Tag Archives: mojo

Ted Cruz’s New Anti-Choice Group Is Headed by a Guy Who Thinks Abortion Caused the Drought

by MelindaWest07 Posted on January 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 campaign stop in Des Moines, Iowa, on Wednesday, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said he’s created an anti-abortion group that will “champion every child, born and unborn.” The Pro-Lifers for Cruz coalition already has more than 17,000 members, according to a press release, and will be chaired by Tony Perkins, the anti-LGBT president of the Family Research Council who recently said same-sex marriage is responsible for “havoc in our homes and blood in our streets.” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has also created a committee, but Cruz has cornered some of the more extreme members of the anti-abortion movement.

Also heading up the coalition are 11 anti-abortion co-chairs “representing virtually every perspective on the pro-life spectrum.” One of those perspectives is that of Troy Newman, the president of Operation Rescue and a board member of the Center for Medical Progress, the group behind the debunked Planned Parenthood videos, whose founder David Daleiden was recently indicted for alleged crimes in connection to the videos. In his announcement on Wednesday, Cruz called Newman’s group “one of the leading pro-life Christian activist organizations in the nation.”

Newman has been involved in anti-abortion organizing for decades, and in 1999 he became the president of Operation Rescue, a group with a long history devoted to shuttering abortion clinics. In 2000 he published the book Their Blood Cries Out, in which he calls abortion doctors “blood-guilty.” In a passage of the book, which is now out of print, Newman wrote that “the United States government has abrogated its responsibility to properly deal with the blood-guilty. This responsibility rightly involves executing convicted murderers, including abortionists, for their crimes in order to expunge bloodguilt sic from the land and people.”

In 2002, Newman moved Operation Rescue headquarters from Southern California to Wichita, Kansas, the home of Dr. George Tiller, one of the only later-term abortion providers in the country at the time. Tiller was shot to death while volunteering as an usher for his church. Scott Roeder, 51, who participated in Operation Rescue events and protests in Wichita, was eventually sentenced to 50 years in prison for the murder. Newman immediately distanced himself from Roeder following Tiller’s death. Operation Rescue’s senior vice president is Cheryl Sullenger, who in the late 1980s served two years in federal prison for conspiring to bomb an abortion clinic.

A year after moving to Wichita, Newman commented on the state execution of Paul Hill, a man convicted of murdering a Florida-based abortion provider and his volunteer escort. In a joint press release, Newman’s Operation Rescue and another pro-life organization wrote that Hill’s execution was unjust because “there are many examples where taking the life in defense of innocent human beings is legally justified and permissible under the law…Execution under these circumstances is nothing less than murder of a political prisoner.”

Last October, Newman, who had been scheduled to speak at an anti-abortion event, was deported from Australia because government officials thought he would be “a threat to good order” and that his views on abortion could compromise the safety and well-being of women seeking abortions. Newman has recently claimed that the ongoing drought in California is caused by abortion: “Is it no wonder that California is experiencing the worst drought in history when it is the largest child-killer in all of the United States?”

Ken Cuccinelli, the former state senator and attorney general of Virginia who has said he opposes abortion even when the pregnancy is a health risk to the woman, is another co-chair of the committee. So is Gianna Jessen, who calls herself an “abortion survivor” because she was born after her mother failed an attempted saline abortion. A disability activist, she testified against Planned Parenthood during the House’s investigation last year.

“I always say that men are born to defend women and children, not sit idly by, or be passive when they are being harmed,” Jessen is quoted as saying on Cruz’s website. “Senator Cruz has been absolutely courageous in his defense of the unborn, and willing to stand alone.”

This article has been revised.

View original post here – 

Ted Cruz’s New Anti-Choice Group Is Headed by a Guy Who Thinks Abortion Caused the Drought

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ted Cruz’s New Anti-Choice Group Is Headed by a Guy Who Thinks Abortion Caused the Drought

Texas Probe of Planned Parenthood Indicts Anti-Abortion Videographers Instead

by BradlyHerman Posted on January 25, 2016

Mother Jones

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

The Harris County, Texas, grand jury tasked with investigating Planned Parenthood announced today that it has cleared the women’s health provider of breaking the law. Instead, the grand jury has indicted David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress. Last summer, their group released a series of secretly recorded and deceptively edited videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials discussing the sale of fetal tissue—which would be illegal. Houston Public Media reports on today’s grand jury indictment:

David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt have been indicted for Tampering with a Governmental Record, which is a felony. Daleidan was also indicted for Prohibition of the Purchase and Sale of Human Organs, meaning he illegally offered to purchase human organs in the video recording. A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Following the release of the CMP’s videos, six states tried to defund Planned Parenthood, 11 states have investigated the women’s health provider (none found evidence of fetal tissue sales), and three congressional committees launched their own inquiries.â&#128;&#139;

The grand jury’s review was extensive and lasted more than two months, noted Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson in a press release. “We were called upon to investigate allegations of criminal conduct by Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast,” Anderson said in the statement. “As I stated at the outset of this investigation, we must go where the evidence leads us. All the evidence uncovered in the course of this investigation was presented to the grand jury. I respect their decision on this difficult case.”

Earlier this month, Planned Parenthood filed a federal lawsuit against Daleiden and other activists that worked with the CMP. The lawsuit accuses the CMP of racketeering, illegally creating and using fake identification, and illegally recording Planned Parenthood staff.

“These anti-abortion extremists spent three years creating a fake company, creating fake identities, lying, and breaking the law,” said Eric Ferrero, vice president of communications for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, in an emailed statement. “When they couldn’t find any improper or illegal activity, they made it up.”

This is a breaking story. We are updating this post as the story develops.

Visit source:  

Texas Probe of Planned Parenthood Indicts Anti-Abortion Videographers Instead

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Texas Probe of Planned Parenthood Indicts Anti-Abortion Videographers Instead

The Supreme Court Just Rejected the Country’s Most Extreme Abortion Ban

by LoisCropper Posted on January 25, 2016

Mother Jones

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

On Monday, the US Supreme Court permanently laid to rest North Dakota’s controversial “fetal heartbeat” law that would have banned abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.

The law, approved by North Dakota’s state Legislature in 2013, was widely cited as the strictest abortion ban in the country because it would have effectively outlawed abortion after the first detection of a fetal heartbeat, which often occurs at six weeks, before many women even know they are pregnant. Six-week bans are so extreme that in many conservative states, which have passed large numbers of abortion restrictions, they have failed to gain traction.

In 2013, after the measure was passed, North Dakota’s sole abortion clinic, the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo, sued the state, and a judge blocked the law just a month before it was set to take effect that summer. After a series of appeals, a federal judge again ruled the law unconstitutional in July. Once more the state appealed the ruling and it went to the Supreme Court. But the court on Monday refused to review the lower court’s ruling, effectively overturning the ban.

Arkansas is the only other state that has banned abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat. That ban, which outlawed abortion after 12 weeks, was also struck down in court last year. The Supreme Court last week decided not to hear the state’s appeal.

Abortion rights advocates are now turning their attention back to the Texas case headed to the Supreme Court this spring. “This utterly cruel and unconstitutional ban would have made North Dakota the first state since Roe v. Wade to effectively ban abortion—with countless women left to pay the price,” said Nancy Northup, whose group the Center for Reproductive Rights is behind both the North Dakota and Texas cases. “We continue to look to the nation’s highest court to protect the rights, health, and dignity of millions of women and now strike down Texas’ clinic shutdown law.”

Oral arguments for the Texas case are scheduled to take place on March 2.

More: 

The Supreme Court Just Rejected the Country’s Most Extreme Abortion Ban

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Just Rejected the Country’s Most Extreme Abortion Ban

The Supreme Court Did Something Great for 1,000 Kids Who Were Sentenced to Life in Prison

by ElouiseAuger9 Posted on January 25, 2016

Mother Jones

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

Juvenile offenders serving a mandatory sentence of life without parole may have a shot at release, following a Supreme Court ruling made on Monday. The case, Montgomery v. Alabama, is the fourth in a string of Supreme Court decisions since 2005 that reduce the harshest penalties imposed on kids, including a 2012 ruling that mandatory juvenile life without parole sentences violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment.”

The decision will affect at least 1,000 people across the country, according to data collected by the Phillips Black Project. This group of inmates disproportionately includes black and Hispanic offenders who committed their crimes as teens.

That includes Taurus Buchanan, a ninth grader who was locked up for life automatically after he threw one punch, killing a younger boy in a neighborhood fight.

Montgomery v. Alabama expands the impact of a 2012 US Supreme Court ruling that banned mandatory life sentences for offenders who committed their crimes as minors. While some states allowed eligible offenders to apply for resentencing after the ruling, lower courts in other states held that the Supreme Court’s decision did not affect old cases. In Montgomery, the high court ruled that the 2012 decision was a “new substantive rule” that states were required to apply retroactively.

The petitioner, Henry Montgomery, was convicted of murder at age 17 after killing a deputy sheriff in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, in 1963. Montgomery was sentenced to death, but a Louisiana Supreme Court finding allowed him to be resentenced to life in prison without parole. In his opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote:

The sentence was automatic upon the jury’s verdict, so Montgomery had no opportunity to present mitigation evidence to justify a less severe sentence. That evidence might have included Montgomery’s young age at the time of the crime; expert testimony regarding his limited capacity for foresight, self-discipline, and judgment; and his potential for rehabilitation. Montgomery, now 69 years old, has spent almost his entire life in prison.

Prisoners will not be granted automatic release—some face the prospect of receiving another life sentence when their cases are reheard. However, the court indicates that states could comply with the decision by simply making juvenile lifers eligible for parole:

This would neither impose an onerous burden on the States nor disturb the finality of state convictions. And it would afford someone like Montgomery, who submits that he has evolved from a troubled, misguided youth to a model member of the prison community, the opportunity to demonstrate the truth of Miller’s central intuition—that children who commit even heinous crimes are capable of change.

This article:

The Supreme Court Did Something Great for 1,000 Kids Who Were Sentenced to Life in Prison

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Did Something Great for 1,000 Kids Who Were Sentenced to Life in Prison

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Just Duked it Out Over Health Care at the Democratic Debate

by KRGMurraydeomam Posted on January 18, 2016

Mother Jones

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

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders spent much of the last week battling over the Vermont senator’s proposal to create a nationwide single-payer health care system. In one of the most important exchanges of Sunday night’s debate, they finally hashed it out face to face.

Watch:

What neither of them would say outright—perhaps because it’s not an especially inspiring message for Democrats to hear—is that the question of how best to expand health care access is, at least for the time being, moot. Republicans have a huge majority in the House and will almost certainly continue to control the House in January 2017. But their argument exposed core differences between the two candidates on what the nation’s health care system should look like, and how it should be paid for. And it doesn’t look like a debate either candidate is about to abandon any time soon.

More:

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Just Duked it Out Over Health Care at the Democratic Debate

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Just Duked it Out Over Health Care at the Democratic Debate

NBC Should Ask Bernie and Hillary These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

by Gwenn Record Posted on January 18, 2016

Mother Jones

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

It’s the Sunday night of a three-day holiday weekend, which can only mean one thing: the three remaining Democratic presidential candidates are having a debate. With the Iowa caucuses less than a month away and Vermont senator Bernie Sanders leading in some early-state polls, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sanders have increasingly turned their fire on each other, fighting over past votes and current positions on universal health care and gun control. Why stop now? We at the Mother Jones‘ politics desk have put together a by-no-means-comprehensive list of questions we’d put to the candidates if we were on stage:

Bernie Sanders:

* In 2005 you voted to give immunity to gun makers from lawsuits. But the next day you voted against giving immunity to companies in the fast food industry, like McDonald’s. Why exempt guns but not Big Macs?

* Your home state of Vermont adopted a single-payer health care system in 2011. But last year the state scrapped the plan citing rising costs. Now you’re proposing single-payer for the nation. What went wrong in Vermont and how would you have fixed it?

* You’ve promised to reduce America’s prison population by more than 500,000 people by the end of your first term. But more than 90 percent of America’s 2.2 million inmates are in state and local facilities. What can a president do about them?

* You’ve said that the United States should take a backseat in the battle against ISIS, and instead leave the fighting to a coalition of Muslim nations including Iran and Saudi Arabia. In light of the most recent dust-up between the two countries and their deep political and religious differences, how will you get two nations that hate each other to take up arms together?

* Even with a Democratic super-majority in the Senate, President Obama struggled to deliver incremental change in Washington, ultimately accepting stripped-down versions of the Affordable Care Act and the Stimulus. How do you expect to push through an even more ambitious health-care proposal in a Republican-controlled Congress still trying to repeal Obamacare?

Hillary Clinton:

* A supporter of yours, Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, reportedly worked to suppress a video of the killing of Laquan McDonald by Chicago police until after his re-election, and even used public funds to pay the victim’s family to keep quiet. Sen. Sanders has said that “any elected official with knowledge that the tape was being suppressed or improperly withheld should resign.” Should Mayor Emanuel resign?

* In October you said the Australian model of compulsory gun buy-backs “is worth looking at.” Have you looked at it? And would you entertain the idea of a compulsory gun re-purchase in the United States?

* Colorado residents will vote next fall on a ballot initiative on whether or not to institute a single-payer health care system. If you lived in Colorado, would you vote to approve that measure?

* You’ve pledged to not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year, and criticized your opponents for proposing to raise taxes on people you’ve termed middle class. What is your actual definition of middle class? Why include a household making $150,000—the top 10 percent for annual income—in the middle class?

* In 2005, you went to war against violence in video games, introducing legislation to restrict sales of games. You said: “We need to treat violent video games the way we treat tobacco, alcohol, and pornography.” Do you still hold that view?

* David Brock, the head of a super-PAC that’s supporting your candidacy, made news yesterday for a report suggesting he’d demand Bernie Sanders release his medical records. Brock’s group, Correct the Record, has said it is coordinating with the campaign thanks to a special exemption in federal election law. Why is a candidate who has pledged to repeal Citizens United using a legal loophole to openly coordinate with a super-PAC?

All candidates:

* The Atlantic‘s Ta-Nehisi Coates argued in 2014 that African-Americans deprived of wealth through decades of federal housing discrimination should be able to apply for reparations from the government—similar to the program offered to Japanese-Americans who lost their homes and businesses during internment. Would you consider such a program if elected? And if not, what will you do to alleviate the lingering damages caused by formal government discrimination in the housing market?

* A recent poll found that 52 percent of Americans believe genetically-modified food to be “unsafe.” Are they right?

* The Obama administration is currently reviewing a proposed rule to expand overtime to most workers who earn less than $50,000 a year. Is that number too high, or too low?

* Over the last half decade pro-life groups have fundamentally re-written abortion laws at the state level, resulting in shuttered women’s health clinics and forcing women to crisscross state lines to get an abortion. Aside from appointing more pro-choice Supreme Court judges, what can a president do to reverse these setbacks at the state level and insure the right to an abortion established by Roe?

* Two years ago, Harry Reid and Senate Democrats used the so-called “nuclear option” to remove the filibuster for judicial nominees. Should the filibuster still exist for legislation and Supreme Court nominees, or should it be wiped out entirely?

See original:

NBC Should Ask Bernie and Hillary These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on NBC Should Ask Bernie and Hillary These Questions at Tonight’s Debate

Chris Christie Flubbed Something Really Basic About American History

by KinaEnd2283 Posted on January 15, 2016

Mother Jones

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

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie made a bold pronouncement at Thursday’s Republican debate: the founders considered the right to bear arms to be one of the most important constitutional amendments—that’s why it was the second one on the list. “I don’t think the Founders put the second amendment as number two by accident,” he said, adding, “I think they made the Second Amendment the Second Amendment because they thought it was just that important.”

But that doesn’t make a lot of sense—the Third Amendment (which prevents citizens from quartering soldiers against their will) is not more important than the Fourth Amendment (which prohibits unwarranted search and seizure), simply because it has a lower number. Nor would you be able to find many conservatives who believe the Tenth Amendment, which delegates rights to the states, is somehow the least important of the bunch.

The other problem with this line of thinking is that the Second Amendment as we know it wasn’t really the second amendment to be written—it was the fourth. James Madison proposed 12 amendments to the Constitution, but the first two were not ratified by enough states. The original First Amendment concerned the size of congressional districts—not quite as big of a deal in the grand scheme of things as, say, the original Third Amendment (which would become freedom of expression). The original Second Amendment would have prohibited Congress from raising its own pay (it was eventually ratified as the 27th.)

This is all a bit confusing but you have to bear in mind the Founding Fathers were drunk most of the time.

Visit site – 

Chris Christie Flubbed Something Really Basic About American History

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Chris Christie Flubbed Something Really Basic About American History

Chelsea Clinton Accuses Sanders of Trying to "Dismantle Obamacare"

by Aaleyah William Posted on January 12, 2016

Mother Jones

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

Chelsea Clinton hit the trail for the first time this election cycle on Tuesday to campaign for her mother, and she came out swinging.

In New Hampshire, the younger Clinton attacked Bernie Sanders’ Medicare-for-all, or single-payer, health care plan by wondering if it would in fact take away coverage from millions.

“Sen. Sanders wants to dismantle Obamacare, dismantle the CHIP program, dismantle Medicare, and dismantle private insurance,” she said, according to MSNBC. “I worry if we give Republicans Democratic permission to do that, we’ll go back to an era—before we had the Affordable Care Act—that would strip millions and millions and millions of people off their health insurance.”

Chelsea Clinton is technically right: Millions of Americans would lose their current health insurance plans, which would be replaced by enrollment in a coverage program available to all (except, perhaps, undocumented immigrants). But it’s unclear how a plan that would make almost everyone eligible for coverage would strip millions of health care coverage, which is what Clinton seemed to be saying. (The Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Sanders’ health care plan, which he outlined in legislation in 2013, would replace the current piecemeal approach to coverage through many different programs—private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP—with government-provided coverage for everyone. As with the Affordable Care Act’s health care exchanges, Sanders’ 2013 bill relies on states to develop single-payer plans. But as the Sanders campaign stresses, any state that refused to set up a singe-payer system would have the federal government step in and do it. So unlike with the current Medicaid expansion, states could not opt out of “Berniecare.”

“It is time for the United States to join the rest of the industrialized world and provide health care as a right to every man, woman, and child,” Sanders campaign spokeswoman Arianna Jones said in a statement responding to Chelsea Clinton’s attack. “A Medicare-for-all plan will save the average middle-class family $5,000 a year. Further, the Clinton campaign is wrong. Our plan will be implemented in every state in the union regardless of who is governor.”

Like her daughter, Hillary Clinton has taken to attacking Sanders over health care, despite having said in 2008 that Democrats shouldn’t criticize each other over universal health care. In Iowa on Monday, Clinton called Sanders’ plan a “risky deal.” Expect this issue to come up on Sunday, when Clinton and Sanders face off in the last debate before voting begins with the February 1 caucuses in Iowa.

Read this article:

Chelsea Clinton Accuses Sanders of Trying to "Dismantle Obamacare"

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Chelsea Clinton Accuses Sanders of Trying to "Dismantle Obamacare"

Hillary Clinton Will Never Let Bernie Sanders Live Down This Vote

by JohnnieVernon5 Posted on January 8, 2016

Mother Jones

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

Three weeks removed from the Iowa caucuses, with Bernie Sanders nipping at Hillary Clinton’s heels in the polls, the Clinton campaign is reminding Democrats of the Vermont senator’s most problematic vote in Congress.

In 2005, Sanders, then in the House of Representatives, voted for an NRA-backed bill to provide legal immunity to gun manufacturers if their guns were used to commit crimes. Then-Sens. Clinton and Barack Obama, by contrast, voted against the bill.

Over the last few months, as mass shootings from Charleston to Roseburg to San Bernardino have rocked the country, and under increasing criticism by Clinton, Sanders has tried to neutralize the gun issue and even walk back his support for that vote. On a Friday conference call, Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, told reporters, “I would say that there’s about zero daylight between the president and Sen. Bernie Sanders.”

So the Clinton campaign set up a conference call of its own.

“Democrats have a real choice, because standing up to the gun lobby is a real difference between Sen. Sanders and Hillary Clinton,” John Podesta, a senior Clinton adviser, told reporters on the Friday afternoon call. Podesta highlighted Sanders’ vote for immunity for gun manufacturers, calling his record very different from both Obama’s and Clinton’s. He issued a challenge Sanders to “commit today to support legislation to overturn the sweeping immunity provision he voted to confer upon the gun industry.”

The Clinton campaign’s latest broadside against Sanders on guns comes one day after President Obama raised the issue of immunity for gun manufacturers in a New York Times op-ed and promised not to support any candidate—including Democrats—”who does not support common-sense gun reform.”

Sanders has come under repeated fire from Clinton for his 2005 vote and others on guns. In response, he has said he would revisit the legislation, but has declined to say that he regrets the vote. “I hope you know that Senator Sanders has said he’d be willing to take another look at that legislation,” Sanders’ spokesman, Michael Briggs, told Politico. This week, Sanders backed Obama’s executive actions on guns, including one to expand background checks to more gun sales.

Still, the senator’s gun record is a clear blemish on his near-sterling progressive record. Don’t expect the Clinton campaign to let voters forget that.

View article: 

Hillary Clinton Will Never Let Bernie Sanders Live Down This Vote

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Sterling, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Will Never Let Bernie Sanders Live Down This Vote

Texas Governor Wants to Add 9 New Amendments to the Constitution

by AnnetteA71 Posted on January 8, 2016

Mother Jones

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

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has a plan to make America great again: Add nine new amendments to the Constitution. On Friday, fed up with Supreme Court rulings that have gone against conservatives as well as the regulatory actions of the Obama administration, the first-term Republican issued a 92-page report outlining his proposed tweaks to the founding document and calling for a national constitutional convention to make it happen.

The “Texas Plan” is as follows:

I. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State.

II. Require Congress to balance its budget.

III. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from creating federal law.

IV. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from preempting state law.

V. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

VI. Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law.

VII. Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.

VIII. Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.

IX. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.

Clearly, Abbott has been listening to way too much of the Hamilton soundtrack.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/2680389-Restoring-the-Rule-of-Law/annotations/270907.js’);

View note

Link to original – 

Texas Governor Wants to Add 9 New Amendments to the Constitution

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Texas Governor Wants to Add 9 New Amendments to the Constitution