See what happens when you turn your back on Republican state legislators? They wreak havoc all over the place. In a strange way, this is good news . Because the Republicans are admitting that, without tricks, traps and lies, voters are much less likely to vote for Republicans! But what delicious irony: They voted in a straight party-line vote to prevent voters from doing the same thing. Yesterday in Raleigh, state Senate lawmakers advanced another bill aimed at making voting harder for North Carolinians who actually make it into the voting booth after clearing the other hurdles the GOP-led legislature has proposed. Reporter Laura Leslie put it succinctly [emphasis mine], The state Senate voted on straight party lines tonight to forbid NC voters from doing the same thing. Senate Bill 411 would repeal the law that allows voters entering the ballot box to choose to vote for all the candidates in one party or the other. About 40% of voters in NC use this option. Those mischievous scamps, what will they think of next? That’s SB411 , also described as the “ Elect Pat McCrory ” bill. Since taking over the North Carolina state legislature, the NCGOP has voted to… Shorten the early voting period by a week [HB 658 -- passed the House] Require registered voters to show a photo ID before voting [HB 351 -- passed out of committee in the House, on the House calendar for action today ] Eliminate a voter’s choice to vote a straight ticket [SB 411 -- passed the Senate] There’s more besides, as lawmakers rush through bills ahead of a key procedural deadline. Passage of a bill through either house by Thursday means they can be considered again next year.
Continue reading …Toxic Radio Host Mike Malloy Haunted by Fear of Families Having Fun at Theme Parks
June 8, 2011 No Comment
Not surprising, considering this is the same fringe radical who wished Navy SEALS shot George W. Bush and not Osama bin Laden. After the Orlando city council passed an ordinance that places restrictions on the group Food Not Bombs from feeding the homeless, followed by a legal battle between the city and group, radio host Mike Malloy did what left-wing logic dictates — he bashed Christians. Here's Malloy ranting about this during a recent radio broadcast (audio clip after page break) — Orlando Food Not Bombs, a peace group that actually does something. Their form of protest is to feed hungry people, homeless people, in much the same way that the Christian avatar did. But the city of Orlando doesn't like that. Orlando, if you've never been there, trust me on this, Orlando for the most part, it has the slums but out of the slums are all those workers that, that's where all the workers come from who work for $10 an hour to run all the attractions in Orlando so that when people come to Orlando, you know, big destination city, you take your family and go to the hottest spot in America, temperature wise, other than the desert Southwest, and you get on these stupid-ass rides.
Continue reading …New NYT Editor Jill Abramson as Howell Raines, Maureen Dowd as Washington Bureau Chief?
June 8, 2011 No Comment
Ominous speculation from Women’s Wear Daily (which has robust media reporting) about the management style of Jill Abramson, the New York Times’s executive editor in waiting — she reminds one anonymous senior editor of the notorious Howell Raines! Abramson also told an interviewer for The Guardian she was most proud of providing a ” sceptical take on the motivations of” Ken Starr ,
Continue reading …
A harsh economic climate has negatively affected cities and municipal services across the country. But the downturn hit home for a five-year-old German Shepherd named Daro earlier this month. (PHOTOS: 15 of the American Kennel Club’s Newest Registered Dog Breeds) Daro, a police dog for the East Haven Police Department in Connecticut, was forcibly retired after
Continue reading …Kenneth Clarke drops shorter jail terms for rapists after tussle with Cameron
June 8, 2011 No Comment
No 10 sounds retreat on cuts to prison numbers while justice secretary insists Treasury must bear costs Justice secretary Kenneth Clarke has been forced by Number 10 to abandon a plan to give rapists, and other serious offenders, a 50% sentence discount in return for early guilty pleas, but he is fiercely resisting Treasury demands to make his justice ministry bear the multi-million pound cost. Clarke had proposed to increase the discount from 33% to 50% for all offenders, so saving £130m from a departmental budget being slashed by a quarter. Following talks with David Cameron over the past 48 hours, Clarke accepted rapists will now be excluded, but he is battling to retain the extra discount for less serious offences, a policy that would free up badly needed prison places. In difficult talks yesterday with the Treasury chief secretary, Danny Alexander, Clarke pointed out he had last year won Treasury agreement that if the government’s so-called rehabilitation revolution did not deliver a lower jail population, then the Treasury would bear the costs from the reserve. Clarke is insisting this be honoured by the Chancellor, George Osborne; if jail places are to go up, Clarke should not pay by finding cuts elsewhere in his budget such as legal aid. The Treasury is insisting he has a four-year settlement with clear ceilings. A Clarke ally said: “He is a former chancellor, and he is involved in a negotiation. He offered up some of the biggest cuts of any government department last year, and if Number 10 wants to change the policy, they are going to have to pay for it.” Clarke’s allies insist he enjoyed the clear agreement of the Treasury and the prime minister for the increase in the discount for pleading guilty early, but that support had gone cold in the past 48 hours. Cameron had been warned by his chief strategist and pollster, Andrew Cooper, that the Conservatives’ credentials as the party of law and order were being fatally damaged by a furore over shorter sentences in return for rapists pleading guilty. Cameron decided to execute a policy U-turn last week, but had not forseen that one-to-one discussions with Clarke on Tuesday would leak. Coming alongside the U-turn over health policy, Cameron will be aware of the danger in being seen as weak or irresolute. He is due to make a crime speech later this month, and the tabloid barrage over rapists was threatening to obscure his message, as well as anger his backbenchers. At prime minister’s questions Cameron went out of his way to praise Clarke, saying “he is doing a superb job” and adding “he has got plenty more fuel in his tank”. In face of claims by Labour leader Ed Miliband that “government sentencing policy was in a mess”, Cameron insisted there had been no U-turn, arguing the discount proposal had only been floated in a consultative green paper. Yet Clarke had in the Commons a fortnight ago described the policy as agreed, and is personally in no doubt Cameron sounded the retreat. The problem for Clarke is that the discount is a major part of his drive to stabilise the record 85,000 prison population in England and Wales. The Ministry of Justice has agreed to find savings of £2bn from a budget of £8.7bn. Ministry estimates show 3,400 of the 6,000 fewer prison places that will be needed as a result of his sentencing package will come from the plan to increase the maximum available sentence discount from 33% to 50%. In practice, the ministry estimates the average actual discount in sentences for early guilty pleas would rise from 25% to 34%. There were 1,058 rapists sentenced in 2010, of which 466 had pleaded guilty. Asked by Miliband to confirm the policy had been dropped, Cameron told MPs: “What we want is tough sentences for serious offenders. We produced a consultation paper that had widespread support for many of the proposals that it made, and in the coming weeks we will be publishing our legislation.” Miliband said there was widespread concern about the proposal and asked Mr Cameron if he had “torn it up, yes or no?” In one of Miliband’s weaker Commons performances, Cameron was able to hit back by pointing out that Sadiq Khan, Miliband’s own shadow justice secretary had described the plan as “a perfectly sensible vision for a sentencing policy”. He suggested it was Miliband who had undergone “a sudden U-turn”. Downing Street is also believed to have insisted that ministers look again at a plan to restore a judge’s discretion in imposing indeterminate sentences for public protection, a major factor in the increase in the jail population in England and Wales. The changes were welcomed on the Tory right. Philip Davies said today: “I think the Prime Minister has realised that Ken Clarke was in danger of single-handedly ruining the reputation of the Conservative party as the party of law and order.” Kenneth Clarke David Cameron Rape Crime Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Kenneth Clarke drops shorter jail terms for rapists after tussle with Cameron
June 8, 2011 No CommentNo 10 sounds retreat on cuts to prison numbers while justice secretary insists Treasury must bear costs Justice secretary Kenneth Clarke has been forced by Number 10 to abandon a plan to give rapists, and other serious offenders, a 50% sentence discount in return for early guilty pleas, but he is fiercely resisting Treasury demands to make his justice ministry bear the multi-million pound cost. Clarke had proposed to increase the discount from 33% to 50% for all offenders, so saving £130m from a departmental budget being slashed by a quarter. Following talks with David Cameron over the past 48 hours, Clarke accepted rapists will now be excluded, but he is battling to retain the extra discount for less serious offences, a policy that would free up badly needed prison places. In difficult talks yesterday with the Treasury chief secretary, Danny Alexander, Clarke pointed out he had last year won Treasury agreement that if the government’s so-called rehabilitation revolution did not deliver a lower jail population, then the Treasury would bear the costs from the reserve. Clarke is insisting this be honoured by the Chancellor, George Osborne; if jail places are to go up, Clarke should not pay by finding cuts elsewhere in his budget such as legal aid. The Treasury is insisting he has a four-year settlement with clear ceilings. A Clarke ally said: “He is a former chancellor, and he is involved in a negotiation. He offered up some of the biggest cuts of any government department last year, and if Number 10 wants to change the policy, they are going to have to pay for it.” Clarke’s allies insist he enjoyed the clear agreement of the Treasury and the prime minister for the increase in the discount for pleading guilty early, but that support had gone cold in the past 48 hours. Cameron had been warned by his chief strategist and pollster, Andrew Cooper, that the Conservatives’ credentials as the party of law and order were being fatally damaged by a furore over shorter sentences in return for rapists pleading guilty. Cameron decided to execute a policy U-turn last week, but had not forseen that one-to-one discussions with Clarke on Tuesday would leak. Coming alongside the U-turn over health policy, Cameron will be aware of the danger in being seen as weak or irresolute. He is due to make a crime speech later this month, and the tabloid barrage over rapists was threatening to obscure his message, as well as anger his backbenchers. At prime minister’s questions Cameron went out of his way to praise Clarke, saying “he is doing a superb job” and adding “he has got plenty more fuel in his tank”. In face of claims by Labour leader Ed Miliband that “government sentencing policy was in a mess”, Cameron insisted there had been no U-turn, arguing the discount proposal had only been floated in a consultative green paper. Yet Clarke had in the Commons a fortnight ago described the policy as agreed, and is personally in no doubt Cameron sounded the retreat. The problem for Clarke is that the discount is a major part of his drive to stabilise the record 85,000 prison population in England and Wales. The Ministry of Justice has agreed to find savings of £2bn from a budget of £8.7bn. Ministry estimates show 3,400 of the 6,000 fewer prison places that will be needed as a result of his sentencing package will come from the plan to increase the maximum available sentence discount from 33% to 50%. In practice, the ministry estimates the average actual discount in sentences for early guilty pleas would rise from 25% to 34%. There were 1,058 rapists sentenced in 2010, of which 466 had pleaded guilty. Asked by Miliband to confirm the policy had been dropped, Cameron told MPs: “What we want is tough sentences for serious offenders. We produced a consultation paper that had widespread support for many of the proposals that it made, and in the coming weeks we will be publishing our legislation.” Miliband said there was widespread concern about the proposal and asked Mr Cameron if he had “torn it up, yes or no?” In one of Miliband’s weaker Commons performances, Cameron was able to hit back by pointing out that Sadiq Khan, Miliband’s own shadow justice secretary had described the plan as “a perfectly sensible vision for a sentencing policy”. He suggested it was Miliband who had undergone “a sudden U-turn”. Downing Street is also believed to have insisted that ministers look again at a plan to restore a judge’s discretion in imposing indeterminate sentences for public protection, a major factor in the increase in the jail population in England and Wales. The changes were welcomed on the Tory right. Philip Davies said today: “I think the Prime Minister has realised that Ken Clarke was in danger of single-handedly ruining the reputation of the Conservative party as the party of law and order.” Kenneth Clarke David Cameron Rape Crime Prisons and probation UK criminal justice Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Jon Stewart came clean last night about his involvement with Weinergate. Stewart opened yesterday’s The Daily Show by holding a mock press conference, apologizing for being too soft on Anthony Weiner. Among not cracking enough jokes, Stewart also referenced his longtime friendship with the congressman. The two have known each other since college, and Weiner
Continue reading …
Lady Cox, the proposer, says aim is to prevent discrimination against Muslim women and ‘jurisdiction creep’ in Islamic tribunals Islamic courts would be forced to acknowledge the primacy of English law under a bill being introduced in the House of Lords. The bill, proposed by Lady Cox and backed by women’s rights groups and the National Secular Society, was drawn up because of “deep concerns” that Muslim women are suffering discrimination within closed sharia law councils. The Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill will introduce an offence carrying a five-year jail sentence for anyone falsely claiming or implying that sharia courts or councils have legal jurisdiction over family or criminal law. The bill, which will apply to all arbitration tribunals if passed, aims to tackle discrimination, which its supporters say is inherent in the courts, by banning the sharia practice of giving woman’s testimony only half the weight of men’s. Cox said: “Equality under the law is a core value of British justice. My bill seeks to preserve that standard” In a similar way to Jewish Beth Din courts, sharia tribunals can make verdicts in cases involving financial and property issues which, under the 1996 Arbitration Act, are enforceable by county courts or the high court. The tribunals should only be deciding civil disputes but two years ago the think-tank Civitas claimed sharia courts, some 85 of which operate in Birmingham, London, Bradford and Manchester, had crossed the proper limits of their jurisdiction and were regularly giving illegal advice on marriage and divorce. Cox said they are increasingly ruling on family and criminal cases, including child custody and domestic violence. Jurisdiction “creep” had caused considerable suffering among women compelled to return to abusive husbands, or to give up children and property. Diana Nammi, of the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation, said: “Women and children are very vulnerable members of the community and under sharia law they become invisible. Women and children are the most vulnerable in minority communities where religion tradition and culture has become the identity taking precedence over the human rights and women’s rights that are protected under civil, UK law.” The bill requires public bodies to inform women they have fewer legal rights if their marriage is unrecognised in English law. Cox said she had found “considerable evidence” of women, some of whom are brought to Britain speaking little English and kept ignorant of their legal rights, suffering domestic violence or unequal access to divorce, due to discriminatory decisions made. “We cannot continue to condone this situation. Many women say: ‘We came to this country to escape these practices only to find the situation is worse here.’ ” Cox said she would be asking the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who caused a row last year when he said a recognised role for sharia law seemed unavoidable, to back her bill. She said: “By appearing to condone this inherent discrimination system which is causing real suffering to women, he has failed to recognise that suffering. He is appearing to forward the acceptability and validity of Sharia law in this country.” Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: “Laws should not impinge on religious freedoms, nor should courts judge on theological matters. By the same token, democratically determined and human rights compliant law must take precedence over the law of any religion.” Aina Khan, a solicitor who advises on sharia law, said: “It is good in parts. I would like to see best practice in sharia councils, like in the Beth Din model and I would like some legislation. I don’t want somebody opening up a sharia board in their front room. Of course sex discrimination laws must apply. But there are some alarmist tones in the bill. Where she goes wrong is assuming that some sort of misogyny and discrimination goes on. Eighty per cent of its users are women.” Khurshid Drabu, adviser on constitutional affairs to the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “Bills of this kind don’t help anybody. They don’t appear to understand that we live in a free country where people can make free choices. Yet again, it appears to be a total misunderstanding of the concept that underpins these arbitration councils. Sharia councils operate under consent. If there is a woman who suffers as a result of a decision by one of these councils a woman is free to go to the British courts.” Islam Communities Women Human rights Equality Religion Karen McVeigh Amelia Hill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Troops and tanks mass outside ‘ghost town’ after massacre amid mounting fears of slip towards Libyan-style civil war Thousands of residents have fled the northern Syrian town of Jisr al-Shughour in fear of an imminent onslaught by government troops ordered to take vengeance on one of the centres of the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad. Anticipation of a violent response by the Syrian regime galvanised international diplomatic action, led by France and Britain at the UN, and fuelled a sense that a turning point may be approaching as disorder spreads and the country slips closer to a Libyan-style civil war. The local co-ordinating committees, a network of Syrian activist groups, reported 40 tanks and 50 troop carriers two-and-a-half miles (4km) from Jisr al-Shughour and soldiers in Idleb, the provincial capital. Amateur video also showed armoured units moving into the area. An independent activist in Damascus said he had seen tanks leaving the capital. The forces are thought to be under the command of the president’s brother, Maher, who commands the Republican Guard and other units, and is widely believed to be the man leading Syria’s violent crackdown. “We believe they may send the 4th division to attack as they can be relied on to be loyal,” said an activist who runs a Facebook page on the protests. “The conscripts, people like me, can’t be relied upon when asked to be so brutal.” Although more than 1,110 Syrians have reportedly been killed in nearly three months of unprecedented unrest, it is clear that the crackdown has failed to crush the opposition — even without the sort of high-level defections suffered by Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader. Video clips showed Jisr al-Shughour eerily deserted, nothing moving in the streets, and the market shuttered. Residents described it as a ghost town as people streamed towards the Turkish border, which the government in Ankara said would remain open. “We are monitoring developments in Syria with concern,” said the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. “Syria should change its attitude towards civilians and should take its attitude to a more tolerant level.” The Turkish news agency said about 170 Syrians had crossed the border, and some wounded had been taken to local hospitals. The government in Damascus claims 120 troops and security personnel were killed in an ambush in Jisr al-Shughour on Sunday, but there is no independent confirmation as no foreign journalists are allowed to operate in Syria. Speculation is rife that the incident may have involved a mutiny by security forces who refused to fire on protesters, and were then themselves killed by loyalists. Syrian state TV reported that “armed terrorist organisations” had used government vehicles and uniforms to commit “a brutal massacre”. They “filmed themselves … to manipulate the photos and videos and distort the reputation of the army,” according to Syrian state TV. It showed pictures from the funerals of eight security personnel. Syria Comment, an influential blog based in the US, said: “Syria is slipping towards civil war. The government has met with no success in quelling the revolt despite an escalating death rate and an ever more ruthless crackdown.” At the UN, France and Britain were preparing to put forward a security council motion condemning the Syrian crackdown and demanding accountability and humanitarian access. “If anyone votes against that resolution or tries to veto it, that should be on their conscience,” the British prime minister, David Cameron, said in a statement to MPs in London. Britain, France, Germany and Portugal circulated a draft condemning Syria at the security council last month, but Russia and China have made clear they dislike the idea of council involvement. Both have the power of veto, but may abstain. Western diplomats in New York said they did not expect a vote on Wednesday. The draft urges countries not to supply weapons to Syria, but it would not provide for an arms embargo or other specific punitive measures. The original text was watered down to make it look less like a prelude to further action, such as the military intervention that Nato has conducted in Libya, and which has angered Russia. Diplomats admit privately that they are far less able to influence Syria than Libya, and that there is no prospect of military action against the Assad regime. In Paris the Syrian ambassador was forced to deny she had resigned in protest at attacks on civilians by Assad’s forces. Lamia Shakkour claimed she was the victim of a hoax aimed at embarrassing her country. She called the announcement “misinformation” and “identity theft”. A woman identifying herself as the Syrian ambassador announced her resignation by telephone on the French television news channel France 24 on Tuesday. “I can no longer continue to support the cycle of extreme violence against unarmed civilians,” she said. “I recognise the legitimacy of the people’s demands for more democracy and freedom.” France 24 said it had called a phone number on which it had spoken to Shakkour previously. After the broadcast Reuters said it had received an email that came via the website of the Syrian embassy in Paris, confirming the resignation. But the resignation was immediately denied by news agencies in Syria. Shakkour appeared on another French television station, BFM TV, to deny she had resigned. France 24 said it did not rule out a “manipulation or a provocation” and promised to investigate the alleged hoax. Nidaa Hassan is the pseudonym of a journalist in Damascus Additional reporting: Kim Willsher, Paris Syria Middle East Protest Arab and Middle East unrest United Nations France Europe David Cameron Ian Black Nidaa Hassan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …I’m sure you are all aware that VP Joe Biden is trying to negotiate some grand bargain with Republicans over the deficit and has been for a while now: The White House and lawmakers are negotiating a budget package that would serve as a “significant down payment” toward cutting the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade, Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday. The remarks suggest the bipartisan group is working on a more limited plan than the comprehensive package offered in December by the White House fiscal commission. The Biden-led talks may not aim at solving all of the country’s budget challenges in time for a crucial summer vote to raise the debt limit. Instead, they could act as an initial step toward bigger deficit-cutting goals. “Look, it’s premature to be optimistic, but I am clearly not pessimistic,” Biden told reporters after a more than two hour meeting at the Blair House. “I genuinely believe we are on the right track here, and there is a real shot for making significant progress defined as making a down payment.” Despite what Republicans say publicly, Biden continued, taxes remain part of the mix. That article was from May, 12th. yesterday it was reported that five Senators wrote a letter to Biden to tell him not to mess with Medicare and some of them are Conservadems: Five Democratic senators are calling on Vice President Joe Biden to reaffirm his commitment to leaving Medicare unchanged during budget and deficit negotiations. Sens. Claire McCaskill, of Missouri, Jon Tester, of Montana, Sherrod Brown, of Ohio, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Bill Nelson of Florida express their concerns in a letter sent Monday to Biden. The letter was obtained by The Associated Press. They note Biden has made progress in negotiations and say that as talks move to areas with less consensus the vice president must insist that significant changes to Medicare are off the table. They say that’s important because Republican leaders have said their Medicare proposal is still a part of negotiations. Medicaid should be part of their letter too, but at least it puts more pressure on Biden to not sink us all and coming from Nelson, Tester, McCaskill is good news for us.
Continue reading …