ONTD Political



WASHINGTON -- An immigration policy analyst from a think tank often cited by Republicans suggested to a tea party crowd last week that President Barack Obama should be executed.

Stephen Steinlight, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies, told the Highlands Tea Party in Florida that efforts to impeach Obama did not go far enough because "there's no court that's going to stop Obama from doing anything."

"We all know, if there ever was a president that deserved to be impeached, it’s this guy. Alright? And I wouldn’t stop. I would think being hung, drawn and quartered is probably too good for him," Steinlight said, according to ThinkProgress. "But you know, this man who wants to rule by the use of a pen, a telephone, let us not forget his teleprompter … the fact is that it would backfire very badly and we’ve got to be grownups and accept that we can’t have everything we want, you know, [like] his head on a skewer.”

The blog Imagine 2050 first noticed Steinlight's comments, which were posted July 20 on YouTube by Highlands Tea Party Chairman John Nelson. That video has since been removed, although The Huffington Post viewed it while it was still publicly available. The site Right Wing Watch also captured part of his remarks and re-posted it on YouTube. (Watch the clip above.)

When reached for comment, Steven Camarota, director of research at CIS, distanced the organization from Steinlight's remarks.

"Steve was speaking figuratively and hyperbolically, obviously, for effect. In that respect his intemperate comments were similar to those who are often critics of President Bush, and I would say like those comments, they are ill-advised," Camarota told The Huffington Post. "I would also say that the Center for Immigration Studies does not in fact support drawing and quartering the president."

CIS officials also said Steinlight had been disciplined and instructed to avoid similar rhetoric in the future.

"I reprimanded him and put a reprimand in his personnel file," said CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian.

CIS is an organization that advocates reducing immigration into the United States. Steinlight has said that Hispanic immigration would lead to the "unmaking of America," and that Muslims should be banned from immigrating to the United States because they "believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution."

"Steve sometimes has used impolitic language and I admonished him to choose his words more carefully in the future," Krikorian said.

CIS research has been influential with Republicans, being cited by lawmakers such as House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.).

By Sam Levine. Posted: 07/23/2014 5:29 pm EDT. Updated: 07/23/2014 5:59 pm EDT.

Source
WASHINGTON -- It's pretty rare that members of Congress and all the witnesses they've called will declare out loud that Americans are just too ignorant to be given a piece of information, but that was a key conclusion of a session of the House Agriculture Committee this week.

The issue was genetically modified organisms, or GMOs as they're often known in the food industry. And members of the subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture, as well as their four experts, agreed that the genetic engineering of food crops has been a thorough success responsible for feeding the hungry, improving nutrition and reducing the use of pesticides.

People who oppose GMOs or want them labeled so that consumers can know what they're eating are alarmists who thrive on fear and ignorance, the panel agreed. Labeling GMO foods would only stoke those fears, and harm a beneficial thing, so it should not be allowed, the lawmakers and witnesses agreed.

"I really worry that labeling does more harm than good, that it leads too many people away from it and it diminishes the market for GMOs that are the solution to a lot of the problems we face," said David Just, a professor at Cornell University and co-director of the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs.

Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.) agreed with Just and asked him, "What is the biggest drawback? Is it the ignorance of what the product is, just from a lack of education?"

"It is ignorance of the product, and it's a general skepticism of anything they eat that is too processed or treated in some way that they don't quite understand," Just said.

"Even using long scientific-sounding words make it sound like it's been grown in a test tube, and people get scared of it," Just added.

Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.) agreed with another witness, Calestous Juma, an international development professor at Harvard's Kennedy School, that political leaders had been cowed by misinformed populaces into bending on GMOs, especially in the European Union, where Juma said hundreds of millions of euros have been spent on studies that have found GMOs safe.

"It's obvious that while the science in the EU in incontrovertible about the health and safety benefits of genetically modified hybrid crops, that because of politics, people are afraid to lead, and inform consumers," Schrader said.

Juma cited an extensive report by the European Commission. (There is at least one controversial group that disagrees with him.)

Certainly, there is misinformation about GMOs, as highlighted in a New York Times feature on a Hawaiian ban of most GMOs. But entirely missing from the hearing was any suggestion that there are real concerns about the impact of genetically engineered food, such as the growth of pesticide-resistant "super weeds," over-reliance on single-crop factory farming, decreased biodiversity, and a lack of a consistent approval process. (Read more pros and cons here.)

The issue may soon gain fresh relevance on Capitol Hill, where a measure backed by Reps. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) to stop states from requiring GMO labeling could get marked up as early as September. The bill also would allow genetically engineered food to be labeled "100 percent natural."

The idea of the bill brought Ben and Jerry's co-founder Jerry Greenfield to Capitol Hill Thursday to push back, along with Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), who backs labeling.

Greenfield told HuffPost that labeling is a simple, inexpensive matter of letting people know what's in their food, and letting them decide what they want to support and eat.

"This idea that consumers will be scared away -- the label will be a very simple thing, a few words on a container saying something like 'may be produced with genetic engineering.' It's not scary," Greenfield said.

By Michael McAuliff. Posted: 07/10/2014 10:00 pm EDT. Updated: 07/11/2014 11:59 am EDT.

Watch the video at the Source to see experts and members of Congress conclude Americans should be denied GMO labels because they are too ignorant, as well as Greenfield's reaction.
Toddler Burned by SWAT Grenade After Raid On Home

A 19-month old Georgia toddler is in critical condition after a northeast Georgia SWAT team threw a “flash bang” grenade into his playpen while he was sleeping, causing him to suffer severe burns and later enter a medically induced coma. The tragic incident is part of a larger trend of innocent bystanders suffering injury and death due to the tactics employed by SWAT teams.

More...Collapse )
As the Oregonian reported, residents in Portland’s New Columbia community are calling for reform of a policy that allowed two officers to take a nine-year-old girl into custody without a juvenile court order last year. The girl — who was wearing a wet bathing suit, flip flops, and a towel — was handcuffed, fingerprinted, and photographed without a trusted adult present.

The arrest came after the nine-year-old fought another girl at a local Boys & Girls Club. Staff who broke up the fight found no “obvious” injuries, but suspended the nine-year-old from the club for one week. Police became involved after the mother of the second girl reported the fight and claimed the nine-year-old slammed her daughter’s head into a brick wall.

Officers David McCarthy and Matthew Huspek confronted the nine-year-old child on her front porch six days later. According to the girl’s mother, Latoya Harris, “They repeatedly asked her, ‘Why don’t you tell me what really happened?’” After questioning, the officers handcuffed and drove the girl to the police department, accusing her of fourth degree assault, or “intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes physical injury to another.”

The policemen refused to let Harris accompany her daughter.

“I observed (her) breathing speed up, she looked down at the ground … crossed her arms and would eventually answer my questions,” McCarthy wrote in his report. The officers also claimed her responses were “inconsistent” with witness accounts. But charges were never brought against the juvenile. And after Harris filed a police complaint for the aggressive treatment of her daughter, an oversight group, the Independent Police Review Division, found no wrongdoing.

Last month, Harris brought her complaint to a local panel tasked with hearing complaints about Portland police misconduct, the Citizen Review Committee. And the ordeal has drawn the support from youth justice advocates, including Youth, Rights & Justice, a law firm that represents juveniles in court. With the help of the panel, advocates want a city ordinance altered so that children under the age of 10 cannot be taken into custody without a juvenile court order.

The criminalization of children for this sort of minor offense remains a prevalent trend nationwide. In the so-called school-to-prison pipeline, for instance, schools across the country increasingly rely on police for handling disciplinary action.

Source probably shouldn't be surprised by this, given all the police crap in the news, but still is. Also? Appalled. Nine freakin' years old. Jesus.


New Hampshire state Rep. Will Infantine (R) explained that the pay gap between men and women stems from the fact that men work harder, take riskier jobs and are “more motivated by money” during a House speech Wednesday against the state’s paycheck equity bill.

“Men by and large make more because of some of the things they do. Their jobs are, by and large, more riskier,” Infantine, a former chairman of the Manchester Republican Committee, said on Wednesday, as captured by progressive advocacy group Granite State Progress. “They don’t mind working nights and weekends. They don’t mind working overtime, or outdoors in the elements.”


In response to an outburst from colleagues objecting to the Hillsborough Republican’s remarks, Infantine responded, “It’s not me!”

“Men work five or six hours longer a week than women do. When it comes to women and men who own businesses … women make half of what men do because of flexibility of work, men are more motivated by money than women are,” Infantine said, noting that facts from the Bureau of Labor Statistics validate his claims. “Guys! I’m not making this stuff up!”

Zandra Rice Hawkins, executive director of Granite State Progress, condemned the New Hampshire legislator’s “outdated thinking” in a press release Thursday.

“Comments like these only serve to remind us of the outdated thinking that has allowed paycheck inequity to exist in the workplace for way too long,” Hawkins said. “Women are not asking for anything more than an equal day’s pay for an equal day’s work.”

The New Hampshire House voted 187-134 on Wednesday to give preliminary approval to the Paycheck Equity Act, a bill seeking to eliminate wage discrimination on the basis of sex. The measure will be reviewed by the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee before returning to the full House for a final vote.

The bill, SB 207, is sponsored by seven Senate Democrats and has also gained support from 11 House Republicans who voted in favor of the legislation on Wednesday despite overwhelming opposition from the party.

New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) has also expressed support for the measure, pointing to negative fiscal impacts related to the state's gender pay gap.

“Today, well over half of the women in our state are either the primary or co-breadwinners in their families,” Hassan said in January. “And yet, on average, women in New Hampshire earn 77 cents on the dollar compared to what men earn in comparable jobs. This disparity ... also puts further strain on our state budget and hurts our local businesses by taking money out of the pockets of consumers."

By Shadee Ashtari. Posted: 04/24/2014 2:07 pm EDT. Updated: 04/24/2014 4:59 pm EDT.

Source has video.


Days after Senate Republicans unanimously blocked a vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act, Phyllis Schlafly, founder of "pro-family" organization Eagle Forum, claimed that providing women with equal pay for equal work would deter their chances of finding a “suitable mate” in a Christian Post op-ed published Tuesday.

Since a woman prefers to marry a man who makes more money than she does, Schlafly argued, decreasing the gender pay gap would leave women unable to secure a husband.

Schlafly, a longtime opponent of the Equal Rights Amendment, wrote:

"Another fact is the influence of hypergamy, which means that women typically choose a mate (husband or boyfriend) who earns more than she does. Men don't have the same preference for a higher-earning mate.

While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.

Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate."


The conservative activist also noted that women do not deserve equal pay because they "work fewer hours per day, per week, per year” and “place a much higher value on pleasant working conditions: a clean, comfortable, air-conditioned office with congenial co-workers.”

Schlafly concluded that the best way to empower women "is to improve job prospects for the men in their lives, even if that means increasing the so-called pay gap."


Earlier this month, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) defended Republicans’ opposition to equal pay legislation, insisting the GOP has long "led the fight for women's equality." Previously, she voted against the 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

“I find this war on women rhetoric almost silly,” Blackburn said on CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday. “It is Republicans that have led the fight for women’s equality. Go back through history -- and look at who was the first woman to vote, to get elected to office, to go to Congress, four out of five governors.”

By Shadee Ashtari. Posted: 04/15/2014 3:15 pm EDT. Updated: 04/16/2014 10:59 am EDT.

Source
This 32-Year-Old Florida Woman Is Dead Because Her State Refused To Expand Medicaid

Charlene Dill, a 32-year-old mother of three, collapsed and died on a stranger’s floor at the end of March. She was at an appointment to try to sell a vacuum cleaner, one of the three part-time jobs that she worked to try to make ends meet for her family. Her death was a result of a documented heart condition — and it could have been prevented.

Dill was uninsured, and she went years without the care she needed to address her chronic conditions because she couldn’t afford it.

Under the health reform law, which seeks to expand coverage to millions of low-income Americans, Dill wasn’t supposed to lack insurance. She was supposed to have access to a public health plan through the law’s expansion of the Medicaid program. But Dill, a Florida resident, is one of the millions of Americans living in a state that has refused to accept Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion after the Supreme Court ruled this provision to be optional. Those low-income people have been left in a coverage gap, making too much income to qualify for a public Medicaid plan but too little income to qualify for the federal subsidies to buy a plan on Obamacare’s private exchanges.

More...Collapse )
Yale University has admitted it "made a mistake" after accusing a student of having an eating disorder and warning if she didn't put on weight she'd be put on medical leave.

Frances Chan, a healthy, and naturally slim, 20-year-old was forced to attend numerous weighing in sessions and appointments with dieticians after the institution decided she was too skinny.

Chan, who blogged about her experiences for HuffPost, gorged on ice-cream, Cheetos and carbs in order to put weight on and avoid being barred from college.

"In the past three weeks alone, I have spent ten hours at Yale Health, our student health centre," she wrote. "The medical professionals think I have an eating disorder -- but they won't look past the number on the scale, to see the person right in front in them.

"These appointments were not optional. The clinician threatened to put me on medical leave if I did not comply."

The history major, who weighs 90lbs and says she has "always been small", was told she had to put on at least two pounds. Chan wrote: "In addition to loading up on carbs for each meal, I've eaten 3-4 scoops of ice cream twice a day with chocolate, cookies, or Cheetos at bedtime. I take elevators instead of stairs wherever possible."

Since writing her blog, and after her parents got involved, Yale has apologised saying it "made a mistake" and acknowledges Chan does not have an eating disorder.

On her Facebook account, Chan posted:

"Just visited Yale Health with my parents and met with a new doctor. She apologized repeatedly for the "months of anguish" I went through and admitted that BMI is not the end all be all. She also looked at my medical records since freshman year (which the previous clinician had not done) and noted that she saw that my weight had remained around the same. So she trusts that I do not have an eating disorder and admitted that "we made a mistake." She also does not want me to feel uncomfortable coming to Yale Health if I get a flu or something. I do still have to see them, but at most once a semester. And I'll be away for the coming year, so....LET TIME BE A MIGHTY RIVER!!!"


But Chan said she had been contacted by students who had experienced similar pressure to gain weight. "A recent graduate messaged me saying that her cholesterol had actually gone up due to the intensive weight-gain diet she used to release herself from weekly weigh-ins," she adds.

"A Yale Herald piece from 2010 told the story of students in similar situations. It's disturbing how little things have changed. "Stacy" was "informed that if she kept failing to reach [Yale Health]'s goals for her, she would be withdrawn for the following semester." Unfortunately, 'the more she stressed out about gaining weight, the more she lost her appetite'."

Source.

But seriously, WTF!?!? Evidently, when it comes to our appearance, women aren't able to get anything right.

Plan B, Brad Pitt's production company that recently financed 12 Years a Slave, grabbed headlines this week with the news that it had purchased the film rights to the Rolling Stone article, "Anonymous Vs. Steubenville." Written by David Kushner, the piece chronicles the efforts of online activists, flying under the name Anonymous, to get justice for a high school rape victim in Steubenville, Ohio. The protagonists of the article are a bunch of young white men who were touched by this girl's suffering and angered by what they deemed a town cover-up of the crime, and set out to make things right.

Read more...Collapse )
Look, women can rescue themselves through political activism on nearly all feminist issues. Women got themselves the vote. But when it comes to sexual assault, we need more men to say, at the very least, "Dude, that is messed up." If this movie ends up showing young men a new model for masculinity, one where you stand up for a woman's right to safety instead of wallow in a "bros before hos" mentality, then I will consider it a win.

Amanda Marcotte is a Brooklyn-based writer and DoubleX contributor. She also writes regularly for the Daily Beast, Alternet, and USA Today. Follow her on Twitter.

Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/04/04/brad_pitt_s_plan_b_buys_the_rights_to_anonymous_vs_steubenville_a_male_centric.html

OP: There's so much wrong with this clusterfuck of an idea that I don't even know where to fuckin' begin.
WATCH: Arizona’s Senate Passes Bill To Appease ‘Christians’ And Discriminate Against Gays

Kansas got the memo. Indiana got the memo. Arizona refuses to read the memo. The state Senate just passed SB 1062 which allows anyone to discriminate against gays at any time if they are doing so out of ‘religious conviction’.

Arizona Democrats did their most unexceptional to stop the bill.

Senate Democrats in Arizona attempted to derail the law with eight amendments, which were quickly disposed of by the Republican majority. The Democrats also warned that Arizona is in for another round of being shunned by businesses, conventions, and tourists who don’t appreciate the continual hanging of a “NOT Welcome” sign. That would echo what happened in 1993 when Arizona lost $500 million and the Super Bowl over its refusal to approve the Martin Luther King holiday. Or in 2010, when companies avoided Arizona en masse over the outrageous anti-immigrant bill, SB 1070.
Read moreCollapse )

Update regarding the state of anti-gay bills in other states.
This page was loaded Dec 26th 2014, 12:17 am GMT.