Posts Tagged ‘GOP’

Election 2016


It seems that every four years Americans are faced with a choice that often leaves us with a bad taste in our mouths. We elect and vote for choices based on the best available candidates, we hope. When it comes time to vote, we somehow also fall for the rhetoric that our very way of life is threatened if the other guy wins and the only way to ensure our preservation is to cast our ballot in favor of “our” guy.

This election is no different, but now we have a woman.After reviewing all of them I’m not so sure the American people benefit with anyone.


Bernie Sanders- Bernie Sanders is a crowd favorite. He brings an authenticity with him that connects with his constituents and his supporters. His track record on civil rights and the rights of minorities is impenetrable. He has energized a whole young population that feels disenfranchised and disengaged from the whole political landscape that their parents live in.

He wants to regulate the banks and get big money out of politics. He also has accomplished a feat never done before. He has wedge into the democratic system that the term socialist is not an evil word and changed the course of campaigning forever. He has answered the call for millions of people who hate the “business as usual” mechanics of politics that often leave minorities in the cold.

The issues aren’t with Bernie’s message it’s that if he were to become president, how effective can he be to make that changes his campaign ran on. Americans are fearful of the term socialist and congress is not just gonna grovel at his feet just cause the people want change. Back in 2008, when Obama became president there was a feeling of real, radical change was going to happen and shifts in policy and laws were going to be enacted that would help African-Americans and other poor groups. After months of fine dining us, Americans were finding out Obama had trouble paying the bill for the meal he ordered and well, we got stuck doing some dishes. I feel this will play out the same way with Bernie.

His supporters aren’t looking for another compromise or a back alley deal that meets in the middle. They want real change for that to happen, Sanders pinned himself in an unwavering position. Sanders records on gun control is murky at best because he against a five-day waiting period for background checks in 1993, but also voted against selling of automatic weapons. He also is another war mongering leader in the making who voted for wars in Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Even Clinton has taken a lot of heat for the 1994 Crime Bill, but Sanders has somehow been able his vote through undetected.

When asked about it, he gives an explanation that is acceptable to his supporters, but others like myself puzzled. In their eyes he can do no wrong. So my question is this. If Sanders is so civil rights, then why did he vote for the Crime Bill knowing the repercussions it would have on generations of African-Americans. Also, don’t the victims of bombings and attacks in Middle Eastern countries by our military deserve rights, our are black and brown rights only relevant on our soil?


Hillary Clinton-Clinton has the chance to make history in this race and that has come at a cost. Her character, voting records, previous comments and experience has all come into question. While Clinton has the drive and fortitude of her male counterparts, has an edge in foreign policy, that her opponents on the right and left do not have. Through her Apprentice Tax Credit that can help millions of Americans. Gun Control advocates back her and she has one of the best presidents of our generation to call on in a moments notice living in the same home, her husband and former president Bill Clinton.

Clinton has faced numerous amounts of attacks that only seemed to be fueled by sexism, ageist and relentlessness by the GOP. With every report about her, whether it’s Benghazi or the current email scandal her opponents find simple-minded attacks to weaken her resolve. She’s been the most scrutinized and politicized figure in this race. Sanders hammers her on her cozy relationship with banks and big budget corporations. While Trump seems to have label her as crooked and makes over inflated statements about her emails, that most Americans just want to move on from.

Hillary’s biggest problem throughout all this has been herself. Three years ago she was the most likable candidate assuming she was going to run at the time. Now her poll numbers show a problem that has become an anchor in her sailboat. Frankly, a lot of voters don’t like or trust her. GOP has a small victory in their corner,but Sanders and his supporters don’t buy into her talk of tough politics against bankers and lobbyists. She also played her hand too late on issues such as immigration, abortion, Keystone Pipeline and others.

This makes her look too indecisive and that someone else is feeding her what to say and how to say it. This is troubling to Americans who want a president who will walk into the situation room or summit with world leaders and give a clear-cut answer at a moments notice when the time comes. Other missteps have been her pandering to the African-American community which she has been called out on numerous times.

Hillary’s biggest challenge won’t be winning the nomination,but concentrating her energy towards Bernie’s supporters without pivoting too far away from her central message that got her base initially. Some Bernie supporters have already vowed to either vote for Trump or not at all if Hillary wins.


Donald Trump- Donald Trump has been the most controversial outspoken candidate of this generation. He has insulted Latinos, Muslims, Women, the disabled, captured war heroes and other groups as well. His racially divisive and hurtful attacks pierce right into the heart of the issue that seems to be the unspoken case of racial disparity and underlining bigotry in our so-called progressive country.

Trump has effectively collected the population of those who feel marginalized, by the growing threat of losing the country their ancestors gained. Trump supporters are overwhelmingly white and mostly males. When his supporters speak of him, their most likely to say how much of a great speaker he is and how he tells it like it is.

They also like the fact that Trump doesn’t have to gravel at the feet of those lobbyists and campaign donors that the other candidate did. He funded most of the campaign himself and his supporters as well. He has a tax plan proposal that would exempt single filers making $25,000 and under from paying taxes.

His biggest win in his campaign has been drawing in the GOP with a gravitational like pull towards himself. Most candidates usually make statements to parallel the GOP brand and narrative already in play. Trump has disregarded the verbal talking points of conservatism and has made inflammatory remarks, one after the other. Even with Governors, Speaker of the House and rivals calling him out on his statements, they all are united in voting for him. That’s much like your uncle saying how much he hates gay people and proposing legislation against them, but the family has to keep putting up with him, because he’s grannies favorite.

What works against Trump has been Trump himself. Unlike Clinton, who’s pandering hurt her to be a favorite among undecided voters, Trump has alienated a base of supporters that the GOP has desperately been trying to obtain that the democrats has had a strong hold on…minorities. His constant remarks about building a wall to keep Mexicans out and increasing security against immigrant Muslims has turned him into apotheosis of angry racist white hatred. He’s a fan favorite among white supremacists and shows no signs of slowing down his tone. He recently made statements about a federal judge who is of Mexican background that again pinned him down to be racist and bigoted.

In addition to Trump inciting racism, he also is a compulsive liar with a bad temperament. He has countless sound bits that has been fact checked and found out to be downright lies.

When you go and vote on these candidate be informed about them, but just don’t vote on your emotions learn about the candidate.


A Republican precinct chairman in North Carolina has resigned one day after an interview he gave to “The Daily Show” aired.

Don Yelton spoke with the Comedy Central show’s Aasif Mandvi in a discussion that aired Wednesday, in which he defended his state’s voter ID law and referred to “lazy blacks that wants the government to give them everything.” He said the law was not racist, but said that he’s “been called a bigot before.”


Buncombe County, N.C., GOP Chairman Henry Mitchell told that Yelton’s statements were “offensive, uninformed and unacceptable of any member within the Republican Party.”

Mitchell said in a press release, “Let me make it very clear, Mr. Yelton’s comments do not reflect the belief or feelings of Buncombe Republicans, nor do they mirror any core principle that our party is founded upon. This mentality will not be supported or propagated within our party.”

Yelton resigned on Thursday, but was unrepentant in an interview with the Asheville, N.C., Citizen-Times. “There’s nothing I said that I would take back. So be it,” he said.

He also claimed that the interview was edited from a two-hour discussion, and that the quotes were “cut and pasted” together by a show he already believed leaned to the political left. 

“I knew going in what was going to happen, and nothing happened that I was surprised at,” said Yelton. “If you and I disagree and we never communicate, are we ever going to accomplish anything?”

Halfway through the clip, Mandvi eyeballs the camera as he waits for Yelton to finish one sentence, in which he says, “One of my best friends is … black.” That leads into a montage of racially charged quotes from Yelton and concludes with Mandvi asking, “You know that we can hear you, right?”

Mitchell’s release said that Yelton had clashed with local members of his party before, and was removed from his position in 2012, but was re-elected by two votes: His own and his wife’s. The statement also said that Yelton had not sought nor received approval to speak on behalf of the GOP in the interview. 

Original Post –


House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio listens during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 10, 2013, following a meeting with House Republicans. Boehner said Republicans will advance legislation to temporarily extend the government's ability to borrow to meet its obligations. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

View gallery

  • .
  • .
  • .
  • .
Associated Press 

ANDREW TAYLOR 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Facing a fresh deadline, House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that Republicans would vote to extend the government’s ability to borrow money for six weeks — but only if President Barack Obama first agrees to fresh negotiations on spending cuts. Under the Republican plan, the partial government shutdown would continue in the meantime.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said that Obama “would likely sign” a clean bill increasing the debt cap but that the president also wants Republicans to reopen the government. He did not rule out Obama agreeing to Boehner’s debt ceiling proposal if the government remains closed, but the White House made no promises that Obama would hold negotiations under those circumstances.

“He will not pay ransom in exchange for the Republicans in the House doing their job,” Carney said.

Obama is to meet with Boehner and other House GOP leaders at the White House Thursday afternoon.

After weeks of decline, financial market indexes shot higher in anticipation of a possible deal that could avert a federal financial default. Both the Dow Jones industrial average and Standard & Poor’s 500 index were up well over 1 percent in afternoon trading

View gallery.”

White House press secretary Jay Carney uses a visual …

White House press secretary Jay Carney uses a visual aid comparing what Republican lawmakers said an …

“I would hope the president would look at this as an opportunity and a good faith effort on our part to move halfway, halfway to what he’s demanded, in order to have these conversations begin,” Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters after presenting the plan to rank-and-file GOP lawmakers.

Boehner produced his proposal as the shutdown entered its 10th day. On that front, the administration said it would allow states to use their own money to reopen some national parks that have been closed.

Governors in at least four states — Utah, South Dakota, Arizona and Colorado — have asked for authority to reopen national parks within their borders because of the economic impact of the closures. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said the government will consider offers to pay for park operations but will not surrender control of national parks to the states.

As for the deeper problem of the federal debt ceiling, the administration has warned that unless the limit is raised, the government will deplete its ability to borrow money by next Thursday, an event officials have warned could trigger a default that could wound the world economy as well as America’s .

Obama has steadfastly insisted that Congress reopen the government and extend the debt limit without conditions. His acceptance of the GOP proposal could mean a brief resolution to the fight over the debt limit and a continuation of the shutdown while negotiations proceed.

View gallery.”

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew testifies on Capitol Hill …

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 10, 2013, befor …

Republicans have been demanding cuts in government programs, including Obama’s 2010 health care law, and a bigger effort to cut long-term federal deficits as their price for reopening government and extending the debt limit.

Obama has repeatedly noted recent improvement in the deficit figures. After four years of trillion-dollar deficits, the 2013 shortfall is expected to register below $700 billion.

Some conservatives still expressed reservations with the Boehner plan. “I’m not very enthusiastic about that,” Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said.

Under Boehner’s offer, the House would also appoint negotiators to bargain with the Democratic-led Senate over a budget compromise. Those talks have been on hold for months, and the two chambers have deep differences over taxes and cuts in benefit programs.

Earlier Thursday, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew warned the Senate Finance Committee that failure to renew the government’s ability to borrow money “could be deeply damaging” to financial markets and threaten Americans’ jobs and savings. It would also leave the government unsure of when it could make payments ranging from food aid to Medicare reimbursements to doctors, he said.

View gallery.”

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew arrives on Capitol Hill …

Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew arrives on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 10, 2013, to test …

“The United States should not be put in a position of making such perilous choices for our economy and our citizens,” the secretary said. “There is no way of knowing the irrevocable damage such an approach would have on our economy and financial markets.”

The game of Washington chicken over increasing the debt limit — required so Treasury can borrow more money to pay the government’s bills in full and on time — had sent the stock market south, spiked the interest rate for one-month Treasury bills and prompted Fidelity Investments, the nation’s largest manager of money market mutual funds, to sell federal debt that comes due around the time the nation could hit its borrowing limit.

At the Finance committee hearing, Lew met incredulity from Republicans, who said the bigger problem was the soaring costs of benefit programs like Social Security and Medicare and the long-term budget deficits the country faces. Many expressed doubt about Lew’s description of the consequences of default.

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said, “I think this is 11th time I’ve been through this discussion about the sky is falling and the Earth will erupt. Wyoming families aren’t buying these arguments.”

Replied Lew, “After they run up their credit card, they don’t get to ignore it.”

View gallery.”

Senate Finance Committee chairman Sen. Max Baucus, …

Senate Finance Committee chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., center, listens as Treasury Secretary Ja …

Meanwhile, the Senate gave final congressional approval to a bill ensuring that families of fallen troops be paid death benefits, which have been halted during the shutdown. Word that those payments had stopped prompted lawmakers of both parties to act to restore them.

In addition, the House voted 249-175 to finance border security and customs personnel through Dec. 15, the latest of the House GOP’s bills aimed at reviving selected programs during the shutdown. The Senate has ignored most of the measures, saying the entire government must be restarted.

Original Post ––finance.html



There have been plenty of jokes over the years about House Speaker John Boehner’s tendency to cry in public. But a new Democratic attack ad goes one step further, comparing Boehner to a bawling infant.

The 30-second-ad, entitled “Temper Tantrum,” opens with footage of a baby crying. The nearly hysterical crying continues uninterrupted for a full 15 seconds before a narrator intones, “Speaker John Boehner didn’t get his way on shutting down health care reform. So he shut down the government and hurt the economy.”

“Temper Tantrum” calls to mind a similar critique made against former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1995. After feeling “snubbed” by former President Bill Clinton during a ride aboard Air Force One, Gingrich moved forward with legislation that eventually led to the 28-day government shutdown that year.

In response, the New York Daily News famously ran a front page cartoon image of Gingrich in a diaper screaming with the headline, “Cry Baby.”

View gallery


The famous “Cry Baby” cover of the New York Daily News lampooning Newt Gingrich (Wikicommons)

For it’s part, “Temper Tantrum” is certainly a unique approach to an attack ad, coming from the House Majority PAC, a Democratic Super Pac that has raised more than $3 million so far to oppose Republican candidates in the 2014 midterm elections.

While the debate over Obamacare has continued unabated since its passage in 2010, the rhetoric has recently turned up in the weeks leading up the government shutdown.

Conservatives made national headlines with their strange and arguably effective “Creepy Uncle Sam” attack ad showing a man dressed in a disturbing Uncle Sam costume who walks in on a young woman awaiting a doctor’s exam. That ad has generated more than 2 million YouTube views since going live on Sept. 18.

And there’s good reason why partisans of all stripes run attack ads: They work. Poll after poll shows that most Americans say they don’t like negative campaign ads. But every major study on their effectiveness shows that negative political advertising resonates with the average voter.

Whether it’s the famous “Daisy” ad from the 1960 presidential campaign or more recent efforts like the 2004 ad showing Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry windsurfing, these sort of “name calling” attack ads have become almost expected in the political debate.

In fact, personal attack ads are so commonplace in the current political debate that some of them are formulated before a political event even takes place. For example, it was reported this week that conservatives in Texas had preemptively crafted an attack ad against State Sen. Wendy Davis just in case Davis decided to run for governor in 2014. For the record, Davis announced her candidacy on Thursday, and the ads are expected to begin airing this weekend.

Original Post –


In this Oct. 1, 2013, photo, The Ohio Clock outside the Senate Chamber on Capitol Hill shows the time of 12:01 a.m., in Washington. Having failed to persuade their traditional Republican allies in Congress to avert a government shutdown, business leaders fear bigger problems ahead, and they’re taking sides with a Democratic president whose health care and regulatory agenda they have vigorously opposed. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

View gallery

  • .
Associated Press 


WASHINGTON (AP) — Business leaders are taking sides with Democratic President Barack Obama after failing to persuade their traditional Republican allies in Congress to avert a government shutdown.

Obama, whose health care and regulatory agenda they have vigorously opposed, is embracing the business outreach, eager to employ groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street CEOs to portray House Republicans as out of touch even with their long-established corporate and financial patrons.

Yet, the partial closing of the government and the looming confrontation over the nation’s borrowing limit highlight the remarkable drop in the business community’s influence among House Republicans, who increasingly respond more to tea party conservatives than to the Chamber of Commerce.

On Wednesday, Obama hosted 14 chief executives from the nation’s biggest financial firms for more than an hour of meetings. Moreover, the Chamber of Commerce has sent a letter to Congress signed by about 250 business groups urging no shutdown and warning that a debt ceiling crisis could lead to an economic disaster. They say that the policy disputes over health care and spending that are separating Democrats and Republicans should be debated later.

Summing up the Wall Street CEOs’ message on the White House driveway Wednesday, Lloyd Blankfein, chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs, said:

“You can re-litigate these policy issues in a political forum, but we shouldn’t use threats of causing the U.S. to fail on its obligations to repay its debt as a cudgel.”

The divide between some GOP lawmakers and the corporate groups that have helped shape the Republican agenda in the past is partly a result of a legacy of the Wall Street bailouts of 2008-09 and a changing communication and campaign finance landscape that has weakened the roles of corporate donors and of the major political parties.

Interviews with House Republicans from all regions of the country demonstrate the corporate community’s waning clout. Most of these lawmakers say local business owners and chambers of commerce have not raised the potential economic downside of a government shutdown or debt default.

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, like many of his colleagues, said the overwhelming message he hears from business owners is their dislike of Obama’s health care overhaul, which is at the center of Congress’ impasse and the government shutdown. Likewise, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, said he mostly hears business owners complain “about the negative effects of ‘Obamacare’ upon their ability to do business and hire people.”

When Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., was asked if he had heard business groups express fears of a government shutdown’s economic impact, he replied: “No. And it wouldn’t make any difference if I did.”

View gallery.”

President Barack Obama pauses while speaking in the …

President Barack Obama pauses while speaking in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Tu …

Still, major business groups are raising alarms, citing the economic cost of a shutdown and warning of even more serious consequences if Congress doesn’t act quickly to raise the $16.7 trillion borrowing limit, which the government is expected to hit around mid-October.

The letter circulated by the Chamber of Commerce urges lawmakers to raise the debt ceiling “in a timely manner and remove any threat to the full faith and credit of the United States government.” It also acknowledges Republican fears over the unsustainable growth of major benefit programs such Medicare and Social Security and the need for a more business-friendly tax system.

But in a rejection of the tactics of House Speaker John Boehner, the letter urges Congress to pass first a short-term spending bill, then raise the debt ceiling, “and then return to work on these other vital issues.”

That advice is being ignored by the GOP-led House.

“There is an element of the more independent, tea party coalition Republicans that, frankly, don’t listen to very many people,” said John Engler, the former Republican governor of Michigan and now president of the Business Roundtable, one of the groups that signed the chamber letter. “They are on a mission, often defined on the basis of their view of the world, and they aren’t paying very much attention to what this means beyond maybe their own districts.”

Concerned, the Chamber of Commerce is preparing to participate in political primaries, protecting friendly lawmakers from conservative challengers. “Clearly we’re getting to a point where we need a Congress that’s going to be productive, proactive and create a stable environment for economic growth and job creation,” said Scott Reed, a Republican political consultant who is advising the chamber on its strategy.

A changing environment has given conservatives plenty of tools to challenge establishment Republicans by using new technology and social media to organize and mobilize highly motivated voters. Campaign finance laws have also given donors a greater playing field that is not limited to the political parties.

What’s more, the bank bailouts of 2008 and 2009 soured the public, which resulted in a new wave of populist Republicans in 2010 driven by a decentralized tea party movement that was not beholden to the GOP establishment.

As a result, said Kevin Madden, a former senior House Republican leadership aide and an adviser to Mitt Romney’ presidential campaign, the political parties, congressional committee chairmen and big donors no longer wield the clout they once did.

“Now it’s more of a bottom-up model, where you see these grass-roots organizations and grass-roots voters are now empowered and they feel they have a stronger voice,” he said. “There is less of an emphasis on the parties. They used to have much more outsize control over who the candidates were and what party discipline was. Now a lot of that is gone.”

Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., emphasized that point. “I’m from a district that pretty much ignores Washington,” he said. “If you say government is going to shut down, they say, ‘OK, which part can we shut down?'”


Original Post ––finance.html

R19025.inddThe reason I am writing this blog is in light of the things I have seen across the country that are bothering me. The George Zimmerman acquittal was the tipping point for me. I don’t have a son, but I have three daughters and the stats for black women being arrested and convicted are rising. My point is Trayvon could have easily been Trisha coming from her girlfriend’s house carrying her purse with makeup and a cell phone getting followed by a gun-toting vigilante who had a preconceived notion they were they in the area “suspiciously”. Honestly it’s not just about race there have been certain actions taken by this government and officials that seem to be bringing us back into the decades before. When women did not have rights and were expected to shut up, stay in the kitchen and make babies.

This is about immigration and the steps being taken to make sure immigrants are discouraged from coming into the country. This is about gay rights being threatened in this country (One step forward two steps back). This is about making voting in our elections next to impossible with section 4 of the Voting Rights Act struck down enabling states to make “adjustments” This is about so much more than just a rant on race it’s about the attack on the strides this country has made in the last six decades and the sneaky conniving way those rights are being undermined and gutted out.  In other words bringing things back to the way it used to be.

Voting Rights Act

Our society is too bloodthirsty and eager to hold a gun to solve an issue rather than rationalize a situation. I just read a law still on the books in Maine stating shotguns are REQUIRED to be taken to church in case of a Native American attack. This country was founded on “pull the trigger first out of fear” mentality rather than try to understand the other side. The other blow to minorities recently is the striking down of section four of the Voting Right Act. This section of the law mandates that any state making changes to the law in their state has to be cleared by the court to assure the law is not discriminatory in any way. Within a 48 period of that section being taken down states like Texas, Virginia, South Carolina and more have already started the wheels turning on making changes to voting laws.

I know there has been outrage in the black community about this section being struck down, but Latinos should also be aware. In the presidential election of 2012 the Latino vote gave Obama a big boost in the polls. In the states I just mentioned which are largely republican I am sure tactics are being put in place to frustrate, agitate and even discourage minorities in those areas so less and less come out on those nights where their voice is needed the most.

Abortion Bills

Texas and North Carolina have made strides to restrict a woman’s choice of choosing to keep their unborn child. Texas is pushing forward a bill that would ban abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy, put new requirements on facilities that practice abortion procedures and also limit a women’s ability to take a pill to induce an abortion. If this bill passes Planned Parenthood in Texas fears it would have to shut its doors to all but six of its facilities. Governor Rick Perry gave a statement about the bill after it passed the house. “This legislation builds on strong and unwavering commitment we have made to defend life and protect women’s health.” He does not get it at all. Honestly the choice over a fetus’s life should be left up to the MOTHER AND FATHER. Mostly the mother because she is carrying the child, when I was young and much less mature, my girlfriend and I had to make a choice much like others in our position about having a baby unexpectedly. My position was to support her decision. While we did not keep the baby the loss was suffered greatly on both of us mentality and spiritually. My point is these choices are not easy, but they’re women’s choices period!!!

North Carolina passed a bill through the house awaiting senate approval with a 74-41 vote. The bill places unnecessary requirements such as having a doctor present when an abortion is being performed. The bill would allow the North Carolina Department of health to make changes to the 31 abortion clinics at any given time and without restraint. It also prohibits government issued insurance plans such as the ones covered under the “The Affordable Care Act” e.i. “Obamacare”. Alabama and Mississippi are also in the process with their own versions of an Abortion Bill in their own respective states. 42 out of the 51 states have introduced bills that make access to abortion harder, more frustrating and even give a level of embarrassment when a woman is subjected to unnecessary tests and probing by a doctor who honestly were not mandatory for these procedures.  To make matters worse the abortion bill in North Carolina was snuck into a Sharia Law bill.

House 695 prohibited the recognition of foreign law, such as Islamic Sharia Lawin family courts. When an amendment was made to the bill after a recess until 5:30 pm it added the abortion bill to the original bill with little warning. Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocacy groups had no idea the bill would be introduced when it was brought before the house. Women rights are under attack stay vigilant.


Immigration has been a hot button issue for the last two elections. I believe we need regulations, but we also need a light at the end of the tunnel. Some of the bills being proposed to me are just a delay tactic to deter immigrants of ALL races and nationalities from becoming part of this country. Let me also make this one point clear I really don’t understand. Unless you are of Native American decent guess what people YOU’RE A DESCENDANT OF AN IMMIGRANT!!!!!! Look into your lineage the proof is there. If you trace your decent going back before the 1600’s guess what your ancestry originated from another country. The beauty of this country is that we are a melting pot building on America from the best and brightest minds this generation and generations before have to offer.

Surprising GOP leaders want immigration reform, but the roadblocks are the House Republicans. With fears what the political landscape will look like if more immigrants are granted citizenship. Don’t believe anything else except this is a game of political stalling to avoid consequences in fear of losing senate and house seats in backlash from supporters. The fear is a primary challenger could come in clean up the wreckage if supporters of politicians feel their voices aren’t being heard on the immigration issue. While House Leader John Boehner has been getting pressure from democrats to push the reform for a vote the coward will more likely wait until the lame duck session when more proposals get reviewed and voted on. Kicking the can on immigration reform to me will bring political death to those postponing the inevitable. With whites becoming the minority and black and brown becoming the majority it only makes sense that a lot of the places of origin for them still have family and friends that are waiting for passage in America. Let’s see what happens.

In Conclusion

I remember after 2008 when Obama won his historic election there was an uproar that the country was going in the wrong direction. The minds of those discriminate against women, minorities, gay and lesbian and foreigners created a grassroots movement now known as the Tea Party. Phrases being thrown around by the party I remember were “Bringing our Country back” “Like it used to be” “The Good Ol’ days”. To me this was rhetoric used by those who noticed a shift in the country. This upturn in the minority vote and women vote was not celebrated by all and some felt disenfranchised, probably for the first time ever. Taking back this country will not happen willingly. Keep in mind the strides for inequality were fought for. If you listen to the whispers there is a strategic plan outlined putting into play across the country. I love all races, genders, nationalities and sexual orientations and I feel it is my duty to report to you what I hear and see and ultimately forecast of what is to come. To my gay and lesbian friends celebrate your right to marry just be wary that just because it is now law does not mean it’s over for the fight.

Let Justice serve the people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!