I recommend checking out the Mann V Ford post and click on some of the links … the link above is a hidden gem of fierce documentation of corporate excessive use of and possibly the worse abuse of power …
Republicans and some conservadems who say they want to help people get back to work, give small business the means to create jobs have once again said one thing while on camera and then voted against the People of the United States. They say small business needs to be helped because small business creates jobs … but Republicans lie and this is yet another example and now evidence of just what they have in mind for us … as Americans we should all be not only outraged but use our voice to keep Republicans out of office. We need to vote for Politicians who have Americans best interest in mind and clearly it is not …NOT Republicans.
I don’t believe Immigration is that issue which will bite the backs of the Obama Administration because immigration has to be dealt with. It has to be comprehensive and unlike what people on TV seems to want viewers to believe, immigration legal or not did not just pop up after President Obama was elected. Immigration is the elephant in the room that Politicians on both sides of the aisle have avoided and were unable to make progress on. Then there are the others who along with corporations were more interested in making a buck then solving the massive influx of undocumented people looking for jobs; not all immigrants are violent, taking jobs, crazy or breaking laws … which is what i would call life, it you are good at what you do compete and win then whining or saying it’s “unfair” and should not be a part of the conversation
It is ultimately something that will affect every single person in this country. The notion that every State should be able to make up their own rules,policies or laws is absurd not to mention the crap coming from people on the right suggesting that the undocumented or illegal’s as they call them be rounded up and taken back to their homeland. The comment and the idea is not only offensive the suggestion about how to pay for the round-up is in itself scary and brings up another time in History the lives of people who were rounded up and well… we all know what happened. Ask yourself how many ethnic groups went through the crap this is being suggested by mostly Republicans, an en masse deportation. I will admit I was definitely offended and surprised that folks in 2010 would even suggest using stimulus money to round up people and ship them back to their homeland. Is it me or are these wild, wicked and stupid comments from people from the right getting on the airwaves talking seemingly crazy and getting paid $175K to do “ThePeoplesWork.” It has been six years and not much has happened in Congress … or course unless to include the money Republicans spent paid for by taxpayers …
Repealing ObamaCare Votes was up to $70 Million with 50 attempts in 2014 now 63 attempts 2016 … so, you do the math
Government Shutdown $24 billion
Benghazi almost $8 Million
Emailgate $75 Million or more
The current bills brought to the floor of Congress should give everyone involved and the country an opportunity to stop, consider and debate the obvious ramifications, maybe accept that comprehensive immigration reform needs to be clearly explained understood unfortunately what the right calls amnesty. It would be in all of best interests for those on the right to avoid the notion that all the undocumented or”illegal” are just violent and malicious folks doing all kinds of bad things. However,they cannot help themselves though we all know that not all undocumented,”illegals” as they call the undocumented are bad and decades ago, employers decided to look the other way when folks started coming across the border to look for jobs getting the jobs that were paying little or nothing but saved them money. It is time to be honest and deal with the reality of the impact and contributions that undocumented people have to the US economy because it is big.
I personally feel that is a civil rights issue. The idea is not lost on me that the immigration laws republicans want moving across the country would also have some negative consequences and would definitely push Americans back to a time that we all hope is gone and only in our history books. However, we have to remind people often that we cannot go backward. It was not that long ago when women and people of colour were seen as 3rd class citizens, servants and rarely heard from by anyone unless being forced to do the unthinkable or worse.
Photo is from Getty Images.
Fishermen Sign On to Clean Up Oil
Kim Vo of Sharko Seafood, a local seafood company in in Venice, La., was selling the company’s final 50 pounds of shrimp.
By ROBBIE BROWN
Published: April 30, 2010
VENICE, La. — About 1,000 angry and frustrated fishermen packed an elementary school gymnasium here Friday afternoon. In a cruel occupational twist, they were seeking employment with the company they blame for an oil spill that may wipe out their industry this year and beyond.
Officials Assail Oil Company Over Response to Gulf Spill (May 1, 2010)
The Lede Blog: Updates on the Oil Slick in the Gulf of Mexico (April 30, 2010)
Oil Spill’s Blow to BP’s Image May Eclipse Costs (April 30, 2010)
Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times
Fishermen gathered at Boothville-Venice Elementary School and registered to take a safety awareness class so they will be able to participate in the oil spill clean-up efforts.
Life in this coastal community centers on seafood — mullet, shark, shrimp and oysters. From May to December, dozens of boats haul shrimp here from the Gulf of Mexico. But aside from two days of fishing allowed this week ahead of the approaching oil slick, the shrimp season has been suspended.
So the fishermen came to receive training in how to clean up the oil spill that was creeping up on the nearby coastline. They were hoping to be hired by BP, the company blamed for the spill and responsible for cleanup efforts.
“Either the seafood industry or the oil industry — that’s the only jobs down here, so I guess I’m trying to move from seafood to oil today,” said Bernel Prout, 55, a fisherman and Venice native.
Friday’s training session was led by local firefighters and law enforcement officials and attended by representatives from BP, the parish government and the local fishermen’s association.
BP has said it will hire as many local residents as possible to clean the beaches and distribute booms through the surrounding marshes and waterways.
But the fishermen said they were reeling from the loss of revenue. They were not told how many would be hired, at what wages, or when. But they were asked to fill out forms listing their names, contact information and available equipment and skills.
“This is not our fault,” Mr. Prout said. “It’s the fault of the oil company.”
The mood inside the crowded, hot gymnasium was one of confusion and growing anxiety.
“We have bills to pay,” said Acy Cooper, the president of a local fishermen’s association. “I don’t care if it’s the federal government or BP, but someone needs to step up and compensate us.”
David Kinnaird, a project director for BP who is coordinating the company’s response in Venice, said BP would hire as many local workers as possible. “We’re not asking the community to do this work for nothing,” he said. “BP is willing to compensate them.”
But Mr. Kinnaird could not say when local fishermen would be hired, how much they would be paid or whether they would be compensated for their lost revenue.
The fishing industry is just now recovering from the hurricanes of recent years, said Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish, where Venice is located. But he said the oil spill could be an even greater setback, potentially changing fishing conditions for years.
“This could be six Katrinas, where for years and years and years there’s not as much work,” he said. “These people have fished their entire lives. They don’t know anything else.”
Still, he said, his job requires balancing the area’s two dominant local industries. He urged federal officials to not let this disaster lead to less oil excavation in the Gulf of Mexico.
“Don’t overreact,” he said. “We don’t ground every plane every time one plane crashes.”
All skiffs were docked in their harbors Friday. A local seafood company, Sharkco, was selling its final 50 pounds of shrimp and had already been depleted of oysters and fish.
“Last shrimp for a long, long time,” yelled Kim Vo, the owner of Sharkco, to passing fishermen, who paid $3 a pound.
“This is for us to eat,” one fishermen said. “We can’t use it for bait. There’s not going to be any fishing around here for months.”
“First Katrina, then Ike, Gustav, the fishermen’s strike — and now this,” said Thi Lee, 35, whose husband lost his 45-foot skiff in Katrina and only recently restored a second skiff to working condition after it was battered by another hurricane.
“We have no idea what to do,” she said.
A group of fishermen who were gathered around a car in the Sharkco parking lot grew more agitated as they listened to radio reports about the worsening spill.
“This spill isn’t going to be fixed in a day, probably even in a year,” said Chuc Nguyen, 35, who emigrated from Vietnam as a child and has fished his entire life. “What else can I do? I don’t know how to read and write. If you tell me to do something other than fishing, I don’t even know what it would be.”
Chan Tran, a dock owner in Venice, said insurance had risen more than 200 percent since Hurricane Katrina. Insuring her fishing dock now costs $50,000 a year, and she planned on paying the bill due this summer with money from the sale of shrimp.
“I cannot sleep for two days,” she said. “I’m done for business.”
Women Presidential Candidates
Women Who Ran for President
Who were the early women candidates for president? Hillary Clinton in her 2008 run for the Democratic nomination for US President came the closest so far that any woman has come to winning the nomination of a major political party in the United States. But Clinton is not the first woman to run for United States President, and not even the first to run for a major party’s nomination. Here’s a list of the female presidential candidates, arranged chronologically by each woman’s first campaign for the office. The list is current through the 2012 election; women running in 2016 will be added after that election’s over.
Who was the first woman to run for president?
What woman ran for US president first? And which women have run since?
Equal Rights Party: 1872
Humanitarian Party: 1892
Victoria Woodhull was the first woman to run for president in the United States. Frederick Douglass was nominated as Vice President, but there’s no record that he accepted. Woodhull was also known for her radicalism as a woman suffrage activist and her role in a sex scandal involving noted preacher of the time, Henry Ward Beecher. More »
National Equal Rights Party: 1884, 1888Belva Lockwood, an activist for voting rights for women and for African Americans, was also one of the earliest women lawyers in the United States. Her campaign for president in 1884 was the first full-scale national campaign of a woman running for president. More »
Surprise Party: 1940Comedian and actress, partner with husband George Burns on the George Burns and Gracie Allen Show, Grace Allen ran for president in 1940 as a publicity stunt. She was not on the ballot — it was, after all, a stunt — but she did get write-in votes.
Communist Party: 1968Nominated by the (tiny) Communist Party in 1968, Charlene Mitchell was the first African American woman nominated for president in the United States. She was on the ballot in two states in the general election, and received less than 1,100 votes nationally.
Patsy Takemoto Mink
Democratic Party: 1972She was the first Asian American to seek nomination as president by a major political party. She was on the Oregon primary ballot in 1972. She was at that time a member of the U.S. Congress, elected from Hawaii.
Linda Osteen Jenness
Socialist Workers Party: 1972Underage for the Constitution’s requirements for the presidency, Linda Jenness ran against Nixon in 1972 and was on the ballot in 25 states. In three states where Jenness was not accepted for the ballot because of her age, Evelyn Reed was in the presidential slot. Their vote total was less than 70,000 nationally.
Compare contrast what he said 9/15 and today
Donald Trump Releases His Tax Plan, A ‘Uge Tax Cut For The Wealthiest Few 9/2015
Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump released his tax plan today and—shocking no one familiar with American politics—analysis by the Center For American Progress Action Fund shows the plan would be another ‘uge windfall for the wealthiest few. In fact, Trump’s family stands to gain more from his plan than almost anyone, with the elimination of the estate tax giving the Trump family a tax cut of up to $3.48 billion, and the dramatic cut to the corporate tax rate also benefitting the family.
The “losers” under Trump’s plan will be anyone that relies on Medicare, Medicaid, or investment in things like infrastructure, education or job training—in other words middle class families. Like Jeb! Bush before him, Trump makes the tired argument that his tax plan is focused on the middle class, when in fact it is a big, beautiful tax cut for the wealthy. Here are three ways the plan favors the wealthy few at the expense of the middle class:
A simply tremendous gift to his kids. Among the biggest beneficiaries of Trump’s pitch to eliminate the estate tax? The Trumps themselves. The estate tax only applies to estates worth $5.43 million, and only two out of every one thousand estates pay any estate tax at all.
- Eliminating the current 40% estate tax could mean that Trump’s kids could stand to save as much as $3.48 billion in estate taxes—given Trump’s claimed net worth of $8.7 billion.
- Because it is easy for wealthy people to use loopholes to lower their estate tax bills, using a more cautious estimate that assumes Trump pays near the average estate tax rate of 18.8 percent, Trump’s plan would result in giving his kids $1.64 billion.
The best, most luxurious tax plan for those living in luxury. Trump’s tax plan would slash corporate, individual income, and capital gains and dividends tax rates—three moves that give bigger boosts to the nation’s richest.
- The top 20 percent of taxpayers pay 78.6 percent of the country’s corporate taxes—meaning a tax cut on corporate income would be a huge boost for them, but do little to nothing for the other 80 percent.
- Trump would cut the top individual tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent—even lower than Jeb Bush’s proposed top individual rate of 28 percent. An analysis by the Center for Tax Justice predicts that the top one percent of Americans would see an average break of $184,000 a year under Trump’s plan, compared to an average annual cut of only $250 for the bottom 20 percent.
- Trump’s plan to cut tax rates on income from capital gains and dividends is yet another gift to the nation’s wealthiest people. The 400 richest taxpayers alone received 12 percent of all capital gains income and 8 percent of all dividend income. As shown in a recent Center for American Progress report, a lower tax rate on dividends and capital gains is one of the ways the U.S. tax code worsens inequality by helping those who are wealthy enough to own capital accumulate even more wealth.
- Even the hedge fund managers who Trump says are “getting away with murder” might get a tax cut on their carried interest. Trump claims to close this loophole, but if investment funds pay taxes as businesses their tax rate on carried interests would fall from 23.8% to 15%. And even if Trump requires hedge funds to pay taxes using his individual rates, taxes on carried interest would only go up from 23.8% to 25%. Not to mention the fact that Trump would still give hedge fund managers huge tax cuts on the rest of their income.
A ‘uge increase to the deficit. Trump claims that his plan “doesn’t add to our debt and deficit,” but any reasoned analysis of the plan suggests that it would be extremely costly. The plan jeopardizes programs that working and middle class families depend on for economic security, like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
- The Center for Tax Justice estimates that Trump’s plan would cost $10 trillion over the next 10 years.
- Though the plans vary in some ways, Bush’s and Trump’s plans pledge to make some very similar tax cuts, which would inevitably force budget cuts from crucial programs. And even the team of advisors Bush recruited to support his plan say that it would cost $3.4 trillion over the next ten years.
BOTTOM LINE: Despite Trump’s populist rhetoric, his tax plan would only be the best, most luxurious tax plan for those already living in luxury. It gives his own family a potential $3.48 billion tax cut, jeopardizing programs that middle class families depend on for economic security along the way.