Jump to content
IGNORED

State Houses Thread


Recommended Posts

clueliss

Hmmmm Dexter Missouri.  Looked it up on the map.  Between Sikeston and Poplar Bluff.  Maybe she got hit in the head by a 'throwed roll' at lamberts a few too many times.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 398
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GreyhoundFan

    103

  • fraurosena

    61

  • AmazonGrace

    59

  • 47of74

    35

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I love this tweet!  

I have been in a state of anger and just despair for our country over this whole thing, I don't have the words. But that in this country sedition is something people are asked to resign for (Trum

Good has prevailed over evil in Texas today.  

Posted Images

Bethella

My state rep got his second drunk driving arrest yesterday. This morning he committed suicide. I'm still in shock. I'd only met him a few times but he seemed nice and he was very dedicated to our area. I feel so sorry for his family and friends but I'm really worried about who the district will elect as his replacement. 

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/05/09/state-rep-john-kivela-drunk-driving/101459168/

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
clueliss

Well the Missouri Real-ID Compromise (rolling eyes here in a SEVERE kind of way) is headed to the Missouri House now.  

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article149643999.html

that's right, instead of complying with the law you will have to Opt-in and go get a new driver's license so that you don't have to do anything if you don't want to.  What the ever living hell people. (By the way, My passport application is in the system right now because I don't trust this group of dipwads or the governor to pass anything on a timely basis.
Oh and NO PRESSURE here folks.  State Legislature adjourns 6 pm on Friday.  

 

Quote

After months of debate, Missouri Senate approves Real ID legislation

BY JASON HANCOCK

[email protected]

 

JEFFERSON CITY 

Legislation putting Missouri in compliance with the federal Real ID law was approved by the state Senate early Wednesday morning.

On a 28-5 vote just after midnight, lawmakers approved a bill allowing those who wish to get a Real ID-compliant driver’s license to do so. Those with concerns about the Real ID law would be permitted to get a license that doesn’t comply with the federal regulations.

The hybrid system was aimed at appeasing opponents of the bill, who have resisted implementation of the federal law over cited privacy concerns.

“We are providing our citizens a choice,” said Sen. Ryan Silvey, a Kansas City Republican sponsoring the bill. “This is the best way forward. It doesn’t force anyone to do anything they don’t want to do.”

The bill now heads back to the Missouri House, which must sign off on the Senate version and send it to Gov. Eric Greitens before the legislature adjourns at 6 p.m. Friday.

The Real ID issue has been among the highest profile of the 2017 session.

That’s because Missouri faces a January 2018 deadline to get into compliance with the federal law. If it does not, Missourians will no longer be able to use a driver’s license to board a commercial airplane or enter certain federal buildings or military bases.

Instead, they would have to have a passport.

To avoid that scenario, lawmakers needed to change a state law that prohibits Missouri from complying with Real ID.

The Missouri House passed the legislation in March. But opponents in the Senate, led by Republican Sen. Will Kraus of Lee’s Summit, threatened to use the filibuster to prevent any Real ID bill from passing.

“I 100 percent hate this bill,” Kraus said Tuesday.

Congress approved the Real ID Act in 2005, following a recommendation from the commission formed to study the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The 9/11  Commission said the country would be safer if there were minimum standards for the government-issued forms of identification, such as driver’s licenses, that are required to enter federal buildings or board commercial airplanes.

Among the requirements that Missouri is not currently meeting: Documents used to obtain a driver’s license, such as a birth certificate or Social Security card, must be scanned and stored in a database. Each state must agree to share its database of licensed drivers with other states.

Kansas driver’s licenses are already in compliance. Missouri is one of five states that currently aren’t compliant.

Privacy concerns inspired Missouri lawmakers to pass a law in 2009 prohibiting the state from complying with the Real ID Act. Four years later, when it was discovered the Missouri Department of Revenue was scanning and storing documents, lawmakers passed another bill specifically outlawing the practice.

Those same privacy concerns continue to stoke opposition today.

Kraus argued that compliance with the Real ID Act essentially creates a national ID card. Even if Missouri is given the option of allowing citizens to get noncompliant licenses now, he said, “the federal government will come back and do away with that exemption. They’ll move the goal posts.”

But after weeks of negotiations with the bill’s supporters, and with adjournment looming, Kraus agreed to stand down.

He did, however, extract a handful of concessions. For example, the bill now includes a mandate that the state can only store documents used to get a Real ID-compliant license on a server that isn’t connected to the internet.

“No one can hack into it because you have to be in the physical location of the server,” Kraus said.

The bill also includes a clause stating it will expire in five years, unless lawmakers renew the law.

Missourians won’t have to run out to get a new license immediately. The Missouri Department of Revenue has said it will take two years to get get the new system up and running. The state has been told the federal government will grant Missouri a waiver permitting those with current state-issued licenses to board planes and enter federal buildings during that time.

Despite the concessions, Kraus continues to oppose the bill.

“Republicans are supposed to be about smaller government, but Real ID creates a database that will only result in a larger, more intrusive government,” Kraus said. “It is one of the worst invasions of privacy the federal government has perpetrated on our citizens.”

Silvey said he understands critics of the bill are still not happy. But he’s pleased lawmakers were able to come to a resolution on the issue.

“It’s not what everybody wants,” he said, “but it does allow our citizens to decide for themselves.”

 

 

 

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Cartmann99
On 5/8/2017 at 5:46 PM, 47of74 said:

It’s a pleasure today for us to welcome a rarity to Big Time Small-Time Dicks: a woman legislator, who said something every bit as fucked as the men we usually feature in this space come up with. Three cheers for equality and for Tila Hubrecht, a Missouri state representative who suggested that pregnancy could be a God-given “silver lining” of a rape. Days later, she isn’t apologizing for her comments. Of course not. Why would she? Why would any of us ever re-think the godawful things we say?

It's a crying shame that Kellyanne Conway took that job with Trump. Otherwise, she'd be available to defend Rep. Hubrecht like she did Todd Akin during his "legitimate rape" saga. :wink-kitty:

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
47of74
5 hours ago, clueliss said:

Well the Missouri Real-ID Compromise (rolling eyes here in a SEVERE kind of way) is headed to the Missouri House now.  

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article149643999.html

that's right, instead of complying with the law you will have to Opt-in and go get a new driver's license so that you don't have to do anything if you don't want to.  What the ever living hell people. (By the way, My passport application is in the system right now because I don't trust this group of dipwads or the governor to pass anything on a timely basis.
Oh and NO PRESSURE here folks.  State Legislature adjourns 6 pm on Friday. 

Yeah, that reminds me I need to get my passport renewed.  I'm planning to wait until after I've had surgery and lose some weight first before getting a picture.  Maybe closer to the end of this year, assuming Donald McFucknugget doesn't get us into WW III with his North Korean mirror image soon.

I'm thinking next summer I might see about going to London for a few days so I'll probably need to do it by December at the latest.

Edited by 47of74
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan

"One Republican’s plan to save money: Turn 82,000 non-English-speaking kids over to ICE"

Quote

Republicans in the Oklahoma state legislature have a challenge on their hands: figuring out how to address a gaping $900 million hole in the state budget without raising taxes.

...

Republican Rep. Mike Ritze told CBS affiliate KWTV that he has another proposal in mind: Rounding up the state’s 82,000 non-English-speaking students and handing them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“Identify them and then turn them over to ICE to see if they truly are citizens — and do we really have to educate noncitizens?” Ritze asked.

The lawmaker disagrees with the idea that the state should be responsible for educating children who aren’t citizens, though a 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler v. Doe, actually prohibits states from denying education to undocumented immigrants.

Still, Ritze told the station that the proposal — which faced immediate backlash and was called “utterly shameful” by the state schools superintendent — could save $60 million.

The Tulsa lawmaker, as the Associated Press notes, didn’t specify whether he wants to merely hand over thousands of names to federal authorities, or whether he’d prefer to see the state round up the individuals — a task that presumably would come with a substantial price tag.

“The State Department of Education said there are actually about 50,000 English learners in pre-K through 12th grade in Oklahoma public schools, but many of those students could be U.S. citizens,” according to the AP.

Pew Research Center estimates that there were 95,000 unauthorized immigrants living in Oklahoma in 2014, the latest year of available data.

...

Ritze did not immediately respond to multiple requests for comment.

His controversial proposal was included on a broader list of budget-related suggestions from the Republican Platform Caucus in Oklahoma, according to KWTV News 9.

But the plan has been slammed by civil liberties advocates and others — including members of Ritze’s own party.

The AP reported that some members of the Republican Platform Caucus “quickly distanced themselves from Ritze’s comments.”

Among them: Rep. Chuck Strohm, the co-chairman of the Republican Platform Caucus, who said deporting students “is not a position that we support,” according to the AP.

Strohm said the caucus discussed the additional financial burden that students who require additional English instruction create, but never the idea of reporting students to ICE.

“This caught many of us by surprise, because that’s not the direction that we talked about,” he said.

House Floor Leader, Rep. Jon Echols (R-Oklahoma City), called Ritze’s plan “a bad idea,” saying, “I have no desire to target ESL students,” according to the AP.

Schools Superintendent Joy Hofmeister, also a Republican, said “the suggestion that Oklahoma should fix its fiscal crisis by ‘rounding up’ non-English-speaking children is utterly shameful.

“Our lawmakers face a very daunting task and time is running out, but surely there are better options than threatening kids,” she said in a statement to The Washington Post. “Investing in education – all the way from early childhood through high school – is an investment in our state’s economic and cultural future. I know the vast majority of our Legislature wants to do right for education, but there is no benefit to floating outrageous ideas that seek to punish kids.”

...

Ritze, who was elected in 2008, is a physician who has “delivered over 2,000 babies,” according to his Oklahoma legislature page.

“Mike is an ordained Southern Baptist Deacon and Sunday School teacher at Arrow Heights Baptist Church,” the page states. “Mike is a cancer survivor for over 37 years. He and Connie have served as medical missionaries to Mexico and Honduras.”

As news of the proposal spread, critics took to Ritze’s Facebook page to slam him.

Under newly posted photos of his grandson, comments quickly turned nasty.

“Does he speak English?” one person wrote.

Wrote another: “Are you sure he is legal or you going to have ICE ‘interview’ him to. Idiot.”

And there were more:

“What would you think if someone suggested having ICE round up this little baby? God, I hope you are not related to this sweet child.”

“You have some nerve posting pics of your grandson while also suggesting your state round up lots of defenseless children. And for what? Oh yes, to close the budget gap you created. Very Christian of you.”

“Why don’t we round up these kids and hand them over to ICE too? Since you think children should be handed over to ICE! You are a disgusting individual and a hate monger!”

Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma, labeled Ritze’s proposed money-saving technique as “disgustingly inhumane.”

In a statement, Kiesel said Republicans were using “political distraction” to hide the fact that the state’s legislature is a “far greater threat” to the safety of Oklahomans than undocumented children.

“The United States Supreme Court has ruled in Plyler v. Doe that all children living in this Nation are guaranteed the right to a public education,” the statement said. “The ACLU will not stand for any attempt to strip any student of that right, nor will we allow the Legislature to insert racial profiling or discriminatory stereotypes about non English speakers into our schools.”

“A government that threatens to turn children over to law enforcement to avoid educating them should alarm and outrage all Oklahomans,” the statement added. “Immigration authority has no place in our schools.”

“Mike is an ordained Southern Baptist Deacon and Sunday School teacher at Arrow Heights Baptist Church,” -- yep, par for the course, because threatening children is so Christian.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
AnywhereButHere

Oh look, here's Oklahoma joining in on the fun...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/one-gop-lawmaker’s-plan-to-save-money-turning-non-english-speaking-kids-over-to-ice/ar-BBB2lLG?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=msnbcrd

Quote

Republicans in the Oklahoma state legislature have a challenge on their hands: figuring out how to address a gaping, $900 million hole in the state budget without raising taxes.

Load Error

Some lawmakers have proposed firing nonessential college employees. Others want to drop a film tax credit, saving the state as much as $5 million.

Republican Rep. Mike Ritze told CBS affiliate KWTV that he has another proposal in mind: rounding up the state’s 82,000 non-English-speaking students and handing them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“Identify them and then turn them over to ICE to see if they truly are citizens, and do we really have to educate noncitizens?” Ritze asked.

The lawmaker disagrees with the idea that the state should be responsible for educating noncitizens.

How much would it save? $60 million, Ritze told the station.

@GreyhoundFan Too funny - I just noticed you posted the same thing after my page refreshed!

Edited by AnywhereButHere
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
sawasdee

Mike Ritze - yet another shining example of Jesus' commandment to 'Suffer all the children to come unto me'.

If there were a god, Ritze would be struck by lightning.

That he calls himself a 'christian'  is outright horrendous.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan

Wow: "Supreme Court won’t review decision that found N.C. voting law discriminates against African Americans"

Spoiler

The Supreme Court will not review a decision that found North Carolina’s 2013 voting law discriminated against African American voters, the justices said Monday.

A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had found in 2016 that North Carolina legislators had acted “with almost surgical precision” to blunt the influence of African American voters.

And last summer the Supreme Court had divided evenly on whether the law could be used in last fall’s election while the appeals continued.

But the election resulted in a new Democratic governor and a Democratic attorney general, and they had told the court they did not want to defend the law enacted by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature. The Republicans had asked to continue the appeal.

In an order saying the court would not review the lower court’s decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. cited the state’s changed political scene, and indicated that not all of the justices agreed with the lower court’s decision.

“Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘the denial of a write of certiori imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case,’” Roberts wrote.

Last summer he and the court’s other conservatives — Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — would have granted the request to use the law in the 2016 elections.

But they were unable to find a necessary fifth vote from one of the court’s four liberals.

The outcome was a major victory for the Obama administration, the Justice Department and a wide group of civil rights organizations that challenged North Carolina’s law, which was one of the country’s most far-reaching.

A unanimous panel of the 4th Circuit on July 29 agreed with allegations from the Justice Department and civil rights groups that North Carolina’s bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.

“The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the panel. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the state’s true motivation.”

The state disputed the ruling and had asked the Supreme Court to allow part of the law to be used this November: restoring the photo-ID requirements, reducing the number of early-voting days from 17 to 10 and ending the state’s practice of pre­registering teenagers to vote so that they are enrolled when they turn 18.

Methinks there are some DOHers in NC who are furious.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
sawasdee

Sorry to be stupid, but what is a 'DOHer'?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan

@sawasdee -- you are NOT stupid! Instead of GOP (Grand Old Party), someone here suggested DOH (with several different names to go with the acronym). So, it's the Republican Party, who is not grand in any way, shape, or form.

Edited by GreyhoundFan
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fraurosena
16 hours ago, sawasdee said:

Sorry to be stupid, but what is a 'DOHer'?

Devious Obfuscating Hypocrites. 

Cuz I liked the acronym better. :pb_lol:

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
onekidanddone

I thought it meant D'OH as in Homer Simpson

22 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Wow: "Supreme Court won’t review decision that found N.C. voting law discriminates against African Americans"

  Reveal hidden contents

The Supreme Court will not review a decision that found North Carolina’s 2013 voting law discriminated against African American voters, the justices said Monday.

A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had found in 2016 that North Carolina legislators had acted “with almost surgical precision” to blunt the influence of African American voters.

And last summer the Supreme Court had divided evenly on whether the law could be used in last fall’s election while the appeals continued.

But the election resulted in a new Democratic governor and a Democratic attorney general, and they had told the court they did not want to defend the law enacted by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature. The Republicans had asked to continue the appeal.

In an order saying the court would not review the lower court’s decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. cited the state’s changed political scene, and indicated that not all of the justices agreed with the lower court’s decision.

“Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘the denial of a write of certiori imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case,’” Roberts wrote.

Last summer he and the court’s other conservatives — Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — would have granted the request to use the law in the 2016 elections.

But they were unable to find a necessary fifth vote from one of the court’s four liberals.

The outcome was a major victory for the Obama administration, the Justice Department and a wide group of civil rights organizations that challenged North Carolina’s law, which was one of the country’s most far-reaching.

A unanimous panel of the 4th Circuit on July 29 agreed with allegations from the Justice Department and civil rights groups that North Carolina’s bill selectively chose voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm blacks, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.

“The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the panel. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the state’s true motivation.”

The state disputed the ruling and had asked the Supreme Court to allow part of the law to be used this November: restoring the photo-ID requirements, reducing the number of early-voting days from 17 to 10 and ending the state’s practice of pre­registering teenagers to vote so that they are enrolled when they turn 18.

Methinks there are some DOHers in NC who are furious.

Wait until TT says he will see them in court and calls them the "so called Supreme Court".

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
fraurosena
12 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

 

I thought it meant D'OH as in Homer Simpson

 

yay, that was what I had in mind... :pb_wink:

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan

Yeah, gotta love this one: "Texas Seeks Medicaid Money It Gave Up Over Planned Parenthood Ban"

Spoiler

Four years after Texas gave up millions of dollars in federal Medicaid funds so it could ban Planned Parenthood from participating in a family planning program for low-income women, the state is asking the Trump administration for the money back.

The request presents an important early test for the administration of President Trump, who recently appointed an anti-abortion official to oversee federal family planning programs. Under President Obama, federal health officials would not allow Medicaid funds to flow to the Texas program after it excluded Planned Parenthood, because federal law requires states to give Medicaid beneficiaries their choice of “any willing provider.”

If the administration agrees to restore the funding for Texas, it could effectively give states the greenlight to ban Planned Parenthood from Medicaid family planning programs with no financial consequences.

“They’re asking the federal government to do a 180 on its Medicaid program rules,” said Elizabeth Nash, a policy analyst at the Guttmacher Institute, a research center that supports abortion rights. “And depending how this shakes out, you could see a number of other states follow suit.”

The issue, and the principle at stake, has put abortion rights supporters in the unusual position of opposing Medicaid funding for family planning services.

The Texas program, now called Healthy Texas Women, provides contraception and screenings for cancer, H.I.V. and sexually transmitted diseases, and as of last year, screening and treatment for diabetes, high cholesterol and high blood pressure, to women ages 15 to 44, with income up to 200 percent of the poverty level — about $23,760 for an individual — who do not qualify for Medicaid. It used to be what is known as a Medicaid waiver program, financed 90 percent by the federal government and 10 percent by the state. About half the states have similar programs for low-income women not otherwise eligible for Medicaid, Ms. Nash said.

But Texas turned its version into an entirely state-financed program in 2013, when it cut out providers that “perform or promote elective abortions,” or contract or affiliate with providers that do so.

Other states have recently expressed a willingness to forfeit Medicaid funds if doing so allows them to block Planned Parenthood from receiving tax dollars. This year, Missouri ended its Medicaid waiver program for family planning services and instead set up a state-financed program that excludes abortion providers. Iowa is planning to do the same.

The reduced funding in Texas has led to a drop in women receiving services through the program. The Texas program had an average monthly enrollment of about 79,000 last year, according to the state, down from 126,000 before it cut out Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. In the first 18 months after the change — which resulted in a loss of $35 million a year in federal Medicaid funds — thousands of women stopped getting long-acting birth control, and Medicaid pregnancies increased by 27 percent, according to a research paper published last year in The New England Journal of Medicine.

In its draft waiver application, the state said it hoped that by turning Healthy Texas Women back into a Medicaid waiver program, it would improve access and participation. The application noted that Texas had the nation’s highest birthrate, with more than 400,000 births in 2015, more than half of which were paid for by Medicaid. It also noted than more than one-third of pregnancies in the state were reported as unintended, and that Texas had one of the highest teen birthrates in the country.

On Monday, at a public hearing on the plan in Austin, several women and representatives of health advocacy groups expressed concern about the request.

“A strong Healthy Texas Women program should include Planned Parenthood,” said Blanca Murillo, 25, who said she relied on Planned Parenthood for contraception that helped treat her polycystic ovary syndrome when she was a student at the University of Texas. “I’m asking the state to choose the health of Texas women — which it has a duty to protect — over scoring political points.”

Stacey Pogue, senior policy analyst at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a liberal research group, pointed to the so-called freedom of choice provision in Medicaid and said she was concerned that “submitting the waiver as is would invite litigation.”

A spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or C.M.S., which oversees Medicaid waiver programs, declined to comment.

Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, said, “We’re been encouraged to present new and innovative ideas to C.M.S. for discussion for possible funding. This is a new administration, and we’re looking at what funding opportunities may exist for us.”

Texas is also seeking to cut off all Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood; a federal judge blocked the effort earlier this year, but the state is appealing the decision.

Conservatives have long targeted Planned Parenthood because its network is the largest provider of abortions, although about half of its affiliates do not perform the procedure. And federal funding is never used to pay for it; since 1977, a law known as the Hyde Amendment has prohibited using federal money for abortions.

Still, Mr. Trump has made a priority of restricting abortions. In April, he signed legislation aimed at cutting off a separate stream of federal family planning money from Planned Parenthood and other groups that perform abortions. And the House bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act would defund Planned Parenthood for a year — so women on Medicaid could no longer seek care at its clinics — as well as ban the use of federal subsidies to buy insurance that pays for abortion.

“There have been many statements out of this administration about its hostility toward Planned Parenthood,” Ms. Nash said. “So this move by Texas is really testing all of that.”

Raegan McDonald-Mosely, the chief medical officer for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said, “The Trump administration must shut down this latest attack on women, because if the rest of the nation goes the way of Texas, it would result in a public health crisis for millions of women.”

So, Texas can screw over women, but still get federal money for women's 'healthcare'? Yeah, that sounds fair...NOT. I have little doubt the tt will agree to it. He can't afford to alienate his feverishly anti-abortion supporters.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
47of74

Some good news regarding NH State Rep. Robert Fisher (R-Fuckstick)

nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/05/18/lawmaker-resigns-after-being-revealed-as-founder-of-women-hating-community-the-red-pill/

Quote

New Hampshire state Representative Robert Fisher resigned on Wednesday, weeks after he was exposed by The Daily Beast as the founder of a “women-hating” Reddit community known as the Red Pill. Under the username pk_atheist, Fisher had authored comments suggesting that women serve “little purpose in day to day life” outside of their physical looks because of their “sub-par intelligence” and “lackluster and boring” personalities. Commenting as pk_atheist, Fisher also claimed that he had installed video cameras in his bedroom to prevent women from accusing him of rape.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
fraurosena
37 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

Yay! Thanks for the info, @47of74. This news puts a smile on my face. I posted about this rage-inducing moron a while back, and I'm so glad he's been forced to resign! 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan
3 hours ago, 47of74 said:

He's the one who serves little purpose in day to day life. I resent that he is taking up our oxygen.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
GreyhoundFan

"Supreme Court rules race improperly dominated N.C. redistricting efforts"

Spoiler

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature unlawfully relied on race when drawing two of the state’s congressional districts.

The decision continued a trend at the court, where justices have found that racial considerations improperly predominated in redistricting decisions by Republican-led legislatures in Virginia, Alabama and North Carolina. Some involved congressional districts, others legislative districts.

The states had contended their efforts were partisan attempts to protect their majorities, which the Supreme Court in the past has allowed, rather than attempts to diminish the impact of minority voters, which is forbidden.

But the justices declared North Carolina had relied too heavily on race in their efforts to “reshuffle,” in the words of Justice Elena Kagan, voters from one district to another. They were unanimous in rejecting one of the districts, and split 5 to 3 on the other.

In the split decision, Justice Clarence Thomas joined the liberal justices in saying race improperly predominated the drawing of the district. New Justice Neil M. Gorsuch was not on the court when the case was heard, and took no part in the decision.

Redistricting is part of a bare-knuckled fight in North Carolina, where Democrats and Republicans uneasily share political power. Last week, the Supreme Court said it would not review a lower court’s ruling that a sweeping 2013 rewrite of the state’s voting laws was an unconstitutional attempt to diminish the power of African American voters. The state’s Republican legislative leadership had asked the Supreme Court to get involved, but the Democratic governor and attorney general said they did not want to defend the law.

In the case involving the congressional districts, a lower court had found them improperly drawn, and in 2016 elections were held in redrawn districts. Republicans maintained control of 10 of 13 districts.

The charge from challengers was that North Carolina legislators had packed minority voters into a few districts in order to dilute their influence in other races. The state contended it was required to consider race in drawing the districts, but their overall effect was to preserve Republican control.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito Jr. were the dissenters in the decision. Alito wrote that drawing the districts is “readily explained by political considerations.”

The case is Cooper v. Harris.

I'm surprised that Thomas ruled on the side of the ebil libruls.

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
sawasdee

There is already an algorithm out there that can draw districts completely impartially.

When the next census comes round, in 2020, and the consequent redrawing of districts, I would love to see its use become compulsory - to stop gerrymandering in both Rep and Dem favour.

You know, to accurately reflect the wishes of the electorate.

Can you see either party adopting that in their campaigns?:confusion-shrug:

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
fraurosena
On 2017-5-22 at 8:20 PM, sawasdee said:

There is already an algorithm out there that can draw districts completely impartially.

When the next census comes round, in 2020, and the consequent redrawing of districts, I would love to see its use become compulsory - to stop gerrymandering in both Rep and Dem favour.

You know, to accurately reflect the wishes of the electorate.

Can you see either party adopting that in their campaigns?:confusion-shrug:

Are you kidding? Then politicians would have to start listening to the people instead of their pockets! 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
onekidanddone
On 5/20/2017 at 7:13 PM, GreyhoundFan said:

He's the one who serves little purpose in day to day life. I resent that he is taking up our oxygen.

@GreyhoundFan, snarky minds think alike. I use that expression often.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fraurosena

This looks promising. Fingers crossed!

A Fishing Hole Spat Could Give Democrats a Shot at a Montana House Seat

This is a lengthy article, worth the read, but these quotes sum up the gist of it:

Quote

[...] With the congressional midterms still 18 months away, Democrats have seized on House special elections as an early test of their political energy and an opportunity to steal a few seats. [...]

Quist, a country singer rarely seen without his white cowboy hat, thinks he can kickstart a Democratic turnaround in the House by betting big on the smallest of issues: a fishing hole.

In the race to fill the seat vacated by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke in March, Quist has tapped into deep-seated fears about the fate of Montana's public lands in Republican-dominated Washington. He has held six rallies "for public lands" across the state and been buoyed by a massive "hands off public lands" protest in Helena and a growing network of progressive grassroots groups. [...]

The acquisition of federal lands in the West was a huge issue during the Obama years, culminating in a string of high-profile showdowns between members of the Bundy family and federal agents in Nevada and Oregon. Many Republican state lawmakers, including in Montana, pushed legislation that would compel the federal government to transfer the deed to some of its public lands to their states. [...]

"Montanans have been locked in a battle against wealthy out-of-state land owners buying up land and blocking access to places Montanans have literally enjoyed for generations," [...]

The key to the public lands movement's success in resisting the land-transfer push has been that it comprises more than just crunchy environmentalists. It also has the backing of hunting and fishing groups and trade associations such as the Montana Wood Products Association.

After President Trump's inauguration, fears grew that public lands would come under threat. In late January, one week after the Helena women's march drew record crowds to the capitol grounds, 1,000 demonstrators, organized by a coalition led by the Montana Wilderness Association, crowded inside the capitol building with luminaries such as Bullock, Tester, and Hilary Hutcheson, a fly-fishing guide who hosts a popular TV show on Trout TV. They had a specific concern in mind: that the Trump administration would sign off on a push by congressional Republicans to sell off public lands. [...]

The race to replace Zinke is in some ways a fitting coda to the political fights of the Obama administration, which saw a new "Sagebrush Rebellion"—the name for the '80s anti-government movement led by Western ranchers— that featured, most sensationally, the antics of the Bundy clan. These new Sagebrushers were backed up by a new crop of local law enforcement leaders who resisted federal authority, as well as legislators, in Washington and state capitals, bent on redistributing federal lands to the states.

The Trump administration's push to reconsider places like Upper Missouri Breaks, which have been in the sights of conservative groups for a long time, represents a high-water mark for this movement. Quist is hoping his race is the beginning of another kind of wave.

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
clueliss

Meanwhile in Brownbackistan...

The Kansas House has stipulated the font size and print type to be used in abortion information.   We'll just ignore the state of the Kansas economy or that bleeding state budget.  

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2017/may/25/house-passes-bill-mandating-12-point-type-abortion/

Quote

House passes bill mandating 12-point type on abortion information

 

By Peter Hancock

May 25, 2017

TOPEKA — The Kansas House gave its final approval Thursday to a bill that specifies the size, color and type of font that must be used in giving women written information before an abortion procedure can be performed.

The bill, which now goes to the Senate for a final vote, makes changes to the Kansas Women's Right to Know Act, which mandates that women be provided certain information about abortion, including alternatives to abortion, before a procedure can be performed.

Anti-abortion activists, however, argued that clinics were getting around that law by simply posting that information on their websites.

The new bill would expand the amount of information that must be provided to patients, and mandates that it be printed on white paper, with black ink in 12-point Times New Roman font.

Abortion rights advocates argued that the bill offers no new protections to women and that it will almost certainly be challenged in court, resulting in unnecessary legal expenses for the state.

The bill passed the House Thursday, 84-38.

The House passed an earlier version of the written notification bill on March 30 and sent it to the Senate where another version of the bill was pending. But that bill never came out of committee, and the full Senate has not considered it yet.

Nevertheless, the latest version came out of a conference committee made up of leaders of the House and Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee.

Under joint rules of the Legislature, it is not necessary for both chambers to consider a bill before it can be considered in a conference committee. Bills that come out of conference committees are not subject to amendment and can only be voted up or down.

The conference committee used a procedure known as "gut-and-go" to put the contents of the House bill into a Senate bill that originally dealt with regulation of propane.

Kansas is currently defending another abortion lawsuit before the Kansas Supreme Court that challenges a 2015 law that bans a certain abortion procedure.

The state is also defending two other lawsuits pending in Shawnee County District Court: one challenging a 2011 law imposing numerous regulations on abortion clinics, and another challenging a 2013 law that prohibits abortions in certain circumstances while declaring that life begins at conception.

1

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Flossie

5/29/2017  

Republican State Representative Matt Rinaldi approached Democratic Reps and revealed that he'd called ICE on protesters in the House gallery.  This didn't go over well and soon Representatives were shouting and shoving each other on the House floor, as two members of each side accused the other of death threats.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/05/29/a-texas-republican-called-ice-on-protesters-then-lawmakers-started-to-scuffle/?utm_term=.f0b8624316f9

Spoiler

 

A Texas Republican called ICE on protesters. Then lawmakers started to scuffle.

Lawmakers scuffled on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives on Monday after a Dallas-area Republican told Democrats that he called Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers on protesters in the House gallery.

“We were just on the floor talking about the SB4 protests, and [state Rep.] Matt Rinaldi came up to us and made it a point to say, ‘I called (ICE) on all of them,’ ” state Rep. Philip Cortez (D) said. “And this is completely unacceptable. We will not be intimidated. We will not be disrespected.”

The protesters were apparently chanting and waving signs against Senate Bill 4, the controversial Texas legislation that Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed into law this month. It bans sanctuary cities, allows police to question anyone they detain about their immigration status, and compels local officials to comply with federal requests to detain individuals in state and local law enforcement facilities. The law was passed amid a national conversation about immigration enforcement priorities and promises from the Trump administration to aggressively pursue and deport undocumented immigrants.

Signing SB4 into law was seen as a big victory for Texas Republicans, who had tried unsuccessfully to pass a ban on sanctuary cities in each legislative session since 2011. Texas Democrats reacted to the bill’s passage with alarm; one lawmaker went on a hunger strike.

Video of the scuffle shows lawmakers pushing one another, yelling and gesticulating. Later, Democrats said, Rinaldi repeatedly got in their faces and cursed at them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDubbZdqJz0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMfBDMp7rt0

Texas Democrats held a news conference after legislators scuffled on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives on May 29 in Austin.  (Todd Wiseman/The Texas Tribune) 

“He saw the crowd, and he saw illegals,” state Rep. Ramon Romero Jr. said. “He saw people that, whether he likes to accept it or not, in his heart, he has hate for those people, and he wants to see them gone. He wants to see them gone so much, to the point that he called ICE.”

At one point, some of the language between the two sides apparently turned violent.

“There was a threat made from Representative Rinaldi to put a bullet in one of my colleagues’ heads,” state Rep. Justin Rodriguez said during the news conference. “That kind of threatening language, he needs to be called out and held accountable for.”

But Rinaldi said the threat went the other way — that state Rep. Poncho Nevárez (D) “threatened my life on the House floor.”

“I called ICE on several illegal immigrants who held signs in the gallery that said, ‘I am an illegal immigrant and here to stay,’ ” he said in a statement after the incident. Rinaldi went on to detail purported threats against him from Democratic lawmakers, saying he was assaulted and had sought the protection of law enforcement officials.

Rinaldi is reportedly under the protection of the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Without audio of the exchange on the Texas House floor, it’s impossible to say who threatened whom. But scuffles in the legislature show how the issue of immigration enforcement can stir passions on both sides.

Rinaldi’s decision to call ICE agents fits in with Texas Republicans’ main argument on immigration: that laws on the books should be enforced more strictly, and undocumented immigrants should be processed for deportation. Democrats say Rinaldi crossed a huge line, accusing him of profiling Hispanics in the House gallery.

And the fight over sanctuary cities isn’t over. In April, a federal judge said President Trump’s executive order on sanctuary cities is unconstitutional, and a barrage of legal challenges to the new Texas law is expected soon.

 

Calling ICE?  Really?  What a tool.
 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Recent Status Updates

    • choralcrusader8613

      choralcrusader8613

      I am going to scream or commit a crime. Why is Driscoll still a thing?!
      CW: misogyny, sexual gross, TMI
       
      · 0 replies
    • Maggie Mae

      Maggie Mae

      Where is the lost and found thread? I want to talk about the Wilkersons (simple living ak) but I'm not sure which thread or where to post. 
      · 5 replies
    • HerNameIsBuffy

      HerNameIsBuffy

      I bet no fundy mom every got such a touching Mother's Day tribute...

      Wishing everyone who celebrates a happy Mother's Day...and some extra love to others out there missing their mom's today, too.
       
      · 2 replies
    • Jasmar

      Jasmar

      My uncle just died from COVID. He wasn’t that much older than I am, so I kind of grew up with him. Just ten days ago my mom had been pleading with him to get vaccinated, but he wanted to wait to make sure the shots were really safe. I’m kind of devastated.
      · 6 replies
    • PumaLover

      PumaLover

      I just found out my little bonus kid is in a treatment center on a suicide watch tonight. He and I share a hobby and a couple weeks back he opened up to me that he's severely depressed and was wanting to hurt himself. I let his parents know and thankfully he had also been talking to them. I'm just heartbroken because him being in this center means that his parents had to call 911 and have him admitted and I know that was so hard for them to do. He's a young kid and has his whole life ahead of him but just wants to end it all and I don't know how to help him. 
      · 6 replies
    • HerNameIsBuffy

      HerNameIsBuffy

      Middle aged woman with mommy issues...but missing her today.
      She got so much wrong with me, but she had the best intentions and tried so hard. 
      She got so much right, too.  I forget that sometimes.  Sometimes I remember and dismiss it out of spite.  
      “They did the best they could with the tools they had.”  I forgot where I first heard that but I’ve carried it with me like a mantra since my parents passed.   They truly did.  Whatever else was missing, whatever I needed that they couldn’t give, the love was always there.  

      Always. 
      That’s something.
      My confidence in my own abilities.  Faith in my own power.  My own strength.  They gave me that, too.
      That’s also something.  
      They’re why I’m messed up, but they’re also why I’m okay.  
       
      Shit’s complicated.
      She died before I figured out how smart she really was.  Sad thing is I don’t think ever figured that out for herself.  
      Ignore me - just crying in my car waiting to pick up my son.  

       
       
      · 1 reply
    • CuttySark

      CuttySark

      The nice thing about posting about Jewish history is how quickly it flushes out the antisemites. 😘
      · 2 replies
    • choralcrusader8613

      choralcrusader8613

      I've been feeling a shitload of this for a while now about various types of Christians tbh.

      · 0 replies
    • HerNameIsBuffy

      HerNameIsBuffy

      It's Friday so yay!  But sweet Jesus I need it to be the end of the day already.  Crappy week and I'm so ready for it to be over.

      · 0 replies
    • nst

      nst

      I got vaccinated yesterday. In the am I got the email and I was  vaccinated 
      · 0 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.