"A campaign of violence, vandalism, and intimidation is endangering providers and patients and curtailing the availability of abortion services. Since 1993, eight clinic workers – including four doctors, two clinic employees, a clinic escort, and a security guard – have been murdered in the United States. Seventeen attempted murders have also occurred since 1991.
In fact, opponents of choice , presumably christians , have directed more than 6,800 reported acts of violence against abortion providers since 1977, including bombings, arsons, death threats, bioterrorism threats, and assaults, as well as more than 188,000 reported acts of disruption, including bomb threats, hate mail, and harassing calls.
One of the earliest attacks was made against the non-profit Boulder Valley (Colorado) Clinic still operating today as the Boulder Valley Women’s Health Center. The attacker struck at night with a Molotov Cocktail. But, the building then housing the clinic had been a residence previously and the attackers mistakenly hit the building’s garage. The Fire Department put out the blaze quickly and the clinic itself was unharmed, but the staff and we board members were shaken. Little did we know how much further these forced-birthers would take things.
More than 40 years later, these attacks continue and yet the media and prominent leaders refuse to call them what they are: terrorism meant to intimidate people from working at or being a client at these facilities. Among the encouragers of these terrorists are people who create lying videos about Planned Parenthood selling baby parts and pundits both prominent and obscure who verbally attack abortion clinics every day from their electronic podiums.
The acts of these encouragers may not be prosecutable but they are nonetheless morally criminal. These cowards need to be called out for the terrorists and terrorist enablers they are.
Hillary ClintonConta verificada
@HillaryClinton Hillary Clinton retweetou
Today and every day, we #StandWithPP.
Hilarious until you realize it's not really a spoof, then it's scary.
David Vitter not running for re-election in the Senate
Source: NOLA Times Picayune
Sen. David Vitter announced Saturday night (Nov. 21) that he will serve the final year of his Senate term, but will not seek re-election in 2016.
Vitter made the announcement after losing his first Louisiana race, falling to Democrat John Bel Edwards in a run for governor.
Vitter served in the Louisiana House of Representatives from 1992 to 1999, before succeeding Bob Livingston in the 1st Congressional District. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004 without going to a runoff. He was re-elected in 2010.
The fact no newscasts are talking about this proves the right wing owns the media.
The media is to blame for not publicizing the Teaparty terrorists in Virginia, right wing owns the media.
"Two men in Virginia, Robert C. Doyle and Ronald Beasley Chaney have both been charged with conspiracy to possess firearms in an attempt to incite a race war by bombing black churches and synagogues, as reported on the Southern Poverty Law Center website.
Whoa… how did this slip under the radar? Well, maybe it had something to do with recent history and media reaction for warning about right-wing terror threats. As you may recall, in February of this year, the Department of Homeland Security released an intelligence assessment warning that extreme right-wing groups and lone actors with extreme right-wing ideological leanings may be as great if not a greater threat to commit acts of terrorism in the U.S. than Islamic extremists. While that report focused more on the “Sovereign Citizen” movement, other similar intelligence reports over the past decade have warned of the dangers of these right-wing groups, or acts of violence perpetrated by lone-wolf actors with similar views. The proof of these dangers is well-documented by various sources.
Most famously, back in 2009 DHS secretary Janet Napolitano warned of the growing threat of right-wing extremism in the wake of the election of Barack Obama. The backlash from right-wing punditry was swift and severe, as they interpreted this report as being baseless, and a mere political ploy to denigrate the burgeoning Tea Party movement. It was effective enough that Napolitano actually semi-apologized for such a “slight.”
Now I always found it fascinating that it was characters like Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and Laura Ingraham who made the leap to associate right-wing terrorists like the would-be church bombers pictured above with seemingly “mainstream” right-wing agitators such as themselves or groups like the Tea Party movement. I didn’t do that. Janet Napolitano didn’t. They did. Chew on that, if you will."
"Remember the great Ebola scare of 2014? The threat of a pandemic, like the threat of a terrorist attack, was real. But it was greatly exaggerated, thanks in large part to hype from the same people now hyping the terrorist danger.
What?s more, the supposed ?solutions? were similar, too, in their combination of cruelty and stupidity. Does anyone remember Mr. Trump declaring that ?the plague will start and spread? in America unless we immediately stopped all plane flights from infected countries? Or the fact that Mitt Romney took a similar position? As it turned out, public health officials knew what they were doing, and Ebola quickly came under control ? but it?s unlikely that anyone on the right learned from the experience.
Dig a little deeper, and Krugman finds that an apocalyptic mind-set has taken hold among Republicans in the Obama years. And it won't let go:
Think about it. From the day Mr. Obama took office, his political foes have warned about imminent catastrophe. Fiscal crisis! Hyperinflation! Economic collapse, brought on by the scourge of health insurance! And nobody on the right dares point out the failure of the promised disasters to materialize, or suggest a more nuanced approach.
"I despise appeals to nativism and prejudice, a lot of which we have been hearing in recent months. And I do proudly believe in immigration reform that gives Hispanics and others a pathway to citizenship and a better life.
And while I am on that subject let me just say a real word of concern to what I have been hearing from some of the Republican candidates in recent months. People can have honest disagreements about immigration or about anything else. That’s called democracy, but people should not be using the political process to inject racism into the debate. And if Donald Trump and others who refer to Latinos as criminals and rapists. If they want to open that door, our job is to shut that door, and shut it tight. This country has gone too far. Too many people have suffered, and too many people have died for us to continue hearing racist words coming from major political candidates.
Sanders didn’t just destroy Trump and the entire racist subtext that many of the Republican presidential candidates are running on. He called on the American people to shut the racists down. Sen. Sanders was correct. We have a moral obligation to shut people like Donald Trump, who are trying to exploit some of the deepest wounds in society for political gain completely down. The reason the media should report on Trump’s remarks with a more critical eye is because he is damaging the country."
Just yesterday Trump told Yahoo News that he would support the development of databases and other systems to track and monitor people in the United States on the basis of their religion. He did not rule out forcing Muslims to have identifying papers or badges. Perhaps he would make them wear a star and crescent in the manner that they made Juice wear the Star of David.
Yahoo News asked Trump whether this level of tracking might require registering Muslims in a database or giving them a form of special identification that noted their religion. He wouldn’t rule it out.
"We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely," Trump said when presented with the idea. "We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully."
This grotesque policy position fits nicely with his prior statement that he believes it may be necessary to close mosques in America. He said that "there’s absolutely no choice" because "some really bad things are happening." Apparently one of the "really bad things" isn't the assault on our Constitution's First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of religion. But that's not all, Trump also told Yahoo News that...
"We’re going to have to do things that we never did before. And some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule," Trump said. "And certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy. And so we’re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago."
So "security is going to rule." And I'll bet the trains will run on time. And speaking of trains, this is the same man who wants to round up 11,000,000 Latinos for mass deportation. How he proposes to do that is a mystery, but it wouldn't be surprising if it involved boxcars and concentration camps. He approvingly cited the 1950's "Operation Wetback" model."
Read a great explanation by an immigration lawyer at :
BryanScottHicks on Facebook.
"Clinton people took it seriously, while the Bushies came in with an Iraq agenda and didn't want to hear about anything else.
He paints a sad tale of both arrogance and ignorance: repeated warnings by both Clarke and George Tenet apparently made no impression on an administration obsessed with Saddam Hussein.
This thesis is born out by the eerily prescient and tragically ignored Hart-Rudman report on terrorism, presented on Jan. 31, 2001. (And let me point out that the media deserve much blame here, as well: All the networks ignored it entirely save for CNN, which did it justice. The New York Times and Wall Street Journal never printed a line about it, though The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times both did thorough jobs.)
That commission concluded, "Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers." They recommended a series of practical and effective steps. Of the various institutions, Congress deserves some credit for trying to pick up on the report, which clearly would have moved us ahead by six moths on terrorism planning.
Donald Rumsfeld, not one of my favorites, also deserves credit for vigorously backing the report. Congress scheduled hearing for May 7, 2001, but according to reports at the time, the White House stifled the move because it did not want Congress out in front on the issue.
True, the report was initiated by President Clinton, but the commission was bipartisan and included former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and other Republicans. On May 5, the White House announced that rather than adopt Hart-Rudman, it was forming its own committee on terrorism headed by Vice President Cheney. That group never
Molly Ivins, 2004
The first clue is that portrait of Ben and a black JC sitting at his shoulder. Have the crackers in Alabama seen that?
Now Ben is claiming his sources are better than Obama's as he defends his assertion that China has a military involvement in the Syrian fight.
And I thought a candidacy couldn't top Trump's for comic relief!!
"If you Work for a Living, do NOT trust ANY politician who espouses a belief in Free Trade, Free Markets, or an Invisible Hand. NONE of those exist, and that politician is NOT your friend."
Has anyone asked Santelli about GOP charges that he has a leftist bias?
That would be good TV!!
There are currently 14 candidates that have regularly been appearing in debates. Giving them five minutes each for opening and closing statements would take 140 minutes, which is more than the total time for a typical two hour debate.
Carson also would like to reduce the total number of debates, calling them a distraction from campaigning.
The meeting comes on the heels of the CNBC debate, which was broadly criticized as chaotic. The candidates have subsequently claimed that the questions by CNBC moderators were biased and inaccurate.
CNBC focuses almost exclusively on business concerns and one of the questioners at the debate launched the Tea Party with a rant on the network. The questions challenged by the candidates were actually accurate.
Ted Cruz has subsequently called for all future debate moderators to be registered Republicans. Cruz suggested Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh."
Then he drifts into:
“So what we’re going to have to start doing instead of, you know, picking on this group or this group, is we’re going to have to have a major reduction in the regulatory influence that is going on. The government is not supposed to be in every part of our lives, and that is what is causing the problem.”
Paging Dr. Carson, the question was about pharmaceutical companies charging astronomical prices for medications. That’s the government’s fault?"
And his abortion stance will put the Gv't in the bedroom and Dr. offices of many Americans but he unconcerned about those intrusions.
“My great concern is that we are on the verge, perhaps, of picking someone who cannot do this job.”
Indeed. The two manifestly unqualified front-runners, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, were remarkably muted. Trump simply repeated his, yes, comic-book version of a presidential campaign — huge wall, huge tax cut, huge Trump smarts — except when he was shamelessly denying he had said what was in his own immigration plan.
Where Trump craves attention, Carson, curiously, seems to flinch from it. Even when pitched softballs, he veers quickly from substance to off-topic platitudes.
Asked about his plan to replace Medicare with individual savings accounts, Carson tossed out some numbers (wrong, actually; 55 million are enrolled, not 48 million, which matters because it reduces the money available in Carson’s private accounts). Then he shifted to conservative autopilot: “It was never intended that the government should be in every aspect of our lives. This is a country that is of, for and by the people.”
Or consider this answer about drug companies profiteering on life-saving medicines, reproduced here in its incoherent entirety:
“Well, there is no question that some people go overboard when it comes to trying to make profits, and they don’t take into consideration the American people. What we have to start thinking about, as leaders, particularly in government, is what can we do for the average American? And you think about the reasons that we’re having such difficulty right now with our job market.
“Well, the average small manufacturer, whatever they’re manufacturing, drugs or anything, if they have less than 50 employees, the average cost in terms of regulations is $34,000 per employee. Makes it a whole lot easier for them to want to go somewhere else."