John Oliver Applauds Wendy Davis Filibuster, Slams Texas Republicans For 'One Of The Shadiest Moves Of All Time'

from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/john-oliver-wendy-davis-f_n_3509669.html

On Wednesday, after first celebrating the demise of DOMA, John Oliver then took some time to applaud the epic filibuster of Texas Senator Wendy Davis. Oliver explained, "I don't know if you watched our show last night. If you did, big mistake. You should not have done that. Why? Because you missed something incredible happening in the Texas State Senate."

After taking us through the superhuman feat that was Davis' effort – and suggesting that a sneaker endorsement might be in her future – Oliver took some swipes at Texas Republicans who tried to push the vote through anyway despite running out of time. Calling their attempt to subvert the rules "one of the shadiest moves of all time," Oliver at least credited the opposition's with being consistent.

"They simply believe that if late one night when you're swept away by your emotions you make a stupid mistake, you should always have a chance to fix it later and not have to live with the consequences."

Watch the clip above and then check out Kristen Schaal's effort to keep the fight going below.

rest at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/john-oliver-wendy-davis-f_n_3509669.html

America Is Raising A Generation Of Kids Who Can't Think Or Write Clearly

from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-war-against-humanities-2013-6?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=emailshare

Gulf Of Mexico's Dead Zone Will Be The Size Of New Jersey This Summer

from http://www.businessinsider.com/huge-dead-zone-predicted-in-gulf-2013-6?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=emailshare

Our Planet Is Exploding With Ocean Dead Zones

here http://www.businessinsider.com/map-of-worldwide-marine-dead-zones-2013-6?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=emailshare

Supreme Court Strikes Down DOMA, Restores Gay Marriage Equality in California

from http://truth-out.org/news/item/17222-supreme-court-strikes-down-doma-restores-gay-marriage-equality-in-california

Supreme Court syllabus striking down DOMA : link here

here http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_g2bh.pdf

@GlennBeck Defends Paula Deen - NOT SURPRISED

FROM http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/06/25/glenn-beck-defends-paula-deen/194588

Conservative commentator Glenn Beck ran to the defense of celebrity chef Paula Deen's right to use racial slurs without fear of being fired from her lucrative deals with the Food Network, QVC, and others. Deen came under fire after she admitted to using the racial slur on several occasions. Beck claimed her critics were engaging in "McCarthyism" and described Deen's words as "violations of political correctness, nothing more."

Deen is being sued by Lisa T. Jackson, a manager at Deen's restaurants in Georgia, over allegations of sexual and racial harassment. A deposition from the proceedings revealed that Deen repeatedly used racial slurs and other offensive language. From The Daily Beast:

In her testimony, Deen admits to using the N-word, reveals her ambivalence towards people watching pornography at a place of work, and--the arguably racist, definitely bizarre bit that's made headlines Wednesday--details the Southern plantation wedding of her dreams, in which black waiters serve guests slave-style.

In the aftermath of the deposition's release to the public, Deen issued a recorded apology. The Food Network announced that her contract will not be renewed, and QVC -- the home shopping network -- is reviewing their business relationship with Deen.

On his June 24 web show, Beck used the backlash against Deen as a platform to rant about what he believes is the active destruction of Constitutional principles, arguing that attacks on Deen over the content of her speech are symptomatic of the nation's decline. Remarkably, Beck invoked the name of African-American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. to defend Deen's use of racial slurs and attack the use of public boycotts -- a tactic King and others utilized to great effect during the civil rights movement.

http://mediamatters.org/embed/static/clips/2013/06/25/30706/blaze-gbp-20130624-deen

GOP aide @DonnyFerguson fails SNAP challenge, declares himself 'Undisputed SNAP Challenge Champion'

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/24/1218528/-GOP-aide-fails-SNAP-challenge-declares-himself-Undisputed-SNAP-Challenge-Champion

Hoo boy. Remember how Donny Ferguson, Rep. Steve Stockman's communications director, decided he'd show House Democrats and millions of food stamp recipients how it's done by living on a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program budget for a week, comfortably and with food left over?

About that.

Foiled by TSA.  Can't bring my #SNAPChallenge food on the plane with me, and I'm not paying $50 for the privilege of losing checked luggage.
— @DonnyFerguson

Although Ferguson had to buy more food while on the road, he's claiming that because he didn't eat more than the average SNAP budget, he is the "Undisputed SNAP Challenge Champion." According to the Dallas Morning News:

In an email, Ferguson said he didn't find out about the trip until Tuesday—a few days after he had bought the food and begun the challenge. He said if he would have planned differently had he known about the trip in advance.

But he still wins, see, because no person living on very little money ever in the history of all time had anything unexpected come up that left them with fewer resources than they expected! No SNAP recipient ever spilled or burned food, had food go bad thanks to a power outage or broken fridge, or otherwise found themselves short of the food they'd so carefully planned and budgeted. Certainly it's not like this exact problem came up in 2007 when then-Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) did the food stamp challenge and his peanut butter and jelly were confiscated by TSA. At the time, Ryan wrote:

I took my bag and walked towards the gate thinking about the 4 or maybe 5 meals that she had taken from me. What am I going to do now? It's not like I can just go to Safeway and grab another jar. I have .33 cents and a bag of cornmeal to last today and tomorrow.

No, Donny Ferguson is calling himself the Undisputed SNAP Challenge Champion because his unexpected loss of some of his food is unique and special and doesn't count. (Kidding! He's calling himself that because he's an asshole who doesn't begin to understand what the words "undisputed," "SNAP challenge," or "champion" mean. Just like he doesn't understand that his original planned SNAP diet of rice and beans, popsicles, cookies, and soft drinks is the kind of unhealthy, unvaried diet that counts as low food security and causes increased health care costs due to trifling conditions like diabetes.)

Supreme Court Voting Rights: Justices Strike Down Section 4

from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/supreme-court-voting-rights_n_3434730.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=062513&utm_medium=email&utm_content=FeatureTitle

'A Huge Defeat For The Civil Rights Community' - SCOTUS strikes down Sec 4 of Voting Rights Act

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/voting-rights-act-supreme-court_n_3429810.html

The Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act on Tuesday, the provision of the landmark civil rights law that designates which parts of the country must have changes to their voting laws cleared by the federal government or in federal court.

The 5-4 ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that "things have changed dramatically" in the South in the nearly 50 years since the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965.

The court's opinion said it did not strike down the act of Congress "lightly," and said it "took care to avoid ruling on the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act" in a separate case back in 2009. "Congress could have updated the coverage formula at that time, but did not do so. Its failure to act leaves us today with no choice but to declare [Section 4] unconstitutional. The formula in that section can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to preclearance."

The Voting Rights Act has recently been used to block a voter ID law in Texas and delay the implementation of another in South Carolina. Both states are no longer subject to the preclearance requirement because of the court's ruling on Tuesday.

"Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions," Roberts wrote.

"There is no doubt that these improvements are in large part because of the Voting Rights Act," he wrote. "The Act has proved immensely successful at redressing racial discrimination and integrating the voting process."

In his bench statement, Roberts said that Congress had extended a 40-year-old coverage formula based on "obsolete statistics and that the coverage formula "violates the constitution."

Congress, the court ruled, "may draft another formula based on current conditions." But given the fact that Republicans currently control the House of Representatives, many voting rights advocates consider it unlikely that Congress will act to create a new formula.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a wide-ranging dissent on behalf of herself and Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, justifying the continued vitality of the Voting Rights Act's preclearance provision.

"The sad irony of today's decision lies in its utter failure to grasp why the VRA has proven effective," Ginsburg wrote. "The Court appears to believe that the VRA's success in eliminating the specific devices extant in 1965 means that preclear­ance is no longer needed."

The court did not rule on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the preclearance requirement itself, which requires those affected states to have changes to their voting laws cleared by the Justice Department or a federal court in Washington, D.C., before they go into effect. Rather, the court ruled that the current formula that determines which states are covered by Section 5 is unconstitutional, effectively eliminating Section 5 enforcement, at least for the time being.

"In the Court's view, the very success of §5 of the Voting Rights Act demands its dormancy," Ginsburg wrote.

She said in her bench statement that in renewing Section 5 in 2006, Congress "found that 40 years has not been a sufficient amount of time to eliminate the vestiges of discrimination following nearly 100 years of disregard for the 15th Amendment."

The provision has proven "enormously successful" in increasing minority registration and access to the ballot and preventing a "return to old ways," Ginsburg said. Even in jurisdictions where discrimination may not be overt, "subtle methods" have emerged to diminish minority turnout, such as racial gerrymandering.

As for Section 4, Ginsburg wrote that "the record for the 2006 reauthorization makes abundantly clear [that] second-generation barriers to minority voting rights have emerged in the covered jurisdictions as at­tempted substitutes for the first-generation barriers that originally triggered preclearance in those jurisdictions."

"Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan and I are of the view that Congress' decision to extend the act and keep the formula was a rational one," Ginsburg said.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas reiterated his belief that Section 5 is also unconstitutional, a position he took in his dissent from the Court's previous encounter with the Voting Rights Act in 2009.

"However one aggregates the data compiled by Congress, it cannot justify the considerable burdens created by §5," Thomas wrote on Tuesday.

The Obama Justice Department, believing the court might strike down Section 5 in the 2009 case, devised a plan to react to the ruling. A Justice Department spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

Voting rights advocates condemned the Supreme Court's ruling.

"The Supreme Court has effectively gutted one of the nation's most important and effective civil rights laws," Jon Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said in a statement. "Minority voters in places with a record of discrimination are now at greater risk of being disenfranchised than they have been in decades. Today's decision is a blow to democracy. Jurisdictions will be able to enact policies which prevent minorities from voting, and the only recourse these citizens will have will be expensive and time-consuming litigation."

"Today's U.S. Supreme Court decision erases fundamental protections against racial discrimination in voting that have been effective for more than 40 years," Elisabeth MacNamara, president of the League of Women Voters of the United States, said in a statement. "Congress must act quickly to restore the Voting Rights Act."

"Today will be remembered as a step backwards in the march towards equal rights," said Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. "We must ensure that this day is just a page in our nation's history, rather than the return to a dark chapter."

"The Roberts Court proved again that it will not be deterred by Supreme Court precedent, the realities on the ground in our nation; nor will it defer to Congress even when the legislative branch is granted clear authority by the Constitution to remedy our nation's long history of discrimination against racial and language minorities," said J. Gerald Hebert of the Campaign Legal Center. "The Court today declared racism dead in this country despite mountains of evidence to the contrary."

UPDATE: 12:00 p.m. -- President Barack Obama reacted to the Supreme Court ruling in a statement:

I am deeply disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision today. For nearly 50 years, the Voting Rights Act – enacted and repeatedly renewed by wide bipartisan majorities in Congress – has helped secure the right to vote for millions of Americans. Today's decision invalidating one of its core provisions upsets decades of well-established practices that help make sure voting is fair, especially in places where voting discrimination has been historically prevalent.

As a nation, we've made a great deal of progress towards guaranteeing every American the right to vote. But, as the Supreme Court recognized, voting discrimination still exists. And while today's decision is a setback, it doesn't represent the end of our efforts to end voting discrimination. I am calling on Congress to pass legislation to ensure every American has equal access to the polls. My Administration will continue to do everything in its power to ensure a fair and equal voting process.

rest http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/voting-rights-act-supreme-court_n_3429810.html

PRINT RETURNS - ON DROPBOX

PRINT RETURNS

@BP_America still dumping mercury, above federal levels, into Lake Michigan, despite pledge to clean it up

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-bp-mercury-20130623,0,3016940.story

Indiana gives BP a pass on mercury

After a 2007 Tribune investigation, BP pledged to tackle its Whiting refinery's toxic discharges into Lake Michigan. Today, state regulators allow the pollution to persist.

BP's Whiting refinery can legally discharge an annual average of 23.1 parts per trillion of mercury — nearly 20 times the federal water quality standard for Great Lakes polluters. A proposed new permit would allow that special exemption to continue indefinitely. (Zbigniew Bzdak, Chicago Tribune / April 1, 2013)

Faced with public outrage and congressional pressure, the oil company BP vowed six years ago to develop cutting-edge technology that could sharply reduce toxic mercury discharged into Lake Michigan by its massive refinery about 20 miles southeast of downtown Chicago.

BP enlisted scientists at Argonne National Laboratory and the Purdue-Calumet Water Institute to come up with methods that company officials said could set a model for factories and sewage treatment plants throughout the Great Lakes region. But despite promising results from two options tested, a new draft permit from Indiana regulators allows BP to avoid installing the mercury-filtering equipment at the Whiting refinery.

Under the terms of an earlier decision by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, the BP refinery can legally discharge an annual average of 23.1 parts per trillion of mercury — nearly 20 times the federal water quality standard for Great Lakes polluters. The proposed new permit would allow that special exemption to continue indefinitely.

Though the amount of mercury that BP's treatment plant puts into the lake is small compared with what falls into the water from air pollution, the federal limit of 1.3 parts per trillion reflects decades of research showing that even tiny drops of the brain-damaging metal can contaminate fish and threaten people. The Whiting refinery is among a handful of industrial polluters that still release mercury-laden wastewater into southern Lake Michigan, according to federal records.

In a letter to Indiana regulators, BP said it plans to keep testing the mercury-removal technology and promised to report back by 2015.

"BP is committed to following the rules, regulations and laws to protect Lake Michigan waters and maintain the lake's high quality," Mitch Beekman, the refinery's manager of health, safety, security and environment, said this month at a public hearing.

Environmental groups that have wrangled with BP for years about the refinery's pollution want the draft water permit overhauled to include legally enforceable deadlines.

"If good intentions were enough to improve water quality, we wouldn't need the Clean Water Act and pollution permits," said Ann Alexander, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "We don't want a permit that allows BP to just study this technology to death. They need to be using it."

BP's 2007 pledge to tackle its mercury problems came after a series of Tribune stories documented how Indiana had allowed the Whiting refinery to substantially increase the amount of toxic ammonia and suspended solids released into Lake Michigan, a move that ran counter to decades of efforts to clean up the Great Lakes. The newspaper also reported that Indiana had exempted BP from meeting the stringent federal limit on mercury water pollution.

Allowing BP to skirt environmental laws helped clear the way for a $3.8 billion expansion of the Whiting refinery that, when completed later this year, will upgrade the nation's seventh-largest refinery to process heavy Canadian crude oil from the tar sands region of Alberta. Indiana regulators justified the move in part by stating that the project will create thousands of construction jobs and 80 new refinery jobs.

Across the state border in Chicago, the public and political reaction to the newspaper's coverage was swift and sustained. Environmental groups gathered 100,000 petition signatures, then-Rep. Mark Kirk threatened to strip BP of lucrative tax breaks, Sen. Dick Durbin ran radio spots urging the public to speak out and then-Sen. Barack Obama and then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel urged congressional hearings. At Lollapalooza, Pearl Jam singer Eddie Vedder called for a BP boycott and led the crowd in a BP protest song.

After insisting for months that they couldn't come up with a solution, BP executives backed down and promised to abide by the terms of an older permit that imposed more stringent limits on ammonia, which promotes algae blooms that can kill fish, and on suspended solids, tiny particles of refinery sludge concentrated with mercury and other heavy metals.

Indiana gave BP until 2012 to meet the strict federal mercury limit but predicted the refinery would fail to meet the deadline. In late 2011, state regulators exempted the refinery from complying and set its mercury limit at 23.1 parts per trillion, allowing BP to continue legally violating the federal standard.

The proposed new permit renews the more stringent limits on ammonia and suspended solids for at least the next five years. But the wording leaves it to Indiana regulators to decide whether to reduce the refinery's mercury limit sometime in the future.

"We're not sure yet if the technology they've come up with will work on a bigger scale," said Bruno Pigott, assistant commissioner for water quality at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.

In contrast to 2007, when Indiana regulators steadfastly defended the permit they had awarded BP, they appear willing this year to consider changes suggested by environmental groups.

"We're not opposed to further refining the permit," Pigott said. "If there is a solution that really works, let's get that going."

In a 2012 report, researchers from Argonne and Purdue reported that they had successfully tested two technologies that reduced mercury concentrations in a portion of the treated refinery waste discharged into Lake Michigan. Both pilot tests met the federal mercury limit by pumping a stream of wastewater through special filters; one also doused it with a chemical used to reduce mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants.

The researchers estimated that installing equipment big enough to screen all of the BP refinery's wastewater would cost $21 million to $147 million.

BP, which reported a first-quarter profit of $4.2 billion, said more testing is needed to ensure the equipment works consistently. "We agree the results so far are promising," said Scott Dean, a company spokesman.

Faced with public outrage and congressional pressure, the oil company BP vowed six years ago to develop cutting-edge technology that could sharply reduce toxic mercury discharged into Lake Michigan by its massive refinery about 20 miles southeast of downtown Chicago.

BP enlisted scientists at Argonne National Laboratory and the Purdue-Calumet Water Institute to come up with methods that company officials said could set a model for factories and sewage treatment plants throughout the Great Lakes region. But despite promising results from two options tested, a new draft permit from Indiana regulators allows BP to avoid installing the mercury-filtering equipment at the Whiting refinery.

Under the terms of an earlier decision by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, the BP refinery can legally discharge an annual average of 23.1 parts per trillion of mercury — nearly 20 times the federal water quality standard for Great Lakes polluters. The proposed new permit would allow that special exemption to continue indefinitely.

Though the amount of mercury that BP's treatment plant puts into the lake is small compared with what falls into the water from air pollution, the federal limit of 1.3 parts per trillion reflects decades of research showing that even tiny drops of the brain-damaging metal can contaminate fish and threaten people. The Whiting refinery is among a handful of industrial polluters that still release mercury-laden wastewater into southern Lake Michigan, according to federal records.

In a letter to Indiana regulators, BP said it plans to keep testing the mercury-removal technology and promised to report back by 2015.

"BP is committed to following the rules, regulations and laws to protect Lake Michigan waters and maintain the lake's high quality," Mitch Beekman, the refinery's manager of health, safety, security and environment, said this month at a public hearing.

Environmental groups that have wrangled with BP for years about the refinery's pollution want the draft water permit overhauled to include legally enforceable deadlines.

"If good intentions were enough to improve water quality, we wouldn't need the Clean Water Act and pollution permits," said Ann Alexander, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "We don't want a permit that allows BP to just study this technology to death. They need to be using it."

BP's 2007 pledge to tackle its mercury problems came after a series of Tribune stories documented how Indiana had allowed the Whiting refinery to substantially increase the amount of toxic ammonia and suspended solids released into Lake Michigan, a move that ran counter to decades of efforts to clean up the Great Lakes. The newspaper also reported that Indiana had exempted BP from meeting the stringent federal limit on mercury water pollution.

Allowing BP to skirt environmental laws helped clear the way for a $3.8 billion expansion of the Whiting refinery that, when completed later this year, will upgrade the nation's seventh-largest refinery to process heavy Canadian crude oil from the tar sands region of Alberta. Indiana regulators justified the move in part by stating that the project will create thousands of construction jobs and 80 new refinery jobs.

Across the state border in Chicago, the public and political reaction to the newspaper's coverage was swift and sustained. Environmental groups gathered 100,000 petition signatures, then-Rep. Mark Kirk threatened to strip BP of lucrative tax breaks, Sen. Dick Durbin ran radio spots urging the public to speak out and then-Sen. Barack Obama and then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel urged congressional hearings. At Lollapalooza, Pearl Jam singer Eddie Vedder called for a BP boycott and led the crowd in a BP protest song.

After insisting for months that they couldn't come up with a solution, BP executives backed down and promised to abide by the terms of an older permit that imposed more stringent limits on ammonia, which promotes algae blooms that can kill fish, and on suspended solids, tiny particles of refinery sludge concentrated with mercury and other heavy metals.

Indiana gave BP until 2012 to meet the strict federal mercury limit but predicted the refinery would fail to meet the deadline. In late 2011, state regulators exempted the refinery from complying and set its mercury limit at 23.1 parts per trillion, allowing BP to continue legally violating the federal standard.

The proposed new permit renews the more stringent limits on ammonia and suspended solids for at least the next five years. But the wording leaves it to Indiana regulators to decide whether to reduce the refinery's mercury limit sometime in the future.

"We're not sure yet if the technology they've come up with will work on a bigger scale," said Bruno Pigott, assistant commissioner for water quality at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.

In contrast to 2007, when Indiana regulators steadfastly defended the permit they had awarded BP, they appear willing this year to consider changes suggested by environmental groups.

"We're not opposed to further refining the permit," Pigott said. "If there is a solution that really works, let's get that going."

In a 2012 report, researchers from Argonne and Purdue reported that they had successfully tested two technologies that reduced mercury concentrations in a portion of the treated refinery waste discharged into Lake Michigan. Both pilot tests met the federal mercury limit by pumping a stream of wastewater through special filters; one also doused it with a chemical used to reduce mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants.

The researchers estimated that installing equipment big enough to screen all of the BP refinery's wastewater would cost $21 million to $147 million.

BP, which reported a first-quarter profit of $4.2 billion, said more testing is needed to ensure the equipment works consistently. "We agree the results so far are promising," said Scott Dean, a company spokesman.

rest at http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-bp-mercury-20130623,0,3016940.story

Dirty secrets of the worst charities - Kids Wish Network tops list

from http://cironline.org/node/4603

The worst charity in America operates from a metal warehouse behind a gas station in Holiday, Fla.

Every year, Kids Wish Network raises millions of dollars in donations in the name of dying children and their families.

Every year, it spends less than 3 cents on the dollar helping kids.

Most of the rest gets diverted to enrich the charity's operators and the for-profit companies Kids Wish hires to drum up donations.

In the past decade alone, Kids Wish has channeled nearly $110 million donated for sick children to its corporate solicitors. An additional $4.8 million has gone to pay the charity's founder and his own consulting firms.

No charity in the nation has siphoned more money away from the needy over a longer period of time.

But Kids Wish is not an isolated case, a yearlong investigation by the Tampa Bay Times and The Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

Using state and federal records, the Times and CIR identified nearly 6,000 charities that have chosen to pay for-profit companies to raise their donations.

Then reporters took an unprecedented look back to zero in on the 50 worst – based on the money they diverted to boiler room operators and other solicitors over a decade.

These nonprofits adopt popular causes or mimic well-known charity names that fool donors. Then they rake in cash, year after year.

The nation's 50 worst charities have paid their solicitors nearly $1 billion over the past 10 years that could have gone to charitable works.

Until today, no one had tallied the cost of this parasitic segment of the nonprofit industry or traced the long history of its worst offenders.

Among the findings:

Click for larger image

Project Cure lists this storage space in Bradenton, Fla., as its office and mailing address.

Credit: John Pendygraft / Tampa Bay Times

• The 50 worst charities in America devote less than 4 percent of donations raised to direct cash aid. Some charities give even less. Over a decade, one diabetes charity raised nearly $14 million and gave about $10,000 to patients. Six spent nothing at all on direct cash aid.
   
• Even as they plead for financial support, operators at many of the 50 worst charities have lied to donors about where their money goes, taken multiple salaries, secretly paid themselves consulting fees or arranged fundraising contracts with friends. One cancer charity paid a company owned by the president's son nearly $18 million over eight years to solicit funds. A medical charity paid its biggest research grant to its president's own for-profit company.
   
• Some nonprofits are little more than fronts for fundraising companies, which bankroll their startup costs, lock them into exclusive contracts at exorbitant rates and even drive the charities into debt. Florida-based Project Cure has raised more than $65 million since 1998, but every year has wound up owing its fundraiser more than what was raised. According to its latest financial filing, the nonprofit is $3 million in debt.
   
• To disguise the meager amount of money that reaches those in need, charities use accounting tricks and inflate the value of donated dollar store cast-offs – snack cakes and air fresheners – that they give to dying cancer patients and homeless veterans.

rest http://cironline.org/node/4603

.@7eleven U.S. Seizes 14 7-Eleven Stores in Immigration Raids - abusing immigrants

from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/nyregion/us-seizes-14-7-eleven-stores-in-immigration-raids.html?hp&_r=0

More than a dozen 7-Eleven franchises took in more than $180 million in revenue by running a "modern-day plantation system," prosecutors in New York charged on Monday, built on the unpaid labor of dozens of illegal immigrants hired using sham Social Security numbers.

Federal authorities seized 14 7-Eleven stores on Long Island and in Virginia, arresting nine owners and managers, and seized property, including five homes. They are investigating 40 other 7-Eleven franchises in New York City and elsewhere in one of the largest criminal immigrant employment investigations ever conducted by the Justice and Homeland Security Departments, officials said.

Through the scheme, the defendants, who as franchisees for the parent company were licensed to use 7-Eleven buildings, trademarks and Slurpee and hot dog machines, recruited more than 50 illegal immigrants and gave them identities stolen from American citizens, including children and dead people.

The employees worked for 100 hours a week but were paid for a fraction of that time, and were forced to live in substandard housing owned by the operators of the convenience stores, the authorities said.

The store managers escaped notice, some for more than a decade, because the national company, 7-Eleven Inc., which has more than 7,600 stores in the United States, did not have safeguards in place to protect its payroll system from employee fraud, the authorities said. For example, two immigrant employees, one in New York and one in Virginia, used the same Social Security number to get paid.

There was "little to no effort to insure the integrity of their payroll system," said Loretta E. Lynch, the United States attorney in Brooklyn, whose office helped investigate the case.

A spokesman for 7-Eleven Inc., Scott Matter, said in a statement that the company would "take aggressive actions to audit the employment status of all its franchisees' employees" and was cooperating with federal authorities. The company, based in Dallas, is one of the largest operators of convenience stores in the world.

The raids come as Congress is debating a major overhaul of the immigration system, and Obama administration officials have been called upon to defend their record on enforcement against illegal immigration to convince skeptical lawmakers, many of them Republicans, that the nation is ready to grant legal status to undocumented immigrants.

Under the Obama administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has moved away from high-profile workplace raids in which dozens of workers in the country illegally were rounded up for deportation. Instead, agents from ICE, as the agency is known, have relied on audits of employers' hiring records to detect illegal immigrant workers.

The audits were low profile but often very effective at forcing illegal immigrants to leave their jobs.

Federal immigration officials said the wage theft and other abuses of the workers in the 7-Eleven case were the type of violation they now treat as a priority. Vincent Picard, an ICE spokesman, said the timing of the arrests was not related to the debate in Washington.

The case began two years ago when a 7-Eleven employee approached the New York State Police about not being paid for his work. Another worker later contacted the Suffolk County police.

The investigation led to two families and their associates with roots in Pakistan and the Philippines, who recruited from their own ethnic communities.

Farrukh and Bushra Baig, a married couple and American citizens from Pakistan who live on Long Island, owned and managed 12 stores in New York and Virginia along with Mr. Baig's brothers, Zahid and Shannawaz, and his associates, Malik Yousaf, Tariq Rana and Ramon Nanas. All have been charged.

A separate case was brought against two brothers, Ahzar Zia, a citizen of the United States and Pakistan, and Ummar Uppal, who the authorities said was an illegal immigrant. They own and control two stores in Suffolk County.

rest http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/18/nyregion/us-seizes-14-7-eleven-stores-in-immigration-raids.html?hp&_r=0

@hannity foxnews Hannity loved NSA Surveillance, claims it kept American safe, until Obama took office

http://freakoutnation.com/2013/06/12/watch-sean-hannity-loved-nsa-surveillance-claims-it-kept-american-safe-until-obama-took-office/

Watch: Sean Hannity loved NSA Surveillance, claims it kept American safe, until Obama took office

June 12, 2013

By Anomaly

Sean Hannity has been vocal recently in opposition of NSA surveillance but not so long ago he was so enamored with the agency, it was almost as if he was ready to perform fellatio on each employee while waving the American flag. He loves the NSA, unless a Democrat is in office. Unless, it's Obama.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sean Hannity before and now.  

Watch courtesy of Media Matters:

http://youtu.be/t27ie4qFlXM

rest at http://freakoutnation.com/2013/06/12/watch-sean-hannity-loved-nsa-surveillance-claims-it-kept-american-safe-until-obama-took-office/

Hero Mom Stands Up Against Officer For Sexual Assault In Front Of Her Two-Year Old Daughter

from http://www.policymic.com/articles/48133/hero-mom-stands-up-against-officer-for-sexual-assault-in-front-of-her-two-year-old-daughter

This is the kind of story that is so unbelievable that you have to see it to believe it. After this mother came into family court accompanied with her two-year-old daughter, she never expected to be taken away from her in handcuffs after making a simple complaint.

http://youtu.be/ytUl2Ie4E8Y

The disturbing incident happened in Clark County family court back in August 2011, when Monica Contreras went to court to settle a divorce case. Her husband requested a temporary restraining order against her during their divorce. After the man failed to show up to the court hearing, the request was dissolved by the judge.

What happens next is absolutely terrifying. Internal documents show that as the woman was leaving, a court marshal named Ron Fox stopped her and ordered her she be submitted to a random "drug search." Confused, she acquiesced and followed him into a room alone. 

"Contreras said Fox touched her buttocks, breast, and ordered her to lift up her shirt. A later internal investigation by Clark County courts validated her claims." reports CBS News affiliate 8 New Now.

The mother then returned to the courtroom and asked for a female marshal to conduct the search because she felt uncomfortable and violated. She said that Fox didn't cease his actions or stop to listen to her. "I think I'd rather have a female in here and he went anyway. I was just offended by it. I'm just offended that he asked me," Contreras explained in the court room. Judge Patricia Donninger ignored her and remained silent.

To the mother's utter shock and horror, Marshal Fox ordered Marshal James Kenyon to arrest her. "For what, sir? Why would I be arrested? Can you please tell me?" Contreras contested.

As the woman is being handcuffed right in front of the eyes of her two year-old child, she continues to beg them to explain why she would be arrested. That's when Marshal Fox replies: "Because of false allegations made against a police officer." According to 8 News Now, no law exists that would even support this arrest and it is also highly unlikely a sexual assault victim could legitimately be placed under arrest by the alleged assaulter.

rest at http://www.policymic.com/articles/48133/hero-mom-stands-up-against-officer-for-sexual-assault-in-front-of-her-two-year-old-daughter

.@JeffFlake Arizona Senator's Son Tweets Racist, Homophobic, Anti-Semitic Garbage

from http://gawker.com/arizona-senators-son-tweets-racist-homphobic-anti-se-512949916

That guy calling himself "N1ggerkiller" while playing the iPhone game "Fun Run" isn't just any racist teenage prick—it's the racist teenage prick son of Arizona Senator Jeff Flake!

And that's not all. Tanner Flake, the "high-school aged" son of Arizona's junior senator, has not been using social media best practices for a while now, as Buzzfeed's John Stanton discovered. Not only does the boy—seen here holding an enormous weapon of some kind—go by "N1ggerkiller" on "Fun Run," he calls people "Jews" and "faggots" on Twitter:

Tanner's since taken his Twitter account private, and his dad—a goofy-looking survivalist Mormon—apologized in a statement to Buzzfeed:

"I'm very disappointed in my teenage son's words, and I sincerely apologize for the insensitivity. This language is unacceptable, anywhere. Needless to say, I've already spoken with him about this, he has apologized, and I apologize as well."

Here are the screenshots of "Fun Run":

"To the faggot who stole my dirt bike from the church parking lot, I will find you, and I will beat the crap out of you" has the distinction of being the most Arizona sentence ever written.

WHAT ASSHOLE: Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader Loses It While Ramming Through Vaginal Ultrasound Bill

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/12/1215753/-VIDEO-Wisconsin-Senate-Majority-Leader-Loses-It-While-Ramming-Through-Vaginal-Ultrasound-Bill#

There isn't a lot of background needed on this. Wisconsin's Republican majority continued their self-proclaimed "laser focus" on jobs this morning by passing a bill forcing women seeking abortions to undergo an invasive vaginal ultrasound first - for "educational" purposes.

The ghouls promoting this state-sanctioned-rape bill decided they didn't have time for debate this morning, so watch what happened...

 http://youtu.be/2iRmaT9KIl4

Here is a portion of what Democratic State Senator Mark Miller had to say about this morning's events:

"Senate Majority Leader Fitzgerald, Senate President Ellis, and the Republican Senate majority conspired not only to limit debate, but also to violate Senate rules of procedure by suspending the rules without obtaining the super-majority consent required. The bill was referred to the Assembly in violation of Senate rules...."

Here is the reaction of State Senator Fred Risser, the longest-serving state legislator in American history:

I've been in the Legislature over 50 years, through different majorities and different minorities, and I have never experienced the abuse of power by the majority party that I experienced today.

The arrogance shown by the Republican Majority today is unprecedented. This is
supposed to be a democracy. The Senate is supposed to be a place where the elected
representatives of the citizens of the state debate issues. Cutting off debate, preventing female Senators from talking about women's issues, is not how we do things in Wisconsin and I am disgusted.

The Republican Majority is afraid. They were afraid that they would lose some of their
own members who were less than enthusiastic about the measure. They were afraid that they were losing the debate publicly so they had to ram the bill though so the public wouldn't find out what they are really up to and who they are beholden to. They're afraid of what's going to happen in the next election and they should be afraid.

Witnesses in the gallery reported that Majority Leader Mike Ellis, the man you see in the video, actually broke his gavel while pounding away and screaming at duly elected officials, ordering them to sit down and shut up.

REST http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/12/1215753/-VIDEO-Wisconsin-Senate-Majority-Leader-Loses-It-While-Ramming-Through-Vaginal-Ultrasound-Bill#

@speakerboehner in 900 days as SoH no jobs bills but obamacare repeal 38 times at cost of 1.45 mil each time

source https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.416444264254.190398.43179984254&type=1

Dem Elijah Cummings releases the transcript of a Republican IRS manager saying the White House had nothing to do with the scandal @DarrellIssa

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/09/elijah_cummings_outplays_darrell_issa/

Ranking Democrat Elijah Cummings of Maryland and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman Darrell Issa(Credit: AP)

Elijah Cummings wastes no time.

Just hours after the vice chair of the House Oversight Committee threatened Chairman Darrell Issa with releasing House Oversight Committee interview transcripts that clear the White House of wrongdoing in the IRS mess on CNN, AP already has the story: "a self-described 'conservative Republican' has told investigators that no one at the White House directed the Internal Revenue Service to target tea party groups."

The Maryland Democrat released a transcript Sunday of the committee investigators' interview with a manager of the IRS' Cincinnati office. The unidentified man told investigators that workers in that office instigated the reviews on their own, that he was unaware of a political motivation behind the extra scrutiny to conservative groups' applying for tax-exempt status, and that there was no evidence of any White House involvement.

You'll recall that a week ago, Issa told CNN's Candy Crowley that IRS agents "were directly being ordered from Washington," but he offered no proof, though he hinted of dark secrets his investigators had learned in their interviews with IRS staff. This Sunday, Cummings told Crowley he "begged" Issa to release the full transcripts – and promised her "If he does not release them, I will. Period…I'll release them by the end of the week." He didn't wait that long.

While Issa had acknowledged that at least one staffer told investigators he didn't see evidence of White House involvement, the full interview was more emphatic, Cummings said.

"He was a 21-year veteran," Cummings told Crowley. "He described himself in the interviews in response to a Republican attorney's question as a conservative Republican. Very significant. He is a conservative Republican working for the IRS. I think these interviews and these statements go a long way to showing the White House was not involved in this."

"Based upon everything I've seen, the case is solved. And if it were me, I would wrap this case up and move on."

Issa is unlikely to wrap up and move on, but Cummings showed he's not going to be a potted plant in the meantime. Nicely played, Mr. Vice-Chairman.

NSA has been collecting phone call data sine 2006 under Bush in case @gop & @foxnews forgot

source https://www.facebook.com/beingliberal.org

from CNN: Edward Snowden was source who leaked material from the National Security Agency per the Guardian

From: CNN Breaking News <BreakingNews@mail.cnn.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 2:13 PM
Subject: CNN Breaking News
To: textbreakingnews2@ema3lsv06.turner.com

The Guardian newspaper has named Edward Snowden, 29, as the source who leaked material from the National Security Agency.

His identity is being revealed at his request, the paper reported Sunday on its website.

He is a former technical assistant for the CIA and has been working at the NSA for the past four years as an employee of various outside contractors, the paper reported.

On Wednesday, the Guardian disclosed a secret order from a U.S. intelligence court that required Verizon Business Network Services to give telephone records detailing the time, location and telephone numbers involved in domestic calls from April 25 to July 19.

Thursday, the Washington Post and the Guardian disclosed the existence of PRISM, reporting that the program allows NSA analysts to extract details of customer activities -- including "audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents" and other materials -- from computers at Microsoft, Google, Apple and other Internet firms.

Follow complete coverage of breaking news on CNN TV, http://cnn.com and CNN Mobile.

*****************************************
Something new is brewing in the morning.
New Day on CNN.
Starts Monday, June 17 on CNN
Weekday Mornings 6-9am ET
CNN.com/NewDay
*****************************************

@reppaulryan Paul Ryan & 16 Other Hypocritial Republicans Caught Begging For Obamacare Funds

from http://occupydemocrats.com/paul-ryan-16-other-hypocritial-republicans-caught-begging-for-obamacare-funds/

You won't believe what The Nation magazine obtained through a Freedom of Information Act Inquiry: a list of 17 Republicans who secretly pursued Obamacare's medicaid expansion dollars while hypocritically slamming the law in public, as well as all of their letters begging for the funds from the big, bad federal government.

Every single one of the Republican congresspeople listed below, including master hypocrite Paul Ryan, have voted over 30 times to repeal the law while privately begging for its funding from the federal government.

The Nation calls this behavior "shameless hypocrisy" as well as evidence "of the fact that the Affordable Care Act bestows tangible benefits that even congresses most extreme right wing ideologues are hard-pressed to deny to their constituents".

While Tea Party Republicans literally believe "Obamacare" to be socialist Armageddon, some of their favorite representatives are making it clear that they are aware of the reality that the Affordable Care Act is a much-needed reform that will improve the life of millions of Americans, including their own constituents.

Why the corporate dominated mainstream media is likely to ignore this story, it is up to us to make some noise about the incredible hypocrisy of these Republican Congress people that publicly denounced a wonderful reform and then turn around and beg for money for its implementation.

Please do your part by sharing this and other related articles on social media forums.

Read all of their hypocritical letters here.

Senators
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX)
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX)
Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL)
Senator Rob Portman (R-OH)

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT, recently joined conservative AEI)

Congress members:
Rep Mary Bono Mack (R-CA)
Rep Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
Rep. David Valadao (R-CA)
Rep John Barrow (R-GA)
Rep Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Rep Gregg Harper (R-MS)
Rep Lee Terry (R-NE)
Rep Steve Pearce (R-NM)
Rep Bob Gibbs (R-OH)
Rep Kirsti Noem (R-SD)
Rep Michael McCaul (R-TX)
Rep Paul Ryan (R-WI) – his letter here

A conservative's story of why she left the Republican Party

from http://thebigslice.org/why-i-am-no-longer-a-republican/

When I began writing this I was overwhelmed with the desire to hit something…or vomit. Over the coming weeks that desire has lessened to a slow simmer of absolute disgust and dismay at what has become of the party that I used to love and support. I was once a Republican living in a red state. Today I'm a registered Democrat living in a blue state. This is my story and why I left the Republican Party.

It all started in 2007. I was a 27 year-old divorced woman with no children. I was a survivor of severe domestic abuse. I was single with no money, no home and no plan other than to try and be something more than what I was. I had a car, my clothes and hope.

After moving to a new state with the help of friends, I found a very cheap apartment in a part of town that I still cringe over. My 2 jobs at minimum wage didn't bring home enough for luxuries like choosing where to live and what to eat. There were days that I had to decide whether I was going to put gas in my car so I could get to work or eat. I always chose work. At least at one of my jobs I would get breakfast and lunch 2 days a week. I could make a $3.99 pizza with 8 slices last for 7 days. I could eat on a can of beans and a pack of crackers for even longer.

I applied to the local university in my town and went back to school while maintaining my two jobs. I took between 15-18 credit hours each semester while working. All of this was possible because of government loans and scholarships.

I went to counseling 2 times a week to work through my PTSD that was caused by the domestic violence I experienced. The church that the counselor worked out of paid for my appointments because I was too poor to pay for them and my counselor said I wouldn't improve mentally without them.

The biggest fear during this time was that I might get physically sick and need to go to the doctor. When you're poor, healthcare is something that you dream about. It's something that you pray you won't need. It's the anxiety of "what if" that keeps you awake at night. I went to work sick. I took finals while running a 104 fever. I ruptured 3 discs in my back and couldn't walk for a week. I wasn't able to get it treated for 3 years. I lost one of my jobs. I found another minimum wage job. It didn't offer health insurance.

Basic healthcare is not a luxury. It is not just for those that "deserve" it. In the country of abundance that we live in, healthcare should be affordable for every citizen. It's reprehensible that I can buy a DVD player for less than what it would cost me to go to the doctor and get an antibiotic. Here in the United States we have some of the best medical technology and doctors in the world. Why do we think that only a few of our citizens should be entitled access to them? Why didn't my Republican party see that? I was left with no answers.

The day I went to sign up for food stamps opened my eyes and changed everything. I had grown up in an upper middle class family. We were traditional, conservative and religious.

I need to break here for a moment and ask that as you read the "religious" part; that you would not confuse it with faith. These are 2 vastly different concepts. What some hold as religion is not the God of the Bible.

My family believed one pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps and never asked for help. It was a family that held firm to a Republican ideology that those on food stamps or "government handouts" were poor, uneducated and lazy individuals that just wanted to stay home and watch tv. These types of people were of the lowest kind. They were to be distrusted and almost hated. However, as I sat in the overcrowded room I looked around and saw people from all walks of life. You could see the desperation on their faces and the worry in every word. "I need help now. What do I do? Please help me." There was something else that was there too…something so tangible it was overwhelming. It was shame. That oppressive shame of having to say, "I can't do this on my own."

I left in tears never returning. My Republican roots and their mantra echoing in my ears…"Lazy, poor, ignorant….Shame!" I told myself I would rather starve.

Throughout this time I had been listening to the candidates' speeches in preparation for the 2008 election. I came from a very politically active family and there hasn't been a single election that I haven't known about and had an "opinion" on (even if it was only given to me by my parents) since I was 8 years-old and my father ran for his first public office as a Republican.

This election was different though. Not just because we potentially had our first African-American candidate, but because we had a candidate that spoke to the people about the everyday issues. We for once had a candidate who said not everyone can pull themselves up without a hand reaching out. I heard words of the civil obligation we have to each other, words of encouragement and of hope.

I went back and listened to every speech I could find that Senator Obama had made. I listened with new ears and a new heart. I was no longer the girl that had lived "easy". I knew what hard was and I wanted a candidate that did too. I reevaluated what my own personal political beliefs were and I knew that I could no longer support the Republican platform.

In 2008 I watched as President Obama was elected. I clapped and shouted with fellow democrats at the headquarters' watch party. It was my first election that I ever voted Democrat in. Everything had changed.

In 2009 I graduated from college with a degree in Political Science and History. I was able to get a better paying job and move into a slightly nicer part of town.

My feelings toward the Republican Party have not changed. They really are no longer Republicans. There are some moderates left, but the narrow, fear mongering voice of the party that has taken over drowns out all of those that speak truth. They have traded in a Christian belief of loving your neighbor for one that champions big business, the wealthy, and those that have no idea what struggle looks like.

Over the past few months alone we have seen how far gone the Republicans really are. 160 voted against The Violence Against Women's Act. My party that I once loved deserted me. Not just as a woman, but as a citizen of this country. We even have a Republican, New Hampshire state Rep. Mark Warden saying "Some people like abusive relationships." My response to him;

"I can answer truthfully that no, I didn't like having my jaw broken or the bones in my face shattered. I didn't like being dragged by my hair or strangled. I didn't like the bruises, busted lips or black eyes. I didn't like the mental and physical scars it left me with. And that's why I left with nothing. I didn't like having to choose between my life and my livelihood, even when your party makes it so hard for women to be on their own. I did. Now, can you please walk in my shoes for a while? My feet are awfully tired."

When it comes to food stamps I have seen many of my Republican friends say how it's so great that we have drug tests for food stamps and yet they've never given out food to the homeless or the poor. And they don't care that the testing will cost Florida millions of dollars and thus far has only saved them $60,000. 98% of those tested have passed. It's still the idea that everyone that needs help must be lazy and on drugs. Another lie that the Republicans would have us believe. I'm sure that there are some that fall into that category, but not all. Just like I know that not all Republicans are right-wing, gun-toting, women hating nut jobs…just some of them are.

There's another issue that I've decided to add in here. I debated long and hard on it, but it needs to be talked about. It's the issue of guns. On September 4, 1962 my grandmother was shot and killed with a .45 caliber automatic pistol. It was a gun that was obtained legally from our own US government actually. Because of this I have very strong views on gun control. Yes, I had them even as a Republican. I just kept them to myself back then. I don't care what nationality, race, religion or party affiliation you are. When you believe that your right to own a gun is greater than another human being's right to live, you have serious problems. I am at a loss for words as to how the very same people who wear the name of Christian are also the loudest opponents of gun control. "Jesus loves you, but please don't take this deadly weapon from me."

My grandmother was a model and an artist. She left behind 3 small children. One of them was my mother. How different her life would have been if our country had strong gun control laws.

People love to ask me, "How could you ever be a Democrat?" My response is always the same; "Because I know what it's like to not be a corporation that has the ear of a well-connected Senator. I know what it feels like to not have a lobbyist organization to speak for me. I know what it's like to be a second class citizen in a country that claims to protect the weak. I have been the woman in need of food stamps, the woman that the Violence Against Women's Act protects. Obamacare was written for me and the millions of others just like me. I went to school on government 'handouts.' I want to live in a nation that values life above the cost of a bullet."

My friends, I didn't leave the Republican Party. They abandoned me years ago.

@realdonaldtrump Donald Trump Blames Crime On Blacks, Hispanics - yet no mention of white collar crime

from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/05/donald-trump-blames-crime_n_3392535.html?ir=Latino%20Voices&utm_campaign=060613&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-latino-voices&utm_content=Title

Donald Trump shared his thoughts on race and crime on Twitter Wednesday, foisting the blame for violence in the United States on blacks and Latinos.

@realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump

According to Bill O'Reilly, 80% of all the shootings in New York City are blacks-if you add Hispanics, that figure goes to 98%. 1% white.

June 5, 2013 7:55 am via Twitter for Android Reply Retweet Favorite

The statistics that Fox pundit Bill O'Reilly cited appear to come from the 2012 New York City Enforcement Report compiled by the police department. The report says that of the 662 shooting suspects for which a race or ethnicity was known, 78.2 percent were black, while 18.9 percent were Hispanic and 2.4 percent were white.

Though national figures crime are far less skewed, Trump went on to tweet that the "overwhelming amount of violent crime in our major cities is committed by blacks and [H]ispanics" and invited his Twitter followers to discuss the "tough subject."

@realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump

Sadly, the overwhelming amount of violent crime in our major cities is committed by blacks and hispanics-a tough subject-must be discussed.

June 5, 2013 8:05 am via Twitter for Android Reply Retweet Favorite

Many serious analysts other than Trump spend their lives analyzing the links between race, ethnicity and crime, often concluding that socioeconomic inequality plays a strong role. Sociologist Robert Sampson and criminologist Janet Lauritsen, for example, wrote in a 1997 study:

Race and ethnic disparities in violent offending and victimization are pronounced and long-standing. Blacks, and to a lesser extent Hispanics, suffer much higher rates of robbery and homicide victimization than do whites… These differences result in part from social forces that ecologically concentrate race with poverty and other social dislocations.

Media critic Eric Deggans dismissed the rightwing real estate mogul's musings in a column at the Tampa Bay Times and wondered how far Trump had to go without prompting a reaction from NBC.

"There is no doubt that violent crime is a serious problem in communities of color," Deggans wrote. "But connecting it to race in such a blunt and unfair fashion seems more about blaming certain kinds of people than solving the problem. As always, it remains puzzling that NBC continues to offer a platform to someone so willing to pass along prejudice disguised as political speech," Media Critic Eric Deggans wrote at the Tampa Bay Times.

walmart keeps costs down ny letting taxpayers foot the bill for much of its employees' basic needs

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/writers/pat_schneider/report-wal-mart-costs-taxpayers-million-in-worker-saftey-net/article_3dc8dbd5-8f28-5f47-bf35-0f3db2e2ead2.html

Wal-Mart keeps wages and benefits low, relying on taxpayers to foot the bill for basic needs for its workers, according to a new study that used Wisconsin data to draw its conclusions. Assistance programs for Wal-Mart workers can run $904,542 to $1.74 million a year for each of the retail giant's 75 super stores in Wisconsin, the congressional staff report found.

The report — which used Wisconsin data because of the state's superior records on Medicaid participation — calculated the cost of a range of benefits programs, from health care to food stamps and housing subsidies and more for the number of workers likely to be eligible at a typical super store. 

Huffington Post was on top of the release of the report just before the Memorial Day weekend, noting its Democrat authors assumed that someone receiving BadgerCare would apply and receive other benefits.

The report drew criticism from Forbes as a vehicle for lobbying for initiatives to raise the minimum wage and make collective bargaining easier. But even that skeptical look took note of the report's "important" observation that the last 10 years have been a "lost decade" for working families, as their wages fell  to the lowest share of GDP on record and corporate profits rose to their greatest share. 

The report, "Wal-Mart's The Low‐Wage Drag on Our Economy," drew renewed attention this week, with Mother Jones publishing a post Thursday noting that as the country's largest low-wage employer, Wal-Mart's policies are a driving force in keeping wages low. The company also epitomizes the economic divide in America, the magazine said, with the collective wealth of the six owning Waltons equaling the wealth of 48.8 million families on the other end of the spectrum.

Other publications are taking a look at the report. The Los Angeles Times reported Thursday on the social impact of Wal-Mart's low-wage strategy. It noted that a similar 2004 report put the safety net cost to taxpayers at $420,750 per Wal-Mart store, and that California is anticipating an even bigger impact in the future as the federal health care package expands. Legislators in that state are calling for a $6,000 fine to companies for every full-time worker who ends up on its Medicaid program.

Wal-Mart calls the congressional report inaccurate and based on unrealistic scenarios. A spokesperson told HuffPo that in response to criticism of its labor practices, the company has launched a campaign on its "unlimited" employment opportunities.

The debate over the corporation's role in the economy is taking place as protesters travel to Bentonville, Arkansas to picket company headquarters during Friday's stockholders' meeting, reports the Nation. The magazine also provides a guide to the billionaires who run the store.

Meanwhile, a Massachusetts woman who works for the company told HuffPo that she earns $11.70 an hour and receives public assistance, food stamps, Section 8 housing, and state-funded health care. "Wal-Mart doesn't pay my salary," she said. "You pay my salary."

.@WholeFoods is this true?! Whole Foods Allegedly Suspends Two Employees For Speaking Spanish

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/whole-foods-allegedly-suspends-two-employees-speaking-spanish?utm_source=OV+Newsletter+List+2&utm_campaign=52b9ce4633-OV_Daily_Newsletter6_7_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5f6757bd76-52b9ce4633-10859405

Whole Foods allegedly suspended two workers at one of its New Mexico locations for speaking Spanish to each other while on the job.

Bryan Baldizan said he and a female employee were suspended for a day after their manager told them Spanish was not allowed during work hours.

"I couldn't believe it," Baldizan said. "All we did was say we didn't believe the policy was fair. We only talk Spanish to each other about personal stuff, not work."

Ben Friedland, who is the Whole Foods Market Rocky Mountain Region executive marketing coordinator, said the company believes in "having a uniform form of communication" to promote a safe working environment, NBC Latino reported.

"Therefore, our policy states that all English speaking team members must speak English to customers and other team members while on the clock," Friedland said. "Team members are free to speak any language they would like during their breaks, meal periods and before and after work."

Advocacy group, ProgressNow New Mexico, said it is organizing a boycott of Whole Foods. An online petition circulated by the group on Thursday collected more than 500 signatures of people who say they will not shop at Whole Foods until it changes its language policy.

"We want Whole Foods to rescind its English-only policy," said Pat Davis, executive director of ProgressNow New Mexico. "We don't think it's appropriate in a state as diverse as New Mexico."

According to Whole Foods spokesperson Libba Letton, the employees were suspended for "rude and disrespectful behavior," and the disciplinary measure had nothing to do with what language they were speaking.

"Due to their rude and disrespectful behavior both in an office and in the store in front of customers, they were suspended with pay," Letton said of the employees. "Their suspension was due to their behavior alone."

Sources: NBC Latino, USA Today 

26 Million Veterans data breached by eight state sponsored organizations

here http://thehackernews.com/2013/06/26-million-veterans-data-breached-by_5.html

NSA collecting phone records of millions of US citizens daily

here http://thehackernews.com/2013/06/NSA-phone-number-records-surveillance-system-verizon_5.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheHackersNews+%28The+Hackers+News+-+Security+Blog%29&_m=3n.009a.237.mo0aof3ygb.5aa

Obama administration defends massive phone record collection

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/06/us-usa-wiretaps-verizon-idUSBRE95502920130606?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Thursday defended its collection of a massive amount of telephone records from at least one carrier as part of U.S. counterterrorism efforts, re-igniting a debate over privacy even as it called the practice critical to protecting Americans from attacks.

The admission came after Britain's Guardian newspaper published on Wednesday a secret court order related to the records of millions of Verizon Communications customers. The surveillance appears to have involved the phone records of millions of Americans.

Privacy advocates blasted the order as unconstitutional government surveillance and called for a review.

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, did not specifically confirm the report, but noted the published court order pertains only to data such as a telephone number or the length of a call, and not the subscribers' identities or the content of the telephone calls.

The order requires the government to turn over to the National Security Agency so-called "metadata" such as a list of numbers that called other U.S. or international numbers as well as other transactional information on the time and location of calls. The NSA is the main U.S. intelligence-gathering agency tasked with monitoring electronic communications.

"Information of the sort described in the Guardian article has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats to the United States, as it allows counterterrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States," the senior administration official said.

The revelation renewed concerns about the intelligence-gathering effort - criticized by human rights and privacy advocates - launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States and raised questions about its oversight.

It also drew fresh attention to President Barack Obama's handling of privacy and free speech issues. His administration already is under fire for searching Associated Press journalists' calling records and the emails of a Fox News Channel reporter as part of its inquiries into leaked government information.

Verizon has declined to comment. It remains unclear whether the practice extends to other carriers, though several security experts and at least one U.S. lawmaker said that was likely.

AT&T Inc declined to comment. Representatives for other major carriers, including Sprint Nextel Corp and T-Mobile, could not be immediately reached or had no immediate comment.

BOSTON BOMBING

The three-month court order, dated April 25, directs Verizon's Business Network Services Inc and Verizon Business Services units to hand over daily electronic data until July 19.

rest http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/06/us-usa-wiretaps-verizon-idUSBRE95502920130606?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

Congress Approval Poll Shows Only 6 Percent Rate Lawmakers Good Or Excellent

here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/05/congress-approval_n_3390566.html

Pelosi: Congress is "rigged" to suppress the interests of women and keep their voices out of the discussion

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/05/nancy-pelosi-congress-rigged_n_3391936.html?ir=Politics&utm_campaign=060613&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-politics&utm_content=Title

The day after Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) and an all-male panel of his colleagues advanced a bill to restrict abortion rights across the U.S., House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Congress is "rigged" to suppress the interests of women and keep their voices out of the discussion.

"This is an environment that is almost rigged, intentionally or not, wittingly or not, rigged so that the status quo just goes on," Pelosi told The Huffington Post in an interview. "We have to kick open the door and make our own environment, reduce the role of money [in campaigns], insist on the civility of debates, and bring more women here, and that's a better reflection of our country."

Pelosi said that as a mother of five children, it infuriates her to see an all-male subcommittee pushing a bill to restrict women's reproductive rights. "What right -- I mean, really, I guess they're elected, they have a committee, they write a bill, but by what moral authority are they to make such a suggestion?" she said. "It always gets me because I have five children. When I brought my baby home, Alexandra, my oldest was turning six. As a practicing Catholic, I think I have the credentials to talk about this subject. Any of you who've had five children in six years can step up to the plate."

Republicans threatened to shut down the federal government over Planned Parenthood funding in early 2011, and women's reproductive rights have been the subject of contentious political debate ever since. Pelosi said that conflict, and the subsequent fury over the birth control coverage requirement in the Affordable Care Act, has really brought to light something she had noticed in Congress for years.

"For 23 years, I have been saying to people, whatever you think about abortion, [Republicans] are against family planning and contraception. But they never believed it," she said. "The one satisfying thing for me last year was that at last the world could see they would shut down the government rather than fund Planned Parenthood. [I said,] 'Now do you see how extreme they are?'"

Pelosi said when she was a ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, she tried to introduce a bill related to funding for international clinics that would educate people on natural family planning methods. She thought that the issue would be something that Republicans and Democrats could agree on, since it did not involve birth control pills or abortion, but all of the Republicans on her committee opposed it. "They said, 'No we're not for any of that family planning,'" she said. "I said, 'We're talking about natural family -- the rhythm system. How come you don't have 13 kids?'"

Pelosi has seen a fair amount of progress since then. Since she was first elected to Congress in 1987, the number of Democratic women in the House of Representatives has multiplied by five, from 12 women to more than 60, and she broke a glass ceiling when she became the first female speaker. But she said the only way to change old ways of thinking and to make sure that women's issues are fairly represented is to continue bringing more diverse voices into politics.

"It's a tough arena for women," she said. "It's not for the faint of heart. But it's definitely worth it, and it's urgently needed."

rest http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/05/nancy-pelosi-congress-rigged_n_3391936.html?ir=Politics&utm_campaign=060613&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-politics&utm_content=Title