Tag Archives: house

There Are Still Politicians Who Think You Can’t Get Pregnant From Rape

by DebbraTiemann Posted on February 29, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

During a hearing by the Idaho House of Representatives on a bill that would require women seeking abortions to undergo an ultrasound and listen to a fetal heart monitor, Angela Dwyer, an employee at a crisis pregnancy center who testified in support of the bill, explained that in her experience, she had seen two rape victims choose not to abort—one kept the baby and the other chose adoption. The proposed legislation does not make an exception for victims of incest or rape.

Rep. Pete Nielsen responded, “Now, I’m of the understanding that in many cases of rape it does not involve any pregnancy because of the trauma of the incident.” He then added, “That may be true with incest a little bit.”

According to the Spokesman-Review, Nielsen stood by his remarks after the hearing. He said pregnancy “doesn’t happen as often as it does with consensual sex, because of the trauma involved.” According to Scientific American, women get pregnant from rape as frequently as they get pregnant from consensual sex.

When pressed on the matter by a reporter who asked him how he knew this, Nielsen replied, “That’s information that I’ve had through the years. Whether it’s totally accurate or not, I don’t know…I’ve read a lot of information…Being the father of two girls, I’ve explored this a lot.”

Nielson’s comments echoed those of former Missouri Rep. Todd Akin, who once memorably said on a television interview, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down.” Akin lost his Senate bid shortly thereafter in 2012 to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.).

Read this article – 

There Are Still Politicians Who Think You Can’t Get Pregnant From Rape

Posted in Anchor, FF, Gandhi, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on There Are Still Politicians Who Think You Can’t Get Pregnant From Rape

Low-Wage Workers Are Protesting Outside Tonight’s GOP Debate

by BeatrizDoughart Posted on February 25, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Texas isn’t known as labor-friendly territory—but that isn’t putting off Fight for $15 organizers. Building on a series of rallies across the country, a group of fast-food, home care, and other low-wage workers affiliated with the movement plan to protest outside the Republican presidential debate in Houston tonight. They are calling for $15 per hour in pay and the right to unionize.

In a race that has been inflamed by Donald Trump’s xenophobic rhetoric, some of the workers—many of them immigrants—will also call for immigration reform, the group said in a press release. The Fight for $15 has organized a string of protests around this year’s election events, including demonstrations outside debates in South Carolina and Wisconsin earlier this month. The group, which is backed by the Service Employees International Union, has gradually gained a national profile since staging its first strikes on New York fast-food chains in November 2012.

None of the Republican presidential candidates support raising the federal minimum wage. Both Democratic candidates do, though to varying degrees: Bernie Sanders has pushed for a $15 federal minimum wage, while Hillary Clinton has backed a more modest hike from the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 to $12 per hour.

Regardless of who makes it to the Oval Office, the Fight for $15 movement has helped to propel wage hikes across the country on the state and local level. Cities such as New York and San Francisco have pledged to phase in $15 minimum wages over the next few years, and states are also beginning to take action. The Oregon House just last week passed a bill to raise its minimum wage, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is traveling his state in an effort to build support for a statewide $15 minimum.

“Forty-eight percent of workers in Texas, or some 5.4 million, are paid less than $15/hour—the second highest number in the nation—making the need to raise pay a major issue in the run-up to the primary,” Fight for $15 organizers said in their press release.

Excerpt from – 

Low-Wage Workers Are Protesting Outside Tonight’s GOP Debate

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Low-Wage Workers Are Protesting Outside Tonight’s GOP Debate

Republicans want to open up millions of acres of public lands to logging and mining

by AustinToRot405 Posted on February 25, 2016

Republicans want to open up millions of acres of public lands to logging and mining

By on 25 Feb 2016commentsShare

Federal lands management has been in the news ever since a group of outlaws decided to occupy a wildlife refuge in Oregon weeks ago. Well, even though the armed standoff came to a (relatively) peaceful end earlier this month and the militiamen and women have take their rightful place in federal custody, Republicans in Congress taken up their cause.

Two bills proposed Thursday by House Committee on Natural Resources Republicans Don Young of Alaska and Raúl Labrador of Idaho would allow state governors to lease millions of acres of national forests for logging. Labrador’s bill would also let industry bypass federal restrictions that protect air, water, and endangered species.

You’d think the Committee on Natural Resources would be in favor of saving those natural resources, but no.

“The natural resources committee is pretty radicalized at this point,” Bobby McEnaney, senior lands analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told The Guardian. “The fact that they would react to what’s happened in Oregon to advance an agenda to take land from the federal government is seriously tone deaf. Most of this committee didn’t condemn the actions at Malheur, so this is not completely unexpected. The agenda here is being driven by oil, gas and timber industries. The Republicans are interested in a deregulation race to zero.”

There is, however, one Republican who is actually to the left of the establishment on public lands: Donald Trump.

Now, before you reconsider your vote, Trump isn’t some kind of closet environmentalist — the man is a climate-change denier after all. But Trump does seem to have a soft spot in his cold, dark heart for America’s public lands. Why? Because they’re great. “We have to be great stewards of this land,” Trump said at the Las Vegas Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade Show in January. “This is magnificent land. And we have to be great stewards of this land.”

Lord, help us: We actually agree with Donald Trump.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Source article – 

Republicans want to open up millions of acres of public lands to logging and mining

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans want to open up millions of acres of public lands to logging and mining

9 Ways You Can Get Cheap Organic Food

by RosalinaWard49 Posted on February 24, 2016

Organic foods have been shown to have higher nutrient contents and significantly lower amounts of toxic pesticide residues than foods grown using non-organic methods. Unfortunately, fresh and prepared organic foods are often sold at a higher price than their mainstream counterparts.

You dont have to pay a premium to buy organic food. Many options exist to keep healthy, organic food affordable.

1. Plan ahead

This may be tough for some of us, but planning your meals ahead of time can be a big money-saver. When you have a clear shopping list, youll be less likely to impulse buy expensive items you dont need.

Try writing down a list of what meals youll be preparing for the upcoming week. It doesnt have to be perfect, as long as you have an idea of the main ingredients youll need on hand. You can also try to make extra portions and freeze them for later.

This will help to make sure you use all the food you buy. If you buy food you dont have a plan for, its easier to let it sit unused and expire or go to waste.

2. Buy seasonal produce

The best place to find seasonal produce is at your local farmers markets. They typically bring freshly harvested produce, which will be at its nutritional peak. You can often buy in larger amounts for a reduced price. There may also be end of the day clearance sales of remaining products the farmers simply dont want to take home.

Grocery stores can also bring in seasonal, local produce. Sometimes these are available at reduced, bulk prices as well.

Another great option for finding seasonal organic produce is you-pick farms. Depending on where you live, you may be able to pick your own organic vegetables, fruit and berries. You-picks tend to have much lower prices per pound than in-store produce.

3. Find bulk foods where possible

Many communities have stores that specialize in bulk foods. Larger grocery stores also often have bulk foods sections that include organic items.

You can typically find lots of organic staples in bulk at good prices, such as beans, grains, dried fruit, nuts and seeds. If you can buy larger amounts at one time, the cost is usually lower.

Keeping your kitchen well-stocked with foods you use on a regular basis will help make meal preparation easier. You also wont need to buy last-minute items in small amounts, which are more expensive.

4. Look for no-name, in-store organic products

Many grocery stores will have their own lines of organic products. This can include prepared foods, such as condiments, canned foods or juices. Some stores even offer their own brand of organic produce.

These products are often priced very competitively compared to organic name-brands.

5. Make use of technology

We have a lot of different modern options to help out with saving money on food costs.

Websites like Living Rich With Coupons, My Grocery Deals and My Simon can automatically compare prices of foods available in regular and online stores.

Coupons are another good way to keep food costs down. You can use flyers from junk mail sent to your house or there are various websites where you can print coupons online, such as Living Rich With Coupons or Coupons.com.

Another way to save is by signing up for rewards and point programs some stores offer. These typically give you points every time you buy something in the store, which can be collected and used to buy more products later.

6. Broaden your definition of organic

Some farmers are committed to organic growing principles, but are not certified due to various reasons. The official organic certification process can be expensive and time-consuming. There is also the criticism that organically certified farms may still cheat and the regulations are not strict enough.

Getting to know your local farmers is a great way to find out more about their growing practices. Those who grow organically, but are not certified, will often be happy to tell you about their own processes for keeping their crops healthy and controlling pests naturally.

Their prices will also potentially be less than those who are officially certified organic.

7. Join a CSA near you

CSA stands for community supported agriculture. With these programs, you often pay a farmer a yearly or monthly fee and receive a box of produce every week or two for the entire growing season. Some CSAs will also operate year round, providing vegetables stored through the winter.

Some CSAs are certified organic, although smaller operations may simply follow organic practices and be uncertified. Ask your local CSA to find out more about them.

8. Grow your own

If you have an interest in gardening, growing your own produce is likely the cheapest option for eating organic. You also know exactly what products, such as compost, were used to grow your crop.

Seeds are fairly cheap, and many organic seed varieties are available. Most seed packages contain enough seed to last for a few years of crops.

Even if you dont have property of your own, find out if there is a community garden where you could rent a plot. Or check if there are any volunteering opportunities locally where you can share a portion of the harvest.

Exchanging crops with friends can be an efficient way to grow more varieties of food. For instance, you could commit to growing enough lettuce and potatoes to share with a few friends, and they would each grow other types of veggies that would also be shared.

9. Preserve your own produce

Canning, freezing and dehydrating are all excellent and affordable ways to preserve fresh organic foods. This allows you to buy in larger quantities at lower prices and create nutritious, convenient supplies you can use all year.

Canning supplies can be easily found secondhand, and canning jars can be consistently re-used. The only expense for freezing is buying freezer bags. A dehydrator can also be found secondhand or if you get a new one, it will be a one-time investment.

Hosting preserving parties can be a fun way to share a harvest with your friends and family. You can also get together and buy bulk quantities of produce together to lower everyones costs.

Related
6 Hearty Vegan Chili Recipes For Any Season
15 Reasons to Eat Organic Food
Top 10 Eco-Friendly Reasons to Buy Organic Meat & Diary

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Source:

9 Ways You Can Get Cheap Organic Food

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Prepara, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 9 Ways You Can Get Cheap Organic Food

Clinton Derangement Syndrome Is Alive and Well

by BrandieRitz Posted on February 24, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Memories:

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that top aides to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton should be questioned under oath about her use of a private email server as secretary of state, raising new political and legal complications for Clinton as she tries to maintain momentum for her campaign.

….The judge said that months of piecemeal revelations to date about Clinton and the State Department’s handling of the email controversy created “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion’ ” that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined. “There has been a constant drip, drip, drip of declarations. When does it stop?” said Sullivan, a 1994 Bill Clinton appointee who has overseen several politically sensitive FOIA cases. “This case is about the public’s right to know,” he said.

This is all courtesy of Judicial Watch, the Scaife-funded outfit that brought us so much endless Clinton paranoia in the 90s. To this day, most people—including an awful lot of reporters who ought to know better—still don’t realize just how deliberate and manufactured the effort to destroy Bill Clinton was back then. Despite thousands of hours and millions of dollars of investigation, virtually none of the “scandals” turned out to be real. They were just an extended effort to throw mud at the wall and see if something stuck. Ironically, the only one that did stick had nothing to do with any of the mud. It was just an old-fashioned sex scandal.

And now we’re back where we started. Hillary obviously blew it when she set up her own email server, but once again, thousands of hours of investigation have turned up nothing. It was dumb, but there’s no scandal, no national security threat, and no cabal of silence. Hillary Clinton has been required to make her entire email record public, something that’s never happened before to a secretary of state, and still there’s nothing. She’s undergone hours of House questioning, and still nothing. But the mud keeps coming. Maybe Huma Abedin will finally provide the smoking gun! Maybe if we demand to see her personal emails! Maybe if we recover bits and pieces from the server! There just has to be something there.

There isn’t. Hillary didn’t order the assassination of Vince Foster and she didn’t set up a personal email account so she could conceal her orders to stand down the rescue effort in Benghazi. But thanks to the obsessive Clinton hatred of Judicial Watch and the assistance of credulous judges like Emmet Sullivan, the “drip drip drip” will keep on coming. We never learn.

Continued here:  

Clinton Derangement Syndrome Is Alive and Well

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Clinton Derangement Syndrome Is Alive and Well

The Clinton-Sanders Ad War Shows How Black Lives Matter Reshaped the Race

by SamualGrimstone Posted on February 23, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign, competing for African American voters in South Carolina, released a new radio ad featuring film director and actor Spike Lee enthusiastically talking up the record of “my brother Bernie Sanders” in fighting racism.

“When Bernie gets in the White House, he will do the right thing!” Lee says in the spot, a nod to the movie that made him famous. “How can we be sure?” he continues. “Bernie was at the March on Washington with Dr. King. He was arrested in Chicago for protesting segregation in public schools. He fought for wealth and education and inequality throughout his whole career. No flipping, no flopping. Enough talk. Time for action.”

The high-energy Spike Lee ad is one of many in the ongoing ad war between Sanders and front-runner Hillary Clinton. Last week, Republican candidates blanketed the Palmetto State with ads that amounted to a million-dollar circular firing squad. The ad blitzes from Sanders and Clinton—primarily targeting hip-hop, gospel, and R&B radio stations—zero in on serious topics: police violence, mass incarceration, and inequality.

The ads in South Carolina, where more than half the Democratic electorate is black, were always going to be a little different than the ads in uber-white New Hampshire. But listen to an hour or two of drive-time radio, and it becomes clear how different the battle lines in South Carolina are from those in the three states that voted before it—and how the work of civil rights activists over the last few years has changed the dynamics of the 2016 race.

“I was one of the leaders in the House to take charge and say the Confederate flag has to come down now,” says Rep. Justin Bamberg, an African American Democrat in a Sanders ad, explaining why he switched from Clinton to the Vermont senator. “He has stood for civil rights his entire life. He marched on Washington with Dr. Martin Luther King. Bernie Sanders will be the advocate to address the problems in the criminal justice system.”

Another Sanders spot features four African American activists from South Carolina, of varying ages, outlining why they back the self-described democratic socialist. “Bernie Sanders realizes that mass incarceration, especially among young people, is a rising epidemic,” says Hamilton Grant. Gloria Bomell Tinubu remarks, “We know that prison is big business; it’s been privatized. And Bryanta-Booker Maxwell says of Sanders, “He is the best champion for criminal justice reform.”

In another radio ad, Sanders, touting his plan to fight “institutional racism,” makes a direct pitch for himself: “Millions of lives are being wrecked, families are being torn apart, we’re spending huge sums of taxpayer money locking people up. It makes a lot more sense for us to be investing in education, in jobs, rather than jails and incarceration.”

Pro-Clinton ads hit similar points, but with three big additions: Obama, Obama, Obama. That is, as these ads depict Clinton as a pursuer of justice and equality, they hammer home her connection to the president.

“We all worked hard to elect President Barack Obama eight years ago,” a woman narrator says at the beginning of a heavily played ad aired by Priorities USA, a Clinton-backing super-PAC. “Republicans have tried to tear him down every step of the way. We can’t let them hold us back. We need a president who will build on all that President Obama has done. President Obama trusted Hillary Clinton to be America’s secretary of state.” And the ad turns toward racism at its end: “She’ll fight to remove the stains of unfairness and prejudice from our criminal justice system, so that justice is just.”

Another spot from the super-PAC cites Clinton’s “bold” plan to curb police brutality. And in an ad paid for directly by the Clinton campaign, former Attorney General Eric Holder, emphasizing his and Clinton’s ties to Obama, hails her efforts to protect civil rights and voting rights and her support for tougher gun laws and police accountability:

The most direct reference to the Black Lives Matter movement comes in an ad in which Clinton herself says, “African Americans are more likely to be arrested by police and sentenced to longer prison terms for doing the same thing that whites do. Too many encounters with law enforcement end tragically for African Americans.” A narrator cites a young Hillary’s work “standing up for African American teenagers locked up with adults in South Carolina jails.” Then Clinton adds, “We have to face up to the hard truth of injustice and systemic racism.”

Perhaps the most surprising thing about Sanders and Clinton’s fight for the airwaves is this: For all their heated exchanges on the debate stage, not a single spot goes negative.

See the original article here:

The Clinton-Sanders Ad War Shows How Black Lives Matter Reshaped the Race

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Clinton-Sanders Ad War Shows How Black Lives Matter Reshaped the Race

Hillary Clinton Needs to Explain Why Young Voters Don’t Need a Rebel

by AnnelieHollande Posted on February 20, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Over at the LA Times, Cathleen Decker says that timing is a big deal in politics, and Hillary Clinton’s timing is rotten:

She’s running a campaign for president on the argument that she is the most carefully prepared, judiciously educated candidate for the White House — at a time when many voters want to cast their lot with newcomers.

….Clinton heard it Thursday night, most painfully from one of her supporters….“We need a rebel,” a college student and supporter told the candidate, in explaining Clinton’s persistent problems with young voters. “My generation is a little wary of placing another politician in the White House. With your tenure in politics, how are you going to deserve our vote?”

If you are Hillary Clinton, how do you answer that?

I’m generally pretty skeptical of amateur speechwriting, which too often simply assumes that what a politician should really say is whatever the amateur speechwriter happens to believe. Maybe I’m about to do that too. But here’s roughly what I think she should say:

A rebel? No, that’s not what we need. What we need is a revolution.

But how do we get that? FDR got one. But he was no rebel: he was a rich patrician from the Hudson Valley. LBJ got a revolution, and he was no rebel either. He was a mainstream Democrat from Texas who loved to wheel and deal. Barack Obama got a mini-revolution, and do you think he’s a rebel? He’s not. He’s a pragmatic, evidence-driven, modern progressive.

So where did these revolutions come from? Listen to a few numbers. When FDR was elected in 1932, he got a Congress to die for: 60 Democratic senators who could power through almost any filibuster and a 71 percent majority in the House. In 1964 LBJ got 68 senators and 68 percent of the House. In 2008, Obama got 60 senators and 59 percent of the House.

What does that mean for young voters—or anyone else who wants to shake up the political establishment? It means we need a 50-state strategy—along with 50 states of grindingly hard work from the bottom up—to elect big Democratic majorities to Congress. And to go with that, we need a president who’s not only obsessive about pitching in to this tough slog from the top down, but knows how to work with Congress—including the few Republicans we’ll probably still need—to get things done.

That’s not Bernie. God love him, but he just isn’t much interested in getting more Democrats in Congress. Last quarter I raised $18 million to help Democrats get elected this cycle. Bernie raised nothing. Bernie has no real interest in a 50-state strategy. I do. Over a 25-year career in Congress, Bernie has accomplished virtually nothing—because he’s always been more interested in playing the gadfly than in building majorities for change.

If you want a revolution, don’t fall in love with someone who talks big. Fall in love with someone who cares about the same things you do and knows how to get them done. And help us get a Democratic Congress. It’s not sexy, but that’s where revolutions are born.

None of this is new ground for Hillary. She’s been calling herself a “progressive who likes to get things done” for a long time. She just needs a convincing elevator speech that really contrasts her favorably with Bernie on this score. Maybe not my little invention, but something along these lines.

View the original here:  

Hillary Clinton Needs to Explain Why Young Voters Don’t Need a Rebel

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Needs to Explain Why Young Voters Don’t Need a Rebel

Woodward and Bernstein Can’t Stop Comparing Hillary Clinton to Richard Nixon

by AlvaGraham7 Posted on February 15, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Earlier this month, Carl Bernstein—half of the reporting duo that helped expose the Watergate scandal in 1972—went on CNN to volunteer an observation about Hillary Clinton’s failure to release the transcripts of her paid speaking gigs at Wall Street firms. “Now, you’ve got a situation with these transcripts,” he said, “a little like Richard Nixon and his tapes that he stonewalled and wouldn’t release.”

“Whoa, whoa,” interrupted CNN anchor Poppy Harlow. “I mean, your investigation brought down a presidency. You know scandal.”

Continue Reading »

Link:

Woodward and Bernstein Can’t Stop Comparing Hillary Clinton to Richard Nixon

Posted in Anchor, Casio, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Woodward and Bernstein Can’t Stop Comparing Hillary Clinton to Richard Nixon

Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.

by BrendanMauger Posted on February 13, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The presidential debates have been widely criticized for so far all but ignoring global warming. But Saturday’s Republican debate has the potential to be even more problematic. That’s because one of the moderators is an outspoken climate change skeptic.

In addition to Face the Nation host John Dickerson and White House correspondent Major Garrett, tonight’s CBS debate will feature questions from Kimberley Strassel, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

While not an obsession of Strassel’s, she’s long expressed doubts: in 2007, Strassel said on CNBC that “there isn’t a consensus yet that climate change is actually caused by man or necessarily will be a huge problem,” before adding “it’s real cold out there today.” (It was January.)

In 2009, she deployed scare quotes to claim that a set of leaked emails between climatologists had “blown the lid off the ‘science’ of manmade global warming.”

More recently, Strassel appeared on Fox in 2014 to explain that global warming “became climate change when you couldn’t prove that there was much global warming anymore, you know, as the temperature didn’t change,” going on to suggest that there was something nefarious about the shift to the widely preferred phrase: “we had to have this catch all term…that meant that any change in the weather somehow supported the theory.”

Those statements align pretty closely with the varying degrees of climate change denial espoused by the remaining Republican candidates. It’s not hard to imagine that a debate showcasing the views of Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Strassel could leave viewers extremely misinformed about climate science.

I’ve asked to Strassel to elaborate on her views and have asked her, Dickerson, and CBS how they plan to handle the issue. They haven’t responded.

Still, if the moderators decide to ask the candidates some scientifically accurate questions about global warming, we’ve compiled a pretty good list for them to pick from. My colleague Tim McDonnell asked a bunch of the nation’s leading climate scientists and environmental activists what they’d ask. Read their suggestions here.

Read this article:  

Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oh Great. A Climate Change Skeptic Is Moderating Tonight’s GOP Debate.

Democratic Congressman: "Free Puerto Rico"

by MiguelLeddy Posted on February 11, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On the House floor Thursday, Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) called on the US Congress to “free Puerto Rico so she can solve the problem of her crushing debt without being handcuffed by Congress, its distant and inattentive colonial master.” The speech came as Congress continues to debate what should be done to assist Puerto Rico in coping with its debt crisis.

Gutiérrez, who is of Puerto Rican descent, said that Congress has offered “very little” tangible help for the island as it grapples with its crushing $72 billion debt. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) said in December that Congress would propose a debt relief package by the end of March. Previous legislative proposals have stalled out, whether offered by Democrats, Republicans, or Pedro Pierluisi, the island’s non-voting representative to congress.

The island’s government and public institutions owe money on more than a dozen separate loans involving a number of different lenders, all with competing interests. Since Puerto Rico’s cities and public institutions cannot seek bankruptcy protection in the same way as their counterparts on the mainland, debt restructuring has to be handled by each individual creditor separately, which has made the process slow and unwieldy.

The Obama administration and Congressional Democrats support the idea of amending US law to let Puerto Rico seek bankruptcy protection, but Congressional Republicans have been resistant, arguing that the island’s government must get its financial affairs in order—and honor its debts—before congressional action should be taken. Republican proposals have included the idea of an independent financial oversight board, an idea Gutiérrez blasted on Thursday.

“And now, what is the solution that everyone in Washington is lining up behind? A federal control board,” he said. “Imagine that. An island that cannot determine its own destiny, that has to play an economic game with a stacked deck and all the rules rigged against them, what is the solution in Washington? Take away what little autonomy they have left and add a new layer of Washington control over the colony.”

Continue reading here:  

Democratic Congressman: "Free Puerto Rico"

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Democratic Congressman: "Free Puerto Rico"