Tag Archives: reviews

Meet John Raese


John Raese On The Issues: Space Lasers And Slashing The Federal Government

October 18, 2010

 

Just a few months ago, nobody would have believed that it would be possible, and maybe even likely, for West Virginia to 

send a Republican Senator to Washington for the first time in 52 years.But in this turbulent political climate, nothing is for certain, not even the candidacy of a popular Democratic Governor battling against John Raese, a wealthy businessman and perpetual candidate who rec

ently proudly proclaimed that minimum wage laws should be repealed.

And so, in the highly anti-Obama but pro-Democratic state, recent polls showed Gov. Joe Manchin trailing by a slim margin behind the Tea Party-backed Republican, who told CNN’s Dana Bash this month that the conservative movement was “a little bit left of me.”

With the potential now arising that West Virginia voters could be sending Raese to the Senate in November, HuffPost has done a little digging into Raese’s positions — some of which may seem familiar from other Tea Party candidates — and has catalogued the most surprising:

 

Get HuffPost Politics On Twitter , Facebook , and Google Buzz !

Know something we don’t? E-m

ail us at huffpolitics@huffingtonpost.com

Three Days to Stop CEOs from Stealing Shareholder Votes



The recently passed Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act gives shareholders—including workers’ pension funds—the chance to vote on CEO pay. But Big Business front groups are putting together devious loopholes, and we only have three days to stop them.

Take Action: Don’t let Big Banks and Wall Street brokers stamp out “say on CEO pay.”

Starting in 2011, shareholders will be able to vote on CEO pay packages. This is great news because:

1. Even if you don’t have any sort of pension, or own any stock, the bottom line is the new Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act will help rein in CEO pay if it’s allowed to work. That’s a good thing for working people and the whole economy.

2. Pension funds hold TRILLIONS of dollars in assets belonging to people who are currently working, as well as retirees. So starting in 2011, there’s a chance to use the collective power of working peoples’ pension money to rein in out-of-control CEO pay that goes against the interests of shareholders.

But the new law is already in danger. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and other Big Business groups are lobbying hard for devious schemes to gut the new law’s “say on CEO pay” provisions, and we only have three days to stop them. They want the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to give corporations more control over the proxy voting system—which is how most shareholders would cast votes on CEO pay.

You can help stop their proposals by sending a public comment to the SEC. But hurry! The deadline to submit your comment is Wednesday, Oct. 20.

Tell the SEC: Shareholders should vote on CEO pay—not Big Banks and Wall Street brokers. (If you add your own words and personalize your comment, even a little, it will make a much bigger impact.)

If Big Business wins on CEO pay, the rest of us lose. The Chamber wants to give Big Banks and Wall Street brokers power to vote on behalf of shareholders—knowing they’ll almost always vote to rubber-stamp excessive CEO pay. And the Business Roundtable wants to weaken investor privacy protections so corporations can send shareholders junk mail soliciting votes in favor of…whatever votes management wants.

Send your public comment to the SEC: Don’t let Big Banks and Wall Street brokers rubber-stamp CEO pay.

Groups representing Big Business are hoping to sneak through these seemingly “technical” changes while nobody’s paying attention. But the fact is, these proposals will undermine the voting rights of shareholders in corporate elections—and because shareholder voting rights will rein in CEO pay, that’s a big deal for everyone who cares about working people in America.

We need your help to make sure the voices of working families are heard in this debate, loud and clear. Can you help? Personalize and submit a public comment now. It only takes a moment.

Thanks for making sure working people keep their say on CEO pay.

Sincerely,

Manny Herrmann, Online Mobilization Manager
AFL-CIO

P.S. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is already trying to buy our elections with gobs of money from secret donors. Don’t let the Chamber undermine our new rights to rein in excessive CEO pay, too. Tell the SEC to put the interests of shareholders—including working families and the pension funds that hold our retirement dollars—before the interests of corporate executives who are trying to suck the rest of us dry.

The greenest way to support UCS


Union of Concerned Scientists
Your support of the Union of Concerned Scientists has helped advance innovative, practical solutions to the problems of global warming, food safety, abuse of government science, and more. 

You can be confident your donations to UCS are spent wisely. We are accredited with the Better Business Bureau, have received four stars from Charity Navigator, and earned an ‘A’ rating from the American Institute of Philanthropy.
Better Business Bureau, Charity Navigator, American Institute of Philanthropy
Become a Partner for the Earth

Want to know how you can make your actions with UCS go even further? Join our Partners for the Earth monthly giving program.

This is an easy and effective way for you to ensure UCS has the funds needed to advance science-based solutions to curb global warming, reduce the threat of nuclear weapons, generate clean energy, produce more fuel-efficient cars—and much more—every day of the year.

The Partners for the Earth program also helps UCS reduce fundraising costs and paper use. It’s the greenest way to give—plus, it’s easy and convenient for you!

Become a Partners for the Earth member today. Simply select an amount that is comfortable for you and it is automatically debited each month from your credit card.

In the coming months, UCS will continue to:

  • Expose corporations, front groups, and media pundits who knowingly mislead the public about climate science and challenge them to get their facts straight;
  • Push state utility commissions to shut down the oldest and dirtiest coal power plants;
  • Organize public pressure on the Senate to reduce the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal; and
  • Press the Obama administration to boost fuel economy for cars and trucks, cut tailpipe pollution, and reduce our nation’s oil use.

We’ve got ambitious goals—and we need your regular support to accomplish them. Click here to join the Partners for the Earth program today.

Thank you for your ongoing support.

Kevin Knobloch Sincerely,
Kevin Knobloch
Kevin Knobloch
President

P.S. As a Partners for the Earth member, you are in control. You decide the amount of your monthly gift, and you can change or cancel your pledge at any time. Join today.

JUSTICE: Uncertainty Around DADT


Last week, the Justice Department asked Judge Virginia Phillips to stay her broad injunction barring the military from enforcing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy until it has an opportunity to appeal the decision to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In the appeal notice that accompanied the stay request, the government argued that ending enforcement of the policy “before the appeal in this case has run its course will place gay and lesbian servicemembers in a position of grave uncertainty.” “If the Court’s decision were later reversed, the military would be faced with the question of whether to discharge any servicemembers who have revealed their sexual orientation in reliance on this Court’s decision and injunction,” the government wrote. “Such an injunction therefore should not be entered before appellate review has been completed.” Meanwhile, the Department of Defense has also issued new orders via email late Thursday afternoon “informing all five branches of the military that they must comply with an injunction ordered by a federal judge” until the judge grants the government’s request. The Pentagon warned gay and lesbian servicemembers against changing their behavior in the interim. “We note for servicemembers that altering their personal conduct in this legally uncertain environment may have adverse consequences for themselves or others should the court’s decision be reversed,” Under Secretary of Defense for personnel and readiness Clifford Stanley wrote on Thursday.

FRUSTRATION OVER APPEAL: DOJ‘s appeal of the decision comes after intense lobbying from House and Senate Democrats — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — to allow the recent ruling to stand. As DADT scholar Nathaniel Frank explained, “The court case, I think, is one of the more likely now, for the President to say, this actually is unconstitutional and although there is a tradition of defending standing law, it’s not obligated to defend a policy that it believes is unconstitutional.” President Obama has previously implied that DADT is constitutional and Republicans and two Democrats successfully filibustered repeal in the Senate (the measure passed the House in May). But Obama has consistently argued that he would continue to try to repeal DADT through the legislative process to accommodate the work of the Pentagon’s ongoing review. “I don’t think it’s too much to ask, to say ‘Let’s do this in an orderly way’ — to ensure, by the way, that gays and lesbians who are serving honorably in our armed forces aren’t subject to harassment and bullying and a whole bunch of other stuff once we implement the policy,” Obama told Rolling Stone magazine in late September. The appeal comes a day after Secretary of Defense Robert Gates warned that ending the ban is “an action that needs to be taken by the Congress and that it is an action that requires careful preparation, and a lot of training.” “It has enormous consequences for our troops,” Gates said, ignoring research by the Center for American Progress’ Larry Korb, Sean Duggan, and Laura Conley which has found that repeal is actually a simple process and has been completed without incident by many other countries, including some of our closest allies.

MILITARY RESISTANT TO CHANGE: Gates, along with other military leaders, has resisted and delayed changing the policy before the Pentagon releases its review of the ban during the first week of December. Following Gates’ remarks, The Palm Center established a website to track his prediction that the court’s decision to suspend the policy would have “enormous consequences,” including all reported instances of harm to unit cohesion, discipline and privacy that have arisen during this period of open gay service. “Now that the ban has been suspended, we are searching vigilantly for such consequences, and we will use the new web site as a hub for reporting what we find,” Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin said. Last week, the group also submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all documentation of reported negative consequences of the suspension of DADT. Meanwhile, the Pentagon task force that has been studying the consequences of ending the policy, is “well along” in formulating its recommendations, and officials don’t expect ruling or the moratorium to affect its work. According to some military officials, “[t]he task force found deep resistance to the idea of repealing the law in some elements of the armed services, especially within the combat units, an officer familiar with the findings said. But the surveys also have found segments of the military who were not overly worried about allowing gays and lesbians to serve.”

ENDING THE BAN THROUGH CONGRESS: During an MTV/BET/CMT sponsored town hall on Thursday, Obama told young voters that the policy should be repealed by Congress, not through an executive order or the courts. Distinguishing himself from President Harry Truman — who desegregated the armed forces via executive order in 1948 — Obama explained that “the difference between my position right now and Harry Truman’s was that Congress explicitly passed a law that took away the power of the executive branch to end this policy unilaterally. So this is not a situation in which with a stroke of a pen I can simply end a policy.” Obama stressed that he’s been able to convince Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen to support repeal and promised that the policy would end “on my watch.” “But I do have an obligation to make sure that I’m following some of the rules,” Obama said. “I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there, I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.” On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs promised that Obama would work to end the policy during the lame duck session of Congress, telling the Advocate’s Kerry Eleveld that the President would be “actively involved in that.” Obama should also suspend discharges using his stop loss authority, thus ending the discharges of qualified men and women during wartime.

mindful Monday &some News


President and Mrs. Obama are hosting a Science Fair

Today.  I have been hearing more BS than ever from “the Media”  which is sad …people need to stop listening to the cable noise, the radio and get the facts -media opinion news is just that -an opinion!!- The Democratic and or President’s message that they speak of was not just held up by Republicans but cable and or mainstream tv that feature politics have held up the message  as well choosing to move more right of center each and every day as the Midterm elections come closer. I blame Republicans of course but the fact is”the Media” has to take some responsibility for their lack of getting any sort of fair and or balanced News from the Democratic Party out to the people wondering just what is the truth behind any story getting airtime. It is obvious that some people unfortunately believe the panel, guests or so-called experts who talk about an issue or a politician but ask yourself why don’t they just have the subject of discussion on for a rebuttal -that would be too easy right

I received and appreciate all the comments on the articles posted here. This week two articles got several responses but one person responded to two of them; one article was about Saving the Country, Murdoch style by MMA and the other was a response to one that came from Senator Barney Franck directly. My responses to both articles are below with some adjustments.

The first Comment was in response to Senator Barney Frank

(1)Well isn’t Barny the guy who said,  “it’s okay to have buddies with money”?  I guess he must of meant it was only okay if they were democrats.  So much for tolerance, eh?

Senator Frank is a politician and anyone with any sense knows that the fight is on to keep their seats in Congress and in doing so that not only means great campaigning, politicking or having the preferred ideology but money. If money meant nothing people would not be backing Angle, Fiorina, Whitman, Brewer, Palin or Christine O’Donnell because none of these embarrassing women are qualified to hold public office. I have no idea what you are asking me when you say – tolerance. The fact is people with or without money can be offensive.

Comment(2)

Tell me something, did you mind when Murdoch supported Hillary not so long ago? http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/2006/05/rupert-murdoch-backs-hillary-clinton.html Do you have a problem …

Actually, my personal comments and or complaints when reading articles are about what I read first. I honestly do not care what side of the aisle the writer, journalist, cable and or mainstream view given to us by them is even though I am a democrat; I call them as i see them and when one side decides to push the envelope too far for me i respond… ah the wonders and need to tweet, FB or blog …and your comments about liberals having all the cable, major newspapers, magazines and whatnot …i know you are joking right? if you listen folks like Murdoch give to both sides of the issue and when one side becomes more of a commodity and gets more airtime he feeds it…everyone knows that -right? Again, people like him do not care just like the NRA they support 58 democrats as well as a whole lot of Republicans. What i do object to are the lies coming from Fox News the race baiting this station engages in …even CNN has moved right and that rhetoric though has 1st amendment on its side is offensive. As a person of colour and as a mom hearing Glenn beck send subliminal nonsense out into the airwaves with actual people choosing wrong instead of right -and people get hurt or worse …that is my prob. My sense of democracy means total cooperation from both sides of an economic collapse yet RTP has decided oh we will take all the money you’re handing out but we will vote no or scale it down as well as throw our own constituents under the bus to regain power -that is not democracy.

Other News …

**Best milk? Chocolate

**Sharron Angle makes some really ugly racist things to Hispanic High School Students

**Washington State- Election 2010 midterm information,tune in 10/19/2010  KING5 7pm

**President Obama will appear on Mythbusters to help kids excited about science

**Celine Dion hospitalized -baby is due next month

**Msnbc claims only 1/2 of the people who voted in 2008 election will be voting in the mid-terms

**Speaker Pelosi announces that the $250 bonus Soc.Sec checks will be voted on after Nov.2nd elections

**Chest pressures first then give breaths

**NOW backs jerry brown

**Federal tax credit ends 12/31

**11thousand cribs,made in China and sold at JCPenny 2003-2007 hardware problems

**did you know that Olympic College decided to ban the 1st Amendment



CSPAN …

Steven Rattner, Author 'Overhaul' Steven Rattner, Author ‘Overhaul’
Today
Pres. Obama & First Lady Michelle Obama at Ohio State Univ. Political Rally Pres. Obama & First Lady Michelle Obama at Ohio State Univ. Political Rally
Sunday
Texas Book Festival 2010 Texas Book Festival 2010
Saturday
Weekly Addresses Weekly Addresses
Saturday