But these were three good interviews, and the President did such a fantastic job talking with these people. Obama is really a classy guy, right down to his core. It is so difficult for me to dislike him.
Carl Bildt, Sweden's former PM and Minister of Foreign Affairs Had been trying to impress the CIA with his rabid, hawkish views for years. In the Wikileaked diplomatic cables, Bildt was described by the CIA as "a medium-sized dog with a BIG-dog attitude."
Praise be to those perspicacious CIA folks!
So Roosh the Douche, a men's rights "activist" who actively promotes the subjugation of women (literally, I am not being sarcastic) and glorifies rape (again, not being sarcastic) has organized meet-ups for his fellow douches in cities in several countries around the world.
These delusional jerk-offs honestly and truly believe feminism has somehow succeeded in turning men into second-class citizens who are subordinate to privileged women. Their proposed solution is basically to make raping women legal.
Well then, maybe beating up douchebags should be legal too.
There are two dominant views about how presidents accomplish fundamental change.
The first might be called the “deal-maker-in-chief,” by which presidents threaten or buy off powerful opponents.
Barack Obama got the Affordable Care Act this way – gaining the support of the pharmaceutical industry, for example, by promising them far more business and guaranteeing that Medicare wouldn’t use its vast bargaining power to negotiate lower drug prices.
The costs of such deals in “the world we’re living in” are likely to be even higher now. Powerful interests are more powerful than ever thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision opening the floodgates to big money.
But such deals can be expensive to the public (the tab for the pharmaceutical exemption is about $16 billion a year), and they don’t really change the allocation of power. They just allow powerful interests to cash in.
Which takes us to the second view about how presidents accomplish big things that powerful interests don’t want: by mobilizing the public to demand them and penalize politicians who don’t heed those demands.
Teddy Roosevelt got a progressive income tax, limits on corporate campaign contributions, regulation of foods and drugs, and the dissolution of giant trusts – not because he was a great dealmaker but because he added fuel to growing public demands for such changes.
It was at a point in American history similar to our own. Giant corporations and a handful of wealthy people dominated American democracy. The lackeys of the “robber barons” literally placed sacks of cash on the desks of pliant legislators.
The American public was angry and frustrated. Roosevelt channeled that anger and frustration into support of initiatives that altered the structure of power in America. He used the office of the president – his “bully pulpit,” as he called it – to galvanize political action.
Could Hillary Clinton do the same? Could Bernie Sanders?
Clinton fashions her prospective presidency as a continuation of Obama’s....
After the 2008 election [Obama] turned his election campaign into a new organization called “Organizing for America” (now dubbed “Organizing for Action”), explicitly designed to harness his grassroots support.
So why did Obama end up relying more on deal-making than public mobilization? Because he thought he needed big money for his 2012 campaign.
Despite OFA’s public claims (in mailings, it promised to secure the “future of the progressive movement”), it morphed into a top-down campaign organization to raise big money.
(please read the whole article if you've come this far)
The lizard brain of Tony Abbott still rules this country. Conservatives hate science and conservative governments hate data. They want to run things along ideological lines and without incumbrances such as "reality" and "evidence".
The government is determined pursue its path of ignoring climate change and this will have ruinous consequences in the coming decades. They abolished the only price signal for carbon emissions and gave the greenlight to Carmichael mega coal mine, one of the most damaging fossil fuel projects on the planet. Now they are gutting the only institution in the country that can can measure and model the changes happening to our climate.
Turnbull is a fraud and a huckster. He has conned Australia's middle class but his policy settings and priorities are exactly the same as Tony Abbott's.
We really need to kick these bastards out.
"Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque," Rubio said at a New Hampshire town hall. "Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims. Of course there’s going to be discrimination in America of every kind. But the bigger issue is radical Islam."
Rubio then compared anti-Muslim bigotry to friendly sports rivalries, and argued that Obama's speech was really the thing causing division. "But again, it’s this constant pitting people against each other — that I can’t stand that. It’s hurting our country badly," Rubio said. "We can disagree on things, right? I’m a Dolphin fan, you’re a Patriot fan." He warned that Obama was dividing America "along ethnic lines and racial lines and economic lines and religious lines.""
The slim margin by which Hillary Clinton won the Iowa caucuses shrank even narrower after the Iowa Democratic Party said Sunday it found counting errors in five of the 14 precincts it double-checked.
The Democratic Party announced Sunday that Clinton won 700.47 state delegate equivalents (SDEs) to Sanders' 696.92 SDEs -- a razor-thin percentage of caucus goers equal to 49.84%-49.59%.
The party determined that Clinton lost .122 SDEs in the recounting, Sanders gained .1053 and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley gained .0167.
"I would like to thank the campaigns and local party leadership for working so hard on caucus night and in the following days to ensure that our results are accurate," state party Chairwoman Andy McGuire said in a statement.
The Sanders campaign is conducting its own review of the results.
That's just too significant in my book for Iowa to claim being finished with verifying results. It would actually make Bernie the winner by a larger margin than is currently claimed for Hillary.
- everywhere, all the time
- Six states in the USA, three states in Mexico and one city in the NetherlandsRegistered critical care nurse.
Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton by 31 points in N.H.: Poll
Sanders was at 61 percent support in the University of Massachusetts Lowell/7News poll, followed by Mrs. Clinton, at 30 percent
Americans Are Running Away From the Corporate Media
() Win or lose - Monday night was a great night for Bernie Sanders and his supporters. Bernie pointed out in his speech Monday night that th
Jane Mayer Reveals History of Koch Family and the Nazis
Mayer uncovers new information about how Fred Koch joined forces with a Nazi sympathizer to build a refinery approved by Adolf Hitler.
Flint, Michigan is What Happens When You Run Government Like a Business...
() Republicans love to say we need to run government like a business. But, we only need to look to Flint, Michigan to see how that works out
Anchorage police: No charges in Palin birthday brawl
An Anchorage Police Department report sheds new light on the fight involving members of the Palin family that erupted at an Anchorage birthd