It is absolutely astonishing! In a recent House session, persistent questioning from a House Democrat forced Republicans to admit that they changed the rules of the House with the sole goal of keeping the government shut!
In the video below, Maryland Democrat Christopher Van Hollen stepped to the House floor and asked about a Standing Rule governing the House – Rule 22, Clause 4. That rule states:
When the stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or resolution with House or Senate amendments, a motion to dispose of any amendment shall be privileged.
That rule simply meant that any member of the House can offer a motion to dispose an amendment – in this case, the disagreement over the continuing resolution which cause Republicans to shut down the government. Using that House Rule, Mr. Van Hollen than asked that the House take up the Senate legislation on the budget and continuing resolution and “open the government now!”
The Teaparty Representative, Rep. Jason Chaffetz notified Mr. Van Hollen that under “Section 2 of House Rule 368,” only the Speaker of the House or his designee may offer such a motion to dispose.
Jason Chaffetz later admitted that Rule 22 Clause 4 was “the standing Rule of the House,” but that the House will not follow that rule because “the House has altered that operation of that standing rule.”
Further questioning by Mr. Van Hollen confirmed that on October 1st, right around the time the Republicans shut down the government, Rule 368 went into effect.
Rule 368 states;
Any motion pursuant to Clause 4 of Rule 22 relating to the House joint resolution may be offered only by the Majority Leader or his designee.
In other words, on October 1st, exactly when Republicans shut down the government, they also changed the rules in the House with a new rule that would only allow the Republican Leader or his designee the exclusive right to offer any motion, as stated in Clause 4.
These Republicans are an amazing bunch, and amazing not in the good way. After they forced a government shutdown, they gathered up the uninformed and convinced the poor souls that President Obama should be blamed.
The government shutdown hasn’t gone quite the way Republicans had hoped. The party’s national support has cratered; the public holds them responsible for a wildly unpopular crisis; and it’s going to take a while for the GOP to recover from a self-inflicted wound this severe.
But no one should assume they’ve hit rock bottom. Yesterday’s theatrics in Washington were a reminder that the Republican Party’s far-right wing can still make matters worse.
Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) attended a rally protesting the closure of the World War II Memorial, according to reports.
The lawmakers and the former governor — and 2008 GOP vice-presidential nominee — joined a crowd that removed barricades at the memorial and chanted “tear down these walls,” according to Washington, D.C., radio station WTOP.
Cruz told the crowd that President Obama is using military veterans as “pawns” to draw support for his argument in the budget impasse, which has resulted in the two-week closure of the federal government and the memorial.
Brilliant. Flailing Republicans lack leaders and direction, but they’ll certainly get back on track now that the former half-term governor of Alaska is stepping out in front.
I’m not sure who was more delighted to see Palin and Cruz whining at a memorial Republicans closed when they shut down the government: far-right activists or the Democratic National Committee.
I looked up the word “desperate” in the dictionary, and this move by top New York Republicans to get Donald Trump to run for Governor against Gov Cuomo, perfectly defines the word.
They’re seeking to make the case that while Trump is only an apprentice politician, he’s the only Republican on the horizon who has the name recognition, guts and money to tell Cuomo, “You’re fired!”
They’re also arguing that Trump could launch a 2016 presidential run — which he has clearly been eyeing with his criticisms of President Obama and Washington — by first winning the election for governor.
So far, Trump, who only recently learned of the effort, which is backed by state GOP Chairman Ed Cox and other party leaders, hasn’t said a flat “no.’’
Asked for comment by The Post, Trump left open the possibility of entering the race and blasted Cuomo, and even Cuomo’s dad, ex-Gov. Mario Cuomo, for their records in office.
He initially said he was “very flattered’’ that top Republicans were promoting his potential candidacy for governor but noted that running for the office was “not something that I’ve ever even thought about.’’
A few hours later, however, Trump followed up with a scathing attack on Gov. Cuomo — for high taxes and his failure to approve fracking for natural gas — as well as on three-term Gov. Mario Cuomo.
House Democrats are circulating a resolution accusing House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) of having a conflict of interest in the debt ceiling debate, a move that could provide an awkward C-SPAN moment for one of the lead Republicans in the budget negotiations.
The resolution goes after Cantor’s investment in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury ETF, a fund that “takes a short position in long-dated government bonds.”
The fund is essentially a bet against U.S. government bonds. If the debt ceiling is not raised and the United States defaults on its debts, the value of Cantor’s fund would likely increase.
The Democratic resolution, obtained by The Huffington Post from a Democratic source on the Hill, argues that Cantor “stands to profit from U.S. treasury default, which thereby raises the appearance of a conflict of interest,” and that he “may be sabotaging [debt ceiling] negotiations for his own personal gain.” It’s not clear how widely the measure was being circulated, with a House Democratic aide saying they hadn’t seen the resolution or heard it being discussed.
“Majority Leader Cantor has compromised the dignity and integrity of the Members of the House by raising the appearance of a conflict of interest in negotiations with the executive branch over raising the debt ceiling,” adds the measure.
So let’s see where we stand at this moment with the brand spanking new teacher evaluation system in New Jersey. This is the law that is going to revolutionize teaching and learning by making sure that students are mastering content and skills and teachers are doing their jobs to ensure learning in the classroom. For those of us not covered by a standardized assessment, the key is the SGO, or Student Growth Objectives, that is supposed to measure student growth (duh).
How are we doing this? By taking the measure of our students at the beginning of the year. Then we’ll evaluate them again in a few months to see how much they’ve learned. In other words, welcome to testing-mania.
The overwhelming majority of teachers in New Jersey have already given an assessment to their students, usually in the form of a test. Most of these tests ask for knowledge and skills that students haven’t been taught yet. The assumption, then, is that when we re-give these tests again in February or March, the students will have learned the information because they’ve been, well, taught it. Students learn, teachers have done their jobs, numbers go up, salaries are paid.
So what’s the problem? Plenty. Most of these tests are low stakes and mean virtually nothing to the students, while meaning everything for the teachers. In addition, there is no measurable data that says that this is a viable method for objectively evaluating teachers. And districts are getting mucho creative with SGOs in ways that even the Christie Administration didn’t envision.
For example, many teachers who plan on taking leaves for maternity or other family concerns, have been told to administer both a pre-and post-assessment in as little as 6 weeks, so the district has a record of their progress. This flies in the face of everything we know about education and assessment, and is using time as the relevant factor and not learning. Why don’t I just do a Monday-Friday assessment cycle and be done with it. I can teach anyone how to write an effective thesis in a week if that’s all I’m going to measure.
It’s also becoming clear, as I speak to colleagues and monitor the news, that administrators and school boards are tying bonuses to the percentage of staff that has an SGO. The law says that classroom teachers must have them, but leaves it up to the district as to whether nurses, guidance counselors and other support staff must have them. Tying SGOs to a bonus virtually guarantees that all staff will be responsible for an SGO, and it’s up to the district to develop one.
Are we connecting student health rates to nurses? How many students come to see them over a three month period? Do we want more students to visit the nurse or fewer? What’s the difference between taking blood pressure and earning a 4 under the Danielson model and earning a 3?
For guidance counselors, are we tying failure rates to counselors? College acceptances? If a child is crying on the way in to the counselor’s office but smiling on the way out, is that an effective SGO?
The dirty truth is that there’s really no way to know. It’s the same for teachers. Once we administer the test/evaluation, then that becomes the default assessment that we’re going to focus on for three months. The tests rule. And it will get even worse come the spring when teachers covered by a state test enter the maelstrom and sweat out their number through the summer.
This evaluation system is taking money, time and resources away from education. It’s not scientifically valid. It wastes time. It’s a step backwards, and it insults teachers everywhere by assuming that they are not effective.
With polls suggesting a tightening race and only a few days remaining in the United States Senate contest in New Jersey, thousands of people gathered at a racetrack here to watch Sarah Palin endorse the Republican candidate, Steve Lonegan.
Sarah Palin, right, backed Steve Lonegan, shown with his wife, Lorraine, with their daughters, Katherine, left, and Brooke.
“Something big is happening here; it’s called momentum,” said Ms. Palin, the former Alaska governor who was John McCain’s running mate during the 2008 presidential election. “The country knows it, the media knows it.”
Recent polls have shown Mr. Lonegan, a former mayor of Bogota, N.J., and a businessman, gaining ground on his nationally known Democratic rival, Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark. The election is on Wednesday.
The surge has surprised many who thought the special election to fill the seat that became vacant upon the death this year of Senator Frank R. Lautenburg, a veteran Democrat, would be a landslide victory for Mr. Booker.
While Mr. Booker maintains a 12-point lead in the polls, Mr. Lonegan has gained traction in part by framing the election as a referendum on Mr. Booker’s celebrity.
“My opponent, Cory Booker, was anointed by Hollywood; he was anointed by Oprah,” Mr. Lonegan said. “California doesn’t need a third senator.”
More than 2,000 supporters of Mr. Lonegan’s crammed beside a dirt racetrack in front of a bus emblazoned with “Tea Party Express.” Many hoisted yellow flags that said “Don’t Tread on Me.” Most raised iPhones to snap photos of Ms. Palin.
Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney cleared a final hurdle Friday in building a new house in California, a house that will include a four-car garage with an elevator for the vehicles.
Romney had already gotten zoning permission from the city of San Diego to demolish the 3,100 square foot home he owns in the La Jolla neighborhood and erect an 11,000 square foot mansion in its place. Plans for the home were put on hold until after the 2012 election.
A neighbor had appealed the city’s decision to the California Coastal Commission. He argued in commission filings that the new home would have exceeded zoning limits that say square footage cannot exceed a certain calculation based on acreage of the plot of land the house sits on.
The Coastal Commission rejected that appeal Friday. Barring a lawsuit, construction can now move forward, according to commission spokesperson Sarah Christie.
The woman shot dead by a Brooklyn cop after she crashed a stolen car was part of a violent crew who police say forced a man into his home at gunpoint, robbed him and shot him as he ran away.
Shantel Davis, 23, took a bullet in the chest during a wild struggle with police after she tried to drive away from the smashup on Church Ave. and E. 38th St. in East Flatbush on Thursday, cops said.
No gun was found on Davis. Her rap sheet — which included robbery and drug busts — shows she was no stranger to run-ins with the law.
Davis was due in court Friday on charges stemming from an attack on April 23, 2011 — when she and a band of brutes allegedly held a man hostage as they robbed his Clarendon Road apartment, court papers show.
The heist netted cash, video games and jewelry, the documents show. But the thieves threatened to take 29-year-old Ralph Ragoobar to East New York and torture him for more loot. He managed to break free and started running down the street, court papers show.
That’s when Davis’ crew opened fire, striking the fleeing man three times in the back and once in the leg. He survived the wounds.
“I was shot five times,” Ragoobar told the Daily News. “I just want to move on with my life.”
Davis and two others were later booked on charges that included kidnapping, attempted murder and weapons possession.
Davis was out on $25,000 bail when two narcotics cops saw her blow a red light at E. 48th St. and start speeding westbound down Church Ave. about 5:35 p.m. Thursday, cops said.
The two plainclothes officers — who sources identified as Detective Phillip Atkins, 44, and Police Officer Daniel Guida, 27 — began to follow Davis in their unmarked car as she sped through a series of red lights before she crashed, cops said.
Davis was driving a 1998 Toyota Camry that she allegedly stole the week before. Armed with a pistol — and just a block away from her E. 52nd St. home — Davis approached the car’s owner, Vilma Craig, 57, and told her to hand over the keys, sources said.
“She had the gun pointed at me,” Craig told the Daily News Friday. “She took my car, my pocketbook and everything in the car.”
It was not clear whether the two cops knew the car was stolen when they approached Davis after she wrecked it.
The 5-foot-6, 185-pound Davis slid into the passenger side of the car in an attempt to flee, cops said.
After a brief struggle with Guida, Davis hopped back in the driver’s seat and tried to drive away.
Atkins, holding his service-issued Smith & Wesson 9-mm., began to grapple with the frantic woman and tried to stop her from putting the car into gear.
But Davis managed to put the car in reverse and hit the gas. During the struggle, Atkins fired one shot, hitting Davis in the chest and killing her.
“There’s no difference between the R-word and the N-word,” ~ Alan Yelsey, American Indian Activists
A Native American coalition in Minnesota has come up with a new strategy in the movement to replace the NFL logo and mascot for the Washington Redskins, which the they deem defamatory.
A letter written by representatives of the Minneapolis-based American Indian Movement asks the MSFA to refrain from printing or broadcasting the Redskins’ name or logo inside the Metrodome during the team’s November 7th game against the Minnesota Vikings. Their reasoning is that doing so within a publicly owned facility, violates federal labor laws, hate-speech protections and the civil rights of American Indians.
Indian activist Alan Yelsey, who co-wrote the letter, says failure to do so could lead to a class-action lawsuit on behalf of American Indian children. Letters were also sent out to Minnesota’s media outlets so that everyone could be on the same page.
“There’s no difference between the R-word and the N-word,” Yelsey said. “There’s no reason why this discriminatory and damaging term needs to be used when alternatives exist.”
On another front: Seventeen years after initially challenging the Washington Redskins trademark, Suzan Shown Harjo, a Native American writer and public policy advocate, along with six other activists have renewed their fight against the use of the trademark. Harjo says that it violates the Lanham Act, which bars trademarks that “disparage” people living or dead. The original petition was denied by a lower-court ruling based on statute of limitations laws, but it was announced last Monday that Harjo’s group will appeal that decision.
Across the country the origin of the word “redskin” is being newly debated. Some scholars say that the word was coined by early settlers in reference to the skin tone of Native Americans, asserting that the actual origin of the word is “positive” and reflects the more benign aspects of early relations between Native Americans and whites.
Uh-huh.
It was only later that the term became more derogative, when books on the “wild west” published between 1875 and 1930 showed an increasingly negative association between the use of redskin, with “dirty”, “lying”, “savage”, etc.; while so-called benign or positive usage such as “noble” redskin were used condescendingly. And let’s not forget the American Western movies emblazoning the more negative connotation in several generations of fans.
An Associated Press GfK poll, conducted from April 11-15, interviewed 1,004 Americans on the subject. The survey found that nearly four in five of those polled didn’t think the team should change its name. 11 percent thought it should be changed, while 8 percent weren’t sure and 2 percent didn’t answer.
“That’s who they’ve been forever. That’s who they’re known as,” said Sarah Lee, a 36-year-old stay-at-home mom from Osceola, Ind., and one of those polled. “I think we as a people make race out to be a bigger issue than it is.”
But those who thought the name should be changed said the word is obviously derogatory. No report on whether any Native Americans were part of this survey.
“The use of any stereotype in the portrayal of Indians is considered … to be contributory to their dehumanization and deracination”, says Harjo, “It is the worst thing in the English language you can be called if you are a native person.”
And while it could be said that other NFL teams trademark names such as the Braves, Indians, Chiefs and Blackhawks all describe a group of people, Redskins clearly references an individual “being called out his name” as the old slang goes.
President Barack Obama said Saturday he would consider getting rid of the name if he owned the team.
On his ultra-conservative talk show, Rush Limbaugh said he was confused as to why anyone might be offended by the much maligned moniker, saying that the whole matter was a controversy “manufactured by the left.”
However, in the end, the AP-Gfk poll and other such opinions are irrelevant.
The verdict of the case Harjo wants put back before The Supreme Court judges — a case said to be one of the most compelling lawsuits in sports history — must be based on Section 2 of the Lanham Act of the trademark law which decides whether or not “relevant parties involved may be discredited or brought into contempt or dishonored” by the Washington Team’s name. Those ‘relevant parties’ are Native American people. And they are saying “Yes” to that.
Police have arrested an 84-year-old man accused of pointing a gun at anti-President Barack Obama protestors.
Roy Smith said he kept the Colt .32 handgun in his car for carjackers. Gwinnett police said he faces three counts of misdemeanor simple assault and pointing a firearm at another.
Protestors Toni Pendley and Marge Moore are part of the Overpasses for Obama’s Impeachment movement, a national movement that places signs along interstate overpasses with anti-Obama messages.
The women said they were protesting on the Steve Reynolds Overpass above Interstate 85 on Sept. 28 when a maroon car drove by and a man pointed a gun at them.
“He was looking straight at me,” Pendley told Channel 2 Action News last week.
A passerby also spotted the gun and call 911. He reported the license tag number. Detectives said they used the tag number to track down Smith at his Norcross home.
In a police report, a detective writes Smith wasn’t home at first but his car was parked in the driveway. Using a search warrant, police found the handgun inside the driver’s side door. It matched the description witnesses gave to police.
In the police report, an investigator said Smith stated “he kept the weapon in the vehicle for the carjackers. He stated that he had the gun with him on the day of the incident, but stated that he did not present it to the protestors.” He “stated that everyone was lying on him in an attempt to get him into trouble.”
“Not your typical suspect,” conceded Gwinnett Police Cpl. Ed Ritter.
In the Sheriff’s Department mugshot of Smith, he is shown with a tube running into his nose like one that is typically used for oxygen tanks.
“Doesn’t matter what his age was, he still threatened somebody with that gun and he is being held accountable for it,” Ritter said.
Channel 2’s Tony Thomas stopped by Smith’s home Tuesday, but he wasn’t home. The maroon car was once again parked there.
A new report focusing on the Canine Special Detail of the LA Sherriff’s Department (LASD) has uncovered a vast increase in the number of minority individuals bitten by police dogs since 2004.
And in the first six months of this year, every single victim of a bite by a LASD dog was African-American or Latino.The data was published in a new report by the Police Assessment Resource Centre (Parc), a Los Angeles-based non-profit organisation, devoted to “advancing effective and accountable policing”.
According to Parc records, the number of Latino individuals bitten by LASD canines went up 30 per cent between 2004 and 2012, from 30 to 39 bites. The number of African-Americans bitten increased by 33 per cent over the same period.
Meanwhile, police dog bites caused injuries at a much higher rate than alternative deterrents such as batons, tear gas and even guns. “Large swathes of LASD’s jurisdiction, encompassing generally affluent areas with smaller minority populations, had few [canine] deployments or bites,” the Parc report states.
“Crime rates are lower in these areas, but the stark disparity leads us to wonder why canine deployments seem to occur disproportionately in less affluent areas with larger minority populations.” During the period covered in the report, the largely black or Latino areas of Century, City of Industry, Compton, Lakewood and South LA/Lennox suffered more dog bites than all of LASD’s other 21 districts combined.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
