Posts Tagged ‘MITT ROMNEY’
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLORADO, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on May 4, 2015 at 12:29 am
Among the major accomplishments of the National Rifle Association:
- In July, 2005, George Zimmerman was arrested for shoving a police officer during an underage drinking raid. The charges were dropped after he completed an alcohol education program. That same summer, his ex-fiancée filed a restraining order against him, alleging that Zimmerman hit her.
- Yet he was allowed to carry a loaded, hidden handgun as a Florida resident–thanks to the 2005 “Stand Your Ground” law the NRA had rammed through the legislature.
- Under that law: A Concealed Carry Permit is revoked only if a gun owner is convicted of a felony. It is not suspended if he’s being investigated for a felony. It is suspended only if he is actually charged.

George Zimmerman
- On February 26, 2012, Zimmerman shot unarmed, 17-year-oldTrvon Martin, who was wearing a “hoodie.” A jury subsquently acquitted him, believing his claim of “self-defense.”
- In March, the NRA issued its own version of a “hoodie”–the Concealed Carry Hooded Sweatshirt, designed to hide firearms. Selling on the NRA’s website for $60 to $65, it is advertised thusly:
- “Inside the sweatshirt you’ll find left and right concealment pockets. The included Velcro®-backed holster and double mag pouch can be repositioned inside the pockets for optimum draw. Ideal for carrying your favorite compact to mid-size pistol, the NRA Concealed Carry Hooded Sweatshirt gives you an extra tactical edge, because its unstructured, casual design appears incapable of concealing a heavy firearm – but it does so with ease!” http://www.nrastore.com/nrastore/ProductDetail.aspx?c=11&p=CO+635&ct=e

- Anyone—including convicted criminals—can buy these “hide-a-gun” sweatshirts, putting both the public and law enforcers at deadly risk.
- The NRA often claims that law-abiding citizens defend themselves with guns millions of times every year. But the FBI has determined that, of the approximately 11,000 gun homicides every year, fewer than 300 are justifiable self-defense killings.
- The NRA supports loopholes that allow criminals to buy guns without background checks, or allow terrorists to buy all the AK-47s they desire.
- The NRA’s executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, declared the NRA was “all in” to defeat Barack Obama in 2012. Yet the President had meekly signed legislation allowing guns to be brought into national parks and onto trains.
- High-capacity magazines were prohibited under the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban–which expired in 2004. The NRA–aided by the Bush administration and Republicans generally–easily overcame efforts to renew the law.
- Political scientist Robert Spitzer, author of the book The Politics of Gun Control,notes that since the passage of the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the assault weapons ban in 1994, state and national laws have been drifting toward more open gun access:
- “In 1988, there were about 18 states that had state laws that made it pretty easy for civilians to carry concealed hand guns around in society. By 2011, that number is up to 39 or 40 states having liberalized laws, depending on how you count it, and the NRA has worked very diligently at the state level to win political victories there, and they’ve really been quite successful.”
- On January 8, 2011, Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head while meeting with constituents outside a,Tucson, Arizona, grocery store. Also killed was Arizona’s chief U.S. District judge, John Roll, who had just stopped by to see his friend Giffords after celebrating Mass. The total number of victims: 6 dead, 13 wounded.
- “The NRA’s response to the Tucson shootings has been to say as little as possible and to keep its head down,” said Spitzer. “And their approach even more has been to say as little as possible and to simply issue a statement of condolence to the families of those who were injured or killed and to wait for the political storm to pass over and then to pick up politics as usual.”
- This is the standard NRA response to each continuing massacre.
- In the spring of 2012, the House Oversight Committee prepared to vote on whether to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for allegedly refusing to provide documents related to “Fast and Furious.” This was an undercover operation launched by the Bush administration to track firearms being sold to Mexican drug cartels.
- The NRA notified Congressional members that how they voted would reflect how the NRA rated them in “candidate evaluations” for the November elections. This amounted to blatant extortion, since the NRA had long accused Holder of having an “anti-gun” agenda.
Summing up the still-current state of gun politics in America, the April 21, 2012 edition of The Economist noted:
“The debate about guns is no longer over whether assault rifles ought to be banned, but over whether guns should be allowed in bars, churches and colleges.”
That is precisely the aim of the NRA–an America where anyplace, anytime, can be turned into the O.K. Corral.
So what should the surviving victims of the Aurora massacre do to seek redress? And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on May 1, 2015 at 12:07 am
On July 20, 2012, James Holmes slaughtered 12 Aurora, Colorado, moviegoers and critically wounded another 58.
On May 4, 2015, he finally goes on trial.
Even his attorneys admit he staged the masscare.
Of course, they’re claiming he was insane at the time and thus not responsible for his actions. And certainly not deserving of the death penalty.
But there is another culprit whose presence at the trial makes it the proverbial elephant in the room.
The National Rifle Association (NRA).
Like Al Qaeda, the NRA promotes violence on an unprecedented scale. Yet there are profound differences in the way Americans view these organizations.
Consider:
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists snuffed out the lives of 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania.

The World Trade Center under attack on 9/11
For more than ten years, the United States–through its global military and espionage networks–has relentlessly hunted down most of those responsible for that September carnage.
On May 1, 2011, U.S. Navy SEALS invaded Osama bin Laden’s fortified mansion in Abbottabad, Pakistan–and shot Al Qaeda’s leader dead.

Navy SEALS
Turning from foreign death-dealers to domestic ones: According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence:
Every day–365 days a year:
- 270 people in America, 47 of them children and teens, are shot in murders, assaults, suicides, accidents and police intervention;
- 87 people die from gun violence, 33 of them murdered;
- 8 children and teens die from gun violence;
- 183 people are shot, but survive their gun injuries;
- 38 children and teens are shot, but survive their gun injuries.
And what does all of this add up to?
- In one year, almost 100,000 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, suicides, accidents, or by police intervention.
- Over a million Americans have been killed with guns since 1968, when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated.
- U.S. homicide rates are 6.9 times higher than rates in 22 other populous high-income countries combined, despite similar non-lethal crime and violence rates. The firearm homicide rate in the U.S. is 19.5 times higher.
- Gun violence impacts society in numerous ways: medical costs; costs of the criminal justice system; security precautions; and reductions in quality of life owing to fear of gun violence.
- An estimated 41% of gun-related homicides would not occur under the same circumstances had no guns been present.
(This average annual estimated composite picture of gun violence is based on death certificates and estimates from emergency room admissions.)
And who, more than anyone (including the actual killers themselves) has made all this carnage possible?
The National Rifle Association, of course.
But unlike the leadership of Al Qaeda, that of the NRA is not simply known, but celebrated. Its director, Wayne LaPierre, is courted as a rock star by Democrats and Republicans seeking NRA endorsements–and campaign contributions.

Wayne LaPierre
He frequently appears as an honored guest at testimonial dinners and political conventions.
The largest of the 13 national pro-gun groups, the NRA has nearly 4 million members, who focus most of their time lobbying Congress for unlimited “gun rights.”
The NRA claims that its mission is to “protect” the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
NRA members conveniently ignore the first half of that sentence: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State….”
For the NRA, the Second Amendment is the Constitution, and the rest of the document is a mere appendage.
At the time Congress ratified the Constitution in 1788, the United States was not a world power.
A mere 26 years later, the British seized and burned Washington, D.C., after repeatedly defeating American armies. On the frontier, settlers had to defend themselves against hostile Indians and marauding bandits.
Only after World War II did the country maintain a powerful standing army during peacetime.
But World War II ended 70 years ago, and today the United States is a far different country than it was in 1788:
- It boasts a nuclear arsenal that can turn any country into nuclear ash–anytime an American President decides to do so.
- It boasts an Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps that can target any enemy, anywhere in the world.
- Its Special Forces–Green Berets, Delta Force and Navy SEALs–are rightly feared by international terrorists.
- American Intelligence has come a long way since 9/11. The FBI’s top priority is to prevent another such terrorist attack, not simply investigate it afterward.
- And waging war on criminals generally are about 836,787 full-time sworn local/state/Federal law enforcement officers.
If a criminal flees or conducts business across state lines, powerful Federal law enforcement agencies–such as the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration–can put him out of business.
But apparently the NRA hasn’t gotten the word.
- The NRA has steadfastly defended the right to own Teflon-coated “cop killer” bullets,” whose only purpose is to penetrate bullet-resistant vests worn by law enforcement officers.

“Cop-killer” bullets
- The NRA and its lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, is responsible for the “stand-your-ground” ordinances now in effect in more than half the states. These allow for the use of deadly force in self-defence, without any obligation to attempt to retreat first.
- The NRA rushed to the defense of accused murderer George Zimmerman, the self-appointed “community watchman” who ignored police orders to stop following 17-year-old Trayvon Martin and ended up shooting him.
- Police did not initially charge Zimmerman because of Florida’s “Stand-Your-Ground” law, which the NRA had rammed through the legislature.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLORADO, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on April 30, 2015 at 9:01 am
It had happened it before–all too many times before:
- Midnight vigils for the victims of yet another spree-killer.

- Makeshift memorials of flowers, candles and teddy bears.
- Grief counselors for students at elementary, junior high and high schools.
- And, of course, the inevitable question: “Why?”
And Americans had seen it all before–-too many times before:
- After the San Ysidro McDonald’s shootings, 1984: 21 dead, 19 wounded.
- After the 101 California Street shootings in San Francisco, 1993: 9 dead, 6 injured.
- After the Columbine High School shootings in Colorado, 1999: 15 dead, 21 wounded.
- After the Virginia Tech shootings, 2007: 32 dead, 23 wounded.
- After the Tucson shootings, 2011: 6 dead, 13 wounded.
And then, on July 20, 2012, came the massacre at the Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado: 12 dead, 58 wounded.
People who wanted nothing more than to see a movie they were eagerly anticipating: The latest addition to the hugely popular “Batman” franchise: The Dark Knight Rises.

The scene of the crime: The Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado
Snuggled into their seats, some eating popcorn or candy, others sipping sodas. None of them expecting that the violence on the screen would suddenly consume them in real-life.
It was a scene of which nightmares are made:
- A sudden eruption of smoke and fire as a tear-gas canister explodes.
- A lone gunman–brandishing a Smith & Wesson AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, a 12-gauge Remington Model 870 shotgun, and a G23 .40 caliber Smith & Wesson Glock pistol.
- First he blasts the ceiling with a shotgun, and then opens fire on the audience, stopping only to reload his weapon.
- He begins aiming at the back of the room, and then targets people who are scrambling to escape in the aisles.
- Some bullets penetrate the wall of the cinema and injure people in an adjoining theater, where the same film is being screened.
- Adding to the nightmarish quality of the scene: The appearance of the gunman–dressed all in black: a ballistic helment, vestand leggings; a throat protector; a groin protector; a gas mask; and black tactical gloves.
As terrible as the massacre was, it could have been worse.
Police arrived in about 90 seconds and arrested the shooter, James Holmes, in the parking lot of the Century 16 Theater he had just ravaged.
Still, the statistics were terrible enough:
- Twelve people–several of them heroes who died shielding others with their bodies–would never return to those who loved them.
- Of the 58 wounded, an unknown number would be physically scarred for life.
- Some would never fully recover from their injuries.
- They would not be able to walk. Or see. Or use their arms or hands.
- Almost all those who were in that theater–-even those who escaped without a scratch-–would be emotionally tormented for months or years to come.
- Some would never escape those moments of murderous insanity.
It’s possible that Holmes, then 24, an honors graduate of the University of California Riverside, became that most lethal specimen: The genius who slides into madness.

James Holmes
Holmes moved to the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Aurora in May, 2011, to pursue a PhD in neuroscience.
He had always excelled in his studies, but in early 2012, his grades took a sharp decline. In June, he told the college that he was going to drop out.
Meanwhile, he was amassing an arsenal of weapons and ammunition.
He bought two Glock pistols, a semi-automatic rifle and a shotgun over the last two months from local gun stores and 6,000 rounds of ammunition via the Internet–-all purchased legally under state law.
In early July, 2012, Holmes ordered the paramilitary bulletproof clothing and gas mask that he intended to wear on his rampage.
Finally, he dyed his hair a shocking red-orange and rigged his university apartment with trip-wires and homemade booby-traps. When he was arrested, he told police: “I am the Joker.”
Commentators immediately began asking: Why did Holmes choose to snuff out the lives and dreams of so many people?
But a better question is: “How did he do it?”
It may never be finally known why he did it. But the answer to how makes clear a fundamental truth:
He could not have done it without access to the awesome firepower he was legally able to purchase:
- The AR-15 semi-automatic rifle is designed for easy reloading. “Even without the grand-sized mag[azine]s, many people who are practiced can reload in 1½ to 2 seconds,” said Steven Howard, a Michigan attorney and security and firearms expert.

And who has made all of this mayhem not only possible but politically invincible?
Who ultimately bears responsibility not only for those murdered and maimed at an Aurora theater but for the almost 100,000 people who are killed or wounded every year from gun violence?
Your friends at the National Rifle Association.

ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, CALVIN COOLIDGE, CBS NEWS, CNN, DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGS THEORY, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, EMPLOYMENT, FACEBOOK, INCOME INEQUALITY, JOHN BOEHNER, MARK SHIELDS, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, OBAMACARE, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLUTOCRACY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 24, 2015 at 12:15 am
If passed by Congress and vigorously enforced by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor, an Employers Responsibility Act would ensure full-time, permanent and productive employment for millions of capable, job-seeking Americans.
Among its remaining provisions:
(10) CEOs whose companies employ illegal aliens would be held directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates. Upon conviction, the CEO would be sentenced to a mandatory prison term of at least ten years.
This would prove a more effective remedy for controlling illegal immigration than stationing tens of thousands of soldiers on the U.S./ Mexican border.
With CEOs forced to account for their subordinates’ actions, they would take drastic steps to ensure their companies complied with Federal immigration laws.

(11) The seeking of “economic incentives” by companies in return for moving to or remaining in cities/states would be strictly forbidden.
Such “economic incentives” usually:
- allow employers to ignore existing laws protecting employees from unsafe working conditions;
- allow employers to ignore existing laws protecting the environment;
- allow employers to pay their employees the lowest acceptable wages, in return for the “privilege” of working at these companies; and/or
- allow employers to pay little or no business taxes, at the expense of communities who are required to make up for lost tax revenues.
(12) Employers who continue to make such overtures would be prosecuted for attempted bribery or extortion:
- Bribery, if they offered to move to a city/state in return for “economic incentives,” or
- Extortion, if they threatened to move their companies from a city/state if they did not receive such “economic incentives.”
This would protect employees against artificially-depressed wages and unsafe working conditions; protect the environment in which these employees live; and protect cities/states from being pitted against one another at the expense of their economic prosperity.
(12) The U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor would regularly monitor the extent of employer compliance with the provisions of this Act.
Among these measures: Sending undercover agents, posing as highly-qualified job-seekers, to apply at companies—and then vigorously prosecuting those employers who blatantly refused to hire despite their proven economic ability to do so.
This would be comparable to the long-time and legally-validated practice of using undercover agents to determine compliance with fair-housing laws.
(13) The Justice Department and/or the Labor Department would be required to maintain a publicly-accessible database on those companies that had been cited, sued and/or convicted for such offenses as
- discrimination,
- harassment,
- health and/or safety violations or
- violating immigration laws.
Employers would be legally required to regularly provide such information to these agencies, so that it would remain accurate and up-to-date.
Such information would arm job applicants with vital information about the employers they were approaching. They could thus decide in advance if an employer is deserving of their skills and dedication.
As matters now stand, employers can legally demand to learn even the most private details of an applicant’s life without having to disclose even the most basic information about themselves and their history of treating employees.
* * * * *
Reform starts with facing the truth–however painful–for what it is. And with seeing one’s enemies–however powerful–for what they are.
For thousands of years, otherwise highly intelligent men and women believed that kings ruled by divine right. That kings held absolute power, levied extortionate taxes and sent countless millions of men off to war–all because God wanted it that way.
That lunacy was dealt a deadly blow in 1776 when American Revolutionaries threw off the despotic rule of King George III of England.
But today, millions of Americans remain imprisoned by an equally outrageous and dangerous theory: The Theory of the Divine Right of Employers.
Summing up this employer-as-God attitude, Calvin Coolidge still speaks for the overwhelming majority of employers and their paid shills in government:
“The man who builds a factory builds a temple, and the man who works there worships there.”
America can no longer afford such a dangerous fallacy as the Theory of the Divine Right of Employers.
The solution lies in remembering that the powerful never voluntarily surrender their privileges.
Americans did not win their freedom from Great Britain–-and its enslaving doctrine of “the Divine Right of Kings”-–by begging for their rights.
And Americans will not win their freedom from their corporate masters–-and the equally enslaving doctrine of “the Divine Right of Employers”––by begging for the right to work and support themselves and their families.
And they will most certainly never win such freedom by supporting right-wing political candidates whose first and only allegiance is to the corporate interests who bankroll their campaigns.
Corporations can–and do–spend millions of dollars on TV ads, selling lies–lies such as the “skills gap,” and how if the wealthy are forced to pay their fair share of taxes, jobs will inevitably disappear.
But Americans can choose to reject those lies–and demand that employers behave like patriots instead of predators.
ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, CALVIN COOLIDGE, CBS NEWS, CNN, DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGS THEORY, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, EMPLOYMENT, FACEBOOK, INCOME INEQUALITY, JOHN BOEHNER, MARK SHIELDS, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, OBAMACARE, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLUTOCRACY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 23, 2015 at 12:01 am
An Employers Responsibility Act (ERA) would quickly return millions of willing-to-work Americans to fulltime, permanent employment.
Such legislation would legally require employers to demonstrate as much initiative for hiring as job-seekers are now expected to show in searching for work.
Among the provisions of a nationwide Employers Responsibility Act:
(1) American companies that close plants in the United States and open others abroad would be forbidden to sell products made in those foreign plants within the United States.
This would protect both American and foreign workers from employers seeking to profit at their expense. American workers would be ensured of continued employment. And foreign laborers would be protected against substandard wages and working conditions.
Companies found violating this provision would be subject to Federal criminal prosecution. Guilty verdicts would result in heavy fines and lengthy imprisonment for their owners and top managers.
(2) Large companies (those employing more than 100 persons) would be required to create entry-level training programs for new, future employees.
These would be modeled on programs now existing for public employees, such as firefighters, police officers and members of the armed services.
Such programs would remove the employer excuse, “I’m sorry, but we can’t hire you because you’ve never had any experience in this line of work.”
After all, the Air Force has never rejected an applicant because, “I’m sorry, but you’ve never flown a plane before.”
This Nation has greatly benefited from the humane and professional efforts of the men and women who have graduated from public-sector training programs.
There is no reason for the private sector to shun programs that have succeeded so brilliantly for the public sector.
(3) Employers would receive tax credits for creating professional, well-paying, full-time jobs.
This would encourage the creation of better than the menial, dead-end, low-paying and often part-time jobs which exist in the service industry. Employers found using such tax credits for any other purpose would be prosecuted for tax fraud.
(4) A company that acquired another–through a merger or buyout–would be forbidden to fire en masse the career employees of that acquired company.
This would be comparable to the protection existing for career civil service employees. Such a ban would prevent a return to the predatory “corporate raiding” practices of the 1980s, which left so much human and economic wreckage in their wake.
The wholesale firing of employees would trigger the prosecution of the company’s new owners. Employees could still be fired, but only for provable just cause, and only on a case-by-case basis.
(5) Employers would be required to provide full medical and pension benefits for all employees, regardless of their full-time or part-time status.
Increasingly, employers are replacing full-time workers with part-time ones—solely to avoid paying medical and pension benefits.
Requiring employers to act humanely and responsibly toward all their employees would encourage them to provide full-time positions—and hasten the death of this greed-based practice.
(6) Employers of all part-time workers would be required to comply with all Federal labor laws.
Under current law, part-time employees are not protected against such abuses as discrimination, sexual harassment and unsafe working conditions. Closing this loophole would immediately create two positive results:
- Untold numbers of currently-exploited workers would be protected from the abuses of predatory employers; and
- Even predatorily-inclined employers would be encouraged to offer permanent, fulltime jobs rather than only part-time ones—since a major incentive for offering part-time jobs would now be eliminated.
(7) Employers would be encouraged to hire to their widest possible limits, through a combination of financial incentives and legal sanctions.
Among those incentives: Employers demonstrating a willingness to hire would receive substantial Federal tax credits, based on the number of new, permanent employees hired per year.
Employers claiming eligibility for such credits would be required to make their financial records available to Federal investigators. Employers found making false claims would be prosecuted for perjury and tax fraud, and face heavy fines and imprisonment if convicted.
(8) Among those sanctions: Employers refusing to hire could be required, to prove, in court:
- Their economic inability to hire further employees, and/or
- The unfitness of the specific, rejected applicant.
Companies found guilty of unjustifiably refusing to hire would face the same penalties as now applying in cases of discrimination on the basis of age, race, sex and disability.
Employers would thus fund it easier to hire than to refuse to do so. Job-seekers would no longer be prevented from even being considered for employment because of arbitrary and interminable “hiring freezes.”
(9) Employers refusing to hire would be required to pay an additional “crime tax.”
Sociologists and criminologists agree that “the best cure for crime is a job.” Thus, employers who refuse to hire contribute to a growing crime rate in this Nation.
Such non-hiring employers would be required to pay an additional tax, which would be earmarked for agencies of the criminal justice system at State and Federal levels.
ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, CALVIN COOLIDGE, CBS NEWS, CNN, DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGS THEORY, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, EMPLOYMENT, FACEBOOK, INCOME INEQUALITY, JOHN BOEHNER, MARK SHIELDS, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, OBAMACARE, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLUTOCRACY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 22, 2015 at 12:10 am
Republicans, always ready to attack President Barack Obama, have found a new cause for blame: Obama is responsible for increased inequality.
“Frankly, the president’s policies have made income inequality worse,” House Speaker John Boehner said on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in January.
And he blamed Obamacare for the growing inequality:
“All the regulations that are coming out of Washington make it more difficult for employers to hire more people, chief amongst those, I would argue is Obamacare–which basically puts a penalty or a tax on employers for every new job they create.”
Even Mitt Romney has suddenly discovered that millions of Americans are suffering from income inequality.
Yes, that Mitt Romney–who famously said during his 2012 campaign for President: “Corporations are people, my friend”; “I like being able to fire people”; and “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”
“Under President Obama, the rich have gotten richer, income inequality has gotten worse and there are more people in poverty than ever before,” Romney told a crowd of Republican National Committee members in January.

Mitt Romney speaking on the USS Midway
“Their liberal policies are good every four years for a campaign, but they don’t get the job done,” he said from the deck of the USS Midway in San Diego.
“The only policies that will reach into the hearts of the American people and pull people out of poverty and break the cycle of poverty are Republican principles, conservative principles.”
Click here: The reinvention of Mitt Romney – Edward-Isaac Dovere – POLITICO
But syndicated political columnist Mark Shields has another reason for why millions of Americans can’t find jobs–or jobs that pay a living wage.
His culprit: International trade agreements.

Mark Shields
“They have been a disaster for American workers, a total disaster, beginning with NAFTA,” said Shields on the April 17 edition of the PBS Newshour.
“They have put all the power in the hands of the employer.
“The employer threatens, if you don’t go along, if you don’t surrender your bargaining rights, if you don’t surrender your health and pension benefits, if you don’t surrender collective union membership, we will move your job overseas.
“And as consequence of NAFTA some 22 years ago, documented by our own government, 755,000 jobs lost immediately, five million fewer American–five million fewer American manufacturing jobs than there were….
“We see it where all–the trade agreements, the investor class capital is protected, whether it’s copyrights or whatever, intellectual property, their investments. And they just pay lip service to workers’ rights….
“Median household income in the United States was lower in 2012 than it was in 1989. I’m not saying solely because of this, but largely because of this.
“If you want to see the dominance of capital that I think these trade agreements exemplify and embody, all you have to see is the 2008 crisis, economic crisis in this country.
“Millions of ordinary Americans saw their futures, their savings, their homes wiped out. And they got nothing in the way of relief.
“Those who had caused it, who had brought the country to its knees, the big banks and the investment houses of Wall Street, were bailed out by people. They were made whole.
“So, you had a choice. Who are you going to help and who you going to leave to make out for their own?
“We have capitalism for the rich and we have free enterprise, high risk for workers. And I just think this is what it exemplifies….American workers have lost their clout politically.”
Click here: Shields and Brooks on Pacific trade deal politics
Romney is right: “The rich have gotten richer, income inequality has gotten worse and there are more people in poverty than ever before.”
And so is Shields: “American workers have lost their clout politically.”
But what neither man offered was a solution–although one is available.
It is long past time for Americans to address the following evils for which employers are directly responsible:
- The loss of jobs within the United States owing to companies’ moving their operations abroad—solely to pay substandard wages to their new employees.
- The mass firings of employees which usually accompany corporate mergers or acquisitions.
- The widespread victimization of part-time employees, who are not legally protected against such threats as racial discrimination, sexual harassment and unsafe working conditions.
- The refusal of many employers to create better than menial, low-wage jobs.
- The widespread employer practice of extorting “economic incentives” from cities or states in return for moving to or remaining in those areas. Such “incentives” usually absolve employers from complying with laws protecting the environment and/or workers’ rights.
- The refusal of many employers to provide medical and pension benefits—nearly always in the case of part-time employees, and, increasingly, for full-time, permanent ones as well.
- Rising crime rates, due to rising unemployment.
The solution to these evils can be summed up in three words: Employers Responsibility Act (ERA).
If passed by Congress and vigorously enforced by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor, an ERA would ensure full-time, permanent and productive employment for millions of capable, job-seeking Americans.
And it would achieve this without raising taxes or creating controversial government “make work” programs.
BARACK OBAMA, FBI, CIA, MITT ROMNEY, COMMUNISM, JOHN F. KENNEDY, ABC NEWS, CNN, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, NBC NEWS, CBS NEWS, MAFIA, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, NEWT GINGRICH, CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO, FLORIDA, RICK SANTORUM, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, RON PAUL, COLD WAR, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, BAY OF PIGS, SAM GIANCANA, GUS RUSSO, LIVE BY THE SWORD, JOHN ROSELLI, ROBERT MCNAMARA
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 17, 2015 at 12:15 am
“John and Robert Kennedy knew what they were doing. They waged a vicious war against Fidel Castro–a war someone had to lose.”
So writes Gus Russo in Live By the Sword: The Secret War Against Castro and the Death of JFK, published in 1998.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy–referring to the 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor–had resisted demands for a “sneak attack” on Cuba by saying: “I don’t want my brother to be the Tojo of the 1960s.”
But in the fall of 1963, the Kennedys planned just such an attack on Cuba only one month before the November, 1964 Presidential election.

In what is almost certainly the definitive account of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Russo reaches some startling–but highly documented–conclusions:
- Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated Kennedy.
- He did it alone.
- Oswald, a former Marine, was a committed Marxist–whose hero was Castro.
- The CIA’s ongoing campaign to overthrow and/or assassinate Castro was an open secret throughout the Gulf.
- Oswald visited New Orleans in the spring of 1963.
- There he learned that Castro was in the crosshairs of the CIA.
- Oswald told his Russian-born wife, Marina: “Fidel Castro needs defenders. I’m going to join his army of volunteers.”
- Jack Ruby, a Dallas nightclub owner, murdered Oswald because he was distraught over Kennedy’s death.
- Ruby was not part of a Mafia conspiracy to silence Oswald.
- Skeptics of the Warren Commission–which concluded that Oswald had acted alone–asked the wrong question: “Who killed Kennedy?”
- They should have asked: “Why was he killed?”
- The answer–according to Russo: “The Kennedys’ relentless pursuit of Castro and Cuba backfired in tragedy on that terrible day in November, 1963.”

Lee Harvey Oswald
Another book well worth reading about America’s Cuban obsession during the early 1960s is American Tabloid, by James Ellroy.

Although a novel, it vividly captures the atmosphere of intrigue, danger and sleaziness that permeated America’s Cuba obsession in a way that dry, historical documents never can.
“The 50s are finished,” reads its paperback dust jacket. “Zealous young lawyer Robert Kennedy has a red-hot jones to nail Jimmy Hoffa. JFK has his eyes on the Oval Office.
“J. Edgar Hoover is swooping down on the Red Menace. Howard Hughes is dodging subpoenas and digging up Kennedy dirt. And Castro is mopping up the bloody aftermath of his new Communist nation….
“Mob bosses, politicos, snitches, psychos, fall guys and femmes fatale. They’re mixing up a Molotov cocktail guaranteed to end the country’s innocence with a bang.”
Among the legacies of America’s twisted romance with anti-Castro Cubans:
- Following the JFK assassination, there was a coverup–to safeguard the reputation of the United States government and that of its newly-martyred President.
- Thus, the CIA and FBI concealed the anti-Castro murder plots from the Warren Commission investigating Kennedy’s assassination.
- Other participating officials in the cover-up included Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and President Lyndon B. Johnson.
- This secrecy ignited the widespread–and false–belief that the President had died at the hands of a government conspiracy.
- Robert Kennedy feared that his relentless pursuit of Castro might have backfired against JFK, leading Castro to “take out” the President first.
- Fearing his own assassination if he continued Kennedy’s efforts to murder Castro, President Johnson ordered the CIA to halt its campaign to overthrow and/or assassinate the Cuban leader.
- The huge Cuban community throughout Florida–and especially Miami–continues to exert a blackmail influence on American politics.
- Right-wing politicians from Richard Nixon to Newt Gingrich have reaped electoral rewards by catering to the demands of this hate-obsessed voting block.
- As a result, the United States still refuses to open diplomatic relations with Cuba–even though it has done so with such former enemies as the Soviet Union, China and Vietnam.
- Cuban ex-patriots still hope that the United States will launch a full-scale military invasion of the island to remove Castro.
- These alleged Cuban patriots fear to risk their own lives by returning to Cuba and launching an uprising against him.
That crisis stemmed from our twisted obsession with Cuba, an obsession that continues today.
Texas Congressman Ron Paul is correct:
“But I think it’s time…to quit this isolation business of not talking to people. We talked to the Soviets. We talk to the Chinese. And we opened up trade, and we’re not killing each other now.
“We fought with the Vietnamese for a long time. We finally gave up, started talking to them, now we trade with them. I don’t know why…the Cuban people should be so intimidating.”
It’s time to end the half-century contamination of American politics by those Cubans who live for their hatred of Fidel Castro and those political candidates who live to exploit it.
It’s long past time to end this wag-the-dog relationship. A population of about 1,700,000 Cuban exiles should not be allowed to shape the domestic and foreign policy of a nation of 300 million.
Those who continue to hate–or love–Castro should be left to their own private feud. But that is a feud they should settle on their own island, and not from the shores of the United States.
BARACK OBAMA, FBI, CIA, MITT ROMNEY, COMMUNISM, JOHN F. KENNEDY, ABC NEWS, CNN, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, NBC NEWS, CBS NEWS, MAFIA, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, NEWT GINGRICH, CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO, FLORIDA, RICK SANTORUM, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, RON PAUL, COLD WAR, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, BAY OF PIGS, SAM GIANCANA, CARLOS MARCELLO, JOHN ROSELLI, ROBERT MCNAMARA
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 16, 2015 at 12:05 am
On April 17, 1961, the U.S. Navy landed 1,700 CIA-trained Cuban exiles ashore at Cuba’s Bay of Pigs.
President John F. Kennedy–wanting to disguise the role of the United States in the invasion–refused to commit U.S. Marines and Air Force bombers to the attack.
Long forewarned of the coming invasion, Fidel Castro sent in his forces to decimate the invaders.
Kennedy took responsibility for the failure. But privately he blamed Castro for refusing to be overthrown.
As a result, Kennedy and his brother, Robert–then Attorney General–created their own covert operation to depose Castro.

Robert and John F. Kennedy
Known as the Special Group, and overseen by Robert Kennedy, it launched a secret war against the Castro regime, code-named Operation Mongoose.
“We were hysterical about Castro at about the time of the Bay of Pigs and thereafter,” Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara later testified before Congress about these efforts. “And there was pressure from JFK and RFK to do something about Castro.”

Robert S. McNamara
Nor was everyone in the CIA enthusiastic about the “get Castro” effort.
“Everyone at CIA was surprised at Kennedy’s obsession with Fidel,” recalled Sam Halpern, who was assigned to the Cuba Project. “They thought it was a waste of time. We all knew [Castro] couldn’t hurt us. Most of us at CIA initially liked Kennedy, but why go after this little guy?
“One thing is for sure: Kennedy wasn’t doing it out of national security concerns. It was a personal thing. The Kennedy family felt personally burnt by the Bay of Pigs and sought revenge.”
It was all-out war. Among the tactics used:
- Hiring Cuban gangsters to murder Cuban police officials and Soviet technicians.
- Sabotaging mines.
- Paying up to $100,000 per “hit” for the murder or kidnapping of Cuban officials.
- Using biological and chemical warfare against the Cuban sugar industry.
“Bobby (Kennedy) wanted boom and bang all over the island,” recalled Halpern. “It was stupid. The pressure from the White House was very great.”
Among that “boom and bang” were a series of assassination plots against Castro, in which the Mafia was to be a key player.
Chicago Mobster Johnny Rosselli proposed a simple plan: through its underworld connections in Cuba, the Mafia would recruit a Cuban in Castro’s entourage, such as a waiter or bodyguard, who would poison him.
The CIA’s Technical Services division produced a botulinus toxin which was then injected into Castro’s favorite brand of cigars. The CIA also produced simpler botulinus toxin pills that could be dissolved in his food or drink.
But the deputized Mafia contacts failed to deliver any of the poisons to Castro.

Fidel Castro
As Rosselli explained to the CIA, the first poisoner had been discharged from Castro’s employ before he could kill him, while a back-up agent got “cold feet.”
Other proposals or attempts included:
- Planting colorful seashells rigged to explode at a site where Castro liked to go skindiving.
- Trying to arrange for his being presented with a wetsuit impregnated with noxious bacteria and mould spores, or with lethal chemical agents.
- Attempting to infect Castro’s scuba regulator with tuberculous bacilli.
- Trying to douse his handkerchiefs, tea and coffee with other lethal bacteria.
Americans would rightly label such methods as “terrorist” if another power used them against the United States today. And the Cuban government saw the situation exactly the same way.
So Castro appealed to Nikita Khrushchev, leader of the Soviet Union, for assistance.

Nikita Khrushchev
Khrushchev was quick to comply: “We must not allow the communist infant to be strangled in its crib,” he told members of his inncer circle.
By October, 1962, the Soviet Union had sent more than 40,000 soldiers, 1,300 field pieces, 700 anti-airctaft guns, 350 tanks and 150 jets to Cuba to deter another invasion.
Khrushchev also began supplying Castro with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles–whose discovery, on October 15, 1962, ignited the single most dangerous confrontation of the Cold War.
Suddenly, the two most powerful nuclear countries–the United States and the Soviet Union–found themselves on the brink of nuclear war.

John F. Kennedy in the Oval Office
At the time, Kennedy officials claimed they couldn’t understand why Khrushchev had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba. “Maybe Khrushchev’s gone mad” was a typical musing.
None of these officials admitted that JFK had been waging a no-holds-barred campaign to overthrow the Cuban government and assassinate its leader.
The crisis ended when, after 13 harrowing days, Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba. Behind its resolution lay a promise by the Kennedy administration to not invade Cuba.
But President Kennedy was not finished with Castro. While continuing the campaign of sabotage throughout Cuba, the Kennedys were preparing something far bigger: A fullscale American invasion of the island.
On October 4, 1963, the Joint Chiefs of Staff submitted its latest version of the invasion plan, known as OPLAN 380-63. Its timetable went:
- January, 1964: Infiltration into Cuba by Cuban exiles.
- July 15, 1964: U.S. conventional forces join the fray.
- August 3, 1964: All-out U.S. air strikes on Cuba.
- October 1, 1964: Full-scale invasion to install “a government friendly to the U.S.”
But then fate–in the otherwise unimpressive form of Lee Harvey Oswald–suddenly intervened.
BARACK OBAMA, FBI, CIA, MITT ROMNEY, COMMUNISM, JOHN F. KENNEDY, ABC NEWS, CNN, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, NBC NEWS, CBS NEWS, MAFIA, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, NEWT GINGRICH, CUBA, FIDEL CASTRO, FLORIDA, RICK SANTORUM, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, RON PAUL, COLD WAR, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, BAY OF PIGS, SAM GIANCANA, CARLOS MARCELLO, JOHN ROSELLI, ROBERT MCNAMARA
In Politics, Bureaucracy, History, Social commentary, Military on April 15, 2015 at 12:10 am
On January 23, 2012, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul–all seeking the Republican nomination for President–attended a candidates’ debate in Tampa, Florida.
Gingrich, Santorum and Romney played to the huge–and influential–Cuban community in Florida, especially in Miami.
All three had carefully avoided military service. But all three “chickenhawks” now wanted to show how eagerly they could send others into harm’s way.
Former House Speaker Gingrich spoke for all three when he said: “The policy of the United States should be aggressively to overthrow the [Castro] regime and to do everything we can to support those Cubans who want freedom.”

Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul
Only Texas Congressman Ron Paul–who had served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963 to 1968–dared to call for normalization of relations between the United States and Cuba.
But even Paul’s courage ignored a great many ugly historical truths. Among these:

- In October, 1962, Castro stopped regularly scheduled travel between the two countries, and asylum seekers began sailing from Cuba to Florida.
- Between 1962 and 1979, hundreds of thousands of Cubans entered the United States under the Attorney General’s parole authority.
- The overwhelming majority of Cubans who immigrated into the United States settled in Florida, whose political, economic, and cultural life they transformed.
- By 2008, more than 1.24 million Cuban Americans were living in the United States, mostly in South Florida, where the population of Miami was about one-third Cuban.
- Many of these Cubans viewed themselves as political exiles, rather than immigrants, hoping to return to Cuba after its communist regime fell from power.
- The large number of Cubans in South Florida, particularly in Miami’s “Little Havana,” allowed them to preserve their culture and customs to a degree rare for immigrant groups.
- These discontented immigrants became a potential force for politicians to court.
- Unsurprisingly, most of their votes went to Right-wing Republicans.
John F. Kennedy was the first President to face this dilemma.

John F. Kennedy
During the closing months of the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the CIA had begun training Cuban exiles for an invasion of their former homeland.
The goal: To do what Castro had done–seek refuge in the mountains and launch a successful anti-Castro revolution.
But word of the coming invasion quickly leaked: The exiles were terrible secret-keepers. (A joke at the CIA went: “A Cuban thinks a secret is something you tell to only 300 people.”)
Kennedy insisted the invasion must appear to be an entirely Cuban enterprise. He refused to commit U.S. Marines and Air Force bombers.
The invasion force was quickly overwhelmed at the Bay of Pigs, with hundreds of its men taken prisoner.
Kennedy publicly took the blame for its failure: “Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan.” But privately he seethed, and ordered the CIA to redouble its efforts to remove Castro at all costs.
To make certain his order was carried out, he appointed his brother, Robert–then Attorney General–to oversee the CIA’s “Castro removal” program.
It’s here that America’s obsession with Cuba entered its darkest and most disgraceful period.
The CIA and the Mafia entered into an unholy alliance to assassinate Castro–each for its own benefit.
The CIA wanted to please Kennedy. The Mafia wanted to regain its casino and brothel holdings that had made Cuba the playground of the rich in pre-Castro times.
The CIA supplied poisons and explosives to various members of the Mafia. It was then up to the mobsters to assassinate Castro.
The available sources disagree on what actually happened. Some believe that the Mob made a genuine effort to “whack” Fidel.
Others are convinced the mobsters simply ran a scam on the government. They pretended to carry out their “patriotic duty” while in fact making no effort at all to penetrate Castro’s security.
The mobsters hoped to use their pose as patriots to win immunity from future prosecution.
The CIA asked John Roselli, a mobster linked to the Chicago syndicate, to go to Florida in 1961 and 1962 to organize assassination teams of Cuban exiles. They were to infiltrate their homeland and assassinate Castro.

John Roselli
Rosselli called upon two other crime figures: Chicago Mafia boss Sam Giancana and Santos Trafficante, the Costra Nostra chieftain for Cuba, to help him.
Giancana, using the name “Sam Gold” in his dealings with the CIA, was being hounded by the FBI on direct orders of Attorney General Kennedy.

Sam Giancana
BARACK OBAMA, MITT ROMNEY, ABC NEWS, CNN, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, NBC NEWS, CBS NEWS, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, DONALD TRUMP, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on March 18, 2015 at 11:09 am
On March 18, Right-wing businessman and “reality” television celebrity Donald Trump announced plans to form a presidential exploratory committee.
“I am the only one who can make America truly great again,” he declared.
With this in mind, it’s well to recall his behavior during the 2012 Presidential election.
On April 17, 2011, toying with the idea of entering the Presidential race, the always self-promoting Trump said this about Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and GOP candidate:
“He’d buy companies. He’d close companies. He’d get rid of jobs. I’ve built a great company. I’m a much bigger businessman and have a much, much bigger net worth. I mean my net worth is many, many, many times Mitt Romney.

Donald Trump
“Mitt Romney is a basically small-business guy, if you really think about it. He was a hedge fund. He was a funds guy. He walked away with some money from a very good company that he didn’t create. He worked there. He didn’t create it.”
Trump added that Bain Capital, the hedge fund where Romney made millions of dollars before running for governor, didn’t create any jobs. Whereas Trump claimed that he–Trump–had created “hundreds of thousands of jobs.”
So Romney himself may have been puzzled when Trump announced, on February 2, 2012: “It’s my honor, real honor, and privilege to endorse Mitt Romney” for President.
“Mitt is tough, he’s smart, he’s sharp, he’s not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love. So, Governor Romney, go out and get ‘em. You can do it,” said Trump.
And Romney, in turn, had his own swooning-girl moment: “I’m so honored to have his endorsement….There are some things that you just can’t imagine in your life. This is one of them.”

Mitt Romney
Throughout the 2012 Presidential race, Trump continued to “help” Romney–by repeatedly accusing President Barack Obama of not being an American citizen.
Had that been true, Obama would not have had the right to be President–since the Constitution says that only an American citizen can hold this position.
Of course, that was entirely what Trump wanted people to believe–that Obama was an illegitimate President, and deserved to be thrown out.
Come election night–and disaster for Romney. And Trump.
When it became clear that Romney was not going to be America’s 45th President, Trump went ballistic on Twitter. Among his tweets:
- More votes equals a loss…revolution!
- Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.
- We can’t let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
- The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!
- He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!
To put Trump’s rants into real-world perspective:
- According to Trump, the electoral process works when a Republican wins the Presidency. It only doesn’t work when a Democrat wins.
- “We should march on Washington” conjures up images of another Fascist–Benito Mussolini–marching on Rome at the head of his Blackshirts to sieze power. Which is no doubt what Trump would love to do himself.
- “The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!”
This is absurd on three counts (four, if you count Trump’s misspelling of “won”).
First, the 2012 Republican Platform spoke lovingly about the need for preserving the Electoral College:
“We oppose the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact or any other scheme to abolish or distort the procedures of the Electoral College.
“We recognize that an unconstitutional effort to impose ‘national popular vote’ would be a mortal threat to our federal system and a guarantee of corruption as every ballot box in every state would become a chance to steal the presidency.”
Second, the loser didn’t win: He lost. With votes still being counted (as of November 8) Obama got 60,652,238. Romney got 57,810,407.
Third, in 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote (50,999,897) to George W. Bush’s 50,456,002. But Bush trounced Gore in the Electoral College (271 to 266).
Still, that meant Bush–not Gore–would head the country for the next eight years. And that was perfectly OK with right-wingers like Trump.
It was only when Obama won the Electoral College count by 332 to 206 that this was–according to Trump–a “travesty.”
And Trump’s solution if voters dare to elect someone other than Trump’s pet choice: “Revolution!”
This comes perilously close to advocating violent overthrow of the government. Otherwise known as treason–a crime traditionally punished by execution, or at least lengthy imprisonment.
In 2016, Americans would do well to consider the implications of this in the case of Donald Trump.
9/11, ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, BARACK OBAMA, BATMAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLORADO, COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS, COP KILLER BULLETS, CRIME, ERIC HOLDER, FBI, FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, GREEN BERETS, GUN CONTROL, JAMES HOLMES, MITT ROMNEY, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE DARK NIGHT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TRAVON MARTIN, TUSCON SHOOTINGS, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WAYNE LAPIERRE, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
THE REAL CULPRIT IN THE “DARK KNIGHT” TRIAL: PART THREE (OF FOUR)
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on May 4, 2015 at 12:29 amAmong the major accomplishments of the National Rifle Association:
George Zimmerman
Summing up the still-current state of gun politics in America, the April 21, 2012 edition of The Economist noted:
“The debate about guns is no longer over whether assault rifles ought to be banned, but over whether guns should be allowed in bars, churches and colleges.”
That is precisely the aim of the NRA–an America where anyplace, anytime, can be turned into the O.K. Corral.
So what should the surviving victims of the Aurora massacre do to seek redress? And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Share this: