House Of Public Discourse
Is an area in social life where individuals can come together to freely discuss and identify societal problems, and through that discussion influence political action.
Red States Win By Cheating Let The Voter Suppression Begin!
The Republican tactic of cheating and disenfranchising voters in the Red States is away in earnest. Roll Tide! Alabama has taken voter suppression to a whole new level for the 2016 election cycle.
The latest round of voter restrictions coming from Alabama has laid the racism factor up front for the whole world to see.
"Due to budget cuts, Alabama Law Enforcement Agency said that 31 satellite DMV offices would no longer have access to drivers licence examiners. This action means residents in these counties will have to travel to other counties in the state to apply for a drivers licence." [See Source]
75 percent of the 31 counties are mainly populated by "Black Voters."
Just last year the state of Alabama enacted a "Voter Photo ID Law." What this says is you must have a photo ID to vote in this state. And, if you live in a county that no longer provides the state issued photo ID you are on your own. The classic Republican Party " fend for yourselves." routine.
There is no sugar coating this move by the state of Alabama. This action by the state is racially motivated. The top 10 counties in Alabama with the highest percentage of black registered voters are Macon, Greene, Sumter, Lowndes, Bullock, Perry, Wilcox, Dallas, Hale, and Montgomery. Thanks to these new so-called budget cuts eight of them will be closed.
Block The Vote
In fact, our source here in the House of Public Discourse has found that in every single county in Alabama where the Black's make up more than 75% of the population will see their driver's licence office closed. Of course, Alabama state officials say this is not a premeditated move by the state to suppress the minority vote. But, no matter the motivation by the state the results are the same. All of these voter ID laws enacted by various states have been conceived on the notion of a nonexistent widespread voter fraud claim. Many of these state laws concerning voter suppression have been written by the American Legislative Exchange Counsel. [ALEC]
The Backroom Where Laws Are Born
In report after report, study after study, investigation after investigation, it has been found that voter fraud is not a problem in America. Voter Fraud in America is a myth. Any person who has ever had to venture to a state DMV office knows they are historically a pain in the rear. Moreover, for elderly, sick, or poor people with no vehicle getting to these offices can be difficult. These actions by lawmakers in Alabama are not a coincidence.
States With New Voter ID Laws Since 2010 Election
Photo Courtesy: billmoyers.com
The Republican Party will do whatever it takes to hold on to power in the Red States. And, if cheating is the order of the day so be it.
Oathkeepers Defenders Of The Constitution, MY ASS!
According to credible sources, Kentucky Clerk and the newest Christian Right Saint Kim Davis goes back to work on Monday What's up in the air will she issue a same-sex marriage license if the situation arises. If not, she could be arrested and thrown right back in jail.
Stewart Rhoades Oathkeepers Founder
According to the self-proclaimed defenders of the Constitution the "Oathkeepers" that's not going to happen. The Oathkeepers listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center are a "Radical Right Wing Hate Group." The group's leader Stewart Rhoades stated they will be there to protect her from what he calls a tyrannical government imposing its will on an American citizen. Rhoades Stated:
"We believe Federal District Court Judge David Bunning grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs. Davis’ due process rights, and, in particular, her right to a jury trial. This judge has assumed unto himself not just the powers of all three branches of government, but has also taken on the powers of judge, jury, and “executioner.”
Rhoades added.
"What matters to us is not whether you agree with her position on gay marriage or her decision to not issue marriage licenses. What matters is that the judge is violating the Constitution in his anger and desire to punish her for going against his will."[See Source]
First and only point the contention by this group's leader that the Judge overstepped his authority and did not offer Kim Davis due process of law is complete "bull-crap." Anyone who believes this to be true doesn't know a single thing about the law whatsoever. A law was passed allowing "same-sex marriage" and as an elected official Kim Davis has to carry out the law of the land whether she likes it or not. The mere act of not doing so is not only contempt of a judge's court order it's a violation of oath of an elected official to carry out the laws of the land. Guess what? God's law or theocratic law does not have one single thing to do with secular law period. So, the Oathkeepers position that the judges order was improper just makes clear that the group's leader maybe a lawyer he doesn't know what he is talking about period.
The Real Question Is Do The Oathkeepers Pose A Threat To "We The People" Who Believe They Are A Hate Group And Full Of S_ _T?
President Obama
One of the most troubling developments over the last several years has been the rise of the " Right-Wing Militia Movement." Memberships in so-called " Patriot Groups" has sky-rocketed since the election of America's first person of color to the White House. Both Homeland Security and the Southern Poverty Law Center warned us back in 2009 to expect this rise in " Hate Groups'" in America. We saw back in the Spring of 2014 this reality when a cattle rancher in Nevada, who had been stealing from the taxpayers being brought to justice. And, these people, headed up mostly by the very same " Oathkeepers" pointing rifles and other firearms at law enforcement officials tasked to bring him to justice.
The Oathkeepers was founded in 2009. They claim to be non-partisan. They are mostly made up of former and current law enforcement personnel. Their mantra is they're needed to defend the Constitution. However, the Southern Poverty Law Center disagrees. So, what is the real agenda of the Oathkeepers? No matter your feeling if the Southern Poverty Law Center is legit or not there are some common sense issues surrounding the Oathkeepers and other Right Wing groups that elevate themselves as protectors of We The People.
Far right-wing groups have and do pose a threat to the security of our nation. The Oathkeepers are nothing more than a water downed version of the Sovereign Citizen Movement. Americans have been inundated with Fox News and Right-Wing Talk Radio about the Muslim are going to take over America. How Obama going to take our guns and put us all in FEMA camps. The fear-mongering has been unprecedented.
However, a recent study shows groups we need to fear the most are not ISIS or minorities but, in fact, homegrown "Domestic Terrorist."[See Study Results]
There were several law enforcement agencies who participated in this study and the overwhelming response to the inquiry was the Sovereign Citizen Movement posed the biggest threat to both law enforcement and public safety.
Who Are The Sovereign Citizens?
Not unlike the Sovereign Citizen Movement the "Oathkeepers" tend to predetermine what is the law of the land and cherry pick the law they will accept and not accept. The bottom line is there are laws both on the federal and state level that forbid citizens from taking the law into their hands. The Oathkeepers have stuck their busybody noses in places it does not belong from Cliven Bundy, Ferguson, and now the " Kim Davis Affair." Their involvement in these events and others has only enhanced the danger and lessen the security. Their actions are not a problem solver but, in fact, a problem creator. But what they are not is defenders of the Constitution they claim they are but instead overgrown children with a desire to "Play Army" and "Obstructors of Justice."
Thom Hartmann comments on news that the Oath Keepers militia is on patrol in Ferguson, MO during the One year anniversary of the police killing of Michael Brown.
Why Are They Even Allowed Period Explanation Mark, End of Statement!!!
Photo Credit: www.irishtimes.com
Four civilians carrying automatic rifles and sidearms patrolled a riot-torn street in Ferguson, Missouri, early Tuesday, saying they were there to protect a media organisation but drawing swift criticism from police and protesters alike.
The appearance of the four men, all white, quickly drew stares in the mostly black neighborhood, which exploded into violence again on Sunday night as protesters marked the police killing of an unarmed black teen a year ago.
The men identified themselves as part of a group called “Oath Keepers,” which describes itself as an association of current and former US soldiers and police who aim to protect the US Constitution.
Trouble Makers Wanting Play Army Man Is What They Are.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit civil rights organisation, has described the “Oath Keepers” as a “fiercely anti-government, militaristic group,” and St Louis County Police ChiefJon Belmar condemned their appearance in Ferguson.
“Their presence was both unnecessary and inflammatory,” he said, adding that police would work with county prosecutors to see if the men had broken any laws.
Journalists and protesters posted images on social media platforms.
Led by a man who gave his name only as John, the group, whose members wore bulletproof vests and carried sidearms in addition to combat-style rifles, said they had come to protect a journalist from the conservative “Infowars. com” Web site.
“There were problems here, there were people who got hurt. We needed to be prepared for that,” said the man, who noted that Missouri state laws generally allow the open carrying of heavy weapons of the kind that his group were brandishing.
InfoWars could not be reached for immediate comment.
Ferguson has seen months of violent protest since the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown by a white police officer a year ago. Sunday night’s protests were punctuated by gunfire, with police shooting and critically wounding a man who they said had opened fire on them.
Monday’s protests were less chaotic, with about nine people arrested in skirmishes with police that saw protesters throw rocks and bottles at officers.
But many in the crowd questioned the wisdom of openly carrying such heavy weapons into an emotionally charged situation.
“You’re going to bring some uncommissioned citizens, white citizens, into a black community like this? It’s disrespectful,” saidTalal Ahmad (30) who is black and has been a fixture of the last year’s protests, which prompted a Justice Department review that found Ferguson’s police department routinely violated city residents’ civil rights.
“Here, in a black neighborhood, we’re already living in a state of terror,” Ahmad said.
With the recent announcements by Ted Cruz and Rand Paul both Republican's that they were running for the highest office in the land, many felt Hillary Clinton would not be far behind. They were correct. There have been some to express joy. Some have expressed dread and resignation and for many a sense of relief. The early reports we get from the House of Public Discourse is not one of indifference to Hillary. Most Democrats will have no problem voting for Hillary Clinton even if she's not their first choice.
There Are Immediate Questions?
Why Is Hillary Clinton Declaring Now?
To begin with by law, she has to file within 15 days of starting campaign activity and renting a huge office space in Brooklyn, NY was the signature that started the clock. The second reason purely political. With the email scandal, the never ending Benghazi, and the sheer fact the Republican's hate the Clinton's they needed to have a campaign apparatus in place to handle the inevitable storm of adversarial questioning sure to come.
What will her campaign be about?
That is a big unanswered question at this stage of the race. But, we here in the House of Public Discourse have made known we expect something done about income inequality. Do we want to know your positions on Foreign Policy? Yes! With the success of the Obama Administration in the economy and job creation we know there will be no "Change Theme" maybe a " stay the course one." I think it fair that Hillary will handle the "Woman Question," differently this time around. Last Time, she avoided the question until her concession speech when she eluded to a " glass ceiling for women." Bottomline how Hillary Clinton handles and embraces the populism of the Democratic Party is the major stone upturned here.
What has she learned since 2008? And does she really want to be president?
Honestly, in 2008 this writer believes Hillary did not take Barack Obama serious early on in the race, and she ended up paying for it. I don't see Hillary repeating that mistake twice. However, Hillary showed the fight in her and made it a race in 2008. There was also the rumors of backbiting, clashing egos, and ugly behavior. It seems like Hillary Clinton has been running for president forever. Is her heart into this race. Or is it business as usual for Hillary?
How will Republicans attack her?
I am WOMAN hear me roar. The GOP will cry about Hillary using the " woman card." I bet you see this "War on Woman" narrative subdue. The GOP can ill afford to piss the largest voting block in America off even more. I can hear a Koch ad running telling America how a Hillary presidency will just be some dynastic succession from husband to wife. They will sell us on how bad it is for our democracy. The problem the GOP has is that Rand Paul and expected Jeb Bush are in the race. Make no bones about it Hillary Clinton is one of the most knowledgeable people if not the most knowledgeable on Foreign Affairs. The Republicans will try to take this punitive strength and use it against her in only the GOP [fake scandal a day] can do. But, " where the rubber hits the road," with Hillary will be their never-ending questioning of Hillary's honesty.
Rand Paul is already preparing to attack her on honesty.[See Article]
There is no question Hillary has political savvy. The Clinton's have been a political " thorn in the side," to the GOP for decades now. Let's just say there is no love lost.
However, and this is serious business for Hillary Clinton this issue of honesty. This growing mistrust reaches across party lines and is one of our early indicators that people have questions and answers are in order. [See Article]
Are there any skeletons left in the closet?
Surely, there's nothing more left to learn about Clinton, right? After two terms in the White House as first lady, two Senate campaigns, a confirmation for secretary of state, and the aftermath, can anyone turn up more dirt? Is there a Chappaqua Project to echo the Arkansas Project? Democrats hope she's been fully vetted and those worries are put to bed, but the answer likely rests first with the ongoing investigation into the September 11, 2012, attacks in Benghazi, and on the management and donors of the Clinton Foundation.[See Source]
What role will Bill play?
There is no bigger public figure in the world today than Bill Clinton. Some have said that goes for his ego as well. But, to have hubby around is in my view a plus. Yes, there may be some minuses but the former outweigh the latter. For example, a New York Times report suggested that former President Clinton would remain hidden in the background. President Clinton took issue with that report and the New York Times has taken the story down.[See Article]
Will she get a credible challenger?
According to our source, The Atlantic, Martin O'Malley is considering a run. Elizbeth Warren says, " NO I, M NOT RUNNING," Here in the House of Public Discourse we see a huge cry for Elizabeth Warren to run. We hear " Run Bernie Run." Warren calls for a contested primary then proclaims she's not running. Our study shows Bernie Sanders has growing support and is looking to run. Here is a major question/debate being tossed about now. Is a contested primary a good thing or bad thing for Hillary and the Democratic Party?
Can she repair her relationship with the press?
Hillary has always kept the press at " arms-length." However, our source indicates a series of recent hires that have a history of getting along with the press. She[Hillary] and staffers have already provided a hobnob dinner last Thursday night.[See Source] But, in fine Hillary Clinton fashion, has let slip they intend on pooled reporters for smaller events, this is a type example of what irks the Press and shows how Hillary keeps them at bay.
Unbiased Research Tells The Real Truth About Israel
To Coin A Republican Phrase To The Poor, Go Fend For Yourself! If you are reading here expecting a balanced accounting of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, stop now because you will be sorely disappointed. As a researcher and writer of politics, I take pride in reporting what the facts are and not the hyperbole. I say this because the events surrounding this conflict, when told from a non-bias perspective, will be difficult to absorb if all you know about this issue is from mainstream media outlets. I say don't expect a balanced accounting because this conflict is one of imbalance, and there can be no equilibrium when facts reveal there is severe civil injustice prodded by a people upon another people, which is the case in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.
Granted the American people have strong opinions about this conflict one way or the other. However, opinions do not equate to facts. For anyone to claim that there is or ever was balance in this conflict, he is either misinformed or in denial. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is covered in so much myth and double standard. For example. In PM Netanyahu's 2012 speech at the UN, you get a clear indication of the myth and double standard.
The Myth
PM Netanyahu begins his remarks with the assertion that Jews lay claim to the land based on a decree from King David some 3000 years ago. The Jews call it the "right of return." It's important to point out that these Jews marked for return were not the same Jews who were expelled some centuries ago by, if you know your Bible, GOD himself. See, if you know your Bible, this was not the first time GOD past judgment on these stiff-necked people (Bible's description, not mine). Also, these Jews who were earmarked for return were not descendants either. Calling these Jews descendants would liken me to calling myself the offspring of the Pilgrims . I make this point because what Jew is a descendant of Jesus? Oh, I forgot the Jews are just like the Muslims, they don't believe in Jesus. In actuality, the Jews claim some heritage to the land based on a Book more and more people today find suspect. The claim is Zionism, in a nutshell. You would expect that if a people[Jews] felt entitled to the land based on heritage they would accept that as a principle across the board.
You never hear a Jew or the American media expound on the " right of return," of the Palestinian people and if you do, it pales in comparison to the Jews in the biased American media. Then based on our source here in the House of Public Discourse you hear, in fact, Jews proclaiming that the Palestinians don't have the same rights. Hence, the " double-standard."
What's interesting about this double standard is in creating a land for one group of people [Jews]we created refugees out of another.[Palestinians] The major question in this issue you never hear asked or reported on is: Who were the indigenous people of the land historically, and which group of people were forced from their homes? In the Israeli -Palestinian Conflict, the people with the " Keys and the Deeds," were kicked out of their homes and forced to live as nomads. Our source explained there are Palestinians still living today who can show you where their family living area [Family Farm] was that is now an Israeli highway.
With this said, the reality is a small group of people denied rights to a large group of people and with such a case self-evident violence is a given. Conflict is a given. Civil-Injustice is a given.
This conflict is the granddaddy of all double standards. In the 2012 UN speech, PM Netanyahu relied on the Bible account of King David as the Jews claim to a heritage. However, many researchers and academia through exhaustive study question if he ever existed. King David to many is nothing more than a Jewish myth. Quoting the Bible may work fine in some circles but in this world today quoting the Bible as a source of authority is nothing more than the Dominionisism we have been following in our House blog.[See Source] [Read: The Counterfeit Promise Of Dominionism Doctrine]
We report this because archaeologists have dug up the Holy Land trying to find evidence and have turned up nothing on this great King David of the Bible.
Here is the reality. Right now! This minute! Palestinians are being kicked out of their homes and forced into exile by the use of force in order to prove that this mythical figure existed.[Palestinian Point of View]
America's attitude is changing on this. America's Fed Up With Israel.
Now, in the present, we have these 47 traitors from the Republican Party have us clamoring for war once again. Their behavior is nothing new. It's their obstruction and sedition made ready by gerrymandered safe zones.[ Read: Has Liberty Given Way To Gerrymanding?] We should get our perspectives aligned with the truth and balance on this issue that is clearly unbalanced.
Many feel it's way past time for America to revisit its foreign relations with Israel. This relationship and the need for support from the [Jewish Lobby] has driven U.S. policy in the region long enough.
Israel has had such control over our foreign policy in the area we should be in " let's start over mode." Millions upon Millions are at stake in campaign contributions. You factor in the Jewish owned Press, and we see where this imbalance originates. Sincerely.
Both parties need to reevaluate attitudes based on the fact that growing numbers of Americans are asking legitimate questions about why we spend so much of our money on Israel. [See Source]
The poll echoes a Gallup survey from last week.Gallup asked Americans whether they thought Israel's recent actions were justified. While older Americans clearly sided with Israel, 18 to 29-year olds said by a two-to-one margin (51-25) that its actions were unjustified. No other group was as strongly opposed to Israel's actions.
The National Journal's Ron Fournier had this take on the demographic split: "...it's a warning that Israel's decades-old public relations and political dominance is coming to an end unless the nation's leaders change the narrative and reset their strategic position with moderate Palestinians."
Our President
President Obama's diplomatic efforts with Iran are totally within his sphere of authority, moreover, represent the attitudes of the people who voted him into office. As of the rendition of this writing, some untold thousands and growing daily have signed a petition to bring these senators to trial. The letter these 47 Senators sent to Iran was not only the biggest example of congressional overreach but also it was a national embarrassment and disgrace and clearly obstruction of justice for lack of term. It is clear as the nose on one's face they[GOP] were trying to undermine our president's role and duty to carry out foreign policy deemed in the best interest of the people who elected him. How American! Based on the petition circulating there is a growing pulse for Civil Justice in this case. There should be a case. [Johnny Hill-House of Public Discourse]
There is much distrust in American foreign policy globally. Unfortunately, we are not that shining city on the hill President Reagan spoke. The Bush Administration has seen to that. What we do not hear much about is the impact of this letter and why this effect reaches the level of treason. This stunt by the GOP may be one of the dumbest, most criminal acts done with malice and aforethought with an arrogance that " Act of Treason," is a valid question. Hypothetically, harken back to the 1960's when President Kennedy[JFK] and Russia were staring each other down and people were constructing fallout shelters. What if a bunch of GOP Senators had written a letter to Russia telling them that negotiating with President Kennedy was in vain?
Moreover, think about it. What this letter said to Iran was no matter what you and Obama work out we going to bomb you in two years when we take the White House.
The effect has been to throw a wrench into the possible peaceful resolution to a 30-year-old conflict. Moreover, there is this American arrogance that suggests we hold the high ground in the issue internationally. Russian and China, to name a few, are doing business with Iran in spite of Israel and America. Its imminent focus to sabotage the talks has failed, but it gives Iranian officials a moment of pause on the political future of America. This letter is proof positive that the Senate can't be trusted with diplomatic issues. The Logan Act got it right.
