Abortion amendment that bid to strip termination providers of their counselling role crushed as supporters split An attempt to strip abortion providers of their role in counselling women was heavily defeated in the House of Commons this afternoon after a split between the original supporters of the amendment. MPs voted by 368 votes to 118 – a majority of 250 – to reject the amendment by the Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries after she lost the support of her co-sponsor, the former Labour minister Frank Field. Dorries managed to win the support of three cabinet ministers – Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, Liam Fox, the defence secretary, and Owen Paterson, the Northern Ireland secretary. Field withdrew his support for the Dorries amendment after Anne Milton, the health minister, said the government would try to implement the spirit of her proposal. Milton told MPs: “The government is … supportive of the spirit of these amendments and we intend to bring forward proposals for regulations accordingly, but after consultation. Primary legislation is not only unnecessary but would deprive parliament of the opportunity to consider the detail of how this service would develop and evolve.” Dorries hailed Milton’s undertaking as a victory. She told the BBC’s Norman Smith: “We lost the battle but we have won the war.” Milton distanced the government from the amendment towards the end of a stratchy debate in which Dorries said that David Cameron had initially encouraged her. Dorries claimed that the prime minister had advised her on the wording of her amendment by saying that she should describe abortion counsellors as independent. Dorries said: “I went to see the prime minister regarding this amendment and he was very encouraging. In fact it was at the prime minister’s insistence that I inserted the word ‘independent’. I attended a meeting at the department of health and at that meeting it was decided what the outcome, the process that would be implemented, to make this a reality.” The Dorries amendment would have stripped non-statutory abortion providers such as Marie Stopes and Bpas from offering counselling to women. This was designed to provide greater opportunities for independent counsellors, some of whom are influenced by pro-life groups, to provide counselling. NHS abortion providers would still be free to offer counselling. Dorries claimed that the prime minister changed his mind under pressure from Nick Clegg, after the deputy prime minister was lobbied by the former Lib Dem MP Evan Harris. Dorries said: “Basically the Liberal Democrats, in fact a former MP who lost his seat in this place, is blackmailing our prime minister. Our prime minister has been put in an impossible position regarding this amendment. Our health bill has been held to ransom by a former Liberal Democrat MP.” A senior Lib Dem source dismissed her allegation. The source said: “That is utter rubbish. [Nick] doesn’t need Evan to tell him the problems with her amendment.” The defeat was welcomed by Bpas. Ann Furedi, its chief executive, said: “Bpas is pleased to see Nadine Dorries’ amendment so overwhelmingly rejected. We look forward to being able to focus our efforts on the issues which pose a genuine problem for women considering ending a pregnancy.” Dorries insisted that she did not want to restrict access to abortion. “I do not want to return to the days of back street abortionists,” she said. “I am pro-choice. Abortion is here to stay.” The MP said that it was wrong for abortion providers to counsel women with unplanned pregnancies. “It must be wrong that the abortion provider, who is paid to the tune of £60m to carry out terminations, should also provide the counselling if a woman feels strong or brave enough to ask for it. If an organisation is paid that much for abortions, where is the incentive to reduce them?” Diane Abbott, the shadow public health minister, said: “This amendment is a shoddy, ill-conceived attempt to promote non-facts to make a non-case – namely that tens of thousands of women every year are either not getting counselling that they request or are getting counselling that is so poor that only new legislation can remedy the situation. In matters of this kind, if legislation is the answer then you have almost certainly asked the wrong question.” Abortion Health Women Frank Field Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Tommy Christopher at Mediaite reports on a testy exchange between ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney at Tuesday’s White House briefing. Tapper took his time to press Carney on the WH’s response (or lack thereof) to heated comments made by Teamsters President Jimmy Hoff a Jr. prior to President Obama’s Labor Day speech in Detroit: Hoffa’s… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : The Blaze Discovery Date : 06/09/2011 23:35 Number of articles : 3
Continue reading …
A pair of suicide bombers attacked the house of a top military officer in the southwestern city of Quetta on Wednesday, killing his wife and 22 other people, at least eight of them soldiers. (Sept. 7)
Continue reading …
Deputy chief’s wife and two children among those killed in twin attacks in western city of Quetta Suicide bombers have attacked a senior military officer in Quetta in western Pakistan, killing 20 people including eight soldiers and the officer’s wife. Police said they suspected Taliban militants were behind the attack, which comes two days after the army said it had arrested a senior al-Qaida operative in the city. The first bomber struck as the deputy chief of the paramilitary Frontier Corps, which operates across Balochistan province, drove away from his home in a tightly guarded Quetta neighbourhood. A second attacker then stormed into the house, hurling grenades as he went, before blowing himself up. The force of the blasts felled the walls of the house and nearby offices and ripped through passing rickshaws. Police said the targeted officer, Farrukh Shehzad, had been wounded but the extent of his injuries was not clear. The dead included eight of his guards, his wife and two of his children. No group claimed responsibility for the attack but immediate suspicions fell on al-Qaida-affiliated Taliban militants. On Monday the army said it had arrested Younis al-Mauritani, described as a high-ranking al-Qaida operative, and two associates, in a Quetta suburb. Al-qaida is still reeling from the US assassination of Osama bin Laden in northern Pakistan on 2 May and continuing drone attacks in the north-western tribal belt, which have targeted its most senior militants. As the strikes have intensified some al-Qaida fighters have fled into nearby Balochistan, where the drones do not operate. The Bin Laden operation created a bitter rift between the CIA and Pakistani intelligence. But officials from both countries hailed the latest arrest as a sign that relationship may be on the mend. Balochistan, a vast sprawling province along the Afghan border, has long been a hub for Islamist insurgents. Its northern regions are used by the Afghan Taliban as a rear base for attacks on Nato forces inside Afghanistan. The Taliban’s ruling council, known as the Quetta shura, is also believed to be based there, although recent reports suggest it may have effectively shifted to Karachi. Other possible suspects in the attack include Baloch nationalist rebels with whom the FC has been engaged in a bitter war of attrition for at least six years. But the nationalists, who are largely secular, do not have a track record of using suicide bombers. Pakistan Global terrorism al-Qaida Taliban Afghanistan Declan Walsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
[Posted by Karl] Jay Carney gives his boogie shoes a workout: (h/t Matt Lewis) Yet all Carney does is make Team Obama’s double-standard on civility painfully apparent. Incidentally, when assessing Carney’s claim that the White House had no idea that Hoffa was going to call Republicans sons-of-bitches who need to be “taken out,” keep in Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Patterico’s Pontifications Discovery Date : 06/09/2011 23:05 Number of articles : 3
Continue reading …
Liberal Democrats in House of Lords are likely to let legislation be passed after accepting safeguards Plans to bring in elected police commissioners are likely to go ahead with peers expected to announce a compromise on Tuesday lunchtime, the Guardian has learned. Lib Dem peers had been delaying the policy in the House of Lords but have now accepted safeguards added to the legislation and government sources expect the bill to be passed, paving the way for a radical overhaul of policing authorities. Concerns about the cost of the policy will however grow as the compromise will see the first elections delayed until the autumn of 2012 rather than May as had been planned. This is intended to allay fears that any setbacks in their implementation could affect the successful staging of next summer’s Olympic games. Labour had suggested that the policy was too costly at a time of police cuts, gleaning government estimates that the staging of elections would cost around £100m. Those concerns are likely to increase with the decision to hold the elections during a period when none are currently planned, which may increase the cost. However, the policy’s main obstacle had been objections by Lib Dems in the House of Lords. Lib Dem peers had been concerned that the election of a single individual to the role of police commissioner would distort the job of policing because that person would have to chase popularity in order to win and later secure re-election. They feared this would mean individuals would focus on seeking headlines and play to the most voluble parts of the electorate. In May Lib Dem peers defeated the legislation but because of a commitment in the coalition agreement, party managers have been under pressure from the Conservatives to manage this concern in the Lords. Now the compromise will see the first elections of police commissioners delayed from being held on the same day as next May’s local election and held instead in the autumn. Lib Dems feel they have also improved the legislation by ensuring that local authorities will have a part to play in the police commissioner’s role. Conservatives cherish the election policy and in the aftermath of the riots, David Cameron and the home secretary, Theresa May, increased the frequency and ardour with which they referred to the introduction of elected individuals. They suggested that elected figures would have reacted with more alacrity to public concerns over the riots when in the first hours of rioting the police appeared to stand back. Tories also believe the issue to be one of trust for the Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg, who was obliged to deliver his peers into supporting the policy as part of the coalition agreement. Liberal Democrats Police House of Lords Conservatives Labour David Cameron Theresa May Nick Clegg Metropolitan police Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …It’s fun to laugh at Michele Bachmann. Just as it was fun to laugh at Sarah Palin’s idiocy in the 2008 election. During the past election many political pundits knew a McCain Presidency would never come to be and many institutional Republicans blame Palin for the loss. Several weeks ago I had a conversation with a Republican campaign consultant who smirked at the possibility of Bachmann as the GOP nominee. “She won’t be the one,” the consultant said. Yet, August’s Gallup poll showed her among the top three candidates. The top three usually are the ones pundits and reporters believe are the only viable candidates in the race. That’s why the things she has said are fair game. Many people, particularly in Iowa, consider Bachmann to be the brilliant leader GOP voters have been looking for, and there’s a third chance, if you take the Gallup poll seriously, that Bachmann will be the nominee. Here are the top five things Bachmann has said and why they should be concerning for our country. 1. ” Not all cultures are equal . . .” When she was first running for office in 2005, Bachmann said this line during a candidate debate in efforts to convey she believed Muslims had an inferior culture to the western world. We live in an increasingly globalized world. Thomas Friedman called it a flat world because we’re so interconnected. Insensitivity might be a fun talking point for Fox News to poke at, but the reality is that an isolated nation is an endangered nation. We have more at stake than hand shakes and photo-ops. Trade, security, not to mention arms dealing are all things that our country should have a secure handle on at all times. If we have a leader that doesn’t care about the cultures of other nations we run the risk of alienating those nations and isolating the U.S. at our own peril. 2. “If we took away the minimum wage – if conceivably it was gone – we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.” Bachmann 2005 . Let’s go beyond the fact that this is a classist statement that throws the poor under the bus. Instead, I would like to look at the lack of understanding today’s tea party Republicans seem to have about basic economics. Corporations are not your best friend who believes that you and your family should be taken care of. Instead the minimum wage is so-called because it is the basic minimum that an employer is allowed to pay his employee. If they could get away with paying you a quarter, they would because it means larger profits for them. In these tough economic markets there would probably be a worker willing to work for 25 cents an hour. If the competition of the corporation are getting away with paying people only 20 cents the pay could drop lower to allow for even greater profits. This results in a race to the bottom. While many believe the minimum wage was created just to help eradicate poverty (which it does help with), the reality is it’s about fairness and how we value work in a modern society. If we decide as a country that we don’t value work above a quarter then suddenly people can make more money scavenging through a stadium after a game than they would serving you food at Denny’s. In the massive economic recession we’re experiencing it’s not only important, it’s critical to have a President who understands the fundamentals of pocketbook issues. Families are hurting and unemployment is high; now more than ever we need a President who will put people first over the needs of corporations. 3. “Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful but there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.” Bachmann said on the floor of Congress in 2009 . After the President selling us out on pollution caps I think we can all agree we’re screwed on reducing CO2. Municipalities and insurance companies are already preparing for what they believe will be the impacts of global climate change. But, let’s forget that this is a critical issue for a minute and focus on the fact that Bachmann doesn’t know what CO2 is. Not even that she doesn’t know, but that a professional Congressional staff allowed their member to go onto the floor of the House of Congress and say this. It’s more concerning that someone who is believed to be qualified to serve as a President of the United States and doesn’t know that you don’t sit in a garage with the engine running. 4. “Gay marriage is probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, thirty years. I’m not understating that.” See the video above. We all know that Bachmann has a difficult time with the LGBT community. In efforts not to understate it, let’s just say Bachmann doesn’t like the gays. But it’s more concerning that she thinks this is the issue that will impact us over the course of 30 years. This is on the Sally Kern level of belief that the LGBT community is more dangerous than terrorism. We have serious problems when it comes to protecting our nation and stabilizing our economy. People who believe that social issues are more important are terrifying not just to American voters but also to people trying to do business in our country or with our country. Similarly, there’s a problem with a potential President who believes that Gay Rights are more historic than 9/11. I don’t mean to belittle our equality movement, but we’re talking about a defining moment in our country that is belittled by people like Bachmann and Kern. As Wanda Sykes suggested about Sally Kern’s comments about gays being more dangerous than terrorists, perhaps someone like Bachamann will pull our troops from the bases across the world and parachute them into West Hollywood. This might not be the best strategic operation for strengthening a nation’s security. 5. “I don’t know how much God has to do to get the attention of the politicians. We’ve had an earthquake; we’ve had a hurricane. He said, ‘Are you going to start listening to me here?’ Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know government is on a morbid obesity diet and we’ve got to rein in the spending.” –Rep. Michele Bachmann, suggesting at a presidential campaign event in Florida that the 2011 East Coast earthquake and hurricane was a message from God (Aug. 2011) Bachmann later said about this quote that she was joking then tried to say that it was a metaphor . If it was a joke or a metaphor it’s in bad taste to be so insensitive to so many people who lost lives and property in a natural disaster. That’s not acceptable from a President. Beyond that, someone who thinks that God is enacting retribution on Congress when they’re not even in session is to careless even for a joke. Finally, if a deity of any kind were trying to send a message to put America on a spending diet why would that deity send a costly natural disaster? Wouldn’t “God” send a stabilization of the economy in efforts to encourage us to cut spending? With so much insensitivity and disconnection toward American families it’s hard to imagine Bachmann being a viable anything.
Continue reading …
Clegg’s demands over NHS may spark Lords amendments – as Lib Dem grassroots say bill will hurt patients and party The Tories and Liberal Democrats are facing a fresh clash over the government’s NHS reforms after Nick Clegg encouraged his MPs to put “probing questions” to ministers when the bill returns to the Commons on Tuesday. In a two-hour meeting with his parliamentary party on Monday night, the deputy prime minister held out the possibility that he will accept amendments to the heath and social care bill when it moves to the House of Lords later this month. Clegg’s move means that Lady Williams could be backed by Liberal Democrat ministers if she attempts to amend the bill to guarantee that the health secretary has a legal duty to deliver a comprehensive health service free at the point of need. But a source at the Department of Health indicated last night that Andrew Lansley, the health secretary – who has already amended the bill after the government’s “listening exercise” – would not accept fresh amendments on this point. The source said: “Our view is that the legislation is watertight on the secretary of state’s obligation to ensure there is an NHS available to all. That was always our view. But we amended the legislation to reassure those who were not sure.” Clegg said earlier in the day that he accepted the view that there was no need for fresh amendments on this issue. In a speech on schools in south-west London, he said: “Let me be absolutely clear. There is nothing, nothing, nothing in any of the government’s plans which in anyway threaten the basic founding principles of the NHS…There is no question, legally or politically, of the secretary of state under these new arrangements being somehow able to wash his or her hands of the NHS.” But at Monday night’s meeting of the Lib Dem parliamentary party, Clegg admitted that ministers still had to work hard to clarify the bill for MPs and peers with concerns. Paul Burstow, the Lib Dem health minister, is to offer further briefings to MPs and peers who will also be invited to meet officials at the department of health. All sides accept that it is too late to table further amendments on the NHS reforms when the bill is debated by MPs at report stage on Tuesday and Wednesday and at third reading on Wednesday . But Lib Dem MPs have been encouraged to put “probing questions” to ministers for possible amendments that will be tabled in the House of Lords. One Lib Dem source said: “We hope that we will not need to amend the bill further. But we may have to.” Another Lib Dem source said: “There will be robust interventions in the debate.” Lib Dem whips believe that the overwhelming number of MPs will support the amended bill. But Andrew George, the Lib Dem MP for St Ives, said he would rebel. The battle within the Lib Dem ranks was exposed last night in leaked emails, in which grassroots members of the party vented their anger at the leadership. Jeremy Sanders of Huddersfield Liberal Democrats wrote in an email to John Pugh this week, the Lib Dem backbench health committee chairman, that “yes, we can try to get improvements to the details, but none of these changes are going to alter the basic fact that the legislation is based on the assumption that what the NHS needs is a system based on private sector involvement, free market competition and internal markets. “Quite honestly, if our MPs are willing to go along with this, what exactly won’t they be willing to support?” In the same batch of emails obtained by the Guardian, Robert Hutchison, a Lib Dem councillor in Winchester, tells Pugh that “in my view is that if Lib Dem MPs vote for the bill this week — without further major amendments — it will damage the NHS and damage the party”. Charles West, one of the key party activists on the NHS, has written to party members to back an appeal against the the Lb Dem’s conference committee decision not to debate the health bill at the forthcoming party conference. “I have therefore written a letter of appeal to the Federal Conference Committee against their narrow decision not to take the motion that I and over 100 conference reps submitted in June, and in case that appeal fails we are submitting an emergency motion which will achieve the same ends”. Last month Andrew George, the Lib Dem rebel on the health bill, emailed Lib Dem activists with a blunt message: “of course I’ll try to influence colleagues but some are still basking in the synthetic afterglow of the post-pause Bill revision, perhaps having duped themselves that it’s ‘job done’! People need to wake up to the fact that we can say what we like at Conference, but the MPs main chance to influence would already have passed!” Labour twisted the knife into the Lib Dems with the party’s health spokesman John Healey arguing that Nick Clegg’s claim that he had met 11 out of the 13 changes demanded by his party’s spring conference resolution was “wrojng”. “He’s failed on seven and sallen short on six”. Baroness Thornton, the party’s spokesperson in the Lords, warned that the lack of scrutiny in the Commons — where 1,000 amenments mean just 40s of parliamentary to consider each one — could see the bill be put into a specialist committee to examine whether there is enough time to debate the bill. Writing in the Guardian, Tory MP Sarah Wollaston, a former GP who had criticised the health bill, says now is the time to back the coalition’s plans as “the structural changes to the NHS have passed the point of no return”. She argues instead that the bill needs to be amended to ensure that the choice of who is appointed to sit on and run the new NHS National Commissioning Board, a quango with £60bn to spend, is fairly and openly discussed. NHS Health Public services policy Politics Liberal Democrats Conservatives Nick Clegg Liberal-Conservative coalition Nicholas Watt Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
MEXICO CITY — Think before you tweet. A former teacher turned radio commentator and a math tutor who lives with his mother sit in a prison in southern Mexico, facing possible 30-year sentences for terrorism and sabotage in what may be the most serious charges ever brought against anyone using a Twitter social network account. Prosecutors say the defendants helped cause a chaos of car crashes and panic as parents in the Gulf Coast city of Veracruz rushed to save their children because of false reports that gunmen were attacking schools. Gerardo Buganza, interior secretary for Veracruz state, compared the panic to that caused by Orson Welles’ 1938 radio broadcast of “The War of the Worlds.” But he said the fear roused by that account of a Martian invasion of New Jersey “was small compared to what happened here.” “Here, there were 26 car accidents, or people left their cars in the middle of the streets to run and pick up their children, because they thought these things were occurring at their kids’ schools,” Buganza told local reporters. The charges say the messages caused such panic that emergency numbers “totally collapsed because people were terrified,” damaging service for real emergencies. Veracruz, the state’s largest city, and the neighboring suburb of Boca del Rio were already on edge after weeks of gunbattles involving drug traffickers. One attack occurred on a major boulevard. In another, gunmen tossed a grenade outside the city aquarium, killing an tourist and seriously wounding his wife and their two young children. On Aug. 25, nerves were further frayed when residents saw armed convoys of marines circulating on the streets, making some think a confrontation with gangs was imminent. That is when Gilberto Martinez Vera, who works as a low-paid tutor at several private schools, allegedly opened the floodgates of fear with repeated messages that gunmen were taking children from schools. “My sister-in-law just called me all upset, they just kidnapped five children from the school,” Martinez tweeted. In fact, no such kidnappings occurred that day. Defense lawyer Claribel Guevara said the rumors already had started and that Martinez Vera was just relaying what others told him. She said he never claimed to have firsthand knowledge of the incident. But in a subsequent tweet about the kidnap rumor, he said, “I don’t know what time it happened, but it’s true.” He also tweeted that three days earlier, “they mowed down six kids between 13 and 15 in the Hidalgo neighborhood.” While a similar attack occurred, it didn’t involve children. Prosecutors say the rumors were also sent by Maria de Jesus Bravo Pagola, who has worked as a teacher, a state arts official and a radio commentator. She says she was just relaying such messages to her own Twitter followers. “How can they possibly do this to me, for re-tweeting a message? I mean, it’s 140 characters. It’s not logical,’” said Guevara, quoting her client. Better known on the radio and social networks as “Maruchi,” her Facebook site now features the Twitter logo, a little bluebird, blindfolded and standing in front of the scales of justice, with the slogan “I too am a TwitTerrorist.” Online petitions are circulating to demand her release, and the pair’s cause has been taken up by human rights groups that call the charges exaggerated. Amnesty International says officials are violating freedom of expression and it blames the panic on the uncertainty many Mexicans feel amid a drug war in which more than 35,000 people have died over the past five years. “The lack of safety creates an atmosphere of mistrust in which rumors that circulate on social networks are part of people’s efforts to protect themselves, since there is very little trustworthy information,” Amnesty wrote in a statement on the case. In violence-wracked cities in the northern state of Tamaulipas, citizens and even authorities have used Twitter and Facebook to warn one another about shootouts. Anita Vera, Martinez Vera’s 71-year-old mother, said her 48-year-old son still lives at her house with his girlfriend. She said he told her that had posted his messages after the panic had already started. “He told me “Mom, I didn’t start any of this, I just transmitted what I was told,’” Vera Martellis said after visiting her son in prison. “He used the computer, but I swear that my son never wanted to do anybody harm, or start a revolution, like they say he did,” said Vera, who ekes out a living selling flowers. Raul Trejo, an expert on media and violence at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, said the terrorism charge is unwarranted, but described the case as “a very incautious use of Twitter.” He noted that in Mexico, “Twitter has been used by drug traffickers to create panic with false warnings.” In one case, a wave of messages about impending violence shut down schools, bars and restaurants in the central city of Cuernavaca last year. Trejo said Twitter users must learn “not to believe everything, and simply take the Twitter messages as an indication that some (report) is making the rounds.” But the real problem appears to be that governments cannot prevent drug cartel violence or even accurately inform citizens about it. Local news media are often so battered by kidnappings and killings of reporters that, in many states, they are loath to report about it. “These Twitter users had accounts with a few hundred followers,” Trejo noted. “If these lies grew, it is not so much because they propagated them, but because in Veracruz as in most of the rest of the country, there is such a lack of public safety that the public is inclined to believe unconfirmed acts of violence … The government doesn’t make clear what is happening.” Defense attorneys also say their clients were held incommunicado for almost three days, unable to see a lawyer. It appears one of the most serious sets of charges ever brought for sending or resending Twitter messages. Tweeter Paul Chambers was fined 385 pounds and ordered to pay 2,000 pounds ($3,225) in prosecution costs last year for tweeting that if northern England’s Robin Hood Airport didn’t reopen in time for his flight, “I’m blowing the airport sky high!!” Venezuelan authorities last year charged two people with spreading false information about the country’s banking system using Twitter and urging people to pull money out of banks. They could serve nine to 11 years in prison if convicted. In 2009, a Chinese woman was sentenced to a year in a labor camp for posting a satirical Twitter message about the Japan pavilion at the Shanghai Expo.
Continue reading …It might seem natural that on Labor Day weekend, The Washington Post would offer a profile of the Labor Secretary in their Sunday “Kids Post” section . Next to a large picture of Hilda Solis holding a doll from Central America she keeps in her office, the headline was “Secretary of Hard Work: Hilda Solis has been working since she was 10. Her main job now is helping other people find employment.” Here's what's unnatural. While working in details like her collection of dolls from all over the world and photos of the red,white, and blue M&Ms on her desk, the “Kids Post” profile never mentions how the employment picture is doing under Solis and President Obama. Here's another problem: the Post seems to have misled the children about her upbringing. The story began by noting that Solis loves dolls, and her mother worked in a Barbie doll factory, but that mean that at 10, she had to help care for her infant twin sisters: When Hilda Solis was 10 years old, her mother worked in a factory that made Barbie dolls, and she would bring them home. “I love dolls,” Solis said. “When I was a kid I had, like, every Barbie doll.” But her mother’s job had a down side, too: It meant Hilda had to help care for her infant twin sisters . “We had to cook, clean. You wouldn’t believe, back then we had to wash diapers. Rows and rows of diapers,” she said of the work that she and her older sister did. “I had to grow up fast.” But wait: if Solis had to care for infant twin sister while her mother worked at Mattel, why did she say this on the House floor in 2006 to honor her mother's 80th birthday? “When the youngest of her children turned 5 , my mom began work at Mattel Inc. After 22 years of service, Juana retired from her job as an assembler.”
Continue reading …