Yabberz Community Leaderboard

Active Discussions

active 6 seconds ago
146
Posts
1896
Points
50
Users

      The low life incredibly incompetent pinko mayor of New York City,

      Bill de Blasio, is trying to re-ignite the controversy

      in his city by telling New Yorkers

      not to eat at the restaurant

      more less
      active 16 minutes ago
      7
      Posts
      160
      Points
      8
      Users

          Sunday is Mother's Day and today I was reflecting on other mother's.

          Other Mother's are those women in our lives that support the effort's of other children's mothers. Women like child care providers, doctors, lawyers and a host of others.

          As a single mom my daughter has many other mother's. Without them I shutter to think of how she may have turned out.

          I am so grateful to my other mother's.

          For all those other mother's I say Happy Mother's Day. You have no idea how blessed and fortunate this mother feels.

          more less
          active 2 minutes ago
          14
          Posts
          190
          Points
          10
          Users

              The greedy corporate pigs at Verizon ($39 BILLION in profits the last 3 years) treat their employees, the very reason for their profits, as chattel while the corprorate pigs pocket huge sums in salary and bonuses.

              According to a proxy filing, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam pocketed $18.3 million in total compensation last year, including $12 million in stock options on top of his $1.5 million base salary. That was a nearly 16% increase in total compensation compared with 2013


              GO UNION!!!!!


              If this strike does not end favorably within two weeks I will switch my cell service to AT&T.

              Screw Verizon management and all the greedy corporate pigs. Bring back the middle class to America and protect them and their wages.

              http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35912-this-stri...

              more less
              active 5 minutes ago
              14
              Posts
              216
              Points
              12
              Users

                  Progressive "noble intentions" very often end up hurting the very people they say they are trying to help.

                  But by the time the damage becomes evident, they have moved on to the next noble cause and the next fashionable victim du jour.

                  The former CEO of McDonald's says the $15 minimum wage could destroy up to 4 million entry-level jobs and drive thousands of middle-income franchisees out of business.

                  That's always the way with these "progressive" policies: aim at the "big guys," hit the little guys.

                  http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/04/25/mc...

                  GUEST POST WRITTEN BY

                  Ed Rensi

                  Mr. Rensi is the former president and chief executive officer of McDonald’s.

                  A $15 minimum wage will mean wiping out thousands of entry-level opportunities for people without many other options. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

                  The Service Employees International Union spent 2015 expanding its campaign for a $15 minimum wage to other industries. In recent nationwide protests, the union focused again on its original target: Fast food companies, and McDonald's MCD -0.26% in particular.

                  I worked for the company for three decades, and served as its USA President for 13 years. I can assure you that a $15 minimum wage won’t spell the end of the brand. However it will mean wiping out thousands of entry-level opportunities for people without many other options.

                  The $15 minimum wage demand, which translates to $30,000 a year for a full-time employee, is built upon a fundamental misunderstanding of a restaurant business such as McDonald’s. “They’re making millions while millions can’t pay their bills,” argue the union groups, suggesting there’s plenty of profit left over in corporate coffers to fund a massive pay increase at the bottom.

                  In truth, nearly 90% of McDonald’s locations are independently-owned by franchisees who aren’t making “millions” in profit. Rather, they keep roughly six cents of each sales dollar after paying for food, staff costs, rent and other expenses.

                  Do the math

                  Let’s do the math: A typical franchisee sells about $2.6 million worth of burgers, fries, shakes and Happy Meals each year, leaving them with $156,000 in profit. If that franchisee has 15 part-time employees on staff earning minimum wage, a $15 hourly pay requirement eats up three-quarters of their profitability. (In reality, the costs will be much higher, as the company will have to fund raises further up the pay scale.) For some locations, a $15 minimum wage wipes out their entire profit.

                  Recouping those costs isn’t as simple as raising prices. If it were easy to add big price increases to a meal, it would have already been done without a wage hike to trigger it. In the real world, our industry customers are notoriously sensitive to price increases. (If you’re a McDonald’s regular, there’s a reason you gravitate towards an extra-value meal or the dollar menu.) Instead, franchisees can absorb the cost with a change that customers don’t mind: The substitution of a self-service computer kiosk for a a full-service employee.

                  In higher-cost European countries, these kiosks are already the norm. In 2011, the company ordered more than 7,000 of them to replace entry-level employees. They’ve been tested successfully in a number of markets in the U.S., and now the company is even testing self-serve McCafe kiosks where a customer can prepare and customize their own coffee beverage.

                  Hurting young workers

                  If you’re tempted to shrug your shoulders at this brave new world, don’t. Over four million people in the U.S. are employed at “limited service” restaurants, a descriptor which includes companies like McDonald’s. If even one out of every four jobs was automated, that’s one million fewer job opportunities in a country where the youth unemployment rate is more than three times the overall unemployment rate. (In urban markets such as New York City and Washington, DC, the youth unemployment rate averages 30%.)

                  These young adults who face long spells of unemployment now are at a long-term disadvantage relative to their employed counterparts. One study released by the Employment Policies Institute found that high-school seniors with part-time work experience earned 20% more per year on average, 6-9 years after graduating, relative to their fellow students who didn’t work. Ironically, today’s minimum wage mandate for higher pay will be condemning young adults to lower-paid and less-successful futures.

                  I suspect that the labor organizers behind this campaign for a $15 minimum wage are less interested in helping employees, and more interested in helping themselves to dues money from their paycheck. They’re unlikely to succeed in their goal of organizing the employees of McDonald’s franchisees, but they may well succeed in passing $15 into law in other sympathetic locales. You’ll see their legacy every time you visit the Golden Arches, where “would you like fries with that” is a button on a computer screen rather than a phrase spoken by an employee in their first job.

                  more less
                  active 40 minutes ago
                  8
                  Posts
                  354
                  Points
                  16
                  Users
                      When Rita Khanchet saw images of a vicious wildfire destroying homes and uprooting tens of thousands of people in Fort McMurray, she immediately thought of Syria, the homeland she fled just five months ago with her husband and young son.
                      more less
                      active 11 minutes ago
                      17
                      Posts
                      259
                      Points
                      8
                      Users

                          OK, first a disclaimer: I am, have been, and remain a Bernie Sanders supporter. But I can face reality, and Sanders is just not going to be the nominee. The math doesn't work and the Superdelegates are NOT going to save him. That said, Bernie is going to have a good month in May, pretty much every state favors him. But it isn't going to be enough.

                          Take heart, my fellow Bernie supporters...we fought the good fight. We made our issues important. We have virtually guaranteed the Democratic Party can no longer ignore the issues that we are passionate about...the issues that propelled Bernie to his amazing performance that nobody but us thought possible.

                          And, no...Hillary is NOT going to pick Bernie as veep. Not. Gonna. Happen. But it MIGHT be fun to see her name him to the Supreme Court. Won't happen of course, but fun to think about, eh? Can you just see Republican heads exploding at this? Bernie WILL come to the convention with a sizeable Delegate haul, and will therefore enormously influence the Party platform...not that any candidate is bound to adhere to it...but it normally is adhered to.

                          With Trump the nominee and albatross around the Republicans' neck this cycle...this is our opportunity, Bernie supporters...to make the kind of difference we CAN...we can give Hillary our vote and hate doing it. We need to, a President Trump is unthinkable. What we need to do is strike where the Republicans are most vulnerable right now...and channel our efforts downballot...and send Hillary a Congress that will work with her.

                          Imagine what Obama could have accomplished if he had had a cooperative Congress...instead of one determined to block his every effort for six years? Look what he accomplished IN SPITE of their best efforts!

                          This, right now...will be the best way, in my opinion...to carry our issues forward. I know, the downballot races are not a SEXY as the Presidential race, I get it. But if you are a wonk, like I am...then you know that Congress has more influence on what really happens, policy-wise...than the President does.

                          All this said...let's look at possible Veep choices for Hillary.

                          It will not be Elizabeth Warren. She probably would not take it if it was offered, I think she likes where she is. And I am not certain this country is ready for a ticket that has TWO women. I'd like to see it, but I just don't think it's gonna happen.

                          I think you will see a few women touted as possible picks for Hillary, but, in the end, it will not be a woman. People like Amy Klobuchar and Janet Napolitano come to mind as possible names to be flung about.

                          Ultimately, here are the names that come to mind for me.

                          Tim Kaine, of Virginia.

                          Sherrod Brown, of Ohio - the one problem here is that Sherrod would be giving up a competitive House seat in a year where Democrats are thinking it might be possible to grab the House. I personally do not think this will happen...it's just too much of a reach and I think Sherrod is a terrific choice here. He would help swing Ohio our way. And the Republicans never have won the Presidency without Ohio. Of course, if they pick Kasich - then all bets are off.

                          Alan Grayson, of Florida - to my mind another good choice in a swing state, and one who could help mollify the more Progressive wing of the Democratic Party. The aforementioned Sherrod Brown could do the same. And it could help swing Florida in our direction. Of course, if they pick Rubio...all bets are off on this choice.

                          Evan Bayh, of Indiana...could be an interesting pick here...but it would not do much to mollify the Progressives, I think. It COULD however, turn perennially red Indiana our way.

                          Two names being tossed about in some circles I am going to toss: Charlie Crist and Deval Patrick. Crist, being a former Republican...is NOT going to inspire some Democrats...and in fact may well turn off many Bernie supporters. I think the net loss here is larger than the potential net gain in Florida from a Crist pick.

                          Deval Patrick just doesn't add anything to the ticket, being from deep-blue Massachusetts. Seeing as we are coming off having a black President, there is not an add here, either, I think. So I do not believe these two men will be picked.

                          In light of my mention for Tim Kaine, above...another interesting possible would be Mark Warner. Also a Senator from Virginia. I don't see him exciting the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party, though...he is very middle-of-the road...and thus is not likely to excite many. But he is pretty clean, without scandal...and is not a polarizing figure in the way Hillary is...and could provide some balance...and help swing already-swingy Virginia firmly into our column. But I like Tim Kaine in this role better, for reasons I will get into later.

                          Julian Castro would be an interesting pick, in terns of checking off certain boxes. He is Latino, a definite plus. He is also young enough to succeed Clinton as President on his own, making him the first Latino President. Being as he is from Texas, this could also make things interesting. I do not think he has the power to actually swing Texas our way...but one never knows with the Trump albatross around the Republicans' neck.

                          Jay Nixon from Missouri has been put forth as a possible, but I do not think this happens. Outside of the unfortunate last name...I do not think Ferguson is far enough behind us, and I do not think he conducted himself very well in the whole Ferguson affair...this could really blow up in our faces.

                          Let's talk Tim Kaine for a sec here. He is very well-liked in Virginia, a popular former Lieutenant Governor, Governor and now Senator. I think the "insider" view plays against him here, though...outside of Virginia. I think the "insider" view might work against him...outside of Virginia...but I think he is more popular and known than Warner.

                          Tom Vilsack could be an interesting pick...one who could swing parts of the Heartland...but not very exciting to Progressives, once again.

                          Ret. Gen. Wesley Clark could prove an interesting pick. His military cred and "not insider" status could play well this cycle...and I think he could attract some crossover Republican support from those who are "not-Trump" - I think the net gain here could - in the short term - outweigh the loss of Progressives here...but I feel this is the Party shooting themselves in the foot for the future. I really think we have to have a Progressive here and Clark doesn't fit the bill. Short term positive, long-term problem here to my mind.

                          Another name being tossed is Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. I am just not sure that this plays well. He has Progressive cred, no doubt...and he is young enough to succeed Clinton. I just think he own last name is not going to play well...let's face it...the rest of America is sensitive about strange last names. It may be non-PC to say that, but it is a reality here.

                          Of these I have mentioned, this is who I like, and yes, in order:

                          Sherrod Brown (I do not think we win the House anyway. Net positive outweighs possible net loss here)

                          Julian Castro - The net positive of a Latino...and one who could go on to be President himself has unquestionable appeal. He certainly speaks to the Progressive wing, as well. I just wish he was from somewhere more swingy than Texas. The "Castro" last name...is something that I hope will no longer matter, but I do not know.

                          Alan Grayson - I like the fact that he is unquestionably Progressive...and from a swing state like Florida makes him a net positive.

                          Tim Kaine - Again, swingy Virginia...and a clean image...the "insider" status and middle-of-the-road reputation does not excite Progressive Bernie supporters like me, but could attract the "not-Trump" crossover vote elsewhere, and would surely carry Virginia for Team Blue.

                          Evan Bayh - Not exciting...but imminently qualified in his own right. And it might be interesting to see the effect of "not-Trump" on Indiana...if Bayh were on the ticket. I don't think it is enough to flip Indiana, though. I lived near Sputhern Indiana...and it is a different world than Northern Indiana, where Bayh would play better. I can say this because I also lived near Northern Indiana for a significant time and know the political lay of the land there.

                          John Hickenlooper - I'd have him higher up the list if his last name was more a common one. I hate to say it...it's very non-PC...but we are dealing with reality here, and I think the last name presents a problem here. He certainly carries the Progressive cred...which is why he'd be higher up the list.

                          So...Democrats. What do you think?

                          By the way, Republicans, I do not CARE what YOU think!!

                          more less
                          active 4 minutes ago
                          51
                          Posts
                          687
                          Points
                          18
                          Users

                              Much of the media is concentrated on the remaining political campaigns and the election but what seems to be missing? The overwhelming majority of the reportage overlooks something that is happening which is being ignored, and that is the growing number of people who are confused, disenfranchised and angered about the state in which our political system and government is heading. Do we really have a representative Democracy like those in government would like us to think or are we being manipulated into believing that which really doesn't exist? When Special Interests controls our Government and Legislative bodies and caters to the top 1% of our population is that a representative Democracy? So how do we change the status quo and once again make our Government be held responsible by the citizenry rather than the wealthiest, the corporations and the bankers? People have to mobilize and create what is commonly known as a Grassroots movement. One might ask, why can't we change the system from within our current political structure? We could if our Legislators truly represented their constituents but as we all know, that is not the case at all. Our Legislators are owned by by those very same entities we wish to remove and replace with a representative government. The simple answer would be to create a Grassroots movement and one which is all inclusive and one which has real goals and more importantly real solutions to our real problems.

                              Looking at the political pyramid as it exists today doesn't resemble anything that looks like a representative Democracy. It is an Oligarchy which is an obstacle placed before us that prevents us from having a representative Democracy. This brings us back to how can we make the changes necessary that will give the citizenry their voices back that can heard and can once again play a part in how our government functions. Our Legislators aren't listening to their constituents which stifles our voices because it is through our Legislators we are supposed to be heard and unless we can contribute huge sums of money to their campaigns our Legislators aren't all that interested in what we have to say.

                              It is the people themselves who have the real power and that is their vote. As some people are saying, their vote doesn't count. Well it does, but one needs to add their vote alongside of another's vote and keep that progression growing until such time you have a large block of votes and only then will our Legislators start to take notice when their constituents begin to have some real power that can influence the outcome of an election. This is where a Grassroots movement becomes important in consolidating those voters who feel disenfranchised. The average person doesn't have their own lobbyist and stash of cash they need which enables them to gain access to their elected officials to have their concerns addressed. It is important for any Grassroots movement to even become viable they need to rally behind the issue which isn't enough. Grassroots movements need real leadership, and that leadership has to have real solutions to real problems and not just a bunch of empty rhetoric we are used to hearing from our establishment politicians. Can such a Grassroots movement come to fruition? It has already begun.

                              more less
                              active 39 minutes ago
                              31
                              Posts
                              430
                              Points
                              13
                              Users

                                  http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/05/businesses-flee-...

                                  Twenty-one companies in New York City have announced they are laying off workers and many are closing due to “economic” reasons as Mayor Bill de Blasio’s focus has been on targeting a company because of its views on marriage.

                                  As de Blasio encouraged a boycott of Chick-fil-a because he said the company has “anti-LGBT” views, many New Yorkers are facing pink slips in the months to come.

                                  A review of Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notifications filed with the state Department of Labor by The Daily Caller show 21 companies in the past four weeks alone have announced layoffs. Some are even closing shop altogether. The notices show a majority of these companies cite “economic” as the reason behind their decision.

                                  Insurance giant AIG, in an amended notice filing, announced 108 workers at its Water Street location will be laid off, and an additional 132 at its other four locations in the city will also be given pink slips. The reason cited for the dislocation is “economic.”

                                  Goldman Sachs, in its WARN notice, announced 146 workers would be laid off between June 20 and September 28, 2016—the second round of layoffs in the city. The financial services company also claimed the layoffs were driven by “economic” reasons.

                                  Harris Publications announced it was closing and 65 people will lose their jobs. The publisher could no longer continue to operate due to economic reasons.

                                  This summer a total of 219 workers at health insurer Emblemhealth will be laid off. The company cited “economic” as the reason behind its decision to lay off workers at two of its locations in the city.

                                  Workers at Sears in the city will also lose their jobs in July as the store is closing for economic reasons. A total of 154 workers will be affected, according to its WARN notice.

                                  A total of 130 workers at the Four Seasons restaurant will lose their jobs in July, and 197 employees at Al Jazeera next year will be out of work due to economic reasons.

                                  An additional 382 New Yorkers who work at the dining services company Sodexo will be out of jobs at the end of June, as a result of a loss of a contract.



                                  Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/05/businesses-flee-...

                                  more less
                                  active 46 minutes ago
                                  3
                                  Posts
                                  90
                                  Points
                                  6
                                  Users

                                      The land of Choice where you can get anything anytime almost anywhere. You can order your food to your liking, all shapes, any sized portion. You can have everything tailored to your specific tastes, needs and wants. One thing can never be denied, the land of choice is plentiful, it is vast.


                                      It is imperative that those choices exist. A large part of freedom is the freedom of Choice. To choose what is right for you is Liberty, it is freedom, it is quintessentially American. That's where it ends.


                                      You get this one.......


                                      Or this one.....


                                      Whilst the Media continue to scratch their heads as to why Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican Nominee with Democrats seemingly settling on Hillary Clinton the questions of where the US will be come 2017 grow, Trepidation, Fear and an unknown in a world of increasing unknowns. The Pop up Restaurant of Democracy and Presidential Politics rolls up every four years.


                                      A Pop up Restaurant that all will pay attention to, one that offer very little in the way of that choice mentioned at the beginning. Tens of Millions will be given the option of A or B. A population of over 300,000,000 and you get two choices. The Devils or the Deep Blue Sea, the Rock or the hard place, the lesser of two evils. Politics in the US are nothing but a Political version of the London Boat Race, only two are ever represented.


                                      Now it is clear Two characters who are incredibly divisive will be your nominees from your Two parties. Over 300,000,000 people. Two Parties. Not exactly spoilt for choice, In fact can anyone say that two Parties and a population so big can truly represent the minds of all, I think not.


                                      Would you like to see what actual Political Choice looks like in other nations with less standing than the US and much smaller Populations?


                                      How about your near Neighbours....Canada

                                      What about the British...

                                      What about the French...

                                      What about one of Europe's smallest nations, Andorra....


                                      How about Ireland...

                                      (Not including smaller Parties that vary from country to country)

                                      Of course if you combine the Population of the Countries mentioned you still wouldn't make up a Population close to 300,000,000..Yet even with these smaller nations you have a combined number of 30 Political Parties.

                                      You get two parties and are told to take it or leave it.

                                      Just let that sink in.

                                      more less
                                      Pundit Post
                                      active 47 minutes ago
                                      107
                                      Posts
                                      1852
                                      Points
                                      41
                                      Users

                                          The 2016 election and Trump

                                          I started this diary before Trump's win in IN. After his win, I am more sure than ever. The coming Progressive Wave. Sounds impossible, sounds ridiculous, or sounds like a fantasy. In fact, it is a totally realistic prediction and far more probable than Trump being elected in Nov. FAR more likely since Trump's chances are essentially zero. He has alienated so many demographic blocks that there are not the votes there for him to win. And please don't predict that he is suddenly going to switch modes because now we are entering the general election phase. What nonsense!

                                          1. He can't switch modes. He has only one. We have been hammered by it for the better part of a year so America is totally familiar with it.

                                          2. Even if he could pull it off, that routine has not worked in the past and won't now. Remember the famous etch-a-sketch Romney. It went over like a lead balloon. No Latino or woman or Muslim is going to forget his many vicious insults and certainly would be suspicious if he suddenly started voicing support, real support for any of them.

                                          3. HRC is going to control every aspect of the campaign and she will continually poke at him until she gets an out of control response, which won't be difficult since it is plain that he can't deal with her on ANY level.

                                          I'll throw out a prediction here. Right now, beginning of May, I predict Hill Clinton will win in Nov with a greater number of EV than Mr. Obama's 2008 smashing number of 365. A minimum of 380 EV and quite possibly over 400. And not because she is our first woman presidential candidate, but because she is, by far, the most qualified candidate of them all, but mostly because she is running at a unique time that is especially favorable to the democratic candidate, no matter who they might be.


                                          HRC first term - finish the ground work

                                          Do I think HRC is going to usher in that Progressive Wave? Yes and no. I can't say as I think we are going to see the fruits of a mature Progressive Movement in her first 4 years. There is a lot of domestic ground work to do before a Progressive Movement can really take root. The country has not fully recovered from the Great Recession despite the low unemployment rate and the high stock market. There is still a massive wealth inequality that is hampering the recovery and until that is dealt with, the recovery will not be complete.

                                          Senate turns democratic in 2016

                                          Forget Republicans keeping the senate. I'm not sure they will keep the House at this point. Trump's winning the nomination has republican leaders in a tizzy. Their fear? With The Donald at ticket top, disgust, disappointment and anger will be the biggest emotion driving many republicans in Nov, with the biggest result being low voter turnout. This must be avoided at all costs if republicans want to keep either house of congress.

                                          As I understand their plan today, they are looking for a sacrificial lamb to run as a third party candidate who has NO chance of winning (good luck with that career ending move, folks!) in order to lure non-Trump voters to the polls and therefore protect down ballot candidates. Add to it the absurd idea that knowing HRC is going to win, democratic voters won't bother to vote. Where do they come up with such nonsense? Really repubs?? If this is the best plan, you are in serious trouble.

                                          So, why will democrats win the senate and how does that start the progressive movement? Less than 2 years ago Republicans were promising all sorts of legislative action if given both houses of congress. None of it good from a democratic viewpoint mind you, a boatload of conservative looooong standing wishes, but still legislative action was forthcoming! Something completely different than the previous 113th session of congress, which ranked as the most unproductive congress in history. They were going to have the president using his veto pen more than any president in history!

                                          "Put me in coach, I'll deliver!" McConnell's leadership

                                          Republicans wanted both houses. They campaigned on getting stuff done, making rash, impossible to keep promises which would come back to haunt them later. With both houses of congress in repub hands, there would be no more unproductive sessions, a mountain of conservative bills were coming! With the lowest voter turnout in history, and a pro-Republican election, Republicans got what they asked for in Nov 2014 and they have delivered a session of congress even less productive than the record breaking last session.

                                          As time went on from Jan 2015, McConnell was stretching for lies as to why Do Nothing was still the working rule of congress. So far from keeping any of those promises made, or producing landmark conservative legislation, which would force the president to veto it and therefore deliver to their base a ready made argument for the 2016 tough senate elections, i.e. look how bad the president (mean old President Obama, vetoing that bill that allowed only Christian religions to be practiced) and democrats (we have to keep them out of the senate in 2016!), they couldn't produce any legislation at all!

                                          What was happening?? Republicans had majorities in both houses, so blaming democrats was a see threw lie, although that never stopped them before. Blaming the president didn't really work either. They couldn't point to a veto pen when there had been nothing to veto. Why was nothing getting accomplished, except naming the bison as America's national animal, with 2 tries before getting it right?

                                          Average Americans work every weekday and are productive or they don't keep the job. Lots of us work more than that. And on top of the non-production, we are greeted with the news that McConnell is closing shop for the rest of the year.

                                          Yep, very important decisions need to be made, because running a government does require work, but not this year. McConnell is going AWOL. With an open Supreme Court seat and no still no budget, naming a national animal is all the work he is willing to do. When asked why he is refusing to do his job, both as senate leader and as a working senator, McConnell's excuse is classic. "This is an election year. We can't decide anything until after Nov and maybe not even then!" In all seriousness, that is the lamest excuse of all excuses. Never before in our entire history has government stopped working because there was an election in Nov. I'm guessing McConnell is tired of finding excuses for the inaction and has decided to go home to Kentucky. "Screw you" working Americans is the unmistakable message to us and "screw you" fellow senators is the unmistakable message to senate republicans up in tough reelection races this year. You are on your own.

                                          In numerous town halls this summer, not only will these senators have to defend their actions or lack of actions, but now they get to answer questions on the performance of the republican senate as a whole. For his refusal to do his job, McConnell should be fired and would certainly be if he was employed anywhere other than the US Senate. Frankly, he is too old to be doing this anymore. He is burned out and does not care. The same problem John Boehner had.


                                          Scalia's death effects on republican senate

                                          The Grim Reaper came for Scalia at the perfect time. His death is proving to be a huge blow to the republican senate. Quite simply, McConnell is point blank refusing to do his job of filling that seat, and has threatened to continue refusing unless he personally approves the president's choice. This is not how the senate is suppose to act and Americans know it. Every poll taken with that question shows majority support for moving forward on filling this seat. Mr. Obama's choice deserves a hearing and a vote. It is not the job of the senate to pass personal judgement on the nominee. It is their job to vet the nominee and determine qualifications. So not only has McConnell done nothing about passing bills of any kind, let alone the dream conservative agenda, he thinks his job is to obstruct the president to the point where the Supreme Court is working with only 8 justices. This has had a profound effect on cases decided so far.

                                          Scalia's death is the final blow to the myth that republicans can adequately and competently govern. There has been an argument around for a while that claims republicans are great at talking governing, but really lousy at actually doing the work of governing. I think given their feat of accomplishments since just 2000, we can safely say that argument is proven.

                                          In fact, his death has exposed the republican party's dysfunction to such a degree, even the ever blind mainstream media is aware of it. They actually talk about it now, after ignoring it for years. Even Fox is aware of the problem although they are the haziest and most confused about it. (How did this happen? What went wrong? Over wrought emotions on full display.) Simply blaming the president and the democrats for the republican fiasco of failure to legislate, to do the job they were elected to do, that they PROMISED to do no less, is no longer an accepted line for all but Hannity and Rush (deaf, dumb and blind to the bitter end, those 2) and no longer an accepted line at all in other news organizations.

                                          The reality of how badly the republican party is functioning has hit established conservatives very hard and very, very late. This problem has been developing over years, getting worse and worse. All the ignoring and papering over the cracks and hoping it would go away, has allowed the disease of dysfunction to progress to the point of paralyzing the entire republican party. The current level of Do Nothing Obstruction is a brand new phenomenon in American politics. The time of acting like Do Nothing Obstruction is normal is over. It's not!

                                          The reasons for it are varied and fascinating, but I will not discuss that here. Sufficient enough to say it is real and the consequences are coming home, BIG TIME. (Trump over all others is proof enough, Wrong Way Bill Kristol!)

                                          No thanks says Americans to the offer of Republican Kool-Aid

                                          Americans are tired of the rampant dysfunction that has so gripped republicans, basic level functioning is not possible and congress is just going home for the year, with a possible 5 or 6 months left to work. They are tired of republican broken promises. For years, every election, republican candidates would make promises to their voters that they KNEW would be impossible to keep, but just sounded good to a mass of people ignorant on how our government actually works. A sampling of vocally made impossible promises include:

                                          1. Repeal and replace ObamaCare with a republican solution (although ACA IS a republican solution. Romney's MA state healthcare was the blueprint after all)

                                          2. Outlaw abortion once and for all, some way or another never specified (this promise ALWAYS riled up people so no specifics have ever been required)

                                          3. Outlaw gay marriage with an amendment to the Constitution

                                          4. Re-write the 14th amendment to outlaw birth right citizenship

                                          5. Round up and deport 11 million aliens

                                          6. Build a physical border wall and make Mexico pay for it

                                          7. Force President Obama to use his veto pen on conservative legislation a record number of times. Made in 2014 to get both houses of congress (he has only used it twice in 7 years, in 2010).

                                          8. Pass a balanced budget amendment

                                          9. Attack Iran, for whatever reason can be found

                                          10. Restore America's hubris which has been sadly depleted under President Obama. A president more in tune with negotiation than with wielding military power. (The truth is our prestige was destroyed by a republican and restored by a democrat, but it is easy to lie to republicans voters about THAT fact.)

                                          Non-vocal but implied promises made with a wink include:

                                          1. Make Christianity the national religion or ban Islam

                                          2. Stop the "browning" of the nation's population and make whites a permanent majority.

                                          None of these promises were kept, EVER.

                                          Next election you would hear the same old promises again along with a few new ones. There was no end to the Kool-Aid offers. And the voters would fall for it again, only to be disappointed again. Why should there be any surprise republican voters feel BETRAYED? ALL Americans felt betrayed on republican lies on WMD reasons for invading Iraq (the reason I give HRC a pass on her vote in 2003.)

                                          This year was the breaking point. With the current congress's performance or rather non-performance, after all the promises made, plus the refusal to fill Scalia's seat or DO THEIR JOB, on top of closing congress in the middle of the year, Republicans once again disappointed their party, BIG TIME. Only this time the result was not just disappointment. There was real anger to add to the betrayal. The republican party shattered.

                                          The democrats need 5 seats to take the senate in a election year favorable to democrats. With such chaos surrounding republican candidates, it won't be difficult to persuade independent and moderate repubs to vote democratic. Not at all.

                                          HRC and the Supreme Court

                                          There is one area where HRC will start the Progressive Movement in her first term right away. The Supreme Court.

                                          As an aside here, I think leaving Scalia's seat open is a big mistake on McConnell's part. The current nominee Garland, is a moderate. Not a liberal, but a middle of the road choice. He will pull the court to the left, but not as much as a more liberal justice will. McConnell ought to take what he has now instead of making a very poor gamble on Nov. No one knows what Trump will do, where as HRC's actions are completely predictable.

                                          With a democratic senate, HRC can put young progressive liberals on the Supreme Court and she will. 2 maybe 3, even 4 are possible. How? Fill the open seat plus RBG's and Breyer, both of whom are in their 80's and could retire late in her first term, just to ensure that liberal majority. That is 3. (Throw in Kennedy, an outside but possible chance and you get 4). The court will be set for the next 2, possibly 3 decades. Rulings will include reversal of Citizen's United, Voter ID restrictions struck down, abortion restrictions struck down, outlaw gerry mandoring voter districts, upholding immigration reform, no more threats to ACA. These are just a few of the possible rulings. The impact will enormous. (The conservatives must be feeling like a hunted species) And this is a progressive change we will see right away. A remade Supreme Court is going to be the first step of the Progressive Wave.

                                          HRC and the appeals courts

                                          Thanks to McConnell, the number of vacancies on the appeals courts number anywhere from 1/4 to 1/3. These court actually influence law more than the Supreme Court does. With a democratic senate, one of HRC's first jobs will be to fill those vacancies. And she will fill them with left leaning judges. Think about what effect that will have.

                                          Bernie and the Millenniums

                                          Bernie won IN. Added to his other wins, his impact on this election is the equivalent of a level 9 earthquake, felt coast to coast. Bernie was never suppose to be a factor in this race. He is an outsider, despite being in the senate for decades. Looked upon more of a kook than anything else, he has always had socialist ideas and has always talked progressive agenda. How did he suddenly come from left field to capture so much attention? Because of the Millenniums. His ideas caught fire with the largest generation of Americans. They are the victims of the wealth inequality that is still holding our economy hostage. The president has wanted to raise taxes and close loopholes from the beginning. But all he and the democrats have been able to do is let the Bush tax cuts expire and pass healthcare reform. They are the generation most affected by global warming and want action on it. Being the most ethnically diverse generation, they want action on immigration. They feel, rightly too I think, that they have been short changed out of the American Dream. Derided as "parent's basement dwellers" by the uber rich republicans, who do not realize that most of these kids don't have the choices their parents had. Those choices have been gradually eroded away by fiscally conservative economic policies that have favored the rich. Austerity is NOT a necessary policy for this rich, rich country. We can easily afford to support a more socially equitable economic policy.

                                          For a couple of years I have talked about the coming influence of this unique generation and the rise of Bernie Sanders is the first sign of their influence that can be pointed to, without any doubt. His speeches struck a chord with the Millenniums and they responded by giving their support to him. Besides the Trump crazies, they are the only demographic HRC does not have a lock on. And they FAR outnumber the crazies. HRC knows that if she is to make the connection with this all important demographic, she is going to have to embrace Bernie's agenda. And Bernie's agenda is strongly progressive. She can't embrace all of it, but there is absolutely NO doubt of his influence.

                                          Numbers count!

                                          Millenniums number more than any previous generation, some 90+ million with the youngest still not able to vote for a couple of years. They are a powerhouse and anyone who discounts them will not get into office or stay in office very long. And they believe in progressive ideas. Socially aware more than any previous generation since the 1960's, they support free college, universal healthcare, immigration reform with amnesty, gay marriage, transsexual rights, anti-war. A whole slew of progressive ideas.

                                          One of the reasons they have not supported HRC over Bernie is because they see her as part of the group of people who has short changed them. Someone who is more in league with Wall Street than them. HRC MUST capture this demographic if she wants to have 2 terms. The democrats must capture them (right now most register as independents) if they want to wash out the most extreme members of congress who have been instrumental in causing the dysfunction of congress and put congress firmly in democratic control. If democrats don't take the house this year, with Millennium support they will in 2018, especially if those extreme right wingers react to the democratic wins of 2016 by doubling done on the craziness and continue with the Do Nothing Obstruction policies that have done NOTHING for this country. They block all democratic progress at all costs, but are so unrealistic they cannot get any of their own ideas law. The net result is the complete unhappiness of Americans and we know who to blame this on.

                                          Will Millens vote for HRC? Red state rejection

                                          In 2016, yes certainly. To be able to count on their support in the future, the democrats must see her make progress on ideas that Millens support. If only to protect her back from the republican backlash of her Supreme Court and appeals court nominees.

                                          However I am going to make another prediction here. Republicans lose control of the state houses. I read how republicans hold so many governor seats and state houses that the conservative agenda is safe. I would not be so sure of that. Red state voters are slow, it is true. Re-electing Sam Brownback is proof of that, but they are not totally stupid. Electing a democratic governor to replace Jindal is proof of that. Both KS and LA suffered terribly under these men who insist on enacting the conservative agenda. Both states are in financial crisis, thanks to these policies. Both are in social crisis with high unemployment, homelessness, failing infrastructure, failing education.

                                          I think the republican control of the state houses is in serious jeopardy. In the next 4 years we will see a firm rejection of extreme conservatives at the state level. Immigrants and Millens will take control of the voting booth, despite all efforts to suppress their votes. All the state VoterID laws are going to be over-ruled in the next couple of years. Combine a lot of illegally disenfranchised voters with newly remade appeals courts and bingo that problem goes away.

                                          The future

                                          The whole key is whether HRC can start to implement a Progressive agenda. A lot depends on whether the democrats take the house along with the senate this year. If they do, America will start to see more liberal legislation passed right away. If not and repubs are successful at stopping progress, they will pay the price in 2018.

                                          I am so confident of this because of how bad off the republican party is. The dysfunction disease has gone so far it will take years of repair work before republicans can once again go before the American people with any chance of being successful. A lot of politicians who have been part of this cancer will have to go. McConnell, Blunt, Graham, Grassley, Cruz, to name only a few in the senate. Ryan and the Freedom caucus in the house. To be replaced by whom? Scott Walker, Rick Scott, Perry? Why does that strike me as wrong? Replacing dysfunctional congress with dysfunctional state? That won't be a selling point to voters already tired of dysfunction. While this repair work goes on, Progressiveness is in full force. It is completely possible if Millens are not happy with HRC's first term, we will see Bernie or his replacement show up in 2020. No matter what I think the days of extreme conservatives are over. Time is against them. Trump was the high point and what a low point in American politics he is.

                                          more less

                                          Posts Stream

                                          Yabberz Search

                                          Topics Found

                                          Members

                                          Posts

                                          Load More Posts
                                          Hi There,

                                          Do you want to quickly add followers, meet new friends, or simply connect with existing contacts to discuss the news?

                                          Do you have an email group that shares news items?

                                          It's now super easy and rewarding to find and add friends on Yabberz.

                                          This post has either already been PowerShared, not eligible for PowerShare or is not your post. Return Home
                                          0

                                              Click to confirm you are 18 yrs of age or older and open

                                              Click to confirm you want to see post

                                              more less
                                              active
                                              Posts
                                              Points
                                              Users
                                                  more less

                                                  Block User

                                                  This user will be blocked and not see your posts when logged in. You will also not see this user's posts when logged in. In order to later unblock the user, visit the blocked user listed on your about me page.
                                                  loading...
                                                  Last Heard: a minute ago
                                                  Joined: Mar 4' 15
                                                  Followers: 100
                                                  Points: 100,000