We are the Liberal Blog From Hollywood
L.A.'s Premier Post Facility

L.A.'s Premier Post Facility

Photographer in L.A.

Hot Pics & Gossip.

Archive for January 5th, 2012

Whose Democracy is it? Not ours apparently

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:45 am by HL

Whose Democracy is it? Not ours apparently
Despite Iowa being my state of residence, I’m not a fan of the Iowa Caucuses (or the New Hampshire Primary just to be gratuitous) I do have respect for the people that actually work hard in the process and the voters who care enough to take part.

Despite Iowa being my state of residence, I’m not a fan of the Iowa Caucuses (or the New Hampshire Primary just to be gratuitous) I do have respect for the people that actually work hard in the process and the voters who care enough to take part.

That is after all what Democracy is supposed to be about at least, right?

Apparently not for the folks that really matter:

Actual voters are mere speed bumps.


Occupy Wall Street Makes a Film

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:44 am by HL

Occupy Wall Street Makes a Film
In keeping with the democratic spirit of Occupy Wall Street, film-savvy occupiers are pulling from massive amounts of footage shot by journalists and activists to produce a sleek-looking film that chronicles the movement’s early days. Here’s a preliminary trailer and a request for the donations needed to make it happen.

In keeping with the democratic spirit of Occupy Wall Street, film-savvy occupiers are pulling from massive amounts of footage shot by journalists and activists to produce a sleek-looking film that chronicles the movement’s early days. Here’s a preliminary trailer and a request for the donations needed to make it happen.

Related Entries



Santorum: Congress Should Take Obama ‘To Court’ For Recess Appointments

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:43 am by HL

Santorum: Congress Should Take Obama ‘To Court’ For Recess Appointments
BRENTWOOD, N.H. — Rick Santorum, flying high off his victory in the Iowa caucuses, met with voters at a nursing home in New Hampshire on…

Bob Cesca: Ron Paul Is No Friend to Progressives
Ron Paul’s progressive supporters might not grasp that Paul’s libertarianism, while informing some of his seemingly progressive views on foreign policy and the like, carries with it a significant load of horrendous and unacceptable baggage.

Doug Bandow: Should Christians Ask: Who Would Jesus Vote For?
Evangelical churches long have been called the Republican Party at prayer. The observation might be close to true in Iowa. And that should make American…

Is Obama Creating More Summer Jobs For Teens?
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is looking to boost summer job prospects for kids. The White House says that with help from the private sector…


WSJ “Abuse[s]” Precedents To Support South Carolina’s Voter ID Law

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:42 am by HL

WSJ “Abuse[s]” Precedents To Support South Carolina’s Voter ID Law

The Wall Street Journal‘s editorial board attacked the Justice Department’s decision to block South Carolina’s voter ID law, claiming it was the first such denial since 1994 and that the action “contradict[s] both the Supreme Court and the Department’s own precedent.” In fact, DOJ regularly blocks such “‘pre-clearance’ voting rights request[s]” and the “precedent[s]” cited by the Journal are inapt.

WSJ Falsely Claims The Justice Department’s Actions In South Carolina Are Unusual

WSJ: SC Denial Is “The First Denial Of A ‘Pre-Clearance’ Voting Rights Request Since 1994.” From the Wall Street Journal‘s December 30 editorial:

Eric Holder must be amazed that President Obama was elected and he could become Attorney General. That’s a fair inference after the Attorney General last Friday blocked South Carolina’s voter ID law on grounds that it would hurt minorities. What a political abuse of law.

In a letter to South Carolina’s government, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez called the state law — which would require voters to present one of five forms of photo ID at the polls — a violation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Overall, he noted, 8.4% of the state’s registered white voters lack photo ID, compared to 10% of nonwhite voters.

This is the yawning chasm the Justice Department is now using to justify the unprecedented federal intrusion into state election law, and the first denial of a “pre-clearance” Voting Rights request since 1994. [The Wall Street Journal, 12/30/11]

REALITY: DOJ Has Denied Dozens Of Preclearance Requests Since 1994. According to a Media Matters review of the Justice Department’s online listings, since January 1, 2005, DOJ has interposed at least 108 objections to preclearance requests under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, including 45 during the Bush administration. [Justice.gov, accessed 1/4/12]

WSJ Pushes Faulty “Precedent[s]” Of DOJ’s South Carolina Action

WSJ: Justice Position “Contradict[s] Both The Supreme Court And The Department’s Own Precedent” In Georgia And Indiana. From the editorial:

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was created to combat the systematic disenfranchisement of minorities, especially in Southern states with a history of discrimination. But the Justice position is a lead zeppelin, contradicting both the Supreme Court and the Department’s own precedent. In 2005, Justice approved a Georgia law with the same provisions and protections of the one Mr. Holder nixed for South Carolina. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board that an Indiana law requiring photo ID did not present an undue burden on voters. [The Wall Street Journal, 12/30/11]

Voting Section Chief Overruled Review Team To Approve Georgia Voter ID Law

Justice Staff Members Called For Blocking Georgia’s Law Because It Would “Reduce Blacks’ Access To The Polls.” From a November 2005 Washington Post article:

[A]n Aug. 25 staff memo obtained by The Washington Post recommended blocking the program because Georgia failed to show that the measure would not dilute the votes of minority residents, as required under the Voting Rights Act.

The memo, endorsed by four of the team’s five members, also said the state had provided flawed and incomplete data. The team found significant evidence that the plan would be “retrogressive,” meaning that it would reduce blacks’ access to the polls. […]

The Voting Rights Act puts the legal burden on Georgia to show that proposed election-related changes would not be retrogressive. According to the Aug. 25 memo from the Justice review team, Georgia lawmakers and state officials made little effort to research the possible racial impact of the proposed program.

The 51-page memo recommended several steps that Georgia could take to make the ID program fairer to minority voters, such as continuing to allow the use of non-photo identification, such as birth certificates and Social Security cards, that have not been shown to pose security problems.

Those in favor of issuing an objection were Robert Berman, deputy chief of the voting rights section; Amy Zubrensky, a trial lawyer; Heather Moss, a civil rights analyst; and Toby Moore, a geographer, according to the memo. A fifth member of the team, trial lawyer Joshua Rogers, recommended approval, but the memo does not include his reasoning. [Washington Post, 11/17/05, emphasis added]

Justice Review Team Was Overruled By Voting Section Chief Tanner. From the Post article:

A day [after the review team memo was submitted], on Aug. 26, the chief of the department’s voting rights section, John Tanner, told Georgia officials that the program could go forward. “The Attorney General does not interpose any objection to the specified changes,” he said in a letter to them. [Washington Post, 11/17/05]

Tanner Later Resigned After Controversial Comments, “Amid Allegations That He’d Used [His] Position To Aid A Republican Strategy To Suppress African-American Votes.” From a December 2007 McClatchy News article:

The Justice Department’s voting rights chief stepped down Friday amid allegations that he’d used the position to aid a Republican strategy to suppress African-American votes.

John Tanner became the latest of about a dozen senior department officials, including former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who’ve resigned in recent months in a scandal over the politicization of the Justice Department in the Bush administration.

In recent months, McClatchy has reported on a pattern of decision-making within the department’s Civil Rights Division, of which the Voting Rights Section is a part, that tended to narrow the voting rights of Democratic-leaning minorities.

Tanner has been enmeshed for months in congressional investigations over his stewardship of the unit that was established to protect minority-voting rights. He drew increased focus this fall after he told a Latino group: “African-Americans don’t become elderly the way white people do. They die.” [McClatchy News, 12/14/07]

DOJ’s Ethics Office Later Reported That Tanner Had Asked For His Coffee “Mary Frances Berry Style – Black And Bitter.” A July 2008 report from the Department of Justice Inspector General’s Office and the Office of Professional Responsibility stated:

In that incident in August 2004, Voting Section Chief John Tanner sent an e-mail to Schlozman asking Schlozman to bring coffee for him to a meeting both were scheduled to attend. Schlozman replied asking Tanner how he liked his coffee.  Tanner’s response was, “Mary Frances Berry style – black and bitter.” Berry is an African-American who was the Chairperson of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from November 1993 until late 2004. Schlozman forwarded the e-mail chain to several Department officials (including Principal DAAG Bradshaw) but not Acosta, with the comment, “Y’all will appreciate Tanner’s response.”  Acosta said that when he was made aware of the incident, he required Schlozman to make a written apology to him for his role in forwarding the e-mail and that Schlozman did so. Acosta said that he believed Schlozman wrote him the apology in an e-mail, but we were unable to retrieve Acosta’s e-mails and did not find such an e-mail among Schlozman’s recovered e-mail messages. [IG/OPR report, “An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring and Other Improper Personnel Actions in the Civil Rights Division,” 7/2/08]

Supreme Court Case Did Not Address Whether Indiana Voter ID Law Violated Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act

Complaints Alleged That The New Law Violated The 14th Amendment, Not The Voting Rights Act. From the majority opinion in the Supreme Court case, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board:

Promptly after the enactment of SEA 483 in 2005, the Indiana Democratic Party and the Marion County Democratic Central Committee (Democrats) filed suit in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Indiana against the state officials responsible for its enforcement, seeking a judgment declaring the Voter ID Law invalid and enjoining its enforcement. A second suit seeking the same relief was brought on behalf of two elected officials and several nonprofit organizations representing groups of elderly, disabled, poor, and minority voters. The cases were consolidated, and the State of Indiana intervened to defend the validity of the statute.

The complaints in the consolidated cases allege that the new law substantially burdens the right to vote in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; that it is neither a necessary nor appropriate method of avoiding election fraud; and that it will arbitrarily disfranchise qualified voters who do not possess the required identification and will place an unjustified burden on those who cannot readily obtain such identification. Second Amended Complaint in No. 1: 05-CV-0634-SEB-VSS (SD Ind.), pp. 6-9 (hereinafter Second Amended Complaint). [U.S. Supreme Court, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 4/28/08]

Indiana Is Not  A “Covered Jurisdiction” Under Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act And Was Not Subject To Preclearance. According to the Department of Justice, neither the state of Indiana nor any county or township within is a “covered jurisdiction” under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, meaning that the state’s laws are not subject to preclearance. [Justice.gov, accessed 1/4/12]


Tennessee Bill Would Give Anti-Bullying Laws A ‘Religious And Political Beliefs’ Loophole

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:41 am by HL

Tennessee Bill Would Give Anti-Bullying Laws A ‘Religious And Political Beliefs’ Loophole
A proposed bill in Tennessee would create a loophole in the state’s anti-bullying laws to protect those expressing religious, philosophical or political beliefs, which one proponent says would ensure that people can still express their “views on homosexuality.”

Presented By:


The Republican Frontrunners: What Are They Thinking?!

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:39 am by HL

The Republican Frontrunners: What Are They Thinking?!


Rove Says Romney is Heavy Favorite

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:38 am by HL

Rove Says Romney is Heavy Favorite
Karl Rove: “If a year ago you said that Mitt Romney would win Iowa, be heading to New Hampshire with a large lead, and his chief opponent would be a former senator who lost his re-election race in a swing state by 18 points, you would have had to believe Mr. Romney would be on his way to winning the GOP nomination. And you know what? Now we’ll see if it plays out that way.”

Meanwhile, Politico notes, “Because of the divided nature of the opposition and Romney’s organizational and financial advantages, GOP elites made the case Wednesday that there was no clear way he could be stopped.”

McCain on Romney
The DNC welcomes Sen. John McCain’s endorsement of Mitt Romney with a video reminder of his old disdain for Romney.


An Offer To The President

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:37 am by HL

An Offer To The President
Mr. President, we heard what you said last week in Kansas – about the dangers to our economy and democracy of the increasing concentration of income and wealth at the top. We agree. And many of us are prepared to…

Neo-Con Rising
The reports of the death of the Neo-Conservative Movement have been greatly exaggerated. Dick Cheney has become a cheerleader for Newt Gingrich whose sole intention seems to be to continue The Long War ad infinitum. On a day when…



Presented By:
Win New Customers
 

Ads by Pheedo



Scott Brown Reluctantly Backs Cordray Recess Appointment

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:36 am by HL

Scott Brown Reluctantly Backs Cordray Recess Appointment
Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), facing a tough reelection battle against the person who helped set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, came out in support of President Obama’s recess appointment today of Richard Cordray to head the agency. “I would have strongly preferred…[a] normal confirmation process,” Brown told the Huffington Post’s Michael McAuliff, but the […]

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), facing a tough reelection battle against the person who helped set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, came out in support of President Obama’s recess appointment today of Richard Cordray to head the agency. “I would have strongly preferred…[a] normal confirmation process,” Brown told the Huffington Post’s Michael McAuliff, but the “system is completely broken.” Brown was the only Republican senator to support Cordray’s nomination.

Michigan?s Undemocratic Emergency Managers Paid Six Figures At Local Taxpayers? Expense
Last year, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) signed into law a drastic expansion of the state’s emergency manager law, which imposes what critics have dubbed “financial martial law” on local governments the state deems to be mismanaging finances. The emergency managers, who are appointed without input from local communities, have the power to effectively depose […]

Last year, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) signed into law a drastic expansion of the state’s emergency manager law, which imposes what critics have dubbed “financial martial law” on local governments the state deems to be mismanaging finances. The emergency managers, who are appointed without input from local communities, have the power to effectively depose elected officials, break collective bargaining agreements, and unilaterally dictate decisions about city operations, finances, infrastructure, and public safety.

Today, the Flint Journal points out that the managers receive six-figure salaries, set by the state and paid for by the local communities, which are all cash-strapped (or else they wouldn’t be subject to emergency managers in the first place). In Flint, in fact, the manager earns more than the mayor earns:

By law, the pay of Michigan’s five emergency managers — ranging from $132,000 to $250,000 — is set by the state, but the money actually is paid by the local communities they’re in charge of. […]

Mayor Dayne Walling’s was Flint’s highest-paid elected official, receiving $91,800 before [Flint emergency manager Michael] Brown eliminated his pay and benefits and those of city council members.

Brown on Tuesday partially restored Walling’s pay to $55,000 and council members each will receive $7,000 a year.

The Journal points out that law has dictated that local communities pay the salaries of emergency managers since 1990, but Snyder’s expansion of the law means that many more communities have become subject to it than ever before. Activists are working to repeal the law via referendum of through a court ruling.


Featured Advertiser

Posted in Main Blog (All Posts) on January 5th, 2012 5:35 am by HL

Featured Advertiser

Michele Bachmann exits the GOP race as she entered it

After a last-place finish in the Iowa caucuses, Michele Bachmann exited the presidential race just as she entered it, painting “Obamacare” as the socialist undoing of the United States of America.

But it was a real painting, she said, that had urged her into the race in the first place, on the night of March 21, 2010, after health-care reform passed in the House of Representatives.

Read full article >>

The 2012 Iowa caucuses and the 10 closest races in history

Were the Iowa caucuses on Tuesday night the closest major race in modern U.S. political history? No. But they were damn close.

A review of the closest contests on the books shows the 8-vote margin for Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in Iowa was the third-closest (in terms of actual votes) in modern history — behind only a Senate race in New Hampshire and a congressional race in Indiana.

Read full article >>

John McCain, Mitt Romney and the Fix Endorsement Hierarchy

“I‘m really here for one reason and one reason only and that is to make sure that we make Mitt Romney the next President of the United States.” — Arizona Sen. John McCain in New Hampshire today.

As soon as the news broke — kudos to BuzzFeed’s Ben Smith for breaking it — that McCain would endorse Romney as his preferred candidate in the 2012 presidential race, the political world has been asking just one question: Where does this fit into the Fix Endorsement Hierarchy?

Read full article >>