MERRY CHRISTMAS

For those who are Christians, Merry Christmas from the NFTOS staff.

LINUS




Christmas Eve/ Sarajevo

NFTOS STAFF &

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

PHIL DOUBLES DOWN

Phil Robertson has spoken out publicly for the first time since GQ published comments he made condemning homosexuality as sinful and suggesting that African Americans were perfectly happy under Jim Crow laws. He did not address the racist remarks, but used a small group Bible study on Sunday to defend his rebukes of homosexuality, claiming he was merely quoting the Bible.

His new statements, however, clarify further his judgmental views about gay people. For example, he alludes to HIV and other diseases as being the consequence of sexual immorality — reminding of how God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. The only safe sexual option for men, he argues, is to marry a woman:

ROBERTSON: We murder each other and we steal from one another, sex and immorality goes ballistic. All the diseases that just so happen to follow sexual mischief… boy there are some microbes running around now. Sexual sins are numerous and many, I have a few myself. So what is your safest course of action? If you’re a man, find yourself a woman, marry them and keep your sex right there. You can have fun, but one thing is for sure, as long as you are both healthy in the first place, you are not going to catch some debilitating illness, there is safety there. 

Commonsense says we are not going to procreate the human race unless we have a man and a woman. From the beginning Jesus said, “It is a man and a woman.” Adam was made and Eve was made for this reason. They left their fathers and mothers and be united to become one flesh, that’s what marriage is all about. But we looked at it and said it was an outdated stereotype. When you look back at the human race, the sins have always been the same: We get high, we get drunk, we get laid, we steal and kill. Has this changed at all from the time God burnt up whole cities because their every thought was evil? 

Robertson went on to assert that sexual immorality is actually worse than any other sins, but that Jesus can take away the sin of homosexuality. 

ROBERTSON: The acts of the sinful nature are obvious. Sexual immorality, is number one on the list. How many ways can we sin sexually? My goodness. You open up that can of worms and people will be mad at you over it. I am just reading what was written over 2000 years ago. Those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom. All I did was quote from the scriptures, but they just didn’t know it. Whether I said it, or they read it, what’s the difference? The sins are the same, humans haven’t changed.

But there’s a way out, do you want to hear the rest of the story or what? Jesus will take sins away, if you’re a homosexual he’ll take it away, if you’re an adulterer, if you’re a liar, what’s the difference? If you break one sin you may as well break them all. If we lose our morality, we will lose our country. It will happen. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all walk around without stealing from each other and killing each other?

Video also surfaced last week of Robertson speaking against homosexuality back in 2010, comparing homosexuality to bestiality just like he did in the GQ interview by claiming that gay people “bow down to birds animals and reptiles and each other and the first thing you see coming out of them is gross sexual immorality.”

A&E suspended Robertson from filming on Duck Dynasty, which prompted his family to suggest that the show about their duck call business might not be able to continue without him.

Conservatives have fervently been defending Robertson’s comments about homosexuality, though they have been noticeably silent about his comments on race and civil rights.

ROBERTSON: "Sexual immorality, is number one on the list."

Actually, God says all sins are equal. There is no ranking. God also said there is no greater commandment than loving thy neighbor. Something Robertson clearly ignores.

Perhaps Robertson like all bible thumping "Christians" should learn the Bible before attempting to practice selective Christianity.

Phil Robertson, congratulations, you are both todays: Asshat of the day and Worst Person In The World!

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

A WAR ON CHRISTMAS STORY

CONSERVATIVES MADE-UP WAR ON CHRISTMAS STORY

The right wing makes up a fake "War on Christmas" every year. It's easy to joke about, but not all of their lies are laughing matters.


HAPPT FESTIVUS FOX




The Dark Mastermind Behind The War On Christmas




O'Reilly Freaks Out




Sarah Palin 'War on Christmas' Book Flops




Right Wing's Fake War on Christmas Started Nearly 100 Years Ago

This is always a fun time of the year for me, when the NECONS ramp up the lunacy with the war on Christmas. May God keep blessing us with the benighted ignorance of the unlettered GOPer.

NFTOS 

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

UTAH JUDGE GETS IT RIGHT

MARRIAGE EQUALITY

Who'd a thunk it?


United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision striking down the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, was not the clearest opinion the justices have ever produced. Although that opinion was firmly rooted in the Constitution’s guarantee of equality for all Americans, it contained just enough states’ rights language to give anti-gay lawmakers in the states some hopes that marriage discrimination could remain alive in conservative enclaves throughout the country. If a Utah federal judge’s opinion that was released Friday is upheld on appeal, however, there will no longer be any doubt that marriage equality belongs to all Americans.

“The Constitution protects the Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights, which include the right to marry and the right to have that marriage recognized by their government,” Judge Robert Shelby concludes in his opinion striking down Utah’s ban on marriage equality — and this right applies to everyone. The same Constitution, Shelby explains “protects the choice of one’s partner for all citizens, regardless of sexual identity.”

Although Shelby largely relies on the argument that marriage is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution, he also made sharp nods towards the promise of equality. “Rather than protecting or supporting the families of opposite-sex couples,” he explains, Utah’s “Amendment 3 perpetuates inequality by holding that the families and relationships of same-sex couples are not now, nor ever will be, worthy of recognition.”

Rather than protecting or supporting the families of opposite-sex couples, Amendment 3 perpetuates inequality by holding that the families and relationships of same-sex couples are not now, nor ever will be, worthy of recognition. Amendment 3 does not thereby elevate the status of opposite-sex marriage; it merely demeans the dignity of same-sex couples. And while the State cites an interest in protecting traditional marriage, it protects that interest by denying one of the most traditional aspects of marriage to thousands of its citizens: the right to form a family that is strengthened by a partnership based on love, intimacy, and shared responsibilities. The Plaintiffs’ desire to publicly declare their vows of commitment and support to each other is a testament to the strength of marriage in society, not a sign that, by opening its doors to all individuals, it is in danger of collapse.

Beyond Judge Shelby’s conclusion that marriage is a question of constitutional rights, not one of states’ rights — as he explains, “the Fourteenth Amendment requires that individual rights take precedence over states’ rights where these two interests are in conflict” — Shelby’s opinion appears designed to tear down whatever intellectual infrastructure remains supporting marriage discrimination.

The leading argument advanced by supporters of discrimination in same-sex marriage cases is that marriage is necessarily tied to procreation, so same-sex couples can be excluded because they cannot produce biological offspring. Yet, as Shelby points out, the ability to procreate is not “a defining characteristic of conjugal relationships from a legal and constitutional point of view.

” Such an argument does not simply “demean the dignity” of same-sex couples, it also degenerates “the many opposite-sex couples who are unable to reproduce or who choose not to have children.” Indeed, under Utah’s argument for maintaining marriage discrimination, “a post-menopausal woman or infertile man does not have a fundamental right to marry because she or he does not have the capacity to procreate.”

Additionally, opponents of marriage equality who cheered Justice Antonin Scalia’s sharply worded dissent in Lawrence v. Texas — another landmark gay rights opinion — may come to regret Scalia’s words after reading Judge Shelby’s opinion. Scalia wrote in Lawrence that “today’s opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as formal recognition in marriage is concerned.” Shelby’s opinion proclaims that Scalia was right.

It should be noted, however, that Shelby’s opinion is significantly less sweeping that Thursday’s marriage equality decision by the New Mexico Supreme Court. The New Mexico court unanimously held that “because same-gender couples (whether lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, hereinafter ‘LGBT’) are a discrete group which has been subjected to a history of discrimination and violence, and which has inadequate political power to protect itself from such treatment, the classification at issue must withstand intermediate scrutiny to be constitutional.” Thus, under the New Mexico decision, any anti-LGBT law will be subject to heightened constitutional scrutiny — and the New Mexico court explicitly included transgender individuals within the scope of its holding. Shelby’s opinion, by contrast, is largely focused on the right to marry.

Nevertheless, Shelby’s opinion is broad enough to extend the blessings of full marriage equality to all same-sex couples if it is upheld by the Supreme Court. In the meantime, however, it will need to be reviewed by the conservative-leaning United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. So it will probably be quite a while before this case reaches the nation’s highest Court.

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

DUCK DYNASTY SHITSTORM

With the shit-storm over Duck Dynasty Phil Robertson’ comments about homosexuality dominating cable news Thursday, Jon Stewart really had no choice but to offer the world his take on the issue. The Daily Show host took the opportunity to deliver a scathing take down of the “free speech absolutists” at Fox News.

“Look, I think what the guy said is ignorant,” Stewart said, “but I also have an inclination to support a world where saying ignorant shit on television doesn’t get you kicked off that medium.” But does Fox News truly believe you shouldn’t “pressure people to have to adhere to cultural norms of speech?”

This led to an all out “War on Christmas” montage, after which Stewart explained that Fox’s “belief in free speech doesn't extend to the holidays where the word Christmas is mandatory.”


Video Courtesy of Comedy Central

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,The Daily Show on Facebook

I was emailed this today regarding this issue:

"Political correctness is all about changing the language to cater to an aggrieved group, usually a minority."

My response: You're halfway there, once you realize who the targets [of 'politically incorrect' comments 'usually'] are. But since you're not 'usually' in any of those minorities, who gives a shit - right?

It's all about civility - not your '1st amendment right' to spew hateful speech. The government is not preventing you from doing that - but society has a right and obligation to scorn you for doing so.

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

FREE SPEECH SARAH PALIN STYLE

Cross Posted from Crooks and Liars





Sarah Palin took to her Facebook page to defend the Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson, after he was placed on indefinite leave by A&E for his homophobic words, on the grounds that our free speech is endangered.

Free speech is an endangered species. Those “intolerants” hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us.

Here's what he said about the gays:

In the GQ interview, Robertson goes on record with comments about the sinfulness of gays and black people under Jim Crow. In the profile, an unedited Robertson sounds off on what's ailing the country during a trip through the Louisiana backwoods. 

"Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men," he tells reporter Drew Magary. "Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won't inherit the kingdom of God. Don't deceive yourself. It's not right."

He also muses about his own sexual orientation: "It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me. I'm just thinking: There's more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I'm saying? But hey, sin: It's not logical, my man. It's just not logical."

And as Jamie wrote, he also made a claim that African Americans were better off in the pre-civil rights era:

“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy?

Sarah Palin isn't offended by those words at all because in her mind people should be able to say anything they want, anywhere without retribution. It's not surprising that she knows so little about 'freedom of speech' and what it means, (maybe we can get Katie Couric to ask her about it).

But if we go by her own understanding of it, why didn't she defend Martin Bashir over his callous words about her --which caused a conservative outrage and then led him to resign his job at MSNBC? She wallowed in his ridiculous words to her and bathed in the conservative backlash politics that ensued.

Did she say that Bashir was entitled to say anything he wants on MSNBC's airwaves, even attacking her? After all, it was his personal opinion that he voiced. Nope. Did she then go on and debate Bashir over what prompted him to say those things about her? Nope. So it's OK for anti-gay and and pro-Jim Crow words to be uttered by Robertson, but not anti-Palin words.

It's very typical of conservatives like Sarah Palin that their understanding of politics only extends as far as the last Facebook entry they made.

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATER

CHRIS CHRISTIE'S  "BRIDGEGATE"

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie still hasn’t offered an alternate –more believable – explanation for his administration’s controversial lane closures on the George Washington Bridge. The most plausible explanation – that the governor’s administration was punishing a mayor who refused to endorse Christie – is the most politically damaging one, but also the most credible pending further revelations.

Video courtesy of MSNBC




An in-depth follow up can be read here. - RELATED: Gov. Christie's cronies lawyer up as "Bridgegate" gets even messier

You just can't make this stuff up.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

COULTERGIEST ON SINGLE WOMEN

Ann Coulter really has a problem with single women. On a Fox & Friends episode from Dec. 15, she said that tea bageers don’t have a problem with women, they have a problem with single women. On her planet, single women want the government to be their husbands. They want the government to provide for them and pay for their birth control, and basically just take care of everything for them.






It’s not hard to understand that Ann Coulter is a woman with an odd view on women’s issues. Her ideal world is back in 1950, when women knew their place as secondary to men. She wants women everywhere to be married, and submissive to their husbands. It seems she thinks the world’s problems would all go away if women would just get married and shut up. Or, to put it in Ann Coulter’s own words:

“By the way, Republicans don’t have a problem with women. They have a problem with unmarried women who think, ‘No, we don’t need national defense, we need our birth control paid for.’ [...] And why? Because single women look at the government as their husbands. [They say] ‘Please provide for me, please take care of me.’”

Coulter, the "female" version of Rush Limbaugh - once I get over her Adams apple and wondering whether this hate hag has a severe thyroid problem, or is she just the creature I think she is, "Coultergeist" - does she really believe the shit she spews, or is this a dog and pony show for the unlettered tea bagger?

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

WHAT CBS DIDN'T ASK

Cross-posted from thinkprogress:

John Miller, reporting for CBS’ “60 Minutes,” found himself the target of ridicule on social media for his Sunday “exposé” on the National Security Agency (NSA). The segment, which takes viewers through some portions of the NSA building, has been characterized as puff piece with Miller soft-balling questions to Gen. Keith Alexander, the agency’s director and head of the U.S. Cyber Command, and NSA Analyst Stephen Benitez. Here are four questions Miller, a former U.S. Department of National Intelligence employee who reportedly is preparing to join the New York Police Department, missed or didn’t press hard enough to get answered:

Why did Alexander and National Intelligence Director James Clapper tell Congress that NSA wasn’t collecting U.S. citizens’ personal data when it really was?

In a March hearing, Clapper told Congress that no data was “wittingly” collected, according to a letter he sent in June to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Alexander was quoted in the letter as saying, “The story that we have millions or hundreds of millions of dossiers on people is completely false.” During the interview with Miller, he conceded the NSA was collecting some data, arguing, “How do you know when the bad guy who’s using those same communications that my daughters use, is in the United States trying to do something bad?”

Why were employees using NSA tactics to spy on their love interests?

“Nobody [in the NSA] willfully or knowingly trying to break the law,” Alexander said. Miller did point out that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court thought differently, saying “the NSA systematically transgressed both its own court-appointed limits in bulk Internet data collection programs.” But he didn’t bring up that NSA employees have admittedly abused their access in the past. Most notably, many employees used the NSA’s databases to gather intelligence on significant others and exes, violations known under the spycraft label LOVEINT. There was also no mention of the nearly 3,000 incidents of unauthorized data collection by NSA employees discovered over the course of internal investigations, which The Washington Post first reported.

What can the NSA get from spying on Google and Yahoo that it can’t get directly?

Miller acknowledged the agency openly cooperates with the two Internet giants, Apple and others to access user information. However, the NSA still infiltrated Google and Yahoo’s data centers per documents released by NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden. Alexander dodged a similar question when Miller asked if the NSA hacked into U.S. Internet companies’ foreign data centers: “No, that’s not correct,” Alexander said. “We do target terrorist communications. And terrorists use communications from Google, from Yahoo, and from other service providers. So our objective is to collect those communications no matter where they are.” Alexander’s comments echoed those of his predecessor, Michael Hayden, but still didn’t address the need to gather information secretly from companies they work with. Since the revelation, Google, Yahoo and six other tech companies have asked the NSA to revise their agreements after Snowden documents revealed the agency spied on ‘World of Warcraft’ video game users.

Does the NSA ever track people’s cell phone call locations and to what extent?

Miller and Alexander discussed phone monitoring, with Alexander skirting the issue saying, “We’re defending this country from future terrorist attacks and we’re defending our civil liberties and privacy. There’s no reason that we would listen to the phone calls of Americans. There’s no intelligence value in that. There’s no reason that we’d want to read their email. There is no intelligence value in that.” Miller’s narration goes on to say that the NSA only collects “metadata” of phone records for more than 300 million Americans that reveal the number from which a call originated and the one receiving the call. That metadata can also include information about where the call was placed, using GPS technology that most phones have these days. Numerous reports have surfaced on how the NSA uses cell phone tracking data, and that it collects billions of such records world wide each day. But geolocation tracking never came up.

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

THANK YOU FROM NFTOS

When you blog 365 days a year - now for over three years, its at times, a struggle to put one out. This would be one of those days. In the past we have posted our sites statistical analysis, which shows how many hits and readers we have had to our site to date.

Not one to brag much, oh who the hell are we kidding, in the graph below - we have had over 45.7 million hits [page views, unique visits and return visits] since April 2010.

NFTOS 3 YEAR STATS

When you think of it, holding a masters degree in engineer and not in journalism - I am just a compassionate "Damn Nazi Liberal", and to say we have had 46 million computer screens seeing our work - its humbling and mind numbing.

We at NFTOS appreciate every hit to our site whether its a fellow progressive or an American Talibaner.

We would like to thank you for visiting our page [whether you agree with us or not]. There are times when I wonder how much longer we do this, and then a right wing nut job goes to the brink, and then we no longer wonder.

Enjoy your Sunday fellow progressives, and as always, we very much are grateful for your readership.


CHEERS




NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West & Staff

OVER 33,000 DEAD BY GUN VIOLENCE SINCE NEWTOWN

THIS PHOTO UPSETS THE GUN HUGGER MOST

NRA, Gun Huggers, Guns Over People unite, be proud, for over thirty three thousand lives have been taken since Newtown one year ago today.

Today flags in Connecticut will fly at half staff to honor the 20 first-graders and six adults gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, 2012.

I am one of those "Damn Nazi Socialist Liberals" who wants total control over the Guns Over People, until we can prove that we indeed are truly "responsible" with weapons, then we all the pay the fiddler. I often find that "responsible" gun huggers are the ones we really need to watch the most, you know the ones who leave armed weapons on the kitchen table so that 4 year old baby Suzy can pick it up and kill herself or her two year old brother Johnny. How about the "responsible" Ex Vice President who shit his best friend in the face.....responsible my ass!

I posted yesterday on Twitter that over 173 children under the age of 12 have been killed over this same period, and the gun hugging twitter nuts went into a frothy frenzy. One NRA nut asked me to list every gun used in these events....here is the thing numbnutz, I don't give a phuck what weapon was used!

One year later, after this most disgusting event, and still having not done anything in this country to curb this, speaks volumes about Americans as a whole. When a organization [which is only 4 million strong] dictates what we do and don't do with regards to guns - Houston we have a problem! America has over 325 million citizens, since when did 4 million rule 325 million?

We have had more deaths this year alone than the entire 15 year war of Afghanistan and Iraq combined. Thirty three thousand dead via guns - is eight [8] thousand Benghazi's readers, where the hell is the outrage Faux News, Megyn Kelly, GOP, Guns Over People, Gun Huggers, NRA?

Where the phuck are all these good guys with a gun - where are all these "responsible" gun huggers at?

Email just in to NFTOS from a gun hugger:

"Gun control laws have been demonstrated not to work. Gun control laws have been proven to be a huge waste of money. Gun control laws disarm the law-abiding and empower the criminal. Gun control laws are legal booby traps for the unwary, but rarely hinder the criminal." 

Except in every other country in the world where the gun laws are so stringent they basically prohibit routine ownership of weapons. This argument only works in the vacuum of addressing the US attempts at firearm regulation.

It is time to right this wrong - God forbid, but I wonder what happens to a gun hugger when they, or their family become a statistic of gun violence, are they still a proponent of zero gun control?

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

TWITTER HAS A CHANGE OF HEART

From thinkprogress:

Twitter caused quite a stir late Thursday regarding a change in its block policy, provoking outrage from victims of online harassment and advocates. The new policy, which would have allowed blocked users to keep following and retweeting their blockers, was reversed hours after its debut.

But while the decision to reverse the change was welcomed, it may not go far enough for those most vulnerable to violent threats and harassment — specifically women, people of color, and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community.

Women took to Twitter soon after the announcement to protest the change, explaining they used the block function to shield themselves from rape and death threats. In a petition against the new policy, several users shared examples of how they had been stalked and threatened on Twitter. “As a public person who uses the medium for my work, I am very concerned because stalkers and abusers will now be able to keep tabs on their victims, and while there was no way to prevent it 100 percent before, Twitter should not be in the business of making it easier to stalk someone,” wrote Zerlina Maxwell, a political analyst and feminist writer who started the petition. Maxwell received hundreds of rape and death threats after an appearance on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program earlier this year.

“We never want to introduce features at the cost of users feeling less safe,” Michael Sippey, Twitter’s vice president of product wrote in an announcement Thursday night. He also mentions that Twitter is dissatisfied with the “old” block option, which keeps blocked users from seeing any activity of the blockers, saying it’s “not ideal, largely due to the retaliation,” which sometimes involves blocked users recruiting their followers to harass the blockers.

However, to some, the fact that Twitter launched the policy in the first place smacks of insensitivity to female users.

“It’s always a safe bet that if you put money on dudes in tech or media corporate hierarchies underestimating or not considering the needs of women, you’ll always beat the house,” Jenn Pozner, executive director of Women in Media and News. Pozner monitors online harassment of women and has experienced repeated rape and death threats. “Even in the way they discussed why they were making their change, [their] entire mindset was, ‘Let’s coddle harassers who are pissed off and fix something that, even nominally, makes their lives difficult.”

Despite recanting the block policy, users feel Twitter should make a more concerted effort to protect users from online abuse. “I’m pleased that Twitter decided to revert back to the ‘old’ blocking policy, but I would really like to see them improve certain aspects of their reporting policy,” Maxwell said.

Those changes should include a “very clear policy” on abusive tweets that’s actively enforced, Pozner said. Twitter currently has an abusive behavior policy that prohibits “direct, specific threats of violence against others,” a characterization that omits more generalized expressions of violence that still make many targets feel unsafe. The network also has recently rallied against online abuse by holding a video contest under the #ByeByeBullying hashtag and supporting Bullying Awareness Week.

In addition to the now restored blocking option, there should be a “mute” option, which would temporarily filter out someone from your feed and mentions without fully blocking them, Maxwell suggested. Other changes should include a spam reporting function, as well as more aggressive enforcement and follow-up for the current reporting policies and reports, Maxwell said.

“Right now, abusers really can just harass you with impunity. And while no solution is 100 percent, the frequency of threats and harassment that people—and women in particular—deal with on a daily basis is unacceptable,” she added.

Pozner blamed this lax policy on an indifference to women. “They have been told directly by their female users in a ton of different ways that there is a long-term problem that female users have with violent harassment . “I’ve stopped reporting stuff to Twitter because nothing ever happens. They never did anything about it.”

Reigning in threats of abuse, specifically rape, has been an ongoing struggle for Twitter and other social networking sites. Twitter recently agreed to ease its reporting requirements after users complained that it was too hard to report repeated rape threats. The site also promised over the summer to take these abusive tweets more seriously and streamline the reporting process.

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

BOEHNER GETS A SPINE......SORT OF

BOEHNER GETS A SPINE?

Cross-posted from thinkprogress:

After several right-wing outside groups slammed the bipartisan budget deal negotiated by House Budget Chair Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senate Budget Chair Patty Murray (D-WA) — in some cases before the deal was even announced — Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) hit his breaking point. “When you criticize something and you have no idea what you’re criticizing, you’ve lost your credibility,” he told reporters Thursday, noting that it “comes to a point where some people step over a line.” But Boehner’s frustration has no doubt been building up over this three years as Speaker, as groups like Heritage Action, Freedom Works, and the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF) have stymied his attempts to pass even conservative-friendly legislation.

In 2011, Boehner and President Obama were on the verge of reaching a “grand bargain” on taxes, spending, and deficit reduction. The talks fell through, in part because freshmen Republicans and the conservative groups that backed them were unwilling to accept new revenue.

Here are some of the bipartisan and GOP measures the groups have worked to block over the past three years:


The 2011 Budget Control Act.

Facing a possible default on the national debt, Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed on a bill to force automatic spending cuts, known as sequestration, unless a “super committee” could find sufficient savings cut hundreds of billions of dollars from federal spending over the next ten years. Though Boehner had made in clear in 2010 that when Washington hit its debt limit, Congress would “have to deal with it as adults,” groups on the right opposed increasing the ceiling. Heritage Action denounced the agreement, arguing that “Speaker Boehner’s most recent proposal to raise the debt limit is regrettably insufficient for our times.” With Freedom Works and SCF also opposed, 66 House Republicans voted against the bill.


The 2012 highway bill.

With the Highway Trust Fund set to run out of money, the Republican-controlled House and Democratic-control Senate sent an extension bill to conference committee. Freedom Works announced its opposition to the bipartisan compromise and said it would score it as a key vote, criticizing it for making “few reforms to the federal government’s rampant spending on transportation.” Heritage Action also strongly opposed the extension and scored it as a vote “to maintain unsustainable levels of funding when we are nearly $16 trillion in debt.” 52 House Republicans voted no.


The New Year’s Eve 2012 Fiscal Cliff deal.

As 2012 ended, Congress grappled with a standoff over the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts and the beginning of drastic sequestration cuts. After Vice President Joe Biden (D) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell reached a deal to extend some of the tax cuts, let others expire, and delay the cuts, the groups blasted the deal as “higher taxes.” FreedomWorks announced it would count a vote for the bill against legislators, while Heritage Action slammed it before it was even announced as a “K Street gravy train,” laden with giveaways to special interest groups. The deal passed with Boehner’s support, but the majority of Republicans voting against.


Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

The Senate passed a bipartisan immigration reform bill in June by an overwhelming 68-32 super-majority. The bill had the strong opposition of SCF and Heritage Action, who attacked it as “amnesty.” While Boehner initially agreed that it was “time for Congress to act,” GOP opposition has delayed any House action until at least 2014.


Efforts to avert the October 2013 government shutdown over Obamacare.

The effort to force a government shutdown over defunding Obamacare was largely driven by freshman Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and the Senate Conservatives Fund. Even though Boehner warned that it was a bad strategy, SCF and the other groups pressured Republican members to oppose any bill to fund the government without killing the Affordable Care Act. As the government shutdown dragged on, Boehner was forced to pull bills from the floor as members of his caucus refused to go against the groups’ wishes. At one point, he reportedly recited the Serenity Prayer at a closed-door caucus meeting at which he announced his “Plan B” was being scrapped for lack of Republican support. Though FreedomWorks believed the standoff a “brilliant strategy,” Congress eventually reopened government without any repeal. A furious Heritage Action said the compromise “will do nothing to stop Obamacare’s massive new entitlements from taking root — radically changing the nature of American health care.”


The 2013 Farm Bill.

On October 1, Congress allowed the historically bipartisan Farm Bill to expire. Attempts to revive the law, which funds numerous programs vital to the nation’s food supply, have been ongoing. Citing “myriad flaws with both the House and Senate” farm bill proposals, Heritage Action suggested there were “a trillion reasons not to pass the Farm Bill.” Freedom Works opposed even the more conservative House proposal as “80% food stamps and 100% fiscally irresponsible.” Boehner backed the House bill, but 62 Republicans joined with 172 Democrats to defeat it.

Though Paul Ryan has enjoyed a close relationship with Tea Party groups like Freedom Works in the past, these groups slammed the Ryan-Murray compromise as a “surrender.” and promised to hold it against anyone who votes for his bill. Heritage Action condemned the bill as “a step backwards.” The 2012 Vice Presidential nominee dismissed the attacks from the right as a “strange new normal.”

Freedom Works accused Boehner Wednesday of “smearing fiscally conservative groups.” “Speaker Boehner’s real problem here isn't with conservative groups like Freedom Works,” they explained, but “with millions of individual Americans who vote Republican because they were told the GOP was the party of small government and fiscal responsibility.”

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

ERIC CANTER HAS A POT AND KETTLE MOMENT

House Majority Leader and tea bagger extraordinaire - Eric Cantor has published a video featuring a 10-year-old child who last year passed away from brain cancer to attack Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and advance a pediatric research bill he’s co-sponsoring.

In the clip, Gabriella Miller quotes Reid’s objections from October to a Republican-backed measure, proposed during the 17-day government shutdown, that would have partially funded the National Institutes of Health but kept the rest of the government shutdown. Cantor posted the clip to promote The “Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act,” a measure that would eliminate $12.5 million in funding from party nominating conventions and authorize the money for pediatric research grants.





Democrats are whipping against the measure, arguing that it is a political ploy that would not appropriate any additional funds to the NIH. Matt Dennis, a spokesman for Appropriations Democrats, told Congressional Quarterly that the bill wouldn't increase funding “by one dime.” “Rather than increasing the amount that can be appropriated to NIH, it merely creates an unnecessary and unfunded authorization — a solution completely irrelevant to the problem,” Dennis said. “It is a cynical attempt by the majority to obscure their shameful record on medical research funding.”

Indeed, Republicans have voted for budgets that would undercut funding for health care re search and cheered the automatic budget reductions that cut 5 percent or $1.55 billion from the NIH’s fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget. Rep. Paul Ryan’s FY 2012 budget would have also reduced N.I.H. funding by 5 percent or “more than $1 billion” and their latest proposal would result in additional reductions.

The American Taliban has also repeatedly criticized Obama for using children to advance a policy agenda. Rep. John Carter said it was offensive for Obama to invite “so many people whose families had been touched by gun violence” to his 2013 State of the Union address, noting “It’s unfortunate that people feel like they have to throw dead children out in peoples’ faces, as if disagreeing on an issue of guns makes you in favor of killing dead children.” In April, Sen. Rand Paul accused President Obama of exploiting Newtown survivors to advance gun safety and in February, House Speaker John Boehner lashed out at Obama, accusing him of using “our military men and women as a prop in yet another campaign rally to support his tax hikes.”

I guess we can assume that Eric Cantor cared so much for this 10-year old girl that he fought the government shutdown with every fiber of his being - and we can also be assured that Cantor fought against the sequestration - understanding that both of these diabolical events certainly hampered any health research severely. But we know better don't we Eric?

I am ashamed to say that this condescending smirking putz is from my state. He's both reprehensible and a self-aggrandizing buffoon.

Congratulations Eric, you Sir are today's worst person in the world!

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

LUCY, YOU GOT SOME SLPANIN TO DO

Did Gov. Chris Christie's administration cripple a New Jersey community with a deliberate, brutal traffic jam, purely out of petty and partisan spite?

Take a look and see for yourself.


Video courtesy of MSNBC





What's that smell you ask? I think it must be the stink of corruption and the sound of a door closing on a presidential run. What was once considered a Mafioso modus operandi - is now normal bullying from a GOP [Jersey style] Presidential hopeful.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

"DICK" SAYS IRAN DEAL NOT GOOD BECAUSE OF OBAMACARE

Two hearts and one artificial heart pump later, the great American liar rises from the political dead. The heartless bastard named Cheney said on Monday that the deal the U.S. and its international partners reached with Iran last month over its nuclear program is suspect because of some of the Obama administration’s initial missteps in implementing the president’s new health care law.

“I don’t think that Barack Obama believes that the U.S. is an exceptional nation,” Cheney complained on Fox and Friends. “Nobody cares much in the Middle East anymore what the U.S. thinks because we don’t keep our commitments.”

The former vice president moved to Iran and without mentioning any specific criticisms of the agreement, claimed it’s bad because of unrelated health care issues. “We don’t follow through and Iran we've got a very serious problem going forward and a deal now been cut,” he said. “The same people that brought us you can keep your insurance if you want are telling us they've got a great deal in Iran with respect to their nuclear program. I don’t believe it.”






The agreement reached in Geneva last month will actually rein in most aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, capping uranium enrichment to low levels and eliminating its stockpile of higher enriched uranium that is closer to weapons grade material. The deal also established more intrusive inspections regime. U.N. nuclear inspectors arrived in Tehran over the weekend to visit the still unfinished heavy water reactor in Arak for the first time in two years.

It shouldn't come as a surprise that Cheney and others clinging to the neocon legacy aren't happy about the Obama administration’s diplomacy with Iran. But other various experts, lawmakers, interested parties and the American people think the first step agreement with Iran is a good one.

Since "Dicks" answers to every problem is; invade it, bomb it, or dissolve its culture, I'm not surprised he doesn't like a diplomatic alternative in Iran.

Hey "Dick", time to go back to the slime you once came from and let the adults proceed to run the country.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

RANDY FORBES: NO BRAINS, NO HEART, NO COURAGE

Rep. Randy Forbes (Virginia Talibangelical) is apparently urging the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) not to support any gay candidates — specifically because they’re gay. This would impact the races of Richard Tisei, who is once again running for Congress in Massachusetts after having narrowly lost in 2012, and Carl DeMaio, a former San Diego City Councilman running in California.

The NRCC helped fund Tisei’s 2012 campaign and Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) even traveled to Boston to help him fundraise. Many senior House Republicans have given to both Tisei and DeMaio in their current campaigns, but their support of gay candidates seems not have fazed Forbes’ abstinence on the matter:

Last Wednesday, Forbes told POLITICO he thinks “GOP leaders can do whatever they want to do,” in terms of giving money to gay candidates. 

He said he is more concerned about members being asked to contribute to the campaigns. The NRCC is partially funded by collecting tens of millions of dollars from House Republicans, who pay dues to the organization.

When asked if he would withhold political contributions to the NRCC if they backed DeMaio, Forbes said, “I’m not going to be hypothetical on what we would or wouldn’t do at this particular point in time because you’ve got a lot of scenarios. I don’t think we’ve had primaries and nominations to nominate people. So I don’t want to prejudge.”

Because the NRCC does not involve itself in primary elections, this would only happen should DeMaio win the nomination. NRCC Chairman Greg Walden told Politico that the committee will not make decisions based on race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Forbes has received a score of 0 on the Human Rights Campaign’s Congressional Scorecard, having not supported a single LGBT equality measure. He is vying to be the next chair of the House Armed Services Committee, but in 2012, he attacked the Pentagon for allowing military service members to wear their uniforms when marching in San Diego’s pride parade, calling the decision “an outrageous and blatantly political determination issued solely to advance this Administration’s social agenda.” On that committee, he has also supported efforts to enshrine anti-gay discrimination within the military. His website still boasts his opposition to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” expressing his concern that the repeal might imply “official military support for the normalization of homosexual behavior.” In October, Forbes was supposed to be the featured speaker at a luncheon hosted by the American Family Association, an anti-gay hate group, at the Values Voter Summit, but for unknown reasons, he didn’t show.





Forbes is one of the co-sponsors of the so-called “Marriage and Religious Freedom Act,” which would provide a license to discriminate against same-sex couples for all businesses with a religious affiliation. Unsurprisingly, he has previously refused to implement nondiscrimination protections for gay employees in his own Congressional office. He also supports a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage throughout the entire country. In 2007, he opposed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act on the House floor, arguing that protecting gay people from being fired for their identities could somehow “destroy the institution of marriage.”

So much for the "GOP Autopsy". Forbes is just another bloviated outdated blowhard, with a hate for everything not past white.

If Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz found herself surrounded by men with no heart, no brains and no courage, she would be with the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Randy Forbes you are NFTOS' asshat of the week, congratulations!

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

NO MINIMUM WAGE YOU SAY?

Tea bagger Joe Barton told the National Journal that he thinks the country should get rid of the minimum wage. “I think it’s outlived its usefulness,” he said. “It may have been of some value back in the Great Depression. I would vote to repeal the minimum wage.”

Barton’s not the only lawmaker to hold such a view. In June, Sen. Lamar Alexander told a meeting of the Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee to mark 75 years since the signing of the Federal Labor Standards Act, which guaranteed a minimum wage, that he “do[es] not believe in it” and that he would abolish the minimum wage. And while he hasn’t called for the full repeal of the minimum wage, Sen. Marco Rubio  has said, “I don’t think a minimum wage law works.”

The minimum wage historically helped many families stay out of poverty. Up until the early 1980s, making the annual minimum wage income lifted a family of two above the federal poverty line. At its peak in 1968, it was enough to lift a family of three out of poverty. Yet despite rising inflation and worker productivity since then, the minimum wage has failed to keep up. It would be over $10 an hour today if it had risen with inflation since that high, and if it had kept pace with gains in productivity it would be more than $20 an hour.

As it is, however, working a 40 hour week at minimum wage won’t bring in enough money to afford a two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the country — workers would have to put in at least 80 hours a week. Working 40 hours a week for 52 weeks each year at the minimum wage only brings a worker $15,080, below the federal poverty line for a family of two or more. But bringing the wage in line with inflation by increasing it to $10.10 an hour would lift nearly 6 million people out of poverty, many of them women and people of color.

While critics of raising the minimum wage, like Rubio and Rep. Paul Ryan claim that it will cost jobs, there’s little evidence to back that up. In fact several academic studies have shown that raising the wage doesn’t hurt employment, and one even found that states that raised their wages had slightly above average job growth. Perhaps that’s because a higher wage can benefit businesses through increasing demand, lowering turnover, and increasing employee performance.

The American Taliban may have once recognized this, as they weren’t always against a raise. At least67 talibangelicals who are still serving in Congress today supported an increase under President George W. Bush, including Alexander and Ryan. Yet House tea baggers unanimously voted down an increase in March.

Well of course, I looked and there it was, a Republican party, a group that has outlived its usefulness. If you keep voting for these asshats you certainly get what you deserve.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

THE NELSON MANDELA STORY

THE MAN, THE LEGEND, NELSON MANDELA

As told by Rachael Maddow:


Video Courtesy of MSNBC

Celebration of life:

Video Courtesy of MSNBC

There are rare occasions on this earth, when one human can really make a difference - Nelson Mandela was one of those humans. While the American Taliban calls him a communist, most humans with more than one brain cell consider Mandela as a once in a lifetime human.

Nelson Mandela, truly a man for all ages!

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

NELSON MANDELA

ONE OF THE GOOD ONES IS NOW GONE - NELSON MANDELA

Today we at NFTOS mourn the loss of one of the world’s most gracious and greatest humans - that this world has ever seen.

Nelson Mandela, a tireless advocate for human rights and an inspiration to millions across the globe, passed away this day.

His courage and strength will live on – as will his immortal words: “I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it.” and “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” ― Nelson Mandela, 1918 - 2013




NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

RAPE INSURANCE?

Photo Courtesy of Anne C. Savage

Michigan lawmakers are currently deciding whether to advance a bill that would require women in the state to purchase a separate insurance policy for abortion coverage, even in cases of rape or incest. If it’s approved, Michigan would join a long list of other states that have attacked abortion access by preventing women from using their own insurance to pay for it.

The debate over the legislation has heated up this week, particularly since the measure would deny abortion coverage even to women who have become pregnant as a result of rape. Although the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that rape victims should have access to legal abortion services, lawmakers continue to propose policies that would have callous implications for individuals who have been sexually assaulted.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder vetoed the proposed insurance ban last year for exactly this reason — pointing out that it would require rape victims to pay for the total cost of their abortion procedure out-of-pocket, unless they had thought ahead and purchased a separate insurance rider for abortion services. “I don’t believe it is appropriate to tell a woman who becomes pregnant due to a rape that she needed to select elective insurance coverage,” Snyder noted when he rejected the bill last December.

But Michigan’s anti-choice community disagrees. Earlier this year, when advocating for the proposed legislation, a prominent anti-choice leader in Michigan suggested that rape is like a car accident and it’s appropriate to require women to buy “extra insurance” to prepare for it. After Snyder’s veto, abortion opponents decided to simply circumvent the governor and collect enough signatures to provoke a “citizen-initiated” vote on the measure. That petition was successful, and the measure headed to the legislature on Tuesday.

Lawmakers now have 40 days — not including the upcoming holiday break — to act on the measure. If they don’t take any action, the issue will be placed on the 2014 ballot for a statewide vote. If the legislature approves it, on the other hand, the bill will immediately become law — even without Snyder’s signature.

Leading Democrats in the legislature are blasting the proposed measure. “Forcing women to decide whether they want to buy ‘rape insurance’ and even compelling parents to make the unfathomable decision about whether to buy it for their daughters is truly despicable,” State Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer said in a press release on Monday. “Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it’s one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature.”

But abortion opponents aren't giving up. Save the 1, a national anti-choice group that advocates for abortion restrictions without exceptions, organized a press conference at the Michigan Capitol on Tuesday to make the point that rape victims shouldn't ever have the option of choosing abortion. A group of adults who were conceived as a result of rape argued that “no child deserves to be punished for the crimes of their father.”

The issue of rape and abortion access has become particularly contentious over the past year, after several Republican lawmakers have made controversial comments on the subject. Last August, former Rep. Todd Akin asserted that pregnancies resulting from rape are very rare because the female body “has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” And since then, other GOP politicians have suggested that pregnancies from rape are a “gift from God,” mocked rape exceptions as “little gotcha amendments,” and suggested abortion access for rape victims is unnecessary because ending a pregnancy will “put more violence on a woman’s body.”

"Like a car accident", what the fuck!?

Cross-posted from thinkprogress

NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

FAKE [GOP] ACA SITE IN CALIFORNIA

FAKE WEBSITE MAIN PAGE PHOTO

Cross-posted from thinkprogress

Republican members of the California Assembly are distributing seemingly innocuous guides about the coverage options available under the Affordable Care Act that downplay the law’s benefits and misinform voters.

The flyers, which are being sent out at taxpayer expense, are also directing residents to “CoveringHealthCareCA.com,” a domain that closely resembles the official marketplace website for Covered California (CoveredCA.com) But rather than helping Californians enroll in coverage, this site appears to be the creation of the Republican party: it warns senior citizens about health care rationing and “provisions that have driven up insurance costs”. The site is designed to look like a non-partisan guide, but actually mirrors Republican talking points and criticisms of the law:

IRS WILL SINGLE OUT CONSERVATIVES. “In light of the recent revelation of questionable processes at the IRS for approving the tax-exempt status of certain groups, several members of the State Legislature, led by Assemblyman Dan Logue, introduced Assembly Joint Resolution 23 to urge Congress and the President to remove any financial oversight responsibilities of the IRS with regard to the administration of the Affordable Care Act.” 

YOUNG PEOPLE ARE SCREWED. “Young invincible or healthy adults visit the doctor very seldom and are money makers for insurers and medical groups that contract to provide them services. As low-cost additions to insurance pools, young adults would help dilute the expense of covering older, sicker people. Depending on how Congress requires insurers to price their policies, this group could even wind up paying disproportionately hefty premiums — effectively subsidizing coverage for the less healthy.” 

EMPLOYERS WILL STOP HIRING. “There are subsidies in the program for health insurance. However, there is an argument that the Affordable Care Act provides strong incentives for firms to avoid hiring workers from low-income households. … Many economists believe that the employer mandate contained in the federal law has resulted in many employers who currently have fewer than 50 employees from deciding not to hire new workers so that they are not subject to the new mandate or penalty provisions. News stories are beginning to confirm these concerns.” 

SENIORS WILL EXPERIENCE RATIONING. “For seniors that use Medicare’s prescription drug program, the Affordable Care Act gradually closes the “donut hole” until its complete elimination in 2020. To pay for other components of the Affordable Care Act such as expanding Medicaid and creating state health exchanges, Medicare providers will see rate cuts near $200 billion over the next decade. These cuts could potentially result in the exodus of doctors from the Medicare system and force Medicare recipients to find new providers, possibly facing longer wait times for care as that pool of doctors shrinks.”

Despite the GOP’s effort to dissuade Californians from purchasing coverage, however, nearly 80,000 people signed up for health insurance in the state’s new exchange as of late November, with approximately 2,7000 people enrolling daily.

A disclaimer on the site — which is situated next to a link to the Assembly Republican Caucus — notes that “The California State Assembly does not warrant or make any representations as to the quality, content, accuracy, or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links and other items contained on this server or any other server.” Indeed.

Typical Teabaggers, honesty is not a part of their modus operandi, a snake in the grass, just like their don't tread on me flag. I think this calls for the total destruction of the conservative movement. Fortunately, we don't have to do much.






NFTOS
Editor-In-Chief
Roger West

SCOTT "KOCH WHORE" WALKER SAYS SCREW CHRISTMAS GIVE TO ME

KOCH WHORE PUPPET SCOTT WALKER

The War On Christmas may actually be happening this year, but it’s being waged by an unlikely culprit: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.

Last week, Walker’s campaign sent an email encouraging supporters not to buy gifts for their children and to use that money instead to support his reelection effort.

“Instead of electronics or toys that will undoubtedly be outdated, broken, or lost by the next Holiday Season, help give your children the gift of a Wisconsin that we can all be proud of,” the email read.

Here is the email in full:

Walker is currently locked in a tight battle for reelection next year. He leads his possible opponents by anywhere between 4 and 7 percentage points.

Does this Koch Whore really envision many family scenarios throughout Wisconsin where parents are explaining to their children that the lack of presents underneath the tree is so they can have a Wisconsin they can all be proud of - and children are going to understand this? Seriously?

I have said numerous times that there is nothing beyond the pale of a tea bagger, and Scotty was taken fund-raising to a whole new low. One thing for sure, this numbnutz has huge testicles.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

VOTER SUPPRESSION IN OHIO?

TOUGHER PLACES TO VOTE IN RED

Ohio Congresswoman Marcia Fudge has asked Attorney General Eric Holder to review two voting measures making their way through the state legislature that she claims could “suppress the voting rights of African Americans and other minorities.”

The proposed bills (S. 238 and H.B. 269) would reduce the number of absentee-voting days by six, prevent newly registered voters from voting the day they register, and require voters to present valid identification — a driver’s license, a state or military ID card, or a passport — when casting a ballot.

In her letter, Fudge charges that the legislation violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which “prohibits any voting qualification or practice applied by the state which results in the denial or abridgment of the right to vote based on race.” “Recent estimates indicate that over 900,000 eligible voters in Ohio” lack the necessary ID, including as many as “one in four eligible African Americans,” the letter says. Same-day registration and voting “have recently been used at a higher rate by African Americans and lower-income voters.”

“With no indication that voter fraud is a widespread problem in Ohio, this proposal is a thinly veiled attempt to reduce the number of people able to exercise their right to vote,” she writes. “They are attempts to suppress the voting rights of African Americans and other minorities.”

Supporters of the effort argue that limiting early voting would free-up over-stressed election boards “during their busiest time of year” and note that the legislation “allows for free photo IDs for people who can’t afford to purchase one and who are at or below the federal poverty level.”

“I think we can have a reasonable debate about policy here,” said State Sen. Frank LaRose (R), the sponsor of the early voting change. “To invoke the specter of a racial matter, I think, takes it too far. It is kind of shameful to do that. What we are talking about is a very modest reduction in the number of early voting days that still leaves Ohio as a leader in the nation, by far, for early voting.”

On Saturday, The Cleveland Plain Dealer’s editorial board came out against the limitation, writing that “absent compelling evidence of election fraud…there is no good, pro-voter reason to end the practice.” It also condemned a separate measure that would change absentee ballot rules.

During the 2012 presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State Jon "we have a problem" Husted attempted to limit early voting to weekdays, and he defied a court order requiring early voting hours to be restored — although he eventually backed down.

Why should Ohio be any different than Pennsylvania, or any other state having been taken over by the American Taliban? When at all costs, when you can't win an election, cheat at all costs!

At the end of the day I don't think anyone is worried about people voting multiple times - teabaggers are just worried about Democrats being allowed to vote once.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West