I think it’s – it’s a tough argument for the other side to make that not only are they willing to do an – not do anything, but they also want me not to do anything in which case I think the American people who’s, right now, estimation of Congress is already pretty low might might have an even lower opinion.
TAPPER: The Stop Act is not something you take seriously?
OBAMA: I – I am not particularly worried about it.
Transcript:
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/30/just-released-cnns-jake-tapper-exclusive-interview-with-president-obama/
LOL!!!-President Obama’s Message To House Republicans Talking Impeachment: Bring It On
President has called you weasels out by saying:
" Well, I don’t think that’s very serious.....I am not particularly worried about it..."
Your move punks.........
During his CNN interview President Obama not only shrugged off Republican claims of an imperial presidency, but he appeared to challenge the Republicans who are talking lawsuits and impeachment to bring it on.
TAPPER: And let’s talk about House Republicans, because – and – and Senate Republicans. There has been a large contingency of Republicans critical of your new approach. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who might run for president, calls this the imperial presidency. And in the House, there is this thing, as you know, called The Stop Act. They want to rein in what you’re trying to do.
How do you respond to that?
OBAMA: Well, I don’t think that’s very serious. I mean, the truth of the matter is, is that every president engages in executive actions. In fact, we’ve been very disciplined and sparing in terms of the executive actions that we have taken. We make sure that we’re doing it within the authority that we have under statute. But I am not going to make an apology for saying that if I can help middle class families and folks who are working hard to try to get in the middle class do a little bit better, then I’m going to do it.
And, you know, I think it’s – it’s a tough argument for the other side to make that not only are they willing to do an – not do anything, but they also want me not to do anything in which case I think the American people who’s, right now, estimation of Congress is already pretty low might might have an even lower opinion.
TAPPER: The Stop Act is not something you take seriously?
OBAMA: I – I am not particularly worried about it.
Transcript:
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/30/just-released-cnns-jake-tapper-exclusive-interview-with-president-obama/
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
