DocJess Posts

Newt Gingrich put up ads about Romney as a job destroyer so effective that he won the South Carolina primary. Those ads were based on the job killer ads Ted Kennedy ran against Mittens when he ran unsuccessfully against Uncle Teddy in 1994. With imitation being the highest form of flattery, the Obama campaign has launched the Romney Economics site. In response, the Romney campaign has dialed back their claim that Mittens helped created 100,000 jobs while at Bain to "thousands". Source.

This is the first video from Romney Economics:

Crossposted from Democratic Convention Watch

Remember the ACA facet which says that health insurers must rebate to policyholders the amount of money policyholders paid in premiums that did not go to health care costs if those costs are less than 80%/85%? The percentage was dependent on whether it was a group or individual policy. Those checks are going to go out soon, and the first paragraph of the attached letter will say:

"This letter is to inform you that you will receive a rebate of a portion of your health insurance premiums. This rebate is required by the Affordable Care Act—the health reform law."

Kaiser has done some work on the actual numbers:

The largest rebates overall are projected to go to consumers and businesses in Texas (total $186 million) and Florida ($149 million); Hawaii is the only state where no insurer is expected to issue a rebate.

Consumers receiving rebates in the individual market are projected to receive $127 on average, with amounts varying significantly by insurer and state. The average rebates for individual purchasers expected to receive them range from just a few dollars in some states to as much as an average of $305 in Alaska, $294 in Maryland, $243 in Pennsylvania, $241 in Idaho, and $236 in Mississippi.

If you have a WSJ subscription, you can see the full breakdown by type of policy, amount of average rebate and state here.  That chart indicates that the total number of Americans who will receive rebate checks is:

Individual policyholders: 3,360,858
Small Group policyholders: 4,932,786
Large Group policyholders: 7,475,657
Total:  15,769,301

That's almost 16 million people. Trying to find the number of people who have private health insurance is a little tricky. We know that about 87 million people have insurance, but many of them are covered by government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, SChip, military benefits, government workers). Depending on whose statistics you believe, the number of people covered by employer plans runs between 42% and 48%. Thus, the overall conclusion is that as health insurance rates keep climbing, and the number of uninsured keep rising the premium dollars are NOT going to health care costs, but rather to the companies. Which, ahem, now have to send that money back.

So let's recap: the Affordable Health Care Act is working! It's decreasing the amount of money that just gets kept by the insurance companies who keep saying they need to raise premiums to cover costs. (Liars.) This is in addition to the other benefits of covering more people including offspring in their 20's, people with pre-existing conditions, people who don't receive employer benefits and cannot afford individual plans on the open market, plus the decreased Medicare donut hole, and free preventive services. And yet, people seem not to like this, according to most polling. Yet another Ich Kreplach moment, but a win for most Americans nonetheless. 

Remember the ACA facet which says that health insurers must rebate to policyholders the amount of money policyholders paid in premiums that did not go to health care costs if those costs are less than 80%/85%? The percentage was dependent on whether it was a group or individual policy. Those checks are going to go out soon, and the first paragraph of the attached letter will say:

"This letter is to inform you that you will receive a rebate of a portion of your health insurance premiums. This rebate is required by the Affordable Care Act—the health reform law."

Kaiser has done some work on the actual numbers:

The largest rebates overall are projected to go to consumers and businesses in Texas (total $186 million) and Florida ($149 million); Hawaii is the only state where no insurer is expected to issue a rebate.

Consumers receiving rebates in the individual market are projected to receive $127 on average, with amounts varying significantly by insurer and state. The average rebates for individual purchasers expected to receive them range from just a few dollars in some states to as much as an average of $305 in Alaska, $294 in Maryland, $243 in Pennsylvania, $241 in Idaho, and $236 in Mississippi.

If you have a WSJ subscription, you can see the full breakdown by type of policy, amount of average rebate and state here.  That chart indicates that the total number of Americans who will receive rebate checks is:

Individual policyholders: 3,360,858
Small Group policyholders: 4,932,786
Large Group policyholders: 7,475,657
Total:  15,769,301

That's almost 16 million people. Trying to find the number of people who have private health insurance is a little tricky. We know that about 87 million people have insurance, but many of them are covered by government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, SChip, military benefits, government workers). Depending on whose statistics you believe, the number of people covered by employer plans runs between 42% and 48%. Thus, the overall conclusion is that as health insurance rates keep climbing, and the number of uninsured keep rising the premium dollars are NOT going to health care costs, but rather to the companies. Which, ahem, now have to send that money back.

So let's recap: the Affordable Health Care Act is working! It's decreasing the amount of money that just gets kept by the insurance companies who keep saying they need to raise premiums to cover costs. (Liars.) This is in addition to the other benefits of covering more people including offspring in their 20's, people with pre-existing conditions, people who don't receive employer benefits and cannot afford individual plans on the open market, plus the decreased Medicare donut hole, and free preventive services. And yet, people seem not to like this, according to most polling. Yet another Ich Kreplach moment, but a win for most Americans nonetheless. 

Crossposted from Democratic Convention Watch

Yesterday President Obama finally came out as a supporter of gay marriage. You can "blame" Joe Biden for pushing the president into this pronouncement, but as it turns out, his Sunday interview was taped on Friday, and the White House knew about it then. They could have asked for a do-over, but they chose not to. The back story is that Obama had planned to announce his support closer to the convention, but decided to move it up. He had said for a long time that his feelings were evolving, and the story is that he made this decision back in January. 

Some say that this will not hurt him politically, as those people who would have voted him, still will, and those who never would, still won't. (Although that does beg the question of the Log Cabin Republicans: I just don't get how they can support people who support North Carolina's Amendment 1, but maybe Jon Stewart says it best in his piece on cognitive dissonance. Clip here. He's talking Romney, but you'll easily see the association.) There is an issue of whether fundamentalist blacks will still support him: some are rabid anti-gay, but it's likely that re-voting Obama will trump the single issue. The statistic you'll here is that 90% of blacks in California voted for Obama in 2008, but 58% voted for Prop 8. In my heart, I believe that a lot of those people will see Obama's evolution, and think that maybe they, too, need to evolve. Loving v. Virginia all over again with different actors.

The most important thing, I believe, is contained in what Corey Booker said last night on TRMS. He perfectly encapsulated the idea that what Obama did today is not about gay rights, the suffragette movement was not about women's rights, and the Civil Rights movement was not about black rights -- they are ALL about ONE set of EQUAL rights for ALL Americans. He further made the point that teenagers in his city now feel that their president considers them equal, that it is a necessary form of validation. In addition, he pointed out that it isn't just "marriage" - it's the thousands of legal rights and protections that straight people have and gay people do not. If you click on the chart on the left, you'll be taken to an interactive graphic showing how far some states have come, and how far others have to go.

It's all so clear: when you vote this November, will you vote for ALL the people, or only the rich white guys?  Will you, personally, say: my issue is X, but I understand that X is part of A,B,C through X,Y,Z, and we must all stand together. Stand up for all Americans. Stand up and lead the world. You can watch Corey Booker, superstar and super hero, below:

Yesterday President Obama finally came out as a supporter of gay marriage. You can "blame" Joe Biden for pushing the president into this pronouncement, but as it turns out, his Sunday interview was taped on Friday, and the White House knew about it then. They could have asked for a do-over, but they chose not to. The back story is that Obama had planned to announce his support closer to the convention, but decided to move it up. He had said for a long time that his feelings were evolving, and the story is that he made this decision back in January. 

Some say that this will not hurt him politically, as those people who would have voted him, still will, and those who never would, still won't. (Although that does beg the question of the Log Cabin Republicans: I just don't get how they can support people who support North Carolina's Amendment 1, but maybe Jon Stewart says it best in his piece on cognitive dissonance. Clip here. He's talking Romney, but you'll easily see the association.) There is an issue of whether fundamentalist blacks will still support him: some are rabid anti-gay, but it's likely that re-voting Obama will trump the single issue. The statistic you'll here is that 90% of blacks in California voted for Obama in 2008, but 58% voted for Prop 8. In my heart, I believe that a lot of those people will see Obama's evolution, and think that maybe they, too, need to evolve. Loving v Virginia all over again with different actors.

The most important thing, I believe, is contained in what Corey Booker said last night on TRMS. He perfectly encapsulated the idea that what Obama did today is not about gay rights, the suffragette movement was not about women's rights, and the Civil Rights movement was not about black rights -- they are ALL about ONE set of EQUAL rights for ALL Americans. He further made the point that teenagers in his city now feel that their president considers them equal, that it is a necessary form of validation. In addition, he pointed out that it isn't just "marriage" - it's the thousands of legal rights and protections that straight people have and gay people do not. If you click on the chart on the left, you'll be taken to an interactive graphic showing how far some states have come, and how far others have to go.

It's all so clear: when you vote this November, will you vote for ALL the people, or only the rich white guys?  Will you, personally, say: my issue is X, but I understand that X is part of A,B,C through X,Y,Z, and we must all stand together. Stand up for all Americans. Stand up and lead the world. You can watch Corey Booker, superstar and super hero, below:

The topline headline is that Mittens won all the presidential primaries. I'm personally not so sure. He theoretically won Louisiana, Maine, Washington, Iowa (first time, later changed to Spawn of Satan), Michigan, Alaska and host of others....but Ron Paul is racking up delegates left and right at the county conventions. DCW has Paul at 80, as does the AP. Personally, I have him at 171, and think he'll hit a minimum of 400 by August. Not enough to derail Mitten's nomination, but enough to cause trouble on the convention floor, and if he can get enough of the remaining Spawn and Newton Leroy delegates...enough to cause a second ballot. Between a first and second ballot comes the kind of negotiated horse trading that can certainly affect the platform and potential post-election promises. The major takeaway of the ENTIRE Republican primary season is pretty straightforward: they elect the next guy in line (and it's always a white guy). If the voters pick someone else, they are basically disenfranchised. Just sayin'...

Dick Lugar lost in Indiana. No surprise there. The fun part is that if he voted for himself, he was guilty of voter fraud in that he doesn't live in Indiana, and hasn't since 1977. He doesn't even know what address is on his (Indiana) driver's license. Really. 

Drinkers in Ocean City, NJ, lost yesterday: the town will remain dry. The vote was about 3:1, and the interesting thing is that more people in Ocean City voted yesterday than had last November in the elected-officials election. Go figure. 

We all lost in North Carolina: whether you're gay or straight, a North Carolina resident or someone living elsewhere on the planet, you lost. This was a horrific piece of legislation, and proves once again we need to stick together and oust the Republicans. 

There was a winner I'd like to make note of, although this occurred on Saturday, I didn't find out about it until yesterday. Winner of the week is Kristi Noem. Don't know her? She's 40, spent a lot of her life running the family farm, and started back at college in 2008 after leaving in 1994. We all love education, and like when people get degrees, especially when they can afford tuition from their salaries. Kristi's salary is close to $150,000/year. She's a US Congresswoman from South Dakota. She's one of two freshman reps elected as liaisons to the House leadership. She also had A LOT of driving problems, cleared up before her election to Congress: 

From 1989 to 2010, Noem received 27 traffic citations, including 20 for speeding, as well as several for stop sign and seat belt violations, and no driver's license. She also received failure to appear notices, and two arrest warrants were issued. Noem said, "I'm not proud of my driving record, but [I've] been working hard to be a better example to young kids and young drivers out there." Source.

Kristi Noem: criminal, farmer, gun-toter, sweet smiling face of the "new GOP" and now a college graduate.

Crossposted from Democratic Convention Watch

In this week's Time magazine, Bill Bradley has a column. Bradley was a three-term US senator, ran against Al Gore in the 2000 presidential primary, was a Rhodes scholar, plus he was some type of athlete. Smart guy. You can read his full column here. I agree with parts of it, disagree with others, and was struck by this:

The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street offer contrasting examples of citizen involvement. The Tea Party promulgated a very specific objective — roll back government — and immediately converted its energy into electoral politics. The result was that in 2010, 49 Tea Party Republicans won election to Congress. Through their leverage in the Republican caucus, they almost forced the country into bankruptcy during the debate on the debt limit in the summer of 2011. That's how quickly things can change. That's how easily the status quo can crumble. Occupy, on the other hand, while full of passion and solidarity and armed with a catchy slogan — "We're the 99%" — failed to have much of an impact on policy because it had no specific objective. (Emphasis mine.)

Think about it: one election, one group, all that power. And it's more extreme than Bradley counted, if you include the state governments in Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, just to name a few. If you doubt the power of a few, remember that yesterday, Jan Brewer signed legislation effectually banning Planned Parenthood, which Rick Perry did in Texas (now struck down by the courts), and that today marks the Democratic primary to challenge Scott Walker next month, and where Amendment 1 will likely pass in North Carolina. 

I don't know that Bradley's conclusion about Occupy is correct: the teabag contingent was already a movement without a name prior to their rising against the ACA in 2009. The people who comprise the teabaggers are the same racist, homophobic, anti-choice, anti-Semitic, gun-toting, poorly-educated, climate change deniers they've always been. The teabag banner just gave them a clubhouse they could all share with their vitriol. 

Occupy, on the other hand, is relatively young, and has not yet gone through a legitimate election cycle: we'll see whether or not the power of that voting bloc can be harnessed in November. And it is incumbent on us, the Democrats, to reach out and bring them into our tent. It may be a transient location. In France this past weekend, Sarkozy was ousted and much of his party replaced by Socialists who realize that "austerity" is a disaster, and government spending is the only way for Europe to recover from the sins and excesses of the right wing and their bankers. By 2014, Occupy may well be organized enough to be fielding candidates who legitimately embrace the money-out-of-politics, and related, goals. This year, their choice will be to join us, or sit out the election, possibly causing further inroads on the part of the far right.

It's an "ich kreplach" moment for Occupy. (If you don't know "ich kreplach", it's after the jump.) The idea is that they hate the influence of corporations, their money and their power, on elections, politics, and sadly, democracy. They see both parties as having fallen into the grasp of that money pit.  If you ask them about individual issues, Occupy identifies with the mainline Democratic positions: gay marriage, cap and trade, more money for education, etc. In the end though, many do not want to vote because they don't see enough difference between the two major parties, and consider them both equally corrupt.

It is up to US as individuals, to move them from that spot. Bradley's conclusion is different than mine, he thinks the answer lies in expecting more from our politicians, and making them give concrete answers. His conclusion fails in the fact that it's easy to lie, get elected, and change sides. Or just be Mittens and have a position for everyone, given the time of day. My conclusion is that we must realize that the GOP, circa 2012, is the problem, and vanquishing them is the solution. Through any non-violent way possible. 

A shout out to John McCain, who is the last Republican to have done something decent. Yesterday, Mittens was faced at a town hall by a woman who said that Obama should be charged with treason. Like all Republican candidates faced with idiocy and racism on the part of an audience member, he just ignored it. Back in 2008, in the single best moment of his campaign, McCain was faced with a woman who said all sorts of nasty things about Obama in a similar forum. McCain took the mic back and said that while he disagreed with Obama on a number of issues, Obama was a decent man, and an American.

Mic check: Vanquish the GOP at the voting booth. Bring everyone you know. It's our only chance.

Ich Kreplach

Kreplach are little pieces of pasta covered meat often put in Jewish Chicken Soup. They look a lot like wontons.

So, the story goes, there's a kid who hates kreplach. His parents take him to a Chinese restaurant and send him into the kitchen, where he tastes the filling, and declares it delicious. He tastes the pasta and loves that, too. He eats a raw one and is enthralled.  He rejoins his parents at the table, they put a bowl of wonton soup in front of him and he says "ich, kreplach."

In this week's Time magazine, Bill Bradley has a column. Bradley was a three-term US senator, ran against Al Gore in the 2000 presidential primary, was a Rhodes scholar, plus he was some type of athlete. Smart guy. You can read his full column here. I agree with parts of it, disagree with others, and was struck by this:

The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street offer contrasting examples of citizen involvement. The Tea Party promulgated a very specific objective — roll back government — and immediately converted its energy into electoral politics. The result was that in 2010, 49 Tea Party Republicans won election to Congress. Through their leverage in the Republican caucus, they almost forced the country into bankruptcy during the debate on the debt limit in the summer of 2011. That's how quickly things can change. That's how easily the status quo can crumble. Occupy, on the other hand, while full of passion and solidarity and armed with a catchy slogan — "We're the 99%" — failed to have much of an impact on policy because it had no specific objective. (Emphasis mine.)

Think about it: one election, one group, all that power. And it's more extreme than Bradley counted, if you include the state governments in Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, just to name a few. If you doubt the power of a few, remember that yesterday, Jan Brewer signed legislation effectually banning Planned Parenthood, which Rick Perry did in Texas (now struck down by the courts), and that today marks the Democratic primary to challenge Scott Walker next month, and where Amendment 1 will likely pass in North Carolina. 

I don't know that Bradley's conclusion about Occupy is correct: the teabag contingent was already a movement without a name prior to their rising against the ACA in 2009. The people who comprise the teabaggers are the same racist, homophobic, anti-choice, anti-Semitic, gun-toting, poorly-educated, climate change deniers they've always been. The teabag banner just gave them a clubhouse they could all share with their vitriol. 

Occupy, on the other hand, is relatively young, and has not yet gone through a legitimate election cycle: we'll see whether or not the power of that voting bloc can be harnessed in November. And it is incumbent on us, the Democrats, to reach out and bring them into our tent. It may be a transient location. In France this past weekend, Sarkozy was ousted and much of his party replaced by Socialists who realize that "austerity" is a disaster, and government spending is the only way for Europe to recover from the sins and excesses of the right wing and their bankers. By 2014, Occupy may well be organized enough to be fielding candidates who legitimately embrace the money-out-of-politics, and related, goals. This year, their choice will be to join us, or sit out the election, possibly causing further inroads on the part of the far right.

It's an "ich kreplach" moment for Occupy. (If you don't know "ich kreplach", it's after the jump.) The idea is that they hate the influence of corporations, their money and their power, on elections, politics, and sadly, democracy. They see both parties as having fallen into the grasp of that money pit.  If you ask them about individual issues, Occupy identifies with the mainline Democratic positions: gay marriage, cap and trade, more money for education, etc. In the end though, many do not want to vote because they don't see enough difference between the two major parties, and consider them both equally corrupt.

It is up to US as individuals, to move them from that spot. Bradley's conclusion is different than mine, he thinks the answer lies in expecting more from our politicians, and making them give concrete answers. His conclusion fails in the fact that it's easy to lie, get elected, and change sides. Or just be Mittens and have a position for everyone, given the time of day. My conclusion is that we must realize that the GOP, circa 2012, is the problem, and vanquishing them is the solution. Through any non-violent way possible. 

A shout out to John McCain, who is the last Republican to have done something decent. Yesterday, Mittens was faced at a town hall by a woman who said that Obama should be charged with treason. Like all Republican candidates faced with idiocy and racism on the part of an audience member, he just ignored it. Back in 2008, in the single best moment of his campaign, McCain was faced with a woman who said all sorts of nasty things about Obama in a similar forum. McCain took the mic back and said that while he disagreed with Obama on a number of issues, Obama was a decent man, and an American.

Mic check: Vanquish the GOP at the voting booth. Bring everyone you know. It's our only chance.

Ich Kreplach

Kreplach are little pieces of pasta covered meat often put in Jewish Chicken Soup. They look a lot like wontons.

So, the story goes, there's a kid who hates kreplach. His parents take him to a Chinese restaurant and send him into the kitchen, where he tastes the filling, and declares it delicious. He tastes the pasta and loves that, too. He eats a raw one and is enthralled.  He rejoins his parents at the table, they put a bowl of wonton soup in front of him and he says "ich, kreplach."

Crossposted from Democratic Convention Watch.

Listed below are three stories, all true. They are things that are going on in America right now, and I'm very interested in determining how many of them you know about. When I bring them up amoungst people I know who read newspapers, read news online, watch tv and are fundamentally "informed", they don't know about all (or sometimes even any) of them. I consider this a problem with the media, who aren't telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Not that they ever did, as a whole, but it seems to be getting worse. Here goes.

#1: This Tuesday, a ballot initiative called "Amendment 1" will appear on North Carolina ballots. It reads:

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

The most heinous part of this proposal is not just that the rights of the minority should NEVER be a ballot issue, but that couples (same sex or male-female) lose all protections they now have. For example, an unmarried woman would lose the legal standing to get a restraining order against her live-in boyfriend. 

#2: In Michigan (and to a lesser extent Indiana and New York) Emergency Managers have been put in place to run cities and towns. These folks have the right to invalidate contracts, sell city assets, fire city workers, deny elected officials the right to hold meetings, and fundamentally serve as mini-dictators over all aspects of city government.  An attempt was made to put repeal of the enabling legislation on the ballot, but the Board of Canvassers (who needed to certify the petitions) disregarded the position of the Board of Elections, and on a party-line vote deadlocked, therefore denying the ballot issue. Their gripe? The petitions used the wrong font size.

The problem with Emergency Managers is that they completely usurp the democratic process of electing officials, honouring the contracts put in place by those officials, and in general, they don't work out in terms of "saving" the economies of the towns and cities they are charged with running.

#3: Tom Corbett's Pennsylvania budget cuts from schools, infrastructure improvements, Medicaid, food stamps, and everything else reasonable people believe in. Doubtless you knew that, and possibly even knew that with the latest cuts, the total cut this year and next fiscal year specifically to education is about $1 Billion dollars. You probably also knew that the reason Corbett likes cutting school budgets is because he and his friends make money on charter schools. But did you know that the state ended the 2010-2011 fiscal year with a surplus of close to $200 million dollars? 

Listed below are three stories, all true. They are things that are going on in America right now, and I'm very interested in determining how many of them you know about. When I bring them up amoungst people I know who read newspapers, read news online, watch tv and are fundamentally "informed", they don't know about all (or sometimes even any) of them. I consider this a problem with the media, who aren't telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Not that they ever did, as a whole, but it seems to be getting worse. Here goes.

#1: This Tuesday, a ballot initiative called "Amendment 1" will appear on North Carolina ballots. It reads:

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

The most heinous part of this proposal is not just that the rights of the minority should NEVER be a ballot issue, but that couples (same sex or male-female) lose all protections they now have. For example, an unmarried woman would lose the legal standing to get a restraining order against her live-in boyfriend. 

#2: In Michigan (and to a lesser extent Indiana and New York) Emergency Managers have been put in place to run cities and towns. These folks have the right to invalidate contracts, sell city assets, fire city workers, deny elected officials the right to hold meetings, and fundamentally serve as mini-dictators over all aspects of city government.  An attempt was made to put repeal of the enabling legislation on the ballot, but the Board of Canvassers (who needed to certify the petitions) disregarded the position of the Board of Elections, and on a party-line vote deadlocked, therefore denying the ballot issue. Their gripe? The petitions used the wrong font size.

The problem with Emergency Managers is that they completely usurp the democratic process of electing officials, honouring the contracts put in place by those officials, and in general, they don't work out in terms of "saving" the economies of the towns and cities they are charged with running.

#3: Tom Corbett's Pennsylvania budget cuts from schools, infrastructure improvements, Medicaid, food stamps, and everything else reasonable people believe in. Doubtless you knew that, and possibly even knew that with the latest cuts, the total cut this year and next fiscal year specifically to education is about $1 Billion dollars. You probably also knew that the reason Corbett likes cutting school budgets is because he and his friends make money on charter schools. But did you know that the state ended the 2010-2011 fiscal year with a surplus of close to $200 million dollars? 

Crossposted from Democratic Convention Watch  From the ACLU Press Release:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, the Advancement  Project, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP), and  the Washington, DC law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP filed a lawsuit  today on behalf of ten Pennsylvania voters and three prominent advocacy  organizations, alleging that the state's voter photo ID law violates the  Pennsylvania Constitution by depriving citizens of their most  fundamental constitutional right - the right to vote. The plaintiffs are  asking the Commonwealth Court to issue an injunction blocking  enforcement of the law before November's election. If the law is not  overturned, most of the plaintiffs will be unable to cast ballots in the  fall, despite the fact that many of them have voted regularly for  decades.

You can see bios of the plaintiffs here. The lead plaintiff is Viviette Applewhite, shown in the video above. She is 93 and lives in Philadelphia. She had an ID card, but it was in her purse and the purse was stolen. This is her official bio:

Ms. Applewhite is an African-American woman born in 1919 in  Philadelphia. Ms. Applewhite worked as a welder during World War II in  the Sun Shipyard in Chester, Pennsylvania. Ms. Applewhite married and  raised a daughter who for decades worked for various federal,  Pennsylvania, and municipal government agencies. Now a widow, Ms.  Applewhite has lived in Philadelphia for more than twenty years and  enjoys five grandchildren, nine great grandchildren, and four  great-great grandchildren. She has voted in nearly every election since  at least 1960. Ms. Applewhite marched to support civil rights for  African-Americans with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Macon, Georgia,  and traveled on several occasions to hear him preach in Atlanta's  Ebeneezer Baptist Church. Ms. Applewhite does not have and has been  unable to obtain photo identification required by Pennsylvania's voter  photo ID law and thus after voting at nearly every election for more  than 50 years will be unable to cast a ballot this November.

Special shout out to Marian Schneider, one of the lawyers at the Advancement Project, who has been working for fair and clean elections all the years I've known her. From the Advancement Project:

The lawsuit claims that the voter photo ID law imposes a severe  burden on the fundamental right to vote in violation of Article I  section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states that,

“Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military,  shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of  suffrage.”

It also alleges that the ID requirement illegally adds a  new qualification for voting.  Article VII section 1 of the state  constitution only requires that people be 18 years of age, U.S.  citizens, and residents of Pennsylvania and their voting district.

Finally, the suit claims that the voter photo ID law irrationally  distinguishes between in-person and absentee voters because the latter  can vote without photo ID (just writing down the last four digits of the  Social Security number).  Pennsylvania allows people to vote absentee  only if they can demonstrate an impossibility of getting to the polls on  Election Day.  While in-person voter fraud is virtually nonexistent,  there have been far more reports of absentee ballot fraud across the  country, yet under Pennsylvania’s law this form of voting is exempt from  the photo ID requirement.

Lawyers for the petitioners filed a motion for preliminary injunction  with the court, asking for expedited discovery and a trial date in June  in order to allow the Commonwealth Court to decide the case in  sufficient time to permit the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review the  decision in advance of November’s election.

Let's all keep our fingers crossed that the law triumphs over the racism and cupidity that reigns amoungst the GOP in Harrisburg.

From the ACLU Press Release:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, the Advancement Project, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP), and the Washington, DC law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP filed a lawsuit today on behalf of ten Pennsylvania voters and three prominent advocacy organizations, alleging that the state's voter photo ID law violates the Pennsylvania Constitution by depriving citizens of their most fundamental constitutional right - the right to vote. The plaintiffs are asking the Commonwealth Court to issue an injunction blocking enforcement of the law before November's election. If the law is not overturned, most of the plaintiffs will be unable to cast ballots in the fall, despite the fact that many of them have voted regularly for decades.

You can see bios of the plaintiffs here. The lead plaintiff is Viviette Applewhite, pictured left. She's 93 and lives in Philadelphia. She had an ID card, but it was in her purse and the purse was stolen. This is her official bio:

Ms. Applewhite is an African-American woman born in 1919 in Philadelphia. Ms. Applewhite worked as a welder during World War II in the Sun Shipyard in Chester, Pennsylvania. Ms. Applewhite married and raised a daughter who for decades worked for various federal, Pennsylvania, and municipal government agencies. Now a widow, Ms. Applewhite has lived in Philadelphia for more than twenty years and enjoys five grandchildren, nine great grandchildren, and four great-great grandchildren. She has voted in nearly every election since at least 1960. Ms. Applewhite marched to support civil rights for African-Americans with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Macon, Georgia, and traveled on several occasions to hear him preach in Atlanta's Ebeneezer Baptist Church. Ms. Applewhite does not have and has been unable to obtain photo identification required by Pennsylvania's voter photo ID law and thus after voting at nearly every election for more than 50 years will be unable to cast a ballot this November.

Special shout out to Marian Schneider, one of the lawyers at the Advancement Project, who has been working for fair and clean elections all the years I've known her. From the Advancement Project:

The lawsuit claims that the voter photo ID law imposes a severe burden on the fundamental right to vote in violation of Article I section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states that, “Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.” It also alleges that the ID requirement illegally adds a new qualification for voting. Article VII section 1 of the state constitution only requires that people be 18 years of age, U.S. citizens, and residents of Pennsylvania and their voting district.

Finally, the suit claims that the voter photo ID law irrationally distinguishes between in-person and absentee voters because the latter can vote without photo ID (just writing down the last four digits of the Social Security number). Pennsylvania allows people to vote absentee only if they can demonstrate an impossibility of getting to the polls on Election Day. While in-person voter fraud is virtually nonexistent, there have been far more reports of absentee ballot fraud across the country, yet under Pennsylvania’s law this form of voting is exempt from the photo ID requirement.

Lawyers for the petitioners filed a motion for preliminary injunction with the court, asking for expedited discovery and a trial date in June in order to allow the Commonwealth Court to decide the case in sufficient time to permit the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review the decision in advance of November’s election.

Let's all keep our fingers crossed that THE LAW triumphs over the racism and cupidity that reigns amoungst the GOP in Harrisburg.

Last year, Scott asked the poll question "how many wars is the US fighting?" Twice. I thought about this over the weekend when Melissa Harris-Perry spoke about avoiding titles like "the war on women" and "the war against the poor." Her first point was very well taken: for anyone who has lived in an actual war zone, with bombs dropping and people dying, "war" means something very different then the rest of us saying "the war on drugs."

Harris-Perry's second point was equally well taken: that when we say "war" we tend to miss the nuance of what is really going on. What the Republicans are attempting to wreak on women (and unions, and the poor, and voters, the list goes on...) is horrendous. We all know that. But it isn't war, undeclared or otherwise. Saying it is changes the stakes, and misses all the details.

I'm guilty of this, although I'm going to work towards stopping. Instead of saying "the GOP has declared war on me and all the other women", I'm going to say something like: GOP talking heads just plain lie. And then give this example, where Alex Castellanos said: 

"Actually, because for example, men work an average of 44 hours a week, women work 41 hours a week," he said. "Men go into professions like engineering, science and math that earn more. Women want more flexibility."

Flexibility? Really? No, Alex, it's that we want the same dollar-per-dollar paycheck for hours worked. When Tom Corbett says to just close your eyes, I'm going to ask which orifice he wants that 10" probe stuck into. And I don't care which one he picks. 

War? I'm saving that for the potential issues in Iran and North Korea, and all the countries bleeding in Africa, as well as Afghanistan and Syria and other places where the bleeding needs to stop. 

Think about it...and for someone who gets his terms correct, and does it with aplomb and humour, I leave you with this, in case you missed it...

The Iowa GOP won't declare a winner since they're missing tallies from 8 precincts. 

Yup, they voted at midnight. 9 people. 3 for Obama, 2 for Romney, 2 for Huntsman, and 1 each for Newt and Paul. 

President Obama will announce at 3pm that William Daley is stepping down as WH Chief of Staff and will be replaced by Jack Lew, current Budget Director.