[identity profile] kelincihutan.livejournal.com
In a move that probably took a lot of people by surprise, the DNC put God back into their platform along with language affirming Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel today. C-SPAN video of the proceedings is here.

Disclosure: I am a Christian, and I am pro-Israel so this is a platform change of which I approve. That said, I am quite surprised at how, well, undemocratically this change was carried out.

In the video, Mayor Villaraigosa had to call for the vote three times before seeming to decide that he was going to approve the platform change whether there'd been a two-thirds aye vote or not. Obviously this platform change was a matter of major contention among the delegates. I am very surprised that a more formal vote was not carried out, given how divided the Convention seemed to be on the matter. And while I realize that these things take time, isn't this sort of boring, in-house housekeeping the actual reason these conventions happen in the first place? I know we like to pretty them up with balloons (unless we're Democrats) and confetti and music and whatever, but that stuff happens all the time. Hashing out the platform, on the other hand, doesn't come around just whenever.

I suppose, given the way they rammed through Obamacare without concern for what the country wanted, I shouldn't be too surprised, but I didn't figure they'd go all petty-dictator on one another. I would, honestly, have been disappointed in the party (more than I already am, anyway) had these changes not been made. But the way they were made feels dishonest and forced. Where do Democrats really stand on these issues and why didn't they take a more careful vote?

Edit: I have unscreened the comment by "Stan Chaz." Mods, he's your call. ;)
[identity profile] dreadfulpenny00.livejournal.com
This story is about a week old but I didn't see it posted here and it was just too good not to share.

Viviette Applewhite, the 93-year-old woman at the center of a voter-I.D. lawsuit in Pennsylvania was able to obtain her state-issued identification without issue. All she had to do was ride two city buses and present a Medicare card from the 1990s with her information. PennDOT clerks worked with her even though her birth certificate doesn't have the correct information (she was adopted) and her Social Security card was stolen several years ago.

While many on the Left are trying to claim the I.D. was issued so easily this time because she's part of a well-publicized lawsuit, the Philadelphia Inquirer was present when Ms. Applewhite received her identification and stated there was no indication that the clerk was aware of her role in a nationally-publicized lawsuit.

I'm getting sick and tired of the Democratic Party using the elderly and minorities as their scapegoats. Instead of actually trying to help Ms. Applewhite with a simple matter, they immediately jumped on the "voter suppression" bandwagon (which as of late has been heavily weighed-down with bullshit). And now, our "fearless" leader is using the military for the same purpose in Ohio. This is getting ridiculous!
[identity profile] kelincihutan.livejournal.com
Let me preface this by saying that I am not a Romney fan. At all. However, when a moron like Hilary Rosen opens her mouth and says "Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life" because she's a homemaker...well.

Thankfully, Rosen was promptly eaten alive in the media, which has been nice to watch. And certainly Romney had plenty to say for herself. Which leads to this wonderful article:

http://www.nationalreview.com/exchequer/295877/economics-ann-romney

I'll let you read for yourselves what the author has to say, though I think you'll enjoy it. My takeaway from all this, however, has been my increasing certainty that the only real feminists are conservatives. The fact that there's still the occasional attack on Sarah Palin (who isn't even running for anything and didn't deserve it when she was), Babette Josephs claiming pro-life women are "men with breasts," and now Rosen's comments add up to a disgusting picture of institutionalized misogyny running rampant in the Democratic party. How they managed to sell themselves as pro-women I will never figure out.
[identity profile] dreadfulpenny00.livejournal.com
I was reading an article from the New York Times about the Violence Against Women Act that Democrats are planning to put on the table today. The legislation seeks to expand (both in financing and in scope) domestic violence programs all over the country. As both the daughter of a survivor and a survivor myself of domestic violence, I see this as a positive. However, reading between the lines of the article, I'm seeing what this is REALLY all about.

The past month has been crazy to say the least for Republican Congressmen and their supporters, and most notably for right-wing commentator Rush Limbaugh, whose admittedly vitriolic words toward Sandra Fluke opened a Pandora's Box in the midst of the Presidential campaign season. Several companies have expressed their desire to keep mentions of their company off the airwaves during Limbaugh's radio broadcasts, though it doesn't seem his program has suffered because of it. Now Democrats have decided to strike while the iron is hot by introducing legislation that they think Republicans will refuse:

Democrats, confident they have the political upper hand with women, insist that Republican opposition falls into a larger picture of insensitivity toward women that has progressed from abortion fights to contraception to preventive health care coverage — and now to domestic violence.
Democrats are claiming that Republicans are waging a "war on women" but it seems to me that the real warmongers are the Democrats, attempting to use women as pawns on their re-election chessboard.

How?

Some conservatives are feeling trapped.

“I favor the Violence Against Women Act and have supported it at various points over the years, but there are matters put on that bill that almost seem to invite opposition,” said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, who opposed the latest version last month in the Judiciary Committee. “You think that’s possible? You think they might have put things in there we couldn’t support that maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?”
Does ice cream melt in the sun?

The two provisions that Republican legislators disagree with are the provisions allowing battered illegal immigrants to apply for temporary visas (which some believe would creates loopholes in the immigration process) and the provision which would include same-sex couples in dometic violence programs and afford them the same protections. (On a personal note, I see nothing wrong with same-sex couples receiving help in domestic violence situations. However I don't think temporary visas should be granted to immigrants in domestic violence situations, but they should also receive services and protection while they get their affairs in order, whatever the outcome may be.)

The question is will this strategy work? A Wall Street Journal/ABC News poll showed Obama's approval among women rose 14 points from 40% in December to 54% in February. It should be noted that the poll was administered between February 16 and February 20, before Sandra Fluke was even on the national radar. However, a New York Times/CBS News poll (with the poll administered between March 7 and March 11) shows Obama's approval among women dropped 12 points, nearly to its December numbers.

(x-posted from [livejournal.com profile] mividaloca99
[identity profile] dreadfulpenny00.livejournal.com
On his show tonight, Bill O'Reilly busted the doors wide open as to what's REALLY going on with Sandra Fluke. How is a Georgetown law student able to go all over the place to do interviews and who is scheduling them? Turns out it's someone with connections to the White House!

Mediate tells the full story (with video): http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-oreilly-asks-who-is-running-sandra-fluke-it-all-goes-back-to-white-house/

It turns out SKDKnickerbocker, a PR agency, is representing Fluke (with most of her interview requests going through someone named "Mike"). Who happens to be managing editor? None other than Anita "Mao Tse" Dunn, Barack Obama's former communications director. Dunn is also currently a contributor for NBC News/MSNBC/CNBC. This is the same woman who claimed that Fox News was an arm of the Republican Party. As if MSNBC isn't an arm of the Democratic Party?

So now we know what's really going on here - former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led the charge for a mock hearing, invited the press to cover it, and then hired professional activist Sandra Fluke to testify. I doubt their intent was to sink Limbaugh or anyone else, but it was definitely an opportunity to drudge up press for the Obama administration any way they could get it. Now Dunn's taken Fluke under her wing.

I'm getting so disgusted with this administration and their misuse and abuse of the media and free speech. I feel what Limbaugh said was wrong, but to use it to attempt to sink him while Fluke herself is a fraud is inexcusable. This is another reason why the Obama administration needs to be out of the White House!
[identity profile] dark-weezing.livejournal.com
The Subject line above is a lovely parting gift from Steny Hoyer. So now, according to him and other Dems, the Tea Parties probably come from dysfunctional homes. How nice.

Link: http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/2321-hoyer-tea-party-people-come-from-unhappy-families

Allahpundit sums it up properly, especially, as far thumbnail psychoanalysis goes, this is beyond horrible. In fairness, Hoyer doesn't usually do this, but such bomb-throwing is becoming a rite of passage for a modern Democrat. Regardless, as AP said, it's better than the racism charges uttered against the Tea Party, a year ago. (Wait until they use both meme into one. Wait for it.)

Link: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/05/steny-hoyer-im-thinking-most-tea-partiers-probably-come-from-unhappy-families/

Enjoy, I guess.
[identity profile] twichie.livejournal.com
I understand the current gas prices are out of control - but how about REPEALING some of the taxes on fuel/gasoline instead of saying "You've made too much money"?

Oil prices are globablly higher - not just US companies...



Windfall tax considered by Dems on Oil companies )
[identity profile] manichalo.livejournal.com

X-posted
 I HAVE HEARD ENOUGH, AND IT'S NOT EVEN 2008.


WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that a mandate http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m080.htm  http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mandate
requiring every American to purchase health insurance was the only way to achieve universal health care but she rejected the notion of punitive measures to force individuals into the health care system.

"At this point, we don't have anything punitive that we have proposed," the presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We're providing incentives and tax credits which we think will be very attractive to the vast majority of Americans."

She said she could envision a day when "you have to show proof to your employer that you're insured as a part of the job interview — like when your kid goes to school and has to show proof of vaccination," but said such details would be worked out through negotiations with Congress.

Clinton unveiled her health care plan Monday in Iowa, promising to bring coverage to every American by building on the current employer-based system and using tax credits to make insurance more affordable.

She told the AP she relished a debate over health care with her political opponents, including Republicans "who understood that we had to reform health care before they started running for president."

  Apparently she thinks that she's talking to children.  What's frightening is that the ones listening appear to be standing with their mouths wide open and stars in their eyes, waiting for another federally "mandated" entitlement program.  Only this one has TEETH.  Lots more teeth than she wants us to see when she smiles.  Does she really think that we can't read the subtle implications here?  

   That might sound far-fetched, but think about it.  
If you have to buy their insurance, you will have to live by their rules. That means "lifestyle Incentives".  And if you don't buy their insurance and live the way they dictate, you don't work, AND you don't have insurance, and if you want insurance...a vicious circle.
   Surely I don't have to spell it out.  And no punitive measures "at this point"?!?  Then she smiles, like the momma that's gonna make it all better for the poor ignorant masses, and presumes to set the debate terms, like she's the be-all and end-all in American politics.  Her arrogance is astounding...she's certain that she has this wrapped up and tucked away for Christmas...and I feel sick.  The only thing that's reassuring is hope that people will think about the implications of this and realize that the real fascists are on their way, and they appear to be bearing gifts. 
MH

Profile

therightfangirl: (Default)
The Right Fangirl

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 12345 6
789 10 111213
14 15 1617181920
2122 2324252627
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 28th, 2017 06:50 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios