If the American people ever needed a demonstration of why the United States Supreme Court “Citizens United” ruling was the biggest and most dangerous threat to this country they have to look no further than this year’s presidential election. Those behind the scenes have slowly been working up to this point in earlier elections, but because of the blatant and obvious detrimental impact on the democratic process, we are witnessing what amounts to two corporate giants battling for the presidency of the United States by any means necessary.
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)
Sigh, another one. Anything you take from the Drudge report means you're desperate for dirt. The Clinton campaign, unlike the Trump campaign, does not blacklist reporters or hand pick who appears, and this man had a ticket and so he sat and was seen and tea partiers got all excited about drumming up another scandal. Was he a terrorist? Did he kill anyone? Did he help his kid plan an atrocity. Nope it's just more judging someone for something in which he wasn't involved. Would Clinton have liked him not to be there? Probably, but the last I heard it was a free country and so long as you aren't handpicking your audience as both Trump and Bush have done, he is perfectly within his rights to be there. Also, there is not a single reliable source that this man visited the White House and Snopes calls foul since she had been gone as SecState when this evidently fake photo was taken. http://www.snopes.com/orlando-shooters-fat… If you aren't smart enough to check stories you read, you aren't smart enough to vote.
I was happy to see Wasserman-Schultz go, but let's set the record straight on this one: Daily Kos: "Being an honorary chair of a campaign—a position that involves no responsibilities, no employees, no budget, and no duties—is not a promotion from being chair of the DNC.
Being an honorary chair does not mean that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is “in charge of” Hillary Clinton’s campaign. It doesn’t mean anything. That is, unless you think President Obama’s 2012 campaign was run by actress Eva Longoria; or former Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee; or high school guidance counselor Loretta Harper—all of whom were among 24 people who served as honorary co-chairs of Obama’s 2012 campaign.
Being an honorary chair is not a job. It’s a courtesy. It’s the associate producer of politics. It’s an empty title handed out to help ease Debbie Wasserman Schultz out of her chair and make it slightly more palatable for her to leave a job she’d done (badly) for five years without putting up a fuss.
It’s a face-saving sop."
Hillary announced that she is targeting AZ and GA. Wonder what they are spending their money on? Here's my guess.
And it won't be Russia. It will be her lying subordinates. Too bad that Seth Rich was killed.
The Chump supporters should DEFINITELY numb their nuts. In fact, castration is probably the answer.
I think the point is that you should numb your nuts.
Stick a fork in it. Trump's "reboot "lasted less than 48 hours. He doesn't have the stuff, plain and simple. It's also painfully clear that he doesn't want the job.
Yes, we're going through one of our periodic major realignments of political affiliations. Anyone who thinks that has mainly to do with how SCARY Donald Trump is should think again. It has mainly to do with the fact that neither major party finds itself able at this point to serve the interests of the majority of people in the country. Angry, disillusioned right-ish constituents voted for Trump over any of the establishment Republicans, and now the Establishment is protesting by voting for the Establishment candidate the Democratic party forced through with its dishonest, unclean primary process.
That is a genuine cause for Democrat celebration, right? Or maybe not.
If you look at one set of doors on the D-train your will see conservatives hurrying on. Look at another set of doors and you will see liberals unable to stomach Clinton's militarist, neoliberal agenda taking the emergency exit.
Clearly you don't like the Trump Train, David. All of your recent posts seem designed to emphasize that the Trump Train is a train to HELL, and in this post we learn that it is SO hellish that even diabolical Republicans are rushing off of it.
This doesn't obscure the fact that those who are honest still need to ask themselves if the D-train has been re-routed by the money interests in such a way that it will be taking us to a place where neither we nor anyone else in this country who supports a "progressive" policy agenda would want to go....and that may be part of the reason why so many anti-progressive people are willing to board it.
If only we could trust his opponent.
Both major factions in the partisan world are not just fighting with the gloves off, they are down on the ground mud-wrestling with total abandon.
Non-partisan reporting of solid, verifiable fact is what we need from the media (including bloggers like Safier, who, as he helpfully notes in his little anecdote in this piece, had no formal journalistic training and not much vetting of credentials, oversight or fact checking of submissions at the time that he started offering commentary on politics and education to the general public).
What we need to know about Trump and Clinton: all the boring FACTS including the details of their tax plans, whom they would be likely to appoint to the Supreme Court, who their largest donors are, etc. That way we can accurately compare "bad" and "worse," which is what we're faced with in this country at this point. (Not "pretty darn good" VS. "the apocalypse," which is what the partisan hacks on both sides seem to be trying to convey.)
Fear-mongering persuasion techniques are happening and will continue to happen with a vengeance for the next three months, but it would be nice if even the committed partisan mud-wrestlers could recognize that undermining voter confidence in the legitimacy of election results is not a technique that should be used. Problems with electoral process and reporting need to be identified and solved, not wafted about in the form of innuendos intended to undermine the other party's cause but which may backfire by causing yet more bipartisan voter disengagement than we already have.
(What would you think of factions supporting rival candidates for the captain's position on a boat, if, when they found holes in the hull with water flowing in, didn't patch them, but both starting shouting that the opposing team's candidate had caused them and would cause more if he became captain? Keep up that kind of response to the problem and both teams will find themselves on the bottom of the ocean floor with no boat to captain. There are some kinds of problems that undermine the integrity of the vehicle all factions depend on for their existence, and in a democracy any kind of problem with the legitimacy of election results falls in that category.)
The Charter Schools take resources away from public schools blah blah blah
The public schools have to take everyone blah blah blah
Why don't you just admit that you do not want to give poor and minority students a chance to get off the plantation.
The numbnuts keep multiplying! What, is there a Chump rally here? Lord, help me Jesus; I'm surrounded.
I support Adiba's call for access, regardless of whether something is an ADA violation or not. The ADA is not as comprehensive as many imagine, unfortunately, and even when it is comprehensive, it is often not followed. (I see a violation in almost every restaurant I visit: ramps are too steep or not constructed correctly, ramps are blocked with chairs or potted plants, hallway access is restricted with crates or shelves, etc.) Because the ADA is complex, it can sometimes be unclear whether something is a violation, so I would still encourage any parents at TUSD schools to consult with the TUSD ADA Compliance Officer and, if necessary, the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, to get information. Not all ADA violations or access issues are expensive to correct, and a student should not have to continue facing an access barrier because schools are underfunded. We all need to do everything we can to increase funding for education at the same time, absolutely. When it comes to the Children's Museum, I don't think it's a case of either/or. Should we support the Children's Museum if we can with fundraisers and grant writing? Yes. Are there steps the Children's Museum can take now to increase access, like creating an advisory group on disability access if they don't already have one? Yes. Adiba is doing us all a great service by sharing her experience and getting this conversation started.
Two numbnuts now!
Hey look, numbnuts responded again, with another dislike!
"Get Your Hands on a Stingray at the Desert Museum"
No way Jose!
The only thing you got correct in your statement was that the freeways are there.
I love Arizona. I hate the crooks and money-grubs that are in control of it. I will never live there again if I can help it. Please vote those bastards that wanted to sell Oak Flat out. The people of Arizona have the power and November is around the corner. I live in another state that I also love and has its own issues with people trying to just flatten our forests or steal our water to sell. We also have the f-ing Bundys in JAIL and I'm proud of this fact. It's time for the trend of being a land-grabbing/abusing cowboy to become a thing of the past.
Wow! Some numbnuts out there doesn't like children.
Debra- your source is very questionable, a pro-charter website: "We believe that education is not one-size-fits-all and that every family deserves to choose from a range of schools to find the right fit for their children, including high quality charter schools."
The facts are that charters do take away money from public schools, especially here in AZ where the laws and regulations are very pro-charter. Funding is per pupil and based on current year enrollment. Therefore, if a public school loses kids to a charter, their funding is decreased. Alone, this should not be a big issue, but coupled with the relaxed requirements charters receive, can greatly impact public schools. Charters are not required to provide transportation, certified teachers or special education services that public schools are. Amazingly, these extra requirements of public schools are not free. Charters are anything but "inclusive", with many students being "pushed out" for everything from low test scores to special education needs. Public schools take ALL children.
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation